@fro.bot/systematic 1.22.8 → 1.23.1

package/{commands/ce/plan.md → skills/ce-plan/SKILL.md}

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 name: ce:plan
 description: Transform feature descriptions into well-structured project plans following conventions
-argument-hint: "[feature description, bug report, or improvement idea]"
+argument-hint: '[feature description, bug report, or improvement idea]'
 ---
 
 # Create a plan for a new feature or bug fix
@@ -22,40 +22,41 @@ Do not proceed until you have a clear feature description from the user.
 
 ### 0. Idea Refinement
 
-**Check for brainstorm output first:**
+**Check for requirements document first:**
 
-Before asking questions, look for recent brainstorm documents in `docs/brainstorms/` that match this feature:
+Before asking questions, look for recent requirements documents in `docs/brainstorms/` that match this feature:
 
 ```bash
-ls -la docs/brainstorms/*.md 2>/dev/null | head -10
+ls -la docs/brainstorms/*-requirements.md 2>/dev/null | head -10
 ```
 
-**Relevance criteria:** A brainstorm is relevant if:
+**Relevance criteria:** A requirements document is relevant if:
 - The topic (from filename or YAML frontmatter) semantically matches the feature description
 - Created within the last 14 days
 - If multiple candidates match, use the most recent one
 
-**If a relevant brainstorm exists:**
-1. Read the brainstorm document **thoroughly** — every section matters
-2. Announce: "Found brainstorm from [date]: [topic]. Using as foundation for planning."
+**If a relevant requirements document exists:**
+1. Read the source document **thoroughly** — every section matters
+2. Announce: "Found source document from [date]: [topic]. Using as foundation for planning."
 3. Extract and carry forward **ALL** of the following into the plan:
    - Key decisions and their rationale
    - Chosen approach and why alternatives were rejected
-   - Constraints and requirements discovered during brainstorming
-   - Open questions (flag these for resolution during planning)
+   - Problem framing, constraints, and requirements captured during brainstorming
+   - Outstanding questions, preserving whether they block planning or are intentionally deferred
    - Success criteria and scope boundaries
-   - Any specific technical choices or patterns discussed
-4. **Skip the idea refinement questions below** — the brainstorm already answered WHAT to build
-5. Use brainstorm content as the **primary input** to research and planning phases
-6. **Critical: The brainstorm is the origin document.** Throughout the plan, reference specific decisions with `(see brainstorm: docs/brainstorms/<filename>)` when carrying forward conclusions. Do not paraphrase decisions in a way that loses their original context — link back to the source.
-7. **Do not omit brainstorm content** — if the brainstorm discussed it, the plan must address it (even if briefly). Scan each brainstorm section before finalizing the plan to verify nothing was dropped.
+   - Dependencies and assumptions, plus any high-level technical direction only when the origin document is inherently technical
+4. **Skip the idea refinement questions below** — the source document already answered WHAT to build
+5. Use source document content as the **primary input** to research and planning phases
+6. **Critical: The source document is the origin document.** Throughout the plan, reference specific decisions with `(see origin: <source-path>)` when carrying forward conclusions. Do not paraphrase decisions in a way that loses their original context — link back to the source.
+7. **Do not omit source content** — if the source document discussed it, the plan must address it (even if briefly). Scan each section before finalizing the plan to verify nothing was dropped.
+8. **If `Resolve Before Planning` contains any items, stop.** Do not proceed with planning. Tell the user planning is blocked by unanswered brainstorm questions and direct them to resume `/systematic:ce-brainstorm` or answer those questions first.
 
-**If multiple brainstorms could match:**
-Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to ask which brainstorm to use, or whether to proceed without one.
+**If multiple source documents could match:**
+Use **question tool** to ask which source document to use, or whether to proceed without one.
 
-**If no brainstorm found (or not relevant), run idea refinement:**
+**If no requirements document is found (or not relevant), run idea refinement:**
 
-Refine the idea through collaborative dialogue using the **AskUserQuestion tool**:
+Refine the idea through collaborative dialogue using the **question tool**:
 
 - Ask questions one at a time to understand the idea fully
 - Prefer multiple choice questions when natural options exist
@@ -82,8 +83,8 @@ First, I need to understand the project's conventions, existing patterns, and an
 
 Run these agents **in parallel** to gather local context:
 
-- task repo-research-analyst(feature_description)
-- task learnings-researcher(feature_description)
+- task systematic:research:repo-research-analyst(feature_description)
+- task systematic:research:learnings-researcher(feature_description)
 
 **What to look for:**
 - **Repo research:** existing patterns, AGENTS.md guidance, technology familiarity, pattern consistency
@@ -113,8 +114,8 @@ Examples:
 
 Run these agents in parallel:
 
-- Task best-practices-researcher(feature_description)
-- Task framework-docs-researcher(feature_description)
+- task systematic:research:best-practices-researcher(feature_description)
+- task systematic:research:framework-docs-researcher(feature_description)
 
 ### 1.6. Consolidate Research
 
@@ -138,8 +139,11 @@ Think like a product manager - what would make this issue clear and actionable?
 
 - [ ] Draft clear, searchable issue title using conventional format (e.g., `feat: Add user authentication`, `fix: Cart total calculation`)
 - [ ] Determine issue type: enhancement, bug, refactor
-- [ ] Convert title to filename: add today's date prefix, strip prefix colon, kebab-case, add `-plan` suffix
-  - Example: `feat: Add User Authentication` → `2026-01-21-feat-add-user-authentication-plan.md`
+- [ ] Convert title to filename: add today's date prefix, determine daily sequence number, strip prefix colon, kebab-case, add `-plan` suffix
+  - Scan `docs/plans/` for files matching today's date pattern `YYYY-MM-DD-\d{3}-`
+  - Find the highest existing sequence number for today
+  - Increment by 1, zero-padded to 3 digits (001, 002, etc.)
+  - Example: `feat: Add User Authentication` → `2026-01-21-001-feat-add-user-authentication-plan.md`
   - Keep it descriptive (3-5 words after prefix) so plans are findable by context
 
 **Stakeholder Analysis:**
@@ -158,7 +162,7 @@ Think like a product manager - what would make this issue clear and actionable?
 
 After planning the issue structure, run SpecFlow Analyzer to validate and refine the feature specification:
 
-- Task compound-engineering:workflow:spec-flow-analyzer(feature_description, research_findings)
+- task systematic:workflow:spec-flow-analyzer(feature_description, research_findings)
 
 **SpecFlow Analyzer Output:**
 
@@ -188,7 +192,7 @@ title: [Issue Title]
 type: [feat|fix|refactor]
 status: active
 date: YYYY-MM-DD
-origin: docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md  # if originated from brainstorm, otherwise omit
+origin: docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-requirements.md  # if originated from a requirements doc, otherwise omit
 ---
 
 # [Issue Title]
@@ -218,7 +222,7 @@ end
 
 ## Sources
 
-- **Origin brainstorm:** [docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md](path) — include if plan originated from a brainstorm
+- **Origin document:** [docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-requirements.md](path) — include if plan originated from an upstream requirements doc
 - Related issue: #[issue_number]
 - Documentation: [relevant_docs_url]
 ````
@@ -243,7 +247,7 @@ title: [Issue Title]
 type: [feat|fix|refactor]
 status: active
 date: YYYY-MM-DD
-origin: docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md  # if originated from brainstorm, otherwise omit
+origin: docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-requirements.md  # if originated from a requirements doc, otherwise omit
 ---
 
 # [Issue Title]
@@ -290,7 +294,7 @@ origin: docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md  # if originated from
 
 ## Sources & References
 
-- **Origin brainstorm:** [docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md](path) — include if plan originated from a brainstorm
+- **Origin document:** [docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-requirements.md](path) — include if plan originated from an upstream requirements doc
 - Similar implementations: [file_path:line_number]
 - Best practices: [documentation_url]
 - Related PRs: #[pr_number]
@@ -318,7 +322,7 @@ title: [Issue Title]
 type: [feat|fix|refactor]
 status: active
 date: YYYY-MM-DD
-origin: docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md  # if originated from brainstorm, otherwise omit
+origin: docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-requirements.md  # if originated from a requirements doc, otherwise omit
 ---
 
 # [Issue Title]
@@ -433,7 +437,7 @@ origin: docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md  # if originated from
 
 ### Origin
 
-- **Brainstorm document:** [docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md](path) — include if plan originated from a brainstorm. Key decisions carried forward: [list 2-3 major decisions from brainstorm]
+- **Origin document:** [docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-requirements.md](path) — include if plan originated from an upstream requirements doc. Key decisions carried forward: [list 2-3 major decisions from the origin]
 
 ### Internal References
 
@@ -512,15 +516,15 @@ end
 
 ### 6. Final Review & Submission
 
-**Brainstorm cross-check (if plan originated from a brainstorm):**
+**Origin document cross-check (if plan originated from a requirements doc):**
 
-Before finalizing, re-read the brainstorm document and verify:
-- [ ] Every key decision from the brainstorm is reflected in the plan
-- [ ] The chosen approach matches what was decided in the brainstorm
-- [ ] Constraints and requirements from the brainstorm are captured in acceptance criteria
-- [ ] Open questions from the brainstorm are either resolved or flagged
-- [ ] The `origin:` frontmatter field points to the brainstorm file
-- [ ] The Sources section includes the brainstorm with a summary of carried-forward decisions
+Before finalizing, re-read the origin document and verify:
+- [ ] Every key decision from the origin document is reflected in the plan
+- [ ] The chosen approach matches what was decided in the origin document
+- [ ] Constraints and requirements from the origin document are captured in acceptance criteria
+- [ ] Open questions from the origin document are either resolved or flagged
+- [ ] The `origin:` frontmatter field points to the correct source file
+- [ ] The Sources section includes the origin document with a summary of carried-forward decisions
 
 **Pre-submission Checklist:**
 
@@ -538,51 +542,53 @@ Before finalizing, re-read the brainstorm document and verify:
 
 ```bash
 mkdir -p docs/plans/
+# Determine daily sequence number
+today=$(date +%Y-%m-%d)
+last_seq=$(ls docs/plans/${today}-*-plan.md 2>/dev/null | grep -oP "${today}-\K\d{3}" | sort -n | tail -1)
+next_seq=$(printf "%03d" $(( ${last_seq:-0} + 1 )))
 ```
 
-Use the Write tool to save the complete plan to `docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<type>-<descriptive-name>-plan.md`. This step is mandatory and cannot be skipped — even when running as part of LFG/SLFG or other automated pipelines.
+Use the write tool to save the complete plan to `docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-NNN-<type>-<descriptive-name>-plan.md` (where NNN is `$next_seq` from the bash command above). This step is mandatory and cannot be skipped — even when running as part of LFG/SLFG or other automated pipelines.
 
 Confirm: "Plan written to docs/plans/[filename]"
 
-**Pipeline mode:** If invoked from an automated workflow (LFG, SLFG, or any `disable-model-invocation` context), skip all AskUserQuestion calls. Make decisions automatically and proceed to writing the plan without interactive prompts.
+**Pipeline mode:** If invoked from an automated workflow (LFG, SLFG, or any `disable-model-invocation` context), skip all question calls. Make decisions automatically and proceed to writing the plan without interactive prompts.
 
 ## Output Format
 
-**Filename:** Use the date and kebab-case filename from Step 2 Title & Categorization.
+**Filename:** Use the date, daily sequence number, and kebab-case filename from Step 2 Title & Categorization.
 
 ```
-docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<type>-<descriptive-name>-plan.md
+docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-NNN-<type>-<descriptive-name>-plan.md
 ```
 
 Examples:
-- ✅ `docs/plans/2026-01-15-feat-user-authentication-flow-plan.md`
-- ✅ `docs/plans/2026-02-03-fix-checkout-race-condition-plan.md`
-- ✅ `docs/plans/2026-03-10-refactor-api-client-extraction-plan.md`
-- ❌ `docs/plans/2026-01-15-feat-thing-plan.md` (not descriptive - what "thing"?)
-- ❌ `docs/plans/2026-01-15-feat-new-feature-plan.md` (too vague - what feature?)
-- ❌ `docs/plans/2026-01-15-feat: user auth-plan.md` (invalid characters - colon and space)
-- ❌ `docs/plans/feat-user-auth-plan.md` (missing date prefix)
+- ✅ `docs/plans/2026-01-15-001-feat-user-authentication-flow-plan.md`
+- ✅ `docs/plans/2026-02-03-001-fix-checkout-race-condition-plan.md`
+- ✅ `docs/plans/2026-03-10-002-refactor-api-client-extraction-plan.md`
+- ❌ `docs/plans/2026-01-15-feat-thing-plan.md` (missing sequence number, not descriptive)
+- ❌ `docs/plans/2026-01-15-001-feat-new-feature-plan.md` (too vague - what feature?)
+- ❌ `docs/plans/2026-01-15-001-feat: user auth-plan.md` (invalid characters - colon and space)
+- ❌ `docs/plans/feat-user-auth-plan.md` (missing date prefix and sequence number)
 
 ## Post-Generation Options
 
-After writing the plan file, use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to present these options:
+After writing the plan file, use the **question tool** to present these options:
 
-**Question:** "Plan ready at `docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<type>-<name>-plan.md`. What would you like to do next?"
+**Question:** "Plan ready at `docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-NNN-<type>-<name>-plan.md`. What would you like to do next?"
 
 **Options:**
 1. **Open plan in editor** - Open the plan file for review
 2. **Run `/deepen-plan`** - Enhance each section with parallel research agents (best practices, performance, UI)
-3. **Run `/technical_review`** - Technical feedback from code-focused reviewers (DHH, Kieran, Simplicity)
-4. **Review and refine** - Improve the document through structured self-review
-5. **Share to Proof** - Upload to Proof for collaborative review and sharing
-6. **Start `/ce:work`** - Begin implementing this plan locally
-7. **Start `/ce:work` on remote** - Begin implementing in OpenCode on the web (use `&` to run in background)
-8. **Create Issue** - Create issue in project tracker (GitHub/Linear)
+3. **Review and refine** - Improve the document through structured self-review
+4. **Share to Proof** - Upload to Proof for collaborative review and sharing
+5. **Start `/systematic:ce-work`** - Begin implementing this plan locally
+6. **Start `/systematic:ce-work` on remote** - Begin implementing in OpenCode on the web (use `&` to run in background)
+7. **Create Issue** - Create issue in project tracker (GitHub/Linear)
 
 Based on selection:
 - **Open plan in editor** → Run `open docs/plans/<plan_filename>.md` to open the file in the user's default editor
 - **`/deepen-plan`** → Call the /deepen-plan command with the plan file path to enhance with research
-- **`/technical_review`** → Call the /technical_review command with the plan file path
 - **Review and refine** → Load `document-review` skill.
 - **Share to Proof** → Upload the plan to Proof:
   ```bash
@@ -590,18 +596,18 @@ Based on selection:
   TITLE="Plan: <plan title from frontmatter>"
   RESPONSE=$(curl -s -X POST https://www.proofeditor.ai/share/markdown \
     -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-    -d "$(jq -n --arg title "$TITLE" --arg markdown "$CONTENT" --arg by "ai:systematic" '{title: $title, markdown: $markdown, by: $by}')")
+    -d "$(jq -n --arg title "$TITLE" --arg markdown "$CONTENT" --arg by "ai:compound" '{title: $title, markdown: $markdown, by: $by}')")
   PROOF_URL=$(echo "$RESPONSE" | jq -r '.tokenUrl')
   ```
   Display: `View & collaborate in Proof: <PROOF_URL>` — skip silently if curl fails. Then return to options.
-- **`/ce:work`** → Call the /ce:work command with the plan file path
-- **`/ce:work` on remote** → Run `/ce:work docs/plans/<plan_filename>.md &` to start work in background for OpenCode web
+- **`/systematic:ce-work`** → Call the /systematic:ce-work command with the plan file path
+- **`/systematic:ce-work` on remote** → Run `/systematic:ce-work docs/plans/<plan_filename>.md &` to start work in background for OpenCode web
 - **Create Issue** → See "Issue Creation" section below
 - **Other** (automatically provided) → Accept free text for rework or specific changes
 
-**Note:** If running `/ce:plan` with ultrathink enabled, automatically run `/deepen-plan` after plan creation for maximum depth and grounding.
+**Note:** If running `/systematic:ce-plan` with ultrathink enabled, automatically run `/deepen-plan` after plan creation for maximum depth and grounding.
 
-Loop back to options after Simplify or Other changes until user selects `/ce:work` or `/technical_review`.
+Loop back to options after Simplify or Other changes until user selects `/systematic:ce-work` or another action.
 
 ## Issue Creation
 
@@ -631,6 +637,7 @@ When user selects "Create Issue", detect their project tracker from AGENTS.md:
 
 5. **After creation:**
    - Display the issue URL
-   - Ask if they want to proceed to `/ce:work` or `/technical_review`
+   - Ask if they want to proceed to `/systematic:ce-work`
 
 NEVER CODE! Just research and write the plan.
+