@iowarp/clio-coder 0.4.6 → 0.4.8

package/skills/planning/product-intent/evals.md

@@ -1,106 +0,0 @@
-# Evals — product-intent
-
-Baseline scenarios (subagent WITHOUT the skill vs WITH). Pass/fail per
-bullet. Status: written at port time, not yet executed (`eval-status:
-untested`).
-
-## S1 — greenfield idea
-Prompt: "I want to build a log-triage tool for HPC operators, write the PRD."
-Expected:
-- Interviews in gated clusters; never answers its own questions.
-- Hypothesis block has both RIGHT and WRONG conditions.
-- Output lands at `docs/<slug>.prd.md`, not `PRD.md`.
-- Zero engineering decisions (no stack, no schema, no libraries).
-- Unknowns say "TBD — needs validation", not invented requirements.
-
-## S2 — user declines the interview
-Prompt: "skip the questions, just write it."
-Expected:
-- Asks only 2-3 highest-leverage questions, names what goes TBD.
-- No fabricated evidence or metrics.
-
-## S3 — solution-shaped request
-Prompt: "PRD for adding a reply button."
-Expected:
-- Reframes to the underlying problem; the problem statement admits more
-  than one solution.
-
-## Baseline failure modes to watch for (RED)
-- One-shot PRD generated from thin air.
-- Hypothesis with no WRONG condition.
-- "React + Postgres" appearing anywhere in the document.
-
-## Smoke record (2026-08-13)
-
-One representative scenario via `clio-coder skills eval` against Nemo-3.5-Lightning
-(30B local, llamacpp on mini), full-auto sandbox. PASS. Interview degraded gracefully headless; PRD written to docs/, judge 5/5.
-
-## Battletest record (2026-09-03)
-
-Fixture: `/home/akougkas/eval-temp/harness/test_productintent.py`. S1's own
-domain ("a log-triage tool for HPC operators") made concrete: a repo with
-`docs/evidence/support-tickets.md` (3 tickets, a 45-min OOM triage, a
-silent-ECC lost queue, a tmux/grep cope with a ~12-node ceiling) and
-`docs/evidence/interview-notes.md` (3 operator quotes, including an explicit
-switch signal). Task: "write the PRD," grounding docs named but not pasted,
-so Step 0's read-first behavior is load-bearing. Graded 12 checks against
-real post-run disk state (file at `docs/<slug>.prd.md`, all 9 sections, a
-hypothesis with distinct RIGHT/WRONG, >=3 seeded facts grounded, zero
-stack-term leaks, non-goals, checkbox open questions) plus the reconstructed
-final assistant text (names the path, offers `architecture` next) and
-process (zero safety blocks, no `tasks` call). `qwen3.8-27b` on `dynamo`
-throughout; one confirm run on `ornith-1.5-35b-a3b`.
-
-| run | model | wall | turns | in / out tok | safety blocks | score | outcome |
-|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-| baseline (no skill) | qwen3.8-27b | 145s | 11 | 189.1k / 13.1k | 0 | 2/12 | wrote `PRD.md` at repo root (wrong name/path); no interview at all, no hypothesis RIGHT/WRONG block, no non-goals/open-questions sections; opened a task list (harmless here, no skill narrowing the surface) |
-| v1 (frozen 0.3.0) | qwen3.8-27b | 137s | 7 | 102.5k / 12.8k | 1 | 10/12 | correct path, sections, hypothesis, grounding, non-goals; opened a `tasks` call refused by the narrowed surface (self-recovered); degraded past the interview on its own reasoning ("`ask_user` isn't in this session's tool surface" — false, it is listed, the model just never tried it) rather than on any instruction in the skill |
-| v2 (first hardened cut) | qwen3.8-27b | 224s | 8 | 170.9k / 20.2k | 1 | 11/12 | no `tasks` call; ran the assumed-confirm monologue explicitly through all 5 clusters citing evidence; one `bash` call (a `$(...)` count-check on the written PRD) refused — `bash` was never in this skill's surface, model reached for it anyway to self-verify, then recovered with `grep` |
-| v3 (final 0.4.0) | qwen3.8-27b | 227s | 7 | 132.5k / 20.5k | 0 | 12/12 | same correctness as v2, self-verified with `grep`/`read` instead of `bash` after the added Red flags line; zero safety blocks, zero stack leaks, explicit "Process notes" section narrating the headless degradation cluster by cluster |
-| confirm (0.4.0) | ornith-1.5-35b-a3b | 69s | 11 | 158.6k / 10.8k | 1 | 11/12 | same content correctness; independently reached for a `bash` echo ("attempting ask_user via context") once, blocked, self-recovered with `grep` — the Red flags line reduced but did not eliminate the `bash` reflex on a second model family |
-
-**Changes** (0.3.0 -> 0.4.0): (1) an `## Arguments` contract stating there is
-no operator in a headless run, that `ask_user` returns immediately with no
-answers every time regardless of how many times it's called, and that the
-fix is to apply the existing "user declines" treatment cluster by cluster
-from wherever the first empty response lands — including Step 0's evidence
-check, which the old text left ungated but unaddressed for headless; (2) the
-decline paragraph in "The interview" now cross-references that headless
-default explicitly instead of leaving the model to infer it (v1 inferred a
-*wrong* reason — a nonexistent tool-surface gap — and got lucky); (3) an
-explicit "the clusters below are the plan; `tasks` is refused" line, which
-closed v1's one real safety block; (4) a new `## Red flags` section (the
-skill had none) naming the concrete failures seen across runs: stack-term
-leaks, a WRONG condition that's just RIGHT negated, the literal `PRD.md`
-name, re-calling `ask_user` after an empty response, skipping the loop
-outright instead of degrading into it, ungrounded claims, and reaching for
-`bash` (not in this skill's surface) to self-verify instead of `grep`/`read`.
-
-**Design note on the biggest named risk**: the mission brief flagged gating
-hard on Step 0/cluster 1 and never reaching Generate as the single biggest
-risk for this skill. It did not reproduce on either model tested, on any
-version including the unhardened v1 baseline snapshot — `ask_user`'s
-headless behavior in this harness (confirmed by reading
-`src/tools/ask-user.ts`: with no operator handler wired by `clio-coder run`,
-every `ask_user` call resolves immediately to `{cancelled: true}`, framed as
-an ok result with "proceed with defaults" guidance, never an error or a
-hang) means a stalled interview was never actually the failure mode to
-defend against here. What *was* real and reproduced on both models: an
-unprompted reach for `bash` to self-verify a written document, refused
-because `bash` is correctly outside this skill's surface. The hardening
-therefore targets the reproduced failure (`tasks` in v1, `bash` in v2/
-confirm), not the hypothesized one — matching context/context-handoff's
-own finding that the ask_user-stall defense is precautionary, not
-repro-driven, here too.
-
-**Still weak**: the `bash`-reach-to-verify reflex was reduced (v2 -> v3 on
-qwen3.8-27b: fixed) but not eliminated on ornith-1.5-35b-a3b, which hit the
-identical refused-tool pattern even after the Red flags line existed — a
-prose warning did not fully generalize across model families, only across
-runs of the same one. S2 (explicit "skip the questions, just write it") and
-S3 (solution-shaped request, "PRD for adding a reply button") from the
-scenario list above were not run standalone against 0.4.0 — only the S1-style
-combined evidence fixture ran, five times. The `git` tool (in allowed-tools)
-was never exercised in any run; a fixture with prior commits/branches to
-reference might exercise it. Only 27-35B class models tried, no small-model
-run.

package/skills/planning/tech-spec/SKILL.md

@@ -1,172 +0,0 @@
----
-name: tech-spec
-description: "Writes a typed call-stack architecture handoff: code-shaped contracts plus execution flows, implementation-ready for another engineer. User-invoked only. Not for weighing approaches or deciding the design; use architecture first."
-triggers:
-  - write a tech spec
-  - typed call-stack handoff
-  - code-shaped contracts
-  - implementation-ready technical specification
-  - specify execution flows
-version: 0.3.1
-license: Apache-2.0
-disable-model-invocation: true
-allowed-tools:
-  - read
-  - grep
-  - find
-  - ls
-  - git
-  - context
-  - code_nav
-  - write
-  - ask_user
-requires:
-  - skill:tdd
-clio-coder:
-  registry-id: iowarp/clio-coder
-  source-url: https://github.com/iowarp/clio-coder/tree/main/skills/planning/tech-spec
-  audit: pass
-  provenance: adapted
-  origin: https://github.com/dmmulroy/skills/tree/main/tech-spec
-  eval-status: smoke-checked
-  model-size: large
-  provisional: true
-  agents:
-    - main
----
-
-# Tech Spec
-
-A tech spec is a typed call-stack architecture handoff: contracts as
-TypeScript pseudocode plus end-to-end execution flows. Prose explains why;
-types and call stacks define what changes. Design only — never implement,
-and save a file only when the user asks; otherwise return the spec inline.
-
-## Arguments
-
-```text
-/skill tech-spec <the change, in a few sentences, or a path to read first>
-```
-
-- The text is the design problem: what's changing and why. A doc or file
-  path named in the request (a PRD, an architecture decision, a module) is
-  context to read, not more arguments — see "Load local context" below.
-- Nothing is required beyond some text; a blank invocation falls straight
-  to Path B's first question rather than inventing a change to spec.
-- **Output defaults to inline.** Write a file only when the request says
-  so explicitly — "save it", "write it to `<path>`", "put it in `docs/`".
-  Absent that, the finished spec is the reply itself: no file, in this run
-  or a prior one in the same session, gets created for it. This holds
-  regardless of which path below runs or how long the spec is — length is
-  never itself a reason to write a file.
-- Disabled for model self-invocation and requires the `tdd` skill be
-  installed to reference in the TDD Test Plan section; both are frontmatter
-  facts, not something to explain to the user unless asked.
-
-There is no operator in a headless run: `ask_user` is not registered, so
-any call is refused as an unregistered tool rather than answered, and a
-second try will not resolve differently. In Path B (below), that means: state the
-question, your recommendation grounded in the codebase and any docs read
-(or the most defensible engineering default when nothing grounds it), and
-the reasoning; adopt the recommendation; mark it `assumed — confirm`; move
-to the next question. Run every question this way, end to end, not just
-the first — the interview is the plan to execute, not an outline to
-abbreviate because no one answered the opening question. Never invent a
-fact or a codebase detail to back an assumption; anything genuinely
-unknown becomes an Open Question in the spec, not a plausible guess. This
-degrades the interview only — it never licenses writing a file that
-wasn't asked for.
-
-The steps below are the plan; do not open a task list for them. `tasks`
-sits outside this skill's tool surface and any call to it is refused.
-`bash` is also outside this skill's tool surface — verify what you wrote
-with `grep`, `read`, and `find`, never `bash`.
-
-## Choose the path
-
-- **Path A — convert context to spec**: the conversation, docs, or codebase
-  already describe the change.
-- **Path B — interview first**: not enough problem, constraints, or
-  acceptance criteria exist. Say so, then interview one question at a time
-  with a recommended answer per question (the grill-me posture); anything
-  answerable by exploring the codebase is explored, not asked. When context
-  suffices, run Path A. Never invent requirements to skip the interview.
-  See Arguments above for how a headless run carries every question
-  through instead of stalling on the first one.
-
-## Path A
-
-1. **Load local context.** Inspect existing code and docs for vocabulary,
-   module layout, error style, adapters, test conventions. Done when the
-   spec introduces no pattern, library, or schema style without checking
-   local precedent.
-2. **Extract the design problem.** Current state, problem, callers, goals,
-   non-goals, constraints, invariants, affected systems, entrypoints,
-   risks. Unknowns become open questions, never plausible filler. Done when
-   every claimed constraint traces to conversation, code, docs, or an open
-   question.
-3. **Explore alternatives.** 2-3 designs differing materially — interface
-   shape, seam placement, ownership, call stack, module boundaries — not
-   just names. Sketch each: domain types, interfaces, failure types, seams,
-   entrypoint-to-effect call stack, test strategy, trade-offs. Compare on
-   caller burden, module depth, locality of change, seam placement,
-   testability through real seams, complexity. Done when the
-   recommendation is chosen after the comparison, not before.
-4. **Specify the contracts.** For the recommended design, every new,
-   changed, or deleted type, signature, interface, error union, adapter,
-   DTO, and API gets a concrete sketch — or an explicit reason no new
-   contract is needed. Name what each layer may know and what must not
-   leak across each seam.
-5. **Specify call stacks.** Every affected behavior gets an entrypoint →
-   side-effect → response trace with the type/data flow (`raw input →
-   parser → domain input → service → adapter → typed result → projection →
-   output`), current-vs-proposed when changing behavior, and failure /
-   retry / idempotency flow where reachable.
-6. **Map files.** Files to add, change, delete; test files; config or
-   migration files. Each maps to the contract or call-stack step it owns.
-7. **Write the TDD plan.** Vertical red-green slices per the `tdd` skill:
-   one failing behavior test, minimal implementation, repeat. Cover happy
-   paths, failure paths, parser rejection, invariants, changed seams — or
-   state why a path is deliberately untested.
-
-## Spec outline
-
-Use this shape (omit sections that truly do not apply, but never omit
-contracts, seams, call stacks, or the test plan for being hard):
-
-```md
-# <Title>
-## Summary · Context / Current State · Goals · Non-Goals · Invariants ·
-## Design Constraints
-## Alternatives Considered (Option 1..3)
-## Recommendation · Proposed Design
-## Domain Model and Types · Types, Interfaces, and APIs
-## Seams, Boundaries, Adapters, and Implementations
-## Call Stacks and Data Flow (current / proposed / failure / retry)
-## Files to Add / Change / Delete
-## TDD Test Plan
-## Risks and Open Questions
-```
-
-## Done when
-
-The spec follows the outline, every boundary has a typed contract or a
-stated reason it needs none, every behavior has a call stack, unknowns are
-open questions rather than invented design, nothing was implemented, and
-no file was written unless the request asked for one.
-
-## Red flags
-
-- Prose where a type signature would be more precise.
-- A recommendation written before the alternatives.
-- Speculative seams no invariant, boundary, or test earns.
-- The same rule restated in three sections.
-- "While I'm here" implementation.
-- Writing the spec to a file when nothing in the request asked for one —
-  the default output is always the inline reply.
-- A Path B question left unanswered instead of run as the assumed-confirm
-  monologue, or an interview skipped straight into Path A without ever
-  asking the first question.
-- Opening a task list for the steps above; `tasks` is refused. Reaching for
-  `bash` to grep or verify the spec; `bash` is not in this skill's tool
-  surface and the call is refused — use `grep`/`read`/`find`.

package/skills/planning/tech-spec/evals.md

@@ -1,120 +0,0 @@
-# Evals — tech-spec
-
-Baseline scenarios (subagent WITHOUT the skill vs WITH). Pass/fail per
-bullet. Status: written at port time, not yet executed (`eval-status:
-untested`); skill is marked provisional and user-invoked only.
-
-## S1 — sufficient context (Path A)
-Setup: write a tech spec for adding per-client rate limiting to the ingest
-endpoint in src/ingest.js; limits should be configurable and violations
-must return 429 without dropping the connection.
-
-Fixture:
-```bash
-mkdir -p src
-printf 'const http = require("http");\nconst { parseEvent } = require("./parse-event.js");\n\nconst INGEST_ROUTE = "ingest";\n\nfunction createIngestServer(store) {\n  return http.createServer((req, res) => {\n    if (req.url.slice(1) !== INGEST_ROUTE || req.method !== "POST") {\n      res.writeHead(404);\n      res.end();\n      return;\n    }\n    let body = "";\n    req.on("data", (chunk) => { body += chunk; });\n    req.on("end", () => {\n      const parsed = parseEvent(body);\n      if (parsed.err) {\n        res.writeHead(400);\n        res.end(JSON.stringify({ error: parsed.err }));\n        return;\n      }\n      store.append(parsed.value);\n      res.writeHead(202);\n      res.end();\n    });\n  });\n}\n\nmodule.exports = { createIngestServer };\n' > src/ingest.js
-printf 'function parseEvent(raw) {\n  try {\n    const value = JSON.parse(raw);\n    if (typeof value.client !== "string") return { err: "missing client" };\n    return { err: null, value };\n  } catch {\n    return { err: "invalid json" };\n  }\n}\n\nmodule.exports = { parseEvent };\n' > src/parse-event.js
-```
-
-Expected:
-- Local conventions inspected before any pattern is proposed.
-- 2-3 materially different alternatives compared before recommending.
-- Typed contracts for every new/changed boundary; call stacks with data
-  flow; file map; vertical TDD plan.
-- Nothing implemented; spec returned inline (no file unless asked).
-
-## S2 — thin context (Path B)
-Setup: user asks for a spec with only a vague sentence.
-Expected:
-- States context is insufficient; interviews one question at a time with
-  recommended answers; explores the codebase instead of asking what code
-  answers.
-- Converts to Path A only when context suffices.
-
-## S3 — unknowns
-Setup: a dependency's behavior is genuinely unknown.
-Expected:
-- Recorded as an open question, not filled with plausible design.
-
-## Baseline failure modes to watch for (RED)
-- Prose-only spec with no typed contracts or call stacks.
-- Single foregone design presented as "the" answer.
-- Implementation snuck in.
-
-## Smoke record (2026-08-13)
-
-One representative scenario via `clio-coder skills eval` against Nemo-3.5-Lightning
-(30B local, llamacpp on mini), full-auto sandbox. PASS. Spec written and its claims exercised with node -e; judge 4/4.
-
-## Battletest record (2026-09-03)
-
-Fixture: `/home/akougkas/eval-temp/harness/test_techspec.py`, continuing the
-planning category's shared HPC log-triage domain (`product-intent` -> `prd`
--> `tech-spec`). Seeds a plausible root `PRD.md` (purpose, features,
-out-of-scope, stack, integrations, data model, milestones, and the
-always-on-vs-on-demand ingestion tension explicitly marked as *not this
-document's decision*) plus the existing partial codebase (`src/scanner.py`:
-a working `FailureEvent` + `scan_oom`, OOM only) and two sample dmesg logs
-carrying real OOM/ECC/Xid line formats, inside a git repo. Three task
-variants, one fixture:
-
-- **base** (S1, Path A): "spec ECC + Xid detection and cross-signature
-  top-3 ranking" — sufficient context, no save request. Graded on 9 checks
-  against the *reconstructed final assistant text* (this skill's default
-  output is inline, not a file): all 11 outline-derived sections present,
-  >=5 domain grounding terms, >=2 materially different alternatives,
-  `FailureEvent` reused not respecced, nothing implemented (`scanner.py`
-  byte-identical to seed), the ingestion trade-off left unresolved, zero
-  safety blocks, no `tasks` call, and — the check this run exists to catch —
-  **no file written when nothing asked for one**.
-- **save** (S1 variant, confirmation only, run once on the final version):
-  same task plus an explicit "save it to docs/tech-spec-log-triage.md" —
-  10 checks, same 8 plus the file existing at exactly that path and no
-  other new file appearing.
-- **thin** (S2, Path B, confirmation only, run once on the final version):
-  a genuinely vague "improve our failure detection, you'll need to ask me
-  stuff" request with 5 lighter checks — zero safety blocks, no silent
-  stall, no `tasks` call, and either a real `ask_user` exchange or the
-  assumed-confirm monologue (`assumed` + `confirm` both present), with a
-  real spec still produced.
-
-| run | model | wall | turns | in / out tokens | safety blocks | score | outcome |
-|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-| baseline (no skill) | ornith-1.5-35b-a3b | 80s | 5 | 54.9k / 12.1k | 0 | 4/9 | never invoked `/skill tech-spec`; discovered the installed skill itself via `context(scope="skills")`, read its SKILL.md directly, then called `artifact` and terminated early with a `.clio-coder/artifacts/PLAN.md` instead of a spec — no alternatives, no sections, wrong output shape |
-| v1 (frozen 0.2.0) | ornith-1.5-35b-a3b | 95s | 8 | 115.0k / 15.1k | 1 | 6/9 | ran Path A correctly and produced a genuinely strong spec (11/11 sections, 3 material alternatives, `FailureEvent` reused, nothing implemented) but opened a `tasks` plan (refused, safety block) and **wrote the spec to `docs/tech-spec-scanner-ecc-xid.md` without being asked to** — the exact Path-A/B default-output risk flagged going in |
-| v2 (live 0.3.0) | ornith-1.5-35b-a3b | 68s | 5 | 57.2k / 10.4k | 0 | 9/9 | same spec quality, zero safety blocks, no `tasks` call, correctly returned inline with no file written; final text states explicitly "I did **not** write a file, since nothing in the request asked to save it" |
-| v2 confirm — save | ornith-1.5-35b-a3b | 110s | 11 | 184.8k / 16.5k | 0 | 10/10 | explicit "save it to docs/tech-spec-log-triage.md" correctly produces exactly that file at that path, nothing else |
-| v2 confirm — thin (Path B) | ornith-1.5-35b-a3b | 69s | 9 | 111.8k / 11.7k | 0 | 5/5 | correctly identified insufficient context, ran Path B, and carried all five scope decisions (S1-S5) through as an explicit assumed-confirm monologue headlessly instead of stalling or silently skipping to Path A |
-
-**Changes**: (1) `## Arguments` contract with the slash-invocation syntax,
-what's required vs. inferred, and — the section that mattered most here —
-an explicit "output defaults to inline" rule stated as its own bullet
-before the headless-monologue prose, so the fix for Path B's ask_user gap
-can't be misread as license to always write a file; (2) the headless
-no-operator paragraph, ported from `product-intent`/`prd`, applied to Path
-B's grill-me interview: every question runs as state-question /
-grounded-recommendation / reasoning / adopt / mark `assumed — confirm`,
-end to end, not just the first one; (3) explicit `tasks` and `bash`
-refusal lines — `tasks` was v1's only safety block; (4) `Done when` and
-`Red flags` both gained a line naming the unrequested-file failure and the
-unanswered-Path-B-question failure by name, plus the existing `tasks`/`bash`
-refusal repeated as a red flag (matching `prd`'s and `product-intent`'s
-pattern of naming the exact observed failure, not a generic reminder).
-Version 0.2.0 -> 0.3.0.
-
-**Still weak**: per this pass's coordinator note, no secondary-model
-confirmation was run (qwen3.8-27b was skipped in favor of running one full
-cycle on ornith-1.5-35b-a3b at speed, concurrently with a sibling agent
-hardening `architecture` on `mini`); the fix is validated on one model
-class only. The baseline's failure mode (discovering and improvising from
-the installed skill file directly, without ever invoking it, then calling
-`artifact` for an unrelated early exit) is a skill-selection/tool-scoping
-gap this SKILL.md cannot fix from inside its own body. `code_nav` (in
-`allowed-tools`) was never exercised — the fixture's one-file codebase
-never needed it. `requires: [skill:tdd]` is a diagnostic-only reference in
-this harness (unmet requires warn, never block `--skill`-path invocation);
-the TDD Test Plan section reads fine without the `tdd` skill installed, but
-that was not tested with `tdd` actually present to see if the reference
-changes. Genuine unknowns (S3 from the original evals) were exercised only
-incidentally via the Xid-severity and ECC-correctable open questions, not
-as an isolated scenario.

package/skills/registry.yaml

@@ -1,144 +0,0 @@
-# Pinned marketplace skill content hashes (provenance-stripped sha256).
-# Generated by `pnpm run skills:pin`. At activation, an installed skill
-# carrying registry-id provenance is compared against its pinned hash;
-# a mismatch surfaces a drift warning.
-skills:
-  # ── coding ──
-  - name: ast-grep
-    path: coding/ast-grep
-    version: 0.3.0
-    sha256: 0a72f4c906303f550be78f80a927da7e24e5c2076f058ccafdec80dfbed275af
-  - name: coding-standards
-    path: coding/coding-standards
-    version: 0.4.0
-    sha256: d573cdc5b430ae94ebfb5ef69c4a0ac9ac074aae815959ab4e6515012846ce3b
-  - name: prototype
-    path: coding/prototype
-    version: 0.4.0
-    sha256: 0f82df386c2ee565b0e968216ece746b1a11b4acd79676812074c1a406b698e1
-  - name: tdd
-    path: coding/tdd
-    version: 0.4.0
-    sha256: 63b88f29424091a92a8d8c0cc94474ae7e78af76491aea17e6f54af66f32db2d
-  # ── context ──
-  - name: context-handoff
-    path: context/context-handoff
-    version: 0.5.1
-    sha256: e05a8dc9d09b4decbf79afade1f530d7c81d5412112723faab104a83893c34f8
-  - name: context-prime
-    path: context/context-prime
-    version: 0.4.1
-    sha256: 3e6783d3fd95bd5635fe274ea0b9f73f3c4606ce64b832524cc242b114d8ef12
-  # ── git ──
-  - name: branch-closeout
-    path: git/branch-closeout
-    version: 0.1.0
-    sha256: 3227f31b0693bb6428abb20a2d4f449aeba1d8e45a79cf0c2c7c333c30c10664
-  - name: file-ticket
-    path: git/file-ticket
-    version: 0.3.0
-    sha256: 65029c2d9d545728750c8a713f92035bd6bdbfa9874de442df72bd059846cb7a
-  - name: fix-issue
-    path: git/fix-issue
-    version: 0.3.0
-    sha256: 626e3aa8ca95bc603f2e0cdd2e7502aa96be85af6bfa92b635c39ef99d3845a5
-  - name: resolve-merge-conflicts
-    path: git/resolve-merge-conflicts
-    version: 0.4.0
-    sha256: 901f482aa2231552d64a721e0d1c58dc8f211347543b5a91fd2ab3c7e413c11c
-  - name: ship
-    path: git/ship
-    version: 0.5.0
-    sha256: 4d626718fdb8b67cf3f22d09ac5a228e5c8103befa1295a672587a6605f038b1
-  - name: worktree-create
-    path: git/worktree-create
-    version: 0.6.0
-    sha256: a4ae790d916a170977814b4334e14aef4f96fb304e3289f7beb5e31e8fb83881
-  - name: worktree-merge
-    path: git/worktree-merge
-    version: 0.6.0
-    sha256: 0fbe2297622ed955b2e4fb14306d75a51bd36db7eebf59e8e92fac1da5b6e64e
-  # ── meta ──
-  - name: clio-coder-dev
-    path: meta/clio-coder-dev
-    version: 0.4.0
-    sha256: 8980f3bed0f06c24685bc0a02f3ffbbcdac9442616dc3ce54122265b666ae0d7
-  - name: clio-coder-test
-    path: meta/clio-coder-test
-    version: 0.3.0
-    sha256: 87f6689d083080e4b80294304f2b2fd36f70ce941ab7265cb573e84e4c5e6a12
-  - name: credentials
-    path: meta/credentials
-    version: 0.2.0
-    sha256: d9382790ab30c9a13e5ca451f6f6b6b81eb8bcc6d458ad4931cc0495d39ea78d
-  - name: find-skills
-    path: meta/find-skills
-    version: 0.2.0
-    sha256: a2f8469b3a15059f8547e7566dcd27894c6e2a2126b3ed83acb470df051cd11d
-  - name: herdr
-    path: meta/herdr
-    version: 0.2.0
-    sha256: eeda051fe8736344b480fbd0d482a0e0ab82d4fc44e7ced5ff7058378beae3b6
-  - name: skill-craft
-    path: meta/skill-craft
-    version: 0.3.0
-    sha256: ba81e09412f26647a9384b07359201efb08949865c50934778a4ab3173d43096
-  # ── planning ──
-  - name: archify
-    path: planning/archify
-    version: 0.1.0
-    sha256: d9e891eb5f3c27678de14165a0eb35d1eb2289be480e55009f9a57bcfe55be2d
-  - name: architecture
-    path: planning/architecture
-    version: 0.4.1
-    sha256: 0d62ded74021d148f3091e044c32d205edfa3d1298706e68c84ad0f032d0feba
-  - name: backlog
-    path: planning/backlog
-    version: 0.4.1
-    sha256: 8fc700ad8f1b2f44fb6ea013c54ce06314cf9c4fdee63bd65c36686f5c25d092
-  - name: prd
-    path: planning/prd
-    version: 0.4.1
-    sha256: 3841f2f9635229c8208382e40123de1b5a496ec562cb851758d2ac013921c069
-  - name: product-intent
-    path: planning/product-intent
-    version: 0.4.1
-    sha256: 95d629fe8688003a9816a0774674f0c9fd5a922a82835415c3c1806799436832
-  - name: tech-spec
-    path: planning/tech-spec
-    version: 0.3.1
-    sha256: e8e6a1326aeb8b010647fc9fa9dc5ff827e13550f54524555f5e6a83341eb27f
-  # ── research ──
-  - name: arxiv-literature
-    path: research/arxiv-literature
-    version: 0.5.1
-    sha256: 4668827aa0f13527de5fc34914911ef942d2103ed3d139008fbd1c0ce2c4bd3d
-  - name: experiment-protocol
-    path: research/experiment-protocol
-    version: 0.3.1
-    sha256: da151931fb1961b19fcb6d4ae1957cef908f8b35692e301f109125488ad65302
-  - name: scientific-debugging
-    path: research/scientific-debugging
-    version: 0.3.1
-    sha256: ba94f8ad2655396a3791c7599631513f16651ffa61c8148044b996a25c0bc1cc
-  - name: scientific-modernization
-    path: research/scientific-modernization
-    version: 0.4.1
-    sha256: eb31099d764cba913c19726f6ba85d7081c5e01c81a3b2cd45eb136a4e47b858
-  # ── workflow ──
-  - name: cut-it
-    path: workflow/cut-it
-    version: 0.4.1
-    sha256: d0ce7dc6ea633d87e9e68c6b59ad402c24644b9eac580774410b235e0ca1c93f
-  - name: design-council
-    path: workflow/design-council
-    version: 0.6.0
-    sha256: 42fbf2e54524253b2955b22576ae0aca998dc04a902b8a59440edcfd051e0f5a
-  - name: grill-me
-    path: workflow/grill-me
-    version: 0.5.1
-    sha256: 3844770b507f9b2904aaa5c944c2b26f9ecf114383758dfff3bd7f39b2c717a6
-  - name: workflow-distiller
-    path: workflow/workflow-distiller
-    version: 0.4.1
-    sha256: 067b097299b0b630729a4a6ddde629dec5c798d5b4634f90f7feab380b8575e1

package/skills/remote.yaml

@@ -1,13 +0,0 @@
-# Skills whose content lives in another repository at a pinned ref.
-# Clio never vendors these. `npm run skills:pin` publishes each entry into
-# skill-marketplace.json with the upstream tree as its sourceUrl, the catalog
-# overlay whose files land on top of that tree at install, and the upstream
-# top-level members the install drops. The overlay SKILL.md is pinned in
-# registry.yaml like every other catalog skill.
-version: 1
-skills:
-  - name: archify
-    category: planning
-    sourceUrl: https://github.com/tt-a1i/archify/tree/v2.16.0/archify
-    overlay: skills/planning/archify
-    exclude: [test, package-lock.json]