@fitlab-ai/agent-infra 0.9.12 → 0.9.14

package/templates/.agents/skills/review-code/reference/report-template.zh-CN.md

@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
 # 审查报告模板
 
+> 写入本报告前，先用 `task-artifact init --family review-code` 创建骨架，并保留每个 `artifact-section` marker；骨架不包含审查结论。
+
 编写 `review-code.md` 或 `review-code-r{N}.md` 时使用本模板。
 
 ## 输出模板
@@ -12,11 +14,31 @@
 - **审查输入**：
   - `{code-artifact}`（本轮实际检视的最高轮实现产物——含如存在的最高轮修复产物，如 `code-r2.md`；无法可靠取得则留空）
 
-## 状态核对
+## 审查摘要
 
-> 粘贴状态核对命令原文；每条命令以 `$ ` 开头。
+## 资格审计复核
 
-## 审查摘要
+> 按 `.agents/rules/decision-qualification.md` 复核：约束依赖、候选资格、分类结果、上游关系和依赖快照五张表。
+
+### 约束依赖
+| constraint_id | constraint_digest | role | evidence |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- |
+
+### 候选资格
+| candidate_id | status | impact | constraint_ids | evidence |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
+
+### 分类结果
+| decision_id | classification | evidence |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+
+### 上游关系
+| upstream_family | upstream_artifact | upstream_round | upstream_sha256 | relation |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
+
+### 依赖快照
+| task_input_digest | non_constraint_input_digest | upstream_artifact_digest |
+| --- | --- | --- |
 
 - **审查者**：{reviewer-name}
 - **审查时间**：{timestamp}
@@ -117,19 +139,29 @@
 > 如本轮无人工校验项，保留段落标题并写「（无）」。
 
 
-## 审查分歧账本回写
+## 结论与建议
 
-> 本段记录将提交的结构化意图：新 finding 用 `task-ledger finding-upsert`，上一轮响应复核用 `finding-review`；由核心分配 `CD-N` 并校验状态机，禁止手写 task.md 表格。
-> 凡升级为 `needs-human-decision` 的 finding，必须按 `.agents/rules/human-decision-context.md` 在本报告中提供自足详情块，并让 evidence 指向该稳定锚点。
+### 审查决定
+- [ ] 通过
+- [ ] 需要修改
+- [ ] 拒绝
+
+### 下一步
+{recommended next step}
+
+## 状态核对
+
+> 记录状态核对命令、审查范围、关键结果和未覆盖部分；每条命令以 `$ ` 开头。
+> 按 `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md` 同时记录审查范围、关键结果和未覆盖部分；正常成功不粘贴完整 stdout。
 
 ## 证据原文
 
-> 每条“我验证了 X”断言都要配对对应 tool output 原文；gate 仅校验本段存在和至少一行 `$ `。每条 Blocker 必须配可复现的测试、调用链、状态转换、数据流、规范冲突或准确位置证据；无法复现的判断须降级或移入「自我质疑」。
+> 遵循 `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md`：每条断言配对 `$ ` 命令和相称结果摘要；Blocker、失败、阻塞或争议必须保留可复现证据、准确位置和决定性摘录；无法复现的判断须降级或移入「自我质疑」。
 
 - 断言：{verified claim}
 ```text
 $ {command}
-{raw output}
+{result summary or decisive excerpt}
 ```
 
 ## 自我质疑
@@ -138,6 +170,11 @@ $ {command}
 
 - {未直接验证的结论或推断；说明为何未验证、若被推翻的影响}
 
+## 审查分歧账本回写
+
+> 本段记录将提交的结构化意图：新 finding 用 `task-ledger finding-upsert`，上一轮响应复核用 `finding-review`；由核心分配 `CD-N` 并校验状态机，禁止手写 task.md 表格。
+> 凡升级为 `needs-human-decision` 的 finding，必须按 `.agents/rules/human-decision-context.md` 在本报告中提供自足详情块，并让 evidence 指向该稳定锚点。
+
 ## 亮点
 
 - {what went well}
@@ -146,14 +183,4 @@ $ {command}
 
 - [ ] 实现与技术方案一致
 - [ ] 没有意外的范围扩张
-
-## 结论与建议
-
-### 审查决定
-- [ ] 通过
-- [ ] 需要修改
-- [ ] 拒绝
-
-### 下一步
-{recommended next step}
 ```

package/templates/.agents/skills/review-plan/SKILL.en.md

@@ -9,12 +9,17 @@ description: >
 # Technical Plan Review
 > `--agent` values are defined in `.agents/rules/task-management.md` under “Collaborator Token Specification”.
 
-If the entry operands contain `--orchestrated`, bind `{execution-flag}` to `--orchestrated` and forward it unchanged to both the summary finalizer and completed event; otherwise bind it to an empty value. Never infer it from `orchestration.json`, environment variables, or prior artifacts.
+If the entry operands contain `--orchestrated`, bind `{execution-flag}` to `--orchestrated` and forward it unchanged to both the summary finalizer and completed event; otherwise bind it to an empty value. Never infer it from `orchestration.json`, environment variables, or prior artifacts. Lifecycle events also require explicit trigger data: use `{trigger-initiator}=orchestrator` for orchestration and `model` otherwise; `{request-id}` is a stable single-line identifier for this task and artifact round, and `{reason-code}` is `user-request` or `review-finding`. Reuse the same values for started and completed.
 
 Review the latest plan artifact and produce `review-plan.md` or `review-plan-r{N}.md`.
 
 ## Boundary / Critical Rules
 
+### Persisted Report Evidence
+
+Before generating the review report, read `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md`. Normal inspection records the command, scope, structured result, actual conclusion, and uncovered parts; findings, blocking conditions, or disputes retain reproducible locations and decisive excerpts, while identity fields remain exact.
+
+- When reviewing candidate qualification or `HD-N`, read `.agents/rules/decision-qualification.md` and check the five qualification-audit tables, digests, QCR, and upstream relations; do not treat a process label as identity authentication
 - This skill only reviews plan artifacts and writes a report; it does not modify product code.
 - Before generating task or lifecycle Markdown that will be synchronized to an Issue, read `.agents/rules/sync-content-generation.md` and apply its producer-side constraints; the sync path does not parse or rewrite the body
 - After executing this skill, you **must** immediately update task.md.
@@ -25,7 +30,7 @@ Version stamp rule: when creating or updating `task.md` frontmatter, read `.agen
 
 After loading workflow / skill / rules instructions, and before any task-state judgment or user-visible conclusion, run the state check first.
 
-Run these commands and paste the raw output into this round's `## State Check` section:
+Run these commands and record the task/artifact scope, key result, and uncovered parts in this round's `## State Check` section; do not paste complete directory listings or task tails on normal success. Retain decisive raw lines only for failures, blocking conditions, identity mismatches, or disputes:
 
 ```bash
 agent-infra-internal task-snapshot {task-id} --format text
@@ -39,7 +44,7 @@ agent-infra-internal task-snapshot {task-id} --format text
 
 ## Step Start: Write the started Marker
 
-After resolving the artifact context and before this round's first artifact action, run `agent-infra-internal task-event {task-id} review-plan.started --agent {standard-agent-token}`.
+After resolving the artifact context and before this round's first artifact action, run `agent-infra-internal task-event {task-id} review-plan.started --agent {standard-agent-token} --initiator {trigger-initiator} --request-id {request-id} --reason-code {reason-code}`.
 
 ## Steps
 
@@ -64,6 +69,14 @@ Check simplicity, executability, risk control, test strategy, file coverage, and
 
 ### 5. Write Review Report
 
+Before writing this round's `{review-artifact}`, create the controlled review skeleton:
+
+```bash
+agent-infra-internal task-artifact {task-id} init --family review-plan --artifact {review-artifact} --locale en
+```
+
+The skeleton contains identity metadata, stable section markers, and required headings only; complete review content is required before summary finalization. If structural finalization returns one provably safe error, call `task-artifact {task-id} repair --family review-plan --artifact {review-artifact} --expected-sha256 {artifact-sha256} --expected-semantic-digest {semantic-digest}`, then rerun the original finalizer.
+
 Create `.agents/workspace/active/{task-id}/{review-artifact}`.
 
 > Read `reference/report-template.md` before writing the report.
@@ -80,7 +93,7 @@ Bind and reuse this structured mapping from that one response:
 {unresolved-minor} = stageStatus.unresolvedFindingCounts.minor
 ```
 
-The intent atomically finalizes the report summary and returns the same ledger snapshot. Do not call `stage-status`, replace placeholders manually, or rescan the finding list. After a failure, the model may edit the same controlled artifact and rerun the same intent only when the shared rule's mechanical gates pass; reassess convergence after every failure. The final complete result determines the verdict and counts from that same snapshot: `stageStatus.canAdvance=true` with an Approved conclusion permits cross-stage advancement; `stageStatus.canAdvance=false` still requires `agent-infra-internal task-event {task-id} review-plan.completed --agent {standard-agent-token} --artifact {review-artifact} --verdict {approved|changes-requested|rejected} --blockers {unresolved-blockers} --major {unresolved-major} --minor {unresolved-minor} --manual-validation {n} {execution-flag}`, using `changes-requested` and routing to same-stage revision/review (use `rejected` when the report explicitly rejects). On failure, model stop, lack of progress, or the emergency cap, do not publish a completion event or cross-stage command; use the `repair-stop` scenario in `reference/output-templates.md` to show existing summary/findings, the artifact, actual repair attempts, the last diagnostic, and the stop reason.
+The intent atomically finalizes the report summary and returns the same ledger snapshot. Do not call `stage-status`, replace placeholders manually, or rescan the finding list. After a failure, the model may edit the same controlled artifact and rerun the same intent only when the shared rule's mechanical gates pass; reassess convergence after every failure. The final complete result determines the verdict and counts from that same snapshot: `stageStatus.canAdvance=true` with an Approved conclusion permits cross-stage advancement; `stageStatus.canAdvance=false` still requires `agent-infra-internal task-event {task-id} review-plan.completed --agent {standard-agent-token} --initiator {trigger-initiator} --request-id {request-id} --reason-code {reason-code} --artifact {review-artifact} --verdict {approved|changes-requested|rejected} --blockers {unresolved-blockers} --major {unresolved-major} --minor {unresolved-minor} --manual-validation {n} {execution-flag}`, using `changes-requested` and routing to same-stage revision/review (use `rejected` when the report explicitly rejects). On failure, model stop, lack of progress, or the emergency cap, do not publish a completion event or cross-stage command; use the `repair-stop` scenario in `reference/output-templates.md` to show existing summary/findings, the artifact, actual repair attempts, the last diagnostic, and the stop reason.
 
 `manual-validation` is the data source for the `Manual-validation` count folded into review rows in `ai task log`; do not add a parallel manual-verification field.
 

package/templates/.agents/skills/review-plan/SKILL.zh-CN.md

@@ -9,12 +9,17 @@ description: >
 # 技术方案审查
 > `--agent` 取值见 `.agents/rules/task-management.md`「合作者 token 规范」。
 
-若入口业务操作数包含 `--orchestrated`，绑定 `{execution-flag}` = `--orchestrated` 并原样转发给 summary finalizer 与 completed 事件；否则绑定为空。不得从 `orchestration.json`、环境变量或历史产物推断该标记。
+若入口业务操作数包含 `--orchestrated`，绑定 `{execution-flag}` = `--orchestrated` 并原样转发给 summary finalizer 与 completed 事件；否则绑定为空。不得从 `orchestration.json`、环境变量或历史产物推断该标记。生命周期事件还必须携带显式触发信息：编排调用使用 `{trigger-initiator}=orchestrator`，否则使用 `model`；`{request-id}` 是本任务与本轮产物的稳定单行标识，`{reason-code}` 使用 `user-request` 或 `review-finding`；started 与 completed 使用同一组值。
 
 审查最新技术方案产物，并产出 `review-plan.md` 或 `review-plan-r{N}.md`。
 
 ## 行为边界 / 关键规则
 
+### 持久化报告证据
+
+生成审查报告时，先读取 `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md`。正常检视记录命令、范围、结构化结果、实际结论和未覆盖部分；finding、阻塞或争议保留可复现位置与决定性摘录，身份字段必须精确保留。
+
+- 审查候选资格或 `HD-N` 判断时，先读取 `.agents/rules/decision-qualification.md`，逐项复核产物中的五张资格审计表、digest、QCR 和上游关系；不得把流程标签当作身份认证
 - 本技能只审查方案产物并写报告，不修改业务代码
 - 生成会同步到 Issue 的任务或生命周期 Markdown 前，先读取 `.agents/rules/sync-content-generation.md` 并遵循其中的生成端约束；同步端不解析或改写正文
 - 执行本技能后，你**必须**立即更新 task.md
@@ -25,7 +30,7 @@ description: >
 
 在加载 workflow / skill / rules 指令之后、做任何任务状态判断或用户可见结论之前，必须先执行状态核对。指令类文件读取不算对外动作或结论。
 
-运行以下命令，并把原文粘贴到本轮产物的 `## 状态核对` 段：
+运行以下命令，并在本轮产物的 `## 状态核对` 段记录任务/产物范围、关键结果和未覆盖部分；正常成功不粘贴完整目录清单或 `task.md` 尾部。失败、阻塞、身份不一致或争议时，附决定性原文行：
 
 ```bash
 agent-infra-internal task-snapshot {task-id} --format text
@@ -41,7 +46,7 @@ agent-infra-internal task-snapshot {task-id} --format text
 
 ## 步骤开始：声明 started 事件
 
-确认前置条件和产物上下文后、本轮第一个产出动作之前执行 `agent-infra-internal task-event {task-id} review-plan.started --agent {standard-agent-token}`。
+确认前置条件和产物上下文后、本轮第一个产出动作之前执行 `agent-infra-internal task-event {task-id} review-plan.started --agent {standard-agent-token} --initiator {trigger-initiator} --request-id {request-id} --reason-code {reason-code}`。
 
 ## 执行步骤
 ### 1. 验证前置条件
@@ -67,6 +72,14 @@ agent-infra-internal task-snapshot {task-id} --format text
 
 ### 5. 编写审查报告
 
+在首次写入本轮 `{review-artifact}` 前，先创建受控审查骨架：
+
+```bash
+agent-infra-internal task-artifact {task-id} init --family review-plan --artifact {review-artifact}
+```
+
+骨架不生成审查结论、发现或计数；完成审查内容后才能进入 summary finalizer。结构 finalizer 返回可证明的单个错误时，使用其 SHA 和 semantic digest 调用 `task-artifact {task-id} repair --family review-plan --artifact {review-artifact} --expected-sha256 {artifact-sha256} --expected-semantic-digest {semantic-digest}`，再重跑原 finalizer。
+
 创建 `.agents/workspace/active/{task-id}/{review-artifact}`。
 
 > 报告格式见 `reference/report-template.md`。写报告前先读取 `reference/report-template.md`。
@@ -83,7 +96,7 @@ agent-infra-internal task-snapshot {task-id} --format text
 {unresolved-minor} = stageStatus.unresolvedFindingCounts.minor
 ```
 
-该 intent 原子最终化报告摘要并返回同一次账本快照；不得再调用 `stage-status`、手工替换占位符或扫描问题清单。失败后，模型只能在共享规则的机械安全门通过时修改同一个受控 artifact，并完整重跑相同 intent；每次失败都重新判断是否收敛。最终一次完整成功返回决定同一快照的 verdict 和计数：`stageStatus.canAdvance=true` 且结论为 Approved 时允许跨阶段推进；`stageStatus.canAdvance=false` 时仍须执行 `agent-infra-internal task-event {task-id} review-plan.completed --agent {standard-agent-token} --artifact {review-artifact} --verdict {approved|changes-requested|rejected} --blockers {unresolved-blockers} --major {unresolved-major} --minor {unresolved-minor} --manual-validation {n} {execution-flag}`，使用 `changes-requested` 并路由到同阶段修订/复审（报告明确拒绝时使用 `rejected`）。失败、模型停止、无进展或紧急熔断时，不发布完成事件或跨阶段命令，但必须按 `reference/output-templates.md` 的 `repair-stop` 场景展示已有 summary/findings、artifact、实际修复次数、最后诊断和停止原因。
+该 intent 原子最终化报告摘要并返回同一次账本快照；不得再调用 `stage-status`、手工替换占位符或扫描问题清单。失败后，模型只能在共享规则的机械安全门通过时修改同一个受控 artifact，并完整重跑相同 intent；每次失败都重新判断是否收敛。最终一次完整成功返回决定同一快照的 verdict 和计数：`stageStatus.canAdvance=true` 且结论为 Approved 时允许跨阶段推进；`stageStatus.canAdvance=false` 时仍须执行 `agent-infra-internal task-event {task-id} review-plan.completed --agent {standard-agent-token} --initiator {trigger-initiator} --request-id {request-id} --reason-code {reason-code} --artifact {review-artifact} --verdict {approved|changes-requested|rejected} --blockers {unresolved-blockers} --major {unresolved-major} --minor {unresolved-minor} --manual-validation {n} {execution-flag}`，使用 `changes-requested` 并路由到同阶段修订/复审（报告明确拒绝时使用 `rejected`）。失败、模型停止、无进展或紧急熔断时，不发布完成事件或跨阶段命令，但必须按 `reference/output-templates.md` 的 `repair-stop` 场景展示已有 summary/findings、artifact、实际修复次数、最后诊断和停止原因。
 
 `manual-validation` 是 `ai task log` 中 review 行「人工校验点」（EN `Manual-validation`）计数的数据源；不要新增并行人工验证字段。
 

package/templates/.agents/skills/review-plan/config/verify.en.json

@@ -17,24 +17,7 @@
     },
     "artifact": {
       "file_pattern": "review-plan.md|review-plan-r{N}.md",
-      "required_sections": [
-        "Review Summary",
-        "Review Coverage Declaration",
-        "Technical Plan Architecture Coverage",
-        "Traceability Matrix",
-        "Findings",
-        "Non-blocking Advisories",
-        "Manual Validation Items",
-        "Conclusion and Recommendations",
-        "State Check",
-        "Evidence",
-        "Self-Doubt",
-        "Review Disagreement Ledger Writeback"
-      ],
-      "required_patterns": [
-        "^### Approval Decision$",
-        "^\\$ "
-      ]
+      "schema": "review-plan"
     },
     "decision-details": {},
     "review-summary": {

package/templates/.agents/skills/review-plan/config/verify.zh-CN.json

@@ -17,24 +17,7 @@
     },
     "artifact": {
       "file_pattern": "review-plan.md|review-plan-r{N}.md",
-      "required_sections": [
-        "审查摘要",
-        "检视覆盖声明",
-        "技术方案架构覆盖",
-        "追踪矩阵",
-        "问题清单",
-        "非阻塞建议",
-        "人工校验项",
-        "结论与建议",
-        "状态核对",
-        "证据原文",
-        "自我质疑",
-        "审查分歧账本回写"
-      ],
-      "required_patterns": [
-        "^### 审查决定$",
-        "^\\$ "
-      ]
+      "schema": "review-plan"
     },
     "decision-details": {},
     "review-summary": {

package/templates/.agents/skills/review-plan/reference/report-template.en.md

@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
 # Review Report Template
 
+> Before writing this report, use `task-artifact init --family review-plan` to create the skeleton and preserve every `artifact-section` marker; the skeleton contains no review conclusion.
+
 Use this template when writing `review-plan.md` or `review-plan-r{N}.md`.
 
 ## Output Template
@@ -12,11 +14,31 @@ Use this template when writing `review-plan.md` or `review-plan-r{N}.md`.
 - **Review Input**:
   - `{plan-artifact}` (the highest-round technical-plan artifact actually reviewed, e.g. `plan-r2.md`; leave blank if it cannot be reliably determined)
 
-## State Check
+## Review Summary
 
-> Paste the raw state-check command output; each command starts with `$ `.
+## Qualification Audit Review
 
-## Review Summary
+> Use `.agents/rules/decision-qualification.md` to review the five tables: constraint dependencies, candidate qualification, classification results, upstream relations, and dependency snapshot.
+
+### Constraint Dependencies
+| constraint_id | constraint_digest | role | evidence |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- |
+
+### Candidate Qualification
+| candidate_id | status | impact | constraint_ids | evidence |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
+
+### Classification Results
+| decision_id | classification | evidence |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+
+### Upstream Relations
+| upstream_family | upstream_artifact | upstream_round | upstream_sha256 | relation |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
+
+### Dependency Snapshot
+| task_input_digest | non_constraint_input_digest | upstream_artifact_digest |
+| --- | --- | --- |
 
 - **Reviewer**: {reviewer-name}
 - **Review Time**: {timestamp}
@@ -24,7 +46,7 @@ Use this template when writing `review-plan.md` or `review-plan-r{N}.md`.
 - **Overall Verdict**: {Approved / Changes Requested / Rejected}
 - **Findings (AI-actionable)**: {unresolved-blockers} blockers, {unresolved-major} majors, {unresolved-minor} minors / **Manual validation**: 0
 
-## Review Coverage Declaration
+## Inspection Coverage
 
 | pass_id | scope | evidence | result | gaps_or_assumptions |
 |---------|-------|----------|--------|---------------------|
@@ -102,7 +124,7 @@ Use this template when writing `review-plan.md` or `review-plan-r{N}.md`.
 **File**: `{file-path}:{line-number}`
 **Suggestion**: {improvement suggestion}
 
-## Non-blocking Advisories
+## Non-blocking Suggestions
 
 > Record only future optimizations that do not affect the current artifact's completeness, correctness, or acceptance. Advisories do not enter the disagreement ledger, finding counts, or verdict.
 
@@ -121,27 +143,42 @@ Use this template when writing `review-plan.md` or `review-plan-r{N}.md`.
 > If this round has no Manual validation items, keep the section heading and write "None".
 
 
-## Review Disagreement Ledger Writeback
+## Conclusion and Recommendation
 
-> Record the structured intents to submit: use `task-ledger finding-upsert` for new findings and `finding-review` for prior responses. The core allocates `PL-N` and validates transitions; do not edit task.md table rows.
-> Every finding escalated to `needs-human-decision` must include a self-contained detail block per `.agents/rules/human-decision-context.md`, with evidence pointing to that stable anchor.
+### Approval Decision
+- [ ] Approved
+- [ ] Changes Requested
+- [ ] Rejected
+
+### Next Steps
+{recommended next step}
+
+## State Check
 
-## Evidence
+> Record the state-check command, review scope, key result, and uncovered parts; each command starts with `$ `.
+> Follow `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md`: record review scope, key result, and uncovered parts; do not paste complete successful stdout.
 
-> Pair each "I verified X" claim with the corresponding raw tool output; the gate only checks that this section exists and at least one `$ ` line is present. Every Blocker must be backed by a reproducible command (rg/grep/sed/nl) and its raw output; a judgment that cannot be reproduced must be downgraded or moved to Self-Doubt.
+## Raw Evidence
+
+> Follow `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md`: pair each claim with a `$ ` command and proportionate result summary; Blockers, failures, blocking conditions, or disputes require a reproducible command, exact location, and decisive excerpt; a judgment that cannot be reproduced must be downgraded or moved to Self-Doubt.
 
 - Claim: {verified claim}
 ```text
 $ {command}
-{raw output}
+{result summary or decisive excerpt}
 ```
 
-## Self-Doubt
+## Self-critique
 
 > Explicitly declare conclusions, inferences, and assumptions in this review that were **not directly verified**; downstream can rebut them on this basis. Write "None" if there are none.
 
 - {an unverified conclusion or inference; note why it was not verified and the impact if it is overturned}
 
+## Review Disagreement Ledger Write-back
+
+> Record the structured intents to submit: use `task-ledger finding-upsert` for new findings and `finding-review` for prior responses. The core allocates `PL-N` and validates transitions; do not edit task.md table rows.
+> Every finding escalated to `needs-human-decision` must include a self-contained detail block per `.agents/rules/human-decision-context.md`, with evidence pointing to that stable anchor.
+
 ## Highlights
 
 - {what went well}
@@ -150,14 +187,4 @@ $ {command}
 
 - [ ] Implementation matches the technical plan
 - [ ] No unintended scope expansion
-
-## Conclusion and Recommendation
-
-### Approval Decision
-- [ ] Approved
-- [ ] Changes Requested
-- [ ] Rejected
-
-### Next Steps
-{recommended next step}
 ```

package/templates/.agents/skills/review-plan/reference/report-template.zh-CN.md

@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
 # 审查报告模板
 
+> 写入本报告前，先用 `task-artifact init --family review-plan` 创建骨架，并保留每个 `artifact-section` marker；骨架不包含审查结论。
+
 编写 `review-plan.md` 或 `review-plan-r{N}.md` 时使用本模板。
 
 ## 输出模板
@@ -12,11 +14,31 @@
 - **审查输入**：
   - `{plan-artifact}`（本轮实际检视的最高轮技术方案产物，如 `plan-r2.md`；无法可靠取得则留空）
 
-## 状态核对
+## 审查摘要
 
-> 粘贴状态核对命令原文；每条命令以 `$ ` 开头。
+## 资格审计复核
 
-## 审查摘要
+> 按 `.agents/rules/decision-qualification.md` 复核：约束依赖、候选资格、分类结果、上游关系和依赖快照五张表。
+
+### 约束依赖
+| constraint_id | constraint_digest | role | evidence |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- |
+
+### 候选资格
+| candidate_id | status | impact | constraint_ids | evidence |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
+
+### 分类结果
+| decision_id | classification | evidence |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+
+### 上游关系
+| upstream_family | upstream_artifact | upstream_round | upstream_sha256 | relation |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
+
+### 依赖快照
+| task_input_digest | non_constraint_input_digest | upstream_artifact_digest |
+| --- | --- | --- |
 
 - **审查者**：{reviewer-name}
 - **审查时间**：{timestamp}
@@ -121,19 +143,29 @@
 > 如本轮无人工校验项，保留段落标题并写「（无）」。
 
 
-## 审查分歧账本回写
+## 结论与建议
 
-> 本段记录将提交的结构化意图：新 finding 用 `task-ledger finding-upsert`，上一轮响应复核用 `finding-review`；由核心分配 `PL-N` 并校验状态机，禁止手写 task.md 表格。
-> 凡升级为 `needs-human-decision` 的 finding，必须按 `.agents/rules/human-decision-context.md` 在本报告中提供自足详情块，并让 evidence 指向该稳定锚点。
+### 审查决定
+- [ ] 通过
+- [ ] 需要修改
+- [ ] 拒绝
+
+### 下一步
+{recommended next step}
+
+## 状态核对
+
+> 记录状态核对命令、审查范围、关键结果和未覆盖部分；每条命令以 `$ ` 开头。
+> 按 `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md` 同时记录审查范围、关键结果和未覆盖部分；正常成功不粘贴完整 stdout。
 
 ## 证据原文
 
-> 每条“我验证了 X”断言都要配对对应 tool output 原文；gate 仅校验本段存在和至少一行 `$ `。每条 Blocker 必须配可复现命令（rg/grep/sed/nl）及其原文；无法复现的判断须降级或移入「自我质疑」。
+> 遵循 `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md`：每条断言配对 `$ ` 命令和相称结果摘要；Blocker、失败、阻塞或争议必须保留可复现命令、准确位置和决定性摘录；无法复现的判断须降级或移入「自我质疑」。
 
 - 断言：{verified claim}
 ```text
 $ {command}
-{raw output}
+{result summary or decisive excerpt}
 ```
 
 ## 自我质疑
@@ -142,6 +174,11 @@ $ {command}
 
 - {未直接验证的结论或推断；说明为何未验证、若被推翻的影响}
 
+## 审查分歧账本回写
+
+> 本段记录将提交的结构化意图：新 finding 用 `task-ledger finding-upsert`，上一轮响应复核用 `finding-review`；由核心分配 `PL-N` 并校验状态机，禁止手写 task.md 表格。
+> 凡升级为 `needs-human-decision` 的 finding，必须按 `.agents/rules/human-decision-context.md` 在本报告中提供自足详情块，并让 evidence 指向该稳定锚点。
+
 ## 亮点
 
 - {what went well}
@@ -150,14 +187,4 @@ $ {command}
 
 - [ ] 实现与技术方案一致
 - [ ] 没有意外的范围扩张
-
-## 结论与建议
-
-### 审查决定
-- [ ] 通过
-- [ ] 需要修改
-- [ ] 拒绝
-
-### 下一步
-{recommended next step}
 ```

package/templates/.agents/skills/review-pr/SKILL.en.md

@@ -12,6 +12,10 @@ Based on the target PR's lifecycle-evidence completeness and change risk, select
 
 ## Boundary / Critical Rules
 
+### Persisted Report Evidence
+
+Before generating the PR review report, read `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md`. Normal review records the command, scope, structured result, actual conclusion, and uncovered parts; formal Review, findings, blocking conditions, or disputes retain exact identity fields and decisive evidence.
+
 - Strictly follow the fixed evidence-grading decision flow: host resolution → evidence classification → freshness/alignment → risk grading → mode selection
 - `pr-review*` is an independent artifact family: it does not join the analysis/plan/code stage chain and never changes `current_step`
 - Only a formal PR Review (head SHA, conclusion, findings, receipt, Issue artifact link) is published on the PR; no second full process copy goes to a regular PR comment
@@ -41,7 +45,7 @@ Before making any task-state judgment or user-visible conclusion, run the state
 agent-infra-internal task-snapshot {task-id} --format text
 ```
 
-The task-anchored path records the current task directory and existing `pr-review*` rounds before starting; the one-shot path (no task) records the PR number and target directory. Paste the state-check output into the `## State Check` section of this round's `pr-review-rN.md`.
+The task-anchored path records the current task directory and existing `pr-review*` rounds before starting; the one-shot path (no task) records the PR number and target directory. Record the command, PR/head, review scope, key result, and uncovered parts in this round's `## State Check` section; do not paste complete directory listings or task tails on normal success, and retain decisive raw lines for identity mismatches, failures, blocking conditions, or disputes.
 
 ## Steps
 

package/templates/.agents/skills/review-pr/SKILL.zh-CN.md

@@ -12,6 +12,10 @@ description: >
 
 ## 行为边界 / 关键规则
 
+### 持久化报告证据
+
+生成 PR 审查报告时，先读取 `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md`。正常审查记录命令、范围、结构化结果、实际结论和未覆盖部分；正式 Review、finding、阻塞或争议的身份字段和决定性证据必须精确保留。
+
 - 严格遵循方案中固化的证据分级主决策流：宿主解析 → 证据分类 → 新鲜度/对齐 → 风险分级 → 模式选择
 - `pr-review*` 是独立 artifact family：不接入 analysis/plan/code 阶段依赖链，不修改 `current_step`
 - PR 上只发布正式 PR Review（head SHA、结论、finding、receipt、Issue artifact 链接），不发第二份完整过程原文到 PR 普通评论
@@ -41,7 +45,7 @@ description: >
 agent-infra-internal task-snapshot {task-id} --format text
 ```
 
-任务锚定路径在开始前记录当前任务目录与既有 `pr-review*` 轮次；一次性路径（无任务）记录 PR 编号与目标目录。状态核对输出粘贴到本轮产物 `pr-review-rN.md` 的 `## 状态核对` 段。
+任务锚定路径在开始前记录当前任务目录与既有 `pr-review*` 轮次；一次性路径（无任务）记录 PR 编号与目标目录。将命令、PR/head、审查范围、关键结果和未覆盖部分写入本轮产物 `pr-review-rN.md` 的 `## 状态核对` 段；正常成功不粘贴完整目录清单或 `task.md` 尾部，身份不一致、失败、阻塞或争议时保留决定性原文行。
 
 ## 执行步骤
 

package/templates/.agents/skills/review-pr/reference/report-template.en.md

@@ -11,7 +11,8 @@ Use the following structure when creating `pr-review.md` or `pr-review-r{N}.md`.
 
 ## State Check
 
-> Paste the state-check command output verbatim; each command starts with `$ `.
+> Record the state-check command, PR/head, review scope, key result, and uncovered parts; each command starts with `$ `.
+> Follow `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md`: record PR, head, review scope, key result, and uncovered parts; do not paste complete successful stdout.
 
 ## Identity
 
@@ -76,10 +77,10 @@ Land the following in order before the line-level findings, without impersonatin
 
 ## Evidence
 
-> Every "I verified X" assertion must pair with the corresponding tool output verbatim; the gate only checks this section exists and has at least one `$ ` line.
+> Follow `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md`: pair every assertion with a `$ ` command and proportionate result summary; formal Review, failures, blocking conditions, or disputes retain exact identity and decisive excerpts.
 
 - Assertion: {verified claim}
 ```text
 $ {command}
-{raw output}
+{result summary or decisive excerpt}
 ```

package/templates/.agents/skills/review-pr/reference/report-template.zh-CN.md

@@ -11,7 +11,8 @@
 
 ## 状态核对
 
-> 粘贴状态核对命令原文；每条命令以 `$ ` 开头。
+> 记录状态核对命令、PR/head、审查范围、关键结果和未覆盖部分；每条命令以 `$ ` 开头。
+> 按 `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md` 同时记录 PR、head、审查范围、关键结果和未覆盖部分；正常成功不粘贴完整 stdout。
 
 ## 身份信息
 
@@ -76,10 +77,10 @@
 
 ## 证据原文
 
-> 每条「我验证了 X」断言都要配对对应 tool output 原文；gate 仅校验本段存在和至少一行 `$ `。
+> 遵循 `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md`：每条断言配对 `$ ` 命令和相称结果摘要；正式 Review、失败、阻塞或争议保留准确身份和决定性摘录。
 
 - 断言：{verified claim}
 ```text
 $ {command}
-{raw output}
+{result summary or decisive excerpt}
 ```

package/templates/.agents/skills/run-manual-validation/SKILL.en.md

@@ -8,12 +8,18 @@ description: >
 
 # Run Manual Validation
 
+Lifecycle events require explicit trigger data: use `{trigger-initiator}=orchestrator` for orchestration and `model` otherwise; `{request-id}` is a stable single-line identifier for this task and artifact round, and `{reason-code}` is `user-request` or `validation-rerun`. Reuse the same values for started and completed.
+
 ## Task Context Resolution
 
 The entry point may omit the task ref; explicit task scope accepts only `--task <ref>` or `-t <ref>`, and positional task refs are not interpreted. Parse `--scope`, `--timeout`, and `--format` before `--`, preserve the user command after `--` verbatim, then call `agent-infra-internal task-context resolve {task-scope}`. Pass through resolution failures without scanning tasks locally. The internal `task-validate` protocol continues to use a positional task ref.
 
 ## Boundary
 
+### Persisted Report Evidence
+
+Before generating a validation report, read `.agents/rules/evidence-reporting.md`. Record only the command name, target scope, exit status, sanitized result, and coverage gap; never record complete argv, environment variables, tokens, absolute paths, or a raw sensitive transcript.
+
 - Select the validation mode, call the sole mechanical entry point, and record evidence; do not mark PR manual validation complete.
 - `complete-manual-validation` remains the maintainer's final registration after coverage is judged sufficient.
 - Never manipulate temporary worktrees, leases, or containers directly; only call `agent-infra-internal task-validate`.
@@ -22,7 +28,7 @@ The entry point may omit the task ref; explicit task scope accepts only `--task
 
 ## Step 0: State Check (pre-execution hard gate)
 
-Resolve the task reference, then run this command and copy its original output into the artifact:
+Resolve the task reference, then run this command and record the task/artifact scope, key result, and uncovered parts in the artifact; do not paste complete directory listings or task tails on normal success. Retain decisive raw lines only for failures, blocking conditions, identity mismatches, or disputes:
 
 ```bash
 agent-infra-internal task-snapshot {task-id} --format text
@@ -32,10 +38,10 @@ agent-infra-internal task-snapshot {task-id} --format text
 
 1. Read `reference/discovery-and-execution.md` and parse the input mode. Stop before started without an artifact for invalid or partial input.
 2. Run `agent-infra-internal task-artifact {task-id} inspect --family validation-run` and read the latest review-code manual-validation items. Then run `agent-infra-internal platform-pr inspect {task-id}` and use the reference status matrix to discover, merge, and number items. Only automatic mode stops before started when reliable sources are empty or the sole possible source is unreadable; valid explicit mode always continues with the user command as effective work.
-3. Take the round and artifact name from the core result. After confirming valid explicit work or a non-empty discovered list, run `agent-infra-internal task-event {task-id} validation-run.started --agent {standard-agent-token}` and classify each item as `executable|unavailable|unknown|unsafe|unresolved`.
+3. Take the round and artifact name from the core result. After confirming valid explicit work or a non-empty discovered list, run `agent-infra-internal task-event {task-id} validation-run.started --agent {standard-agent-token} --initiator {trigger-initiator} --request-id {request-id} --reason-code {reason-code}` and classify each item as `executable|unavailable|unknown|unsafe|unresolved`.
 4. Invoke every executable item separately with `agent-infra-internal task-validate {task-ref} --scope snapshot --format json -- {command...}`. Only make a second explicit inplace invocation for that item when evidence proves it is required. If no item is executable, run no fabricated command but still produce coverage-gap evidence.
 5. Read `reference/report-template.md`, create `validation-run.md|validation-run-r{N}.md`, and record the input mode, discovered list, per-item results, CLI JSON allowlist, and sanitized summaries.
-6. Run `agent-infra-internal task-event {task-id} validation-run.completed --agent {standard-agent-token} --artifact {artifact}`. When an Issue exists, run `agent-infra-internal platform-comment sync {task-id} --kind task --agent {standard-agent-token}` and then `agent-infra-internal platform-comment sync {task-id} --kind artifact --artifact {artifact} --agent {standard-agent-token}`.
+6. Run `agent-infra-internal task-event {task-id} validation-run.completed --agent {standard-agent-token} --initiator {trigger-initiator} --request-id {request-id} --reason-code {reason-code} --artifact {artifact}`. When an Issue exists, run `agent-infra-internal platform-comment sync {task-id} --kind task --agent {standard-agent-token}` and then `agent-infra-internal platform-comment sync {task-id} --kind artifact --artifact {artifact} --agent {standard-agent-token}`.
 7. Run `agent-infra-internal task-verify {task-id} validation-run.completed --artifact {artifact} --format text`; fix failures and rerun it.
 8. Report the evidence path, coverage gaps, and verification result; explicitly leave the decision to run `complete-manual-validation` to the maintainer. Read `.agents/rules/next-step-output.md` and end with `Completed at`.