@deftai/directive-content 0.93.0 → 0.95.0

package/packs/strategies/strategies-pack-0.1.json

@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@
         "research"
       ],
       "path": "strategies/research.md",
-      "body": "# Research Strategy\n\nLook before you leap — investigate the domain before planning.\n\nLegend (from RFC2119): !=MUST, ~=SHOULD, ≉=SHOULD NOT, ⊗=MUST NOT, ?=MAY.\n\n**⚠️ See also**: [strategies/interview.md](./interview.md) | [strategies/discuss.md](./discuss.md) | [strategies/map.md](./map.md)\n\n> Adapted from [GSD](https://github.com/gsd-build/get-shit-done) research phase.\n\n---\n\n## When to Use\n\n- ~ Before planning a feature in an unfamiliar domain (auth, payments, real-time, etc.)\n- ~ When the feature involves libraries or APIs the agent hasn't used in this project\n- ? Skip for well-understood domains where the agent has strong existing context\n\n## Output\n\n! Before writing output artifacts, follow the [Preparatory Guard](./artifact-guards.md#preparatory-guard-light).\n\nProduce `vbrief/proposed/{feature}-research.vbrief.json` with two mandatory narratives:\n\n! After emitting this scope vBRIEF, surface the GitHub-issue tracking hint from [emit-hints.md](./emit-hints.md) — name all three patterns (none / `--umbrella` / `--per-vbrief`).\n\n### `DontHandRoll` narrative\n\nProblems that look simple but have existing, battle-tested solutions.\n\n- ! For each problem area, specify: **problem**, **recommended library/tool**, **why not hand-roll**\n- ! Check the project's existing dependencies first -- don't add a library when one is already available\n- ~ Consult official docs for the recommended library (use Context7 or equivalent)\n\n**Example narrative content:**\n```\nProblem: JWT validation\nUse: jose\nRationale: Edge cases in token expiry, key rotation, algorithm confusion\n\nProblem: Email templates\nUse: react-email\nRationale: HTML email rendering is notoriously broken across clients\n\nProblem: Rate limiting\nUse: express-rate-limit\nRationale: IP spoofing, distributed state, Redis integration\n```\n\n### `CommonPitfalls` narrative\n\nWhat goes wrong in this domain, why, and how to avoid it.\n\n- ! For each pitfall: **what happens**, **why it happens**, **how to avoid it**, **warning signs**\n- ~ Informed by library docs, codebase patterns, and known failure modes\n- ~ Prioritize pitfalls that agents specifically tend to hit (stubs, missing error handling, hardcoded values)\n\n**Example narrative content:**\n```\nPitfall: Storing plain-text passwords\nWhat: User passwords saved without hashing\nWhy: Agent implements the happy path and forgets security\nAvoid: Use bcrypt/argon2, never store raw passwords\nWarning signs: No crypto import in auth module, password field stored as-is\n```\n\n### `IPRisk` narrative (#738)\n\n! When the project description, the `Don't Hand-Roll` survey, or the\nresearch notes reference third-party intellectual property (IP), the\nresearch phase MUST run the IP-risk heuristic from\n[`../references/ip-risk.md`](../references/ip-risk.md) -- canonical\nimplementation `scripts/ip_risk.py:detect_ip_terms` -- and persist a\nplain-English `IPRisk` narrative on the research vBRIEF.\n\nThe heuristic is permissive on purpose: recognizable IP names (Magic:\nThe Gathering, Pokemon, etc.), fictional-universe terms (Hogwarts,\nTatooine), branded characters, sports leagues, and trademarked products\nall trigger a hit.\n\n- ! When `detect_ip_terms` returns at least one hit, the research output\n  MUST: (1) ask the explicit monetization-intent question (personal vs\n  commercial); (2) emit `plain_risk_summary(hits, intent)` into the\n  `IPRisk` narrative; (3) plan to inject the protection scope items\n  (`ip_risk_scope_items(intent)`) at SPECIFICATION-generation time.\n- ! On `commercial` intent, surface the **non-optional** lawyer-\n  consultation recommendation in the research output -- this carries\n  forward into the interview output and the SPECIFICATION via the\n  `IPRisk` narrative.\n- ⊗ Treat the absence of detected terms as proof that the project is\n  IP-free. The heuristic only knows about the curated lists; when the\n  research scope is vague, ask the user directly whether the project is\n  based on a game / film / sports league / brand.\n- ⊗ Provide legal advice -- Deft is not a law firm. The only\n  recommendation it makes is **consult a lawyer**.\n\n---\n\n## How Research Feeds Downstream\n\n- ! **Planning** reads research before task decomposition — acceptance criteria account for pitfalls\n- ! **Execution** references \"Don't Hand-Roll\" — agent uses recommended libraries, not custom code\n- ~ **Verification** checks for pitfall warning signs during stub detection\n\n## Research Scope Rules\n\n- ! Research the **current feature only** — not the entire project\n- ! Time-box research — if it takes longer than the feature, scope is wrong\n- ⊗ Research as a reason to delay execution indefinitely\n- ~ Research persists as a vBRIEF in `vbrief/proposed/`\n\n---\n\n## Then: Chaining Gate\n\nAfter research is complete, return to the [chaining gate](./interview.md#chaining-gate)\nso the user can run additional preparatory strategies or proceed to spec generation.\n\n- ! On completion, register artifacts in `./vbrief/plan.vbrief.json`:\n  - Update `completedStrategies`: increment `runCount` for `\"research\"`,\n    append artifact path (`vbrief/proposed/{feature}-research.vbrief.json`)\n  - Append the path to the flat `artifacts` array\n- ! Return to [interview.md Chaining Gate](./interview.md#chaining-gate)\n- ! The research findings MUST inform subsequent strategies and spec generation:\n  - \"Don't Hand-Roll\" items become constraints in the specification\n  - \"Common Pitfalls\" become acceptance criteria or NFRs\n- ⊗ End the session after research without returning to the chaining gate\n  or the invoking strategy's next-step menu\n\n! **Standalone context:** If invoked from a standalone strategy (e.g. map's\n  standalone next-step menu) rather than from the interview chaining gate,\n  return to the invoking strategy's menu instead.\n\n---\n\n## Workflow\n\n1. **Scope** -- Identify the domain and feature boundaries for research\n2. **Survey** -- Check existing project dependencies, official docs, and known pitfalls\n3. **Document** -- Produce `vbrief/proposed/{feature}-research.vbrief.json` with `DontHandRoll` and `CommonPitfalls` narratives\n4. **Chain** -- Return to [interview.md Chaining Gate](./interview.md#chaining-gate), or -- if invoked from a standalone strategy (e.g. map's standalone next-step menu) -- return to the invoking strategy's menu per the [standalone-context rule](#then-chaining-gate) above\n\n## Anti-Patterns\n\n- ⊗ Building custom solutions for solved problems\n- ⊗ Skipping research for unfamiliar domains (\"how hard can auth be?\")\n- ⊗ Research that produces a reading list instead of actionable guidance\n- ⊗ Research that doesn't flow into planning (written and never referenced)\n- ⊗ Ending after research without chaining into specification generation (chained mode; in standalone context, returning to the invoking strategy's menu satisfies the completion requirement per the [standalone-context rule](#then-chaining-gate))\n"
+      "body": "# Research Strategy\n\nLook before you leap — investigate the domain before planning.\n\nLegend (from RFC2119): !=MUST, ~=SHOULD, ≉=SHOULD NOT, ⊗=MUST NOT, ?=MAY.\n\n**⚠️ See also**: [strategies/interview.md](./interview.md) | [strategies/discuss.md](./discuss.md) | [strategies/map.md](./map.md)\n\n> Adapted from [GSD](https://github.com/gsd-build/get-shit-done) research phase.\n\n---\n\n## When to Use\n\n- ~ Before planning a feature in an unfamiliar domain (auth, payments, real-time, etc.)\n- ~ When the feature involves libraries or APIs the agent hasn't used in this project\n- ? Skip for well-understood domains where the agent has strong existing context\n\n## Scope Confirmation Gate (#1273)\n\n! Before autonomous research begins, present one blocking scope-confirmation prompt and wait for the user's selection. Use the deterministic question contract: the final two numbered options MUST be `Discuss` and `Back`.\n\nPrompt:\n> \"What should this research focus on before I investigate autonomously?\"\n\n1. Confirm the inferred feature/domain scope (Recommended)\n2. Refine the feature boundary or priority areas\n3. Provide sample data, artifacts, constraints, or sensitive areas to account for\n4. Discuss\n5. Back\n\n- ! **Confirmed-scope postcondition (required before survey):** research MUST NOT start the survey until a confirmed research scope is recorded in notes. Confirmation is achieved by **any** of: option **1** (accept inferred scope as-is), or option **2**/**3** after free-form capture (the free-form answer **is** the confirmation of scope — it replaces option-1 confirmation; do not re-open option 1 after capture).\n- ! On option **1** (confirm inferred scope): record the inferred feature/domain as the confirmed research scope and proceed to the survey step.\n- ! On option **2** (refine boundary): ask a **follow-up free-form question** in the next message (one question only) to capture the refined feature boundary or priority areas; wait for the user's answer; record that free-form text as the **confirmed** research scope; then proceed to survey. ⊗ Proceed to survey after option 2 without collecting free-form refinement text. ⊗ Leave research blocked after option 2 with no follow-up path.\n- ! On option **3** (artifacts/constraints/sensitivity): ask a **follow-up free-form question** in the next message (one question only) for sample data paths, artifacts to analyze, constraints, or sensitive areas; wait for the user's answer; record provided artifacts/constraints/sensitivity flags **and** treat the current feature/domain (plus those inputs) as the **confirmed** research scope; then proceed to survey. ⊗ Proceed to survey after option 3 without collecting free-form artifact/constraint input. ⊗ Leave research blocked after option 3 with no follow-up path.\n- ! If the user declines free-form input after option 2 or 3 (empty answer / \"skip\" / \"none\"): re-present the Scope Confirmation Gate once; if they pick option **1**, confirm inferred scope and proceed; if they again decline capture without confirming, stop research and return to the chaining gate or invoking menu — do not survey on unconfirmed scope.\n- ! Record the confirmed scope, any provided artifacts, and any sensitivity flags in the research notes before the survey step.\n- ⊗ Start the survey from project description alone without a confirmed research scope (option 1 acceptance or option 2/3 free-form confirmation).\n\n## Output\n\n! Before writing output artifacts, follow the [Preparatory Guard](./artifact-guards.md#preparatory-guard-light).\n\nProduce `vbrief/proposed/{feature}-research.vbrief.json` with two mandatory narratives:\n\n! After emitting this scope vBRIEF, surface the GitHub-issue tracking hint from [emit-hints.md](./emit-hints.md) — name all three patterns (none / `--umbrella` / `--per-vbrief`).\n\n### `DontHandRoll` narrative\n\nProblems that look simple but have existing, battle-tested solutions.\n\n- ! For each problem area, specify: **problem**, **recommended library/tool**, **why not hand-roll**\n- ! Check the project's existing dependencies first -- don't add a library when one is already available\n- ~ Consult official docs for the recommended library (use Context7 or equivalent)\n\n**Example narrative content:**\n```\nProblem: JWT validation\nUse: jose\nRationale: Edge cases in token expiry, key rotation, algorithm confusion\n\nProblem: Email templates\nUse: react-email\nRationale: HTML email rendering is notoriously broken across clients\n\nProblem: Rate limiting\nUse: express-rate-limit\nRationale: IP spoofing, distributed state, Redis integration\n```\n\n### `CommonPitfalls` narrative\n\nWhat goes wrong in this domain, why, and how to avoid it.\n\n- ! For each pitfall: **what happens**, **why it happens**, **how to avoid it**, **warning signs**\n- ~ Informed by library docs, codebase patterns, and known failure modes\n- ~ Prioritize pitfalls that agents specifically tend to hit (stubs, missing error handling, hardcoded values)\n\n**Example narrative content:**\n```\nPitfall: Storing plain-text passwords\nWhat: User passwords saved without hashing\nWhy: Agent implements the happy path and forgets security\nAvoid: Use bcrypt/argon2, never store raw passwords\nWarning signs: No crypto import in auth module, password field stored as-is\n```\n\n### `IPRisk` narrative (#738)\n\n! When the project description, the `Don't Hand-Roll` survey, or the\nresearch notes reference third-party intellectual property (IP), the\nresearch phase MUST run the IP-risk heuristic from\n[`../references/ip-risk.md`](../references/ip-risk.md) -- canonical\nimplementation `scripts/ip_risk.py:detect_ip_terms` -- and persist a\nplain-English `IPRisk` narrative on the research vBRIEF.\n\nThe heuristic is permissive on purpose: recognizable IP names (Magic:\nThe Gathering, Pokemon, etc.), fictional-universe terms (Hogwarts,\nTatooine), branded characters, sports leagues, and trademarked products\nall trigger a hit.\n\n- ! When `detect_ip_terms` returns at least one hit, the research output\n  MUST: (1) ask the explicit monetization-intent question (personal vs\n  commercial); (2) emit `plain_risk_summary(hits, intent)` into the\n  `IPRisk` narrative; (3) plan to inject the protection scope items\n  (`ip_risk_scope_items(intent)`) at SPECIFICATION-generation time.\n- ! On `commercial` intent, surface the **non-optional** lawyer-\n  consultation recommendation in the research output -- this carries\n  forward into the interview output and the SPECIFICATION via the\n  `IPRisk` narrative.\n- ⊗ Treat the absence of detected terms as proof that the project is\n  IP-free. The heuristic only knows about the curated lists; when the\n  research scope is vague, ask the user directly whether the project is\n  based on a game / film / sports league / brand.\n- ⊗ Provide legal advice -- Deft is not a law firm. The only\n  recommendation it makes is **consult a lawyer**.\n\n---\n\n## How Research Feeds Downstream\n\n- ! **Planning** reads research before task decomposition — acceptance criteria account for pitfalls\n- ! **Execution** references \"Don't Hand-Roll\" — agent uses recommended libraries, not custom code\n- ~ **Verification** checks for pitfall warning signs during stub detection\n\n## Research Scope Rules\n\n- ! Research the **current feature only** — not the entire project\n- ! Time-box research — if it takes longer than the feature, scope is wrong\n- ⊗ Research as a reason to delay execution indefinitely\n- ~ Research persists as a vBRIEF in `vbrief/proposed/`\n\n---\n\n## Then: Chaining Gate\n\nAfter research is complete, return to the [chaining gate](./interview.md#chaining-gate)\nso the user can run additional preparatory strategies or proceed to spec generation.\n\n- ! On completion, register artifacts in `./vbrief/plan.vbrief.json`:\n  - Update `completedStrategies`: increment `runCount` for `\"research\"`,\n    append artifact path (`vbrief/proposed/{feature}-research.vbrief.json`)\n  - Append the path to the flat `artifacts` array\n- ! Return to [interview.md Chaining Gate](./interview.md#chaining-gate)\n- ! Present the chaining gate as a blocking question and wait for a user selection before any spec generation or additional scope vBRIEF generation.\n- ! Explain at handoff that `completedStrategies` records that research ran, while `vbrief/proposed/{feature}-research.vbrief.json` remains a planning artifact in the scope lifecycle until a later strategy promotes or consumes it.\n- ! The research findings MUST inform subsequent strategies and spec generation:\n  - \"Don't Hand-Roll\" items become constraints in the specification\n  - \"Common Pitfalls\" become acceptance criteria or NFRs\n- ⊗ Generate implementation scope vBRIEFs directly from research findings or proceed to spec generation before the user chooses from the chaining gate.\n- ⊗ End the session after research without returning to the chaining gate\n  or the invoking strategy's next-step menu\n\n! **Standalone context:** If invoked from a standalone strategy (e.g. map's\n  standalone next-step menu) rather than from the interview chaining gate,\n  return to the invoking strategy's menu instead.\n\n---\n\n## Workflow\n\n1. **Scope confirmation** -- Ask the blocking scope-confirmation prompt, wait for the user, and record scope/artifact/sensitivity inputs\n2. **Survey** -- Check existing project dependencies, official docs, and known pitfalls\n3. **Document** -- Produce `vbrief/proposed/{feature}-research.vbrief.json` with `DontHandRoll` and `CommonPitfalls` narratives\n4. **Chain** -- Return to [interview.md Chaining Gate](./interview.md#chaining-gate), or -- if invoked from a standalone strategy (e.g. map's standalone next-step menu) -- return to the invoking strategy's menu per the [standalone-context rule](#then-chaining-gate) above\n\n## Anti-Patterns\n\n- ⊗ Building custom solutions for solved problems\n- ⊗ Skipping research for unfamiliar domains (\"how hard can auth be?\")\n- ⊗ Starting autonomous research before the Scope Confirmation Gate has captured or explicitly skipped user-provided artifacts/constraints\n- ⊗ Research that produces a reading list instead of actionable guidance\n- ⊗ Research that doesn't flow into planning (written and never referenced)\n- ⊗ Ending after research without chaining into specification generation (chained mode; in standalone context, returning to the invoking strategy's menu satisfies the completion requirement per the [standalone-context rule](#then-chaining-gate))\n"
     },
     {
       "id": "roadmap",

package/resilience/continue-here.md

@@ -25,14 +25,14 @@ Sessions end. Work must not be lost. A fresh session must resume from **exactly*
 
 ## Continue Checkpoint Contents
 
-Persist to `./vbrief/continue.vbrief.json` in vBRIEF format:
+Persist to `./xbrief/continue.xbrief.json` in xBRIEF format (legacy `./vbrief/continue.vbrief.json` is read-accepted until migrated):
 
-- ! **Completed** — what's already done (vBRIEF items with `completed` status)
-- ! **Remaining** — what's left (vBRIEF items with `pending` status)
-- ! **Decisions** — choices made during this session (vBRIEF narratives)
+- ! **Completed** — what's already done (xBRIEF items with `completed` status)
+- ! **Remaining** — what's left (xBRIEF items with `pending` status)
+- ! **Decisions** — choices made during this session (xBRIEF narratives)
 - ~ **Hazards** — what was tricky, what to watch out for (narrative)
 - ! **Resume point** — the exact first thing to do when resuming (narrative on the next `pending` item)
-- ! **Scope vBRIEF reference** — when scope vBRIEFs exist, MUST include `planRef` to the scope vBRIEF(s) the agent was working on (enables the resuming agent to load the durable scope record)
+- ! **Scope xBRIEF reference** — when scope xBRIEFs exist, MUST include `planRef` to the scope xBRIEF(s) the agent was working on (enables the resuming agent to load the durable scope record)
 
 ## Resume Protocol
 
@@ -47,8 +47,8 @@ Persist to `./vbrief/continue.vbrief.json` in vBRIEF format:
 
 - ! Continue checkpoints are **ephemeral** — consumed on resume, not permanent records
 - ~ Durable learnings from the session → persist to [meta/lessons.md](../../meta/lessons.md)
-- ~ Durable state → persist to the task's vBRIEF plan file or scope vBRIEF(s) in lifecycle folders
-- ! Scope vBRIEFs (`./vbrief/{proposed,pending,active,completed,cancelled}/`) are **durable** — they persist across sessions and are shared between agents; do not conflate them with ephemeral continue checkpoints
+- ~ Durable state → persist to the task's xBRIEF plan file or scope xBRIEF(s) in lifecycle folders
+- ! Scope xBRIEFs (`./xbrief/{proposed,pending,active,completed,cancelled}/`; legacy `./vbrief/` read-accepted) are **durable** — they persist across sessions and are shared between agents; do not conflate them with ephemeral continue checkpoints
 - ⊗ Accumulate stale continue checkpoints — clean up after resume
 
 ---
@@ -59,4 +59,4 @@ Persist to `./vbrief/continue.vbrief.json` in vBRIEF format:
 - ⊗ Re-reading full conversation history instead of the continue checkpoint
 - ⊗ Losing in-flight decisions because they weren't persisted
 - ⊗ Starting over from scratch after an interruption
-- ⊗ Creating `continue-{ULID}.json` — the file is singular: `continue.vbrief.json`
+- ⊗ Creating `continue-{ULID}.json` — the file is singular: `continue.xbrief.json`

package/skills/deft-directive-build/SKILL.md

@@ -344,6 +344,22 @@ feat(phase-2): add REST API endpoints with integration tests
 - ! Scope xBRIEF ambiguous -> ask user; ⊗ guess
 - ! Scope needs changes -> propose, get approval, update the scope xBRIEF first
 
+
+## Probe-then-fill remote claims (#3120)
+
+! Before filling any **remote** handoff field (PR URL, PR number, commit/HEAD SHA, CI green/success, review score) or claiming `status: pass` / ship/gate done, MUST **probe then fill**:
+
+1. Run same-turn `git` + forge probes (examples: `git rev-parse HEAD`, `gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<N>`, `task pr:watch -- <N> --one-shot`, checks API).
+2. Copy IDs / URLs / SHAs / scores **only** from that probe JSON/text into the evidence block.
+3. Set `proof_status: bound` and attach short raw probe snippets (`command` + `snippet`) for each remote claim.
+
+! Handoff evidence axes: **work** (local) / **ship** (pushed branch or PR) / **gate** (CI/review on HEAD). `proof_status` is `bound` | `unbound` | `n/a-no-remote-claim`.
+! **Legal partial:** local work `done` + ship `not_started` / `blocked` **without** PR/SHA/CI/review fields and `proof_status: n/a-no-remote-claim` (or `status: partial`) is valid — do not invent ship state.
+! **Fail ranking:** **invented-done** (false/unbound remote artifacts under pass) is **stricter** than **empty-done**. Unbound remote claims → invalid evidence (fail), not pass-with-notes.
+! Machine check: `validateHandoffEvidence` in `packages/core/src/handoff-evidence/` (see `templates/agent-prompt-preamble.md` §11).
+⊗ Fill PR / SHA / CI / review fields from recollection, narration, or prior-turn memory.
+⊗ Claim `status: pass` with remote fields when `proof_status` is not `bound` or probes are missing (#3120).
+
 ## Completion
 
 - ! When all phases pass and `task check` is green, complete each implemented story via `task scope:complete -- <active-story-path>` before final PR handoff.
@@ -370,3 +386,5 @@ feat(phase-2): add REST API endpoints with integration tests
 - ⊗ Skip the Change Lifecycle Gate because the user said "proceed" -- broad approval does not satisfy the confirmation gate
 - ⊗ Commit or push directly to the default branch -- always create a feature branch first. Exception: user explicitly instructs a direct commit, or `PROJECT-DEFINITION.xbrief.json` narratives contain `Allow direct commits to master: true`
 - ⊗ Add a prohibition (`!` or `⊗`) without scanning the same file for conflicting softer-strength rules (`~`, `≉`) that reference the same term
+- ⊗ Invent remote PR/SHA/CI/review claims in handoff evidence without same-turn probe binding — invented-done (#3120)
+- ⊗ Fill remote ship/gate fields from memory when only local work completed; legal partial omits PR fields (#3120)

package/skills/deft-directive-pre-pr/SKILL.md

@@ -162,6 +162,22 @@ git --no-pager diff master
 - ! If a full Read-Write-Lint-Diff cycle produced zero changes: exit the loop
 - ~ Track iteration count -- if you exceed 3 iterations, pause and assess whether you are oscillating between competing fixes
 
+
+## Probe-then-fill remote claims (#3120)
+
+! Before filling any **remote** handoff field (PR URL, PR number, commit/HEAD SHA, CI green/success, review score) or claiming `status: pass` / ship/gate done, MUST **probe then fill**:
+
+1. Run same-turn `git` + forge probes (examples: `git rev-parse HEAD`, `gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<N>`, `task pr:watch -- <N> --one-shot`, checks API).
+2. Copy IDs / URLs / SHAs / scores **only** from that probe JSON/text into the evidence block.
+3. Set `proof_status: bound` and attach short raw probe snippets (`command` + `snippet`) for each remote claim.
+
+! Handoff evidence axes: **work** (local) / **ship** (pushed branch or PR) / **gate** (CI/review on HEAD). `proof_status` is `bound` | `unbound` | `n/a-no-remote-claim`.
+! **Legal partial:** local work `done` + ship `not_started` / `blocked` **without** PR/SHA/CI/review fields and `proof_status: n/a-no-remote-claim` (or `status: partial`) is valid — do not invent ship state.
+! **Fail ranking:** **invented-done** (false/unbound remote artifacts under pass) is **stricter** than **empty-done**. Unbound remote claims → invalid evidence (fail), not pass-with-notes.
+! Machine check: `validateHandoffEvidence` in `packages/core/src/handoff-evidence/` (see `templates/agent-prompt-preamble.md` §11).
+⊗ Fill PR / SHA / CI / review fields from recollection, narration, or prior-turn memory.
+⊗ Claim `status: pass` with remote fields when `proof_status` is not `bound` or probes are missing (#3120).
+
 ## Exit Condition
 
 ! Exit when a complete Read-Write-Lint-Diff cycle produces **zero changes** -- no file edits in Write, no lint fixes in Lint, and no scope issues in Diff.
@@ -179,3 +195,5 @@ After exiting:
 - ⊗ Ignore the iteration count -- more than 3 iterations usually indicates oscillating fixes or an unclear spec task
 - ⊗ Add a prohibition (`!` or `⊗`) without scanning the same file for conflicting softer-strength rules (`~`, `≉`) that reference the same term
 - ⊗ Skip `task pr:check-closing-keywords` (#737) before pushing a PR. Intent mode (#3015) also refuses bare/conditional real `Closes #N` without `--allow-close`. The negation-context substring match is the Layer 0 (prevention) gate that prevents the recurring auto-close of umbrella / staying-OPEN issues observed in #697 (closed #642), #401 (closed #642), #700 (closed #233), and #735 (closed #734) -- each incident required manual reopen and downstream cleanup. The lint's three-state exit (0 clean / 1 hits found / 2 config error) MUST be treated as a hard refusal: rewrite the PR body / commit messages until clean, OR pass `--allow-known-false-positives` ONLY for legitimately-quoted occurrences (test fixtures, documentation that discusses the trigger token literally). See `skills/deft-directive-swarm/SKILL.md` Phase 6 Step 1 for the corresponding Layer 3 (recovery) `pr:check-protected-issues` rule (#701)
+- ⊗ Invent remote PR/SHA/CI/review claims in handoff evidence without same-turn probe binding — invented-done (#3120)
+- ⊗ Fill remote ship/gate fields from memory when only local work completed; legal partial omits PR fields (#3120)

package/skills/deft-directive-review-cycle/SKILL.md

@@ -270,7 +270,7 @@ Remediation:
    - `gh pr checks <N>`
    - `gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<N> -q .head.sha` for HEAD pin
    - `gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/commits/<sha>/check-runs` for Greptile terminal check-run
-5. Evaluate the same Step 6 fail-closed all-of (terminal check-run + HEAD SHA + Last reviewed commit + confidence > 3 + no P0/P1).
+5. Evaluate the same Step 6 fail-closed all-of (terminal check-run + HEAD SHA + Last reviewed commit + confidence meets resolved min (policy/dogfood/default; see Step 6 #3095) + no P0/P1).
 6. Surface missing-task once to the operator/parent on first detection; do not silently rebrand freestyle sleep as `pr:watch`.
 
 ⊗ Fake a successful `pr:watch` or `review-monitor:*` gate when every dual-invoke probe failed.
@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ Remediation:
 ⊗ Invent ad-hoc `sleep` / main-session poll / OpenClaw cron loops outside Approach 1–3 when the skill already names this fallback (#2878 / statusreport#153 recurrence).
 ⊗ Skip Step 6 fail-closed fields because deterministic tasks are missing — the gh surfaces above remain mandatory.
 
-! When `clean_gate_holdout=ci_failures` and Greptile otherwise satisfies the probe-side Step 6 fields (SHA match on HEAD, confidence > 3, no P0/P1, not errored): **MUST NOT** idle-poll hoping CI heals. Treat Greptile CLEAN + CI red with the **same ownership** as a Greptile P0 for a merge-ready worker — one fix batch, re-push, re-probe.
+! When `clean_gate_holdout=ci_failures` and Greptile otherwise satisfies the probe-side Step 6 fields (SHA match on HEAD, confidence meets resolved min (policy/dogfood/default; see Step 6 #3095), no P0/P1, not errored): **MUST NOT** idle-poll hoping CI heals. Treat Greptile CLEAN + CI red with the **same ownership** as a Greptile P0 for a merge-ready worker — one fix batch, re-push, re-probe.
 
 ! On persistent `ci_failures` holdout: exit the Greptile wait immediately, fetch failing check annotations (`gh pr checks <N>`, CodeQL / required-check details, or `ci_failed_checks` from `pr:watch --json`), fix or escalate with evidence, then re-enter the review loop after CI is green.
 
@@ -324,6 +324,35 @@ Remediation:
 
 ⊗ Treat a stall as silent -- if the elapsed clock crosses the 10-minute threshold the agent MUST surface the menu, even if the agent is mid-poll. Continuing to poll past the threshold without user input is forbidden.
 
+### Owner Continuity Gate (#3090)
+
+! After any claim of `drive-to: merge-ready`, babysit, shepherd, or "driving review-cycle / merge" on an **open PR**, the **same turn** MUST end in exactly one of:
+
+- **A.** Approach 1 monitor live + sticky `<!-- deft:review-owner -->` lease registered (or #2878 gh-only lease equivalent). Parent yields with an **active** child / monitor and emits `review_cycle: in_progress:<pr>#<monitor_or_lease_ref>`.
+- **B.** Parent-retained ownership: parent does **not** mark the work complete; the next concrete action is an explicit dual-source poll/fix (Step 1 + Step 6). Emit `review_cycle: in_progress:<pr>#parent-retained` (or lease id when a sticky lease exists).
+- **C.** Explicit finish to caller/principal: `BLOCKED` / needs decision / `FAILED` with PR URL + HEAD SHA + why. Emit `review_cycle: skipped:<reason>` or keep `in_progress` only when a live owner remains; never freeform `started`.
+
+! **`review_cycle` evidence enum (portable — all consumers / handoffs / preamble §11 / swarm finish messages):** **only**
+  - `done` — Step 6 fail-closed all-of met on current HEAD (terminal check + HEAD pin + confidence bar + **0 P0/P1** via **dual-source**)
+  - `in_progress:<pr>#<monitor_or_lease_ref>` — verifiable sticky lease, registered monitor id, or documented `parent-retained` ownership
+  - `skipped:<reason>` — intentional skip (e.g. no-pr, operator cancel)
+  - `n/a` — work never entered review-cycle
+
+! Layer **L4** `status: pass` (or equivalent process-green handoff) is **illegal** unless `review_cycle: done` **or** `review_cycle: in_progress:…` with **verifiable** sticky lease / parent-retained ownership documented on that turn.
+
+! Opening a PR may use `in_progress` + lease; the **merge path** requires `done` (stricter product merge bars remain out of scope).
+
+! When dual-source fetch shows open P0/P1 under Step 6 / CLEAN evaluation: continue the fix loop **or** exit **BLOCKED** to the parent — never idle.
+
+! Optional machine gate: `deft verify:l4-owner --pr <N>` (or `task verify:l4-owner -- --pr <N>`; dual-invoke same order as other gates). Exit **0** only when a sticky lease is fresh on the PR **or** the caller asserts `--review-cycle done` after Step 6 (lease-or-done machine gate). `skipped` / `n/a` / parent-retained are process evidence only and do **not** satisfy this machine gate. Exit **1** on silent hold (no lease, no done). Pair with existing monitor-without-lease regression (#2797).
+
+⊗ End an owning turn with **0 children**, **no sticky lease**, and **no finish signal** after a drive-to-merge / babysit / shepherd claim (**silent hold**).
+⊗ Treat check-run **SUCCESS alone** as CLEAN or merge-ready while dual-source P0/P1 remain open.
+⊗ Emit freeform `review_cycle: started` / `pending` / `initiated` or L4 `status: pass` without **A** (or parent-retained **B** with explicit next action) or full Step 6 `done`.
+⊗ Solve Owner Continuity via host cron-as-Approach-1 or always-block-parent-until-merge — use A/B/C above (#2876 / #3090).
+
+~ **Eval / regression (#3090):** Given PR open + check SUCCESS + open inline P1s + agent text claims driving merge + turn ends with 0 subagents and no lease → **FAIL** (Owner Continuity Gate), not PASS.
+
 ### Review Monitoring
 ! **Background / independent dispatch (#1880 Gap D):** Long-running review-cycle owners and pollers (>~3 min) MUST be dispatched independently / in the background so the parent conversation stays interactive. On Cursor, use the Task tool background path (`run_in_background: true`). This generalizes the Approach-1 sub-agent monitor rule to implementation and fix workers as well — foreground dispatch is reserved for short tasks. The parent receives completion via `DONE` / `BLOCKED` / `FAILED` per `templates/agent-prompt-preamble.md` §11.
 
@@ -372,7 +401,7 @@ Remediation:
 
 1. ! Launch via the matching primitive: `start_agent` (Warp), `spawn_subagent` (grok-build / TUI / non-Warp), the Cursor `Task` tool with `run_in_background: true` (`cursor-composer` / `cursor-cloud-agent`, #1877), **or OpenClaw `sessions_spawn` (`openclaw`, #2876)** with a prompt that instructs it to poll for Greptile completion. For `spawn_subagent`, Cursor `Task`, and OpenClaw `sessions_spawn` the prompt MUST reference the canonical poller template `templates/swarm-greptile-poller-prompt.md` (with placeholders filled) plus the agent preamble; the working directory / context must be the PR branch (worktree or equivalent for hybrid).
 2. ! The sub-agent polls using the mechanism for its primitive: for `spawn_subagent` use `get_command_or_subagent_output` (adaptive cadence: ~20-30s first check after push, ~60s second, ~90s thereafter; Greptile typically lands in 3-7 min); for `start_agent` the native messaging path; for the Cursor `Task` tool the backgrounded-task completion-notification path; for OpenClaw `sessions_spawn` the host session completion / messaging channel (prefer `task pr:watch` inside the child when available). Front-load the first check to catch fast reviews.
-3. ! When the exit condition is met (Greptile review current on the HEAD commit SHA, confidence > 3, no P0/P1 remaining), the sub-agent reports completion back to the parent (via `send_message_to_agent`, the spawn_subagent result channel, or the OpenClaw sessions completion channel).
+3. ! When the exit condition is met (Greptile review current on the HEAD commit SHA, confidence meets resolved min (policy/dogfood/default; see Step 6 #3095), no P0/P1 remaining), the sub-agent reports completion back to the parent (via `send_message_to_agent`, the spawn_subagent result channel, or the OpenClaw sessions completion channel).
 4. ! The main conversation pane stays fully interactive during monitoring -- the user (or parent monitor) can continue other work.
 5. ! On receiving the completion message / result, the parent re-fetches findings (both gh pr view --comments and the secondary source) and proceeds to Step 5.
 
@@ -389,6 +418,11 @@ Remediation:
 
 ~ Recurrence: enterprize PR #43 (2026-08-02) — first monitor polled live, host settled empty/unknown; parent spawned a second same-`taskName` monitor; dual lease collision while PR stayed open. See also `meta/lessons.md` and FC04 / growth friction R1 + R10.
 
+
+### Completion latch on settle replay (#3092)
+
+! **Empty settle** is not a latch hit — use Empty announce ≠ done (#3044) above. When the parent has already emitted **one** consolidate for a monitor/leaf `runId` and the harness re-delivers an **identical or equivalent** non-empty settle for the same key, stay **silent** (no re-QC, no second final; host silent token when defined). Re-open only on new runId, principal reopen, or material new evidence. Full MUST: `templates/agent-prompt-preamble.md` §11.5.
+
 ### Single review-monitor lease (#3044 / #2814)
 
 ! **One sticky lease per PR:** ownership is the single sticky GitHub PR comment `<!-- deft:review-owner -->` (or the dual-invoke `review-monitor:register` form that writes it). Parallel ownership is forbidden.
@@ -452,7 +486,7 @@ NOTES: <short>
    - Second check: wait ~60 seconds, then poll
    - Subsequent checks: wait ~90 seconds, then poll
 2. ! Poll using `gh pr view <number> --comments` and `gh pr checks <number>` in the same shell session
-3. ! When the exit condition is met (Greptile review current, confidence > 3, no P0/P1), exit the loop and proceed to Step 5
+3. ! When the exit condition is met (Greptile review current, confidence meets resolved min (policy/dogfood/default; see Step 6 #3095), no P0/P1), exit the loop and proceed to Step 5
 4. ! If the user interrupts (Ctrl+C or equivalent), exit gracefully and report current review status
 
 ! Greptile may advance its review by **editing an existing PR issue comment** rather than creating a new PR review object. Do NOT rely solely on `pulls/{number}/reviews` — that endpoint may remain stale at an older commit SHA even after Greptile has reviewed the latest commit.
@@ -493,7 +527,7 @@ NOTES: <short>
     ```
 
    A missing or non-matching completion marker is `unknown`. See [`../../templates/swarm-greptile-poller-prompt.md`](../../templates/swarm-greptile-poller-prompt.md) `### Last reviewed commit:` for the canonical regex shared with the push-driven poller loop.
-4. ! **Confidence > 3** — the parsed `Confidence Score: X/5` is strictly greater than 3 (i.e. 4/5 or 5/5). A `confidence == 3`, an unparsed confidence, or an absent confidence is `unknown`.
+4. ! **Confidence meets resolved min (#3095)** — the parsed `Confidence Score: X/5` is **>=** the resolved floor from `plan.policy.review.minGreptileConfidence` (inspect: `task policy:show --field=minGreptileConfidence`; `pr:watch` / `pr:merge-ready` share this SoT). Resolution order: typed project policy > framework dogfood detect (framework source → **5**) > consumer default (**4**, legacy confidence > 3 / 4/5+). A score below the floor, an unparsed confidence, or an absent confidence is `unknown`. Directive dogfood MUST NOT exit CLEAN on 4/5.
 5. ! **No P0/P1 findings** — the triple-tier (+ Tier 2.5) detector reports zero P0 and zero P1 findings (P2 issues are non-blocking style suggestions and do not gate the loop).
 
 ! All five fields MUST hold on the SAME single fresh fetch. The agent MUST NOT assemble a "pass" by combining a terminal check-run observed on one poll with a confidence parsed on an earlier poll — the read is atomic per the SHA-pinned-AT-READ-TIME rule above.
@@ -583,8 +617,27 @@ task lifecycle:event -- emit plan:approved \
 3. ~ This step mirrors `skills/deft-directive-swarm/SKILL.md` Phase 6 Step 2 and applies to ALL PR merges, not just swarm runs.
 4. ! For PRs that referenced any umbrella / staying-OPEN issue (`Refs #N`), the INVERSE check applies: any protected issue that auto-closed MUST be reopened with a comment citing #701 and the merged PR. See `skills/deft-directive-swarm/SKILL.md` Phase 6 Step 1 protected-issue reopen sweep and `meta/lessons.md` `## GitHub Closing-Keyword False-Positive Layer 3` for the persistent `closingIssuesReferences` link case (Layer 3, #701).
 
+
+## Probe-then-fill remote claims (#3120)
+
+! Before filling any **remote** handoff field (PR URL, PR number, commit/HEAD SHA, CI green/success, review score) or claiming `status: pass` / ship/gate done, MUST **probe then fill**:
+
+1. Run same-turn `git` + forge probes (examples: `git rev-parse HEAD`, `gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<N>`, `task pr:watch -- <N> --one-shot`, checks API).
+2. Copy IDs / URLs / SHAs / scores **only** from that probe JSON/text into the evidence block.
+3. Set `proof_status: bound` and attach short raw probe snippets (`command` + `snippet`) for each remote claim.
+
+! Handoff evidence axes: **work** (local) / **ship** (pushed branch or PR) / **gate** (CI/review on HEAD). `proof_status` is `bound` | `unbound` | `n/a-no-remote-claim`.
+! **Legal partial:** local work `done` + ship `not_started` / `blocked` **without** PR/SHA/CI/review fields and `proof_status: n/a-no-remote-claim` (or `status: partial`) is valid — do not invent ship state.
+! **Fail ranking:** **invented-done** (false/unbound remote artifacts under pass) is **stricter** than **empty-done**. Unbound remote claims → invalid evidence (fail), not pass-with-notes.
+! Machine check: `validateHandoffEvidence` in `packages/core/src/handoff-evidence/` (see `templates/agent-prompt-preamble.md` §11).
+⊗ Fill PR / SHA / CI / review fields from recollection, narration, or prior-turn memory.
+⊗ Claim `status: pass` with remote fields when `proof_status` is not `bound` or probes are missing (#3120).
+
 ## Anti-Patterns
 
+- ⊗ End owning turn with 0 children, no sticky lease, and no finish after drive-to-merge / babysit / shepherd claim — silent hold (#3090)
+- ⊗ Emit freeform `review_cycle: started` / `pending` / `initiated` or L4 `status: pass` without `done` or verifiable `in_progress:<pr>#…` lease/parent-retained (#3090)
+- ⊗ Treat check-run SUCCESS alone as CLEAN / merge-ready while dual-source P0/P1 remain (#3090)
 - ⊗ Ignore [`coding/review.md`](../../coding/review.md) while running this adapter — universal batch/severity/exit/post-merge rules live there
 - ⊗ Route PR shepherding to Cursor global `babysit` on Deft-managed repos when `.deft/core/` is installed -- use this review-cycle skill instead (#2261)
 - ⊗ Route OpenClaw babysit/shepherd/watch to main-session gh poll + cron when `sessions_spawn` is available -- use Approach 1 with `sessions_spawn` (#2876 / #2261)
@@ -621,3 +674,5 @@ task lifecycle:event -- emit plan:approved \
 - ⊗ Treat empty/unknown review-monitor settle as DONE/CLEAN/merge-ready without same-turn ground truth (#3044 / FC04 residual)
 - ⊗ Spawn a second review-monitor while prior owner is running or last settle was empty/unknown without terminal ground truth (#3044)
 - ⊗ Accept empty review-monitor final message missing STATUS/HEAD/CHECKS/MERGE handback (#3044)
+- ⊗ Invent remote PR/SHA/CI/review claims in handoff evidence without same-turn probe binding — invented-done (#3120)
+- ⊗ Fill remote ship/gate fields from memory when only local work completed; legal partial omits PR fields (#3120)

package/skills/deft-directive-setup/SKILL.md

@@ -655,7 +655,9 @@ omit = [
 - **anything else** (discuss, yolo, speckit, research, brownfield, map, etc.) →
   1. ! Read `deft/strategies/{strategy-name}.md` **right now, in this same turn**
   2. ! Begin the strategy's workflow immediately — ask its first question
-  3. ! **STOP reading this section** — do NOT use the interview process below
+  3. ! For `research`, the first question is the strategy's Scope Confirmation Gate (#1273); ask it and wait before any autonomous research begins.
+  4. ! For `research`, after the research artifact is written, surface the strategy's Then: Chaining Gate and wait for a user selection; do NOT create scope xBRIEFs from research output unless the user later chooses a spec-generating path; do NOT fall through to the interview output path after research.
+  5. ! **STOP reading this section** — do NOT use the interview process below
 
 - ⊗ Default to interview without reading PROJECT-DEFINITION.xbrief.json
 - ⊗ Continue reading below when PROJECT-DEFINITION.xbrief.json specifies a non-interview strategy
@@ -760,8 +762,14 @@ Per [strategies/interview.md](../../strategies/interview.md#interview-rules-shar
 **Spec Structure (both paths):**
 - ! Overview, Architecture
 - ! Implementation Plan: scope xBRIEFs in `xbrief/proposed/` with phases and dependencies
-- ! Explicit dependency mapping between scopes (via xBRIEF `edges` or `references`)
+- ! Explicit dependency mapping MUST use the field consumers actually read for the scope shape:
+  - **Story-shaped scopes** (`plan.metadata.kind = "story"` or scopes intended for swarm allocation / decompose): sequential/blocked work MUST set `plan.metadata.swarm.depends_on` to an array of **resolvable story identifiers**. Swarm readiness, decompose, and queue traversal read **only** this field for story ordering — not `plan.metadata.dependencies` alone. ! Each `depends_on` entry MUST equal the blocking scope's `plan.id` when that field is set; otherwise the blocking artifact's **filename stem** (basename with `.xbrief.json` / `.vbrief.json` stripped — the same stem readiness uses as `story_id`). ⊗ Use rendered titles, free-form prose, date-only prefixes, or unstripped full filenames — those do not resolve and leave the generated scope blocked.
+  - **Phase/epic or cross-scope roadmap batches**: MAY also set plan-level `plan.metadata.dependencies` for roadmap/export readers.
+  - `edges` / `references` may supplement documentation but **do not** replace `plan.metadata.swarm.depends_on` for sequential story scopes.
+- ! When multiple scopes are produced in one Phase 3 pass, encode machine-readable dependency ordering before finishing the write: independent scopes use empty `plan.metadata.swarm.depends_on` (`[]`); sequential/blocked story scopes use non-empty `plan.metadata.swarm.depends_on`. Optionally mirror the same DAG in `plan.metadata.dependencies` for roadmap views.
 - ~ Scopes designed for parallel work by multiple agents
+- ⊗ Deposit sequential story-shaped scopes with only `plan.metadata.dependencies` / `edges` / `references` and missing `plan.metadata.swarm.depends_on` — orchestration will treat them as independent or reject readiness.
+- ⊗ Deposit multiple generated scope xBRIEFs with no dependency metadata and rely on filenames or human prose for ordering.
 - ! Testing Strategy and Deployment captured in narratives
 - ⊗ Write code — specification only
 

package/skills/deft-directive-swarm/SKILL.md

@@ -115,6 +115,12 @@ Large multi-host skills use a **host-neutral core** plus **one** per-host adapte
 ⊗ Multi-sentence progress-only first response after announce with zero tools / yield (#2943 text-repetition hang).
 ⊗ Treat thin DONE (no PR URL / merge evidence) as success (#2943).
 
+
+
+### Completion latch after first consolidate (#3092)
+
+! After the parent emits **one** user/caller-visible consolidate for a child `runId` / settle batch, **identical or equivalent completion replay** for the same key MUST be **silent** (no tools, no re-QC, no second final; host silent token when defined, e.g. OpenClaw `NO_REPLY`). Re-open only on new `runId`/batch, principal explicit reopen, or materially new evidence (new HEAD, new blocker class). Replay storms: at most one fail-loud note, then silent. Full MUST: `templates/agent-prompt-preamble.md` §11.5. Depth: `references/core-phase-5-6.md`. Orthogonal to empty settle ≠ done (#3044).
+
 ## Runtime Capability Detection (summary)
 
 ! Before selecting a launch method, probe the environment. Full probe text: [`references/core-phase-3.md`](references/core-phase-3.md).
@@ -152,6 +158,7 @@ Large multi-host skills use a **host-neutral core** plus **one** per-host adapte
 - ⊗ Prose-only phase handoff after cohort complete (“I will spawn…”) (#2934)
 - ⊗ Multi-sentence progress-only first response after leaf announce with zero tools / yield (#2943)
 - ⊗ Treat thin DONE (no PR URL / merge evidence) as success (#2943)
+- ⊗ Second+ user-visible consolidate for the same child runId without new evidence (#3092)
 - ⊗ Assign overlapping files to multiple agents
 - ⊗ Merge before Greptile exit condition (score > 3, no P0/P1)
 - ⊗ Skip Phase 0 approval before Phase 1

package/skills/deft-directive-swarm/references/core-ops.md

@@ -143,3 +143,5 @@ CONSTRAINTS:
 - ⊗ End a cohort phase-boundary turn with only narrative “I will spawn…” / “review next” and zero next-phase tool calls and no explicit terminal status (`blocked` / `awaiting-human` / `done`) (#2934)
 - ⊗ Multi-sentence progress-only first response after leaf completion announce (`subagent_announce` / parent-push) with zero tools / yield — tool-first ground-truth batch or host yield only (#2943 text-repetition hang)
 - ⊗ Treat thin DONE (completion without PR URL / merge evidence) as success — re-dispatch or take over after ground truth (#2943)
+- ⊗ Second+ user-visible consolidate / final for the same child `runId` / settle batch without new evidence or principal reopen — completion latch silent-replay path (`templates/agent-prompt-preamble.md` §11.5 / #3092)
+- ⊗ Full dual-source re-QC solely because the harness re-delivered the same settle event (#3092)

package/skills/deft-directive-swarm/references/core-phase-5-6.md

@@ -37,6 +37,8 @@ For each agent's PR:
 
 ! **Parent tool-first after leaf announce (#2943):** On the first parent turn after a leaf completion event (`subagent_announce` / parent-push / host completion notify), the parent MUST either (a) emit a **tool-first** ground-truth batch (`gh` / `git` / worktree or file status), or (b) **yield** (`sessions_yield` on OpenClaw, or host equivalent). ⊗ Multi-sentence progress-only first response with zero tools / yield — the text-repetition hang class.
 
+! **Completion latch after first consolidate (#3092):** After the parent has emitted **one** user/caller-visible consolidate for a child `runId` / settle batch (accept or reject), **identical or equivalent completion replay** for the same key MUST be **silent** (no tools, no re-QC, no second final; host silent token when defined, e.g. OpenClaw `NO_REPLY`). Re-open only on new `runId`/batch, principal explicit reopen, or **materially new** evidence (new HEAD, new blocker class) — not fat re-embeds of the same rollup. Replay storms: at most one fail-loud note, then silent. Full MUST + anti-patterns: `templates/agent-prompt-preamble.md` §11.5. Orthogonal to empty settle ≠ done (#3044).
+
 ### Complete xBRIEFs
 
 ! The cohort's story xBRIEFs are completed by the deterministic **cohort completion sweep** in Phase 6 (`task swarm:complete-cohort`, Phase 6 Step 1.5 below), which runs AFTER the merge cascade. Do NOT move story xBRIEFs out of `xbrief/active/` before their PRs merge — a pre-merge move creates premature state if the merge cascade fails. This section is where the monitor records, per story, what the post-merge sweep will finalize: