@heihei0299/matt-skills 1.3.1 → 1.3.3

package/.agents/skills/to-tickets/SKILL.md

@@ -1,14 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: to-tickets
-description: Break a plan, spec, or the current conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges, published to the configured tracker — edges as text in one file per ticket locally, or native blocking links on a real tracker.
+description: Break a plan, spec, or the current conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges, published to the configured tracker (edges as text in one file per ticket locally, or native blocking links on a real tracker).
 disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
 # To Tickets
 
-Break a plan, spec, or conversation into a set of **tickets** — tracer-bullet vertical slices, each declaring the tickets that **block** it.
+Break a plan, spec, or conversation into a set of **tickets**: tracer-bullet vertical slices, each declaring the tickets that **block** it.
 
-The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
+The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you. If not, tell the user to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`.
 
 ## Process
 
@@ -28,16 +28,16 @@ Break the work into **tracer bullet** tickets.
 
 <vertical-slice-rules>
 
-- Each slice cuts a narrow but COMPLETE path through every layer (schema, API, UI, tests) — vertical, NOT a horizontal slice of one layer
+- Each slice cuts a narrow but COMPLETE path through every layer (schema, API, UI, tests): vertical, NOT a horizontal slice of one layer
 - A completed slice is demoable or verifiable on its own
 - Each slice is sized to fit in a single fresh context window
 - Any prefactoring should be done first
 
 </vertical-slice-rules>
 
-Give each ticket its **blocking edges** — the other tickets that must complete before it can start. A ticket with no blockers can start immediately.
+Give each ticket its **blocking edges**: the other tickets that must complete before it can start. A ticket with no blockers can start immediately.
 
-**Wide refactors are the exception to vertical slicing.** A **wide refactor** is one mechanical change — rename a column, retype a shared symbol — whose **blast radius** fans across the whole codebase, so a single edit breaks thousands of call sites at once and no vertical slice can land green. Don't force it into a tracer bullet; sequence it as **expand–contract**. First expand: add the new form beside the old so nothing breaks. Then migrate the call sites over in batches sized by blast radius (per package, per directory), each batch its own ticket blocked by the expand, keeping CI green batch to batch because the old form still exists. Finally contract: delete the old form once no caller remains, in a ticket blocked by every migrate batch. When even the batches can't stay green alone, keep the sequence but let them share an integration branch that all block a final integrate-and-verify ticket — green is promised only there.
+**Wide refactors are the exception to vertical slicing.** A **wide refactor** is one mechanical change (rename a column, retype a shared symbol) whose **blast radius** fans across the whole codebase, so a single edit breaks thousands of call sites at once and no vertical slice can land green. Don't force it into a tracer bullet; sequence it as **expand–contract**. First expand: add the new form beside the old so nothing breaks. Then migrate the call sites over in batches sized by blast radius (per package, per directory), each batch its own ticket blocked by the expand, keeping CI green batch to batch because the old form still exists. Finally contract: delete the old form once no caller remains, in a ticket blocked by every migrate batch. When even the batches can't stay green alone, keep the sequence but let them share an integration branch that all block a final integrate-and-verify ticket; green is promised only there.
 
 ### 4. Quiz the user
 
@@ -50,17 +50,17 @@ Present the proposed breakdown as a numbered list. For each ticket, show:
 Ask the user:
 
 - Does the granularity feel right? (too coarse / too fine)
-- Are the blocking edges correct — does each ticket only depend on tickets that genuinely gate it?
+- Are the blocking edges correct: does each ticket only depend on tickets that genuinely gate it?
 - Should any tickets be merged or split further?
 
 Iterate until the user approves the breakdown.
 
 ### 5. Publish the tickets to the configured tracker
 
-Publish the approved tickets. **How** depends on the tracker `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` configured — the tickets are the same either way, only the shape of the blocking edges changes:
+Publish the approved tickets. **How** depends on the tracker `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` configured; the tickets are the same either way, only the shape of the blocking edges changes:
 
-- **Local files** → write one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01` in dependency order (blockers first). Each file's "Blocked by" lists the numbers/titles it depends on. Use the per-ticket file template below — one ticket per file, never a single combined file.
-- **A real issue tracker (GitHub, Linear, …)** → publish one issue per ticket in dependency order (blockers first) so each ticket's blocking edges can reference real identifiers. Use the platform's native blocking / sub-issue relationship where it has one; otherwise set each ticket's "Blocked by" to the blocking issues. Apply the `ready-for-agent` triage label unless instructed otherwise — the tickets are agent-grabbable by construction.
+- **Local files** → write one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01` in dependency order (blockers first). Each file's "Blocked by" lists the numbers/titles it depends on. Use the per-ticket file template below: one ticket per file, never a single combined file.
+- **A real issue tracker (GitHub, Linear, …)** → publish one issue per ticket in dependency order (blockers first) so each ticket's blocking edges can reference real identifiers. Use the platform's native blocking / sub-issue relationship where it has one; otherwise set each ticket's "Blocked by" to the blocking issues. Apply the `ready-for-agent` triage label unless instructed otherwise; the tickets are agent-grabbable by construction.
 
 Work the **frontier**: any ticket whose blockers are all done. For a purely linear chain that means top to bottom.
 
@@ -68,11 +68,11 @@ Do NOT close or modify any parent issue.
 
 <local-ticket-template>
 
-# <NN> — <Ticket title>
+# <NN>: <Ticket title>
 
-**What to build:** the end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective — not a layer-by-layer implementation list.
+**What to build:** the end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective, not a layer-by-layer implementation list.
 
-**Blocked by:** the numbers/titles of the tickets that gate this one, or "None — can start immediately".
+**Blocked by:** the numbers/titles of the tickets that gate this one, or "None (can start immediately)".
 
 **Status:** ready-for-agent
 
@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ A reference to the parent issue on the tracker (if the source was an existing is
 
 ## What to build
 
-The end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective — not layer-by-layer implementation.
+The end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective, not layer-by-layer implementation.
 
 ## Acceptance criteria
 
@@ -98,8 +98,8 @@ The end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective —
 
 ## Blocked by
 
-- A reference to each blocking ticket, or "None — can start immediately".
+- A reference to each blocking ticket, or "None (can start immediately)".
 
 </issue-template>
 
-In either form, avoid specific file paths or code snippets — they go stale fast. Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts — not a working demo, just the important bits.
+In either form, avoid specific file paths or code snippets: they go stale fast. Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts, not a working demo, just the important bits.

package/.agents/skills/triage/AGENT-BRIEF.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # Writing Agent Briefs
 
-An agent brief is a structured comment posted on a GitHub issue or PR when it moves to `ready-for-agent`. It is the authoritative specification that an AFK agent will work from. The original body and discussion are context — the agent brief is the contract.
+An agent brief is a structured comment posted on a GitHub issue or PR when it moves to `ready-for-agent`. It is the authoritative specification that an AFK agent will work from. The original body and discussion are context: the agent brief is the contract.
 
-The brief states **what the agent should do**, which stretches to both surfaces: for an issue, that's building the change from nothing; for a PR, it's what's left to do *to the existing diff* — finish it, close gaps, address review points. Same principles either way; the PR example below shows the difference.
+The brief states **what the agent should do**, which stretches to both surfaces: for an issue, that's building the change from nothing; for a PR, it's what's left to do *to the existing diff*: finish it, close gaps, address review points. Same principles either way; the PR example below shows the difference.
 
 ## Principles
 
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ The issue may sit in `ready-for-agent` for days or weeks. The codebase will chan
 
 - **Do** describe interfaces, types, and behavioral contracts
 - **Do** name specific types, function signatures, or config shapes that the agent should look for or modify
-- **Don't** reference file paths — they go stale
+- **Don't** reference file paths: they go stale
 - **Don't** reference line numbers
 - **Don't** assume the current implementation structure will remain the same
 
@@ -53,9 +53,9 @@ Describe what should happen after the agent's work is complete.
 Be specific about edge cases and error conditions.
 
 **Key interfaces:**
-- `TypeName` — what needs to change and why
-- `functionName()` return type — what it currently returns vs what it should return
-- Config shape — any new configuration options needed
+- `TypeName`: what needs to change and why
+- `functionName()` return type: what it currently returns vs what it should return
+- Config shape: any new configuration options needed
 
 **Acceptance criteria:**
 - [ ] Specific, testable criterion 1
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ Truncation should break at the last word boundary before 1024 characters
 and append "..." to indicate truncation.
 
 **Key interfaces:**
-- The `SkillMetadata` type's `description` field — no type change needed,
+- The `SkillMetadata` type's `description` field: no type change needed,
   but the validation/processing logic that populates it needs to respect
   word boundaries
 - Any function that reads SKILL.md frontmatter and extracts the description
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ requested the feature. When triaging new issues, these files should be
 checked for matches.
 
 **Key interfaces:**
-- Markdown file format in `.out-of-scope/` — each file should have a
+- Markdown file format in `.out-of-scope/`: each file should have a
   `# Concept Name` heading, a `**Decision:**` line, a `**Reason:**` line,
   and a `**Prior requests:**` list with issue links
 - The triage workflow should read all `.out-of-scope/*.md` files early
@@ -162,7 +162,7 @@ remain: errors are still printed as human text (not JSON), and the new flag has
 no test coverage.
 
 **Desired behavior:**
-With `--json`, all output — including errors — is well-formed JSON on stdout,
+With `--json`, all output (including errors) is well-formed JSON on stdout,
 and the command's exit codes are unchanged. The existing human-readable output
 is untouched when the flag is absent.
 

package/.agents/skills/triage/OUT-OF-SCOPE.md

@@ -2,8 +2,8 @@
 
 The `.out-of-scope/` directory in a repo stores persistent records of rejected feature requests. It serves two purposes:
 
-1. **Institutional memory** — why a feature was rejected, so the reasoning isn't lost when the issue is closed
-2. **Deduplication** — when a new issue comes in that matches a prior rejection, the skill can surface the previous decision instead of re-litigating it
+1. **Institutional memory**: why a feature was rejected, so the reasoning isn't lost when the issue is closed
+2. **Deduplication**: when a new issue comes in that matches a prior rejection, the skill can surface the previous decision instead of re-litigating it
 
 ## Directory structure
 
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ One file per **concept**, not per issue. Multiple issues requesting the same thi
 
 ## File format
 
-The file should be written in a relaxed, readable style — more like a short design document than a database entry. Use paragraphs, code samples, and examples to make the reasoning clear and useful to someone encountering it for the first time.
+The file should be written in a relaxed, readable style, more like a short design document than a database entry. Use paragraphs, code samples, and examples to make the reasoning clear and useful to someone encountering it for the first time.
 
 ```markdown
 # Dark Mode
@@ -48,9 +48,9 @@ interface ThemeConfig {
 
 ## Prior requests
 
-- #42 — "Add dark mode support"
-- #87 — "Night theme for accessibility"
-- #134 — "Dark theme option"
+- #42: "Add dark mode support"
+- #87: "Night theme for accessibility"
+- #134: "Dark theme option"
 ```
 
 ### Naming the file
@@ -59,31 +59,31 @@ Use a short, descriptive kebab-case name for the concept: `dark-mode.md`, `plugi
 
 ### Writing the reason
 
-The reason should be substantive — not "we don't want this" but why. Good reasons reference:
+The reason should be substantive: not "we don't want this" but why. Good reasons reference:
 
 - Project scope or philosophy ("This project focuses on X; theming is a downstream concern")
 - Technical constraints ("Supporting this would require Y, which conflicts with our Z architecture")
 - Strategic decisions ("We chose to use A instead of B because...")
 
-The reason should be durable. Avoid referencing temporary circumstances ("we're too busy right now") — those aren't real rejections, they're deferrals.
+The reason should be durable. Avoid referencing temporary circumstances ("we're too busy right now"); those aren't real rejections, they're deferrals.
 
 ## When to check `.out-of-scope/`
 
 During triage (Step 1: Gather context), read all files in `.out-of-scope/`. When evaluating a new issue:
 
 - Check if the request matches an existing out-of-scope concept
-- Matching is by concept similarity, not keyword — "night theme" matches `dark-mode.md`
-- If there's a match, surface it to the maintainer: "This is similar to `.out-of-scope/dark-mode.md` — we rejected this before because [reason]. Do you still feel the same way?"
+- Matching is by concept similarity, not keyword: "night theme" matches `dark-mode.md`
+- If there's a match, surface it to the maintainer: "This is similar to `.out-of-scope/dark-mode.md`. We rejected this before because [reason]. Do you still feel the same way?"
 
 The maintainer may:
 
-- **Confirm** — the new issue gets added to the existing file's "Prior requests" list, then closed
-- **Reconsider** — the out-of-scope file gets deleted or updated, and the issue proceeds through normal triage
-- **Disagree** — the issues are related but distinct, proceed with normal triage
+- **Confirm**: the new issue gets added to the existing file's "Prior requests" list, then closed
+- **Reconsider**: the out-of-scope file gets deleted or updated, and the issue proceeds through normal triage
+- **Disagree**: the issues are related but distinct, proceed with normal triage
 
 ## When to write to `.out-of-scope/`
 
-Only when an **enhancement** (not a bug) is *rejected* as `wontfix`. This applies to enhancement PRs exactly as it does to issues — a rejected PR is recorded here so the same request doesn't return as fresh code.
+Only when an **enhancement** (not a bug) is *rejected* as `wontfix`. This applies to enhancement PRs exactly as it does to issues: a rejected PR is recorded here so the same request doesn't return as fresh code.
 
 Do **not** write here when something is closed as `wontfix` because it's **already implemented**. That's a built feature, not a rejected one; recording it would poison the dedup checks with false rejections. Instead, the closing comment points to where the feature already lives.
 
@@ -101,5 +101,5 @@ The flow:
 If the maintainer changes their mind about a previously rejected concept:
 
 - Delete the `.out-of-scope/` file
-- The skill does not need to reopen old issues — they're historical records
+- The skill does not need to reopen old issues; they're historical records
 - The new issue that triggered the reconsideration proceeds through normal triage

package/.agents/skills/triage/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: triage
-description: Move issues and external PRs through a state machine of triage roles — categorise, verify, grill if needed, and write agent-ready briefs.
+description: Move issues and external PRs through a state machine of triage roles, categorise, verify, grill if needed, and write agent-ready briefs.
 disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ disable-model-invocation: true
 
 Move issues on the project issue tracker through a small state machine of triage roles.
 
-If this repo treats external pull requests as a request surface (see the issue-tracker config), triage covers them too: **a PR is an issue with attached code** — same roles, same states, same machine, with a few deltas marked "for a PR" below. Resolve a bare `#42` to an issue or PR per the tracker config.
+If this repo treats external pull requests as a request surface (see the issue-tracker config), triage covers them too: **a PR is an issue with attached code**, using the same roles, same states, and same machine, with a few deltas marked "for a PR" below. Resolve a bare `#42` to an issue or PR per the tracker config.
 
 Every comment or issue posted to the issue tracker during triage **must** start with this disclaimer:
 
@@ -18,31 +18,31 @@ Every comment or issue posted to the issue tracker during triage **must** start
 
 ## Reference docs
 
-- [AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md) — how to write durable agent briefs
-- [OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md) — how the `.out-of-scope/` knowledge base works
+- [AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md): how to write durable agent briefs
+- [OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md): how the `.out-of-scope/` knowledge base works
 
 ## Roles
 
 Two **category** roles:
 
-- `bug` — something is broken
-- `enhancement` — new feature or improvement
+- `bug`: something is broken
+- `enhancement`: new feature or improvement
 
 Five **state** roles:
 
-- `needs-triage` — maintainer needs to evaluate
-- `needs-info` — waiting on reporter for more information
-- `ready-for-agent` — fully specified, ready for an AFK agent
-- `ready-for-human` — needs human implementation
-- `wontfix` — will not be actioned
+- `needs-triage`: maintainer needs to evaluate
+- `needs-info`: waiting on reporter for more information
+- `ready-for-agent`: fully specified, ready for an AFK agent
+- `ready-for-human`: needs human implementation
+- `wontfix`: will not be actioned
 
 For a PR, the same states read against the attached code: `ready-for-agent` means a brief is attached and an agent should take the next step on the diff; `ready-for-human` means it's ready for a human to merge.
 
 Every triaged issue should carry exactly one category role and one state role. If state roles conflict, flag it and ask the maintainer before doing anything else.
 
-These are canonical role names — the actual label strings used in the issue tracker may differ. The mapping should have been provided to you - run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
+These are canonical role names. The actual label strings used in the issue tracker may differ. The mapping should have been provided to you. If not, tell the user to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`.
 
-State transitions: an unlabeled issue normally goes to `needs-triage` first; from there it moves to `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, or `wontfix`. `needs-info` returns to `needs-triage` once the reporter replies. The maintainer can override at any time — flag transitions that look unusual and ask before proceeding.
+State transitions: an unlabeled issue normally goes to `needs-triage` first; from there it moves to `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, or `wontfix`. `needs-info` returns to `needs-triage` once the reporter replies. The maintainer can override at any time; flag transitions that look unusual and ask before proceeding.
 
 ## Invocation
 
@@ -57,33 +57,33 @@ The maintainer invokes `/triage` and describes what they want in natural languag
 
 Query the issue tracker and present three buckets, oldest first:
 
-1. **Unlabeled** — never triaged.
-2. **`needs-triage`** — evaluation in progress.
-3. **`needs-info` with reporter activity since the last triage notes** — needs re-evaluation.
+1. **Unlabeled**: never triaged.
+2. **`needs-triage`**: evaluation in progress.
+3. **`needs-info` with reporter activity since the last triage notes**: needs re-evaluation.
 
-When PRs are in scope, include external PRs in these buckets and tag each line `[PR]` or `[issue]`. Discovery surfaces only *external* PRs (the tracker config defines who counts as external) — a collaborator's in-flight PR is not triage work. This filter is discovery-only; an explicitly named PR is always triaged regardless of author.
+When PRs are in scope, include external PRs in these buckets and tag each line `[PR]` or `[issue]`. Discovery surfaces only *external* PRs (the tracker config defines who counts as external), so a collaborator's in-flight PR is not triage work. This filter is discovery-only; an explicitly named PR is always triaged regardless of author.
 
 Show counts and a one-line summary per item. Let the maintainer pick.
 
 ## Triage a specific issue or PR
 
-1. **Gather context.** Read the full issue or PR (body, comments, labels, author, dates; for a PR, the diff too). Parse any prior triage notes so you don't re-ask resolved questions. Explore the codebase using the project's domain glossary, respecting ADRs in the area. Run two checks against the codebase: (a) **redundancy** — search for an existing implementation of the requested behavior by domain concept (not just the request's wording), and report where you looked. If found, it's an already-implemented `wontfix` (step 5). (b) **prior rejection** — read `.out-of-scope/*.md` and surface any that resembles this request.
+1. **Gather context.** Read the full issue or PR (body, comments, labels, author, dates; for a PR, the diff too). Parse any prior triage notes so you don't re-ask resolved questions. Explore the codebase using the project's domain glossary, respecting ADRs in the area. Run two checks against the codebase: (a) **redundancy**: search for an existing implementation of the requested behavior by domain concept (not just the request's wording), and report where you looked. If found, it's an already-implemented `wontfix` (step 5). (b) **prior rejection**: read `.out-of-scope/*.md` and surface any that resembles this request.
 
-2. **Recommend.** Tell the maintainer your category and state recommendation with reasoning, plus a brief codebase summary relevant to the request — including whether it's already implemented. Wait for direction.
+2. **Recommend.** Tell the maintainer your category and state recommendation with reasoning, plus a brief codebase summary relevant to the request (including whether it's already implemented). Wait for direction.
 
-3. **Verify the claim.** Before any grilling, check that the claim holds up. For a bug, reproduce it from the reporter's steps. For a PR, confirm the diff does what it claims — check it out, run the relevant tests or commands. Report what happened: confirmed (with code path), failed, or insufficient detail (a strong `needs-info` signal). A confirmed verification makes a much stronger agent brief.
+3. **Verify the claim.** Before any grilling, check that the claim holds up. For a bug, reproduce it from the reporter's steps. For a PR, confirm the diff does what it claims: check it out, run the relevant tests or commands. Report what happened: confirmed (with code path), failed, or insufficient detail (a strong `needs-info` signal). A confirmed verification makes a much stronger agent brief.
 
-4. **Grill (if needed).** If the request needs fleshing out, run the `/grilling` and `/domain-modeling` skills together — grill it into shape one question at a time, sharpening domain terms and updating `CONTEXT.md`/ADRs inline as decisions land.
+4. **Grill (if needed).** If the request needs fleshing out, call the Skill tool twice, for "grilling" and "domain-modeling", and grill it into shape a round of questions at a time, sharpening domain terms and updating `CONTEXT.md`/ADRs inline as decisions land.
 
 5. **Apply the outcome:**
-   - `ready-for-agent` — post an agent brief comment ([AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md)).
-   - `ready-for-human` — same structure as an agent brief, but note why it can't be delegated (judgment calls, external access, design decisions, manual testing).
-   - `needs-info` — post triage notes (template below).
-   - `wontfix` — close, with the comment depending on *why*:
-     - **Already implemented** — the change already exists in the codebase. Point to where it lives; do **not** write to `.out-of-scope/` (that KB is for *rejected* requests, not built ones).
-     - **Rejected (bug)** — polite explanation, then close.
-     - **Rejected (enhancement)** — write to `.out-of-scope/`, link to it from a comment, then close ([OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md)).
-   - `needs-triage` — apply the role. Optional comment if there's partial progress.
+   - `ready-for-agent`: post an agent brief comment ([AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md)).
+   - `ready-for-human`: same structure as an agent brief, but note why it can't be delegated (judgment calls, external access, design decisions, manual testing).
+   - `needs-info`: post triage notes (template below).
+   - For `wontfix`, close the issue, with the comment depending on *why*:
+     - **Already implemented**: the change already exists in the codebase. Point to where it lives; do **not** write to `.out-of-scope/` (that KB is for *rejected* requests, not built ones).
+     - **Rejected (bug)**: give a polite explanation, then close.
+     - **Rejected (enhancement)**: write to `.out-of-scope/`, link to it from a comment, then close ([OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md)).
+   - `needs-triage`: apply the role. Optional comment if there's partial progress.
 
 ## Quick state override
 

package/.agents/skills/wait-what/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+name: wait-what
+description: "Stop. That last message did not land: re-pitch it."
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+Wait, I don't understand where you've got to here. Re-pitch that: give me a little bit of context, talk in ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English, and use the ubiquitous language from `CONTEXT.md` (follow `CONTEXT-MAP.md` to the right one if the repo has more than one).

package/.agents/skills/wait-what/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Wait What"
+  short_description: "Re-pitch that: simpler, with the context I'm missing"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

package/.agents/skills/wayfinder/SKILL.md

@@ -1,37 +1,37 @@
 ---
 name: wayfinder
-description: Plan a huge chunk of work — more than one agent session can hold — as a shared map of decision tickets on your issue tracker, and resolve them one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
+description: Plan a huge chunk of work (more than one agent session can hold) as a shared map of decision tickets on your issue tracker, and resolve them one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
 disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
-A loose idea has arrived — too big for one agent session, and wrapped in fog: the way from here to the **destination** isn't visible yet. Wayfinding is about finding that way, not charging at the destination. This skill charts the way as a **shared map** on the repo's issue tracker, then works its **decision tickets** — questions whose resolution is a decision, not slices of a build to execute — one at a time until the route is clear.
+A loose idea has arrived, too big for one agent session, and wrapped in fog: the way from here to the **destination** isn't visible yet. Wayfinding is about finding that way, not charging at the destination. This skill charts the way as a **shared map** on the repo's issue tracker, then works its **decision tickets** (questions whose resolution is a decision, not slices of a build to execute) one at a time until the route is clear.
 
-The destination varies per effort, and naming it is the first act of charting — it shapes every ticket. It might be a spec to hand off and iterate on, a decision to lock before planning starts, or a change made in place like a data-structure migration. The map is domain-agnostic — engineering work, course content, whatever fits the shape.
+The destination varies per effort, and naming it is the first act of charting: it shapes every ticket. It might be a spec to hand off and iterate on, a decision to lock before planning starts, or a change made in place like a data-structure migration. The map is domain-agnostic: engineering work, course content, whatever fits the shape.
 
 ## Plan, don't do
 
-Wayfinder is **planning** by default: each ticket resolves a decision, and the map is done when the way is clear — nothing left to decide before someone goes and does the thing. The pull to just do the work is usually the signal you've reached the edge of the map and it's time to hand off. An effort can override this in its **Notes** — carrying execution into the map itself — but absent that, produce decisions, not deliverables.
+Wayfinder is **planning** by default: each ticket resolves a decision, and the map is done when the way is clear, with nothing left to decide before someone goes and does the thing. The pull to just do the work is usually the signal you've reached the edge of the map and it's time to hand off. An effort can override this in its **Notes**, carrying execution into the map itself, but absent that, produce decisions, not deliverables.
 
 ## Refer by name
 
-Every map and ticket is an issue, so it has a **name** — its title. In everything the human reads — narration, the map's Decisions-so-far — refer to it by that name, never by a bare id, number, or slug. A wall of `#42, #43, #44` is illegible; names read at a glance. The id and URL don't vanish — a name wraps its link — but they ride *inside* the name, never stand in for it.
+Every map and ticket is an issue, so it has a **name**: its title. In everything the human reads (narration, the map's Decisions-so-far), refer to it by that name, never by a bare id, number, or slug. A wall of `#42, #43, #44` is illegible; names read at a glance. The id and URL don't vanish; a name wraps its link, but they ride _inside_ the name, never stand in for it.
 
 ## The Map
 
-The map is a single issue on this repo's issue tracker, labelled `wayfinder:map` — the canonical artifact. Its tickets are child issues of the map.
+The map is a single issue on this repo's issue tracker, labelled `wayfinder:map`, the canonical artifact. Its tickets are child issues of the map.
 
-The map is an **index**, not a store. It lists the decisions made and points at the tickets that hold their detail; a decision lives in exactly one place — its ticket — so the map never restates it, only gists it and links.
+The map is an **index**, not a store. It lists the decisions made and points at the tickets that hold their detail; a decision lives in exactly one place, its ticket, so the map never restates it, only gists it and links.
 
-**Where the map, its child tickets, blocking, and frontier queries physically live is tracker-specific.** The issue tracker should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not. Consult the tracker doc's "Wayfinding operations" section for how _this_ repo expresses them. If no tracker has been provided, default to the local-markdown tracker.
+**Where the map, its child tickets, blocking, and frontier queries physically live is tracker-specific.** The issue tracker should have been provided to you. If not, tell the user to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`. Consult the tracker doc's "Wayfinding operations" section for how _this_ repo expresses them. If no tracker has been provided, default to the local-markdown tracker.
 
 ### The map body
 
-The whole map at low resolution, loaded once per session. Open tickets are **not** listed — they are open child issues, found by query.
+The whole map at low resolution, loaded once per session. Open tickets are **not** listed: they are open child issues, found by query.
 
 ```markdown
 ## Destination
 
-<what reaching the end of this map looks like — the spec, decision, or change this effort is finding its way to. One or two lines; every session orients to it before choosing a ticket.>
+<what reaching the end of this map looks like: the spec, decision, or change this effort is finding its way to. One or two lines; every session orients to it before choosing a ticket.>
 
 ## Notes
 
@@ -39,9 +39,9 @@ The whole map at low resolution, loaded once per session. Open tickets are **not
 
 ## Decisions so far
 
-<!-- the index — one line per closed ticket: enough to judge relevance, then zoom the link for the detail the ticket holds -->
+<!-- the index: one line per closed ticket, enough to judge relevance, then zoom the link for the detail the ticket holds -->
 
-- [<closed ticket title>](link) — <one-line gist of the answer>
+- [<closed ticket title>](link): <one-line gist of the answer>
 
 ## Not yet specified
 
@@ -62,67 +62,67 @@ Each ticket is a **child issue** of the map; the tracker's issue id is its ident
 <the decision or investigation this ticket resolves>
 ```
 
-Each ticket carries a `wayfinder:<type>` label — one of `research`, `prototype`, `grilling`, `task` (see [Ticket Types](#ticket-types)).
+Each ticket carries a `wayfinder:<type>` label, one of `research`, `prototype`, `grilling`, `task` (see [Ticket Types](#ticket-types)).
 
 A session **claims** a ticket by assigning it to the dev driving the map, **first**, before any work, so concurrent sessions skip it. That assignee _is_ the claim: an open, unassigned ticket is unclaimed.
 
-Blocking uses the tracker's **native** dependency relationship — essential because it renders the frontier _visually_ in the tracker's own UI, so the human sees what's takeable without opening the map. Only a tracker that lacks native blocking falls back to a body convention. A ticket is **unblocked** when every ticket blocking it is closed; the **frontier** is the open, unblocked, unclaimed children — the edge of the known.
+Blocking uses the tracker's **native** dependency relationship: essential because it renders the frontier _visually_ in the tracker's own UI, so the human sees what's takeable without opening the map. Only a tracker that lacks native blocking falls back to a body convention. A ticket is **unblocked** when every ticket blocking it is closed; the **frontier** is the open, unblocked, unclaimed children, the edge of the known.
 
-The answer isn't part of the body — it's recorded on resolution (see [Work through the map](#work-through-the-map)). Assets created while resolving a ticket are linked from the issue, not pasted in.
+The answer isn't part of the body; it's recorded on resolution (see [Work through the map](#work-through-the-map)). Assets created while resolving a ticket are linked from the issue, not pasted in.
 
 ## Ticket Types
 
-Every ticket is either **HITL** — human in the loop, worked *with* a human who speaks for themselves — or **AFK**, driven by the agent alone. A HITL ticket only resolves through that live exchange; the agent never stands in for the human's side of it (a grilling agent that answers its own questions has broken this).
+Every ticket is either **HITL** (human in the loop, worked _with_ a human who speaks for themselves) or **AFK**, driven by the agent alone. A HITL ticket only resolves through that live exchange; the agent never stands in for the human's side of it (a grilling agent that answers its own questions has broken this).
 
-- **Research** (AFK): Reading documentation, third-party APIs, or local resources like knowledge bases to surface a fact a decision waits on. Resolved by a `/research` **subagent**. Use when knowledge outside the current working directory is required.
-- **Prototype** (HITL): Raise the fidelity of the discussion by making a cheap, rough, concrete artifact to react to — an outline, a rough take, a stub, or UI/logic code via the /prototype skill. Links the prototype as an asset. Use when "how should it look" or "how should it behave" is the key question.
-- **Grilling** (HITL): Conversation via the /grilling and /domain-modeling skills, one question at a time. The default case.
-- **Task** (HITL or AFK): Manual work that must happen before a *decision* can be made — nothing to decide, prototype, or research, but the discussion is blocked until it's done. Signing up for a service so its API can be judged, provisioning access, moving data so its shape can be seen. This is the one type that *does* rather than decides — and it earns its place by unblocking a decision, not by delivering the destination. The agent drives it alone where it can (AFK); otherwise it hands the human a precise checklist (HITL). Resolved when the work is done; the answer records what was done and any resulting facts (credentials location, new URLs, row counts) later tickets depend on.
+- **Research** (AFK): Reading documentation, third-party APIs, or local resources like knowledge bases to surface a fact a decision waits on. Resolved by a subagent that calls the Skill tool with "research". Use when knowledge outside the current working directory is required.
+- **Prototype** (HITL): Raise the fidelity of the discussion by making a cheap, rough, concrete artifact to react to (an outline, a rough take, a stub, or UI/logic code) by calling the Skill tool with "prototype". Links the prototype as an asset. Use when "how should it look" or "how should it behave" is the key question.
+- **Grilling** (HITL): Conversation. The default case. Always call the Skill tool twice, for "grilling" and "domain-modeling".
+- **Task** (HITL or AFK): Manual work that must happen before a _decision_ can be made: nothing to decide, prototype, or research, but the discussion is blocked until it's done. Signing up for a service so its API can be judged, provisioning access, moving data so its shape can be seen. This is the one type that _does_ rather than decides, and it earns its place by unblocking a decision, not by delivering the destination. The agent drives it alone where it can (AFK); otherwise it hands the human a precise checklist (HITL). Resolved when the work is done; the answer records what was done and any resulting facts (credentials location, new URLs, row counts) later tickets depend on.
 
 ## Fog of war
 
-The map is _deliberately_ incomplete: don't chart what you can't yet see. Beyond the live tickets lies the **fog of war** — the dim view of decisions and investigations you can tell are coming but can't yet pin down, because they hang on questions still open. Resolving a ticket clears the fog ahead of it, graduating whatever's now specifiable into fresh tickets — one at a time, until the way to the destination is clear and no tickets remain.
+The map is _deliberately_ incomplete: don't chart what you can't yet see. Beyond the live tickets lies the **fog of war**: the dim view of decisions and investigations you can tell are coming but can't yet pin down, because they hang on questions still open. Resolving a ticket clears the fog ahead of it, graduating whatever's now specifiable into fresh tickets, one at a time, until the way to the destination is clear and no tickets remain.
 
-The map's **Not yet specified** section is where that dim view is written down: the suspected question, the area to revisit later. It's the undiscovered frontier _toward_ the destination — everything here is in scope, just not sharp enough to ticket. Write as loosely or as fully as the view allows; it doubles as a signpost for collaborators reading where the effort is headed.
+The map's **Not yet specified** section is where that dim view is written down: the suspected question, the area to revisit later. It's the undiscovered frontier _toward_ the destination: everything here is in scope, just not sharp enough to ticket. Write as loosely or as fully as the view allows; it doubles as a signpost for collaborators reading where the effort is headed.
 
-**Fog or ticket?** The test is whether you can state the question precisely now — _not_ whether you can answer it now.
+**Fog or ticket?** The test is whether you can state the question precisely now, _not_ whether you can answer it now.
 
-- **Ticket when** the question is already sharp — even if it's blocked and you can't act on it yet.
+- **Ticket when** the question is already sharp, even if it's blocked and you can't act on it yet.
 - **Not yet specified when** you can't yet phrase it that sharply. Don't pre-slice the fog into ticket-sized pieces: it's coarser than a ticket, and one patch may graduate into several tickets, or none, once the frontier reaches it.
 
 **Not yet specified** excludes what's already decided (Decisions so far), what's already a live ticket, and what's out of scope (the next section).
 
 ## Out of scope
 
-Fog only ever gathers _toward_ the destination. The destination fixes the scope, so work beyond it is **out of scope** — it isn't fog, and it doesn't belong in **Not yet specified**. It gets its own **Out of scope** section on the map: work you've consciously ruled out of _this_ effort. Scope, not sharpness, lands it here.
+Fog only ever gathers _toward_ the destination. The destination fixes the scope, so work beyond it is **out of scope**: it isn't fog, and it doesn't belong in **Not yet specified**. It gets its own **Out of scope** section on the map: work you've consciously ruled out of _this_ effort. Scope, not sharpness, lands it here.
 
-Out-of-scope work never graduates — the frontier stops at the destination — so it returns only if the destination is redrawn, and then as a fresh effort, not a resumption.
+Out-of-scope work never graduates (the frontier stops at the destination), so it returns only if the destination is redrawn, and then as a fresh effort, not a resumption.
 
-Ruling something out of scope is a scoping act, not a step on the route. When a ticket that already exists turns out to sit past the destination — mis-scoped in while charting, or exposed by a resolution — **close it** (a closed ticket is unambiguously off the frontier) and leave one line in the **Out of scope** section: the gist plus why it's out of scope, linking the closed ticket. It stays out of **Decisions so far**, which records the route actually walked — a scope boundary isn't a step on it.
+Ruling something out of scope is a scoping act, not a step on the route. When a ticket that already exists turns out to sit past the destination (mis-scoped in while charting, or exposed by a resolution), **close it** (a closed ticket is unambiguously off the frontier) and leave one line in the **Out of scope** section: the gist plus why it's out of scope, linking the closed ticket. It stays out of **Decisions so far**, which records the route actually walked; a scope boundary isn't a step on it.
 
 ## Invocation
 
-Two modes. Either way, **never resolve more than one ticket per session** — with the exception of research tickets.
+Two modes. Either way, **never resolve more than one ticket per session**, with the exception of research tickets.
 
 ### Chart the map
 
 User invokes with a loose idea.
 
-1. **Name the destination.** Run a `/grilling` and `/domain-modeling` session to pin down what this map is finding its way to — the spec, decision, or change. The destination fixes the scope, so it's settled first.
-2. **Map the frontier.** Grill again, **breadth-first** this time: fan out across the whole space rather than deep on any one thread, surfacing the open decisions and the first steps takeable now. **If this surfaces no fog** — the way to the destination is already clear, the whole journey small enough for one session — you don't need a map. Stop and ask the user how they'd like to proceed.
+1. **Name the destination.** Call the Skill tool twice, for "grilling" and "domain-modeling", to pin down what this map is finding its way to: the spec, decision, or change. The destination fixes the scope, so it's settled first.
+2. **Map the frontier.** Grill again, **breadth-first** this time: fan out across the whole space rather than deep on any one thread, surfacing the open decisions and the first steps takeable now. **If this surfaces no fog** (the way to the destination is already clear, the whole journey small enough for one session), you don't need a map. Stop and ask the user how they'd like to proceed.
 3. **Create the map** (label `wayfinder:map`): Destination and Notes filled in, Decisions-so-far empty, the fog sketched into **Not yet specified**.
-4. **Create the tickets you can specify now** as child issues of the map — then wire blocking edges in a **second pass** (issues need ids before they can reference each other). Wiring sorts them into the frontier and the blocked; everything you can't yet specify stays in the fog — the **Not yet specified** section.
-5. **Fire the research subagents.** For each `research` ticket you just created, spin up a `/research` subagent to resolve it in parallel, capturing its findings on a throwaway `research/<name>` branch with a context pointer from the ticket.
-6. Stop — charting is one session's work; it hand-resolves nothing.
+4. **Create the tickets you can specify now** as child issues of the map, then wire blocking edges in a **second pass** (issues need ids before they can reference each other). Wiring sorts them into the frontier and the blocked; everything you can't yet specify stays in the fog: the **Not yet specified** section.
+5. **Fire the research subagents.** For each `research` ticket you just created, spin up a subagent that calls the Skill tool with "research" to resolve it in parallel, capturing its findings on a throwaway `research/<name>` branch with a context pointer from the ticket.
+6. Stop: charting is one session's work; it hand-resolves nothing.
 
 ### Work through the map
 
-User invokes with a map (URL or number). A ticket is **optional** — without one, you pick the next decision, not the user.
+User invokes with a map (URL or number). A ticket is **optional**: without one, you pick the next decision, not the user.
 
-1. Load the **map** — the low-res view, not every ticket body.
+1. Load the **map**: the low-res view, not every ticket body.
 2. Choose the ticket. If the user named one, use it. Otherwise take the first frontier ticket in order. **Claim it**: assign it to yourself before any work.
-3. Resolve it — **zoom as needed**: fetch the full body of any related or closed ticket on demand; invoke the skills the `## Notes` block names. If in doubt, use `/grilling` and `/domain-modeling`.
+3. Resolve it. **Zoom as needed**: fetch the full body of any related or closed ticket on demand; call the Skill tool for whichever skills the `## Notes` block names. If in doubt, call the Skill tool twice, for "grilling" and "domain-modeling".
 4. Record the resolution: post the answer as a **resolution comment**, **close** the issue, and **append a context pointer** to the map's Decisions-so-far.
-5. Add newly-surfaced tickets (create-then-wire); graduate any fog the answer has made specifiable, clearing each graduated patch from **Not yet specified** so it lives only as its new ticket. If the answer reveals a ticket — this one or another — sits beyond the destination, **rule it out of scope** rather than resolving it on the route. If the decision invalidates other parts of the map, update or delete those tickets.
+5. Add newly-surfaced tickets (create-then-wire); graduate any fog the answer has made specifiable, clearing each graduated patch from **Not yet specified** so it lives only as its new ticket. If the answer reveals that a ticket (this one or another) sits beyond the destination, **rule it out of scope** rather than resolving it on the route. If the decision invalidates other parts of the map, update or delete those tickets.
 
 The user may run unblocked tickets in parallel, so expect other sessions to be editing the tracker concurrently.

package/.agents/skills/wizard/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+---
+name: wizard
+description: Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform. Use when provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover. Don't invoke this for steps the agent can perform itself.
+---
+
+# Wizard
+
+A **wizard** is a bash script that walks a human, step by step, through a manual procedure that's tedious to do by hand and tedious to re-explain to an AI every time. It opens each URL, says exactly what to click and copy, captures the values, writes them where they belong (`.env`, GitHub secrets), confirms at every stage, and shows how many stages are left. It might configure third-party services, run a one-off migration, or move the project from one state to another.
+
+The delightful UX is already solved by [template.sh](template.sh): stage-by-stage progress, confirmation gates, cross-platform URL opening (including WSL), hidden secret entry, idempotent `.env` upserts, `gh secret`/`gh variable` writes, and a closing summary. **Your job is only to scope the procedure and author its stages.** The library above the `STAGES` marker is identical in every wizard; that consistency is the point: never hand-edit it.
+
+A wizard is ephemeral by default: built for one run, saved to a scratch or `scripts/` path, deleted when the job's done. Commit it only when the user wants a repeatable setup path that should live in the repo.
+
+## Process
+
+### 1. Scope the procedure
+
+Work out every manual step the human must take and every value that gets captured along the way. Read the repo first, don't ask cold:
+
+- For setup: `.env`, `.env.example`, `.env.*`, `README`, `docker-compose*`, framework config, and `.github/workflows/*` (every `secrets.*` / `vars.*` reference is a value the wizard must produce).
+- For a migration or transition: the current state, the target state, and the irreversible actions between them.
+
+Then show the user the ordered list of stages and the values each produces, and confirm: they may add, drop, or reorder.
+
+**Done when:** every stage is named in order, and for each captured value you know (a) where the human gets it, (b) where it's written (`.env`, a GitHub secret, both, or nowhere; some stages are pure actions), and (c) whether it's secret (hidden entry) or public.
+
+### 2. Map each stage's journey
+
+For each stage, write the precise path a human follows: which URL to open, what to do there, where a value is shown, which variable it fills: e.g. "Dashboard → Developers → API keys → Reveal test key → copy". Where you don't actually know the current UI or the exact command, say so and ask the user or check the docs: never invent steps that may not exist.
+
+**Done when:** every stage traces to concrete instructions a stranger could follow.
+
+### 3. Author the wizard
+
+Copy `template.sh` to the target path. Replace the example stage with one `stage` per step, in dependency order. Use the library helpers: `stage`, `say`/`step`, `open_url`, `ask`/`ask_secret`, `write_env`, `set_secret`/`set_var`, `pause`/`confirm`. Set `TOTAL_STAGES` to the number of stages you wrote.
+
+Hold the bar the template sets: open the URL before asking for its value, use `ask_secret` for anything secret, `write_env` every persisted value, `set_secret` only the values CI actually needs, and `confirm` before any irreversible action. Each `stage` clears the screen so only the current step is visible: keep a stage to one focused task so nothing the human needs scrolls away. Don't touch the library above the marker.
+
+### 4. Verify and hand off
+
+- `bash -n <script>`; run `shellcheck` if available.
+- `chmod +x <script>`.
+- Don't run it end-to-end yourself: it opens browsers and blocks on human input. Trace it statically instead: every value from step 1 is captured and lands where step 1 said, and every `set_secret` name exactly matches a `secrets.*` reference in CI.
+- Tell the user how to run it. If it's a repeatable setup path, commit it and link it from the README so the next person runs the script instead of asking an AI.

package/.agents/skills/wizard/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Wizard"
+  short_description: "Generate an interactive setup wizard"