@event4u/agent-config 14.23.0 → 15.0.0

package/dist/agent-src/skills/judge-synthesis/SKILL.md

@@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ reproduces the pre-filter defect one layer up — the finding was found, the
 reviewer reported it, and the aggregator withheld it. Filtering is the
 consumer's pass, after the ledger is whole. Output shape, the separate
 `Confidence` field, and the preserve-an-unverified-S0 rule are specified once in
-[`adversarial-review-protocol`](../../../docs/contracts/adversarial-review-protocol.md)
+[`adversarial-review-protocol`](../../docs/contracts/adversarial-review-protocol.md)
 § 3.
 
 ### 2. Find consensus (highest confidence)

package/dist/agent-src/skills/laravel-api-endpoint/SKILL.md

@@ -39,8 +39,8 @@ Do NOT use when:
 
 ## What to generate
 
-1. **Controller** — Single Action (invokable). Read `agents/reference/docs/controller.md` and `../../../docs/guidelines/php/controllers.md`.
-2. **FormRequest** — Validation rules, `authorize()` via policies. Read `../../../docs/guidelines/php/validations.md`.
+1. **Controller** — Single Action (invokable). Read `agents/reference/docs/controller.md` and `../../guidelines/php/controllers.md`.
+2. **FormRequest** — Validation rules, `authorize()` via policies. Read `../../guidelines/php/validations.md`.
 3. **Resource** — JSON response transformation. Read `agents/reference/docs/api-resources.md`.
 4. **Route** — Add to the correct versioned route file.
 5. **Policy** — If authorization is needed.

package/dist/agent-src/skills/launch-readiness/SKILL.md

@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ This skill produces the **decision** to ship and the rollback contract.
 - **Mental model 10 — Reversible vs irreversible.** Map every step
   of the rollout to a reversibility class; the rollback criteria
   must name the irreversible steps and the abort threshold for each.
-  See [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 10.
+  See [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 10.
 - **Mental model 29 — Pre-mortems.** Imagine the rollout failed in
   six hours; what failed first? The pre-mortem becomes the rollback
   criteria, not a separate document. See `mental-models.md` § 29.
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ This skill produces the **decision** to ship and the rollback contract.
 - **Team + product context-spine slots.** Read **team** for the
   on-call rotation and ops handoff path; read **product** for the
   segment / cohort exposure of the rollout. See
-  [`context-spine`](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
+  [`context-spine`](../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
 
 ## Procedure
 
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ hand-wave.
 ### 2b. Epistemics block — the diagnostic report (contract-backed)
 
 For a consumer-facing diagnostic (not just the merge decision), emit a
-report per [`docs/contracts/prelaunch-diagnostics.md`](../../../docs/contracts/prelaunch-diagnostics.md)
+report per [`docs/contracts/prelaunch-diagnostics.md`](../../docs/contracts/prelaunch-diagnostics.md)
 (schema: `prelaunch-report.schema.json`). Rules:
 
 - **Coverage backbone** — diagnose exactly the fixed area vocabulary

package/dist/agent-src/skills/learning-to-rule-or-skill/SKILL.md

@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ Use this skill when:
 * Deciding whether a learning belongs in a rule or a skill
 * After completing a task — reflecting on what worked or caused friction
 * Mining the audit log (`agents/runtime/state/audit/<YYYY-MM>.jsonl`,
-  [`audit-log-v1`](../../../docs/contracts/audit-log-v1.md)) surfaced
+  [`audit-log-v1`](../../docs/contracts/audit-log-v1.md)) surfaced
   a repeated phase pattern via
   [`extract_audit_patterns.ts`](../../../scripts/extract_audit_patterns.ts)
   — the pattern's `count` ≥ 2 already satisfies the repetition gate
@@ -223,7 +223,7 @@ The output of this skill is a **curated proposal** under
 `.augment/templates/agents/proposal.example.md` (shipped by the
 package). This is the input to the five-stage pipeline
 (capture → classify → propose → gate → upstream); see
-[`self-improvement-pipeline`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/self-improvement-pipeline.md).
+[`self-improvement-pipeline`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/self-improvement-pipeline.md).
 
 Mandatory fields the draft MUST fill:
 
@@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ Mandatory fields the draft MUST fill:
   file this proposal was captured from
 * `evidence` — **at least two independent** references (PR, issue,
   incident, review-comment, test-failure, **or audit-log line ids**
-  per [`audit-log-v1`](../../../docs/contracts/audit-log-v1.md));
+  per [`audit-log-v1`](../../docs/contracts/audit-log-v1.md));
   entries that all resolve to the same PR or the same audit-log
   `run_id` are rejected by the gate (independence floor)
 * `Proposed artefact` (§4) — the full draft body, no `TODO` / `TBD`
@@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ the gap is documented in its skill body.
 When the input is a pattern surfaced by
 [`extract_audit_patterns.ts`](../../../scripts/extract_audit_patterns.ts)
 mining `agents/runtime/state/audit/<YYYY-MM>.jsonl`
-([`audit-log-v1`](../../../docs/contracts/audit-log-v1.md)):
+([`audit-log-v1`](../../docs/contracts/audit-log-v1.md)):
 
 1. Treat the script's pattern record as the **State the learning**
    step input (§1) — `pattern.summary` is the one-sentence
@@ -381,8 +381,8 @@ step):
 2. **Ground the draft in the original session logs, never the
    consolidated summary alone.** The candidate entry's `Sessions:`
    list names the chat-history session ids the topic recurred in —
-   pull those via [`/chat-history import`](../../../commands/chat-history/import.md)
-   (select by id) or the host's native transcript view before
+   read those from the host's native transcript view, or reconstruct
+   them manually from the retained continuity records, before
    drafting. A skill written purely from the recurrence-counter
    summary tends to be plausible but wrong; the original transcripts
    carry the detail the summary dropped.

package/dist/agent-src/skills/livewire/SKILL.md

@@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ current state on the next polish round.
 ## Anti-slop
 
 When a Livewire component renders UI, pull
-[`docs/guidelines/design-antipatterns.md`](../../../docs/guidelines/design-antipatterns.md)
+[`docs/guidelines/design-antipatterns.md`](../../guidelines/design-antipatterns.md)
 for the Visual / Layout / Motion checks (loading states that animate layout
 properties — M2 — are a common Livewire `wire:loading` pitfall). Stack styling
 bans: [`tailwind-engineer`](../tailwind-engineer/SKILL.md).

package/dist/agent-src/skills/market-entry-analysis/SKILL.md

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ Do NOT use for build-vs-buy decisions on capability gaps (route to `build-buy-pa
 
 ## Cognition cluster
 
-- **Mental model 23 — Beachhead.** Pick a single segment / geo / vertical where the constraints favour winning, then expand from a position of strength. Trying to enter "the whole market" with no beachhead is the canonical failure pattern. See [`mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 23.
+- **Mental model 23 — Beachhead.** Pick a single segment / geo / vertical where the constraints favour winning, then expand from a position of strength. Trying to enter "the whole market" with no beachhead is the canonical failure pattern. See [`mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 23.
 - **Mental model 21 — Second-order thinking.** Entry costs (sales motion, regulatory compliance, segment-specific support) compound across markets. Reading entry as *"just open the door"* misses the second-order shape of multi-market operations. See `mental-models.md` § 21.
 - **Mental model 16 — Leading vs lagging.** Revenue from new market is lagging; **segment-specific pipeline coverage** + **win rates against incumbents in target segment** are leading. Reading only lagging signals = entering markets that already won't work. See `mental-models.md` § 16.
 - **Context-spine — customer-segment + regulatory-regime + product.** Read **customer-segment** for which buyer cohort the entry targets; **regulatory-regime** for the compliance delta (often the load-bearing cost in geo expansion); **product** for what's GA-shippable in the target market without re-platforming.

package/dist/agent-src/skills/mcp-builder/SKILL.md

@@ -118,4 +118,4 @@ Workflow sequencing, preconditions, ID/output provenance ("copy ids verbatim,
 never from memory"), a mandatory "why" intent field, and turn-end contracts
 belong INSIDE this artifact's description/frontmatter — where they fire at the
 decision point — not in always-on prose. See
-[`tool-description-as-policy`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/tool-description-as-policy.md).
+[`tool-description-as-policy`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/tool-description-as-policy.md).

package/dist/agent-src/skills/memory-consolidation/SKILL.md

@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ user-scoped channel (§ Global user-scoped channel, below) — never into
 - **Mental model 5 — Signal vs. noise.** A consolidation pass that
   promotes 30 entries from a 50-message session is noise; the Pareto
   cut is roughly 3–5 promote-worthy signals per cycle. See
-  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 5.
+  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 5.
 - **Mental model 12 — Defense in depth.** Date-discipline, tag
   intersection, and per-invocation transcript-access confirmation are
   three independent guards; any one alone fails open. See § 12.
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ not advance until the gate is green.
    once here — CONSOLIDATE step 2 needs the answer to know whether
    project-scoped facts land in `agents/memory/intake/` or route through
    the global buffer instead (§ Project attribution channel, below).
-3. Review the **repo** slot of the [context-spine](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md)
+3. Review the **repo** slot of the [context-spine](../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md)
    for project boundaries (modules, owners, sensitive paths). If empty,
    note the gap in the consolidation report; do not invent.
 4. Resolve the `TranscriptAdapter` for the current host (see Adapter
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ Read it before touching either path — the guards are restated there, not linke
 
    A fact may carry **two** tags; the promoter resolves via tag
    intersection, not by file extension. See
-   [`memory-access`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/memory-access.md)
+   [`memory-access`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/memory-access.md)
    for the file-backed retrieval contract over the curated YAML.
 
 2. **Managed project only** (§ Project attribution channel, above, for the

package/dist/agent-src/skills/messaging-architecture/SKILL.md

@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ launch sequencing (route to `gtm-launch`).
   segment's noise floor, not just be true. Estimate the noise before
   drafting; without it, every line looks distinctive in the doc and
   forgettable in market. See
-  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 15.
+  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 15.
 - **Mental model 30 — Inversion.** Ask *"what is the strongest
   message a credible alternative would land against us?"* The answer
   exposes the proofs the message stack must carry, not the words.
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ launch sequencing (route to `gtm-launch`).
   slot for the proofs the team can actually back; read the
   **customer-segment** slot for the buyer's listening posture.
   Architecture that exceeds the proofs available is fiction. See
-  [`context-spine`](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
+  [`context-spine`](../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
 
 ## Procedure
 

package/dist/agent-src/skills/monorepo-workspace/SKILL.md

@@ -172,4 +172,4 @@ When the runner was absent, the last line reads
 - [`standards-from-config`](../standards-from-config/SKILL.md) — the Class-A pointer+digest shape this follows.
 - [`workspace-link`](../workspace-link/SKILL.md) — when a cross-workspace import will not resolve.
 - [`blast-radius-analyzer`](../blast-radius-analyzer/SKILL.md) — § Monorepo consumes this graph.
-- [`monorepo-antipatterns`](../../../docs/guidelines/monorepo-antipatterns.md) — diff-detectable task-graph mistakes.
+- [`monorepo-antipatterns`](../../guidelines/monorepo-antipatterns.md) — diff-detectable task-graph mistakes.

package/dist/agent-src/skills/onboarding-design/SKILL.md

@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ to `funnel-analysis`).
   reshapes retention more than a change in the welcome email. Pick
   the leverage point — milestone definition over surface polish.
   See
-  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 14.
+  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 14.
 - **Mental model 16 — Leading vs. lagging indicators.**
   Time-to-first-value and milestone-completion are leading; D30
   retention is lagging. Onboarding decisions built on lagging
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ to `funnel-analysis`).
   configure unattended, the **customer-segment** slot for the
   segment's job and switch-event, and the **funnel-stage** slot for
   where activation sits relative to signup and paid. See
-  [`context-spine`](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
+  [`context-spine`](../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
 
 ## Procedure
 

package/dist/agent-src/skills/onboarding-program/SKILL.md

@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ Do NOT use as a customer-onboarding surface (route to Wing-3 [`onboarding-design
 
 ## Cognition cluster
 
-- **Mental model 1 — First principles.** Strip onboarding to: *what does this person need to know, do, and decide alone before being net-positive?* Most onboarding programs over-index on what's easy to teach (history, slides) and under-index on what's hard (decision rights, who-knows-what, codebase / domain context). See [`mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 1.
+- **Mental model 1 — First principles.** Strip onboarding to: *what does this person need to know, do, and decide alone before being net-positive?* Most onboarding programs over-index on what's easy to teach (history, slides) and under-index on what's hard (decision rights, who-knows-what, codebase / domain context). See [`mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 1.
 - **Mental model 21 — Second-order thinking.** Onboarding is paid for in mentor time. A 4-hour-per-week mentor commitment from a senior person costs more than people realise; mentor capacity is the binding constraint on hiring velocity. Read mentor cost as part of the program, not a free input.
 - **Mental model 28 — Inversion.** *"What would make this hire fail in their first 90 days?"* Inversion surfaces the load-bearing risks (unclear scope, no early win, missing tools, no peer relationship). Most onboarding failures trace to one of these four, not to skill gaps.
 - **Mental model 26 — Optionality.** A heavy template onboarding preserves *consistency* optionality but forecloses *role-specific* optionality. A pure free-form onboarding preserves customization but forecloses scalability. Pick the trade explicitly per role family.

package/dist/agent-src/skills/one-on-one-cadence/SKILL.md

@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ Do NOT use this for non-engineering teams as the primary lens (Q4 `perf-feedback
 
 ## Cognition cluster
 
-- **Mental model 1 — First principles.** Strip the 1:1 to: *what conversation can only happen between this manager and this report, that wouldn't happen anywhere else?* If the answer is "status that fits in standup", the 1:1 is mis-shaped. See [`mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 1.
+- **Mental model 1 — First principles.** Strip the 1:1 to: *what conversation can only happen between this manager and this report, that wouldn't happen anywhere else?* If the answer is "status that fits in standup", the 1:1 is mis-shaped. See [`mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 1.
 - **Mental model 21 — Second-order thinking.** A cancelled 1:1 signals more than a missed conversation. Two consecutive cancellations from the manager side recalibrate the report's read of priority for months. Cancellation has compounding cost; protect the slot.
 - **Mental model 28 — Inversion.** *"What 1:1 shape would make this report stop bringing up real problems?"* — usually: pure status-update format, manager-talks-most, no growth dimension, recurring cancellation, public location. Inversion surfaces the 5 canonical failure modes.
 - **Mental model — Theory of constraints.** In a manager's week, 1:1 time is the binding constraint on people-leverage. Reducing per-1:1 time below 30 minutes for direct reports usually starves the channel; protecting 30–45 minutes weekly is the canonical default.

package/dist/agent-src/skills/org-design/SKILL.md

@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ Do NOT use as a hiring-plan substitute (route to forthcoming hiring-loop / comp
 
 ## Cognition cluster
 
-- **Mental model — Theory of constraints.** Org bottlenecks live in one or two places at a time; reorging everywhere else is theatre. Find the constraint (decision queue, dependency hub, single-threaded role), reshape around it, leave the rest. See [`mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md).
+- **Mental model — Theory of constraints.** Org bottlenecks live in one or two places at a time; reorging everywhere else is theatre. Find the constraint (decision queue, dependency hub, single-threaded role), reshape around it, leave the rest. See [`mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md).
 - **Mental model — Conway's law.** Systems mirror the communication structure that shipped them. If two services must integrate cleanly, the two teams must communicate cleanly. Org boundary = future architecture boundary. Use the inverse: pick the architecture you want, then draw the org to match.
 - **Mental model 28 — Inversion.** *"What problem does the proposed structure prevent us from solving?"* Every structure trades one class of problem for another. The honest question is which trade is acceptable, not which structure is best.
 - **Mental model 26 — Optionality.** Reorgs cost 3–6 months of throughput; the reorg is worth it only if the new shape preserves more optionality than the old shape forecloses. Reorging for short-term symptoms usually destroys optionality.

package/dist/agent-src/skills/overbuild-review-lens/SKILL.md

@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ packs:
 - A diff adds a helper, a wrapper, a config layer, an abstraction, or a
   dependency.
 - A rewrite, v2, or large refactor landed — the peak over-build context
-  (see [`minimal-safe-diff-mechanics`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/minimal-safe-diff-mechanics.md)
+  (see [`minimal-safe-diff-mechanics`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/minimal-safe-diff-mechanics.md)
   § The sanctioned-rewrite trap).
 - A reviewer asks "is all of this needed?", "could the platform do
   this?", or "why is this so clever?".
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ demands is not, however large.
 
 For every new unit (function, class, module, config key, dependency),
 find the highest rung that would have carried it — see
-[`agent-interaction-and-decision-quality`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/agent-interaction-and-decision-quality.md)
+[`agent-interaction-and-decision-quality`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/agent-interaction-and-decision-quality.md)
 § 8b-ladder:
 
 | Tag | Meaning | The evidence that makes it a finding |
@@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ Chesterton's Fence, operationalised. Agents are documented as
 especially fence-blind: complex code reads as an invitation to simplify
 when the complexity may exist for a reason the reader has no context
 for. This does not restate
-[`minimal-safe-diff`](../../../src/rules/minimal-safe-diff.md)'s "never
+[`minimal-safe-diff`](../../rules/minimal-safe-diff.md)'s "never
 delete code that *looks* dead without proof" — it is the output contract
 that makes the proof visible.
 

package/dist/agent-src/skills/override-management/SKILL.md

@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ Override files **must match the original filename** exactly:
 | `.augment/rules/php-coding.md` | `agents/overrides/rules/php-coding.md` |
 | `.augment/skills/eloquent/SKILL.md` | `agents/overrides/skills/eloquent.md` |
 | `.augment/commands/feature/plan.md` | `agents/overrides/commands/feature/plan.md` |
-| `../../../docs/guidelines/php/controllers.md` | `agents/overrides/guidelines/php-controllers.md` |
+| `../../guidelines/php/controllers.md` | `agents/overrides/guidelines/php-controllers.md` |
 | `.augment/templates/roadmaps.md` | `agents/overrides/templates/roadmaps.md` |
 
 **Skills** are flattened: the original lives in a directory (`skills/{name}/SKILL.md`),

package/dist/agent-src/skills/perf-feedback-craft/SKILL.md

@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ Do NOT use as a comp-decision surface (route to Q2 `comp-banding`; feedback info
 
 ## Cognition cluster
 
-- **Mental model 1 — First principles.** Strip feedback to: *what observation, about what behavior, with what impact, requesting what change?* Most feedback fails because it skips the observation (jumps to interpretation) or skips the impact (assumes it's obvious). See [`mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 1.
+- **Mental model 1 — First principles.** Strip feedback to: *what observation, about what behavior, with what impact, requesting what change?* Most feedback fails because it skips the observation (jumps to interpretation) or skips the impact (assumes it's obvious). See [`mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 1.
 - **Mental model — Ladder of inference.** Behavior observed → data selected → meaning inferred → assumptions made → conclusions drawn → beliefs adopted → action taken. Most feedback exchanges fail because giver and receiver are on different rungs. Naming the rung you're on (and inviting the other party to do the same) is the single highest-leverage feedback skill.
 - **Mental model 28 — Inversion.** *"What would make this feedback land as an attack instead of a gift?"* — usually: public delivery, surprise (no prior signal), interpretation-as-fact, no specific request, no listening turn. Inversion surfaces the four canonical mis-deliveries.
 - **Mental model 21 — Second-order thinking.** Feedback ripples. Praise in public, correction in private — the inverse damages both giver and receiver. A single mishandled feedback exchange damages trust for 6+ months; a single well-handled one banks trust that compounds.

package/dist/agent-src/skills/persona-writing/SKILL.md

@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ to every persona you author.
 * Author a persona that nobody cites.
 * Restate Iron-Law text from rules inside `## Output expectations`.
 * Use ALL-CAPS Iron-Law fenced blocks — those belong in rules on the
-  [`kernel-membership`](../../../docs/contracts/kernel-membership.md)
+  [`kernel-membership`](../../docs/contracts/kernel-membership.md)
   list.
 * Ship a persona that overlaps an existing one's focus by more than
   50 % — merge instead.

package/dist/agent-src/skills/php-coder/SKILL.md

@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ Trigger keywords in the task or surrounding code:
 - allowlist constants: `private const SUPPORTED_FOO = [Type::A, Type::B]`
 
 → Run the sniff test in
-[`docs/guidelines/php/patterns/strategy.md`](../../../docs/guidelines/php/patterns/strategy.md#sniff-test--when-an-enumstring-discriminator-wants-to-become-a-strategy).
+[`docs/guidelines/php/patterns/strategy.md`](../../guidelines/php/patterns/strategy.md#sniff-test--when-an-enumstring-discriminator-wants-to-become-a-strategy).
 Two "yes" answers → propose Strategy + Registry **before** adding the new
 branch. Three "yes" → it is already overdue and the refactor is the change.
 

package/dist/agent-src/skills/pipeline-strategy/SKILL.md

@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ skill is strategy, not tooling).
   binding stage at any time; rates upstream of the constraint are
   inventory that never ships, rates downstream cannot exceed the
   constraint. Find the constraint before changing anything else. See
-  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 6.
+  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 6.
 - **Mental model 16 — Leading vs. lagging indicators.** Stage-to-stage
   conversion is leading; closed-won is lagging. A coverage call built
   on lagging signals can only confirm the miss after it lands. See
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ skill is strategy, not tooling).
   quarter, the **customer-segment** slot for which segments belong in
   pipeline (and which are pre-pipeline education), and the
   **channel-stage** slot for where each segment enters. See
-  [`context-spine`](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
+  [`context-spine`](../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
 
 ## Procedure
 

package/dist/agent-src/skills/playwright-testing/SKILL.md

@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ triggers:
 ## When to use
 
 > **Design verification.** When exercising a UI artifact, run the
-> [design-artifact verification checklist](../../../docs/contracts/design-artifact-verification.md#verification-checklist)
+> [design-artifact verification checklist](../../docs/contracts/design-artifact-verification.md#verification-checklist)
 > (open → console/load → viewport → text-fit → assets → interaction) and capture
 > evidence; a design task with browser capability present is not "done" without it.
 
@@ -29,12 +29,12 @@ Use this skill when:
 - Debugging flaky E2E tests
 - Configuring Playwright for CI/CD
 
-**Guideline:** `../../../docs/guidelines/e2e/playwright.md` — full conventions, config templates, CI setup.
+**Guideline:** `../../guidelines/e2e/playwright.md` — full conventions, config templates, CI setup.
 **Mobile:** for native iOS/Android or React Native E2E, do NOT reuse Playwright — see the `mobile-e2e-strategy` skill for framework selection.
 
 ## Procedure: Write Playwright tests
 
-1. **Read the guideline** — `../../../docs/guidelines/e2e/playwright.md` for detailed conventions.
+1. **Read the guideline** — `../../guidelines/e2e/playwright.md` for detailed conventions.
 2. **Check Playwright config** — `playwright.config.ts` for browsers, base URL, timeouts.
 3. **Check existing tests** — match patterns in `tests/e2e/` or `e2e/`.
 4. **Check test utilities** — look for page objects, fixtures, helpers.

package/dist/agent-src/skills/po-discovery/SKILL.md

@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ not name an implementation**. Use Given / When / Then or a numbered
 list. Reject ACs that hide assumptions ("works correctly", "is fast
 enough") — replace with measurable thresholds or strike them.
 
-**Cross-source discrepancy scan** (per [`cross-source-consistency`](../../rules/cross-source-consistency.md), gated by `consistency.cross_source`): when the raw input includes a screenshot / mockup alongside the story text, check the sources against each other and surface any conflict as a `gap` / open question — never resolve it silently. Watch for: story text contradicting an attached screenshot; the AC contradicting the description; a clearly-needed behavior the input never states (weekend/holiday shift, empty/error state). Batch them into one clarifying question. Taxonomy: [`cross-source-consistency-mechanics`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/cross-source-consistency-mechanics.md).
+**Cross-source discrepancy scan** (per [`cross-source-consistency`](../../rules/cross-source-consistency.md), gated by `consistency.cross_source`): when the raw input includes a screenshot / mockup alongside the story text, check the sources against each other and surface any conflict as a `gap` / open question — never resolve it silently. Watch for: story text contradicting an attached screenshot; the AC contradicting the description; a clearly-needed behavior the input never states (weekend/holiday shift, empty/error state). Batch them into one clarifying question. Taxonomy: [`cross-source-consistency-mechanics`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/cross-source-consistency-mechanics.md).
 
 ### 5. Surface non-functional gaps
 

package/dist/agent-src/skills/positioning-strategy/SKILL.md

@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ Do NOT use for peer-versus-peer feature comparison (route to
   the underlying job: who fires what, to make what progress, under
   what pressure. Inherited category labels are the trap; the unit of
   positioning is the job, not the label. See
-  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 1.
+  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 1.
 - **Mental model 30 — Inversion.** For every positioning claim, ask
   *"what would a competitor with a credible alternative argue against
   this?"* A claim that has no opposable counter is either trivially
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ Do NOT use for peer-versus-peer feature comparison (route to
   slot for non-goals and the **customer-segment** slot for the ICP
   shape before locking the frame. Positioning that contradicts either
   slot fails its own audit. See
-  [`context-spine`](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
+  [`context-spine`](../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
 
 ## Procedure
 

package/dist/agent-src/skills/privacy-review/SKILL.md

@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ Do NOT use as a substitute for qualified privacy counsel (this skill produces th
 
 ## Cognition cluster
 
-- **Mental model 28 — Inversion.** *"What's the worst-case if this data flow leaks, is subpoenaed, or is mis-consented?"* Inversion sizes the regulatory tail before consent / DPA shape is debated. See [`mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 28.
+- **Mental model 28 — Inversion.** *"What's the worst-case if this data flow leaks, is subpoenaed, or is mis-consented?"* Inversion sizes the regulatory tail before consent / DPA shape is debated. See [`mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 28.
 - **Mental model 1 — First principles.** Strip the data flow to: *who* (data subject), *what* (data category), *why* (lawful basis / purpose), *where* (residency / transfer), *how long* (retention), *who else* (sub-processors). Six primitives anchor every regime delta. See `mental-models.md` § 1.
 - **Mental model 21 — Second-order thinking.** Consent design at signup interacts with marketing automation; retention defaults interact with data-subject-rights workflow; sub-processor chains interact with breach-notification timelines. Each privacy choice has downstream regime obligations. See `mental-models.md` § 21.
 - **Context-spine — regulatory-regime + customer-segment + product.** Read **regulatory-regime** (J1) for the applicable floor (GDPR, CCPA/CPRA, HIPAA, PIPEDA, LGPD, sector-specific). Read **customer-segment** for who the data subjects are (B2C-EU = GDPR primary; US-healthcare = HIPAA primary; B2B-EU-of-US-customers = mixed). Read **product** for which features touch sensitive categories.

package/dist/agent-src/skills/prompt-optimizer/SKILL.md

@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ packs:
    - *Complex / multi-step* → chain-of-thought + systematic framing (template: **CoT** or **ReAct**)
    - *Image AI (Midjourney / SD / DALL·E)* → **Visual Descriptor** or **Reference-Image-Edit**
    - Assign an AI role/expertise; layer context; add logical structure.
-   - Full template catalogue + when-to-pick rubric: [`docs/guidelines/prompt-templates.md`](../../../docs/guidelines/prompt-templates.md).
+   - Full template catalogue + when-to-pick rubric: [`docs/guidelines/prompt-templates.md`](../../guidelines/prompt-templates.md).
 4. **Deliver** — output the optimized prompt + a short "what changed" + (DETAIL only) techniques applied + one pro-tip.
 
 ## Setting awareness
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ Format per § Output format. Do **not** execute the optimized prompt yourself un
 - The model tends to **preserve a presupposed canon while sharpening around it** — asked to improve "apply the 7 laws of X", it produces a cleaner prompt that still presupposes seven laws, and the target model then invents them. Turn the presupposition into a DETAIL question or a stated BASIC assumption; never carry it through polished.
 - The model tends to **keep every demand in a scope-stuffed prompt** because each one came from the author — four deliverables in one prompt produce four shallow answers. Name the primary deliverable, and surface the rest as a numbered option rather than silently answering all of them.
 - The model tends to **over-apply de-inflation once it has the concept** — stripping a constraint the author meant, because it read as verbose. Exactly three patterns are strippable (§ 3b); everything else the author wrote is a requirement. Removing a requirement is the worse failure of the two, and it is silent.
-- The model tends to inherit upstream dogma that "only 5 techniques are safe" (few-shot, role, structured-output, constraint-based, chain-of-thought). That claim travels with an external prompt-collection and is **rejected here** — CO-STAR, RISEN, CRISPE, ReAct, and the image-AI templates land in [`docs/guidelines/prompt-templates.md`](../../../docs/guidelines/prompt-templates.md) and are first-class. Pick by request type, not by upstream whitelist.
+- The model tends to inherit upstream dogma that "only 5 techniques are safe" (few-shot, role, structured-output, constraint-based, chain-of-thought). That claim travels with an external prompt-collection and is **rejected here** — CO-STAR, RISEN, CRISPE, ReAct, and the image-AI templates land in [`docs/guidelines/prompt-templates.md`](../../guidelines/prompt-templates.md) and are first-class. Pick by request type, not by upstream whitelist.
 
 ## Do NOT
 
@@ -149,5 +149,5 @@ Format per § Output format. Do **not** execute the optimized prompt yourself un
 ## See also
 
 - [`refine-prompt`](../refine-prompt/SKILL.md) — engine-inbound sibling; same `prompt_optimization` setting controls its mode
-- [`docs/guidelines/prompt-templates.md`](../../../docs/guidelines/prompt-templates.md) — 12-template catalogue cited from Develop step
+- [`docs/guidelines/prompt-templates.md`](../../guidelines/prompt-templates.md) — 12-template catalogue cited from Develop step
 - AI Council session: `agents/runtime/council/responses/prompt-master-mini.json` (2026-05-17) — analysis behind template adoption and the 5-safe-dogma rejection <!-- council-ref-allowed: ADR decision trace -->

package/dist/agent-src/skills/react-shadcn-ui/SKILL.md

@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ Do NOT use when:
   breaks consistency — variation lives between projects, not between
   components in the same surface.
 - **Anti-AI-slop catalog + linter.** Pull
-  [`docs/guidelines/design-antipatterns.md`](../../../docs/guidelines/design-antipatterns.md)
+  [`docs/guidelines/design-antipatterns.md`](../../guidelines/design-antipatterns.md)
   before the polish step (Visual V1–V8, Layout L1–L10 are the React-component
   slop tells); the objective quality floors (WCAG contrast, focus-visible,
   reduced-motion) are validated via `accessibility-auditor`'s checklist —

package/dist/agent-src/skills/reasoning-orchestrator/SKILL.md

@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ Each link **delegates** to the artifact that owns it (no duplication):
 1. **ground** — close constraints/tools/info-gaps before designing
    ([`think-before-action` § Environment grounding](../../rules/think-before-action.md));
    seed the read from the **repo** slot of the
-   [context-spine](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md) when present.
+   [context-spine](../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md) when present.
 2. **intent** — state the inferred goal + one recommendation, standard host only
    ([`improve-before-implement` § Intent inference](../../rules/improve-before-implement.md)).
 3. **notes** — hypotheses/predictions/decisions/uncertainty to the notes file, not
@@ -146,4 +146,4 @@ action — grounding and the load-bearing-unknown resolution precede any edit):
   [`verify-before-complete`](../../rules/verify-before-complete.md)) instead of the
   whole chain.
 - Needing the rationale behind the protocol — read
-  [`frontier-reasoning-operating-profile`](../../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/frontier-reasoning-operating-profile.md).
+  [`frontier-reasoning-operating-profile`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/frontier-reasoning-operating-profile.md).

package/dist/agent-src/skills/receiving-code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ For each comment classified as blocking/important:
 * Check `git blame` / history — the current code may be the way it is
   for a reason
 * **Consult memory for prior context.** Via
-  [`memory-access`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/memory-access.md),
+  [`memory-access`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/memory-access.md),
   call `retrieve(types=["historical-patterns"],
   keys=<files in the review>, limit=3)`. A registered historical pattern
   may confirm the reviewer's concern (accept). For architectural rationale

package/dist/agent-src/skills/refine-ticket/SKILL.md

@@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ Check the loaded ticket for clarity signals before orchestrating:
 - **silent-but-needed** — is the spec silent on a clearly-needed behavior (weekend/holiday shift, empty state, error path, timezone, permissions)? Surface it and ask before it becomes an implementation assumption — an inferred behavior is a scope expansion, not a given.
 - **intra-ticket** — do the AC, description, and comments contradict each other?
 
-Fold every discrepancy into the refined output's *Open questions* section (one batched list), never a second prompt. Full taxonomy + scan procedure: [`cross-source-consistency-mechanics`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/cross-source-consistency-mechanics.md).
+Fold every discrepancy into the refined output's *Open questions* section (one batched list), never a second prompt. Full taxonomy + scan procedure: [`cross-source-consistency-mechanics`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/cross-source-consistency-mechanics.md).
 
 Then run the deterministic detection helper — do **not** re-derive trigger
 logic in prose:
@@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ lens. v1 is CLI-only (no skill-level default; no frontmatter list). The
 user-type voice renders as one paragraph in *Persona voices* labelled
 `**User: <label>**`, citing Daily Workflow, Vocabulary, Operational
 Constraints, and Ticket Red Flags from the loaded user-type. Contract:
-[`docs/contracts/user-type-schema.md`](../../../docs/contracts/user-type-schema.md).
+[`docs/contracts/user-type-schema.md`](../../docs/contracts/user-type-schema.md).
 
 ### 5. Synthesize + close-prompt
 

package/dist/agent-src/skills/release-comms/SKILL.md

@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ discovery — this skill assumes the change is **shipped**.
 - **Mental model 16 — Leading vs. lagging indicators.** A release
   note is the lagging artifact; the leading version is the in-app
   prompt that fired before the user found the change-log. See
-  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 16.
+  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 16.
 - **Value-not-feature heuristic.** Every paragraph passes the *"so
   the user can ___"* completion. Failing rows go back for re-write.
 
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ discovery — this skill assumes the change is **shipped**.
 ### Step 0: Ground the release
 
 1. Read the merged PR list / changelog block / release branch diff. The release is the **what**; comms is the **so what**. Conflate the two and you ship marketing.
-2. Read the **product** and **team** slots of the [context-spine](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md) (if the consumer project has filled them) for bounded scope and release cadence — surface choice depends on cadence (weekly: in-app + log; quarterly: email + post; major: all four).
+2. Read the **product** and **team** slots of the [context-spine](../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md) (if the consumer project has filled them) for bounded scope and release cadence — surface choice depends on cadence (weekly: in-app + log; quarterly: email + post; major: all four).
 3. Identify the **single dominant change** the release ships. A release with three "headliners" reads as three half-announcements.
 
 ### Step 1: Audience-segment

package/dist/agent-src/skills/retention-loops/SKILL.md

@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ Do NOT use to fix days 0–30 onboarding friction (route to
   *gain* (how strong the reward is) and *delay* (how long until
   the reward lands), not in the surface UI. Pick the leverage
   point — gain or delay — over surface polish. See
-  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 14.
+  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 14.
 - **Mental model 8 — Compounding.** A loop with even small gain
   per cycle compounds across cohorts; a one-time activation
   bump does not. Verify which loops compound before investing
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ Do NOT use to fix days 0–30 onboarding friction (route to
   **customer-segment** slot for which segments have the latent
   need the loop addresses, and the **funnel-stage** slot for where
   the loop sits relative to activation and paid. See
-  [`context-spine`](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
+  [`context-spine`](../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
 
 ## Procedure
 

package/dist/agent-src/skills/review-routing/SKILL.md

@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ back. If neither file exists, emit the generic role-based fallback
 using the common role vocabulary below.
 
 **Also** pull agent-written signals via the shared abstraction (see
-[`memory-access`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/memory-access.md)):
+[`memory-access`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/memory-access.md)):
 
 ```bash
 agent-config memory:lookup \
@@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ Data source: <"ownership-map.yml + historical-bug-patterns.yml"
 ## See also
 
 - [`reviewer-awareness`](../../rules/reviewer-awareness.md) — the rule that routes here: anchor reviewer choice in paths and risk, never seniority
-- [`review-routing-data-format`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/review-routing-data-format.md)
+- [`review-routing-data-format`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/review-routing-data-format.md)
 - [`/pr:create:description-only`](../../domains/git/pr/create/description-only/command.md)
 - [`judge-test-coverage`](../judge-test-coverage/SKILL.md) — consumes
   the `required_test` entries from matched patterns.

package/dist/agent-src/skills/roadmap-management/SKILL.md

@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ different agents.
 
 **Module path resolution.** `{module_root}` and `{agent_folder}` come from
 `modules.root_paths` and `modules.agent_folder` in
-`.agent-project-settings.yml` — see [`layered-settings`](../../../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/layered-settings.md).
+`.agent-project-settings.yml` — see [`layered-settings`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/layered-settings.md).
 Common shapes:
 
 - Laravel — `app/Modules/{Module}/agents/roadmaps/`

package/dist/agent-src/skills/roadmap-management/references/archival.md

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ After the last step of a roadmap is done, check completion status:
    - Work findings in priority order — each ends `fixed` / `accepted-risk` /
      `deferred`. No code surface → explicit skip, never silent.
    - Grammar, scope-hash binding, escape hatch:
-     [`plan-review-gates § 2`](../../../../docs/contracts/plan-review-gates.md).
+     [`plan-review-gates § 2`](../../../docs/contracts/plan-review-gates.md).
 
 1. **Scan the file** for all checkbox markers: `- [x]`, `- [ ]`, `- [~]`, `- [-]`.
 2. **Classify:**

package/dist/agent-src/skills/roadmap-writing/SKILL.md

@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ packs:
 * Rewriting an existing roadmap (phase restructure, goal pivot,
   council-pass integration — not a checkbox flip)
 * Drafting a phase block, exit criteria, or rollback section that
-  will land inside an existing roadmap — an operator **symptom** as the input has its own entry procedure: [`symptom-driven harvest`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/symptom-driven-harvest-loop.md)
+  will land inside an existing roadmap — an operator **symptom** as the input has its own entry procedure: [`symptom-driven harvest`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/symptom-driven-harvest-loop.md)
 
 Do NOT use this skill when:
 
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ carry `parent_roadmap:` (rule 17).
 Default `lightweight` (≤ 6 phases, ≤ 600 lines). Only use
 `structural` when the change touches a contract, kernel rule, or
 budget invariant — the complexity linter enforces it. Standard:
-[`roadmap-complexity-standard`](../../../docs/contracts/roadmap-complexity-standard.md).
+[`roadmap-complexity-standard`](../../docs/contracts/roadmap-complexity-standard.md).
 
 ### 3. Write the goal first
 
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ built over a text↔image contradiction or a silent-but-needed behavior
 every downstream step. Surface each discrepancy as one batched open
 question first; an inferred behavior is a scope expansion to confirm, not
 to plan silently. Taxonomy + procedure:
-[`cross-source-consistency-mechanics`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/cross-source-consistency-mechanics.md).
+[`cross-source-consistency-mechanics`](../../guidelines/agent-infra/cross-source-consistency-mechanics.md).
 
 ### 4. Phase blocks carry checkboxes
 
@@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ Omit it entirely when there is no such gate; run the § 4c gate-test first.
   from a fresh C→R1 handoff state (never re-ask a resolved branch).
 - Product AND implementation risks ranked descending, one mitigation per row,
   each anchored to a phase/step here; none → exact honest-null grammar.
-- Schema, staleness, grandfather, drafts-exempt: [`plan-review-gates § 1`](../../../docs/contracts/plan-review-gates.md).
+- Schema, staleness, grandfather, drafts-exempt: [`plan-review-gates § 1`](../../docs/contracts/plan-review-gates.md).
 
 ### 6. Step-marker semantics — pick `[~]` (defer) vs `[-]` (cancel) honestly
 
@@ -352,7 +352,7 @@ to every roadmap you author.
   `<!-- carve-out: new-gate-verification -->` when it verifies a NEW
   gate this roadmap introduces.
 * Use ALL-CAPS Iron-Law fenced blocks — those belong in
-  [`kernel-membership`](../../../docs/contracts/kernel-membership.md)-listed rules.
+  [`kernel-membership`](../../docs/contracts/kernel-membership.md)-listed rules.
 * Adopt items from an external source / harvest **without a
   `KEEP`/`FOLD`/`CUT` gap-table** against the existing surface (§ 8) —
   that is a skill dump, not integration.