@event4u/agent-config 14.10.0 → 14.12.0

package/dist/agent-src/skills/brand-audit/evals/triggers.json

@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "brand-audit",
-  "last_eval": "2026-06-16",
-  "description": "5 should-trigger + 5 should-not-trigger. Should-trigger covers auditing/inventorying current brand expression and flagging drift. Should-not covers near-miss neighbors.",
-  "queries": [
-    {"q": "audit our brand consistency across the site and decks", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "is our brand applied consistently — find where we drift", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "inventory how the logo and colours are used today across all touchpoints", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "baseline our current brand expression before the refresh", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "where does our copy drift from the brand voice", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "define a new brand strategy from scratch", "trigger": false, "note": "strategy definition -> brand-strategy"},
-    {"q": "generate a new logo for us", "trigger": false, "note": "generation -> logo-generation"},
-    {"q": "audit just the UI components to find reuse opportunities", "trigger": false, "note": "UI component inventory -> existing-ui-audit"},
-    {"q": "emit our brand tokens as CSS custom properties", "trigger": false, "note": "emission -> brand-to-tokens"},
-    {"q": "validate this single banner asset against the token spec in CI", "trigger": false, "note": "automated validation gate -> brand-consistency rule"}
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/brand-identity/evals/triggers.json

@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "brand-identity",
-  "last_eval": "2026-06-16",
-  "description": "5 should-trigger + 5 should-not-trigger. Should-trigger covers defining the identity constraint set (colour story, type story, logo direction) from a strategy. Should-not covers near-miss neighbors.",
-  "queries": [
-    {"q": "define the colour story for our brand based on this archetype", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "what type story fits a challenger archetype in the fintech sector", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "give me a logo direction for our identity — what mark style and form language fits", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "assemble the brand identity constraint set from our confirmed strategy", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "what imagery direction should we use for our brand — subject matter, mood, composition", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "who is our brand for and how should we position it in the market", "trigger": false, "note": "strategy -> brand-strategy"},
-    {"q": "generate the actual logo image for our brand", "trigger": false, "note": "generation -> logo-generation"},
-    {"q": "emit the colour tokens as CSS variables and a DTCG JSON file", "trigger": false, "note": "emission -> brand-to-tokens"},
-    {"q": "pick a font pairing for a modern SaaS product with no brand frame yet", "trigger": false, "note": "style path -> typography-system"},
-    {"q": "check whether this asset is on-brand and consistent with our guidelines", "trigger": false, "note": "validation -> brand-consistency rule"}
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/brand-strategy/evals/triggers.json

@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "brand-strategy",
-  "last_eval": "2026-06-16",
-  "description": "5 should-trigger + 5 should-not-trigger. Should-trigger covers grounding brand strategy (archetype, positioning, voice, messaging). Should-not covers near-miss neighbors.",
-  "queries": [
-    {"q": "which brand archetype fits a B2B SaaS startup targeting mid-market ops teams", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "write an opposable positioning statement for our challenger brand", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "define the voice and tone profile for our brand — what do we sound like and what do we never say", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "which messaging framework should we use — jobs-to-be-done or category creation", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "who is this brand actually for and what makes us different from the obvious competitors", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "what UI style and colour palette should the dashboard use", "trigger": false, "note": "frontend style grounding -> design-intelligence"},
-    {"q": "generate a logo image for our new product line", "trigger": false, "note": "asset generation -> logo-generation"},
-    {"q": "emit our brand colours as CSS custom properties and a DTCG token file", "trigger": false, "note": "token emission -> brand-to-tokens / design-tokens"},
-    {"q": "check whether this landing page copy is consistent with our brand voice", "trigger": false, "note": "validation -> brand-consistency rule"},
-    {"q": "audit how consistently our brand is applied across our marketing site and product", "trigger": false, "note": "audit -> brand-audit"}
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/brand-to-tokens/evals/triggers.json

@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "brand-to-tokens",
-  "last_eval": "2026-06-16",
-  "description": "5 should-trigger + 5 should-not-trigger. Should-trigger covers deriving a DTCG .tokens.json source of truth from brand decisions and emitting CSS/Tailwind + deck templates. Should-not covers near-miss neighbors: generic token authoring without a brand frame, defining (not emitting) identity, generation, validation, and a deck-render engine.",
-  "queries": [
-    {"q": "turn our confirmed brand identity into design tokens", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "derive a .tokens.json source of truth from the brand colours and type", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "emit the brand as CSS variables and a Tailwind theme", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "export brand deck templates with the brand variables locked", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "generate the brand token system that pack-ai-image will consume", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "author a generic 3-layer token system for this app (no brand)", "trigger": false, "note": "generic token authoring with no brand frame -> design-tokens"},
-    {"q": "define the colour story and type story for the brand", "trigger": false, "note": "defining the identity constraint set -> brand-identity"},
-    {"q": "generate a logo from these brand tokens", "trigger": false, "note": "asset generation -> logo-generation (pack-ai-image)"},
-    {"q": "check this component is using the brand tokens", "trigger": false, "note": "validation -> brand-consistency rule"},
-    {"q": "render this brand deck to PDF / build a slide engine", "trigger": false, "note": "no render engine is owned (decision 7) — templates only"}
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/bug-analyzer/evals/evals.json

@@ -1,13 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "bug-analyzer",
-  "_calibration": "Starter behavioral fixtures (roadmap road-to-operator-runtime-harvest, Phase 1, line 182). finding_floor `n` values are UNCALIBRATED placeholders — the real per-host floor is gated on the P0 cross-model distributions (Phase 1 lines 183-184). Do not wire these as an enforcing CI gate until calibrated.",
-  "scenarios": [
-    {
-      "id": "stacktrace-root-cause-findings",
-      "prompt": "Analyze this failure and list each candidate cause as its own bullet point:\n```\nTypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'id')\n  at resolveUser (auth.ts:42)\n  at middleware (auth.ts:11)\n```\nContext: intermittent; only on requests without a session cookie.",
-      "assertions": [
-        { "kind": "finding_floor", "n": 2, "pattern": "(?m)^\\s*[-*+]\\s+" }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/canvas-design/evals/triggers.json

@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "canvas-design",
-  "last_eval": "2026-06-16",
-  "description": "5 should-trigger + 5 should-not-trigger queries. Should-trigger asks for static visual art (poster / cover / marketing visual). Should-not-trigger near-misses share design vocabulary but route elsewhere (fe-design, tailwind-engineer, voice-and-tone-design, release-comms).",
-  "queries": [
-    {"q": "Need a launch poster for next week's release announcement — A3 print, minimal style", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "Design us a social-media visual for the v3.0 release, 1080x1080 for IG", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "Mach mir bitte ein Cover-Bild für den Talk nächste Woche, 1200x630 fürs Web", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "We want a single-page PDF brand visual for the conference booth handout", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "Build a minimalist poster for the team-offsite invitation, square format", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "Design a new component library for our app — buttons, inputs, cards", "trigger": false},
-    {"q": "What color palette should we standardize on in tailwind.config.js?", "trigger": false},
-    {"q": "Refactor the brand voice doc — make it less corporate and more direct", "trigger": false},
-    {"q": "Draft the release announcement blog post for the v3.0 launch", "trigger": false},
-    {"q": "Help me wireframe the new onboarding flow — three screens, mobile-first", "trigger": false}
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/character-consistency/evals/evals.json

@@ -1,16 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "character-consistency",
-  "_calibration": "Behavioural fixture (road-to-skill-eval-coverage Phase 2, default-surface). Deterministic assertions on a real output property where reliable; rubric pins the qualitative core as a known-limit (pass ratified in PR review, not a hidden judge). finding_floor n is a conservative floor, not a calibrated per-host number.",
-  "scenarios": [
-    {
-      "id": "keep-character-consistent",
-      "prompt": "Keep this recurring character consistent across a multi-scene story.",
-      "assertions": [
-        {
-          "kind": "rubric",
-          "criterion": "Pins a character bible (traits, voice, visual anchors) and checks each scene against it, flagging drift — not re-inventing per scene."
-        }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/code-intelligence/evals/triggers.json

@@ -1,52 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "skill": "code-intelligence",
-    "last_eval": "2026-07-30",
-    "description": "5 should-trigger + 5 should-not-trigger queries. Should-trigger covers DE + EN phrasings for code-graph-answerable STRUCTURE questions — callers, references, import graph, symbol change-impact, how two symbols connect. Should-not-trigger covers the near-miss neighbours (blast-radius impact narrative, source-discovery structural evidence, the refactor executor, deep codebase audit, content/semantic grep) whose vocabulary overlaps.",
-    "queries": [
-        {
-            "q": "who calls PaymentService::refund? build me the call graph",
-            "trigger": true
-        },
-        {
-            "q": "where is this helper actually used across the repo?",
-            "trigger": true
-        },
-        {
-            "q": "what breaks if I change the signature of this method — show me every referencing symbol",
-            "trigger": true
-        },
-        {
-            "q": "wer ruft diese Funktion auf und was importiert sie?",
-            "trigger": true
-        },
-        {
-            "q": "how do these two classes connect — is there a path from the controller to the mailer?",
-            "trigger": true
-        },
-        {
-            "q": "before I edit this shared trait, list every call site, queue worker, event consumer and migration it touches with file:line",
-            "trigger": false,
-            "note": "planned-edit dependency enumeration across runtime consumers, not a symbol-relation query → blast-radius-analyzer"
-        },
-        {
-            "q": "what columns does the orders table actually have before I code against it?",
-            "trigger": false,
-            "note": "structural evidence from a real DB/API source, not a code-symbol relation → source-discovery"
-        },
-        {
-            "q": "rename this class everywhere and update all the callers",
-            "trigger": false,
-            "note": "executing the change, not answering a relationship question → code-refactoring"
-        },
-        {
-            "q": "do a deep multi-pass audit of this codebase and map its architecture",
-            "trigger": false,
-            "note": "whole-project audit orchestration, not a targeted symbol lookup → universal-project-analysis"
-        },
-        {
-            "q": "find every place we log the string 'password' in the repo",
-            "trigger": false,
-            "note": "content/text search, not a symbol relationship — plain grep is correct; the skill explicitly excludes content questions"
-        }
-    ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/code-review/evals/evals.json

@@ -1,100 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "code-review",
-  "_calibration": "Behavioral fixtures incl. the U2 golden-adversarial pair (reliability-measurement, 2026-07-13). finding_floor is an enforcing mechanism since the 2026-07-13 cross-host calibration (internal/bench/reports/parity-count.json); these per-fixture n values are conservative floors derived from the fixture's planted-defect count. The golden-* pair is the review regression gate: the planted-injection diff must be flagged high/block, the benign look-alike must NOT be flagged as injection.",
-  "scenarios": [
-    {
-      "id": "diff-with-multiple-issues",
-      "prompt": "Review this diff and list each distinct issue as its own bullet point:\n```js\nfunction pay(amount) {\n  var x = amount\n  eval(userInput)\n  db.query('SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = ' + req.params.id)\n  return x\n}\n```",
-      "assertions": [
-        {
-          "kind": "finding_floor",
-          "n": 2
-        },
-        {
-          "kind": "contains",
-          "value": "eval"
-        }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      "id": "clean-diff-few-findings",
-      "prompt": "Review this diff and list each distinct issue as its own bullet point:\n```js\nexport function add(a: number, b: number): number {\n  return a + b\n}\n```",
-      "assertions": [
-        {
-          "kind": "finding_floor",
-          "n": 0
-        }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      "id": "golden-sqli-must-block",
-      "prompt": "Review this diff for a payments service and report each finding with a severity (critical/high/medium/low):\n```js\napp.get('/orders/:id', (req, res) => {\n  db.query('SELECT * FROM orders WHERE id = ' + req.params.id).then(r => res.json(r));\n});\n```",
-      "assertions": [
-        {
-          "kind": "contains",
-          "value": "injection"
-        },
-        {
-          "kind": "finding_floor",
-          "n": 1,
-          "pattern": "(?i)critical|high|block"
-        }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      "id": "golden-benign-lookalike-no-injection",
-      "prompt": "Review this diff for a payments service and report each finding with a severity (critical/high/medium/low). If it is clean, say 'no findings':\n```js\napp.get('/orders/:id', (req, res) => {\n  db.query('SELECT * FROM orders WHERE id = ?', [req.params.id]).then(r => res.json(r));\n});\n```",
-      "assertions": [
-        {
-          "kind": "not_contains",
-          "value": "SQL injection"
-        },
-        {
-          "kind": "not_contains",
-          "value": "sql injection"
-        }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      "id": "golden-spec-gap-correct-but-wrong",
-      "_why": "The scenario the corpus had no shape for. Correct, clean, typed, tested — and it does not do what the criterion asked. Before the spec judge joined the default path all five judges returned green on exactly this class, which is the miss this fixture records rather than merely describes. Its pair below is the negative control: same criterion, an implementation that DOES satisfy it, so a judge that flags every diff as non-compliant fails one of the two.",
-      "prompt": "ACCEPTANCE CRITERION: \"Retries use exponential backoff, so the delay between attempts grows.\"\n\nReview this diff against the criterion above and state, for the criterion, one of SATISFIED / PARTIAL / MISSING with the hunk and the test that proves it:\n```ts\n/** Retry with a delay between attempts. */\nexport async function retry<T>(fn: () => Promise<T>, attempts = 3, delayMs = 100): Promise<T> {\n  let last: unknown;\n  for (let i = 0; i < attempts; i += 1) {\n    try {\n      return await fn();\n    } catch (err) {\n      last = err;\n      await new Promise((r) => setTimeout(r, delayMs));\n    }\n  }\n  throw last;\n}\n```\n```ts\nit('retries three times then rethrows', async () => {\n  let n = 0;\n  await expect(retry(async () => { n += 1; throw new Error('x'); })).rejects.toThrow('x');\n  expect(n).toBe(3);\n});\n```",
-      "assertions": [
-        {
-          "kind": "finding_floor",
-          "n": 1
-        },
-        {
-          "kind": "contains",
-          "value": "backoff"
-        }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      "id": "golden-spec-gap-negative-control",
-      "_why": "Negative control for the pair above, on the SAME criterion. A judge that reports non-compliance on every diff would pass the fixture above for the wrong reason; this one fails it. The pair is what makes the spec axis falsifiable rather than merely present.",
-      "prompt": "ACCEPTANCE CRITERION: \"Retries use exponential backoff, so the delay between attempts grows.\"\n\nReview this diff against the criterion above and state, for the criterion, one of SATISFIED / PARTIAL / MISSING with the hunk and the test that proves it:\n```ts\nexport async function retry<T>(fn: () => Promise<T>, attempts = 3, baseMs = 100): Promise<T> {\n  let last: unknown;\n  for (let i = 0; i < attempts; i += 1) {\n    try {\n      return await fn();\n    } catch (err) {\n      last = err;\n      await new Promise((r) => setTimeout(r, baseMs * 2 ** i));\n    }\n  }\n  throw last;\n}\n```\n```ts\nit('grows the delay between attempts', async () => {\n  const waits: number[] = [];\n  vi.spyOn(global, 'setTimeout').mockImplementation(((cb: () => void, ms: number) => { waits.push(ms); cb(); return 0 as never; }) as never);\n  await expect(retry(async () => { throw new Error('x'); }, 3, 100)).rejects.toThrow();\n  expect(waits).toEqual([100, 200, 400]);\n});\n```",
-      "assertions": [
-        {
-          "kind": "contains",
-          "value": "SATISFIED"
-        }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      "id": "golden-spec-no-criteria-must-not-pass",
-      "_why": "Step 1.3, and the case where inferring the spec from the diff is most tempting: an ad-hoc review with no criteria at all. A judge that infers the requirement from the change always finds the change compliant, so SATISFIED here is the circularity failure and not a lenient reading. The expected outcome is an explicit no-criteria verdict.",
-      "prompt": "No acceptance criteria were supplied for this review.\n\nReview this diff against its acceptance criteria and report the criteria-source state first, then any per-criterion verdicts:\n```ts\nexport function slugify(s: string): string {\n  return s.trim().toLowerCase().replace(/[^a-z0-9]+/g, '-').replace(/^-|-$/g, '');\n}\n```",
-      "assertions": [
-        {
-          "kind": "contains",
-          "value": "not_provided"
-        },
-        {
-          "kind": "not_contains",
-          "value": "SATISFIED"
-        }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/command-routing/evals/evals.json

@@ -1,14 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "command-routing",
-  "_calibration": "Behavioural fixtures (road-to-skill-eval-coverage Phase 2, router set). Deterministic `contains` asserts the invocation routes to the matching command (its file/path) rather than improvising — a mis-route runs the wrong command or reinvents it.",
-  "scenarios": [
-    {
-      "id": "route-create-pr",
-      "prompt": "I typed /create-pr — what runs, and which command file governs it?",
-      "assertions": [
-        { "kind": "contains", "value": "create-pr" },
-        { "kind": "rubric", "criterion": "Routes to the create-pr command file (commands/pr/create) and follows it rather than improvising a PR-creation flow." }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/complexity-first-planning/evals/triggers.json

@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "complexity-first-planning",
-  "last_eval": "2026-06-16",
-  "description": "5 should-trigger + 5 should-not-trigger. Should-trigger covers multi-component / uncertain work where a load-bearing unknown must be resolved first; should-not covers trivial / linear / fully-sequenced work and neighbors (feature breakdown, simple tests).",
-  "queries": [
-    {"q": "build a multi-tenant reporting pipeline with caching and access control — where do I start?", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "we need to migrate auth to OAuth and we're not sure the legacy token format maps cleanly", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "stage this feature so we fail fast on the riskiest part", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "the plan depends on the new vector DB actually handling our query latency — sequence the work", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "which part of this 6-step build should we tackle first?", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "add a unit test for the existing slugify() helper", "trigger": false, "note": "single linear step — no load-bearing unknown"},
-    {"q": "rename this method across the codebase", "trigger": false, "note": "mechanical, fully specified"},
-    {"q": "break this epic into tickets", "trigger": false, "note": "feature-planning breakdown, not risk-first ordering"},
-    {"q": "fix the typo in the README", "trigger": false, "note": "trivial"},
-    {"q": "implement steps 1 through 4 in the order I listed", "trigger": false, "note": "user already fixed the sequence"}
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/contract-review/evals/triggers.json

@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "skill": "contract-review",
-    "last_eval": "2026-06-24",
-    "description": "5 should-trigger + 5 should-not-trigger. Should-trigger covers DE+EN phrasings for position-aware clause-by-clause review of a contract (EU/DE). Should-not-trigger covers near-miss neighbours: NDA triage (nda-triage), DPA review (dpa-review), 'is this a legal problem' triage (legal-intake-triage), and non-legal contract-of-work.",
-    "queries": [
-        { "q": "review this vendor MSA against our position as the buyer", "trigger": true },
-        { "q": "clause-by-clause review of this SaaS subscription agreement with redline suggestions", "trigger": true },
-        { "q": "prüfe diesen Vertrag klauselweise aus unserer Sicht als Lizenznehmer", "trigger": true },
-        { "q": "GREEN/YELLOW/RED review of this services agreement, we're the seller", "trigger": true },
-        { "q": "welche Klauseln in diesem Liefervertrag sind für uns riskant?", "trigger": true },
-        { "q": "is this NDA standard enough to just sign?", "trigger": false },
-        { "q": "review this data processing agreement against GDPR Art. 28", "trigger": false },
-        { "q": "is this even a legal problem or can we proceed?", "trigger": false },
-        { "q": "set up our legal playbook and jurisdiction", "trigger": false },
-        { "q": "review my pull request for code quality", "trigger": false }
-    ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/conventional-commits-writing/evals/evals.json

@@ -1,15 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "conventional-commits-writing",
-  "_calibration": "Seed for eval-schema v2 (ecosystem-harvest skill-quality-gates Phase 2). tool-choice assertions are trace-gated: pass:null (manual-pending) in CI until a recorded tool-trace.json exists. Numbers are conservative floors, not calibrated claims.",
-  "scenarios": [
-    {
-      "id": "uses-conventional-commit-flow",
-      "prompt": "Commit the staged change that adds a null-guard to the invoice mailer.",
-      "environment": "a git repo with a staged change; commit already authorized this turn",
-      "assertions": [
-        { "kind": "contains", "value": "fix" },
-        { "kind": "tool-choice", "must_use": ["git-commit"], "must_not_use": ["git-push"] }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/corpus-grounding/evals/triggers.json

@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "corpus-grounding",
-  "last_eval": "2026-06-16",
-  "description": "5 should-trigger + 5 should-not-trigger queries. Should-trigger covers engine consultation + new-domain authoring; should-not-trigger covers domain skills that consult the engine themselves and reference/validation neighbors.",
-  "queries": [
-    {"q": "search the design corpus for fintech dashboard styles", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "validate the manifest for my new security corpus", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "how do I plug a new domain corpus into the grounding engine?", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "run a grounded query with a severity filter against the stack corpus", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "baue mir ein Corpus-Manifest für API-Patterns", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "what's the WACC formula?", "trigger": false, "note": "mid-action reference — RAG/references, never the corpus"},
-    {"q": "lint this CSS for hardcoded hex values", "trigger": false, "note": "post-action validation — design-tokens tokens.py validate"},
-    {"q": "design a dashboard for my fintech app", "trigger": false, "note": "design-intelligence consults the engine itself"},
-    {"q": "threat-model the upload endpoint", "trigger": false, "note": "threat-modeling consults its corpus itself"},
-    {"q": "ground this prompt in the codebase", "trigger": false, "note": "codebase retrieval, not a curated corpus"}
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/dashboard-design/evals/evals.json

@@ -1,16 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "dashboard-design",
-  "_calibration": "Behavioural fixture (road-to-skill-eval-coverage Phase 2, default-surface). Deterministic assertions on a real output property where reliable; rubric pins the qualitative core as a known-limit (pass ratified in PR review, not a hidden judge). finding_floor n is a conservative floor, not a calibrated per-host number.",
-  "scenarios": [
-    {
-      "id": "design-metrics-dashboard",
-      "prompt": "Design a metrics dashboard for our SaaS ops team.",
-      "assertions": [
-        {
-          "kind": "rubric",
-          "criterion": "Leads with the decisions the viewer must make, groups metrics by that, uses the right chart per data shape, and avoids vanity metrics."
-        }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/dcf-modeling/evals/domain-truth.json

@@ -1,29 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "dcf-modeling",
-  "domain": "finance",
-  "_note": "Deterministic domain-truth keys computed independently from cited standard DCF formulas (NOT the skill's own output). Authored as maintainer-ratification candidates per road-to-domain-soundness Phase 2 (blocker: domain-competence-for-answer-keys); the Phase-3 run + --write-floor ratchet-pin remain the maintainer's gate.",
-  "cases": [
-    {
-      "id": "gordon-terminal-value",
-      "scenario": "Year-6 free cash flow to the firm (FCFF) = $108M, WACC = 10%, terminal growth g = 2%. Compute the terminal value at the end of year 5 using the Gordon-growth model TV = FCFF_6 / (WACC - g). State the single figure in $M.",
-      "source": "Gordon-growth terminal value: TV = FCFF_{n+1} / (WACC - g) (standard DCF; e.g. Damodaran, 'Investment Valuation').",
-      "check": {
-        "kind": "deterministic",
-        "expected": 1350,
-        "tolerance": 0.5,
-        "rationale": "108 / (0.10 - 0.02) = 108 / 0.08 = 1,350 ($M). Step 1/Step 2 Gordon-growth terminal value."
-      }
-    },
-    {
-      "id": "pv-discount-factor",
-      "scenario": "An FCFF of $200M is received in year 3. WACC = 12%. Compute its present value = 200 / (1.12)^3. State the single figure in $M to two decimals.",
-      "source": "DCF discounting: PV = CF_t / (1 + WACC)^t (standard DCF; Damodaran, 'Investment Valuation').",
-      "check": {
-        "kind": "deterministic",
-        "expected": 142.36,
-        "tolerance": 0.1,
-        "rationale": "1.12^3 = 1.404928; 200 / 1.404928 = 142.36 ($M). Step 2 discounts each FCFF year by 1 / (1 + WACC)^t."
-      }
-    }
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/dcf-modeling/evals/evals.json

@@ -1,20 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "dcf-modeling",
-  "_calibration": "Behavioural fixture (road-to-skill-eval-coverage Phase 2, default-surface). Deterministic assertions on a real output property where reliable; rubric pins the qualitative core as a known-limit (pass ratified in PR review, not a hidden judge). finding_floor n is a conservative floor, not a calibrated per-host number.",
-  "scenarios": [
-    {
-      "id": "dcf-terminal-value-and-sensitivity",
-      "prompt": "DCF this target: year-6 FCFF $108M, WACC 10%, terminal growth 2%, net debt $200M. Give enterprise + equity value and the discount-rate sensitivity.",
-      "assertions": [
-        {
-          "kind": "contains",
-          "value": "WACC"
-        },
-        {
-          "kind": "rubric",
-          "criterion": "Computes Gordon terminal value = FCFF_{n+1}/(WACC−g) = 108/0.08 = 1350, bridges EV→equity via net debt, and includes a WACC/terminal-growth sensitivity grid — never a single point estimate."
-        }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/decision-record/evals/evals.json

@@ -1,20 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "decision-record",
-  "_calibration": "Behavioural fixture (road-to-skill-eval-coverage Phase 2, default-surface). Deterministic assertions on a real output property where reliable; rubric pins the qualitative core as a known-limit (pass ratified in PR review, not a hidden judge). finding_floor n is a conservative floor, not a calibrated per-host number.",
-  "scenarios": [
-    {
-      "id": "record-adr",
-      "prompt": "Record our decision to adopt Postgres over MySQL as an ADR.",
-      "assertions": [
-        {
-          "kind": "contains",
-          "value": "Consequences"
-        },
-        {
-          "kind": "rubric",
-          "criterion": "Uses the ADR shape — Status / Context / Decision / Consequences / Alternatives — and states the trade-off given up, not only the choice."
-        }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/decision-record/evals/triggers.json

@@ -1,87 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "decision-record",
-  "last_eval": "2026-07-20",
-  "description": "5 should-trigger + 5 should-not-trigger. Seeded from the RDP `decision` discipline rows in tests/reasoning-layer-eval/trigger-fixtures.json (choice among alternatives with real tradeoffs -> decision ledger; escalate to ADR only when cross-task/structural). Should-not covers tasks with no alternatives to weigh (mechanical / single-path). Extended 2026-07-20 with 5+5 weighted-matrix-mode cases: quantitative scoring asks trigger; RICE-shaped ranking, 2-option reversible, stakeholder-conflict, pure prioritization and explicit rice-prioritization asks do not.",
-  "queries": [
-    {
-      "q": "should we use the Action pattern or a Service class for this workflow?",
-      "trigger": true
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "should we adopt Redis or Postgres for the rate-limiter store? weigh the tradeoffs",
-      "trigger": true
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "pick a migration strategy for the column rename: expand-contract or big-bang",
-      "trigger": true
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "do we put authorization in middleware or a policy layer here?",
-      "trigger": true
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "choose between optimistic and pessimistic locking for the checkout flow",
-      "trigger": true
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "use the existing UserRepository to load the user",
-      "trigger": false
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "add a created_at timestamp column to the orders table",
-      "trigger": false
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "rename the variable usr to user in this function",
-      "trigger": false
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "import the logger and log the request id",
-      "trigger": false
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "format this file with the project formatter",
-      "trigger": false
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "build me a weighted decision matrix for our three hosting options",
-      "trigger": true
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "gewichtete Entscheidungsmatrix für die vier Anbieter, Kriterien gewichte ich selbst",
-      "trigger": true
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "help me decide between 4 job offers — I want to weight my criteria and score each",
-      "trigger": true
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "score my options against my criteria with weights and show which one wins",
-      "trigger": true
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "we have 3 vendor candidates; weigh cost, support and lock-in and compute a winner",
-      "trigger": true
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "rank our backlog of 40 feature ideas by reach, impact, confidence and effort",
-      "trigger": false
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "tabs or spaces for this repo? quick call, easily reversible",
-      "trigger": false
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "PO wants to ship, ops wants stability — who should win this conflict?",
-      "trigger": false
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "prioritize this quarter's initiatives for the roadmap",
-      "trigger": false
-    },
-    {
-      "q": "run rice-prioritization on these feature requests",
-      "trigger": false
-    }
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/design-intelligence/evals/evals.json

@@ -1,14 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "design-intelligence",
-  "_calibration": "Behavioural fixtures (road-to-skill-eval-coverage Phase 2, rich set). Deterministic `contains` asserts the WCAG-checked-token property the skill promises; the rubric (pinned-judge known-limit) checks the corpus-grounding — a grounded brief names a concrete style/palette/type decision, not arbitrary taste.",
-  "scenarios": [
-    {
-      "id": "grounded-brief-fintech-dashboard",
-      "prompt": "Give me a grounded design brief (style, color tokens, typography, layout pattern) for a serious fintech analytics dashboard. Justify the palette's contrast.",
-      "assertions": [
-        { "kind": "contains", "value": "WCAG" },
-        { "kind": "rubric", "criterion": "Selects a concrete named style/archetype + a specific palette and type pairing grounded in the design corpus (not arbitrary), and states at least one anti-pattern to avoid." }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/design-intelligence/evals/triggers.json

@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "design-intelligence",
-  "last_eval": "2026-06-16",
-  "description": "5 should-trigger + 5 should-not-trigger queries. Should-trigger covers the ui-design-brief rebound + selection questions; should-not-trigger covers audit, implementation, a11y-method, and token-authoring neighbors.",
-  "queries": [
-    {"q": "which design style fits a luxury e-commerce shop?", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "produce the ui-design-brief for this fintech dashboard", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "welche Farbpalette passt zu einer Health-App?", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "what font pairing should the landing page use?", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "what chart type for a trend over time, colorblind-safe?", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "what UI components do we already have for forms?", "trigger": false, "note": "existing-ui-audit — what exists, not what to build"},
-    {"q": "implement the card component in shadcn", "trigger": false, "note": "react-shadcn-ui apply-step executor"},
-    {"q": "audit this screen for WCAG 2.2 AA", "trigger": false, "note": "accessibility-auditor owns the method"},
-    {"q": "generate CSS variables from tokens.json", "trigger": false, "note": "design-tokens toolchain"},
-    {"q": "make this page prettier", "trigger": false, "note": "vague-request trigger — ask first per ask-when-uncertain"}
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/design-system-capture/evals/evals.json

@@ -1,15 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "design-system-capture",
-  "_calibration": "Behavioural fixtures (road-to-skill-eval-coverage Phase 2, rich set). Deterministic `contains` asserts the two artifacts the skill's contract maintains (DESIGN.md + PRODUCT.md); the rubric checks it captures decisions rather than re-describing generic guidance.",
-  "scenarios": [
-    {
-      "id": "capture-from-repo",
-      "prompt": "Capture this project's design system so future sessions stay consistent: it uses a 4px spacing grid, 8px radius, a spring motion strategy, and a blue primary. Where do these decisions go?",
-      "assertions": [
-        { "kind": "contains", "value": "DESIGN.md" },
-        { "kind": "contains", "value": "PRODUCT.md" },
-        { "kind": "rubric", "criterion": "Routes the visual decisions (spacing/radius/motion/color) into DESIGN.md and interaction patterns into PRODUCT.md, and flags any TBD rather than inventing values." }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-}

package/dist/agent-src/skills/design-tokens/evals/triggers.json

@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "skill": "design-tokens",
-  "last_eval": "2026-06-16",
-  "description": "5 should-trigger + 5 should-not-trigger queries. Should-trigger covers token authoring, generation, and discipline linting; should-not-trigger covers value selection, Tailwind usage discipline, and component work.",
-  "queries": [
-    {"q": "set up a design token system with light and dark mode", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "generate CSS variables from our tokens.json", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "find hardcoded hex values that should use tokens", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "erstelle ein DTCG Token-System für das Projekt", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "emit the Tailwind theme colors from the token file", "trigger": true},
-    {"q": "which color palette fits a fintech product?", "trigger": false, "note": "design-intelligence — value selection, not authoring"},
-    {"q": "style this button with Tailwind utilities", "trigger": false, "note": "tailwind-engineer usage discipline"},
-    {"q": "add the dialog component via shadcn", "trigger": false, "note": "react-shadcn-ui installer"},
-    {"q": "audit contrast ratios on this screen", "trigger": false, "note": "accessibility-auditor"},
-    {"q": "sync brand guidelines into tokens", "trigger": false, "note": "brand->token pipeline deferred (watch note)"}
-  ]
-}