@fro.bot/systematic 3.13.5 → 3.13.7

package/dist/cli.js

@@ -1988,7 +1988,10 @@ var MAX_FINDINGS = 32;
 var MAX_PERSONAS = 64;
 var REVIEW_ARTIFACT_CUSTOM_MESSAGES = [
   "severity count must match rejected finding count",
-  "filtered findings require a validation reason"
+  "filtered findings require a validation reason",
+  "risk-critical dispatches require a non-empty selection surface",
+  "satisfied risk coverage requires a citing input finding ID",
+  "unsatisfied risk coverage must not cite an input finding ID"
 ];
 var boundedText = (maxLength) => exports_external.string().min(1).max(maxLength).regex(/\S/);
 var DispatchOutcomeSchema = exports_external.enum([
@@ -2012,6 +2015,14 @@ var BranchSchema = exports_external.string().max(MAX_BRANCH_LENGTH);
 var HeadShaSchema = exports_external.string().regex(/^[0-9a-f]{40}$/);
 var CompletedAtSchema = exports_external.iso.datetime({ offset: false });
 var ReasonSchema = boundedText(MAX_REASON_LENGTH);
+var RISK_CRITICAL_PERSONAS = [
+  "security",
+  "data-migrations",
+  "api-contract",
+  "reliability",
+  "performance"
+];
+var RiskCriticalPersonaSchema = exports_external.enum(RISK_CRITICAL_PERSONAS);
 var FindingTitleSchema = boundedText(256);
 var SeveritySchema = exports_external.enum(["P0", "P1", "P2", "P3", "unknown"]);
 var FindingSeveritySchema = SeveritySchema.exclude(["unknown"]);
@@ -2098,8 +2109,18 @@ var DispatchSchema = exports_external.object({
   persona: ReviewerSchema,
   dispatch_outcome: DispatchOutcomeSchema,
   input_finding_count: exports_external.number().int().nonnegative().max(MAX_FINDINGS),
-  rejection_reason: ReasonSchema.optional()
-}).strict();
+  rejection_reason: ReasonSchema.optional(),
+  selection_surface: exports_external.array(RepoRelativePathSchema).max(MAX_FINDINGS).optional(),
+  selection_reason: ReasonSchema.optional()
+}).strict().superRefine((dispatch, ctx) => {
+  if (RISK_CRITICAL_PERSONAS.includes(dispatch.persona) && (!dispatch.selection_surface || dispatch.selection_surface.length === 0)) {
+    ctx.addIssue({
+      code: "custom",
+      path: ["selection_surface"],
+      message: REVIEW_ARTIFACT_CUSTOM_MESSAGES[2]
+    });
+  }
+});
 var DispositionCountsSchema = exports_external.object({
   surviving: exports_external.number().int().nonnegative().max(MAX_FINDINGS * MAX_PERSONAS),
   merged: exports_external.number().int().nonnegative().max(MAX_FINDINGS * MAX_PERSONAS),
@@ -2121,6 +2142,26 @@ var DeclinedMergeSchema = exports_external.object({
   input_finding_ids: exports_external.array(boundedText(MAX_INPUT_ID_LENGTH)).min(2).max(MAX_FINDINGS),
   reason: ReasonSchema
 }).strict();
+var RiskCoverageSchema = exports_external.object({
+  persona: RiskCriticalPersonaSchema,
+  satisfied: exports_external.boolean(),
+  input_finding_id: boundedText(MAX_INPUT_ID_LENGTH).optional()
+}).strict().superRefine((coverage, ctx) => {
+  if (coverage.satisfied && coverage.input_finding_id === undefined) {
+    ctx.addIssue({
+      code: "custom",
+      path: ["input_finding_id"],
+      message: REVIEW_ARTIFACT_CUSTOM_MESSAGES[3]
+    });
+  }
+  if (!coverage.satisfied && coverage.input_finding_id !== undefined) {
+    ctx.addIssue({
+      code: "custom",
+      path: ["input_finding_id"],
+      message: REVIEW_ARTIFACT_CUSTOM_MESSAGES[4]
+    });
+  }
+});
 var ReviewArtifactSchema = exports_external.object({
   schema_version: exports_external.literal(1),
   run_id: boundedText(MAX_RUN_ID_LENGTH),
@@ -2140,6 +2181,7 @@ var ReviewArtifactSchema = exports_external.object({
   input_findings: exports_external.array(InputFindingSchema).max(MAX_FINDINGS * MAX_PERSONAS),
   findings: exports_external.array(SynthesizedFindingSchema).max(MAX_FINDINGS),
   declined_merges: exports_external.array(DeclinedMergeSchema).max(MAX_FINDINGS).optional(),
+  risk_coverage: exports_external.array(RiskCoverageSchema).max(MAX_PERSONAS).optional(),
   disposition_counts: DispositionCountsSchema,
   applied_fixes: exports_external.array(ReasonSchema).max(MAX_FINDINGS),
   residual_actionable_work: exports_external.array(ReasonSchema).max(MAX_FINDINGS),

package/dist/lib/review-artifact-schema.d.ts

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 import { z } from 'zod';
-export declare const REVIEW_ARTIFACT_CUSTOM_MESSAGES: readonly ['severity count must match rejected finding count', 'filtered findings require a validation reason'];
+export declare const REVIEW_ARTIFACT_CUSTOM_MESSAGES: readonly ['severity count must match rejected finding count', 'filtered findings require a validation reason', 'risk-critical dispatches require a non-empty selection surface', 'satisfied risk coverage requires a citing input finding ID', 'unsatisfied risk coverage must not cite an input finding ID'];
 export declare const DispatchOutcomeSchema: z.ZodEnum<{
     empty: "empty";
     findings: "findings";
@@ -134,6 +134,8 @@ export declare const ReviewArtifactSchema: z.ZodObject<{
         }>;
         input_finding_count: z.ZodNumber;
         rejection_reason: z.ZodOptional<z.ZodString>;
+        selection_surface: z.ZodOptional<z.ZodArray<z.ZodString>>;
+        selection_reason: z.ZodOptional<z.ZodString>;
     }, z.core.$strict>>;
     input_findings: z.ZodArray<z.ZodDiscriminatedUnion<[z.ZodObject<{
         record_type: z.ZodLiteral<"admitted">;
@@ -223,6 +225,17 @@ export declare const ReviewArtifactSchema: z.ZodObject<{
         input_finding_ids: z.ZodArray<z.ZodString>;
         reason: z.ZodString;
     }, z.core.$strict>>>;
+    risk_coverage: z.ZodOptional<z.ZodArray<z.ZodObject<{
+        persona: z.ZodEnum<{
+            "api-contract": "api-contract";
+            "data-migrations": "data-migrations";
+            performance: "performance";
+            reliability: "reliability";
+            security: "security";
+        }>;
+        satisfied: z.ZodBoolean;
+        input_finding_id: z.ZodOptional<z.ZodString>;
+    }, z.core.$strict>>>;
     disposition_counts: z.ZodObject<{
         surviving: z.ZodNumber;
         merged: z.ZodNumber;

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@fro.bot/systematic",
-  "version": "3.13.5",
+  "version": "3.13.7",
   "description": "Compound-engineering loops for OpenCode, Pi, and Claude Code",
   "type": "module",
   "homepage": "https://fro.bot/systematic",

package/skills/ce-compound/assets/resolution-template.md

@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ tags: [keyword-one, keyword-two]
 
 ## Knowledge Track Template
 
-Use for: `best_practice`, `documentation_gap`, `workflow_issue`, `developer_experience`
+Use for: `best_practice`, `documentation_gap`, `workflow_issue`, `developer_experience`, `architecture_pattern`, `design_pattern`, `tooling_decision`, `convention`
 
 ```markdown
 ---

package/skills/ce-compound-refresh/assets/resolution-template.md

@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ tags: [keyword-one, keyword-two]
 
 ## Knowledge Track Template
 
-Use for: `best_practice`, `documentation_gap`, `workflow_issue`, `developer_experience`
+Use for: `best_practice`, `documentation_gap`, `workflow_issue`, `developer_experience`, `architecture_pattern`, `design_pattern`, `tooling_decision`, `convention`
 
 ```markdown
 ---

package/skills/ce-review/SKILL.md

@@ -360,6 +360,10 @@ Review team:
 
 This is progress reporting, not a blocking confirmation.
 
+Record each conditional persona's selection reason and triggering file paths
+on its dispatch record; see the [synthesis artifact contract](./references/synthesis-artifact-contract.md)
+for the field semantics.
+
 ### Stage 3b: Discover project standards paths
 
 Before spawning sub-agents, find the file paths (not contents) of all relevant standards files for the `project-standards` persona. Use the native file-search/glob tool to locate:
@@ -520,8 +524,8 @@ Assemble the final report using **pipe-delimited markdown tables for findings**
 8. **Learnings & Past Solutions.** Surface learnings-researcher results: if past solutions are relevant, flag them as "Known Pattern" with links to docs/solutions/ files.
 9. **Agent-Native Gaps.** Surface agent-native-reviewer results. Omit section if no gaps found.
 10. **Deployment Notes.** If deployment-verification-agent ran, surface the key Go/No-Go items: blocking pre-deploy checks, the most important verification queries, rollback caveats, and monitoring focus areas. Keep the checklist actionable rather than dropping it into Coverage.
-11. **Coverage.** Suppressed count, residual risks, testing gaps, failed/timed-out reviewers, validator failures, and any intent uncertainty carried by non-interactive modes.
-12. **Verdict.** Ready to merge / Ready with fixes / Not ready. Fix order if applicable. When an `explicit` plan has unaddressed requirements, the verdict must reflect it — a PR that's code-clean but missing planned requirements is "Not ready" unless the omission is intentional. When an `inferred` plan has unaddressed requirements, note it in the verdict reasoning but do not block on it alone. Apply the risk-aware degraded verdict rule from the [synthesis artifact contract](./references/synthesis-artifact-contract.md).
+11. **Coverage.** Suppressed count, residual risks, testing gaps, failed/timed-out reviewers, validator failures, risk-coverage entries with citing input finding IDs and exit conditions for blocked entries, and any intent uncertainty carried by non-interactive modes.
+12. **Verdict.** Ready to merge / Ready with fixes / Not ready. Fix order if applicable. When an `explicit` plan has unaddressed requirements, the verdict must reflect it — a PR that's code-clean but missing planned requirements is "Not ready" unless the omission is intentional. When an `inferred` plan has unaddressed requirements, note it in the verdict reasoning but do not block on it alone. Apply the risk-aware degraded verdict rule from the [synthesis artifact contract](./references/synthesis-artifact-contract.md), including the recorded exit condition for a blocked risk-critical verdict.
 
 Do not include time estimates.
 

package/skills/ce-review/references/review-output-template.md

@@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ This fails because: no pipe-delimited tables, no severity-grouped `###` headers,
 - **Learnings & Past Solutions section** -- results from learnings-researcher, with links to docs/solutions/ files
 - **Agent-Native Gaps section** -- results from agent-native-reviewer. Omit if no gaps found.
 - **Deployment Notes section** -- key checklist items from deployment-verification-agent. Omit if the agent did not run.
-- **Coverage section** -- suppressed count with original confidences, residual risks, testing gaps, failed reviewers, and disposition reconciliation
+- **Coverage section** -- suppressed count with original confidences, residual risks, testing gaps, failed reviewers, disposition reconciliation, and risk-coverage entries with their citing input finding IDs and blocked-entry exit conditions
 - **Summary uses blockquotes** for verdict, reasoning, and fix order
 - **Horizontal rule** (`---`) separates findings from verdict
 - **`###` headers** for each section -- never plain text headers

package/skills/ce-review/references/review-summary-schema.json

@@ -69,6 +69,31 @@
             "minLength": 1,
             "maxLength": 2048,
             "pattern": "\\S"
+          },
+          "selection_surface": {
+            "maxItems": 32,
+            "type": "array",
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string",
+              "minLength": 1,
+              "maxLength": 256,
+              "allOf": [
+                {
+                  "type": "string",
+                  "pattern": "\\S"
+                },
+                {
+                  "type": "string",
+                  "pattern": "^(?!\\/)(?![A-Za-z]:[\\\\/])(?!\\\\).+"
+                }
+              ]
+            }
+          },
+          "selection_reason": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "minLength": 1,
+            "maxLength": 2048,
+            "pattern": "\\S"
           }
         },
         "required": ["persona", "dispatch_outcome", "input_finding_count"],
@@ -417,6 +442,36 @@
         "additionalProperties": false
       }
     },
+    "risk_coverage": {
+      "maxItems": 64,
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object",
+        "properties": {
+          "persona": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "enum": [
+              "security",
+              "data-migrations",
+              "api-contract",
+              "reliability",
+              "performance"
+            ]
+          },
+          "satisfied": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "input_finding_id": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "minLength": 1,
+            "maxLength": 128,
+            "pattern": "\\S"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": ["persona", "satisfied"],
+        "additionalProperties": false
+      }
+    },
     "disposition_counts": {
       "type": "object",
       "properties": {

package/skills/ce-review/references/synthesis-artifact-contract.md

@@ -105,7 +105,10 @@ The artifact must preserve these distinctions:
   records what a persona returned: `findings`, `empty`, `malformed`, or
   `never_returned`. A rejection reason is the exact safe validation reason,
   naming persona and field without echoing the offending value. Dispatch
-  outcome is separate from finding disposition.
+  outcome is separate from finding disposition. Conditional selections record
+  their triggering changed-file paths in `selection_surface` and the announced
+  selection explanation in `selection_reason`; always-on personas may omit
+  both fields.
 - `input_findings` is the authoritative parent-owned ledger. Before the
   confidence gate, every admitted finding receives an `input_id` of
   `<reviewer>#<1-based finding index>`. Every admitted input has exactly one
@@ -207,10 +210,17 @@ validating it. This ordering makes the artifact validatable at all: without
 `schema_version`, the validator reports the legacy status (exit 3) rather than
 a real validation result.
 
-After writing `review-summary.json`, the parent runs
-`systematic validate-review-artifact <path>` against it. A nonzero exit means
-the run is not complete. The [executable schema](./review-summary-schema.json)
-is generated from a Zod source and is the machine-checkable form of the shape
+After writing `review-summary.json`, the parent checks whether the
+`systematic` executable is available on the invoking environment's `PATH`.
+When it is available, the parent runs
+`systematic validate-review-artifact <path>` against it. The executable ships
+through the npm package's `bin` entry; a harness that installs bundled
+markdown without that package will not have it. When it is unavailable, the
+parent records that validation did not run and why in the run record.
+Unavailable validation is distinct from skipped validation, and the parent
+does not represent the artifact as validated. A nonzero exit means the run is
+not complete. The [executable schema](./review-summary-schema.json) is
+generated from a Zod source and is the machine-checkable form of the shape
 described here.
 
 On validation failure, the parent repairs the artifact and re-runs the
@@ -223,7 +233,8 @@ This is enforcement by visible failure, not by containment. An agent that
 never runs the command can still finalize an artifact, but produces no evidence
 in either direction. That is why the command exists as an independently
 runnable check rather than as a self-validation instruction, and why its result
-belongs in the run record.
+belongs in the run record. An unavailable validator is recorded as unavailable,
+not as skipped or validated.
 
 `mode:report-only` writes no artifact and therefore performs no validation.
 
@@ -246,18 +257,20 @@ The risk-critical surfaces are `security`, `data-migrations`, `api-contract`,
 specifically for the matching diff shape in Stage 3. If one of those selected
 personas has `dispatch_outcome: "malformed"` or
 `dispatch_outcome: "never_returned"`, the review verdict must not be clean:
-it is blocking unless another persona covered the same surface and returned
-validated evidence for it. For this rule, validated evidence means at least
+it is blocking unless another persona covered the lost surface with validated
+evidence. For this rule, a validated finding from another persona covers a
+lost risk-critical surface if and only if the finding's `file` appears in the
+lost persona's recorded `selection_surface`; validated evidence means at least
 one finding from that other persona's return passed complete schema and
-environment-value validation and is relevant to the same surface. A coverage
-note alone cannot satisfy this rule; the verdict must reflect the missing
-risk-critical evidence.
+environment-value validation. A coverage note alone cannot satisfy this rule;
+the verdict must reflect the missing risk-critical evidence.
 
 Finding-level rejection is keyed by the severities in
 `rejected_severities`. A selected risk-critical persona whose rejected
 findings include any `P0`, `P1`, or `unknown` severity is treated exactly as a
 rejected persona for this verdict rule: blocking unless another persona
-covered the same surface with validated evidence. A selected risk-critical
+covered the lost surface with a validated finding whose `file` appears in the
+lost persona's recorded `selection_surface`. A selected risk-critical
 persona whose rejected findings are only `P2` or `P3` does not block on that
 basis alone; record it in the Coverage section instead. Unknown severity is
 treated as blocking as deliberate fail-closed behavior because the parent
@@ -265,3 +278,12 @@ could not determine what was lost. Admitted findings and verdict blocking
 are independent: surviving findings from the same return continue through
 synthesis normally. Partial return is not partial coverage when the lost
 part was critical.
+
+Record each lost risk-critical persona in the optional `risk_coverage` array
+with `satisfied: true` and `input_finding_id` set to the citing input finding
+ID when coverage is satisfied, or `satisfied: false` without an
+`input_finding_id` otherwise. A blocked verdict must name its exit condition
+in the report: re-run the lost persona, or supply a validated finding from
+another persona whose `file` appears in the lost persona's recorded
+`selection_surface`. Derive that condition from the dispatch and risk-coverage
+records, not from a coverage note.