@polymorphism-tech/morph-spec 4.19.0 → 4.20.0

package/README.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
 > Spec-driven development framework for multi-stack projects. Turns feature requests into implementation-ready code through structured, AI-orchestrated phases.
 
 **Package:** `@polymorphism-tech/morph-spec`
-**Version:** 4.19.0  
+**Version:** 4.20.0  
 **Requires:** Node.js 18+, Claude Code
 
 ---
@@ -364,4 +364,4 @@ Code generated by morph-spec (contracts, templates, implementation output) belon
 
 ---
 
-*morph-spec v4.19.0 by [Polymorphism Tech](https://polymorphism.tech)*
+*morph-spec v4.20.0 by [Polymorphism Tech](https://polymorphism.tech)*

package/bin/morph-spec.js

@@ -65,6 +65,9 @@ import { projectMetricsCommand } from '../src/commands/agents/project-metrics.js
 // Context commands
 import { contextRefreshCommand } from '../src/commands/context/context-refresh.js';
 
+// Dashboard commands
+import { dashboardCommand } from '../src/commands/dashboard/dashboard.js';
+
 const __dirname = dirname(fileURLToPath(import.meta.url));
 const pkg = JSON.parse(readFileSync(join(__dirname, '..', 'package.json'), 'utf8'));
 
@@ -477,4 +480,12 @@ contextCommand
   .option('--json', 'Output scan result as JSON')
   .action((options) => contextRefreshCommand(options));
 
+// Dashboard / Inspector
+program
+  .command('dashboard')
+  .description('Open the morph-spec inspector dashboard')
+  .option('-p, --port <port>', 'Port number', '3200')
+  .option('--no-open', 'Don\'t auto-open browser')
+  .action(dashboardCommand);
+
 program.parse();

package/bin/task-manager.js

@@ -208,13 +208,20 @@ class TaskManager {
         console.log(chalk.cyan('\n  ℹ️  Dry-run — tasks NOT marked as complete'));
         return [];
       }
-      if (!validationResult.passed) {
+      // Score-based retry decision (falls back to pass/fail if scores unavailable)
+      const scoreAction = validationResult.scores?.action;
+      const shouldFail = scoreAction ? scoreAction !== 'approve' : !validationResult.passed;
+
+      if (shouldFail) {
         // Reload state to ensure we have the latest (may have been modified by validation)
         const currentState = loadState();
         const currentFeature = currentState.features[featureName];
         if (currentFeature) {
+          // Score-based escalation: 'escalate' action blocks immediately
+          const forceEscalate = scoreAction === 'escalate';
+
           for (const task of tasksToComplete) {
-            this.persistValidationHistory(currentFeature, task.id, validationResult);
+            this.persistValidationHistory(currentFeature, task.id, validationResult, forceEscalate);
           }
           saveState(currentState);
 
@@ -224,11 +231,18 @@ class TaskManager {
             return hist?.status === 'blocked';
           });
           if (blockedTasks.length > 0) {
-            console.error(chalk.red(`\n⛔ ESCALATION — Task(s) ${blockedTasks.map(t => t.id).join(', ')} have failed 3 times`));
-            console.error(chalk.red('   Human review required. Mark resolved with: morph-spec state set <feature> validationHistory.<taskId>.status passed'));
+            const scoreInfo = validationResult.scores ? ` (score: ${validationResult.scores.score}/10)` : '';
+            console.error(chalk.red(`\n⛔ ESCALATION — Task(s) ${blockedTasks.map(t => t.id).join(', ')}${scoreInfo}`));
+            if (forceEscalate) {
+              console.error(chalk.red('   Score below retry threshold — immediate escalation'));
+            } else {
+              console.error(chalk.red('   Failed 3 times — human review required'));
+            }
+            console.error(chalk.red('   Mark resolved with: morph-spec state set <feature> validationHistory.<taskId>.status passed'));
           } else {
             const attempt = currentFeature.validationHistory?.[tasksToComplete[0]?.id]?.attempt || 1;
-            console.error(chalk.red(`\n❌ Validation failed (attempt ${attempt}/3) — tasks NOT marked as complete`));
+            const scoreInfo = validationResult.scores ? ` | score: ${validationResult.scores.score}/10` : '';
+            console.error(chalk.red(`\n❌ Validation failed (attempt ${attempt}/3${scoreInfo}) — tasks NOT marked as complete`));
             console.log(chalk.gray('   Fix the issues above, then run task done again'));
             if (attempt >= 2) {
               console.log(chalk.yellow(`   ⚠️  Next failure will escalate to human review`));
@@ -436,14 +450,14 @@ class TaskManager {
         ? validatorEntries.filter(v => v.passed).length / validatorEntries.length
         : (result.passed ? 1.0 : 0.0);
 
-      return { passed: result.passed, validators, passRate };
+      return { passed: result.passed, validators, passRate, scores: result.scores || null };
     } catch (error) {
       // If validation runner fails to load, warn but don't block task completion.
       // This is fail-open by design: a broken validator shouldn't block commits.
       // Common cause: missing optional deps.
       console.log(chalk.yellow(`\n⚠️  Validation skipped (${error.message})`));
       console.log(chalk.gray(`   Run manually: morph-spec validate-feature ${featureName}`));
-      return { passed: true, validators: {}, passRate: 1.0 };
+      return { passed: true, validators: {}, passRate: 1.0, scores: null };
     }
   }
 
@@ -455,21 +469,32 @@ class TaskManager {
    * @param {string} taskId - Task ID
    * @param {{ passed: boolean, validators: Object, passRate: number }} validationResult
    */
-  persistValidationHistory(feature, taskId, validationResult) {
+  persistValidationHistory(feature, taskId, validationResult, forceEscalate = false) {
     if (!feature.validationHistory) {
       feature.validationHistory = {};
     }
     const existing = feature.validationHistory[taskId] || { attempt: 0 };
     const attempt = (existing.attempt || 0) + 1;
-    const status = attempt >= 3 ? 'blocked' : 'failed';
+    const status = forceEscalate ? 'blocked' : (attempt >= 3 ? 'blocked' : 'failed');
 
-    feature.validationHistory[taskId] = {
+    const entry = {
       attempt,
       validators: validationResult.validators || {},
       passRate: validationResult.passRate || 0,
       status,
       updatedAt: new Date().toISOString(),
     };
+
+    // Attach score data when available
+    if (validationResult.scores) {
+      entry.scores = {
+        score: validationResult.scores.score,
+        action: validationResult.scores.action,
+        breakdown: validationResult.scores.breakdown,
+      };
+    }
+
+    feature.validationHistory[taskId] = entry;
   }
 
   /**

package/claude-plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "morph-spec",
-  "version": "4.19.0",
+  "version": "4.20.0",
   "displayName": "MORPH-SPEC Framework",
   "description": "Spec-driven development with 38 agents and 8-phase workflow for .NET/Blazor/Next.js/Azure",
   "publisher": "polymorphism-tech",

package/docs/CHEATSHEET.md

@@ -196,4 +196,4 @@ These files are never edited directly. Use CLI commands or `morph-spec update` i
 
 ---
 
-*morph-spec v4.19.0 by Polymorphism Tech*
+*morph-spec v4.20.0 by Polymorphism Tech*

package/docs/QUICKSTART.md

@@ -197,4 +197,4 @@ morph-spec doctor
 
 ---
 
-*morph-spec v4.19.0 by Polymorphism Tech*
+*morph-spec v4.20.0 by Polymorphism Tech*

package/framework/agents/architecture/architecture-expert.md

@@ -19,6 +19,18 @@ READ-ONLY scanner for architectural violations in .NET VSA projects.
 
 ---
 
+## Evaluation Posture
+
+You are an ADVERSARIAL evaluator. Your default assumption is that architectural violations exist.
+
+- **Assume violations exist** until proven otherwise — your job is to FIND them, not confirm the architecture is clean
+- **Challenge surface appearances** — code that compiles and runs may hide dependency violations or SRP breaches
+- **A clean report is suspicious** — if you found nothing, dig deeper before concluding
+- **Prioritize by severity** — wrong dependency direction and DI violations before style warnings
+- **Be specific** — every finding needs file path, line number, violation type, and concrete fix
+
+---
+
 ## Scan Categories
 
 ### Critical (Severity: Error)

package/framework/agents/architecture/packages-validator.md

@@ -19,6 +19,18 @@ READ-ONLY scanner for NuGet and npm package issues.
 
 ---
 
+## Evaluation Posture
+
+You are an ADVERSARIAL evaluator. Your default assumption is that dependency issues exist.
+
+- **Assume problems exist** until proven otherwise — your job is to FIND version conflicts and deprecated packages, not confirm everything is up to date
+- **Challenge surface appearances** — packages that install without errors may still have version conflicts, security advisories, or deprecated APIs
+- **A clean report is suspicious** — if you found nothing, dig deeper before concluding
+- **Prioritize by severity** — version conflicts and security advisories before style preferences
+- **Be specific** — every finding needs file path, package name, installed version, and concrete fix
+
+---
+
 ## Scan Categories
 
 ### NuGet (.csproj)

package/framework/agents/architecture/security-expert.md

@@ -18,6 +18,18 @@ READ-ONLY scanner for security vulnerabilities across all source files.
 
 ---
 
+## Evaluation Posture
+
+You are an ADVERSARIAL evaluator. Your default assumption is that security vulnerabilities exist.
+
+- **Assume vulnerabilities exist** until proven otherwise — your job is to FIND them, not confirm the code is safe
+- **Challenge surface appearances** — code that looks secure may hide subtle injection vectors or auth bypasses
+- **A clean report is suspicious** — if you found nothing, dig deeper before concluding
+- **Prioritize by severity** — critical vulnerabilities (injection, secrets) before style issues
+- **Be specific** — every finding needs file path, line number, vulnerability type, and concrete fix
+
+---
+
 ## Scan Categories
 
 ### Critical (Severity: Error)

package/framework/agents/frontend/design-system-validator.md

@@ -29,6 +29,18 @@ READ-ONLY scanner for design token compliance across CSS and component files.
 
 ---
 
+## Evaluation Posture
+
+You are an ADVERSARIAL evaluator. Your default assumption is that design token violations exist.
+
+- **Assume violations exist** until proven otherwise — your job is to FIND hardcoded values and naming inconsistencies, not confirm compliance
+- **Challenge surface appearances** — components that look correct visually may use hardcoded colors, spacing, or typography that bypass the design system
+- **A clean report is suspicious** — if you found nothing, dig deeper before concluding
+- **Prioritize by severity** — hardcoded colors and spacing before naming convention warnings
+- **Be specific** — every finding needs file path, line number, the hardcoded value found, and the correct design token to use
+
+---
+
 ## Scan Categories
 
 ### Colors

package/framework/agents/frontend/nextjs-component-validator.md

@@ -21,6 +21,18 @@ READ-ONLY scanner for App Router compliance in Next.js projects.
 
 ---
 
+## Evaluation Posture
+
+You are an ADVERSARIAL evaluator. Your default assumption is that App Router violations exist.
+
+- **Assume violations exist** until proven otherwise — your job is to FIND boundary errors and pattern misuse, not confirm compliance
+- **Challenge surface appearances** — components that render correctly may have wrong `'use client'` placement, missing Suspense boundaries, or server/client leaks
+- **A clean report is suspicious** — if you found nothing, dig deeper before concluding
+- **Prioritize by severity** — server/client boundary violations before performance optimizations
+- **Be specific** — every finding needs file path, line number, the violation type, and concrete fix
+
+---
+
 ## Scan Categories
 
 ### Server/Client Boundaries

package/framework/hooks/claude-code/post-tool-use/dispatch.js

@@ -83,6 +83,19 @@ async function dispatch(command, payload) {
             }).trim();
           } catch { /* no git */ }
 
+          // Include score context from latest validation if available
+          let scoreContext = '';
+          try {
+            const evalFeature = getFeature(featureName);
+            const taskScores = evalFeature?.validationHistory?.[taskId]?.scores;
+            if (taskScores) {
+              scoreContext = `\n## Previous Validation Score: ${taskScores.score}/10\n` +
+                Object.entries(taskScores.breakdown || {})
+                  .map(([cat, d]) => `  ${cat}: ${Math.round(d.score * 10) / 10}/10 (weight ${Math.round(d.weight * 100)}%)`)
+                  .join('\n') + '\n\nFocus your evaluation on categories with the lowest scores.\n';
+            }
+          } catch { /* non-blocking */ }
+
           contextParts.push(
             `🔍 EVALUATOR DISPATCH\n` +
             `════════════════════════════════════════\n` +
@@ -92,14 +105,18 @@ async function dispatch(command, payload) {
             `  model: "sonnet"\n` +
             `  prompt: (see below)\n\n` +
             `--- EVALUATOR PROMPT ---\n` +
-            `You are an independent evaluator. Validate this implementation against the sprint contract.\n\n` +
+            `You are an ADVERSARIAL evaluator. Your default assumption is that defects exist.\n` +
+            `Do NOT confirm correctness — actively search for problems.\n\n` +
             `## Contract\n${contractContent}\n\n` +
-            `## Changed Files\n${changedFiles || '(unable to determine)'}\n\n` +
+            `## Changed Files\n${changedFiles || '(unable to determine)'}\n` +
+            `${scoreContext}\n` +
             `## Instructions\n` +
             `1. Read each changed file\n` +
             `2. Run the verification commands from the contract\n` +
             `3. Evaluate each definitionOfDone item: PASS or FAIL with evidence\n` +
-            `4. Return a structured result with overall PASS/FAIL\n` +
+            `4. For each category, score 0-10 and explain deficiencies found\n` +
+            `5. A clean report is suspicious — dig deeper before declaring PASS\n` +
+            `6. Return a structured result with overall PASS/FAIL and score breakdown\n` +
             `--- END EVALUATOR PROMPT ---`
           );
         }

package/framework/hooks/claude-code/post-tool-use/validator-feedback.js

@@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ try {
 function buildRemediationContext(featureName, taskId, taskHistory) {
   const attempt = taskHistory.attempt || 1;
   const validators = taskHistory.validators || {};
+  const scores = taskHistory.scores || null;
 
   // Collect all issues across all validators
   const allIssues = [];
@@ -95,28 +96,60 @@ function buildRemediationContext(featureName, taskId, taskHistory) {
   const lines = [];
 
   if (taskHistory.status === 'blocked') {
-    // Max attempts reached — escalation message
-    lines.push(`⛔ ESCALATION REQUIRED — Task ${taskId} in feature '${featureName}'`);
-    lines.push(`   Validation failed ${attempt} times (max attempts reached).`);
+    // Max attempts reached OR score-based escalation
+    const scoreInfo = scores ? ` (score: ${scores.score}/10)` : '';
+    lines.push(`⛔ ESCALATION REQUIRED — Task ${taskId} in feature '${featureName}'${scoreInfo}`);
+    if (scores?.action === 'escalate') {
+      lines.push(`   Score below retry threshold — immediate escalation.`);
+    } else {
+      lines.push(`   Validation failed ${attempt} times (max attempts reached).`);
+    }
     lines.push(`   Human review required before proceeding.`);
+    if (scores) {
+      lines.push(``);
+      lines.push(`   Score breakdown:`);
+      appendScoreBreakdown(lines, scores);
+    }
     lines.push(`   Last failures:`);
     for (const issue of allIssues.slice(0, 5)) {
       lines.push(`     • [${issue.validator}] ${issue.message} ${issue.file ? `(${issue.file}${issue.line ? ':' + issue.line : ''})` : ''}`);
     }
   } else {
     // Active remediation — attempt N of 3
-    lines.push(`🔄 REMEDIATION REQUIRED — Task ${taskId} (attempt ${attempt}/3)`);
+    const scoreInfo = scores ? ` | score: ${scores.score}/10` : '';
+    lines.push(`🔄 REMEDIATION REQUIRED — Task ${taskId} (attempt ${attempt}/3${scoreInfo})`);
     lines.push(`   Validation failed. Fix the following issues and re-run:`);
     lines.push(`   morph-spec task done ${featureName} ${taskId}`);
     lines.push(``);
 
-    for (const issue of allIssues) {
-      const refKey = getRefKey(issue.rule || issue.validator);
-      const ref = refKey ? ` — Ref: ${STANDARD_REFS[refKey] || refKey}` : '';
-      const location = issue.file
-        ? ` (${issue.file}${issue.line ? ':' + issue.line : ''})`
-        : '';
-      lines.push(`  • [${issue.validator}] ${issue.message}${location}${ref}`);
+    // Score-based prioritized feedback (when available)
+    if (scores?.breakdown) {
+      lines.push(`   Priority fixes (by impact):`);
+      const sorted = Object.entries(scores.breakdown)
+        .filter(([, cat]) => (cat.issues?.length || 0) > 0)
+        .sort((a, b) => ((10 - b[1].score) * b[1].weight) - ((10 - a[1].score) * a[1].weight));
+
+      for (const [category, cat] of sorted) {
+        const topIssue = cat.issues[0];
+        const location = topIssue?.file ? ` (${topIssue.file}${topIssue.line ? ':' + topIssue.line : ''})` : '';
+        const msg = topIssue?.message || 'Issues detected';
+        lines.push(`   ${Math.round(cat.score * 10) / 10}/10 [${category}] ${msg}${location}`);
+        if (cat.issues.length > 1) {
+          lines.push(`         ... and ${cat.issues.length - 1} more issue(s)`);
+        }
+      }
+      lines.push(``);
+      appendScoreBreakdown(lines, scores);
+    } else {
+      // Fallback: original issue-by-issue format
+      for (const issue of allIssues) {
+        const refKey = getRefKey(issue.rule || issue.validator);
+        const ref = refKey ? ` — Ref: ${STANDARD_REFS[refKey] || refKey}` : '';
+        const location = issue.file
+          ? ` (${issue.file}${issue.line ? ':' + issue.line : ''})`
+          : '';
+        lines.push(`  • [${issue.validator}] ${issue.message}${location}${ref}`);
+      }
     }
 
     if (attempt >= 2) {
@@ -128,6 +161,22 @@ function buildRemediationContext(featureName, taskId, taskHistory) {
   injectContext(lines.join('\n'));
 }
 
+/**
+ * Append score breakdown lines to output.
+ * @param {string[]} lines - Output array
+ * @param {Object} scores - { score, action, breakdown }
+ */
+function appendScoreBreakdown(lines, scores) {
+  if (!scores?.breakdown) return;
+  const approveThreshold = scores.approveThreshold ?? 8.0;
+  for (const [category, data] of Object.entries(scores.breakdown)) {
+    if (category === '_unmapped') continue; // skip internal unmapped category
+    const pct = Math.round(data.weight * 100);
+    const indicator = data.score >= approveThreshold ? '\u2713' : data.score >= 6 ? '\u2193' : '\u2193\u2193';
+    lines.push(`     ${category}: ${Math.round(data.score * 10) / 10}/10 (weight ${pct}%) ${indicator}`);
+  }
+}
+
 /**
  * Map a rule/validator name to a STANDARD_REFS key.
  * @param {string} ruleOrValidator

package/framework/rubrics/backend.json

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+{
+  "id": "backend",
+  "version": "1.0.0",
+  "description": "Backend-focused rubric. Higher weight on architecture, security, and package health.",
+  "categories": {
+    "functionality": {
+      "weight": 0.30,
+      "validators": ["contract-compliance"],
+      "description": "Core feature correctness and contract compliance"
+    },
+    "code_quality": {
+      "weight": 0.30,
+      "validators": ["architecture"],
+      "description": "Architecture patterns, dependency direction, and code structure"
+    },
+    "design_ui": {
+      "weight": 0.05,
+      "validators": ["design-system", "css", "contrast", "nextjs-component"],
+      "description": "Design system compliance (minimal weight for backend projects)"
+    },
+    "security": {
+      "weight": 0.15,
+      "validators": [],
+      "description": "Security posture (agent-evaluated, no automated validator)"
+    },
+    "packages": {
+      "weight": 0.20,
+      "validators": ["packages"],
+      "description": "Dependency health, version compatibility, and deprecated packages"
+    }
+  },
+  "thresholds": {
+    "approve": 8.0,
+    "retry": 6.0
+  }
+}

package/framework/rubrics/default.json

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+{
+  "id": "default",
+  "version": "1.0.0",
+  "description": "Default rubric for general-purpose projects. Balanced weights across all categories.",
+  "categories": {
+    "functionality": {
+      "weight": 0.30,
+      "validators": ["contract-compliance"],
+      "description": "Core feature correctness and contract compliance"
+    },
+    "code_quality": {
+      "weight": 0.25,
+      "validators": ["architecture"],
+      "description": "Architecture patterns and code structure"
+    },
+    "design_ui": {
+      "weight": 0.15,
+      "validators": ["design-system", "css", "contrast", "nextjs-component"],
+      "description": "Design system compliance, CSS quality, and UI correctness"
+    },
+    "security": {
+      "weight": 0.15,
+      "validators": [],
+      "description": "Security posture (agent-evaluated, no automated validator)"
+    },
+    "packages": {
+      "weight": 0.15,
+      "validators": ["packages"],
+      "description": "Dependency health and compatibility"
+    }
+  },
+  "thresholds": {
+    "approve": 8.0,
+    "retry": 6.0
+  }
+}

package/framework/rubrics/frontend.json

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+{
+  "id": "frontend",
+  "version": "1.0.0",
+  "description": "Frontend-focused rubric. Higher weight on design system compliance and UI quality.",
+  "categories": {
+    "functionality": {
+      "weight": 0.25,
+      "validators": ["contract-compliance"],
+      "description": "Core feature correctness and contract compliance"
+    },
+    "code_quality": {
+      "weight": 0.15,
+      "validators": ["architecture"],
+      "description": "Architecture patterns and code structure"
+    },
+    "design_ui": {
+      "weight": 0.35,
+      "validators": ["design-system", "css", "contrast", "nextjs-component"],
+      "description": "Design system compliance, CSS quality, contrast ratios, and component correctness"
+    },
+    "security": {
+      "weight": 0.10,
+      "validators": [],
+      "description": "Security posture (agent-evaluated, no automated validator)"
+    },
+    "packages": {
+      "weight": 0.15,
+      "validators": ["packages"],
+      "description": "Dependency health and compatibility"
+    }
+  },
+  "thresholds": {
+    "approve": 8.0,
+    "retry": 6.0
+  }
+}

package/framework/skills/level-0-meta/morph-frontend-review/SKILL.md

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep, AskUserQuestion,
   mcp__playwright__browser_navigate, mcp__playwright__browser_resize,
   mcp__playwright__browser_take_screenshot, mcp__playwright__browser_snapshot,
   mcp__playwright__browser_evaluate, mcp__playwright__browser_console_messages
-cliVersion: "4.19.0"
+cliVersion: "4.20.0"
 stacks:
   - nextjs
 ---

package/framework/skills/level-1-workflows/morph-phase-codebase-analysis/SKILL.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ name: morph-phase-codebase-analysis
 description: MORPH-SPEC Design sub-phase that analyzes existing codebase and database schema, producing schema-analysis.md with real column names, types, relationships, and field mismatches. Use at the start of Design phase before generating contracts.cs to prevent incorrect field names or types.
 user-invocable: false
 allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep, AskUserQuestion
-cliVersion: "4.19.0"
+cliVersion: "4.20.0"
 ---
 
 # MORPH Codebase Analysis - Design Sub-phase

package/framework/skills/level-1-workflows/morph-phase-design/SKILL.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ description: MORPH-SPEC Phase 2 (Design). Schema-first interactive design: reads
 argument-hint: "[feature-name]"
 user-invocable: false
 allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep, AskUserQuestion, Agent
-cliVersion: "4.19.0"
+cliVersion: "4.20.0"
 ---
 
 # MORPH Design — Phase 2

package/framework/skills/level-1-workflows/morph-phase-implement/SKILL.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ argument-hint: "[feature-name]"
 context: fork
 agent: general-purpose
 user-invocable: false
-cliVersion: "4.19.0"
+cliVersion: "4.20.0"
 allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep, AskUserQuestion, Agent
 ---
 

package/framework/skills/level-1-workflows/morph-phase-plan/SKILL.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ description: MORPH-SPEC Phase 3 (Plan). Generates a detailed implementation plan
 argument-hint: "[feature-name]"
 user-invocable: false
 allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep, AskUserQuestion
-cliVersion: "4.19.0"
+cliVersion: "4.20.0"
 ---
 
 # MORPH Plan — Phase 3

package/framework/skills/level-1-workflows/morph-phase-tasks/SKILL.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ description: MORPH-SPEC Phase 4 (Tasks). Breaks approved spec into bottom-up ord
 argument-hint: "[feature-name]"
 user-invocable: false
 allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep, AskUserQuestion
-cliVersion: "4.19.0"
+cliVersion: "4.20.0"
 ---
 
 # MORPH Tasks — Phase 4

package/framework/skills/level-1-workflows/morph-phase-uiux/SKILL.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ description: MORPH-SPEC Phase 2 (UI/UX). Creates design-system.md, mockups.md, c
 argument-hint: "[feature-name]"
 user-invocable: false
 allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep, AskUserQuestion
-cliVersion: "4.19.0"
+cliVersion: "4.20.0"
 ---
 
 # MORPH UI/UX Design - Phase 2

package/framework/skills/level-1-workflows/morph-scope-escalation/SKILL.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ description: Guided workflow for mid-implementation scope escalation — analyze
 user-invocable: true
 argument-hint: "[feature-name]"
 allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep, AskUserQuestion
-cliVersion: "4.19.0"
+cliVersion: "4.20.0"
 ---
 
 # Scope Escalation Workflow

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@polymorphism-tech/morph-spec",
-  "version": "4.19.0",
+  "version": "4.20.0",
   "description": "MORPH-SPEC: AI-First development framework with validation pipeline and multi-stack support",
   "keywords": [
     "claude-code",