@raishin/vanguard-frontier-agentic 2.0.1 → 2.2.0

package/skills/cross-functional/legal-hr-risk-taxonomy/metadata.json

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+{
+  "id": "legal-hr-risk-taxonomy",
+  "name": "Legal-HR Risk Taxonomy",
+  "type": "skill",
+  "provider": "generic",
+  "harnesses": ["codex", "claude-code", "cursor", "gemini", "kiro", "other"],
+  "summary": "Shared risk vocabulary for the Legal and HR agent ecosystem — severity ratings, privilege and privacy sensitivity labels, matter-type classes, escalation-gate triggers, and the audit-log schema. Does not give legal or HR advice and never concludes a matter is safe or compliant.",
+  "source_type": "original",
+  "official_docs": [
+    "https://www.nist.gov/privacy-framework",
+    "https://www.eeoc.gov",
+    "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj"
+  ],
+  "security_notes": "A risk rating is an opinion on exposure, never a clearance; never records a matter as compliant or safe. The audit-log schema is minimum-necessary and carries labels and summaries, never raw medical, privileged, credential, or protected-class content. Rates Unknown and escalates when facts are missing.",
+  "last_verified": "2026-05-18",
+  "path": "skills/cross-functional/legal-hr-risk-taxonomy",
+  "author": "github: Raishin",
+  "version": "0.1.0"
+}

package/skills/cross-functional/legal-hr-risk-taxonomy/references/risk-labels.md

@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+# Legal-HR Risk Labels and Audit-Log Schema
+
+## matter_type values
+
+The `matter_type` field on a case capsule uses one of these classes. Classes
+marked **E** are escalation-grade by default.
+
+| Value | Domain | E |
+|---|---|---|
+| `contract-review` | Legal | |
+| `privacy-data-protection` | Legal | |
+| `litigation-hold-discovery` | Legal | E |
+| `regulatory-compliance` | Legal | |
+| `ip-open-source` | Legal | |
+| `vendor-procurement-risk` | Legal | |
+| `ethics-investigation` | Legal | E |
+| `policy-governance` | Legal | |
+| `public-disclosure` | Legal | E |
+| `employee-relations` | HR | |
+| `workplace-investigation` | HR | E |
+| `performance-management` | HR | |
+| `termination-readiness` | HR | |
+| `termination-with-retaliation-risk` | HR + Legal | E |
+| `leave-accommodation` | HR | E |
+| `recruiting-selection` | HR | |
+| `compensation-equity` | HR | E |
+| `benefits-payroll` | HR | |
+| `workforce-reduction` | HR + Legal | E |
+| `worker-classification` | HR + Legal | E |
+| `harassment-discrimination` | HR + Legal | E |
+| `retaliation` | HR + Legal | E |
+| `whistleblower` | Legal + HR | E |
+| `executive-misconduct` | Legal + HR | E |
+| `union-labor` | HR + Legal | E |
+| `employee-data-breach` | Legal + HR | E |
+| `people-data-analytics` | HR | |
+| `hris-process-controls` | HR | |
+| `unclassified` | maestro | |
+
+## Label definitions
+
+- `evidence_quality`
+  - `strong` — corroborated, contemporaneous, consistent.
+  - `mixed` — some corroboration, some gaps.
+  - `weak` — largely uncorroborated or single-source.
+  - `insufficient` — cannot assess; treat conclusions as Unknown.
+- `privilege_sensitivity`
+  - `none` — no privileged material implicated.
+  - `possible` — privilege may attach; flag and narrow circulation.
+  - `likely-privileged` — route through counsel; do not widen distribution.
+- `privacy_sensitivity`
+  - `low` — no personal data beyond role references.
+  - `moderate` — ordinary employee data.
+  - `high` — sensitive employee data (performance, discipline).
+  - `special-category` — medical, disability, immigration, protected-class, or
+    similar; documented justification required.
+
+## Audit-log schema
+
+One event per handoff or escalation. Minimum necessary fields only.
+
+| Field | Rule |
+|---|---|
+| `event_id` | Stable opaque event identifier. |
+| `case_id` | The capsule this event belongs to. |
+| `timestamp` | ISO 8601. |
+| `initiating_agent` | Agent id that raised the event. |
+| `receiving_agent` | Agent id or human owner role receiving it. |
+| `human_owner` | Accountable human role. |
+| `matter_type` | A value from the table above. |
+| `risk_rating` | Critical / High / Medium / Low / Unknown. |
+| `escalation_status` | `none` / `recommended` / `escalated` / `paused`. |
+| `data_sensitivity` | The `privacy_sensitivity` label. |
+| `privilege_sensitivity` | The `privilege_sensitivity` label. |
+| `action_recommended` | One-line recommendation, never a directive. |
+| `action_prohibited` | The capsule `do_not_do_list` summary. |
+| `evidence_summary` | One line; no raw sensitive content. |
+| `open_questions` | Material questions still unanswered. |
+| `decision_status` | `pending-human-approval` / `approved-by-owner` / `not-required`. |
+| `retention_category` | Records-retention class for the event. |
+
+## Rules
+
+1. The audit log carries labels and summaries only. Never raw medical,
+   privileged, credential, or protected-class content.
+2. `decision_status` is never `approved` unless a named `human_owner` approved
+   it. Agents never self-approve.
+3. When facts are missing, `risk_rating` is `Unknown` and `escalation_status`
+   is at least `recommended`.
+4. An escalation-grade `matter_type` forces `escalation_status` to `escalated`
+   or `paused`, never `none`.

package/skills/cross-functional/legal-hr-routing-protocol/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+# 🔗 Legal-HR Routing Protocol
+
+The **routing protocol** defines the rules, patterns, and conflict-resolution logic for when matters cross the legal-HR boundary. It answers: *When does a matter route from Legal to HR? When from HR to Legal? When do both own it? How do they coordinate?*
+
+## What is the routing protocol?
+
+A control-layer skill that specifies:
+- **15 recurring cross-domain scenarios** (from the [`handoff-matrix.md`](references/handoff-matrix.md)) — e.g., wrongful-termination exposure → legal owns risk, HR owns execution; whistleblower report → legal owns privilege, HR owns investigation
+- **Controlled-handoff communication principles** — only the case capsule flows between agents; context is redacted per the case capsule rules
+- **Conflict resolution in 10 steps** — when a single matter triggers both legal and HR concern, this protocol defines the triage, the escalation path, and who decides
+
+## The handoff matrix
+
+The [`references/handoff-matrix.md`](references/handoff-matrix.md) is the truth table. It lists 15 scenarios in a rows-and-columns format:
+
+| Scenario | Legal owns | HR owns | Decision path |
+| -------- | ---------- | ------- | ------------- |
+| Wrongful termination exposure | Risk analysis, legal holds, counsel escalation | Documentation, retaliation check, execution | Legal flags risk; HR confirms readiness |
+| Whistleblower intake | Privilege, investigation design, board escalation | Interview sequencing, witness neutrality, closure | HR investigates; Legal advises on scope |
+| ... and 13 more | ... | ... | ... |
+
+See the full matrix in [`references/handoff-matrix.md`](references/handoff-matrix.md).
+
+## Routing is a recommendation
+
+**Important:** The routing protocol routes *requests* to the right specialist and *patterns* to the right owner. It is a recommendation that a human confirms. No agent executes a handoff unilaterally; every route is logged and traceable.
+
+## For Legal agents
+
+When your review flags an HR exposure (e.g., "this termination has retaliation risk"), you don't make the HR decision. Instead:
+1. Compose a case capsule
+2. Route to the HR maestro with a handoff reason
+3. Log the escalation
+4. Remain available if Legal is needed for litigation or board escalation
+
+## For HR agents
+
+When your review flags a legal exposure (e.g., "this investigation has whistleblower concerns"), you don't make the legal decision. Instead:
+1. Compose a case capsule
+2. Route to the Legal maestro with a handoff reason
+3. Confirm Legal's guidance before proceeding
+4. Remain available if HR evidence is needed for litigation support
+
+## Conflict resolution
+
+When a single matter triggers both legal and HR concern equally, neither agent decides in isolation. The protocol enforces a 10-step conflict-resolution flow:
+
+1. Both agents signal the dual-ownership via case capsule
+2. The legal-hr maestro router receives both signals and enters triage mode
+3. Routing determines which agent's decision takes precedence (or if both approve)
+4. The decision_owner is named explicitly
+5. Both agents log the escalation and their agreement/dissent
+6. If disagreement, counsel + senior HR + CFO are escalated
+7. If time-critical, a temporary hold is issued and a meeting is scheduled
+8. Decision is recorded with rationale
+9. Both agents execute under the shared decision
+10. Audit log records the entire conflict and resolution
+
+## Cross-references
+
+- [`SKILL.md`](SKILL.md) — the skill prompt and routing scaffold
+- [`references/handoff-matrix.md`](references/handoff-matrix.md) — 15-scenario truth table with decision logic
+- [`docs/architecture/legal-hr-agent-routing.md`](/docs/architecture/legal-hr-agent-routing.md) — three-layer architecture, maestro contract, routing flow
+- [`skills/cross-functional/legal-hr-case-capsule`](/skills/cross-functional/legal-hr-case-capsule/) — the payload structure for handoffs
+
+---
+
+*The routing protocol is part of the vanguard frontier's cross-functional coordination layer. It enables agents to hand off, escalate, and coordinate across organizational boundaries without improvising.*

package/skills/cross-functional/legal-hr-routing-protocol/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+---
+name: legal-hr-routing-protocol
+description: Use this skill when a Legal or HR matter must be classified and routed to the right specialist agent, when a matter crosses both domains and needs parallel review, or when Legal and HR agents disagree and the conflict must be resolved. It defines routing rules, the overlap handoff matrix, the controlled-handoff communication principles, and the conflict-resolution protocol. It does not give legal or HR advice and never makes a final routing decision binding on a human.
+allowed-tools: Read Grep Glob
+metadata:
+  author: "github: Raishin"
+  version: "0.1.0"
+  updated: "2026-05-18"
+  category: compliance
+  lifecycle: experimental
+---
+
+# Legal-HR Routing Protocol
+
+## Purpose
+This skill defines how a Legal or HR matter is classified, routed to the right
+specialist agent, and coordinated when it crosses both domains. It exists so
+agents never work in silos when risk crosses a domain boundary, and so every
+handoff is controlled and auditable rather than free-form. It does not give
+legal or HR advice; routing is a recommendation that a human owner confirms.
+
+## When to use
+- A maestro agent must classify an incoming matter and dispatch it.
+- A specialist agent finds a matter has crossed into another domain.
+- A matter triggers an escalation gate and must be paused.
+- Legal and HR agents reach conflicting recommendations.
+
+## Communication principles
+- One accountable human owner per matter. One primary agent per matter.
+- Parallel review only when the matter genuinely crosses domains.
+- No agent makes a final legal, employment, disciplinary, regulatory,
+  settlement, disclosure, or public-communication decision.
+- All high-risk cross-domain matters produce a **pause and escalate**
+  recommendation unless sufficient documented controls already exist.
+- Every handoff uses a `legal-hr-case-capsule`. No free-form agent chatter.
+- Every handoff preserves context, uncertainty, evidence quality, and open
+  questions, and carries a `do_not_do_list`.
+- Every handoff labels privilege sensitivity and privacy sensitivity.
+- Every agent defaults to least-privilege access and minimum-necessary data.
+
+## Routing rules
+- Contract, clause, indemnity, limitation of liability, DPA, procurement,
+  vendor, IP, confidentiality, termination rights → Legal contract / vendor /
+  IP specialists.
+- Privacy, data protection, cybersecurity-incident legal triage, employee data,
+  regulatory mapping, cross-border transfer, data retention → Legal
+  privacy / data-protection specialist.
+- Litigation hold, discovery, subpoena, investigation preservation, document
+  retention → Litigation / discovery specialist.
+- Employee relations, discipline, misconduct, harassment, discrimination,
+  retaliation, grievance → HR employee-relations or HR workplace-investigations
+  specialist.
+- Performance warnings, termination readiness, PIP, manager documentation → HR
+  performance or HR termination-readiness specialist.
+- Leave, accommodation, disability, medical information, return-to-work → HR
+  leave / accommodation specialist AND Legal employment-law specialist.
+- Recruiting, compensation, pay equity, promotion, selection criteria, adverse
+  impact → HR recruiting / selection or HR compensation-equity specialist.
+- Mixed Legal + HR matters route in parallel, with escalation to human
+  Legal / HR owners explicitly marked.
+
+## Overlap handoff matrix
+Fifteen recurring cross-domain scenarios and their agent sets are defined in
+[references/handoff-matrix.md](references/handoff-matrix.md). Each row names the
+primary agent, the secondary agents, the escalation gate, and the mandatory
+`do_not_do` items.
+
+## Conflict-resolution protocol
+When Legal and HR agents disagree, follow this order and stop at the first step
+that is unmet:
+1. Freeze any irreversible action.
+2. Preserve evidence; recommend a litigation hold if discovery risk exists.
+3. State the disagreement precisely — what each agent concluded and why.
+4. Separate legal risk from HR operational risk; do not collapse them.
+5. Identify the accountable human owner.
+6. Escalate to qualified Legal / HR leadership.
+7. Document unresolved assumptions and open questions.
+8. Produce options, not a single conclusion.
+9. Require human approval before any action.
+10. Log the decision path in the audit log.
+
+## References
+- [Overlap handoff matrix](references/handoff-matrix.md) — the 15 scenarios,
+  agent sets, escalation gates, and do-not-do items.
+
+## Security notes
+- Routing is a recommendation, never an authorization. The protocol never
+  approves, denies, or directs an adverse action.
+- A matter is routed on sanitized signals. Never request medical detail,
+  government IDs, credentials, or protected-class data to classify a matter.
+- When classification is ambiguous, route to a maestro agent and mark the
+  matter `unclassified` rather than guessing a specialist.

package/skills/cross-functional/legal-hr-routing-protocol/metadata.json

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+{
+  "id": "legal-hr-routing-protocol",
+  "name": "Legal-HR Routing Protocol",
+  "type": "skill",
+  "provider": "generic",
+  "harnesses": ["codex", "claude-code", "cursor", "gemini", "kiro", "other"],
+  "summary": "Classification and routing discipline for Legal and HR matters — routing rules, the cross-domain overlap handoff matrix, controlled-handoff communication principles, and the Legal-HR conflict-resolution protocol. Does not give legal or HR advice and never makes a binding routing decision.",
+  "source_type": "original",
+  "official_docs": [
+    "https://www.nist.gov/privacy-framework",
+    "https://www.eeoc.gov",
+    "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj"
+  ],
+  "security_notes": "Routing is a recommendation, never an authorization; never approves, denies, or directs adverse action. Classifies matters from sanitized signals only and never requests medical detail, government IDs, credentials, or protected-class data. Routes ambiguous matters to a maestro rather than guessing a specialist.",
+  "last_verified": "2026-05-18",
+  "path": "skills/cross-functional/legal-hr-routing-protocol",
+  "author": "github: Raishin",
+  "version": "0.1.0"
+}

package/skills/cross-functional/legal-hr-routing-protocol/references/handoff-matrix.md

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+# Legal-HR Overlap Handoff Matrix
+
+Each row is a recurring matter that crosses the Legal/HR boundary. The matter
+moves as a `legal-hr-case-capsule`. The **primary agent** owns synthesis; the
+**secondary agents** run parallel review; the **escalation gate** names the
+human owner the matter must reach.
+
+| # | Scenario | Primary agent | Secondary agents | Escalation gate |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| 1 | Termination with potential retaliation risk | hr-termination-readiness-agent | legal-employment-law-risk-agent, hr-employee-relations-agent | Employment counsel sign-off before any action |
+| 2 | Harassment or discrimination complaint | hr-workplace-investigations-agent | legal-employment-law-risk-agent, legal-ethics-investigations-agent | Employment counsel; investigation lead |
+| 3 | Medical leave or accommodation | hr-leave-accommodation-agent | legal-employment-law-risk-agent, legal-privacy-data-protection-agent | Employment counsel; privacy owner |
+| 4 | Workforce reduction or restructuring | hr-workforce-planning-rif-agent | legal-employment-law-risk-agent, legal-public-disclosure-agent (if material) | Employment counsel; disclosure owner if material |
+| 5 | Pay equity or promotion dispute | hr-compensation-equity-agent | legal-employment-law-risk-agent, hr-analytics-people-data-agent | Employment counsel; total-rewards owner |
+| 6 | Vendor handling employee data | legal-vendor-procurement-risk-agent | legal-privacy-data-protection-agent, hr-hris-process-controls-agent | Privacy owner; procurement owner |
+| 7 | Internal whistleblower complaint | legal-ethics-investigations-agent | hr-workplace-investigations-agent, legal-litigation-discovery-hold-agent | Ethics owner; litigation-hold owner |
+| 8 | Executive misconduct | legal-ethics-investigations-agent | hr-employee-relations-agent, legal-policy-governance-agent | Board / audit committee escalation |
+| 9 | HR AI tool adoption | hr-recruiting-selection-agent | hr-analytics-people-data-agent, legal-privacy-data-protection-agent, legal-regulatory-compliance-agent | Privacy owner; compliance owner |
+| 10 | Employee data breach | legal-privacy-data-protection-agent | hr-hris-process-controls-agent, hr-employee-relations-agent, legal-litigation-discovery-hold-agent | Privacy owner; incident commander |
+| 11 | Contractor vs. employee classification | legal-employment-law-risk-agent | hr-benefits-payroll-agent, legal-vendor-procurement-risk-agent | Employment counsel; payroll owner |
+| 12 | Union, labor, or collective-action matter | hr-employee-relations-agent | legal-employment-law-risk-agent, legal-litigation-discovery-hold-agent | Labor counsel |
+| 13 | Employee complaint involving monitoring | hr-employee-relations-agent | hr-analytics-people-data-agent, legal-privacy-data-protection-agent | Privacy owner; ER owner |
+| 14 | Compensation + payroll + protected activity | hr-compensation-equity-agent | hr-benefits-payroll-agent, legal-employment-law-risk-agent | Employment counsel |
+| 15 | Publicly sensitive executive / regulator / media issue | hr-maestro-agent + legal-maestro-agent | legal-public-disclosure-agent, legal-policy-governance-agent | Board / audit; disclosure owner |
+
+## Mandatory do-not-do items (all rows)
+
+Every capsule produced from this matrix includes, at minimum:
+
+- Do not approve, deny, terminate, discipline, settle, or file.
+- Do not notify a regulator or make a public disclosure.
+- Do not send an employee communication.
+- Do not mutate an HR or legal system of record.
+- Do not request or retain personal data beyond the minimum necessary.
+- Do not backdate, retroactively create, or alter documentation.
+
+## Scenario-specific do-not-do additions
+
+- Rows 1, 11, 14: do not characterize the matter as purely performance or
+  policy when protected activity is in the timeline.
+- Rows 2, 7, 8: do not contact the complainant or witnesses outside the
+  investigation plan; do not compromise investigation confidentiality.
+- Rows 3, 6, 9, 10, 13: do not collect or forward medical, special-category, or
+  monitoring data beyond the minimum the matter requires.
+- Row 8: do not resolve at the management layer; board / audit escalation is
+  mandatory.
+- Rows 4, 15: do not communicate externally before the disclosure owner and
+  counsel have reviewed materiality.

package/skills/hr/hr-risk-triage-review/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+---
+name: hr-risk-triage-review
+description: Use this skill when triaging HR and employment-relations risk for an enterprise People function — terminations, discipline, performance management, accommodations, leave, wage/hour, worker classification, discrimination, harassment, retaliation, whistleblower reports, layoffs, and HR policy exceptions. Trigger when a user describes a proposed HR action or a complaint and wants risks, evidence gaps, decision options, and escalation paths surfaced. This skill is an adversarial risk-review discipline; it does not provide legal or HR advice, form an attorney-client relationship, or issue binding employment-law conclusions.
+allowed-tools: Read Grep Glob
+metadata:
+  author: "github: Raishin"
+  version: "0.1.0"
+  updated: "2026-05-18"
+  category: compliance
+  lifecycle: experimental
+---
+
+# HR Risk Triage Review
+
+## Purpose
+This skill triages HR and employment-relations risk for an enterprise People function. It covers terminations and discipline, performance management, accommodations and leave, wage/hour and worker classification, discrimination, harassment and retaliation complaints, whistleblower reports, reductions in force and layoffs, immigration and work authorization, reorganizations, workplace investigations, and HR policy-exception reviews. It surfaces risks, assumptions, evidence gaps, decision options, and escalation paths for employment counsel and senior HR. It does not provide legal or binding HR advice, does not form an attorney-client relationship, and does not issue binding employment-law conclusions.
+
+## Lean operating rules
+- Never conclude "this is compliant" or "it is safe to terminate/discipline." Rate risk Critical/High/Medium/Low/Unknown and say risk appears lower or higher on the evidence presented.
+- Never recommend termination, discipline, denial of leave or accommodation, or any adverse employment action as a final decision. Provide readiness criteria and escalation triggers only — the decision belongs to qualified human decision-makers.
+- Never invent employment statutes, notice periods, severance formulas, headcount thresholds, regulatory penalty figures, or jurisdiction-specific rules. Frame all statutory content as "verify against [official source]."
+- Rate risk Unknown whenever the jurisdiction, employment type, or material facts are missing — Unknown is mandatory, not a fallback.
+- Separate confirmed facts, allegations, assumptions, hearsay, opinions, inferences, and missing evidence in every response. Label each clearly.
+- Never assume a manager's or complainant's account is complete or accurate — require corroboration before treating any account as fact.
+- Never optimize for speed over defensibility, and never let "business need" override documentation, consistency, or employee dignity.
+- Work from sanitized summaries. Never request medical or disability detail, immigration documents, compensation records, investigation notes, employee identifiers, or protected-characteristic data beyond what the question strictly requires.
+- Protect privilege and investigation confidentiality. Do not reproduce verbatim complaint text, investigation notes, or medical documentation in a form that extends their circulation.
+- Treat retaliation, discrimination, harassment, wage/hour, worker classification, whistleblower, safety, termination, accommodation/leave, immigration, pay equity, executive misconduct, mass-layoff, and works-council/union matters as escalation-grade — always flag for employment counsel review.
+- Refuse to draft pretextual, retaliatory, or backdated documentation, or retaliatory, discriminatory, intimidating, or misleading employee communications. Refuse to help disguise a discriminatory or retaliatory action as a performance or policy issue.
+- Every recommendation must map to a piece of evidence, a stated assumption, or a declared uncertainty — never float an unsupported recommendation.
+- Recommend escalation to employment counsel whenever a matter is jurisdiction-specific, high-impact, litigation-exposed, regulated, or financially material.
+
+## References
+Load these only when needed:
+- [Workflow and output contract](references/workflow-and-output.md) — use when executing the full triage or formatting the final answer.
+- [US jurisdiction reference](references/jurisdictions/us.md) — US federal and state employment-law regime map.
+- [EU jurisdiction reference](references/jurisdictions/eu.md) — EU directives and member-state employment-law regime map.
+- [UK jurisdiction reference](references/jurisdictions/uk.md) — Great Britain employment-law regime map.
+- [Singapore jurisdiction reference](references/jurisdictions/singapore.md) — Singapore employment-law regime map.
+- [Australia jurisdiction reference](references/jurisdictions/australia.md) — Australian federal employment-law regime map.
+
+## Response minimum
+Return, at minimum, the ten-section contract defined in
+[references/workflow-and-output.md](references/workflow-and-output.md):
+1. Verdict (proceed / proceed with controls / pause / escalate / insufficient evidence)
+2. Ruthless challenge — the weakest part of the current HR thinking
+3. Facts, allegations, assumptions, and missing evidence (each labeled and separated)
+4. Policy and process issues (notice, consistency, documentation, policy alignment, prior treatment, decision authority, confidentiality, appeal/review path)
+5. Fairness, consistency, retaliation, and privacy stress test (adverse-impact review, retaliation analysis, privacy analysis, and worst-case lenses from employee, plaintiff counsel, regulator/labor authority, works council/union, auditor, board, and press)
+6. Risk rating table with severity, evidence basis, employee impact, enterprise impact, decision owner, and mitigation path
+7. Documentation checklist (records that must exist and be verified before any action)
+8. Safe next actions (not a single overconfident recommendation)
+9. Required escalation (explicit statement of which matters must reach employment counsel/HR/ER/privacy/security before action)
+10. Questions HR and legal must answer before action
+
+Also identify jurisdiction and employment type (or Unknown if not provided) and
+classify the HR risk domain (recruiting, onboarding, performance, discipline,
+termination, RIF/reorg, compensation, benefits, accommodation, leave, harassment,
+discrimination, retaliation, workplace safety, investigations, employee privacy,
+labor relations, or culture).

package/skills/hr/hr-risk-triage-review/metadata.json

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+{
+  "id": "hr-risk-triage-review",
+  "name": "HR Risk Triage Review",
+  "type": "skill",
+  "provider": "generic",
+  "harnesses": ["codex", "claude-code", "cursor", "gemini", "kiro", "other"],
+  "summary": "Adversarial HR and employment-risk triage discipline for terminations, discipline, accommodations, wage/hour, discrimination, harassment, retaliation, layoffs, and HR policy exceptions — surfaces risks, evidence gaps, and escalation paths for employment counsel. Does not give legal or HR advice.",
+  "source_type": "original",
+  "official_docs": [
+    "https://www.eeoc.gov/laws-guidance",
+    "https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/flsa",
+    "https://www.acas.org.uk/advice",
+    "https://www.gov.uk/browse/working",
+    "https://www.mom.gov.sg/employment-practices",
+    "https://www.fairwork.gov.au/"
+  ],
+  "security_notes": "Static review only — works from sanitized excerpts; never requests employee medical records, personal data, or protected-characteristic data beyond what the question requires. Does not issue binding employment-law conclusions; refuses pretextual or retaliatory documentation and recommends escalation to employment counsel.",
+  "last_verified": "2026-05-18",
+  "path": "skills/hr/hr-risk-triage-review",
+  "author": "github: Raishin",
+  "version": "0.1.0"
+}

package/skills/hr/hr-risk-triage-review/references/jurisdictions/australia.md

@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
+# Australia Employment Law — Jurisdiction Reference Map
+
+> **Review map only.** This file describes the structure of the Australian employment-law regime and where to verify requirements. The national Fair Work system covers most private-sector employers, but certain employers remain subject to state industrial-relations systems — confirm coverage before proceeding. This file is not legal advice, may be out of date, and must be verified against current official sources. Jurisdiction-specific conclusions require qualified Australian employment counsel.
+
+Last verified: 2026-05-18
+
+---
+
+## Regime overview
+
+Australia's employment law operates primarily under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), administered by the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) and the Fair Work Commission (FWC). The national system covers constitutional corporations, the Commonwealth, and certain other employers. A small number of employers — principally in Western Australia (non-incorporated employers) — remain under state industrial systems; confirm which system applies before proceeding.
+
+The Fair Work system sets the National Employment Standards (NES) as a minimum safety net applying to all national system employees. Modern awards and enterprise agreements sit above the NES and set additional conditions for covered employee populations. The general protections provisions (adverse action) and unfair dismissal regime operate as distinct heads of claim with different eligibility criteria, time limits, and remedies.
+
+---
+
+## Primary regulators and bodies
+
+| Body | Role | Official source |
+|---|---|---|
+| Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) | Compliance and enforcement — NES, awards, agreements, general protections | https://www.fairwork.gov.au |
+| Fair Work Commission (FWC) | Unfair dismissal, general protections (dismissal), enterprise agreements, industrial action | https://www.fwc.gov.au |
+| Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) | Federal discrimination and human rights complaints | https://humanrights.gov.au |
+| State and territory anti-discrimination bodies | State discrimination complaints (parallel to federal) | Varies — verify per state/territory |
+| Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | Privacy Act 1988 — employee records and personal data | https://www.oaic.gov.au |
+| Safe Work Australia | Model work health and safety laws; national policy | https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au |
+| State WorkCover/SafeWork authorities | Workers' compensation; WHS enforcement | Varies — verify per state/territory |
+
+---
+
+## Primary statutes and frameworks
+
+| Statute / framework | Subject | Official source |
+|---|---|---|
+| Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) | NES, unfair dismissal, general protections, enterprise bargaining, industrial action | https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2023C00112 |
+| National Employment Standards (NES) | Minimum entitlements: notice, leave, maximum hours, redundancy pay, FWI | https://www.fairwork.gov.au/employment-conditions/national-employment-standards |
+| Modern Awards | Industry/occupation-specific minimum pay and conditions | https://www.fairwork.gov.au/employment-conditions/awards |
+| Age Discrimination Act 2004 | Protection from age-based discrimination | https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/age-discrimination |
+| Disability Discrimination Act 1992 | Disability discrimination; reasonable adjustments | https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/disability-rights |
+| Racial Discrimination Act 1975 | Race, colour, national or ethnic origin discrimination | https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/race-discrimination |
+| Sex Discrimination Act 1984 | Sex, pregnancy, breastfeeding, sexual harassment discrimination | https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/sex-discrimination |
+| Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) | Employee records exemption and APP obligations for personal data | https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/the-privacy-act |
+| Work Health and Safety Act (model WHS Act) | WHS duties; psychosocial hazards; consultation | https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/law-and-regulation/model-whs-laws |
+| State anti-discrimination legislation | State-level protected attributes and complaint bodies | Verify per state/territory |
+
+---
+
+## Structural review checkpoints
+
+**Fair Work system coverage**
+- Confirm whether the employer is a national system employer (constitutional corporation, Commonwealth, ACT, NT, or other federal employers) or subject to a state system. Western Australia non-incorporated employers are outside the national system.
+
+**National Employment Standards (NES)**
+- The NES apply to all national system employees and cannot be excluded by any agreement. Key NES entitlements include: maximum weekly hours, flexible work requests, leave (annual, personal/carer's, compassionate, parental, community service), public holidays, notice of termination and redundancy pay, and the Fair Work Information Statement.
+- Verify current NES entitlements at https://www.fairwork.gov.au/employment-conditions/national-employment-standards — do not state specific leave periods or redundancy pay amounts without verifying against current FWO content.
+
+**Unfair dismissal**
+- Eligible employees (meeting minimum employment period — verify current period at https://www.fairwork.gov.au/ending-employment/unfair-dismissal) may apply to the FWC for unfair dismissal remedy.
+- A dismissal is unfair if it was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable — the FWC considers: valid reason, notification of reason, opportunity to respond, support person, and size/HR capability of the employer.
+- Small business employers (fewer than 15 employees — verify threshold) have different procedural obligations under the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code.
+- Application must be lodged within 21 days of dismissal taking effect — verify at https://www.fwc.gov.au/termination-employment/unfair-dismissal.
+
+**General protections (adverse action)**
+- General protections apply to all workers in the national system (not just employees) and have no minimum-employment-period requirement.
+- Adverse action is unlawful if taken because an employee exercised, or proposed to exercise, a workplace right (including making a complaint, taking leave, engaging in union activity, or invoking a workplace right under an agreement or law).
+- There is a reverse onus: once an employee establishes adverse action, the burden shifts to the employer to prove a non-prohibited reason. This is the primary escalation risk for terminations or adverse actions that follow a complaint or the exercise of a workplace right.
+- General protections dismissal applications must be lodged within 21 days — verify at https://www.fwc.gov.au.
+
+**Anti-discrimination**
+- Four federal anti-discrimination statutes (Age, Disability, Racial, Sex Discrimination Acts) apply to employment. State anti-discrimination laws operate in parallel and may cover additional attributes. Complaints may be lodged with the AHRC and/or state bodies — verify where the employee may file.
+- Sexual harassment in the workplace: the Sex Discrimination Act and recent amendments create positive duties on employers to eliminate sexual harassment — verify current obligations at https://humanrights.gov.au.
+
+**Redundancy and retrenchment**
+- The NES provides redundancy pay entitlements for employees with qualifying service (excluding small businesses below the threshold — verify). Notice of termination entitlements also apply.
+- Genuine redundancy: the position must be genuinely surplus and the employer must consult any applicable modern award or enterprise agreement obligations about major workplace changes. Failure to consult can convert a genuine redundancy into an unfair dismissal.
+- Verify current consultation obligations under the applicable modern award or enterprise agreement.
+
+**Modern awards and enterprise agreements**
+- Most employees are covered by a modern award or enterprise agreement that imposes additional conditions above the NES. Identify the applicable modern award or enterprise agreement before assessing entitlements. Use the FWO's Pay and Conditions Tool to confirm coverage — https://www.fairwork.gov.au/pay-and-wages/pay-calculator.
+
+**Privacy and employee records**
+- The Privacy Act 1988 grants a general exemption for employee records used directly in the employment relationship — verify the scope and limits of this exemption with OAIC guidance at https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/the-privacy-act.
+- The exemption does not apply to failed job applicants or former employees in all circumstances — verify.
+
+**Work health and safety (psychosocial hazards)**
+- Model WHS laws include an obligation to manage psychosocial risks (bullying, harassment, high job demands). Verify whether the applicable state/territory has adopted the model psychosocial risk regulations.
+- Workers' compensation obligations are state/territory-based — verify the applicable scheme.
+
+---
+
+## Escalation triggers (Australia-specific)
+
+- Any adverse action following an employee's complaint, leave request, union activity, or exercise of any workplace right — general protections reverse onus applies.
+- Proposed redundancy where consultation obligations under an award or enterprise agreement may not have been met.
+- Sexual harassment complaint — positive duty on employers under amended Sex Discrimination Act.
+- Any termination of an employee who may have lodged, or is eligible to lodge, an unfair dismissal or general protections application within the 21-day window.
+- Redundancy pay dispute — particularly where NES or agreement entitlements are contested.
+- Whether employer qualifies as a small business for Small Business Fair Dismissal Code purposes.
+
+---
+
+## Sources
+
+- https://www.fairwork.gov.au — Fair Work Ombudsman (confirmed via search 2026-05-18; 503 on direct fetch — use the search-confirmed URLs)
+- https://www.fairwork.gov.au/employment-conditions/national-employment-standards — NES (confirmed via search 2026-05-18)
+- https://www.fairwork.gov.au/ending-employment/unfair-dismissal — FWO unfair dismissal (confirmed via search 2026-05-18)
+- https://www.fairwork.gov.au/employment-conditions/protections-at-work — general protections (confirmed via search 2026-05-18)
+- https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2023C00112 — Fair Work Act 2009 (confirmed via search 2026-05-18)
+- https://humanrights.gov.au — Australian Human Rights Commission (confirmed via search 2026-05-18)
+- https://www.fwc.gov.au — Fair Work Commission
+- https://www.oaic.gov.au — Office of the Australian Information Commissioner