@pavp/storywright 1.17.0 → 1.18.0
This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
package/package.json
CHANGED
|
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ name: storywright-base
|
|
|
3
3
|
description: Shared base behavior for all storywright top-level skills. Hard rules, canonical output, terminal-only Q, context schema, mechanical deps, V audit, language detect.
|
|
4
4
|
trigger: "internal use by story-* skills"
|
|
5
5
|
intent: Component skill that holds the v2.2 baseline. Top-level skills (story-generate, story-refine, story-split, story-from-figma) compose this and add only their source-specific behavior on top.
|
|
6
|
-
version: 2.
|
|
6
|
+
version: 2.6.0
|
|
7
7
|
inputs:
|
|
8
8
|
- none
|
|
9
9
|
outputs:
|
|
@@ -104,6 +104,8 @@ If you are reading this through a top-level skill, treat every rule below as non
|
|
|
104
104
|
|
|
105
105
|
If you find yourself writing a banned section into a PM file, stop. Move its content to `story.dev.md` instead (use `## Technical Considerations` as the target heading for Accessibility, Performance, and Security content). Do not silently drop it.
|
|
106
106
|
|
|
107
|
+
14. **Project-less by design — never ground in the open repo.** storywright generates a forward contract for work that often does not exist yet; it is NOT a code-analysis tool. Do NOT read, scan, or infer from the files of any repository open in the session, even if they appear relevant. All technical detail in `story.dev.md` (endpoints, components, file paths, library choices) is **inferred from domain knowledge**, not read from a codebase. Mark any non-obvious technical inference with `⚠️ Assumed:` so the developer treats it as a starting point, not verified fact. Grounding silently against an open repo makes output non-deterministic (the same prompt yields different stories depending on what files happen to be open) and gives false confidence that inferred specifics were verified — neither is acceptable. If the user explicitly wants the story grounded in real code, that is out of scope: tell them to confirm the specifics against the codebase themselves.
|
|
108
|
+
|
|
107
109
|
### 4a. Language auto-detect — expanded signals (rule E)
|
|
108
110
|
|
|
109
111
|
Run cheap detection before asking. Multi-signal weighted decision:
|