@leeovery/claude-technical-workflows 2.1.12 → 2.1.14

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@leeovery/claude-technical-workflows",
-  "version": "2.1.12",
+  "version": "2.1.14",
   "description": "Technical workflow skills & commands for Claude Code",
   "license": "MIT",
   "author": "Lee Overy <me@leeovery.com>",

package/skills/start-discussion/SKILL.md

@@ -232,10 +232,10 @@ Discussions:
 
 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
-  • **`r`/`refresh`** - Force fresh research analysis
+- From research — pick a topic number above (e.g., "1" or "research 1")
+- Continue discussion — name one above (e.g., "continue {topic}")
+- Fresh topic — describe what you want to discuss
+- **`r`/`refresh`** — Force fresh research analysis
 ```
 
 **If ONLY research exists:**
@@ -244,9 +244,9 @@ How would you like to proceed?
 
 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
-  • **`r`/`refresh`** - Force fresh research analysis
+- From research — pick a topic number above (e.g., "1" or "research 1")
+- Fresh topic — describe what you want to discuss
+- **`r`/`refresh`** — Force fresh research analysis
 ```
 
 **If ONLY discussions exist:**
@@ -255,8 +255,8 @@ How would you like to proceed?
 
 How would you like to proceed?
 
-  • **Continue discussion** - Name one above (e.g., "continue {topic}")
-  • **Fresh topic** - Describe what you want to discuss
+- Continue discussion — name one above (e.g., "continue {topic}")
+- Fresh topic — describe what you want to discuss
 ```
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user response before proceeding.

package/skills/start-specification/SKILL.md

@@ -214,11 +214,9 @@ Check `cache.status` from discovery to determine which options to present.
 
 What would you like to do?
 
-1. **Continue an existing specification** - Resume work on a spec in progress
-2. **Select from groupings** - Choose from previously analyzed groupings ({cache.generated})
-3. **Re-analyze groupings** - Fresh analysis of discussion relationships
-
-Which approach?
+- Continue an existing specification — resume work on a spec in progress
+- Select from groupings — choose from previously analyzed groupings ({cache.generated})
+- Re-analyze groupings — fresh analysis of discussion relationships
 ```
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user response.
@@ -232,10 +230,8 @@ 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.
 
-1. **Continue an existing specification** - Resume work on a spec in progress
-2. **Assess for groupings** - Re-analyze discussions for combinations
-
-Which approach?
+- Continue an existing specification — resume work on a spec in progress
+- Assess for groupings — re-analyze discussions for combinations
 ```
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user response.
@@ -247,10 +243,8 @@ Which approach?
 
 What would you like to do?
 
-1. **Continue an existing specification** - Resume work on a spec in progress
-2. **Assess for groupings** - Analyze discussions for combinations
-
-Which approach?
+- Continue an existing specification — resume work on a spec in progress
+- Assess for groupings — analyze discussions for combinations
 ```
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user response.
@@ -484,11 +478,10 @@ Coupling: {explanation}
 
 How would you like to proceed?
 
-1. **Proceed as recommended** - I'll ask which to start with
-2. **Combine differently** - Tell me your preferred groupings
-3. **Single specification** - Consolidate ALL into one unified spec
-4. **Individual specifications** - Create 1:1 specs (I'll ask which to start)
-
+- Proceed as recommended — I'll ask which to start with
+- Combine differently — tell me your preferred groupings
+- Single specification — consolidate ALL into one unified spec
+- Individual specifications — create 1:1 specs (I'll ask which to start)
 - **`r`/`refresh`** — Re-analyze discussions
 ```
 
@@ -574,10 +567,8 @@ Moving discussions between established specifications requires deleting the affe
 · · ·
 
 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
-
-Which approach?
+- Delete affected specs and proceed — remove {spec-1}, {spec-2} and create fresh specs for your new groupings
+- Reconsider — adjust your groupings to affect fewer specs
 ```
 
 **STOP.** Wait for user choice.

package/skills/technical-discussion/SKILL.md

@@ -95,6 +95,36 @@ These are natural pauses, not every exchange. Document the reasoning and context
 
 **Create the file early.** After understanding the topic and initial questions, create the discussion file with frontmatter, context, and the questions list. Don't wait until you have answers.
 
+## Concluding a Discussion
+
+When the user is ready to conclude the discussion:
+
+1. Update frontmatter `status: concluded`
+2. Final commit
+3. Check for remaining in-progress discussions in `docs/workflow/discussion/`
+
+**If other in-progress discussions exist:**
+
+```
+Discussion concluded: {topic}
+
+Remaining in-progress discussions:
+- {topic-1}
+- {topic-2}
+
+To continue, clear your context and run `/start-discussion` to pick up the next topic.
+```
+
+**If no in-progress discussions remain:**
+
+```
+Discussion concluded: {topic}
+
+All discussions are now concluded.
+```
+
+**Do not offer to continue with another discussion in this session.** Each discussion benefits from a fresh context — continuing risks compaction-related information loss and reduced attention. Always advise the user to clear context first.
+
 ## Quick Reference
 
 - **Approach**: **[meeting-assistant.md](references/meeting-assistant.md)** - Dual role, workflow

package/skills/technical-discussion/references/guidelines.md

@@ -89,5 +89,3 @@ Before marking discussion complete:
 - ✅ Impact explained
 - ✅ Confidence stated
 - ✅ No hallucination
-
-**When complete**: Update frontmatter `status: concluded`.

package/skills/technical-discussion/references/template.md

@@ -128,5 +128,3 @@ What we chose, why, the deciding factor, trade-offs accepted, confidence level.
 - Major questions concluded with rationale
 - Trade-offs understood
 - Path forward clear
-
-**When complete**: Update frontmatter `status: concluded` to signal ready for specification.

package/skills/technical-research/SKILL.md

@@ -85,11 +85,13 @@ Watch for these signs that a thread is moving from exploration toward decision-m
 
 When you notice convergence, **flag it and give the user options**:
 
-> "This thread seems to be converging — we've explored {topic} enough that the tradeoffs are clear and it's approaching decision territory.
+> This thread seems to be converging — we've explored {topic} enough that the tradeoffs are clear and it's approaching decision territory.
+>
+> · · ·
 >
 > - **`p`/`park`** — Mark as discussion-ready and move to another topic
 > - **`k`/`keep`** — Keep digging, there's more to understand
-> - **`s`/`something else`** — Your call"
+> - **Comment** — Your call
 
 **Never decide for the user.** Even if the answer seems obvious, flag it and ask.