@leeovery/claude-technical-workflows 2.1.0 → 2.1.2

package/commands/link-dependencies.md

@@ -159,7 +159,11 @@ UPDATED FILES:
 If any files were updated:
 
 ```
-Shall I commit these dependency updates? (y/n)
+· · ·
+
+Shall I commit these dependency updates?
+- **`y`/`yes`** — Commit the changes
+- **`n`/`no`** — Skip
 ```
 
 If yes, commit with message:

package/commands/workflow/start-discussion.md

@@ -222,25 +222,31 @@ Discussions:
 
 **If research AND discussions exist:**
 ```
+· · ·
+
 How would you like to proceed?
 
   • **From research** - Pick a topic number above (e.g., "research 1" or "1")
   • **Continue discussion** - Name one above (e.g., "continue {topic}")
   • **Fresh topic** - Describe what you want to discuss
-  • **refresh** - Force fresh research analysis
+  • **`r`/`refresh`** - Force fresh research analysis
 ```
 
 **If ONLY research exists:**
 ```
+· · ·
+
 How would you like to proceed?
 
   • **From research** - Pick a topic number above (e.g., "research 1" or "1")
   • **Fresh topic** - Describe what you want to discuss
-  • **refresh** - Force fresh research analysis
+  • **`r`/`refresh`** - Force fresh research analysis
 ```
 
 **If ONLY discussions exist:**
 ```
+· · ·
+
 How would you like to proceed?
 
   • **Continue discussion** - Name one above (e.g., "continue {topic}")

package/commands/workflow/start-implementation.md

@@ -193,15 +193,19 @@ Show Not implementable section only (with unblock hint above).
 ```
 No implementable plans.
 
-To proceed:
-- Complete blocking dependencies first
-- Or finish plans still in progress with /start-planning
+Before you can start implementation:
+- Complete blocking dependencies first, or
+- Finish plans still in progress with /start-planning
+
+Then re-run /start-implementation.
 ```
 
-**STOP.** Wait for user response.
+**STOP.** This workflow cannot continue — do not proceed.
 
 **Otherwise (multiple selectable plans, or implemented plans exist):**
 ```
+· · ·
+
 Select a plan (enter number):
 ```
 
@@ -250,6 +254,8 @@ INCOMPLETE (planned but not implemented):
 - {topic}: task {task_id} not yet completed
   -> This task must be completed first.
 
+· · ·
+
 OPTIONS:
 1. Implement the blocking dependencies first
 2. Mark a dependency as "satisfied externally" if it was implemented outside this workflow

package/commands/workflow/start-planning.md

@@ -149,6 +149,8 @@ Omit either section entirely if it has no entries.
 
 **If multiple actionable items:**
 ```
+· · ·
+
 Select a specification (enter number):
 ```
 
@@ -165,12 +167,14 @@ Auto-selecting: {topic} (only actionable specification)
 ```
 No plannable specifications.
 
-To proceed:
-- Complete any in-progress specifications with /start-specification
-- Or create a new specification first
+Before you can start planning:
+- Complete any in-progress specifications with /start-specification, or
+- Create a new specification first
+
+Then re-run /start-planning.
 ```
 
-**STOP.** Wait for user response before ending.
+**STOP.** This workflow cannot continue — do not proceed.
 
 → Based on user choice, proceed to **Step 4**.
 

package/commands/workflow/start-review.md

@@ -108,6 +108,8 @@ Available Plans:
   1. {topic-1} ({status}) - format: {format}, spec: {exists|missing}
   2. {topic-2} ({status}) - format: {format}, spec: {exists|missing}
 
+· · ·
+
 Which plan would you like to review the implementation for? (Enter a number or name)
 ```
 
@@ -130,6 +132,8 @@ Auto-selecting: {topic} (only available plan)
 Ask the user what code to review:
 
 ```
+· · ·
+
 What code should I review?
 
 1. All changes since the plan was created

package/commands/workflow/start-specification.md

@@ -204,6 +204,8 @@ Check `cache.status` from discovery to determine which options to present.
 ##### If `cache.status: "valid"`
 
 ```
+· · ·
+
 What would you like to do?
 
 1. **Continue an existing specification** - Resume work on a spec in progress
@@ -218,6 +220,8 @@ Which approach?
 ##### If `cache.status: "stale"`
 
 ```
+· · ·
+
 What would you like to do?
 
 Note: A previous grouping analysis exists but is now outdated - discussion documents have changed since it was created. Re-analysis is required, but existing specification names will be preserved where groupings overlap.
@@ -233,6 +237,8 @@ Which approach?
 ##### If `cache.status: "none"`
 
 ```
+· · ·
+
 What would you like to do?
 
 1. **Continue an existing specification** - Resume work on a spec in progress
@@ -468,6 +474,8 @@ Coupling: {explanation}
 
 ---
 
+· · ·
+
 How would you like to proceed?
 
 1. **Proceed as recommended** - I'll ask which to start with
@@ -475,7 +483,7 @@ How would you like to proceed?
 3. **Single specification** - Consolidate ALL into one unified spec
 4. **Individual specifications** - Create 1:1 specs (I'll ask which to start)
 
-(Enter 'refresh' to re-analyze)
+- **`r`/`refresh`** — Re-analyze discussions
 ```
 
 **Status Legend:**
@@ -557,6 +565,8 @@ This reorganization affects multiple existing specifications:
 
 Moving discussions between established specifications requires deleting the affected specs and re-processing. The source material in your discussions is preserved.
 
+· · ·
+
 Options:
 1. **Delete affected specs and proceed** - Remove {spec-1}, {spec-2} and create fresh specs for your new groupings
 2. **Reconsider** - Adjust your groupings to affect fewer specs
@@ -602,7 +612,11 @@ Check if `docs/workflow/specification/unified.md` already exists.
 
 This will consolidate ALL {N} concluded discussions into a single specification.
 
-Proceed with unified specification? (y/n)
+· · ·
+
+Proceed with unified specification?
+- **`y`/`yes`** — Proceed
+- **`n`/`no`** — Cancel
 ```
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user to confirm, then proceed to **Step 9** with all discussions as sources.
@@ -655,7 +669,11 @@ Output: docs/workflow/specification/{grouping-name}.md
 After completion:
 - specification/{topic-c}.md will be marked as superseded
 
-Proceed? (y/n)
+· · ·
+
+Proceed?
+- **`y`/`yes`** — Proceed
+- **`n`/`no`** — Go back
 ```
 
 #### If creating a NEW grouped specification (no existing specs)
@@ -670,7 +688,11 @@ Sources:
 
 Output: docs/workflow/specification/{grouping-name}.md
 
-Proceed? (y/n)
+· · ·
+
+Proceed?
+- **`y`/`yes`** — Proceed
+- **`n`/`no`** — Go back
 ```
 
 #### If CONTINUING an existing grouped specification
@@ -684,7 +706,11 @@ Sources:
 - docs/workflow/discussion/{topic-a}.md
 - docs/workflow/discussion/{topic-b}.md
 
-Proceed? (y/n)
+· · ·
+
+Proceed?
+- **`y`/`yes`** — Proceed
+- **`n`/`no`** — Go back
 ```
 
 #### If creating/continuing an INDIVIDUAL specification
@@ -697,7 +723,11 @@ Sources:
 
 Output: docs/workflow/specification/{topic}.md
 
-Proceed? (y/n)
+· · ·
+
+Proceed?
+- **`y`/`yes`** — Proceed
+- **`n`/`no`** — Go back
 ```
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user confirmation.

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@leeovery/claude-technical-workflows",
-  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "version": "2.1.2",
   "description": "Technical workflow skills & commands for Claude Code",
   "license": "MIT",
   "author": "Lee Overy <me@leeovery.com>",

package/skills/technical-implementation/SKILL.md

@@ -151,8 +151,10 @@ If `project_skills` is populated in the tracking file, present for confirmation:
 > - `{skill-name}` — {path}
 > - ...
 >
+> · · ·
+>
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Keep these, proceed
-> - **`change`** — Add or remove skills"
+> - **`c`/`change`** — Add or remove skills"
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user choice.
 

package/skills/technical-implementation/references/steps/task-loop.md

@@ -45,9 +45,11 @@ Present the executor's ISSUES to the user:
 >
 > {executor's ISSUES content}
 >
-> - **`retry`** — Re-invoke the executor with your comments (provide below)
-> - **`skip`** — Skip this task and move to the next
-> - **`stop`** — Stop implementation entirely
+> · · ·
+>
+> - **`r`/`retry`** — Re-invoke the executor with your comments (provide below)
+> - **`s`/`skip`** — Skip this task and move to the next
+> - **`t`/`stop`** — Stop implementation entirely
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user choice.
 
@@ -84,8 +86,10 @@ Present the reviewer's findings to the user:
 > Notes (non-blocking):
 > {NOTES from reviewer}
 >
+> · · ·
+>
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Accept these notes and pass them to the executor to fix
-> - **`skip`** — Override the reviewer and proceed as-is
+> - **`s`/`skip`** — Override the reviewer and proceed as-is
 > - **Comment** — Modify or add to the notes before passing to the executor
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user choice.
@@ -109,9 +113,11 @@ Present a summary and wait for user input:
 > Phase: {phase number} — {phase name}
 > {executor's SUMMARY — brief commentary, decisions, implementation notes}
 >
+> · · ·
+>
 > **Options:**
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Approve, commit, continue to next task
-> - **`auto`** — Approve this and all future reviewer-approved tasks automatically
+> - **`a`/`auto`** — Approve this and all future reviewer-approved tasks automatically
 > - **Comment** — Feedback the reviewer missed (triggers a fix round)
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user input.

package/skills/technical-planning/SKILL.md

@@ -79,8 +79,10 @@ Load **[spec-change-detection.md](references/spec-change-detection.md)** to chec
 >
 > {spec change summary from spec-change-detection.md}
 >
-> - **`continue`** — Walk through the plan from the start. You can review, amend, or navigate at any point — including straight to the leading edge.
-> - **`restart`** — Erase all planning work for this topic and start fresh. This deletes the Plan Index File and any Authored Tasks. Other topics are unaffected."
+> · · ·
+>
+> - **`c`/`continue`** — Walk through the plan from the start. You can review, amend, or navigate at any point — including straight to the leading edge.
+> - **`r`/`restart`** — Erase all planning work for this topic and start fresh. This deletes the Plan Index File and any Authored Tasks. Other topics are unaffected."
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user response.
 
@@ -118,8 +120,11 @@ First, choose the Output Format.
 Present the recommendation:
 
 > "Existing plans use **{format}**. Use the same format for consistency?
-> - **yes** — use {format}
-> - **no** — see all available formats"
+>
+> · · ·
+>
+> - **`y`/`yes`** — Use {format}
+> - **`n`/`no`** — See all available formats"
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user choice. If declined, fall through to the full list below.
 

package/skills/technical-planning/references/steps/analyze-task-graph.md

@@ -38,6 +38,8 @@ The natural task order is already correct. Present this to the user:
 >
 > {notes from agent output}"
 
+> · · ·
+>
 > **To proceed:**
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Confirmed.
 > - **Or tell me what to change.**
@@ -70,6 +72,8 @@ Dependencies and priorities have already been written to the task files. Present
 >
 > {any notes from agent output}"
 
+> · · ·
+>
 > **To proceed:**
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Approved.
 > - **Or tell me what to change.**

package/skills/technical-planning/references/steps/author-tasks.md

@@ -31,6 +31,8 @@ After presenting, ask:
 
 > **Task {M} of {total}: {Task Name}**
 >
+> · · ·
+>
 > **To proceed:**
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Approved. I'll log it to the plan.
 > - **Or tell me what to change.**

package/skills/technical-planning/references/steps/define-phases.md

@@ -59,6 +59,8 @@ Present the phase structure to the user.
 
 > **Phase Structure**
 >
+> · · ·
+>
 > **To proceed:**
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Approved. I'll proceed to task breakdown.
 > - **Or tell me what to change** — reorder, split, merge, add, edit, or remove phases.

package/skills/technical-planning/references/steps/define-tasks.md

@@ -42,6 +42,8 @@ Present the task overview to the user.
 
 **STOP.** Ask:
 
+> · · ·
+>
 > **To proceed:**
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Approved.
 > - **Or tell me what to change** — reorder, split, merge, add, edit, or remove tasks.

package/skills/technical-planning/references/steps/plan-construction.md

@@ -71,6 +71,8 @@ Present the task list to the user for review.
 
 > **Phase {N}: {Phase Name}** — {M} tasks.
 >
+> · · ·
+>
 > **To proceed:**
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Confirmed.
 > - **Or tell me what to change.**

package/skills/technical-planning/references/steps/resolve-dependencies.md

@@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ Skip the resolution and reverse check — there is nothing to resolve against. D
 
 **STOP.** Present a summary of the dependency state: what was documented, what was resolved, what remains unresolved, and any reverse resolutions made.
 
+> · · ·
+>
 > **To proceed:**
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Approved. I'll proceed to plan review.
 > - **Or tell me what to change.**

package/skills/technical-planning/references/steps/review-integrity.md

@@ -171,9 +171,11 @@ After presenting the finding and proposed fix, ask:
 
 > **Finding {N} of {total}: {Brief Title}**
 >
+> · · ·
+>
 > **To proceed:**
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Approved. I'll apply it to the plan verbatim.
-> - **`skip`** — Leave this as-is and move to the next finding.
+> - **`s`/`skip`** — Leave this as-is and move to the next finding.
 > - **Or tell me what to change.**
 
 **STOP.** Wait for the user's response.

package/skills/technical-planning/references/steps/review-traceability.md

@@ -149,9 +149,11 @@ After presenting the finding and proposed fix, ask:
 
 > **Finding {N} of {total}: {Brief Title}**
 >
+> · · ·
+>
 > **To proceed:**
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Approved. I'll apply it to the plan verbatim.
-> - **`skip`** — Leave this as-is and move to the next finding.
+> - **`s`/`skip`** — Leave this as-is and move to the next finding.
 > - **Or tell me what to change.**
 
 **STOP.** Wait for the user's response.

package/skills/technical-specification/references/specification-guide.md

@@ -78,6 +78,8 @@ Present your understanding to the user **in the format it would appear in the sp
 
 Then present two explicit choices:
 
+> · · ·
+>
 > **To proceed:**
 > - **`y`/`yes`** — Approved. I'll add the above to the specification **verbatim** (exactly as shown, no modifications).
 > - **Or tell me what to change.**
@@ -516,6 +518,8 @@ For each item, follow the **same workflow as the main specification process**:
    >
    > [content exactly as it would appear]
    >
+   > · · ·
+   >
    > **To proceed:**
    > - **`y`/`yes`** — Approved. I'll add the above to the specification **verbatim**.
    > - **Or tell me what to change.**
@@ -646,6 +650,8 @@ For each item:
    >
    > [content exactly as it would appear]
    >
+   > · · ·
+   >
    > **To proceed:**
    > - **`y`/`yes`** — Approved. I'll add the above to the specification **verbatim**.
    > - **Or tell me what to change.**