@iowarp/clio-coder 0.4.6 → 0.4.8

package/skills/research/scientific-debugging/SKILL.md

@@ -1,149 +0,0 @@
----
-name: scientific-debugging
-description: Diagnoses stalled or cross-system failures and wrong, NaN, nondeterministic, or unexpectedly slow scientific results through falsifiable hypotheses across distinct fault classes, with evidence-cited verdicts before any fix. Not for designing benchmarks or pre-registered experiments; use experiment-protocol.
-triggers:
-  - wrong scientific results
-  - nondeterministic HPC code
-  - unexplained performance regression
-  - diagnose NaNs
-  - debug with falsifiable hypotheses
-  - scientific root cause
-version: 0.3.1
-license: Apache-2.0
-allowed-tools:
-  - read
-  - grep
-  - ls
-  - find
-  - git
-  - context
-  - code_nav
-  - bash
-clio-coder:
-  registry-id: iowarp/clio-coder
-  source-url: https://github.com/iowarp/clio-coder/tree/main/skills/research/scientific-debugging
-  audit: pass
-  provenance: designed
-  eval-status: smoke-checked
-  model-size: any
----
-
-# Scientific Debugging
-
-Debug by falsification, not by trying fixes. A fix attempted before a confirmed
-diagnosis is an experiment run without a hypothesis; when it "works" you have
-learned nothing, and when it does not you have contaminated the evidence.
-
-Anti-trigger: if the failure is a typo, a missing import, or an error message
-that names its own cause, fix it directly and skip this workflow. The loop
-below is for failures that survived the first obvious fix.
-
-## Arguments
-
-```text
-/skill scientific-debugging <failure description>
-```
-
-Everything after the skill name is the failure report: the observed wrong
-behavior and whatever has already been tried. 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. If the goal,
-a fault-class split, or a ranking call is ambiguous, state your best reading
-in Step 1 or Step 3 and proceed; never stall a step waiting for confirmation.
-
-The Loop below is the plan; do not open a task list for it — `tasks` sits
-outside this skill's tool surface and any call to it is refused.
-
-Shell rules for every `bash` call: one command per call, plain and direct.
-Never use `$(...)` or backticks; they trigger an approval gate that ends a
-headless run. This skill has no `write`/`edit` tool — the structured-
-investigation file in the Tiers section below is written with a `bash`
-heredoc (`cat > file <<'EOF' ... EOF`), never through an edit tool that
-isn't in this skill's surface.
-
-## The Loop
-
-1. **Goal.** One sentence stating the observable "fixed" state. "The regression
-   test matches the reference output within the documented tolerance on two
-   consecutive runs" is a goal; "make it work" is not.
-2. **Hypothesize.** Write at least three hypotheses. Each must name its fault
-   class and carry a falsification test: "this is WRONG if <observation>".
-   A hypothesis you cannot state a falsification test for is a hunch; refine it
-   until it is testable.
-3. **Rank.** Order by test cost times prior likelihood. Run the cheapest
-   decisive test first, not the most interesting one.
-4. **Test.** One variable per test. Preserve the raw failing output somewhere
-   untouched before you change anything.
-5. **Verdict.** Record CONFIRMED, REFUTED, or INCONCLUSIVE per hypothesis, each
-   citing the command and output that decided it. A verdict without a citable
-   observation is a guess.
-6. **Iterate.** Refuted everything? Generate new hypotheses from what the tests
-   revealed. Confirmed one? Only now edit code.
-
-## Fault Classes
-
-Hypotheses must span at least two distinct classes. Anchoring on a single class
-is the failure mode this rule exists to break: the debugger who is sure it is
-"a race" stops seeing the stale module load in front of them.
-
-| Class | Typical suspects |
-|---|---|
-| numerics | accumulation order, mixed precision, tolerance misuse, fastmath |
-| data | format or layout drift, HDF5/NetCDF/Zarr metadata, units, corruption |
-| concurrency | races, MPI collective mismatch, nondeterministic reduction order |
-| environment | modules, compiler flags, library versions, scheduler context |
-| resources | memory pressure, filesystem quirks, quota, node differences |
-| regression | a recent change; bisect the history instead of staring at code |
-
-## Tiers
-
-**Quick diagnosis** (default): the loop above, state held in conversation,
-time-boxed at fifteen minutes of investigation. If the box expires without a
-CONFIRMED verdict, escalate. Say that you are escalating; do not silently keep
-poking.
-
-**Structured investigation**: write an investigation file (for example
-`INVESTIGATION.md` or `.clio-coder/investigation-<slug>.md` via bash heredoc since
-this skill does not edit code) containing the goal, baseline measurements of
-the failing behavior, and one experiment per hypothesis with its verdict
-condition committed *before* the experiment runs. Update verdicts as evidence
-arrives. The file is the state; the conversation is commentary.
-
-## Evidence Rule
-
-The fix commit should cite the confirming observation, e.g. "confirmed by:
-`OMP_NUM_THREADS=1` reproduces bitwise-identical results, run log above".
-High-rigor repos will demand validation evidence at completion anyway; produce
-it proactively rather than being re-prompted for it.
-
-## Worked Example
-
-Report: "after the refactor, results differ from reference by 1e-4."
-
-- Goal: `pytest tests/test_advection.py` passes against the pinned reference
-  within its stated rtol on a clean checkout plus the refactor commit.
-- H1 (regression): the refactor changed the loop order and with it the
-  floating-point accumulation order. WRONG if the pre-refactor commit shows the
-  same 1e-4 drift. Test: `git stash && pytest ...` (cost: 1 min).
-- H2 (numerics): the comparison uses an absolute tolerance where values near
-  zero need a relative one. WRONG if the drift is uniform across magnitudes.
-  Test: print elementwise error vs magnitude (cost: 5 min).
-- H3 (environment): a different BLAS or compiler flag set is active in the new
-  environment. WRONG if `pip freeze`/module list matches the reference
-  environment pin. Test: diff environments (cost: 2 min).
-- Order: H1, H3, H2. H1 verdict: REFUTED, pre-refactor commit is clean, output
-  cited. H3: REFUTED, environments identical. H2: CONFIRMED, error is constant
-  1e-4 at all magnitudes, so near-zero elements fail the absolute check.
-- Only now edit: fix the tolerance semantics, cite H2's observation in the
-  commit message.
-
-## Red Flags
-
-- Editing code before any hypothesis has a CONFIRMED verdict.
-- All hypotheses drawn from one fault class.
-- A test that changes two variables at once.
-- "It seems better now" presented as a verdict.
-- Retrying a flaky test until it passes instead of making it deterministic.
-- The fifteen-minute box expiring without an explicit escalation.
-- Feeling certain: when a hypothesis feels obviously true, state its
-  falsification test anyway before touching the code.

package/skills/research/scientific-debugging/evals.md

@@ -1,156 +0,0 @@
-# Evals - scientific-debugging
-
-Baseline scenarios (run a subagent WITHOUT the skill to capture the gap, then
-WITH the skill to confirm it closes). Rubric is pass/fail per bullet.
-
-## S1 - stalled numerical bug
-
-Setup: a small numerical project with a reference-comparison test. The
-workspace already contains the fixture; run `python -m unittest -q` for the
-reference check. Prompt: "after a refactor our results differ from the
-reference by about 1e-4 and the obvious fix did not help; diagnose it."
-
-Fixture:
-
-```bash
-mkdir -p tests
-cat > diffusion.py <<'PY'
-import math
-
-
-def weighted_mean(values, weights):
-    weighted = [value * weight for value, weight in zip(values, weights)]
-    return math.fsum(weighted) / math.fsum(weights)
-PY
-cat > tests/test_diffusion.py <<'PY'
-import math
-import unittest
-
-from diffusion import weighted_mean
-
-
-class DiffusionReferenceTest(unittest.TestCase):
-    def test_weighted_mean_matches_reference(self):
-        values = [1.0e16, 6.0e-4, -1.0e16, 1.0e-4, 2.0e-4, -3.0e-4]
-        weights = [1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0]
-        expected = math.fsum(value * weight for value, weight in zip(values, weights)) / math.fsum(weights)
-        observed = weighted_mean(values, weights)
-        self.assertLess(abs(observed - expected), 1.0e-12)
-
-
-if __name__ == "__main__":
-    unittest.main()
-PY
-git init -q
-git config user.name "Clio Coder Eval"
-git config user.email "eval@clio-coder.local"
-git add diffusion.py tests/test_diffusion.py
-git commit -q -m "add stable weighted mean reference"
-cat > diffusion.py <<'PY'
-def weighted_mean(values, weights):
-    total = 0.0
-    for value, weight in zip(values, weights):
-        total += value * weight
-    return total / sum(weights)
-PY
-```
-
-Expected:
-
-- States a one-sentence goal naming the observable fixed state before
-  investigating.
-- Writes at least three hypotheses, each with an explicit "this is WRONG if"
-  falsification test.
-- Hypotheses span at least two distinct fault classes, including numerics and
-  regression.
-- Orders tests cheapest-first and runs one variable per test.
-- Records a CONFIRMED/REFUTED/INCONCLUSIVE verdict per hypothesis, each citing
-  a command and its output.
-- Edits no code before a hypothesis is CONFIRMED.
-
-## S2 - flaky parallel test
-
-Setup: a test suite where one MPI/threaded test fails intermittently. Prompt:
-"this test is flaky, sometimes it passes; figure out why."
-
-Expected:
-
-- Includes a concurrency-class hypothesis (race, collective mismatch, or
-  reduction order).
-- Attempts a deterministic reproduction (pin threads, fix seeds, force
-  ordering) rather than rerunning until green.
-- Preserves the raw failing output before changing anything.
-- Does not present a lucky pass as a verdict.
-
-## S3 - escalation to structured tier
-
-Setup: quick-tier investigation is not converging; all initial hypotheses come
-back REFUTED and fifteen minutes of investigation have elapsed.
-
-Expected:
-
-- Explicitly announces escalation to the structured tier instead of silently
-  continuing.
-- Writes an investigation file containing the goal, baseline measurements of
-  the failing behavior, and one experiment per hypothesis.
-- Each experiment's verdict condition is committed before the experiment runs.
-- New hypotheses are generated from what the refuted tests revealed.
-
-## S4 - anti-trigger: trivial failure
-
-Setup: the failure is an obvious typo or missing import whose error message
-names its own cause. Prompt: "why is this failing?"
-
-Expected:
-
-- Fixes it directly or says a quick fix is appropriate.
-- Does not run the hypothesis ceremony for a self-explanatory failure.
-
-## Baseline failure modes to watch for (RED)
-
-- Tries a fix immediately with no stated hypothesis.
-- Single hypothesis, no falsification test, anchored on one fault class.
-- Bundles the fix with the diagnosis in one edit.
-- Verdicts asserted from intuition with no cited observation.
-- Flaky test "resolved" by rerunning until it passes.
-- Investigation drifts past the time box with no escalation and no file.
-
-## Observed gap closure
-
-S1 run 2026-07-01, headless `clio-coder run` against a scratch git fixture (an
-order-sensitive summation whose refactor replaced `math.fsum` with a plain
-accumulation loop; regression check fails by 1.474e-4).
-
-- RED (no skill): the agent found the correct root cause but with no stated
-  goal, no enumerated hypotheses, no falsification tests, and no verdicts; it
-  read the diff, asserted the cause, and benchmarked alternative summations ad
-  hoc. On a harder bug that first guess would have been unfalsified anchoring.
-- GREEN (skill via `--skill` and `/skill <name>` invocation): one-sentence goal,
-  three hypotheses (numerics, data, environment; the refactor regression
-  folded into H1) each with a WRONG-if test, explicit cheapest-first ranking,
-  CONFIRMED/REFUTED verdicts citing command output, untested H3 marked N/A,
-  fix applied only after the CONFIRMED verdict, and a commit message citing
-  the confirming observation. All six S1 bullets pass.
-
-## 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. Judge 6/6 on the seeded numerical fixture; cleanest research run.
-
-## Battletest record (2026-09-03)
-
-Real `clio-coder run --json` against dynamo (LM Studio, `qwen3.8-27b`), the S1
-diffusion fixture above (order-sensitive summation regression, git repo under
-`/home/akougkas/eval-temp/scidebug-fixture/`). No `## Arguments` section,
-`tasks`-refusal, shell-rules paragraph, or no-operator statement existed in
-the skill body going in — same gap every other hardened category this session
-found. Added all four, matching skills/coding/prototype/SKILL.md's pattern,
-and made explicit that the structured-investigation file goes through a
-`bash` heredoc because this skill has no `write`/`edit` tool.
-
-| run | model | outcome |
-|---|---|---|
-| baseline (no skill) | qwen3.8-27b | ran 9 API calls / ~180k tokens without converging inside a 200s box; genuinely still reasoning, not stalled |
-| v0.3.0 (hardened) | qwen3.8-27b | loaded the skill cleanly, `context`/`ls`/`git log`/`git diff`/`read` in sensible order, correctly identified the `math.fsum` → naive-accumulation regression in its own reasoning before the box closed; zero safety blocks, zero `tasks`, zero `$(...)` |
-
-**Still weak**: this session's harness runs are token-heavy (each tool round-trip reprocesses the full growing context) and neither the baseline nor the hardened run reached a written goal/hypotheses/verdict block inside the time box used this pass — the trajectory is correct and clean, but full-loop completion on this model under this box is unconfirmed, only strongly suggested. No cross-model confirmation this pass (time-boxed session). The 2026-07-01 gap-closure run above remains the only evidence of a complete Loop run end to end; this pass only confirms the hardening didn't break anything and closes the same Arguments/tasks/shell-rules gap every other category found.

package/skills/research/scientific-modernization/SKILL.md

@@ -1,170 +0,0 @@
----
-name: scientific-modernization
-description: Modernizes, ports, rewrites, packages, or replaces established scientific software in independently validated stages against an external scientific oracle, settling compatibility and upstream stewardship before calling it complete. Not for an isolated benchmark; use experiment-protocol. Not for diagnosing wrong results; use scientific-debugging.
-triggers:
-  - modernize this scientific code
-  - rewrite this scientific software in Rust
-  - port this solver to GPU
-  - migrate the scientific build system
-  - create a maintained fork
-  - preserve scientific parity
-version: 0.4.1
-license: Apache-2.0
-allowed-tools:
-  - read
-  - write
-  - grep
-  - ls
-  - find
-  - git
-  - context
-  - code_nav
-  - bash
-clio-coder:
-  registry-id: iowarp/clio-coder
-  source-url: https://github.com/iowarp/clio-coder/tree/main/skills/research/scientific-modernization
-  audit: pass
-  provenance: designed
-  eval-status: scenarios-recorded
-  model-size: large
----
-
-# Scientific Modernization
-
-Modernization preserves scientific behavior and stewardship; it is not source
-translation. Faster code, a clean build, and passing self-authored unit tests
-do not establish scientific equivalence. Work the stages below in order; each
-has an explicit exit condition.
-
-## Arguments
-
-```text
-/skill scientific-modernization <what to modernize, port, rewrite, or replace, and why>
-```
-
-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. Stage 1's "the user has seen them" exit condition means,
-headlessly: state the four bullets in your reply and proceed, never stall
-waiting for acknowledgment. Every other stage gate below works the same way
-— state the decision and its reasoning, then continue.
-
-The six stages 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.
-
-Shell rules for every `bash` call: one command per call, plain and direct.
-Never use `$(...)` or backticks; they trigger an approval gate that ends a
-headless run.
-
-This is a long, multi-stage process on a small model or a time-boxed run. If
-you are approaching your tool-call or time budget before reaching Stage 6,
-stop at the current stage, state exactly which stage you reached and why you
-stopped, and report the work as an incomplete prototype — never fabricate
-completion of stages you did not actually reach.
-
-## Stage 1 — Decide whether this work should exist
-
-Identify the upstream project: active maintainers, license, release cadence,
-supported users, contribution path. Prefer improving the original project when
-coordination is viable.
-
-Record the decision in writing before any implementation:
-
-- path chosen: upstream contribution, maintained successor, or explicitly
-  scoped fork;
-- the accountable maintainer or organization by name;
-- the compatibility surface users already rely on;
-- release, deprecation, and migration intent.
-
-Do not start a rewrite whose only durable plan is "the community can maintain
-it later." Exit: the four bullets above are written down and the user has seen
-them.
-
-## Stage 2 — Establish an independent scientific oracle
-
-Write the acceptance contract in `.clio-coder/validation.yaml` (preferred) or
-`VALIDATION.md` before changing behavior. Pick at least one oracle that does
-not depend on the new implementation agreeing with itself:
-
-- exact outputs from a trusted reference implementation;
-- parity against the established tool over a representative corpus;
-- known statistical behavior with pre-registered bounds;
-- simulated data whose correct answer is fixed in advance;
-- conserved quantities, analytical solutions, or domain invariants.
-
-For every output, define: units, shapes, ordering, missing-value behavior,
-determinism, absolute and relative tolerances, allowed platform variation.
-Include adversarial and historically troublesome inputs.
-
-If no credible oracle exists, stop and report that limitation. Implementation
-velocity cannot repair an undefined truth condition. Keep performance
-acceptance separate: pre-register speed claims through `experiment-protocol`.
-Exit: the contract file exists and names its oracle(s).
-
-## Stage 3 — Freeze the compatibility envelope
-
-Inventory observable behavior before migrating anything:
-
-- CLI and API contracts, file formats, schemas, defaults, error behavior;
-- packaging, fresh-install, upgrade, and uninstall paths;
-- supported platforms, compilers, runtimes, accelerators, schedulers;
-- resource scaling, reproducibility controls, provenance;
-- undocumented conventions captured by downstream tests and real workflows.
-
-Capture reference outputs and install evidence from released artifacts, not
-only the source checkout: mature tools carry user trust and conventions a
-line-by-line translation misses. Exit: reference outputs and the envelope
-inventory are stored as artifacts.
-
-## Stage 4 — Deliver in independently valid stages
-
-Split the work into the smallest stages that can each be checked against the
-oracle. Every stage gets a before/after boundary, an acceptance command, a
-retained artifact, and a rollback point. Prefer vertical slices that produce a
-usable result over a big-bang rewrite.
-
-Per stage:
-
-1. Capture the reference result on the pinned corpus and environment.
-2. Make one bounded change.
-3. Run compatibility and scientific-oracle checks.
-4. Preserve raw outputs, discrepancies, and provenance.
-5. Resolve or explicitly classify every mismatch before expanding scope.
-
-An agent's confidence is not evidence. If a reviewer cannot reconstruct the
-comparison from retained artifacts, the stage is unverified; say so. Exit per
-stage: oracle checks pass or every mismatch is classified in writing.
-
-## Stage 5 — Budget explicitly for the last mile
-
-Initial implementation is faster than convergence. Reserve work for: edge
-cases, subtle numerical differences, nondeterminism, fresh environments,
-large inputs, interrupted runs, packaging metadata, documentation, user
-migration. Re-run the full oracle matrix after any optimization: correctness
-proven before an optimization is not inherited by the optimized code.
-
-Use `scientific-debugging` when a mismatch needs causal diagnosis. Never widen
-tolerances or drop inconvenient corpus entries to obtain parity.
-
-## Stage 6 — Ship only with evidence and stewardship
-
-A completion claim must include all of:
-
-- the oracle and compatibility matrix that passed, plus retained artifacts;
-- unresolved differences and their user-visible consequences;
-- fresh-install and documented-workflow results;
-- performance results, if claimed, under their registered protocol;
-- upstream status, or the named owner and maintenance plan;
-- migration, rollback, release, and deprecation instructions.
-
-If scientific validity or durable ownership is unresolved, report the work as
-a prototype. Do not call it a replacement, successor, or production release.
-
-## Red Flags
-
-- A rewrite begins before maintainers or downstream users are consulted.
-- Tests derived only from the new implementation.
-- "The outputs look close" replacing declared tolerance semantics.
-- Performance wins reported before scientific parity.
-- One final comparison substituting for staged validation.
-- A passing happy path hiding fresh-install, scale, or edge-case failures.
-- A fork shipping without an accountable owner and maintenance horizon.

package/skills/research/scientific-modernization/evals.md

@@ -1,111 +0,0 @@
-# Evals - scientific-modernization
-
-Baseline scenarios (run a subagent WITHOUT the skill to capture the gap, then
-WITH the skill to confirm it closes). Rubric is pass/fail per bullet.
-
-## S1 - rewrite an established genomics tool in Rust
-
-Setup: a maintained genomics parser has a large user base, a reference CLI,
-and representative public datasets. The new repository has no validation
-contract. Prompt: "Rewrite this parser in Rust and make it the new default."
-
-Expected:
-
-- Checks the upstream contribution path, maintainers, license, and downstream
-  compatibility obligations before choosing a fork or successor.
-- Writes an acceptance contract before implementation, using the released
-  parser and fixed datasets as an independent parity oracle.
-- Specifies file, API, CLI, error, ordering, missing-value, and numerical
-  compatibility rather than comparing only happy-path output.
-- Splits the migration into independently validated stages with retained raw
-  comparison artifacts and rollback points.
-- Calls the result a prototype unless ownership, release, migration, and
-  maintenance are settled.
-
-## S2 - port a numerical solver to GPU
-
-Setup: a CPU solver is trusted, but floating-point reduction order will change
-on the GPU. Prompt: "Port the solver to CUDA and prove it is correct and
-faster."
-
-Expected:
-
-- Uses the CPU implementation, analytical cases, conserved quantities, or
-  fixed simulated truth as an oracle independent of the CUDA code.
-- Defines units, shapes, absolute and relative tolerances, nondeterminism, and
-  platform variation before the first GPU result.
-- Separates correctness parity from a pre-registered performance experiment
-  and invokes experiment-protocol for the latter.
-- Revalidates the full oracle matrix after each optimization rather than
-  inheriting correctness from an earlier version.
-- Includes large inputs, fresh environments, failures, and numerical edge
-  cases in the last-mile plan.
-
-## S3 - modernize packaging in place
-
-Setup: a scientific Python package has a legacy build, multiple supported
-platforms, and an active upstream. Prompt: "Replace the packaging system and
-release it without changing scientific behavior."
-
-Expected:
-
-- Prefers an upstreamable bounded change over creating a replacement package.
-- Captures fresh-install, upgrade, uninstall, import, CLI, and documented
-  workflow behavior from released artifacts before editing the build.
-- Uses existing scientific outputs as a no-regression oracle even though the
-  requested change appears packaging-only.
-- Delivers the migration in reversible stages and records platform-specific
-  evidence.
-- Names release ownership, deprecation impact, and rollback instructions.
-
-## S4 - anti-triggers
-
-Setup: one request asks why a solver emits NaNs; another asks to benchmark two
-MPI collectives without migrating software.
-
-Expected:
-
-- Routes the NaN diagnosis to scientific-debugging.
-- Routes the isolated performance comparison to experiment-protocol.
-- Does not manufacture a modernization or stewardship project for either.
-
-## Baseline failure modes to watch for (RED)
-
-- Starts a big-bang rewrite immediately and treats self-authored tests as proof.
-- Declares parity from a few hand-picked examples with no tolerance semantics.
-- Mixes correctness and performance so a speedup excuses changed answers.
-- Discovers edge cases only in one final comparison after the rewrite.
-- Replaces an active project without early maintainer coordination.
-- Calls an unowned fork production-ready because installation succeeds.
-
-## 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. NOT COMPLETED: loop guard at 75 tool calls. The run also surfaced two harness containment findings (write-tool workspace escape; cross-arm workspace visibility) — harness issues, not skill issues.
-
-## Battletest record (2026-09-03)
-
-Same structural gap as the other three research skills: no `## Arguments`,
-no `tasks`-refusal, no shell-rules paragraph, no no-operator statement. Added
-all four, plus an explicit budget-awareness line (state which stage you
-reached and report the work as an incomplete prototype rather than
-fabricate completion) directly answering the 2026-08-13 record's loop-guard
-finding above.
-
-This mission's plan called for a small legacy-C fixture and a live A/B pass
-on `mini`; that track was killed mid-run this session for taking materially
-longer than the wall-clock budget available (this is a six-stage,
-`model-size: large` skill — the prior smoke record already didn't complete
-on a 30B model, and a fresh fixture never got built before the track was
-stopped). **This pass is a static hardening pass only** — the four additions
-above were applied and `npm run skills:pin && npm run skills:check && npm
-run lint` verified green, but no fresh live run against this skill's
-hardened body exists yet. Treat 0.4.0 as unverified beyond the structural
-fix; it needs the small legacy-C fixture (a single-file numeric routine with
-a captured reference output as the oracle) and a real baseline/hardened A/B
-pass before its `eval-status` can move past `scenarios-recorded`.
-
-**Still weak**: everything — no fixture built this pass, no run executed
-against 0.4.0, no cross-model confirmation. This is the one skill in the
-category that did not get real battletest evidence this session; say so
-plainly rather than implying otherwise from the version bump.