@fitlab-ai/agent-infra 0.6.4 → 0.7.0

package/templates/.agents/rules/issue-sync.github.en.md

@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ When a skill creates or imports an Issue, automatically add the current executor
 
 ## `in:` Label Sync
 
-> **Trigger timing**: run `in:` label sync only after code is committed (the `commit` skill). Do not run it during `implement-task` or `refine-task`. During `create-pr`, only copy the labels from the Issue to the PR without recomputing them.
+> **Trigger timing**: run `in:` label sync only after code is committed (the `commit` skill). Do not run it during `code-task`. During `create-pr`, only copy the labels from the Issue to the PR without recomputing them.
 
 Read the `labels.in` mapping from `.agents/.airc.json`.
 
@@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ task comment sync always runs and is never downgraded.
 
 ## Backfill Rules (run before `/complete-task` archives)
 
-- Scan `task.md`, `analysis*.md`, `plan*.md`, `implementation*.md`, `review*.md`, and `refinement*.md` in the task directory
+- Scan `task.md`, `analysis*.md`, `review-analysis*.md`, `plan*.md`, `review-plan*.md`, `code*.md`, and `review-code*.md` in the task directory
 - Check whether each `{file-stem}` was already published by its hidden marker; publish only missing artifacts
 - Backfill only appends missing comments and never deletes or reorders existing comments
 - Resolve `{agent}` for backfilled comments in this order:
@@ -281,10 +281,11 @@ Title mapping:
 
 - `task` -> `Task File`
 - `analysis` / `analysis-r{N}` -> `Requirements Analysis` / `Requirements Analysis (Round {N})`
+- `review-analysis` / `review-analysis-r{N}` -> `Requirements Analysis Review (Round 1)` / `Requirements Analysis Review (Round {N})`
 - `plan` / `plan-r{N}` -> `Technical Plan` / `Technical Plan (Round {N})`
-- `implementation` / `implementation-r{N}` -> `Implementation Report (Round 1)` / `Implementation Report (Round {N})`
-- `review` / `review-r{N}` -> `Review Report (Round 1)` / `Review Report (Round {N})`
-- `refinement` / `refinement-r{N}` -> `Refinement Report (Round 1)` / `Refinement Report (Round {N})`
+- `review-plan` / `review-plan-r{N}` -> `Technical Plan Review (Round 1)` / `Technical Plan Review (Round {N})`
+- `code` / `code-r{N}` -> `Code Report (Round 1)` / `Code Report (Round {N})`
+- `review-code` / `review-code-r{N}` -> `Code Review (Round 1)` / `Code Review (Round {N})`
 - `summary` -> `Delivery Summary`
 
 Backfilled comments are also not gated by `has_triage` or `has_push`.

package/templates/.agents/rules/issue-sync.github.zh-CN.md

@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ fi
 
 ## `in:` label 同步
 
-> **触发时机**：`in:` label 同步应在代码提交后（commit 技能）执行，不在 implement-task 或 refine-task 阶段执行。create-pr 阶段仅从 Issue 复制到 PR，不重新计算。
+> **触发时机**：`in:` label 同步应在代码提交后（commit 技能）执行，不在 code-task 阶段执行。create-pr 阶段仅从 Issue 复制到 PR，不重新计算。
 
 读取 `.agents/.airc.json` 的 `labels.in` 映射。
 
@@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ task 留言同步始终执行，不受权限降级影响。
 
 ## 补发规则（`/complete-task` 归档前执行）
 
-- 扫描任务目录中的 `task.md`、`analysis*.md`、`plan*.md`、`implementation*.md`、`review*.md`、`refinement*.md`
+- 扫描任务目录中的 `task.md`、`analysis*.md`、`review-analysis*.md`、`plan*.md`、`review-plan*.md`、`code*.md`、`review-code*.md`
 - 对每个 `{file-stem}` 用隐藏标记检查是否已发布；未发布则补发，已发布则跳过
 - 补发只追加缺失评论，不删除或重排已有评论
 - 补发评论的 `{agent}` 按以下顺序确定：
@@ -281,10 +281,11 @@ task 留言同步始终执行，不受权限降级影响。
 
 - `task` -> `任务文件`
 - `analysis` / `analysis-r{N}` -> `需求分析` / `需求分析（Round {N}）`
+- `review-analysis` / `review-analysis-r{N}` -> `需求分析审查（Round 1）` / `需求分析审查（Round {N}）`
 - `plan` / `plan-r{N}` -> `技术方案` / `技术方案（Round {N}）`
-- `implementation` / `implementation-r{N}` -> `实现报告（Round 1）` / `实现报告（Round {N}）`
-- `review` / `review-r{N}` -> `审查报告（Round 1）` / `审查报告（Round {N}）`
-- `refinement` / `refinement-r{N}` -> `修复报告（Round 1）` / `修复报告（Round {N}）`
+- `review-plan` / `review-plan-r{N}` -> `技术方案审查（Round 1）` / `技术方案审查（Round {N}）`
+- `code` / `code-r{N}` -> `实现报告（Round 1）` / `实现报告（Round {N}）`
+- `review-code` / `review-code-r{N}` -> `代码审查（Round 1）` / `代码审查（Round {N}）`
 - `summary` -> `交付摘要`
 
 补发评论同样不受 `has_triage` / `has_push` 限制。

package/templates/.agents/rules/milestone-inference.github.en.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Milestone Inference Rules
 
-Read this file before the `create-task` platform rule, `implement-task`, or `create-pr` handles a milestone.
+Read this file before the `create-task` platform rule, `code-task`, or `create-pr` handles a milestone.
 
 ## General Principles
 
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ fi
 
 If `has_triage=false`, inference returns empty, or `gh issue edit` fails, skip and continue without blocking the `import-issue` workflow.
 
-## Phase 2: `implement-task`
+## Phase 2: `code-task`
 
 Goal: narrow the Issue milestone from a release line to a concrete version when implementation starts.
 

package/templates/.agents/rules/milestone-inference.github.zh-CN.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Milestone 推断规则
 
-在 `create-task` 的平台规则、`implement-task` 或 `create-pr` 处理 milestone 之前先读取本文件。
+在 `create-task` 的平台规则、`code-task` 或 `create-pr` 处理 milestone 之前先读取本文件。
 
 ## 通用原则
 
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ fi
 
 如果 `has_triage=false`、推断结果为空、或 `gh issue edit` 失败，跳过并继续，不阻断 `import-issue` 工作流。
 
-## 阶段 2：`implement-task`
+## 阶段 2：`code-task`
 
 目标：开始开发时，把 Issue milestone 从版本线收窄到具体版本。
 

package/templates/.agents/rules/no-mid-flow-questions.en.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+# General Rule - No Mid-Flow Questions During SKILL Execution
+
+> **Scope**: this rule applies to **all SKILL** executions.
+> Only the two exemption categories below may ask the user; any other mid-flow question is a violation.
+
+## Exemption Categories
+
+### Exemption 1: Literal clarification of entry-point natural-language input
+
+Allowed only when the SKILL's core responsibility is to process **natural-language input the user provided in this invocation**, and that input is unparseable or self-contradictory. The clarification must be about the **literal input itself**; it must not be used to solicit implementation preferences.
+
+SKILLs currently covered by this exemption:
+
+- `create-task`: may clarify the task description itself when the user-provided description is unclear
+- `refine-title`: requires the user's final confirmation (y/n) for a generated title
+
+### Exemption 2: Short confirmation before truly irreversible destructive operations
+
+Any SKILL may pause briefly before the following irreversible operations; routine design choices do not qualify:
+
+- `git push --force`, `rm -rf` against the user's worktree, etc.
+- Deleting or overwriting shared remote resources (e.g., shared GitHub labels)
+- Overwriting uncommitted local changes
+
+SKILLs currently covered by this exemption:
+
+- `init-labels`: may confirm before deleting legacy labels not in the final mapping
+- `commit`: may stop and confirm when its plan conflicts with the user's uncommitted changes
+
+## No-Mid-Flow-Questions Clause (default behavior)
+
+For every SKILL execution context not covered by the two exemptions above, the default behavior is:
+
+1. Do not call any user-question tool, including but not limited to `AskUserQuestion` and equivalent mechanisms that ask the user to choose.
+2. When uncertain, proceed with the most robust option without interrupting the flow. Use this priority order:
+   1. Prefer the option consistent with existing code, documentation, and rules
+   2. Prefer the more reversible option
+   3. Prefer the option with the smaller impact area
+3. If assumptions or open questions exist, write them into fixed artifact sections instead of leaving them suspended in the conversation:
+   - English artifacts use `## Assumptions` / `## Open Questions`; Chinese artifacts use `## 假设` / `## 未决问题`
+   - Meaning: the assumptions section records assumptions used for this run that may be revisited later; the open questions section records unresolved questions for human review
+   - If the artifact template does not reserve these sections, append them as needed. If there are no assumptions or open questions, do not force empty sections.
+
+## Human Review Checkpoint Semantics
+
+A mandatory human review checkpoint means:
+
+- Stop after producing the artifact: once the skill finishes an artifact such as `plan.md`, end the current invocation and wait for the user to explicitly trigger the next skill command
+- Do not pause mid-process to ask for input: do not insert interruptions such as "Do you prefer option A or B?" between execution steps
+
+If a key decision needs human judgment during execution, follow the assumptions and open questions rule above: record it in the artifact's "Open Questions" / `未决问题` section for the user to address at the review checkpoint.
+
+## Anchor Location
+
+This rule's sole global anchor lives in the project-level AGENTS.md "AI Behavior Principles" preamble, which every AI tool loads. Individual SKILL.md files no longer reference this rule, so no per-skill duplicate bullet needs to be maintained.
+
+When executing any SKILL, if AGENTS.md's preamble notes "follow this rule first," the LLM should **proactively Read** this file to load the complete exemption list and concrete constraints.

package/templates/.agents/rules/no-mid-flow-questions.zh-CN.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+# 通用规则 - SKILL 执行禁言
+
+> **适用范围**：本规则适用于**所有 SKILL** 的执行过程。
+> 仅以下两类例外可向用户提问；不属于这两类的发问一律按违规处理。
+
+## 例外类型
+
+### 例外 1：入口式自然语言入参的字面澄清
+
+仅当 SKILL 的本职职责就是处理**用户当次提供的自然语言入参**时，如果该入参无法解析或自相矛盾，可直接就**该入参字面**向用户澄清。不允许借此征求实现方案的偏好。
+
+当前归入本例外的 SKILL：
+
+- `create-task`：用户提供的任务描述不清晰时可澄清描述本身
+- `refine-title`：生成的新标题需要用户最终确认（y/n）
+
+### 例外 2：不可逆破坏性操作前的短暂确认
+
+任何 SKILL 在以下不可逆操作前可短暂确认；常规方案选择不属于此类：
+
+- `git push --force`、`rm -rf` 用户工作树等
+- 删除/覆盖远端共享资源（如 GitHub 共享 label）
+- 覆盖用户未提交的本机改动
+
+当前归入本例外的 SKILL：
+
+- `init-labels`：删除不在最终映射中的旧 label 前可确认
+- `commit`：检测到与用户未提交改动冲突时可停下确认
+
+## 禁言条款（默认行为）
+
+不属于上述两类例外的所有 SKILL 执行场景，遵循以下默认行为：
+
+1. **禁止调用**任何向用户发问的工具（包括但不限于 `AskUserQuestion` 及等价的「征求用户选择」机制）。
+2. **不确定时**，按「最稳健方案」自主推进，不中断对话。最稳健方案的判定优先级：
+   1. 与现有代码 / 文档 / 规则一致的方案优先
+   2. 可逆性更高的方案优先
+   3. 影响面更小的方案优先
+3. **如存在假设或未决问题**，写入产物中的固定段落，不在对话中悬置：
+   - 中文产物用 `## 假设` / `## 未决问题`；英文产物用 `## Assumptions` / `## Open Questions`
+   - 含义：`假设` 段记录本次按某假设推进、未来若假设不成立可推翻；`未决问题` 段记录本次未决、需要人工审查时裁定的问题
+   - 产物模板未预留这两段时，按需追加；没有假设或未决问题时不必强行写空段。
+
+## 人工审查检查点语义
+
+「强制性人工审查检查点」（mandatory human review checkpoint）的语义是：
+
+- **产出后停止**：技能完成产物（如 `plan.md`）后立即结束本轮调用，等待用户主动触发下一个技能命令
+- **不是过程中暂停征求意见**：不允许在执行步骤之间插入「请问您倾向 A 还是 B？」之类的中断
+
+如果在执行过程中发现需要用户裁定的关键决策，按上文「假设与未决问题」处理，记录到产物的「未决问题」/`Open Questions` 段落，由用户在审查检查点统一回应。
+
+## 锚点位置
+
+本规则的唯一全局锚点在项目级 AGENTS.md 的「AI 行为准则」preamble，所有 AI 工具加载 AGENTS.md 时即可见。各 SKILL.md 不再单独引用本规则，避免在每个 SKILL 顶部维护重复 bullet。
+
+LLM 在执行任一 SKILL 时，若 AGENTS.md 的 preamble 已说明「优先遵循本规则」，应**主动 Read** 本文件以获取完整的例外列表与具体约束。

package/templates/.agents/rules/pr-sync.github.en.md

@@ -24,14 +24,13 @@ Within one PR, a given `{task-id}` must have only one summary comment with this
 
 Aggregate the latest artifacts in the task directory:
 - `plan.md` or the latest `plan-r{N}.md`
-- `implementation.md` or the latest `implementation-r{N}.md`
-- `review.md` or the latest `review-r{N}.md`
-- `refinement.md` or the latest `refinement-r{N}.md`
+- `code.md` or the latest `code-r{N}.md`
+- `review-code.md` or the latest `review-code-r{N}.md`
 
 Aggregation rules:
 - extract 2-4 self-contained technical decisions from `plan*`
-- build the review-history table from `review*` and `refinement*`
-- extract the test summary from `implementation*` or `refinement*`
+- build the review-history table from `review-code*` and `code*`
+- extract the test summary from `code*`
 - if one artifact class is missing, treat it as "no data for this stage" and continue
 
 ## Comment Body Template

package/templates/.agents/rules/pr-sync.github.zh-CN.md

@@ -24,14 +24,13 @@
 
 聚合当前任务目录中的最新产物：
 - `plan.md` 或最新 `plan-r{N}.md`
-- `implementation.md` 或最新 `implementation-r{N}.md`
-- `review.md` 或最新 `review-r{N}.md`
-- `refinement.md` 或最新 `refinement-r{N}.md`
+- `code.md` 或最新 `code-r{N}.md`
+- `review-code.md` 或最新 `review-code-r{N}.md`
 
 聚合规则：
 - 从 `plan*` 提取 2-4 条自包含的关键技术决策
-- 用 `review*` 与 `refinement*` 构建审查历程表
-- 从 `implementation*` 或 `refinement*` 提取测试结果摘要
+- 用 `review-code*` 与 `code*` 构建审查历程表
+- 从 `code*` 提取测试结果摘要
 - 某一类产物缺失时，按“无该阶段数据”处理并继续生成
 
 ## 评论体模板

package/templates/.agents/rules/task-management.en.md

@@ -5,10 +5,12 @@
 Map user intent to the corresponding workflow command:
 - "analyze issue #123" -> `import-issue`
 - "analyze task TASK-20260306-143022" -> `analyze-task`
+- "review requirement analysis" -> `review-analysis`
 - "design a plan" -> `plan-task`
-- "implement" or "build" -> `implement-task`
-- "review" -> `review-task`
-- "fix review feedback" -> `refine-task`
+- "review a plan" or "review technical design" -> `review-plan`
+- "implement" or "build" -> `code-task`
+- "code review" or "review code" -> `review-code`
+- "fix review feedback" -> `code-task`
 
 ## Task State Management
 
@@ -25,10 +27,11 @@ Map user intent to the corresponding workflow command:
 - `import-dependabot`: update `current_step`, `updated_at`, `assigned_to`, `agent_infra_version`
 - `restore-task`: update `status`, `updated_at`, `assigned_to`, `agent_infra_version`
 - `analyze-task`: update `current_step`, `updated_at`, `assigned_to`, `agent_infra_version`
+- `review-analysis`: update `current_step`, `updated_at`, `agent_infra_version`
 - `plan-task`: update `current_step`, `updated_at`, `agent_infra_version`
-- `implement-task`: update `current_step`, `updated_at`, `agent_infra_version`
-- `review-task`: update `current_step`, `updated_at`, `agent_infra_version`
-- `refine-task`: update `current_step`, `updated_at`, `agent_infra_version`
+- `review-plan`: update `current_step`, `updated_at`, `agent_infra_version`
+- `code-task`: update `current_step`, `updated_at`, `agent_infra_version`
+- `review-code`: update `current_step`, `updated_at`, `agent_infra_version`
 - `create-pr`: update `pr_number`, `updated_at`, `agent_infra_version`
 - `commit`: update `updated_at`, `agent_infra_version`; update `current_step` when needed (see `commit/reference/task-status-update.md`)
 - `complete-task`: update `status`, `current_step`, `completed_at`, `updated_at`, `agent_infra_version`

package/templates/.agents/rules/task-management.zh-CN.md

@@ -5,10 +5,12 @@
 根据用户意图自动映射到对应工作流命令：
 - “分析 issue #123” -> `import-issue`
 - “分析任务 TASK-20260306-143022” -> `analyze-task`
+- “审查需求分析” -> `review-analysis`
 - “设计方案” -> `plan-task`
-- “实施/实现” -> `implement-task`
-- “审查” -> `review-task`
-- “修复审查问题” -> `refine-task`
+- “审查方案/审查技术方案” -> `review-plan`
+- “实施/实现” -> `code-task`
+- “审查代码/代码审查” -> `review-code`
+- “修复审查问题” -> `code-task`
 
 ## 任务状态管理
 
@@ -25,10 +27,11 @@
 - `import-dependabot`：更新 `current_step`、`updated_at`、`assigned_to`、`agent_infra_version`
 - `restore-task`：更新 `status`、`updated_at`、`assigned_to`、`agent_infra_version`
 - `analyze-task`：更新 `current_step`、`updated_at`、`assigned_to`、`agent_infra_version`
+- `review-analysis`：更新 `current_step`、`updated_at`、`agent_infra_version`
 - `plan-task`：更新 `current_step`、`updated_at`、`agent_infra_version`
-- `implement-task`：更新 `current_step`、`updated_at`、`agent_infra_version`
-- `review-task`：更新 `current_step`、`updated_at`、`agent_infra_version`
-- `refine-task`：更新 `current_step`、`updated_at`、`agent_infra_version`
+- `review-plan`：更新 `current_step`、`updated_at`、`agent_infra_version`
+- `code-task`：更新 `current_step`、`updated_at`、`agent_infra_version`
+- `review-code`：更新 `current_step`、`updated_at`、`agent_infra_version`
 - `create-pr`：更新 `pr_number`、`updated_at`、`agent_infra_version`
 - `commit`：更新 `updated_at`、`agent_infra_version`；必要时更新 `current_step`（详见 `commit/reference/task-status-update.md`）
 - `complete-task`：更新 `status`、`current_step`、`completed_at`、`updated_at`、`agent_infra_version`

package/templates/.agents/rules/testing-discipline.en.md

@@ -12,13 +12,13 @@ When a positive assertion already covers the expected behavior, do not add anoth
 
 Bad:
 ```ts
-assert.match(content, /^name: implement-task$/m);    // The positive assertion already covers the expected value.
+assert.match(content, /^name: code-task$/m);         // The positive assertion already covers the expected value.
 assert.doesNotMatch(content, /^name: wrong-name$/m); // Redundant: permanently remembers a value that should not appear.
 ```
 
 Good:
 ```ts
-assert.match(content, /^name: implement-task$/m);    // The positive assertion is enough.
+assert.match(content, /^name: code-task$/m);         // The positive assertion is enough.
 ```
 
 If the positive assertion passes, the value is correct. The extra negative assertion adds no protection, only maintenance cost, and can become a test that permanently remembers a concept after the feature is gone.

package/templates/.agents/rules/testing-discipline.zh-CN.md

@@ -12,13 +12,13 @@
 
 ❌ 反例：
 ```ts
-assert.match(content, /^name: implement-task$/m);    // 正向已覆盖期望值
+assert.match(content, /^name: code-task$/m);         // 正向已覆盖期望值
 assert.doesNotMatch(content, /^name: wrong-name$/m); // 多余：永久记住一个不该出现的值
 ```
 
 ✅ 正例：
 ```ts
-assert.match(content, /^name: implement-task$/m);    // 正向断言已足够
+assert.match(content, /^name: code-task$/m);         // 正向断言已足够
 ```
 
 正向断言通过即证明值正确；额外的反向断言不增加保护，只增加维护成本，并会在功能删除后退化为"测试永久记住一个不再存在的概念"。

package/templates/.agents/scripts/validate-artifact.js

@@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ function runCheck(type, context) {
   }
 }
 
-// === Check Implementations ===
+// === Check Functions ===
 
 function checkTaskMeta({ taskDir, config }) {
   const task = loadTask(taskDir);

package/templates/.agents/skills/analyze-task/SKILL.en.md

@@ -115,6 +115,18 @@ Create `.agents/workspace/active/{task-id}/{analysis-artifact}`.
 ## Dependencies
 - {Required dependencies and coordination with other modules}
 
+## Assumptions
+
+> If this analysis depends on assumptions, list them here; omit this section if there are none.
+
+- {assumption}
+
+## Open Questions
+
+> If there are unresolved questions for human review, list them here; omit this section if there are none.
+
+- {open question}
+
 ## Effort and Complexity Assessment
 - Complexity: {High/Medium/Low}
 - Risk level: {High/Medium/Low}
@@ -189,10 +201,10 @@ Summary:
 Output file:
 - Analysis report: .agents/workspace/active/{task-id}/{analysis-artifact}
 
-Next step - create technical plan:
-  - Claude Code / OpenCode: /plan-task {task-id}
-  - Gemini CLI: /{{project}}:plan-task {task-id}
-  - Codex CLI: $plan-task {task-id}
+Next step - review the analysis:
+  - Claude Code / OpenCode: /review-analysis {task-id}
+  - Gemini CLI: /{{project}}:review-analysis {task-id}
+  - Codex CLI: $review-analysis {task-id}
 ```
 
 ## Completion Checklist

package/templates/.agents/skills/analyze-task/SKILL.zh-CN.md

@@ -115,6 +115,18 @@ tail .agents/workspace/active/{task-id}/task.md
 ## 依赖关系
 - {需要的依赖和与其他模块的协调}
 
+## 假设
+
+> 如本次分析依赖某些假设，列在此处；没有则可省略本段。
+
+- {本轮分析所依赖的假设}
+
+## 未决问题
+
+> 如有需要人工裁定的未决问题，列在此处；没有则可省略本段。
+
+- {未决问题}
+
 ## 工作量和复杂度评估
 - 复杂度：{高/中/低}
 - 风险等级：{高/中/低}
@@ -189,10 +201,10 @@ node .agents/scripts/validate-artifact.js gate analyze-task .agents/workspace/ac
 产出文件：
 - 分析报告：.agents/workspace/active/{task-id}/{analysis-artifact}
 
-下一步 - 设计技术方案：
-  - Claude Code / OpenCode：/plan-task {task-id}
-  - Gemini CLI：/agent-infra:plan-task {task-id}
-  - Codex CLI：$plan-task {task-id}
+下一步 - 审查需求分析：
+  - Claude Code / OpenCode：/review-analysis {task-id}
+  - Gemini CLI：/agent-infra:review-analysis {task-id}
+  - Codex CLI：$review-analysis {task-id}
 ```
 
 ## 完成检查清单

package/templates/.agents/skills/check-task/SKILL.en.md

@@ -36,11 +36,12 @@ Extract from `task.md`:
 Scan and record the existence, round, and status of these artifact types:
 - `analysis.md`, `analysis-r{N}.md` - Requirement analysis
 - `plan.md`, `plan-r{N}.md` - Technical plan
-- `implementation.md`, `implementation-r2.md`, ... - Implementation reports
-- `refinement.md`, `refinement-r2.md`, ... - Refinement reports
-- `review.md`, `review-r2.md`, ... - Review reports
+- `code.md`, `code-r2.md`, ... - Code reports
+- `review-analysis.md`, `review-analysis-r{N}.md` - Requirement analysis review reports
+- `review-plan.md`, `review-plan-r{N}.md` - Technical plan review reports
+- `review-code.md`, `review-code-r{N}.md` - Code review reports
 
-For versioned artifacts (`analysis`, `plan`, `implementation`, `refinement`, `review`):
+For versioned artifacts (`analysis`, `review-analysis`, `plan`, `review-plan`, `code`, `review-code`):
 - Scan all versioned files of the same artifact type in the task directory
 - Record the latest round, latest file path, and total number of rounds for each artifact type
 - If the latest round is recorded in `task.md` Activity Log, cross-check it against the actual file when possible
@@ -64,28 +65,30 @@ Basic info:
 
 Workflow progress:
   [done]       Requirement Analysis  analysis-r2.md (Round 2, latest)
+  [done]       Analysis Review       review-analysis.md (Round 1, latest)
   [done]       Technical Design      plan.md (Round 1)
-  [current]    Implementation        implementation.md (Round 1)
-  [pending]    Refinement            refinement.md (Round 1 will be created next)
-  [pending]    Code Review           review.md (Round 1 will be created next)
+  [done]       Plan Review           review-plan.md (Round 1, latest)
+  [current]    Code                  code.md (Round 1)
+  [pending]    Code Review           review-code.md (Round 1 will be created next)
   [pending]    Final Commit
 
 Context files:
 - analysis.md:           Exists (Round 1)
 - analysis-r2.md:        Exists (Round 2, latest)
+- review-analysis.md:    Exists (Round 1, latest)
 - plan.md:               Exists (Round 1, latest)
-- implementation.md:     Exists (Round 1, latest)
-- refinement.md:         Not started
-- review.md:             Not started
+- review-plan.md:        Exists (Round 1, latest)
+- code.md:               Exists (Round 1, latest)
+- review-code.md:        Not started
 
 If multiple rounds exist, show all rounds and mark the latest, for example:
-- plan.md: Exists (Round 1)
-- plan-r2.md: Exists (Round 2, latest)
-- implementation.md: Exists (Round 1)
-- implementation-r2.md: Exists (Round 2, latest)
-- refinement.md: Exists (Round 1)
-- review.md: Exists (Round 1)
-- review-r2.md: Exists (Round 2, latest)
+- plan.md:             Exists (Round 1)
+- plan-r2.md:          Exists (Round 2, latest)
+- review-plan.md:      Exists (Round 1)
+- code.md:             Exists (Round 1)
+- code-r2.md:          Exists (Round 2, latest)
+- review-code.md:      Exists (Round 1)
+- review-code-r2.md:   Exists (Round 2, latest)
 
 Next step:
   Complete implementation, then run code review
@@ -107,26 +110,34 @@ Recommend the appropriate next skill based on the current workflow state. You mu
 > - `status = blocked` -> choose "Task Blocked"
 > - `status = completed` -> choose "Task Completed"
 > - `current_step = requirement-analysis` and the latest analysis artifact is complete -> choose "Analysis Complete"
+> - `current_step = requirement-analysis-review` and the latest analysis review artifact is approved -> choose "Analysis Review Passed"
+> - `current_step = requirement-analysis-review` and the latest analysis review artifact exists but is not approved or has findings -> choose "Analysis Review Has Issues"
 > - `current_step = technical-design` and the latest plan artifact is complete -> choose "Plan Complete"
-> - The latest implementation artifact exists and there is still no latest review artifact -> choose "Implementation Complete"
-> - The latest review artifact exists, the verdict is `Approved`, and `Blocker = 0`, `Major = 0`, `Minor = 0` -> choose "Review Passed"
-> - The latest review artifact exists, but any `Blocker`, `Major`, or `Minor` issue remains, or the verdict is not a clean approval -> choose "Review Has Issues"
+> - `current_step = technical-design-review` and the latest plan review artifact is approved -> choose "Plan Review Passed"
+> - `current_step = technical-design-review` and the latest plan review artifact exists but is not approved or has findings -> choose "Plan Review Has Issues"
+> - The latest code artifact exists and there is still no latest code review artifact -> choose "Code Complete"
+> - `current_step = code-review` and the latest code review artifact exists, the verdict is `Approved`, and `Blocker = 0`, `Major = 0`, `Minor = 0` -> choose "Code Review Passed"
+> - `current_step = code-review` and the latest code review artifact exists, but any `Blocker`, `Major`, or `Minor` issue remains, or the verdict is not a clean approval -> choose "Code Review Has Issues"
 >
-> **Important: if the latest review report contains any issue at all, do not use the "Review Passed" row. You must use "Review Has Issues" instead.**
-
-| Current State | Claude Code / OpenCode | Gemini CLI | Codex CLI |
-|--------------|------------------------|------------|-----------|
-| Analysis Complete | `/plan-task {task-id}` | `/{{project}}:plan-task {task-id}` | `$plan-task {task-id}` |
-| Plan Complete | `/implement-task {task-id}` | `/{{project}}:implement-task {task-id}` | `$implement-task {task-id}` |
-| Implementation Complete | `/review-task {task-id}` | `/{{project}}:review-task {task-id}` | `$review-task {task-id}` |
-| Review Passed | `/commit` | `/{{project}}:commit` | `$commit` |
-| Review Has Issues | `/refine-task {task-id}` | `/{{project}}:refine-task {task-id}` | `$refine-task {task-id}` |
-| Task Blocked | Unblock the task or provide the missing information | — | Unblock the task or provide the missing information |
-| Task Completed | No action needed | — | No action needed |
+> **Important: if the latest review report contains any issue at all, do not use the corresponding review-passed row. Use the corresponding has-issues row instead.**
+
+| Current State              | Claude Code / OpenCode                              | Gemini CLI                               | Codex CLI                                           |
+|----------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|
+| Analysis Complete          | `/review-analysis {task-id}`                        | `/{{project}}:review-analysis {task-id}` | `$review-analysis {task-id}`                        |
+| Analysis Review Passed     | `/plan-task {task-id}`                              | `/{{project}}:plan-task {task-id}`       | `$plan-task {task-id}`                              |
+| Analysis Review Has Issues | `/analyze-task {task-id}`                           | `/{{project}}:analyze-task {task-id}`    | `$analyze-task {task-id}`                           |
+| Plan Complete              | `/review-plan {task-id}`                            | `/{{project}}:review-plan {task-id}`     | `$review-plan {task-id}`                            |
+| Plan Review Passed         | `/code-task {task-id}`                              | `/{{project}}:code-task {task-id}`       | `$code-task {task-id}`                              |
+| Plan Review Has Issues     | `/plan-task {task-id}`                              | `/{{project}}:plan-task {task-id}`       | `$plan-task {task-id}`                              |
+| Code Complete              | `/review-code {task-id}`                            | `/{{project}}:review-code {task-id}`     | `$review-code {task-id}`                            |
+| Code Review Passed         | `/commit`                                           | `/{{project}}:commit`                    | `$commit`                                           |
+| Code Review Has Issues     | `/code-task {task-id}`                              | `/{{project}}:code-task {task-id}`       | `$code-task {task-id}`                              |
+| Task Blocked               | Unblock the task or provide the missing information | —                                        | Unblock the task or provide the missing information |
+| Task Completed             | No action needed                                    | —                                        | No action needed                                    |
 
 ## Notes
 
 1. **Read-only**: This skill only reads and reports -- it does not modify files
 2. **Multi-directory search**: Always check active, blocked, and completed
 3. **Quick reference**: Use this skill any time you need to see where a task is in the workflow
-4. **Versioned artifacts**: `analysis`, `plan`, `implementation`, `refinement`, and `review` must all report the actual round, not only the base filename
+4. **Versioned artifacts**: `analysis`, `review-analysis`, `plan`, `review-plan`, `code`, and `review-code` must all report the actual round, not only the base filename