@mrciphersmith/keryx 0.2.71 → 0.2.73

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/code-style-review/SKILL.opencode.md

@@ -28,32 +28,11 @@ license: "MIT"
 - Фидбек должен быть подробным: проблема -> почему это проблема -> где (файл/участок) -> что сделать -> пример исправления.
 - Исправления предлагай в виде unified diff-патчей, не вноси изменения в код напрямую.
 
-## Git workflow (вычислить базу и diff)
+## Scope Detection
 
-Определи parent ref и вычисли merge-base:
+See shared script: `skills/shared/git-merge-base.md`
 
-```bash
-BRANCH="$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD)"
-UPSTREAM_REF="$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref --symbolic-full-name @{upstream} 2>/dev/null || true)"
-
-PARENT=""
-if git rev-parse --verify -q "origin/main" >/dev/null; then
-  PARENT="origin/main"
-elif git rev-parse --verify -q "origin/master" >/dev/null; then
-  PARENT="origin/master"
-elif git rev-parse --verify -q "main" >/dev/null; then
-  PARENT="main"
-elif git rev-parse --verify -q "master" >/dev/null; then
-  PARENT="master"
-elif [ -n "$UPSTREAM_REF" ] && [ "$UPSTREAM_REF" != "$BRANCH" ] && [ "$UPSTREAM_REF" != "origin/$BRANCH" ]; then
-  PARENT="@{upstream}"
-else
-  echo "Cannot determine parent ref" >&2
-  exit 1
-fi
-
-BASE_SHA="$(git merge-base HEAD "$PARENT")"
-```
+Run the script from that file to determine MERGE_BASE and SCOPE before proceeding with the review.
 
 Собери входные данные:
 
@@ -158,6 +137,20 @@ git diff --find-renames <FROM_SHA>..<TO_SHA>
 
 ---
 
+## Scope Boundaries
+
+This skill covers **code style and architecture patterns** — naming, organization, TypeScript usage, pattern compliance per `code-style-patterns.mdc`.
+
+| Concern | This skill | Use instead |
+|---------|-----------|-------------|
+| Naming conventions, file organization, import order | ✅ YES | — |
+| TypeScript patterns, component/hook structure | ✅ YES | — |
+| Architecture pattern compliance | ✅ YES | — |
+| Logic correctness, type safety deep dives | ❌ NO | `code-ai-review` or `code-learned-review` |
+| MobX store internals | ❌ NO | `code-mobx-store-review` |
+
+---
+
 ## Job Context Awareness
 
 When dispatched by `job-orchestrator` as part of a job pipeline, the prompt MAY include:

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/code-style-review/SKILL.zed.md

@@ -28,32 +28,11 @@ license: "MIT"
 - Фидбек должен быть подробным: проблема -> почему это проблема -> где (файл/участок) -> что сделать -> пример исправления.
 - Исправления предлагай в виде unified diff-патчей, не вноси изменения в код напрямую.
 
-## Git workflow (вычислить базу и diff)
+## Scope Detection
 
-Определи parent ref и вычисли merge-base:
+See shared script: `skills/shared/git-merge-base.md`
 
-```bash
-BRANCH="$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD)"
-UPSTREAM_REF="$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref --symbolic-full-name @{upstream} 2>/dev/null || true)"
-
-PARENT=""
-if git rev-parse --verify -q "origin/main" >/dev/null; then
-  PARENT="origin/main"
-elif git rev-parse --verify -q "origin/master" >/dev/null; then
-  PARENT="origin/master"
-elif git rev-parse --verify -q "main" >/dev/null; then
-  PARENT="main"
-elif git rev-parse --verify -q "master" >/dev/null; then
-  PARENT="master"
-elif [ -n "$UPSTREAM_REF" ] && [ "$UPSTREAM_REF" != "$BRANCH" ] && [ "$UPSTREAM_REF" != "origin/$BRANCH" ]; then
-  PARENT="@{upstream}"
-else
-  echo "Cannot determine parent ref" >&2
-  exit 1
-fi
-
-BASE_SHA="$(git merge-base HEAD "$PARENT")"
-```
+Run the script from that file to determine MERGE_BASE and SCOPE before proceeding with the review.
 
 Собери входные данные:
 
@@ -158,6 +137,20 @@ git diff --find-renames <FROM_SHA>..<TO_SHA>
 
 ---
 
+## Scope Boundaries
+
+This skill covers **code style and architecture patterns** — naming, organization, TypeScript usage, pattern compliance per `code-style-patterns.mdc`.
+
+| Concern | This skill | Use instead |
+|---------|-----------|-------------|
+| Naming conventions, file organization, import order | ✅ YES | — |
+| TypeScript patterns, component/hook structure | ✅ YES | — |
+| Architecture pattern compliance | ✅ YES | — |
+| Logic correctness, type safety deep dives | ❌ NO | `code-ai-review` or `code-learned-review` |
+| MobX store internals | ❌ NO | `code-mobx-store-review` |
+
+---
+
 ## Job Context Awareness
 
 When dispatched by `job-orchestrator` as part of a job pipeline, the prompt MAY include:

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-architecture/SKILL.md

@@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ Focus on **SRP** and **DIP** — the two most commonly violated in practice.
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-backend/SKILL.md

@@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ is, and a condition that cannot name one is not a `blocker`.
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-clean-code/SKILL.md

@@ -367,7 +367,7 @@ Flags:
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-core-boundaries/SKILL.md

@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ boundary is the trigger-and-outcome test.
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-flow-graph/SKILL.md

@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ boundary is the trigger-and-outcome test.
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-frontend/SKILL.md

@@ -630,7 +630,7 @@ If the file does not exist or is not provided, proceed normally — context is o
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-frontend-conventions/SKILL.md

@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ boundary is the trigger-and-outcome test.
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-highload/SKILL.md

@@ -406,7 +406,7 @@ Flags:
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-logic/SKILL.md

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ license: "MIT"
 # Review Logic
 
 Specialized reviewer for **logic correctness and algorithmic soundness**.
-Inherits from the original `code-ai-review` + `code-boss-review` correctness phases
+Inherits from the original `code-ai-review` + `code-learned-review` correctness phases
 and unifies them into a single focused pass.
 
 This reviewer does not care about formatting, naming, or architecture opinions.
@@ -174,7 +174,7 @@ Do not review unrelated files.
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-orchestrator/SKILL.md

@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ triggers:
   - "review --flow-graph"
   - "review --legacy-profiles"
   - "review --code-ai"
-  - "review --b091"
+  - "review --learned"
   - "review --code-style"
   - "review --mobx-store"
 metadata:
@@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ which of its inputs were recovered and which were never written down.
 
 | Field | Type | Required | Description |
 |-------|------|----------|-------------|
-| `flags` | string[] | no | One or more of: `--frontend`, `--backend`, `--architecture`, `--security`, `--performance`, `--style`, `--clean-code`, `--highload`, `--project-conventions`, `--frontend-conventions`, `--testing-practices`, `--core-boundaries`, `--flow-graph`, `--legacy-profiles`, `--code-ai`, `--b091`, `--code-style`, `--mobx-store`, `--verify`, `--all` |
+| `flags` | string[] | no | One or more of: `--frontend`, `--backend`, `--architecture`, `--security`, `--performance`, `--style`, `--clean-code`, `--highload`, `--project-conventions`, `--frontend-conventions`, `--testing-practices`, `--core-boundaries`, `--flow-graph`, `--legacy-profiles`, `--code-ai`, `--learned`, `--code-style`, `--mobx-store`, `--verify`, `--all` |
 | `path` | string | no | File or directory path to review (e.g., `src/stores/`, `src/components/UserCard.tsx`). Activates **path mode** — reviews the files at this path directly, not a git diff. |
 | `commit_range` | string | no | Explicit commit hash or range (e.g., `abc123..HEAD`). Overrides merge-base detection. Ignored in path mode. |
 | `issue_url` | string | no | GitHub issue or task URL. If provided, Stage 1 gate checks spec compliance before dispatching reviewers. |
@@ -420,7 +420,7 @@ not ask for our reasoning and is reading between other tasks.
 
 ## Review Context Pack
 
-Before routing reviewers, build a compact `review_context` object. This is the shared source of truth for all sub-agents and must follow `skills/review-orchestrator/review-context.schema.json`.
+Before routing reviewers, build a compact `review_context` object. This is the shared source of truth for all sub-agents and must follow `skills/review/review-orchestrator/review-context.schema.json`.
 
 Required content:
 - Request: raw user request, flags, review mode, explicit paths or commit range.
@@ -534,9 +534,22 @@ Rules:
 
 A **fix round** is any review of work produced to answer earlier findings. Set
 `is_fix_round: true` on every reviewer input, and populate `prior_findings` with
-the earlier findings and the disposition the fix claimed for each — the schema
-rejects the dispatch otherwise. A reviewer that cannot see what the fix was
-answering cannot tell whether the fix is complete.
+the earlier findings and the disposition the fix claimed for each.
+
+**Nothing refuses a dispatch that omits them, and this file used to say
+otherwise.** `reviewer-input.schema.json` states the rule and no production
+TypeScript loads that schema; reviewer dispatch is an action the host agent
+takes, not a `keryx` invocation, so there is no point at which a malformed
+dispatch could be rejected. `reviewer-input` is also absent from the `CONTRACTS`
+registry (`src/gdskills/contracts.ts`), so `keryx skills contracts validate`
+cannot be pointed at it either. The sentence that stood here until flow 209 told
+you the schema would reject a dispatch without `prior_findings`; it asserted an
+enforcement that has never existed, which is the same class of claim this whole
+package was written to delete.
+
+So this is a requirement on you, unenforced, and the only evidence it was met is
+the `prior_findings` array the reviewer actually receives. A reviewer that cannot
+see what the fix was answering cannot tell whether the fix is complete.
 
 Two scope rules apply, and they exist because breaking them is what produced
 seven rounds on PR #215 and four on PR #216:
@@ -817,9 +830,9 @@ Legacy/profile reviewers are specialized review profiles that predate the review
 
 | Trigger | Reviewers appended |
 |---|---|
-| `--legacy-profiles` | `code-ai-review` + `code-b091-review` + `code-style-review` + `code-mobx-store-review` when MobX/store files are present |
+| `--legacy-profiles` | `code-ai-review` + `code-learned-review` + `code-style-review` + `code-mobx-store-review` when MobX/store files are present |
 | `--code-ai` | `code-ai-review` |
-| `--b091` | `code-b091-review` |
+| `--learned` | `code-learned-review` |
 | `--code-style` | `code-style-review` |
 | `--mobx-store` | `code-mobx-store-review` |
 | `*.store.ts`, `makeObservable`, `observable`, `computed`, `action.bound` | suggest `code-mobx-store-review` as optional profile reviewer |
@@ -839,13 +852,13 @@ Review Plan Preview must include an `Optional legacy/profile reviewers` group an
 ```text
 Optional legacy/profile reviewers:
   - code-ai-review: available via --code-ai or --legacy-profiles
-  - code-b091-review: available via --b091 or --legacy-profiles
+  - code-learned-review: available via --learned or --legacy-profiles
   - code-style-review: available via --code-style or --legacy-profiles
   - code-mobx-store-review: auto-suggest when *.store.ts or MobX patterns are present; available via --mobx-store or --legacy-profiles
 
 Skipped reviewers:
   - code-ai-review: profile reviewer, not selected unless --code-ai/--legacy-profiles
-  - code-b091-review: profile reviewer, not selected unless --b091/--legacy-profiles
+  - code-learned-review: profile reviewer, not selected unless --learned/--legacy-profiles
   - code-style-review: legacy style profile, not selected unless --code-style/--legacy-profiles
   - code-mobx-store-review: not selected unless --mobx-store/--legacy-profiles or MobX store files are detected
 ```
@@ -989,7 +1002,7 @@ Runtime rules:
 
 Do not use vague fallback messages such as "running through available agent types" without naming which reviewers used fallback and why.
 
-Pass each sub-reviewer a payload matching `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-input.schema.json`:
+Pass each sub-reviewer a payload matching `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-input.schema.json`:
 
 ```yaml
 review_context: <bounded context pack>
@@ -1012,7 +1025,7 @@ target_path: <resolved path or file list>
 file_contents: <bounded file contents relevant to this reviewer>
 ```
 
-Each reviewer must return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object matching `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, followed by a concise markdown summary. The orchestrator must reject or normalize free-form reports before consolidation.
+Each reviewer must return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object matching `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, followed by a concise markdown summary. The orchestrator must reject or normalize free-form reports before consolidation.
 
 **Important for path mode:** instruct each reviewer to check the **entire file**, not just changes. The scope report should say "Path: `<TARGET_PATH>`" instead of a branch/merge-base.
 
@@ -1034,7 +1047,7 @@ Each reviewer must return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object matching `skills/review-orche
 | Test / e2e conventions | NO | `review-testing-practices` |
 | Shared core boundary rules | NO | `review-core-boundaries` |
 | Shared flow/graph abstraction contracts | NO | `review-flow-graph` |
-| Legacy/profile review profiles | NO | `code-ai-review`, `code-b091-review`, `code-style-review`, `code-mobx-store-review` |
+| Legacy/profile review profiles | NO | `code-ai-review`, `code-learned-review`, `code-style-review`, `code-mobx-store-review` |
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-performance/SKILL.md

@@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ If the file does not exist or is not provided, proceed normally — context is o
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-pr-feedback/SKILL.md

@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ review-pr-feedback Progress:
 - [ ] Step 4: Group comments by author
 - [ ] Step 5: Classify comment types (blocker intent / suggestion / question / nitpick)
 - [ ] Step 6: Explain each comment + suggest concrete fix with code example
-- [ ] Step 7: Detect senior/boss reviewer comments — offer pattern extraction (with user consent)
+- [ ] Step 7: Comments from configured learning authors — offer a learning proposal (with user consent)
 - [ ] Step 8: Emit structured report with action items checklist
 ```
 
@@ -183,20 +183,39 @@ If confidence is Low, state both interpretations and ask the user which one appl
 
 ---
 
-## Step 7: Senior / Boss Reviewer Handling
-
-**Detection**: if an author is identified as a senior or boss reviewer (by username, or by
-review authority markers such as "REQUEST_CHANGES from `boss`"), trigger this flow:
-
-1. Notify the user: "This PR has comments from a senior reviewer (`<login>`)."
-2. **NEVER update rules, CLAUDE.md, or any configuration without explicit user consent.**
-3. Ask: "Should I analyze `<login>`'s comments for patterns and suggest updates to review rules?"
-4. If the user agrees:
-   - Identify recurring patterns in that reviewer's feedback (not one-off edge cases)
-   - Propose specific additions to `.metaproject/rules/core/code-review-boss-profile.mdc` or the relevant rule file
-   - Present the proposed changes to the user for approval before writing anything
-   - After approval, update the rule file and note it in the output
-5. Extract generalizable patterns only — not personal phrasing or one-off opinions
+## Step 7: Feed the comments back into the project's learned skill
+
+**Detection is configuration, not judgement.** Which authors teach this project is
+declared in `.metaproject/review-learning.config.json`, alongside the local skill
+to teach and the repository to read. Do not decide that an author is senior,
+authoritative, or worth learning from — the file decides, and an author it does
+not name contributes nothing.
+
+If the file is absent, this project does not learn. Say nothing about it and skip
+this step; absence is a supported state, not a misconfiguration.
+
+If the file is present and names at least one author who commented on this PR:
+
+1. Notify the user: "This PR has comments from `<login>`, a configured learning
+   source for `<module>/<skill>`."
+2. **NEVER apply a proposal without explicit user consent.**
+3. Ask: "Should I turn those comments into a learning proposal for
+   `<module>/<skill>`?"
+4. If the user agrees, run the two commands. The first writes a proposal and
+   changes nothing; the second is the only writer:
+   ```bash
+   keryx review learn --pr <n>
+   keryx skills learn apply .metaproject/data/gdskills/proposals/<id>.json
+   ```
+5. Present the proposal's lessons before applying. `learn` reads the record
+   `keryx review comments collect` already wrote and never re-fetches, so the
+   proposal shows exactly what would be written.
+
+**The target is the project skill, never a rule file.** `.metaproject/rules/core/`
+holds shipped templates that `keryx update` overwrites with force, and
+`applyLearningProposal` refuses any target outside
+`.metaproject/project-skills/` — a lesson written anywhere else is lost on the
+next update, or refused outright.
 
 ---
 
@@ -318,7 +337,7 @@ If provided and the file exists, read it before fetching PR comments. If absent,
 
 | Rationalization | Why it is wrong |
 |----------------|-----------------|
-| "I'll update the rule file based on the boss's comments without asking" | NEVER auto-update rules; always ask first — rules affect all future reviews |
+| "I'll write these comments into a rule file without asking" | NEVER apply a learning proposal unsupervised, and never target a rule file — `keryx skills learn apply` refuses anything outside `.metaproject/project-skills/` |
 | "The reviewer's question is just curiosity, not a real concern" | Questions often hide concerns; classify carefully |
 | "I'll skip the 'praise' comments — they're not actionable" | Positive patterns help developers understand what to repeat |
 | "Confidence High for an ambiguous comment" | Low confidence is honest; false confidence leads to wrong fixes |
@@ -327,7 +346,7 @@ If provided and the file exists, read it before fetching PR comments. If absent,
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-security-code/SKILL.md

@@ -373,7 +373,7 @@ If the file does not exist or is not provided, proceed normally — context is o
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-style/SKILL.md

@@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ boundary is the trigger-and-outcome test.
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-testing-practices/SKILL.md

@@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ boundary is the trigger-and-outcome test.
 
 ## Orchestrated Review Contract
 
-When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
+When dispatched by `review-orchestrator`, follow the provided `reviewer-input.schema.json` payload. Return a `REVIEW_RESULT` object compatible with `skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-finding.schema.json`, then a concise markdown summary. Keep findings evidence-based, include concrete `suggested_fix` for every blocker/major, and return `NEEDS_CONTEXT` instead of guessing when required context is missing.
 
 ---
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-verifier/SKILL.md

@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ STATUS: DONE | NEEDS_CONTEXT | BLOCKED
 There is no `DONE_WITH_CONCERNS`: a verifier has no concerns of its own.
 
 Return one object conforming to
-`skills/review-orchestrator/verification-claim.schema.json`:
+`skills/review/review-orchestrator/verification-claim.schema.json`:
 
 ````text
 ```json keryx:verifications

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/shared/git-merge-base.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 ## Purpose
 Reusable bash script for determining the review scope (merge-base) for review skills.
-Used by: code-ai-review, code-boss-review, code-mobx-store-review, code-style-review.
+Used by: code-ai-review, code-learned-review, code-mobx-store-review, code-style-review.
 
 ## Script
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/rules/core/code-review-b091-profile.mdc

@@ -1,48 +0,0 @@
----
-description: "b091-style review profile: direct, strict, architecture-first feedback with concrete fixes."
-alwaysApply: false
----
-
-# b091 Review Profile
-
-## Purpose
-Replicate the b091 review style for requested reviews.
-
-## When To Apply
-Apply when user explicitly asks for review in b091 style.
-
-## Style Profile
-- Direct and concise.
-- Architecture-first.
-- Strongly against duct-tape fixes.
-- Focus on testability and single source of truth.
-
-## What To Flag
-- Business logic in UI instead of store/service.
-- **SOLID & Layering Violations**: Domain stores instantiating or importing UI component stores (e.g. `StepStore` directly owning `@components/...` stores). Domain state must remain decoupled from specific UI representations.
-- PRs containing overloaded, AI-generated boilerplate descriptions ("white noise"). Encourage conciseness.
-- Re-introducing known bad patterns or regressions (e.g., adding UI-specific schema fields to core API DTOs).
-- Duplicate rule checks in multiple places.
-- Unsafe casts (`any`, disguised casts).
-- Mocks inheriting production classes.
-- Loading/no-data semantics confusion.
-- Magic numbers without rationale.
-- **Status/result mapping semantics**: Mapping "none" or absence-of-result to a semantic outcome (e.g. canceled, failed) without domain justification. Verify that source enum values (e.g. none, killed, cancelled) have distinct meanings and that the mapping preserves them; flag mappings that equate semantically different states (e.g. `none === canceled`, `killed === canceled` without explicit product rationale).
-- **Non-null assertions (`!`) in tests** — `value!` papers over real initialization issues (test fixtures that didn't actually run, async state that never arrived). Use type guards, typed fixtures/helper returns, or assertion-based setup (`expect(setter).toHaveBeenCalled()`) instead. Applies to `*.test.ts`, `*.spec.ts`, and `e2e/tests/**`. Codebase removed this pattern project-wide previously; flag re-introductions immediately.
-- **Store method accessibility** — See `core/mobx-store-template.mdc` for definitive rules on public vs private store methods. Key violations to flag:
-  - Public `onChangeX` / `handleX` methods (must be private)
-  - Public `action.bound` that should be private callbacks
-
-## Response Format
-1. Verdict in one line — use 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.
-3. Concrete replacement/fix path.
-
-## Guardrails
-- No personal attacks.
-- No empty nitpicks.
-- Keep recommendations lint-safe and scoped.

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/planning/brainstorm/SKILL.claude.md

@@ -1,46 +0,0 @@
----
-description: Structured brainstorming — architecture decisions, problem solving, open exploration
-allowed-tools: Read(*), Glob(*), Bash(git log:*), Bash(git branch:*)
----
-
-## Context
-
-- Project: !`basename $(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null) 2>/dev/null || basename $PWD`
-- Current branch: !`git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null || echo "n/a"`
-- Recent work: !`git log --oneline -5 2>/dev/null || echo "n/a"`
-
-## Your task
-
-Topic to brainstorm: $ARGUMENTS
-
-Run a structured brainstorm session. Auto-detect mode from topic:
-
-### Mode A — Feature / Architecture
-*when topic is about building or designing something*
-
-1. **Restate the problem** in one sentence
-2. **Constraints** — perf, compat, team, time, existing stack
-3. **5-7 distinct approaches** — each with: catchy name, core idea (1-2 sentences), key trade-off
-4. **Wild card** — one unconventional idea that breaks assumptions
-5. **Recommendation** — top 2 with reasoning
-6. **Open questions** — what must be decided before committing
-
-### Mode B — Problem Solving
-*when topic is a bug, failure, or "why is X happening"*
-
-1. **Reproduce** — what fails, when, under what conditions
-2. **5 hypotheses** — ordered by likelihood
-3. **Fastest disproof** — specific command or check for each
-4. **Most likely culprit** — and why
-5. **Fix options** — quick fix vs proper fix
-
-### Mode C — Open-ended / Creative
-*when topic is vague or exploratory*
-
-1. **Expand the space** — 3 different framings of the question
-2. **Diverge** — 10 raw ideas, no filtering
-3. **Converge** — cluster into 3 strongest themes
-4. **Stress test** — what could go wrong with each?
-5. **Next step** — one concrete action
-
-Be direct and opinionated. Never end without a concrete recommendation.