@open-agent-toolkit/cli 0.0.10

package/assets/skills/deep-research/references/schema-architectural.md

@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
+<!-- schema-architectural.md — Extended schema for architectural decision research.
+     Used by: /deep-research (when schema=architectural is selected).
+     Inherits: schema-base.md (Executive Summary, Methodology, Sources & References).
+     Extends: Findings section with architectural decision subsections below. -->
+
+# Architectural Decision Research Schema
+
+Inherits the base artifact template from `schema-base.md`. The Findings section is
+extended with the following subsections.
+
+---
+
+## Findings
+
+### Decision Framework
+
+{Criteria for evaluating architectural options. Define:
+
+- **Decision drivers** — the forces shaping this decision (performance requirements,
+  team expertise, timeline, budget, compliance, etc.)
+- **Constraints** — non-negotiable boundaries (must run on X, must support Y)
+- **Quality attributes** — the -ilities that matter most (scalability, maintainability,
+  testability, observability, etc.)
+- **Evaluation method** — how options were assessed against these criteria}
+
+### Options Analyzed
+
+{Each option presented as a subsection with consistent structure:
+
+#### Option N: {Name}
+
+- **Description** — what this approach entails at a high level
+- **Tradeoffs** — pros and cons specific to this option
+- **Constraints it satisfies** — which decision drivers and constraints it addresses
+- **Constraints it violates** — where it falls short or requires compromise
+- **Fit assessment** — how well it matches the stated requirements
+- **Precedent** — where this approach has been used successfully (or unsuccessfully)
+
+Include 2-5 options. If fewer than 2, the decision may not warrant this schema. If
+more than 5, consolidate similar approaches.}
+
+### Tradeoff Matrix
+
+{Key dimensions where options differ, presented as a comparison table:
+
+| Dimension             | Option 1     | Option 2     | Option 3     |
+| --------------------- | ------------ | ------------ | ------------ |
+| {Quality attribute 1} | {Assessment} | {Assessment} | {Assessment} |
+| {Quality attribute 2} | {Assessment} | {Assessment} | {Assessment} |
+| {Constraint fit}      | {Assessment} | {Assessment} | {Assessment} |
+| ...                   | ...          | ...          | ...          |
+
+Focus on dimensions where options meaningfully differ. Omit dimensions where all
+options perform equivalently.}
+
+### Risk Considerations
+
+{What could go wrong with each approach:
+
+- **Technical risks** — failure modes, scaling limits, integration hazards
+- **Organizational risks** — team capability gaps, hiring implications, vendor lock-in
+- **Timeline risks** — implementation duration, migration complexity, ramp-up time
+- **Reversibility** — how costly it would be to change direction after adoption
+
+Rate risk severity (low/medium/high) and likelihood where possible.}
+
+### Recommendation
+
+{Preferred approach with conditions:
+
+- **Recommended option**: {Name}
+- **Rationale** — why this option best satisfies the decision framework
+- **Conditions** — assumptions that must hold for this recommendation to remain valid
+- **Fallback** — which option to pursue if conditions change or key assumptions fail
+- **Next steps** — concrete actions to begin implementing the recommendation}

package/assets/skills/deep-research/references/schema-base.md

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+<!-- schema-base.md — Base artifact template shared by /deep-research and /analyze.
+     All extended schemas (technical, comparative, conceptual, architectural, analysis)
+     inherit this skeleton and override or extend the Findings section. -->
+
+# Artifact Frontmatter Contract
+
+All artifact-producing skills in this suite emit YAML frontmatter at the top of the
+generated artifact. Extended schemas inherit this contract automatically.
+
+## Required Keys
+
+```yaml
+---
+skill: deep-research | compare | analyze # which skill produced the artifact
+schema: technical | comparative | conceptual | architectural | analysis # schema used
+topic: 'human-readable topic' # research/analysis topic
+model: opus-4-6 # model identifier slug
+generated_at: 2026-03-14 # ISO date of generation
+---
+```
+
+## Optional Keys
+
+```yaml
+context: docs/security-policy.md # --context path provided by user
+depth: standard # research depth (for /deep-research)
+focus: security # focus angle (for /deep-research)
+input_type: code # classified input type (for /analyze)
+```
+
+---
+
+# Base Artifact Template
+
+<!-- Skills should emit frontmatter (see contract above), then this structure. -->
+
+# {Title}
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+{2-3 paragraph overview of findings and key takeaways. Lead with the most important
+conclusion. Include scope: what was researched, why it matters, and the bottom-line
+recommendation or insight.}
+
+## Methodology
+
+{How this research or analysis was conducted. Cover:
+
+- Sources consulted (documentation, repositories, benchmarks, articles)
+- Angles or dimensions explored
+- Tools or techniques used (code analysis, benchmarking, manual review)
+- Any constraints or limitations that affected the investigation}
+
+## Findings
+
+{Structure varies by extended schema. Each extended schema either adds subsections
+to this section or replaces it entirely. See the individual schema files for details.
+
+When no extended schema applies, use free-form subsections organized by theme.}
+
+## Sources & References
+
+{Cited sources with sufficient detail for the reader to locate them:
+
+- URLs for web resources
+- File paths for local code references
+- Package names with version numbers
+- Paper titles with authors and publication year
+
+Use a numbered or bulleted list. Prefer inline links where natural.}

package/assets/skills/deep-research/references/schema-comparative.md

@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+<!-- schema-comparative.md — Extended schema for comparative analysis.
+     Used by: /deep-research (when schema=comparative is selected),
+              /compare (artifact mode).
+     Inherits: schema-base.md (Executive Summary, Methodology, Sources & References).
+     Replaces: Findings section with structured comparison below. -->
+
+# Comparative Analysis Schema
+
+Inherits the base artifact template from `schema-base.md`. The Findings section is
+replaced with the structured comparison sections below.
+
+---
+
+## Comparison Overview
+
+{What is being compared and why. Include:
+
+- The options under evaluation (name each clearly)
+- The context driving the comparison (project constraints, goals, timeline)
+- The evaluation approach (how dimensions were selected, any weighting rationale)
+- Scope boundaries — what is explicitly excluded from the comparison}
+
+## Dimensions
+
+{Table of evaluation criteria with per-option assessment. Use a Markdown table with
+one row per dimension and one column per option.
+
+Example structure:
+
+| Dimension     | Option A     | Option B     | Option C     |
+| ------------- | ------------ | ------------ | ------------ |
+| {Criterion 1} | {Assessment} | {Assessment} | {Assessment} |
+| {Criterion 2} | {Assessment} | {Assessment} | {Assessment} |
+| ...           | ...          | ...          | ...          |
+
+Choose dimensions relevant to the decision context. Common dimensions include:
+
+- Performance characteristics
+- Developer experience / API ergonomics
+- Ecosystem and community health
+- Maintenance and long-term viability
+- Cost (licensing, infrastructure, operational)
+- Migration effort from current state}
+
+## Scoring
+
+{Qualitative assessment per dimension. Provide a brief narrative for each dimension
+explaining the relative strengths and weaknesses of each option.
+
+Avoid numeric scores by default — qualitative labels (strong, adequate, weak, N/A)
+communicate better when dimensions are not commensurable. If the user requests
+numeric scoring, use a consistent 1-5 scale with clear rubric.}
+
+## Recommendation
+
+{Clear winner declaration with rationale:
+
+- **Recommended option**: {Name}
+- **Primary reasons**: {2-3 key differentiators that drove the recommendation}
+- **Fit for context**: {Why this option is the best match for the stated constraints}
+
+If there is no clear winner, state that explicitly and describe the conditions under
+which each option would be preferred.}
+
+## Caveats
+
+{When the recommendation might not apply:
+
+- Alternative contexts where a different option would win
+- Assumptions the recommendation depends on
+- Information gaps that could change the conclusion
+- Time sensitivity — when this comparison should be revisited}

package/assets/skills/deep-research/references/schema-conceptual.md

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+<!-- schema-conceptual.md — Extended schema for conceptual/thematic research.
+     Used by: /deep-research (when schema=conceptual is selected).
+     Inherits: schema-base.md (Executive Summary, Methodology, Sources & References).
+     Extends: Findings section with conceptual subsections below. -->
+
+# Conceptual Research Schema
+
+Inherits the base artifact template from `schema-base.md`. The Findings section is
+extended with the following subsections.
+
+---
+
+## Findings
+
+### Key Themes
+
+{Major conceptual threads discovered during research. For each theme:
+
+- **Theme name** — a concise label
+- **Description** — what the theme encompasses
+- **Supporting evidence** — sources, examples, or data points that substantiate it
+- **Relevance** — why this theme matters to the research topic
+
+Organize themes from most to least significant. Aim for 3-7 themes; fewer suggests
+the topic needs broader exploration, more suggests themes should be consolidated.}
+
+### Mental Models
+
+{Frameworks for thinking about the topic. These are reusable abstractions the reader
+can carry forward:
+
+- **Model name** — a memorable label
+- **How it works** — brief description of the model's mechanics
+- **When to apply** — situations where this model is most useful
+- **Limitations** — where the model breaks down or oversimplifies
+
+Include diagrams (ASCII or Mermaid) when they clarify relationships.}
+
+### Notable References
+
+{Seminal or high-value resources worth reading beyond this artifact:
+
+- Papers, books, or academic publications
+- Conference talks or recorded presentations
+- Blog posts, essays, or long-form articles
+- Open-source projects that embody the concepts
+
+For each, include a one-sentence annotation explaining why it is worth the reader's
+time.}
+
+### Open Questions
+
+{Unresolved questions that emerged during research. These are not failures — they
+signal the frontier of understanding:
+
+- Questions the research could not conclusively answer
+- Debates in the community where consensus has not formed
+- Areas where more data or experimentation would be needed
+- Contradictions between sources that remain unreconciled}
+
+### Implications
+
+{What this research means for the user's context:
+
+- **Immediate takeaways** — conclusions that can inform decisions now
+- **Strategic considerations** — longer-term effects on direction or architecture
+- **Action suggestions** — concrete next steps the reader might consider
+- **Watch items** — emerging trends or developments to monitor}

package/assets/skills/deep-research/references/schema-technical.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+<!-- schema-technical.md — Extended schema for technical research.
+     Used by: /deep-research (when schema=technical is selected).
+     Inherits: schema-base.md (Executive Summary, Methodology, Sources & References).
+     Extends: Findings section with technical subsections below. -->
+
+# Technical Research Schema
+
+Inherits the base artifact template from `schema-base.md`. The Findings section is
+extended with the following subsections.
+
+---
+
+## Findings
+
+### Packages & Libraries
+
+{Evaluated packages and libraries relevant to the research topic. For each:
+
+- **Name** and **version** (or version range evaluated)
+- **Maintenance status** — last release date, commit frequency, open issue count
+- **TypeScript support** — native types, DefinitelyTyped, or none
+- **License** — SPDX identifier
+- **Ecosystem fit** — how well it integrates with the target stack}
+
+### Repository Analysis
+
+{Code quality signals and architectural observations for key repositories:
+
+- **Architecture patterns** — module structure, dependency graph, layering approach
+- **Test coverage** — testing strategy, coverage percentage if available, test quality
+- **Build & CI** — build system, CI pipeline, release process
+- **Code health** — linting, formatting, type strictness, documentation quality
+- **Community** — contributors, responsiveness to issues, governance}
+
+### Code Examples
+
+{Key usage patterns and integration snippets demonstrating how the technology works
+in practice. Include:
+
+- Minimal "hello world" or quickstart example
+- Pattern most relevant to the user's context
+- Any non-obvious configuration or setup steps
+- Error handling patterns if applicable
+
+Use fenced code blocks with language identifiers.}
+
+### Integration Notes
+
+{Practical guidance for adopting the technology:
+
+- **Compatibility** — runtime requirements, peer dependencies, browser/Node support
+- **Migration path** — steps to move from the current solution (if applicable)
+- **Setup requirements** — environment variables, config files, CLI tools
+- **Breaking changes** — known gotchas between major versions}
+
+### Technical Tradeoffs
+
+{Balanced assessment of costs and benefits:
+
+- **Performance** — runtime speed, memory footprint, startup time
+- **Bundle size** — production bundle impact (tree-shakeable?)
+- **Learning curve** — documentation quality, API surface complexity
+- **Operational cost** — monitoring, debugging, observability support
+- **Lock-in risk** — portability, standard compliance, escape hatches}