@mrciphersmith/keryx 0.2.71 → 0.2.73

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@mrciphersmith/keryx",
-  "version": "0.2.71",
+  "version": "0.2.73",
   "description": "Version-controlled project context for AI coding agents: code graph, architecture wiki, project memory, relevant tests, quality signals, and task flows.",
   "private": false,
   "publishConfig": {
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@
     "check": "tsc --noEmit && bun test",
     "check:doc-links": "bun scripts/check-doc-links.ts",
     "baseline:review-precision": "bun scripts/review-precision-baseline.ts",
-    "test:guards": "bun test src/lib/config-dir.ast.test.ts src/lib/config-dir.readers.test.ts src/lib/production-graph.test.ts src/harness/policy/profiles.test.ts src/lib/serve-server.test.ts"
+    "test:guards": "bun test src/lib/config-dir.ast.test.ts src/lib/config-dir.readers.test.ts src/lib/production-graph.test.ts src/harness/policy/profiles.test.ts src/lib/serve-server.test.ts src/gdskills/agent-catalogue-xref.test.ts src/gdskills/enforcement-claims.test.ts"
   },
   "files": [
     "dist",

package/src/gdskills/bundled/rules/core/code-review-learned-profile.mdc

@@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
+---
+description: "Learned review profile: a review checklist this project built from its own pull-request comments, not a style shipped with the tool."
+alwaysApply: false
+---
+
+# Learned Review Profile
+
+## What This Rule Is
+
+This is a **dynamic rule**. It carries no conventions of its own, and it ships
+empty of them on purpose.
+
+Every other review rule in `rules/core/` states what to flag. This one states
+**where the things to flag come from**: the pull-request comments left on this
+project, by the people this project named, applied to this project's own code.
+Nothing here describes a reviewer, a team, or a stack — because a rule that
+described one would be wrong for the next project that installed it.
+
+The checklist a reader wants lives in the project, in a project skill under
+`.metaproject/project-skills/<module>/<skill>/SKILL.md`. That file is written by
+`keryx review learn` proposing and `keryx skills learn apply` applying, and it
+never travels back into the tool.
+
+## Where The Content Comes From
+
+```
+keryx review comments collect   →  the durable record: who commented, and what they said
+keryx review learn              →  keeps the configured authors, writes a proposal
+keryx skills learn apply        →  writes the lesson into the project skill, bumps its version
+```
+
+`.metaproject/review-learning.config.json` names the three things the join needs:
+the local skill to teach, the repository to read, and the comment authors whose
+text counts. A project without that file does not learn — that is a supported
+state, not an error.
+
+`keryx review learn` reads the record `collect` already wrote; it does not talk
+to GitHub. An author the config does not name contributes nothing: their text
+reaches no proposal and no `SKILL.md`.
+
+## Two Boundaries That Are Enforced In Code, Not Advised Here
+
+- **Proposing never writes.** `keryx review learn` writes a proposal under
+  `.metaproject/data/gdskills/proposals/` and changes no skill. `keryx skills
+  learn apply` is the only writer, it refuses a proposal it has already applied,
+  and it records what it did in `skill-changelog.md`.
+- **Learned content cannot leave the project.** `applyLearningProposal` resolves
+  the target and refuses any path outside `.metaproject/project-skills/`. A
+  project that misconfigures its skill path cannot write into the shipped
+  templates under `src/gdskills/bundled/`; the apply fails instead.
+
+Both are assertions about code that exists. Neither is a request to be careful.
+
+## When To Apply
+
+Apply when the project has a learned review skill and the reader wants that
+project's accumulated review conventions rather than a generic pass. If the
+project has no learned skill yet, prefer `review-orchestrator` and its
+domain reviewers — an empty learned profile has nothing to say and should say
+nothing.
+
+## Response Format
+
+1. Verdict in one line — the canonical verdict vocabulary (same set as
+   `core/code-review-ai-assistant.mdc`):
+   - `APPROVE` — no blocking issues; changes accepted as-is
+   - `APPROVE WITH SUGGESTIONS` — accepted but improvements noted for follow-up
+   - `REQUEST CHANGES` — has issues that must be fixed before merge
+   - `COMMENT` — informational findings only; no blocking action required
+2. Top 1-3 blocking findings, each traceable to a line in the learned skill.
+3. Concrete replacement/fix path.
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- Cite the learned lesson a finding rests on. A finding with no line behind it in
+  the project skill is a generic review finding and belongs to the reviewer that
+  owns it.
+- Do not restate a lesson as a rule about people. The record says a comment was
+  left; it does not license a claim about who is usually right.
+- No personal attacks. No empty nitpicks. Keep recommendations lint-safe and
+  scoped.

package/src/gdskills/bundled/rules/core/gproject-contracts.mdc

@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ Every dispatch from gproject-orchestrator MUST include:
 ```yaml
 # Required (from base protocol)
 description: "<phase>: <task>"
-subagent_type: "general"
+subagent_type: "general-purpose"
 prompt: "<structured prompt — see template below>"
 
 # gproject-specific (inside prompt)

package/src/gdskills/bundled/rules/core/jobs-documentation.mdc

@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ Every job folder MUST contain at minimum:
     ...
 ```
 
-> **`results/` folder:** Created by `task-implementer` during Phase 6 (one file per task). The orchestrator and wave-executor never receive full task results inline — they read these files only when a task reports `DONE_WITH_CONCERNS` or `BLOCKED`. This keeps the orchestrator context bounded.
+> **`results/` folder:** Written by `task-implementer` during Phase 6.1 (one file per task), then validated with `keryx skills contracts validate … --schema task-implementer-output` and recorded with `keryx job document <job-name> --type implementation-report --file <that file>`, which refuses if the file was never written. There is no `wave-executor` agent: the orchestrator dispatches each task itself, never receives a full task result inline, and reads a `results/` file only when a task reports `DONE_WITH_CONCERNS` or `BLOCKED`. This keeps the orchestrator context bounded.
 
 ## README.md Format
 
@@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ The README is the entry point for both humans and AI agents. It MUST contain:
 1. [x] Analyze issue (issue-analyzer)
 2. [ ] Prepare feature branch
 3. [ ] Implement tasks (task-implementer)
-4. [ ] Review (code-ai-review, code-boss-review, code-style-review)
+4. [ ] Review (code-ai-review, code-learned-review, code-style-review)
 5. [ ] Fix review findings
 6. [ ] Final checks
 7. [ ] Generate report

package/src/gdskills/bundled/rules/core/review-strict-profile.mdc

@@ -1,15 +1,19 @@
 ---
-description: "boss-style review profile: direct, strict, architecture-first feedback with concrete fixes."
+description: "Strict review profile: direct, architecture-first feedback with concrete fixes."
 alwaysApply: false
 ---
 
-# boss Review Profile
+# Strict Review Profile
 
 ## Purpose
-Replicate the boss review style for requested reviews.
+Apply a strict, architecture-first pass: name the defect, name where the logic
+belongs, and give the replacement.
 
 ## When To Apply
-Apply when user explicitly asks for review in boss style.
+Apply when the caller explicitly asks for a strict review. For a checklist this
+project learned from its own pull-request comments, use
+`core/code-review-learned-profile.mdc` instead — that one carries no conventions
+of its own and reads them from the project.
 
 ## Style Profile
 - Direct and concise.

package/src/gdskills/bundled/rules/core/subagent-context-construction.md

@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ Use this template for every subagent dispatch:
 ```
 Task({
   description: "<one-line summary for logs>",
-  subagent_type: "general",
+  subagent_type: "general-purpose",
   prompt: |
     ## Task
     <Exactly what to do — no ambiguity>

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/orchestration/code-verifier/SKILL.codex.md

@@ -1,47 +1,353 @@
 ---
 name: code-verifier
-description: "Full quality gate: lint, type-check, tests, circular imports. Mandatory post-implementation step in job-orchestrator. Use when: verifying code after implementation, running quality gate before review, checking code health standalone."
+model_tier: light
+description: "Use when running a full quality gate after implementation — lint, type-check, tests, and import validation. Mandatory step in job-orchestrator after task-implementer and after fix iterations. Use standalone when you need a structured verification report."
 triggers:
   - "Run verification"
   - "Quality gate"
+  - "Check code quality"
   - "Run lint and tests"
   - "Verify implementation"
+  - "Run checks"
 metadata:
   author: "MrCipherSmith"
   version: "1.0.0"
   category: "verification"
+  agent_worthy: true
   compatible_harnesses: "cursor,codex,zed,opencode"
 license: "MIT"
 ---
 
 # Code Verifier
 
-Full quality gate: lint → type-check → tests → circular imports.
+## Purpose
 
-**Position:** task-implementer → **code-verifier** → review
+Runs the full quality gate for a project: lint, type-check, tests, and import validation. Provides a structured, parseable result that the orchestrator uses to decide whether to proceed or trigger a fix loop.
 
-## Steps
-1. Detect PM and tooling (bun/npm/pnpm/yarn/python/go)
-2. Run lint (ESLint/Biome/ruff)
-3. Run type-check (tsc --noEmit / mypy / pyright)
-4. Run tests (vitest/jest/pytest/go test)
-5. Check circular imports (madge, if available)
-6. Classify findings by severity, determine gate
-7. Emit VERIFICATION_RESULT
+**Distinct from `task-implementer` Phase 5:** task-implementer does inline self-verification during implementation. `code-verifier` is an independent gate that runs after all tasks in a wave are complete — giving a clean, consolidated view of the whole diff, not per-task.
 
-## Gate
-- CRITICAL (type errors, test failures) or HIGH (lint errors, cycles) → GATE: FAIL
-- LOW only → GATE: PASS_WITH_WARNINGS
+**Input:** Codebase path + worktree path + scope (changed files or full project)
+**Output:** `VERIFICATION_RESULT` structured report — gate status (pass/fail), per-check results, actionable findings
+
+## When to Use
+
+- Dispatched by `job-orchestrator` after each task-implementer wave (mandatory)
+- Dispatched by `job-orchestrator` after each fix iteration
+- Run standalone: "verify my code", "run quality gate", "/code-verifier"
+- Any time you need a reproducible, structured view of project health
+
+## Architecture: 4 Phases
+
+```
+Phase 1: DETECT   →  Auto-detect stack, tooling, commands
+Phase 2: RUN      →  Execute lint → type-check → tests → import-check
+Phase 3: ANALYZE  →  Parse outputs, classify findings by severity
+Phase 4: REPORT   →  Emit VERIFICATION_RESULT
+```
+
+---
+
+## Workflow
+
+```
+Code Verifier Progress:
+- [ ] Phase 1: Detect stack and tooling
+- [ ] Phase 2: Run verification checks
+- [ ] Phase 3: Analyze and classify findings
+- [ ] Phase 4: Report results
+```
+
+---
+
+### Phase 1: DETECT
+
+Auto-detect the project stack and available verification tools.
+
+**1.1 Package manager and runner:**
+
+```bash
+cd <codebase_path>
+
+if   [ -f bun.lockb ];         then PM=bun;    RUNNER="bun run"
+elif [ -f pnpm-lock.yaml ];    then PM=pnpm;   RUNNER="pnpm run"
+elif [ -f yarn.lock ];         then PM=yarn;   RUNNER="yarn"
+elif [ -f package-lock.json ]; then PM=npm;    RUNNER="npm run"
+elif [ -f pyproject.toml ] || [ -f requirements.txt ]; then PM=python; RUNNER=""
+elif [ -f go.mod ];            then PM=go;     RUNNER=""
+else PM=unknown; RUNNER=""
+fi
+```
+
+**1.2 Detect available check commands:**
+
+| Check | How to detect | Command |
+|---|---|---|
+| Lint | `package.json` has `"lint"` script | `$RUNNER lint` |
+| Lint (auto) | `eslint.config.*` or `.eslintrc*` present | `npx eslint . --max-warnings 0` |
+| Biome | `biome.json` present | `npx biome check .` |
+| Type-check | `package.json` has `"type-check"` or `"typecheck"` script | `$RUNNER type-check` |
+| Type-check (auto) | `tsconfig.json` present | `npx tsc --noEmit` |
+| Tests | `package.json` has `"test"` script | `$RUNNER test --run` (vitest) or `$RUNNER test` |
+| pytest | `pytest` in `pyproject.toml` or `requirements.txt` | `pytest --tb=short -q` |
+| Go tests | `go.mod` present | `go test ./...` |
+| Circular imports | `madge` in devDependencies | `npx madge --circular src/` |
+
+**1.3 Determine scope:**
+
+```
+IF scope = "changed" (default when dispatched by orchestrator):
+  FILES = git diff --name-only <base_branch>...HEAD
+  Run tests only for files related to changed code
+  Run lint only on changed files: npx eslint <changed_files>
+  Run type-check on full project (tsc doesn't support file-level scope)
+
+IF scope = "full":
+  Run all checks on full project
+```
+
+**Output of Phase 1:**
+```
+TOOLING:
+  pm: bun | pnpm | yarn | npm | python | go | unknown
+  runner: "bun run" | ...
+  checks_available: [lint, type-check, tests, circular-imports]
+  checks_skipped: [<reason>]
+  scope: changed | full
+  changed_files: [<paths>]
+```
+
+---
+
+### Phase 2: RUN
+
+Execute each available check in order. Capture full output.
+
+**Execution order:** lint → type-check → tests → import-check
+
+**Do NOT abort early** — run all checks even if one fails. The orchestrator needs the complete picture.
+
+**2.1 Lint:**
+```bash
+# Changed files only (faster, more actionable)
+npx eslint <changed_files> --format=json --max-warnings 0
+# OR if lint script exists:
+$RUNNER lint
+```
+
+Capture:
+- Exit code (0 = pass, non-zero = fail)
+- Number of errors and warnings
+- Per-file error list (file path, line, column, rule, message)
+
+**2.2 Type-check:**
+```bash
+npx tsc --noEmit 2>&1
+# OR:
+$RUNNER type-check
+```
+
+Capture:
+- Exit code
+- Number of errors
+- Per-error: file, line, column, message, TS error code
+
+**2.3 Tests:**
+```bash
+$RUNNER test --run 2>&1        # vitest
+# OR: npx jest --ci 2>&1
+# OR: pytest --tb=short -q 2>&1
+# OR: go test ./... 2>&1
+```
+
+Capture:
+- Exit code
+- Tests passed / failed / skipped counts
+- Per-failure: test name, file, error message, stack (first 5 lines)
+
+**2.4 Circular import check (if madge available):**
+```bash
+npx madge --circular --extensions ts,tsx src/ 2>&1
+```
+
+Capture:
+- Exit code
+- List of circular chains (if any)
+
+---
+
+### Phase 3: ANALYZE
+
+Parse raw outputs into structured findings. Classify by severity.
+
+**3.1 Severity classification:**
+
+| Finding | Severity |
+|---|---|
+| Type error | CRITICAL |
+| Test failure | CRITICAL |
+| ESLint error (not warning) | HIGH |
+| Circular import | HIGH |
+| ESLint warning | LOW |
+| Skipped test | INFO |
+
+**3.2 Gate decision:**
+
+```
+GATE = PASS
+IF any CRITICAL findings  → GATE = FAIL (blocks proceed)
+IF any HIGH findings      → GATE = FAIL (blocks proceed)
+IF only LOW/INFO findings → GATE = PASS_WITH_WARNINGS
+```
+
+**3.3 Actionable finding format:**
+
+Each finding must include enough context for `task-implementer` (fix mode) to resolve it without re-reading the full output:
+
+```
+{
+  severity: CRITICAL | HIGH | LOW | INFO,
+  check: lint | type-check | test | circular-import,
+  file: <path>,
+  line: <N> | null,
+  column: <N> | null,
+  rule: <ESLint rule or TS error code> | null,
+  message: <error text>,
+  suggestion: <optional fix hint>
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+### Phase 4: REPORT
+
+Emit the structured `VERIFICATION_RESULT` as the final message.
 
-## Output
 ```
 VERIFICATION_RESULT:
   gate: PASS | PASS_WITH_WARNINGS | FAIL
-  checks: { lint, type_check, tests, circular_imports }
-  findings: [{ severity, check, file, line, rule, message }]
-  summary: "..."
+  scope: changed | full
+  
+  checks:
+    lint:
+      status: pass | fail | skipped
+      errors: <N>
+      warnings: <N>
+      command_used: "<command>"
+    
+    type_check:
+      status: pass | fail | skipped
+      errors: <N>
+      command_used: "<command>"
+    
+    tests:
+      status: pass | fail | skipped
+      passed: <N>
+      failed: <N>
+      skipped: <N>
+      command_used: "<command>"
+    
+    circular_imports:
+      status: pass | fail | skipped
+      cycles: <N>
+  
+  findings:
+    - severity: CRITICAL
+      check: type-check
+      file: src/services/UserService.ts
+      line: 42
+      rule: TS2345
+      message: "Argument of type 'string' is not assignable to parameter of type 'number'"
+    - severity: HIGH
+      check: lint
+      file: src/components/Form.tsx
+      line: 18
+      rule: "no-unused-vars"
+      message: "'value' is defined but never used"
+  
+  summary: "<1-2 sentence human-readable summary>"
+```
+
+**STATUS reporting:**
+
+```
+STATUS: DONE          — gate PASS or PASS_WITH_WARNINGS, report follows
+STATUS: DONE_WITH_CONCERNS — PASS_WITH_WARNINGS with notable warnings
+STATUS: BLOCKED       — could not run checks (missing tooling, wrong directory)
+```
+
+> If `gate: FAIL` → STATUS is still `DONE` (the gate result, not the skill's execution). The orchestrator reads `gate: FAIL` and decides to trigger fix.
+
+---
 
-STATUS: DONE
+## Integration with job-orchestrator
+
+The orchestrator dispatches `code-verifier` at two points:
+
+**After task-implementer wave (pre-review gate):**
 ```
+code-verifier:
+  codebase_path: <worktree_path>
+  scope: changed
+  base_branch: <base_branch from JOB_STATE>
+→ If gate: FAIL → dispatch fix tasks → re-run code-verifier
+→ If gate: PASS → proceed to review
+```
+
+**After fix iterations (post-fix gate):**
+```
+code-verifier:
+  codebase_path: <worktree_path>
+  scope: changed
+→ If gate still FAIL after 2 iterations → report as BLOCKED, skip to report
+→ If gate: PASS → proceed to report
+```
+
+**The orchestrator's internal "checks" step (2.8) is replaced by `code-verifier` dispatch.**
+
+---
+
+## Standalone Usage
+
+```bash
+# Run on current directory, changed files only
+/code-verifier
+
+# Run on specific project
+/code-verifier --path /path/to/project
+
+# Full project scan (not just changed files)
+/code-verifier --scope full
+```
+
+---
+
+## Automation Settings
+
+| Setting | Default | Options | Description |
+|---------|---------|---------|-------------|
+| `scope` | `changed` | `changed` / `full` | Limit checks to changed files or run full project |
+| `fail_on_warnings` | `false` | true/false | Treat ESLint warnings as gate failures |
+| `include_circular` | `true` | true/false | Run circular import detection if madge available |
+| `max_findings_reported` | `20` | 1-100 | Cap findings in report to avoid overflow |
+
+---
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Action |
+|---|---|
+| Check command not found | Mark check as `skipped`, continue others |
+| Wrong working directory | ABORT with `STATUS: BLOCKED` and directory hint |
+| Command times out (>120s) | Mark check as `skipped (timeout)`, continue |
+| Zero checks available | `STATUS: BLOCKED` — cannot verify without any tooling |
+| Circular import tool missing | Skip silently (not installed in all projects) |
+
+---
+
+## Rules of Engagement
 
-Full spec: `.metaproject/skills/gdskills/orchestration/code-verifier/SKILL.md`
+1. **Run ALL checks** — never abort after first failure. The orchestrator needs the full picture.
+2. **Do NOT modify files** — this is read-only verification.
+3. **Scope to changed files** by default — full scans are slow and produce noise.
+4. **Be specific** in findings — include file, line, rule, message. Vague "lint failed" is not actionable.
+5. Return `VERIFICATION_RESULT` as the **final message** to the orchestrator.