@raishin/vanguard-frontier-agentic 2.8.0 → 2.10.0

package/skills/azure/azure-security-posture-hardening/references/official-sources.md

@@ -1,15 +1,26 @@
-# Official Sources
-
-## Official sources
-
-- Azure landing zone security design area: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/security
-- Azure landing zone design areas: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-areas
-- Azure security best practices and patterns: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/security/fundamentals/best-practices-and-patterns
-- Managed identity best practice recommendations: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/active-directory/managed-identities-azure-resources/managed-identity-best-practice-recommendations
-- Secure your Azure Key Vault: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/key-vault/general/best-practices
-- Azure Key Vault RBAC guide: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/key-vault/general/rbac-guide
-- Configure network security for Azure Key Vault: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/key-vault/general/how-to-azure-key-vault-network-security
-- Enable Key Vault logging: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/key-vault/general/howto-logging
-- Monitor Azure Key Vault: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/key-vault/general/monitor-key-vault
-- Azure MCP Server tools: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/developer/azure-mcp-server/tools/
-- Manage Azure Key Vault with Azure MCP Server: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/developer/azure-mcp-server/services/azure-mcp-server-for-key-vault
+# Official sources
+
+Use this reference when grounding current Azure behavior for `azure-security-posture-hardening`.
+
+## Microsoft Learn sources
+
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/key-vault/general/secure-key-vault
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/security/benchmark/azure/baselines/key-vault-security-baseline
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/security/benchmark/azure/baselines/microsoft-defender-for-cloud-security-baseline
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/defender-for-cloud/recommendations-reference-identity-access
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/security
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/governance/policy/overview
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/role-based-access-control/best-practices
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/defender-for-cloud/secure-score-security-controls
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/defender-for-cloud/concept-cloud-security-posture-management
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/defender-for-cloud/review-security-recommendations
+
+## Current documentation refresh (2026-06-05)
+
+- Microsoft Learn documentation through the user's configured documentation MCP is the primary source for documented Azure behavior.
+- Documentation evidence is not live customer-state evidence. It does not prove the user's tenant, subscription, RBAC, quotas, deployed resources, billing state, security posture, or production readiness.
+- Use sampled read-only Azure evidence only when the user has configured it and the task requires current-state confirmation. Label it as sampled evidence, not broad proof.
+
+## Grounding rule
+
+Docs explain service behavior. Current-state claims require sampled read-only evidence or sanitized user-provided evidence. If current state was not queried or shown, say so.

package/skills/azure/azure-security-posture-hardening/references/safety-checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+# Safety checklist
+
+Use before recommending production Azure changes, access grants, security remediation, hierarchy moves, cost actions, reliability changes, or readiness conclusions for `azure-security-posture-hardening`.
+
+## Non-negotiables
+
+- Do not ask for or print credentials, client secrets, certificates, private keys, access tokens, tenant IDs, subscription IDs, resource IDs, customer data, raw incident payloads, or environment-specific identifiers.
+- Prefer Microsoft Learn documentation through the user's configured documentation MCP for documented Azure behavior.
+- Use sampled read-only Azure evidence only for current-state claims and label it as sampled evidence.
+- Require explicit approval before recommending live mutation, broad access, destructive remediation, billing changes, commitment purchases, hierarchy moves, failover, failback, or alert suppression.
+- Keep recommendations least-privilege, reversible where possible, and scoped to the named resource or workload.
+- Separate documentation-based claims, sampled evidence, user-provided evidence, and inference.
+
+## Component risks
+
+- **Identity and roles:** broad privileged roles, direct user grants, wildcard custom roles, missing PIM/time-bound controls, inherited scope surprises.
+- **Security posture:** stored secrets, public exposure, missing managed identities, weak Key Vault boundaries, no diagnostic coverage, untracked policy exemptions.
+- **Resource organization:** flat hierarchy drift, fake isolation via resource groups, subscription sprawl, weak ownership, policy inheritance surprises.
+- **Cost:** optimizing recommendations without workload context, deleting resources without owner confirmation, buying commitments before rightsizing, ignoring licensing and reliability cost tradeoffs.
+- **Reliability:** vague SLOs, untested recovery, overengineered topology, missing health model, no dependency mapping, unvalidated chaos or failover assumptions.
+
+## Evidence labels
+
+Use `documentation-based`, `sampled read-only evidence`, `repo evidence`, `user-provided evidence`, or `inference`. Documentation alone never proves the user's live Azure environment.

package/skills/azure/azure-security-posture-hardening/references/security-posture-hardening-operations.md

@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+# Azure Security Posture Hardening Operations
+
+> Version note: Azure service behavior and tooling change over time. Verify exact command syntax, permissions, and feature availability against Microsoft Learn documentation through the user's configured documentation MCP before production use. Do not paste secrets or sensitive identifiers into commands, files, or chat.
+
+Use this reference for current, source-grounded service behavior and the hard review gates that the lean `SKILL.md` intentionally does not carry.
+
+## What people get wrong
+
+- Calling a workload hardened because it has a Key Vault.
+- Using stored service-principal secrets when managed identities are supported.
+- Keeping Key Vault public access or legacy access policies without justification.
+- Treating Defender recommendations as optional noise instead of risk signals to triage.
+- Skipping diagnostics and audit logs until after an incident.
+
+## Officially grounded service shape
+
+- Microsoft Learn Key Vault guidance implements Zero Trust principles: verify explicitly, use least privilege, and assume breach.
+- Key Vault hardening includes one vault per application/region/environment where appropriate, private access or firewall controls, Azure RBAC over legacy access policies for critical workloads, PIM for privileged operations, soft delete, purge protection, rotation, logging, Defender, policy enforcement, and backup/recovery testing.
+- Security baselines call out managed identities, Azure Policy audit/deny/deploy-if-not-exists effects, Defender for Cloud monitoring, conditional access where supported, and secure storage of credentials in Key Vault.
+- Documentation-based security recommendations do not prove the user has enabled these controls. Current-state posture needs sampled read-only evidence.
+
+Documentation evidence proves documented Azure service behavior. It does not prove the user's tenant, subscription, RBAC, quotas, deployed resources, billing state, security posture, or production readiness.
+
+## Non-negotiable design rules
+
+- Prefer managed identities over stored secrets where the service supports them.
+- Use Azure RBAC, least privilege, and PIM/time-bound elevation for privileged operations.
+- Disable public exposure or restrict network access where workload requirements allow it.
+- Require diagnostic logs, alerts, and policy compliance evidence before calling posture audit-ready.
+- Stage remediation and avoid broad production changes without rollback and owner approval.
+
+## Minimal safe implementation flow
+
+- Scope workload, data sensitivity, identities, secrets, public exposure, policies, logging, and production impact.
+- Collect documentation requirements and sampled posture evidence when available.
+- Classify gaps by identity, network, secret lifecycle, policy, monitoring, and backup/recovery risk.
+- Prioritize reversible least-privilege remediations before disruptive controls.
+- Return hardened target state, blockers, safe rollout sequence, verification checks, and residual risk.
+
+## High-risk assumptions to kill
+
+- Secure score equals production readiness; it is an input, not a substitute for owner-reviewed risk acceptance.
+- A Defender recommendation is false positive noise until triaged; unreviewed recommendations are unbounded risk debt.
+- Enabling a paid plan, policy, or deny effect is automatically safe; it can affect cost, deployment paths, and operations.
+- A Key Vault exists, therefore secrets are safe; network access, RBAC model, purge protection, diagnostics, and rotation still matter.
+- Documentation guidance proves current posture; it only proves documented service behavior unless sampled evidence confirms the environment.
+
+## Safe command/code verification targets
+
+- Query Defender secure score controls and recommendations read-only, then label results as sampled current-state evidence.
+- Review policy assignments, exemptions, and compliance states before recommending deny or deploy-if-not-exists effects.
+- Inspect identity usage, Key Vault access model, network settings, soft delete, purge protection, rotation, and diagnostic settings without exposing secrets.
+- Verify log destinations and alert ownership; an enabled diagnostic setting with no owner is not audit readiness.
+- Separate documentation evidence, sampled read-only evidence, and sanitized user evidence in the final verdict.
+
+## Safe verification targets
+
+- Managed identities or approved credential model are used for service access.
+- Key Vault RBAC, network controls, soft delete, purge protection, rotation, and diagnostics match sensitivity.
+- Policy assignments or Defender recommendations cover required controls and exemptions are justified.
+- Audit logs and alerts reach an owned destination.
+- Remediation has rollback or staged deployment plan.
+
+## When to push back
+
+- The user wants public access because private networking is inconvenient.
+- The plan stores credentials in repo, pipeline files, or app settings without a secure reference.
+- The request skips logging or Defender/Policy evidence.
+- The remediation would break production without staged validation.

package/skills/azure/azure-security-posture-hardening/references/workflow-and-output.md

@@ -1,96 +1,41 @@
-# Workflow and Output Contract
+# Workflow and output contract
 
-## Workflow
-
-1. **Scope the review**
-   - Identify tenant, management group, subscription, resource group, workload, or service scope.
-   - Separate platform controls from workload-local controls.
-   - Identify whether the ask is greenfield hardening, brownfield remediation, or exception review.
+Use this reference for full execution of `azure-security-posture-hardening`.
 
-2. **Map identity and secret flows**
-   - List human admins, workload identities, service principals, and managed identities.
-   - Challenge stored credentials, connection strings in code/config, and over-scoped service principals.
-   - Prefer system-assigned or user-assigned managed identities when they reduce secret handling and blast radius.
-   - Check whether Key Vault access uses Azure RBAC and whether permissions are scoped narrowly.
+## Workflow
 
-3. **Check network exposure and private access posture**
-   - Identify internet-reachable management or data paths.
-   - Challenge public endpoints for sensitive data paths by default.
-   - Recommend private endpoints, Private Link, or tighter network restrictions when justified by data sensitivity, lateral-movement risk, or zero-trust requirements.
-   - Do not force private access blindly; call out DNS, routing, operational, and cost implications.
+1. **Classify the request**
+   - Identify service/domain, resource scope, environment, production impact, and whether mutation or billing impact is requested.
+   - Identify whether the task needs documentation-only guidance, sampled read-only current-state evidence, or sanitized user evidence.
 
-4. **Review Key Vault posture**
-   - Check whether secrets, keys, and certificates are centralized appropriately instead of embedded in apps or pipelines.
-   - Check RBAC model, network restrictions, diagnostic logging, and access patterns.
-   - Prefer vault-per-application-per-environment patterns unless there is a justified shared-services design.
-   - Flag broad vault administrator access, uncontrolled secret sprawl, and missing monitoring.
+2. **Ground in current sources**
+   - Prefer Microsoft Learn documentation through the user's configured documentation MCP.
+   - Read the component operations guide before issuing design, safety, or readiness conclusions.
+   - Treat current-state claims as unproven unless supported by sampled read-only evidence or sanitized user-provided evidence.
 
-5. **Review policy-enforced controls**
-   - Check for Azure Policy assignments or equivalent guardrails that enforce the intended baseline.
-   - Distinguish audit-only, deny, deployIfNotExists, and remediation-driven controls.
-   - Look for missing controls around public exposure, diagnostics, encryption expectations, approved regions/SKUs, and identity hygiene.
+3. **Stress-test the plan**
+   - Kill broad permissions, vague ownership, missing rollback, missing validation, and unsupported production-readiness claims.
+   - Separate facts from inference.
+   - State blockers before recommendations.
 
-6. **Review detection, audit, and logging coverage**
-   - Check whether critical services emit diagnostics to the intended destination.
-   - Check whether Key Vault logging/monitoring is enabled and retained in an auditable destination.
-   - Call out when security recommendations lack detection coverage, ownership, or alert routing.
-   - Separate “control exists” from “control is monitored.”
+4. **Recommend minimal safe action**
+   - Prefer read-only inspection, preview, what-if, diagnostic query, cost forecast, or staged rollout before mutation.
+   - Require explicit approval for live, destructive, access, reliability, hierarchy, or billing-impacting actions.
+   - Keep the recommendation scoped and reversible where possible.
 
-7. **Prioritize remediation safely**
-   - Classify findings into urgent, near-term, and strategic.
-   - Sequence changes to avoid breaking apps, pipelines, or operators.
-   - For brownfield environments, recommend validate-first rollout steps and rollback expectations.
+5. **Validate and hand off**
+   - Name verification targets and evidence gaps.
+   - Provide safe next actions and escalation criteria.
+   - Do not claim tenant, subscription, resource, billing, quota, or posture state that was not observed.
 
 ## Output contract
 
-Return all of the following:
-
-- **Scope and evidence summary**
-  - reviewed scope,
-  - evidence sources used,
-  - important unknowns.
-- **Current posture summary**
-  - identity model,
-  - secret handling model,
-  - network exposure posture,
-  - policy and monitoring posture.
-- **High-risk findings**
-  - issue,
-  - why it matters,
-  - likely blast radius.
-- **Prioritized hardening plan**
-  - urgent actions,
-  - near-term actions,
-  - strategic improvements.
-- **Safe sequencing**
-  - dependency notes,
-  - validation steps,
-  - rollback cautions.
-- **Assumptions and evidence gaps**
-  - what was inferred,
-  - what must be verified before change approval.
-
-## Eval gate
-
-The skill output is only acceptable if it:
-
-1. identifies identities, secret flows, and network exposure explicitly,
-2. separates control-plane, data-plane, and policy/monitoring concerns,
-3. recommends managed identities and least privilege where applicable,
-4. addresses Key Vault posture, not just generic “use a vault” advice,
-5. includes logging or diagnostic expectations,
-6. prioritizes actions by risk and rollout safety,
-7. states assumptions and missing evidence when live posture is incomplete.
-
-Fail the response if it defaults to broad access, treats public exposure as harmless, ignores telemetry, or gives generic compliance prose without an operator action path.
-
-## Safety notes
+Return:
 
-- Do not request or expose secrets, tokens, certificates, keys, tenant secrets, or customer data.
-- Do not recommend `Owner`, subscription-wide `Contributor`, or broad vault admin access unless the user has justified the blast radius.
-- Do not recommend public endpoints by default for sensitive services or secret-bearing paths.
-- Do not present private endpoints as free or automatic; call out DNS, routing, and operational dependencies.
-- Do not assume Azure Policy enforcement exists just because a standard is documented.
-- Do not treat diagnostic settings as optional for sensitive services.
-- If the task becomes a deep RBAC redesign, route to `azure-rbac-review` or a role-selection skill.
-- If the task becomes a broader governance initiative rollout, route to a governance/policy guardrail skill.
+1. Scope and target
+2. Evidence level: documentation-based, sampled read-only evidence, user-provided evidence, repo evidence, or inference
+3. Key findings and risks
+4. Blockers or missing evidence
+5. Minimal safe next actions
+6. Verification targets
+7. Rollback, cleanup, expiry, or reversal path where applicable

package/skills/azure/azure-subscription-resource-organization/SKILL.md

@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@ description: Use this skill for Azure management-group hierarchy, subscription p
 allowed-tools: Read Grep Glob
 metadata:
   author: github: Raishin
-  version: 0.1.0
-  updated: "2026-05-05"
+  version: 0.1.2
+  updated: "2026-06-05"
   category: compliance
 ---
 
@@ -17,11 +17,10 @@ Act as a ruthless Azure resource-organization architect. Your job is to stop wea
 
 Default posture:
 
-- Prefer official Microsoft Learn guidance for Azure landing zones, resource organization, and governance.
-- Prefer live Azure MCP evidence when the client exposes relevant official Azure tools and current-state inspection reduces guesswork.
+- Prefer Microsoft Learn documentation through the user's configured documentation MCP, then sampled read-only Azure evidence when available, then sanitized user evidence.
 - Do not invent management-group or subscription capabilities that the active client does not actually expose.
 - Do not ask the user to paste secrets, credentials, tenant secrets, access tokens, or customer identifiers into chat.
-- Do not hard-code tenant names, management-group IDs, subscription IDs, resource-group names, or organizational structure unless the user provides them as confirmed context.
+- Do not hard-code tenant names, management-group names, subscription IDs, resource-group names, or organizational structure unless the user provides them as confirmed context.
 
 ## Trigger Situations
 
@@ -37,7 +36,7 @@ Use this skill when the user asks to:
 
 ## Lean operating rules
 
-- Prefer live Azure or Microsoft evidence first when the active client exposes it; otherwise fall back to official documentation and sanitized user evidence.
+- Prefer Microsoft Learn documentation through the user's configured documentation MCP, then sampled read-only Azure evidence when available, then sanitized user evidence.
 - Separate confirmed facts from inference. If state was not queried or shown, say so.
 - Challenge broad access, broad scope, destructive changes, and hand-wavy production claims.
 - Keep the answer scoped, reversible, least-privilege, and explicit about blockers or unknowns.
@@ -46,7 +45,9 @@ Use this skill when the user asks to:
 
 Load these only when needed:
 
-- [MCP and evidence path](references/mcp-and-evidence.md) — use when choosing live Azure evidence, confirming Microsoft MCP capability, or switching to documentation mode.
+- [Azure Subscription Resource Organization Operations](references/subscription-resource-organization-operations.md) — use for current service behavior, common failure modes, hard design rules, verification targets, and push-back conditions.
+- [Safety checklist](references/safety-checklist.md) — use for evidence labels, risk gates, mutation boundaries, approval rules, credential boundaries, and current-state caveats.
+- [MCP and evidence path](references/mcp-and-evidence.md) — use when choosing documentation-based evidence, sampled read-only evidence, or sanitized user evidence.
 - [Workflow and output contract](references/workflow-and-output.md) — use when executing the full review, applying stress checks, or formatting the final answer.
 - [Official sources](references/official-sources.md) — use when you need the detailed Microsoft documentation list or source notes.
 

package/skills/azure/azure-subscription-resource-organization/metadata.json

@@ -11,21 +11,20 @@
     "kiro",
     "other"
   ],
-  "summary": "Design and review Azure management-group, subscription, and resource-group boundaries with explicit governance, ownership, and landing-zone operating-model consequences.",
+  "summary": "Design and review Azure management-group, subscription, and resource-group boundaries with explicit governance, ownership, policy inheritance, scale-unit, and landing-zone operating-model consequences.",
   "source_type": "original",
   "official_docs": [
-    "https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-areas",
-    "https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/",
-    "https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/resource-org",
-    "https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/resource-org-management-groups",
-    "https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/governance",
-    "https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/developer/azure-mcp-server/tools/",
-    "https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/developer/azure-mcp-server/tools/subscription",
-    "https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/developer/azure-mcp-server/tools/resource-group"
+    "https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/resource-org",
+    "https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/resource-org-management-groups",
+    "https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/resource-org-subscriptions",
+    "https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/azure-setup-guide/organize-resources",
+    "https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/management-application-environments",
+    "https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/governance",
+    "https://learn.microsoft.com/training/modules/design-governance/"
   ],
-  "security_notes": "Do not recommend flat hierarchies, fake isolation via resource groups, or subscription moves without proving governance, ownership, policy inheritance, and operational blast-radius implications.",
-  "last_verified": "2026-04-27",
+  "security_notes": "Do not recommend flat hierarchies, fake isolation via resource groups, or subscription moves without proving governance, ownership, policy inheritance, RBAC, cost, quota, and operational blast-radius implications.",
+  "last_verified": "2026-06-05",
   "path": "skills/azure/azure-subscription-resource-organization",
   "author": "github: Raishin",
-  "version": "0.1.0"
+  "version": "0.1.2"
 }

package/skills/azure/azure-subscription-resource-organization/references/mcp-and-evidence.md

@@ -1,32 +1,21 @@
-# MCP and Evidence Path
+# MCP and evidence path
 
-## Official Azure MCP Linkage
+Use this reference when deciding how to ground `azure-subscription-resource-organization` guidance.
 
-Use official Azure MCP tools only if they are actually available in the active client.
+## Evidence order
 
-Preferred evidence path:
+1. Microsoft Learn documentation through the user's configured documentation MCP for documented Azure behavior.
+2. Sampled read-only Azure evidence when the user has configured it and current-state confirmation is necessary.
+3. Sanitized user-provided evidence when no read-only evidence path is available.
+4. Clearly labeled inference when evidence is incomplete.
 
-- `subscription` for current subscription inventory and placement context.
-- `group` for resource-group inventory and workload grouping inside a subscription.
-- `group` only if the active client exposes an official group-related Azure capability; do not assume this means management-group mutation support.
+## Boundaries
 
-Important constraint:
+- Documentation evidence does not prove the user's tenant, subscription, RBAC, quotas, deployed resources, billing state, security posture, reliability state, or production readiness.
+- Sampled read-only evidence proves only the sampled configured environment and time window.
+- User-provided evidence can be incomplete or stale; preserve uncertainty.
+- Never ask for credentials, tokens, secrets, tenant IDs, subscription IDs, resource IDs, customer data, private keys, or raw incident payloads.
 
-- The official Azure MCP documentation identified for this repo clearly documents subscription and resource-group tools. It does **not** prove that every client exposes management-group tools. If management-group inspection is unavailable, switch to documentation mode plus sanitized user-provided hierarchy evidence.
+## Required phrasing
 
-## Platform-Agnostic Execution
-
-This skill must work on macOS, Windows, Linux, and MCP-only clients.
-
-- Prefer Azure MCP evidence first when available.
-- When examples need commands or checks, keep them abstract with `<placeholders>` unless the user’s active platform and toolchain are known.
-- Do not anchor the workflow to Azure CLI, PowerShell, Terraform, or portal-only steps unless the user asks for that execution path next.
-
-## Documentation Fallback When Live Data Is Unavailable
-
-Live Azure evidence beats documentation for current-state questions. If live MCP data is unavailable, denied, incomplete, or unsafe to query:
-
-- Fall back to the Microsoft Learn references listed above.
-- Ask for sanitized hierarchy diagrams, subscription inventories, policy-assignment views, naming standards, or ownership maps if current-state proof matters.
-- Label conclusions as `live evidence`, `documentation-based`, `user-provided sanitized evidence`, or `inference`.
-- Do not pretend Microsoft Learn proves the user’s actual hierarchy, subscription sprawl, policy inheritance, or team ownership reality.
+Use generic phrasing such as "Microsoft Learn documentation through the user's configured documentation MCP". Do not expose internal tool names, profile names, environment names, or local identifiers in committed docs.

package/skills/azure/azure-subscription-resource-organization/references/official-sources.md

@@ -1,14 +1,26 @@
-# Official Sources
+# Official sources
 
-## References
+Use this reference when grounding current Azure behavior for `azure-subscription-resource-organization`.
 
-Ground conclusions only in these official Microsoft documentation paths and live Azure evidence when available:
+## Microsoft Learn sources
 
-- [Azure landing zone design areas](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-areas) — top-level design-area map and relationship to landing-zone structure.
-- [Azure landing zones overview](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/) — platform landing zones versus application landing zones and reference-architecture framing.
-- [Resource organization design area](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/resource-org) — management-group design, subscription design, naming, tagging, and scaling considerations.
-- [Management groups design guidance](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/resource-org-management-groups) — management-group depth, inheritance, and hierarchy recommendations.
-- [Governance design area](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/governance) — policy, compliance, and operating-model consequences of scope choices.
-- [Azure MCP tools inventory](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/developer/azure-mcp-server/tools/) — official Azure MCP namespace discovery and shared parameter behavior.
-- [Azure MCP subscription tools](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/developer/azure-mcp-server/tools/subscription) — official subscription inspection capability when available.
-- [Azure MCP resource-group tools](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/developer/azure-mcp-server/tools/resource-group) — official resource-group inspection capability when available.
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/resource-org
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/resource-org-management-groups
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/resource-org-subscriptions
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/azure-setup-guide/organize-resources
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/management-application-environments
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/landing-zone/design-area/governance
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/training/modules/design-governance/
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/governance/management-groups/overview
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ready/azure-best-practices/resource-tagging
+- https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/azure-resource-manager/management/tag-policies
+
+## Current documentation refresh (2026-06-05)
+
+- Microsoft Learn documentation through the user's configured documentation MCP is the primary source for documented Azure behavior.
+- Documentation evidence is not live customer-state evidence. It does not prove the user's tenant, subscription, RBAC, quotas, deployed resources, billing state, security posture, or production readiness.
+- Use sampled read-only Azure evidence only when the user has configured it and the task requires current-state confirmation. Label it as sampled evidence, not broad proof.
+
+## Grounding rule
+
+Docs explain service behavior. Current-state claims require sampled read-only evidence or sanitized user-provided evidence. If current state was not queried or shown, say so.

package/skills/azure/azure-subscription-resource-organization/references/safety-checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+# Safety checklist
+
+Use before recommending production Azure changes, access grants, security remediation, hierarchy moves, cost actions, reliability changes, or readiness conclusions for `azure-subscription-resource-organization`.
+
+## Non-negotiables
+
+- Do not ask for or print credentials, client secrets, certificates, private keys, access tokens, tenant IDs, subscription IDs, resource IDs, customer data, raw incident payloads, or environment-specific identifiers.
+- Prefer Microsoft Learn documentation through the user's configured documentation MCP for documented Azure behavior.
+- Use sampled read-only Azure evidence only for current-state claims and label it as sampled evidence.
+- Require explicit approval before recommending live mutation, broad access, destructive remediation, billing changes, commitment purchases, hierarchy moves, failover, failback, or alert suppression.
+- Keep recommendations least-privilege, reversible where possible, and scoped to the named resource or workload.
+- Separate documentation-based claims, sampled evidence, user-provided evidence, and inference.
+
+## Component risks
+
+- **Identity and roles:** broad privileged roles, direct user grants, wildcard custom roles, missing PIM/time-bound controls, inherited scope surprises.
+- **Security posture:** stored secrets, public exposure, missing managed identities, weak Key Vault boundaries, no diagnostic coverage, untracked policy exemptions.
+- **Resource organization:** flat hierarchy drift, fake isolation via resource groups, subscription sprawl, weak ownership, policy inheritance surprises.
+- **Cost:** optimizing recommendations without workload context, deleting resources without owner confirmation, buying commitments before rightsizing, ignoring licensing and reliability cost tradeoffs.
+- **Reliability:** vague SLOs, untested recovery, overengineered topology, missing health model, no dependency mapping, unvalidated chaos or failover assumptions.
+
+## Evidence labels
+
+Use `documentation-based`, `sampled read-only evidence`, `repo evidence`, `user-provided evidence`, or `inference`. Documentation alone never proves the user's live Azure environment.

package/skills/azure/azure-subscription-resource-organization/references/subscription-resource-organization-operations.md

@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+# Azure Subscription Resource Organization Operations
+
+> Version note: Azure service behavior and tooling change over time. Verify exact command syntax, permissions, and feature availability against Microsoft Learn documentation through the user's configured documentation MCP before production use. Do not paste secrets or sensitive identifiers into commands, files, or chat.
+
+Use this reference for current, source-grounded service behavior and the hard review gates that the lean `SKILL.md` intentionally does not carry.
+
+## What people get wrong
+
+- Using resource groups as the main isolation boundary for production environments.
+- Building a flat subscription estate then hoping tags fix governance later.
+- Moving subscriptions without understanding inherited policy and RBAC impact.
+- Mixing platform shared services and workload resources without owner boundaries.
+- Ignoring quotas, regions, naming, tagging, and lifecycle when designing hierarchy.
+
+## Officially grounded service shape
+
+- Microsoft Learn evidence says Azure resources can be organized at management group, subscription, resource group, and resource levels.
+- Resource organization decisions are foundational for naming, tagging, subscription design, and management group design.
+- Management groups manage policies, access, and compliance across subscriptions at scale; subscriptions act as policy and management boundaries and scale units.
+- Landing-zone guidance separates platform/management deployments from workload or application resources and recommends planning for scale, multiple regions, governance, and ownership.
+
+Documentation evidence proves documented Azure service behavior. It does not prove the user's tenant, subscription, RBAC, quotas, deployed resources, billing state, security posture, or production readiness.
+
+## Non-negotiable design rules
+
+- Choose hierarchy from governance, ownership, compliance, network, cost, and scale requirements, not aesthetics.
+- Use subscriptions as isolation, policy, management, and scale boundaries where environment or workload separation is needed.
+- Use resource groups for shared lifecycle, not as a substitute for subscription isolation.
+- Document policy/RBAC inheritance and exemption strategy before moving subscriptions.
+- Require naming, tagging, budget, and owner model for every proposed boundary.
+
+## Minimal safe implementation flow
+
+- Scope organization goal, current hierarchy, workloads, environments, regions, owners, compliance, and platform services.
+- Map management groups, subscriptions, resource groups, policies, RBAC, budgets, tags, and quotas.
+- Identify weak boundaries, inheritance surprises, and migration risks.
+- Propose minimal target-state changes with staged moves and rollback/communication plan.
+- Return target hierarchy, rationale, blockers, verification checks, and governance debt.
+
+## High-risk assumptions to kill
+
+- Tags can replace hierarchy; tags help reporting and policy targeting, but they are not first-class isolation boundaries.
+- Resource groups can isolate production from nonproduction; they share subscription-level policy, quota, billing, and many blast-radius concerns.
+- A flat hierarchy is simpler; it usually defers governance debt until policy, RBAC, and compliance inheritance become painful.
+- Subscription moves are administrative cleanup; they can change inherited policy, RBAC, budgets, compliance reporting, and operational ownership.
+- A landing-zone diagram proves suitability; current quotas, regions, ownership, and workload lifecycle still need evidence.
+
+## Safe command/code verification targets
+
+- Inventory management groups, subscriptions, resource groups, inherited policies, role assignments, tags, budgets, and quotas with read-only queries.
+- Compare proposed boundaries to workload lifecycle, owner, environment, compliance, network, and cost-accountability requirements.
+- Check management-group depth, parentage, and subscription placement constraints before proposing hierarchy moves.
+- Validate naming and tagging standards against Microsoft Learn guidance and existing policy enforcement.
+- Label hierarchy inventory as sampled current-state evidence; documentation alone does not prove the estate is organized correctly.
+
+## Safe verification targets
+
+- Management group purpose and inherited controls are documented.
+- Subscription placement matches workload/environment/platform boundary.
+- Resource groups contain resources with shared lifecycle and ownership.
+- Policy, RBAC, budget, tag, naming, and quota implications are known.
+- Subscription moves or hierarchy changes have validation and rollback/communication plan.
+
+## When to push back
+
+- The user wants one subscription or flat hierarchy for convenience.
+- A resource group is used to isolate production from non-production without policy/RBAC proof.
+- The proposed move ignores inherited deny policies or RBAC.
+- Ownership and cost accountability are undefined.