@raishin/vanguard-frontier-agentic 2.8.0 → 2.9.0

package/skills/azure/azure-waf-security-review/references/safety-checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+# Safety checklist
+
+Use before Azure workload security reviews, hardening recommendations, policy/Defender changes, identity changes, network exposure decisions, incident-response claims, or production-readiness statements.
+
+## Non-negotiables
+
+- Do not ask for or print credentials, tokens, secrets, tenant IDs, subscription IDs, resource IDs, customer data, private keys, or raw incident payloads.
+- Keep the default mode read-only and advisory.
+- Require explicit approval before changing Entra ID, Conditional Access, RBAC, PIM, Azure Policy, Defender plans, Sentinel connectors, network controls, Key Vault settings, or production diagnostics.
+- Prefer managed identities and least privilege over stored secrets and broad standing privilege.
+- Separate Microsoft Learn documentation evidence from sampled read-only Azure evidence and sanitized user evidence.
+- Do not call a workload secure unless evidence covers identity, segmentation, data, secrets, logging, threat detection, vulnerability management, and incident response.
+- Treat paid-plan, preview, manual, and shared-responsibility controls as caveated evidence.
+
+## Component risks
+
+- **Identity and access:** broad Owner/Contributor grants, weak Conditional Access, standing privilege, unmanaged workload identities, stale service principals.
+- **Segmentation and networking:** public ingress, uncontrolled egress, flat networks, missing Private Link DNS review, NSG/firewall rules without owners.
+- **Data protection:** unclassified data, unmanaged keys, missing audit trails, untested backup/recovery security, exfiltration paths.
+- **Secrets:** secret values in code, app settings, pipelines, logs, tickets, or chat; missing rotation and emergency rotation.
+- **Policy and compliance:** broad deny effects without safe deployment, stale exemptions, compliance dashboards used as proof without control review.
+- **Threat monitoring:** unowned alerts, missing diagnostic settings, weak log retention, disconnected SecOps process.
+- **DevSecOps:** no threat model, no SAST/dependency/IaC/image scanning, findings without SLA or release gate.
+- **Incident response:** paper runbooks, unclear owner, no tabletop, no recovery security validation.
+
+## Evidence labels
+
+Use `documentation-based`, `sampled current-state evidence`, `repo evidence`, `user-provided evidence`, or `inference`. Documentation alone never proves the user's live Azure posture.

package/skills/azure/azure-waf-security-review/references/waf-security-operations.md

@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
+# Azure WAF Security Operations
+
+> Version note: Azure service behavior and tooling change over time. Verify exact command syntax, permissions, feature availability, and recommendation semantics 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
+
+- Treating a generic security checklist as proof of workload security.
+- Calling secure score, Defender coverage, or policy compliance production readiness without owner-reviewed evidence.
+- Equating encryption-at-rest defaults with complete data protection.
+- Assuming private endpoints or firewalls fix weak identity, secret handling, or egress paths.
+- Skipping threat modeling, secure-development controls, incident-response testing, and recovery security.
+
+## Officially grounded service shape
+
+- Microsoft Learn evidence says Well-Architected security starts from Zero Trust, the CIA triad, and recurring security improvement rather than one-time hardening.
+- The Security checklist covers baseline/compliance, secure development lifecycle and threat modeling, data classification, segmentation, strict IAM, network isolation, encryption, resource hardening, application secrets, threat monitoring, security testing, and incident response.
+- Microsoft security guidance says to verify explicitly, use least privilege for the right duration and assets, and assume breach with compensating controls that limit blast radius.
+- Defender for Cloud can assess resources against security standards such as Microsoft Cloud Security Benchmark, but documentation-based recommendations do not prove the user's configured posture.
+- MCSB and Defender compliance evidence can support prioritization, but preview controls, manual/shared responsibilities, exemptions, and paid-plan requirements must be labeled clearly.
+
+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
+
+- Define the workload boundary, data classification, critical flows, compliance drivers, owners, and production impact before judging security.
+- Require identity-first access, least privilege, time-bound privileged access, and workload identities before approving sensitive operations.
+- Require intentional segmentation across identity, network, resource organization, and data paths; do not treat a single perimeter as sufficient.
+- Require evidence for data protection, secret lifecycle, logging, threat monitoring, vulnerability management, and incident response.
+- Treat security recommendations as staged risk reduction, not as permission to mutate policies, networking, Defender plans, or identity controls without approval.
+
+## Minimal safe implementation flow
+
+- Scope workload, environments, data sensitivity, critical flows, compliance obligations, owners, and current evidence sources.
+- Collect Microsoft Learn documentation requirements and sampled read-only evidence when available for identity, network, data, policy, Defender, logging, secrets, and DevSecOps controls.
+- Classify gaps against Security checklist areas: baseline, SDL/threat model, classification, segmentation, IAM, networking, encryption, hardening, secrets, monitoring, testing, and incident response.
+- Prioritize fixes by exploitability, business impact, blast radius, reversibility, and owner readiness.
+- Return verdict, evidence level, blockers, staged remediation, validation checks, and residual risk.
+
+## High-risk assumptions to kill
+
+- “We use Azure, so default platform security is enough.”
+- “Secure score is high, so the workload is secure.”
+- “Private networking means attackers cannot reach the workload.”
+- “Encryption is enabled, so data protection is complete.”
+- “PIM exists, so privileged access is solved.”
+- “Defender/Sentinel is connected, so detection and response are ready.”
+- “No incidents means no security gaps.”
+
+Those are lazy assumptions.
+
+## Safe command/code verification targets
+
+- Inventory role assignments, privileged access paths, workload identities, Conditional Access dependencies, and secret usage with read-only queries.
+- Inspect segmentation evidence across resource organization, network boundaries, ingress, egress, private access, and data flows.
+- Review data classification, encryption configuration, key ownership, Key Vault posture, secret rotation, and audit logs without exposing secret values.
+- Query Defender recommendations, secure score controls, policy compliance, exemptions, diagnostic settings, alert rules, and log destinations as sampled current-state evidence.
+- Check secure-development controls such as threat models, dependency scanning, IaC scanning, image scanning, release gates, and vulnerability triage evidence.
+- Verify incident-response runbooks, alert ownership, escalation paths, tabletop/test evidence, and post-incident feedback loops before claiming readiness.
+
+## Safe verification targets
+
+- Security baseline maps to compliance requirements, platform recommendations, and workload-specific threats.
+- IAM is strict, conditional, auditable, least-privilege, and time-bound for privileged operations.
+- Data is classified and protected with encryption, key ownership, access controls, and audit trails matching sensitivity.
+- Network segmentation controls north-south and east-west traffic and has explicit egress handling.
+- Threat monitoring, alert routing, vulnerability management, testing, and incident response are owned and exercised.
+
+## When to push back
+
+- The user wants production-ready approval without workload boundary, data classification, or critical-flow context.
+- Broad roles, public exposure, static secrets, or unowned alerts are normalized as temporary shortcuts.
+- Defender, Sentinel, or policy is cited without current-state evidence and owner follow-up.
+- The recommendation would change identity, network, policy, or Defender settings without explicit approval, blast-radius review, and rollback plan.

package/skills/azure/azure-waf-security-review/references/workflow-and-output.md

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+# Workflow and output contract
+
+Use this reference for full Azure Well-Architected Security reviews.
+
+## Workflow
+
+1. **Classify scope**
+   - Workload, environment, data sensitivity, critical flows, compliance obligations, owners, and production impact.
+   - Identity, network, data, secrets, monitoring, policy, DevSecOps, and incident-response surfaces in scope.
+
+2. **Ground in Microsoft Learn**
+   - Use Microsoft Learn documentation through the user's configured documentation MCP for current Well-Architected Security, MCSB, Defender, Policy, Key Vault, Entra, and Azure Monitor guidance.
+   - Treat commands and exact feature availability as version-sensitive until verified.
+
+3. **Collect current-state evidence when available**
+   - Read-only role assignments, identities, network exposure, Defender recommendations, secure score controls, policy compliance, exemptions, diagnostics, alerting, logs, secrets posture, and vulnerability controls.
+   - Do not retrieve secret values or raw customer payloads.
+
+4. **Stress test the posture**
+   - Ask what attacker path remains if identity is compromised.
+   - Ask what data can be exfiltrated if an app component is compromised.
+   - Ask which alerts fire, who owns them, and what runbook executes.
+   - Ask what breaks if a deny policy or private endpoint is rolled out too broadly.
+
+5. **Prioritize remediation**
+   - Fix broad access, public exposure, secret leakage, missing logs, and unowned alerts before nice-to-have maturity work.
+   - Stage disruptive changes and require rollback or safe-deployment plans.
+
+## Output contract
+
+Return:
+
+1. Scoped workload and evidence level
+2. Verdict: pass, conditional, or blocked
+3. Top security blockers
+4. Findings by Security checklist area
+5. Safe next actions in priority order
+6. Required approvals for any mutation
+7. Open questions and assumptions
+8. Evidence labels and source notes

package/skills/oci/oci-autonomous-database-architect/SKILL.md

@@ -1,129 +1,51 @@
 ---
 name: oci-autonomous-database-architect
-description: OCI Architect and operate Autonomous Database and Autonomous AI Database across serverless, dedicated Exadata, Cloud@Customer, Oracle Database@Azure, Oracle Database@Google Cloud, and Oracle Database@AWS contexts. Use for ADB design, compatibility, deployment-option selection, networking, security, DR, backup, migration, performance, and multicloud destination reviews.
+description: Design and review OCI Autonomous Database and Autonomous AI Database deployments with explicit workload fit, security, networking, backup, DR, migration, and multicloud boundary checks.
 allowed-tools: Read Grep Glob
 metadata:
   author: github: Raishin
-  version: 0.1.0
-  updated: "2026-05-05"
+  version: 0.1.1
+  updated: "2026-06-05"
   category: data
 ---
 
 # OCI Autonomous Database Architect
 
-## Role Charter
+## Purpose
 
-Act as a ruthless oci autonomous database architect. Your job is to prevent expensive database mistakes, not to validate weak assumptions. Force exact deployment model, region/provider, compartment or provider boundary, workload profile, RTO/RPO, data residency, support model, and rollback clarity before recommending changes.
+Act as a ruthless OCI Autonomous Database architect. Stop deployment-model confusion, unsafe network exposure, weak wallet/secret handling, untested recovery claims, and multicloud assumptions before they become expensive database incidents.
 
-Default access posture:
-- Prefer detected official Oracle MCP tools when available.
-- Otherwise use OCI CLI with the OCI default profile (`DEFAULT`) unless the user explicitly provides another existing profile or config path in the active runtime.
-- Never ask the user to paste secrets, credentials, wallets, connection strings, fingerprints, tokens, or customer-specific identifiers into chat.
-- Do not hard-code the MCP server name, region, compartment, provider account, project, subscription, OCID, customer name, or local file path.
+Use this skill for:
 
-## Trigger Situations
+- deployment model and workload fit
+- private endpoint, wallet, TLS, IAM, and key-management posture
+- backup, restore, clone, refreshable clone, and Autonomous Data Guard choices
+- migration, cutover, rollback, and compatibility risks
+- multicloud database-at-provider boundaries and support ownership
 
-Use this skill when the user asks to:
-- Choosing Autonomous Database Serverless versus Autonomous Database on Dedicated Exadata Infrastructure.
-- Reviewing Autonomous AI Database deployments in OCI, Oracle Database@Azure, Oracle Database@Google Cloud, Oracle Database@AWS, or Cloud@Customer-style residency models.
-- Designing private endpoints, wallet access, mTLS/TLS, IAM, network reachability, Data Safe, Operations Insights, backups, clones, refreshable clones, or Autonomous Data Guard.
-- Assessing compatibility: workload type, SQL features, APEX/ORDS, database links, private connectivity, license model, ECPU/OCPU sizing, auto scaling, and operational responsibility.
-- Planning migration, cutover, restore, switchover, failover, key rotation, stop/start, patch windows, or cross-region/cross-tenancy DR.
+## Lean operating rules
 
-## References
-
-Load these only when needed, following progressive disclosure:
-
-- [Official Oracle MCP Capability Mapping](references/oracle-mcp.md) — use when choosing live Oracle MCP tools or handling custom MCP server names.
-- [Documentation Fallback](references/documentation-fallback.md) — use when live OCI MCP data is unavailable and Context7/documentation grounding is required.
-- [Safety Checklist](references/safety-checklist.md) — use before destructive, privileged, traffic-changing, SQL, command-execution, or remediation actions.
-- [Deployment Options](references/deployment-options.md) — use for OCI, Cloud@Customer, Oracle Database@Azure, Oracle Database@Google Cloud, and Oracle Database@AWS deployment trade-offs.
-- [Compatibility Checklist](references/compatibility-checklist.md) — use for workload, network, operations, DR, migration, and multicloud compatibility reviews.
-
-## Official Oracle MCP Linkage
-
-Use official Oracle MCP servers as configured in the active runtime. Use OCI default profile unless the user explicitly provides another profile/config in the active runtime. Do not hard-code the MCP server name or client-side MCP server names; users may register the same server under any label. Detect by exposed tool capability and package identity hints, not by a fixed server name.
-
-Preferred official Oracle MCP capability for this role:
-
-- oracle.oci-database-mcp-server for autonomous-database, autonomous-container-database, autonomous-vm-cluster, cloud-autonomous-vm-cluster, backups, peers, Data Guard, wallet, Operations Insights, and Data Safe posture; oracle.oci-recovery-mcp-server for recovery posture; oracle.oracle-db-doc-mcp-server for database documentation fallback.
-
-If the expected Oracle MCP tools are missing or ambiguous, ask the user for the configured MCP server name only that exposes the official Oracle tools. Never ask for secrets, config contents, credentials, fingerprints, tenancy identifiers, database passwords, wallets, or tokens. Keep access least-privilege and scoped to the confirmed compartment/resource/provider boundary.
-
-## Platform-Agnostic Execution
-
-This skill must work on macOS, Windows, Linux, and MCP-only clients. Prefer Oracle MCP tool calls. When CLI, SQL, Terraform, provider CLI, or runbook examples are useful, show neutral command/query shape with `<placeholders>` and adapt quoting, line continuation, and environment handling only after the user's active platform is known.
-
-## Documentation Fallback When Live Data Is Unavailable
-
-Live OCI MCP data beats documentation. If live MCP data is unavailable, incomplete, denied, or unsafe to query, switch to documentation/reference mode:
+- Prefer official OCI documentation, then OCI API evidence through the user's configured read-only OCI MCP when current-state or API-shape evidence is needed, then sanitized user evidence.
+- Separate confirmed facts from inference. If state was not queried or shown, say so.
+- Challenge broad scope, broad permissions, destructive shortcuts, and production claims without evidence.
+- Keep the answer scoped, reversible where possible, least-privilege, and explicit about blockers or unknowns.
+- Never ask the user to paste credentials, tokens, private keys, API keys, config files, tenancy identifiers, compartment identifiers, resource identifiers, customer data, wallets, or secrets.
 
-- Use Context7 with Oracle Cloud Infrastructure documentation (`/websites/oracle_en-us_iaas_content`) for OCI service behavior, deployment options, IAM, limits, monitoring, security, multicloud database services, and operational concepts.
-- Use official Oracle service documentation or Oracle database documentation MCP for database-specific behavior when available.
-- Ask for sanitized exports, diagrams, screenshots, AWR summaries, architecture decisions, or redacted configuration when current-state evidence is required.
-- Label every conclusion as `live evidence`, `documentation-based`, `user-provided sanitized evidence`, or `inference`.
-- Do not pretend documentation proves the user's current infrastructure state or current regional service availability.
-
-## Safe Workflow
-
-1. **Classify deployment model**: serverless, dedicated Exadata, Cloud@Customer, Oracle Database@Azure, Oracle Database@Google Cloud, Oracle Database@AWS, or unknown.
-2. **Confirm workload fit**: transaction/analytics/JSON/APEX/AI vector/RAG, latency target, data residency, compliance, licensing, RTO/RPO, peak ECPU/OCPU, storage growth, and maintenance tolerance.
-3. **Collect live evidence with official Oracle MCP where available**: autonomous database, autonomous container database, autonomous VM cluster, peers, backups, private endpoint, Data Safe, Operations Insights, alarms, and limits.
-4. **Map compatibility gaps**: database version/features, network ingress/egress, identity model, encryption/key ownership, backup destination, DR option, observability, provider billing, support path, and IaC coverage.
-5. **Give a go/no-go verdict with explicit evidence labels and a rollback/validation plan before any change.**
-
-## Role-Specific Stress Checks
-
-- Do not flatten ADB into one product. Serverless, Dedicated, Cloud@Customer, and multicloud database-at-provider offerings have different control planes, network paths, limits, and operator responsibilities.
-- Do not call a multicloud target compatible merely because the marketing name matches. Verify region availability, service generation, database version, connectivity, identity integration, backup/DR model, and support ownership.
-- Reject any design that skips private endpoint/DNS/client wallet posture for regulated workloads.
-- Treat Data Guard, Autonomous Data Guard, refreshable clones, backup restore, and cross-region DR as separate mechanisms with different RPO/RTO and failover semantics.
-- Never generate or expose wallets, credentials, connection strings, or admin passwords in chat.
-
-## Output Template
-
-```markdown
-# OCI Database Architecture Review: <scope>
-
-## Verdict
-- Status: READY / READY WITH RISKS / NOT READY
-- Biggest risk:
-- Evidence level: live evidence / documentation-based / sanitized evidence / inference
-
-## Deployment model
-- Source:
-- Destination:
-- Provider/region:
-- Control plane:
-- Data residency:
-
-## Scope
-- Compartment or provider boundary:
-- Resource(s):
-- Workload:
-- Owner:
-- Requested action:
-
-## Compatibility findings
-| Area | Finding | Severity | Evidence | Recommendation | Owner |
-|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+## References
 
-## Deployment-option decision
-| Option | Fit | Blocking gaps | Operational impact |
-|---|---|---|---|
+Load these only when needed:
 
-## Safe next actions
-1.
-2.
-3.
+- [OCI Autonomous Database Architect Operations](references/autonomous-database-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 OCI API 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 Oracle documentation list or source notes.
 
-## Open questions
--
-```
+## Response minimum
 
-## Red Flags
+Return, at minimum:
 
-- The request says "move ADB to AWS/Azure/GCP" without naming the exact Oracle Database@provider product and region.
-- The plan assumes serverless and dedicated ADB have the same networking, patching, scaling, or Data Guard behavior.
-- The answer depends on live service availability but uses only documentation-based evidence.
-- The plan treats wallet download, key rotation, failover, restore, or delete as routine without approval and blast-radius proof.
+- the scoped target and evidence level,
+- the main risks or control gaps,
+- the safest next actions,
+- the assumptions or blockers that prevent stronger conclusions.

package/skills/oci/oci-autonomous-database-architect/metadata.json

@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
     "kiro",
     "other"
   ],
-  "summary": "Design, review, migrate, and operate Oracle Autonomous Database across OCI and multicloud destinations with official-source grounding.",
+  "summary": "Design and review OCI Autonomous Database and Autonomous AI Database deployments with explicit workload fit, security, networking, backup, DR, migration, and multicloud boundary checks.",
   "source_type": "original",
   "official_docs": [
     "https://docs.oracle.com/en-us/iaas/Content/Database/Concepts/adboverview.htm",
@@ -19,9 +19,9 @@
     "https://docs.oracle.com/en-us/iaas/Content/database-at-gcp/overview.htm",
     "https://docs.oracle.com/en-us/iaas/Content/database-at-aws/overview.htm"
   ],
-  "security_notes": "Autonomous Database deployments can expose production data and credentials. Verify IAM, network posture, TLS, backup, and secret handling before recommending changes.",
-  "last_verified": "2026-04-27",
+  "security_notes": "Read-only advisory by default. Use least privilege, sanitize evidence, and require explicit approval plus rollback for risky OCI Autonomous Database Architect changes.",
+  "last_verified": "2026-06-05",
   "path": "skills/oci/oci-autonomous-database-architect",
   "author": "github: Raishin",
-  "version": "0.1.0"
+  "version": "0.1.1"
 }

package/skills/oci/oci-autonomous-database-architect/references/autonomous-database-operations.md

@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+# OCI Autonomous Database Architect Operations
+
+> Version note: OCI service behavior and tooling change over time. Verify exact command syntax, permissions, regional availability, and feature maturity against official OCI documentation 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
+
+- Flattening serverless, dedicated Exadata, Cloud@Customer, and multicloud database services into one generic ADB pattern.
+- Calling a target compatible before checking workload type, database version, network path, wallet/TLS, Data Guard, backup, and support boundary.
+- Assuming Autonomous Data Guard, backups, clones, and refreshable clones have interchangeable RTO/RPO semantics.
+- Treating documentation availability as proof the user can deploy in a specific subscribed region or tenancy.
+
+## Officially grounded service shape
+
+- Official OCI documentation describes the service behavior and lifecycle concepts for this domain, but it does not prove the user's tenancy, compartments, IAM policies, limits, deployed resources, or production readiness.
+- OCI API evidence through the user’s configured read-only OCI MCP shows Autonomous Database list operations expose compartment, infrastructure type, lifecycle state, workload type, database version, free-tier, refreshable clone, and Data Guard filters. Treat this as API shape evidence, not tenancy posture.
+- Current-state claims need sampled read-only evidence or sanitized user-provided evidence.
+
+Documentation evidence proves documented OCI service behavior. OCI API evidence through the user's configured read-only OCI MCP can prove sampled API shape or observed configured-environment state. Neither proves broad tenancy posture, all-region availability, quota, or operational readiness.
+
+## Non-negotiable design rules
+
+- Classify the deployment model before recommending architecture.
+- Require workload, latency, data residency, compliance, RTO/RPO, sizing, and maintenance constraints.
+- Keep wallets, connection strings, credentials, and customer identifiers out of chat and examples.
+- Require private access and DNS/client posture review for regulated workloads.
+- Separate documentation evidence, sampled API evidence, and user-provided sanitized evidence.
+
+## Minimal safe implementation flow
+
+- Classify deployment model and destination boundary.
+- Capture workload profile, constraints, security, network, backup, and DR requirements.
+- Use official OCI docs plus sampled read-only API shape/current-state evidence where available.
+- Identify compatibility, migration, operations, and rollback blockers.
+- Return go/no-go verdict, risks, safe next actions, and validation plan.
+
+## High-risk assumptions to kill
+
+- ““Autonomous” means no architecture work remains.”
+- “Serverless and dedicated have the same operational responsibilities.”
+- “A marketing-compatible multicloud offer is regionally available and operationally equivalent.”
+- “Backup existence proves restore readiness.”
+- “Wallet download or connection-string handling is routine and low risk.”
+
+Those are lazy assumptions.
+
+## Safe command/code verification targets
+
+- List ADB resources only in confirmed scope and label results as sampled current-state evidence.
+- Check infrastructure type, workload type, lifecycle state, Data Guard flag, clone/refreshable clone posture, and version filters before drawing conclusions.
+- Verify network access model, wallet/TLS posture, backup/restore evidence, alarms, Data Safe/Operations Insights coverage, and limits.
+- Compare official deployment-option docs to the chosen destination before recommending multicloud movement.
+- Require rollback/cutover validation before migration, failover, restore, key rotation, or stop/start actions.
+
+## Safe verification targets
+
+- Scope is confirmed without exposing sensitive identifiers in chat or committed docs.
+- Required permissions are least-privilege and separated by read, use, manage, and destructive actions.
+- Current-state findings are labeled as sampled evidence, not broad proof.
+- Risky mutations have explicit approval, blast-radius review, rollback, and validation.
+- Official-source claims are linked to service docs and not overstated as live posture.
+
+## When to push back
+
+- The user asks for a write/delete/start/stop/update/remediate action before scope and owner are clear.
+- The answer would depend on live infrastructure state but only documentation evidence exists.
+- The proposed access is broader than the task requires.
+- The plan has no rollback, owner, or validation step.

package/skills/oci/oci-autonomous-database-architect/references/compatibility-checklist.md

@@ -1,28 +1,9 @@
-# Autonomous Database Compatibility Checklist
+# Autonomous Database compatibility checklist
 
-## Workload compatibility
+Use this component-specific checklist for workload fit.
 
-- Confirm database workload type: Transaction Processing, Data Warehouse, JSON, APEX, AI/vector/RAG, or mixed.
-- Confirm database version and feature dependencies before assuming portability.
-- Validate SQL plan stability, optimizer behavior, object types, scheduler jobs, database links, external tables, network ACLs, APEX/ORDS, and client driver support.
-- Check if the application assumes host-level access; Autonomous Database does not provide normal host administration.
-
-## Network and access compatibility
-
-- Private endpoint or public endpoint decision is explicit.
-- DNS resolution path is documented for OCI, Azure, AWS, Google Cloud, on-premises, and developer clients.
-- Wallet, mTLS/TLS, secret storage, rotation, and client rollout are owned.
-- Ingress and egress are least-privilege and auditable.
-
-## Operations compatibility
-
-- RTO/RPO mapped to Autonomous Data Guard, backups, clones, refreshable clones, or application-level replication.
-- Restore test evidence exists; backup existence alone is not enough.
-- Scaling model is validated: ECPU/OCPU, auto scaling, storage auto scaling, and license model.
-- Observability covers database metrics, audit logs, Data Safe, Operations Insights, alarms, and application SLOs.
-
-## Multicloud compatibility
-
-- Provider destination is named exactly: Oracle Database@Azure, Oracle Database@Google Cloud, Oracle Database@AWS, OCI, or Cloud@Customer.
-- The answer distinguishes Oracle-managed infrastructure from the host cloud's native database products.
-- Region availability, billing path, quota/capacity, identity integration, support workflow, and IaC provider coverage are verified rather than assumed.
+- Workload type, database version, feature usage, APEX/ORDS/JSON/vector needs.
+- Network path, private endpoint, DNS, wallet/TLS, client version, and egress controls.
+- Backup, restore, clone, refreshable clone, Data Guard, switchover/failover, and rollback evidence.
+- Data residency, encryption/key ownership, audit, Data Safe, Operations Insights, alarms, and owner model.
+- Migration method, cutover window, validation queries, rollback criteria, and support escalation path.

package/skills/oci/oci-autonomous-database-architect/references/deployment-options.md

@@ -1,24 +1,10 @@
-# Autonomous Database Deployment Options
+# Autonomous Database deployment options
 
-Use this reference when choosing an Autonomous Database or Autonomous AI Database deployment pattern.
+Use this component-specific reference after loading the operations reference.
 
-## Deployment families
+## Review dimensions
 
-| Family | Where it runs | Good fit | Watch-outs |
-|---|---|---|---|
-| Autonomous Database Serverless | OCI-managed shared Exadata fleet in OCI regions, and selected multicloud database-at-provider offers where available | Fast provisioning, elastic scaling, low operational overhead | Validate private endpoint, regional availability, feature parity, RTO/RPO, wallet/connectivity, and provider-specific control plane |
-| Autonomous Database on Dedicated Exadata Infrastructure | Dedicated Exadata capacity with autonomous container databases and Autonomous VM Cluster concepts | Isolation, predictable fleet governance, regulated workloads, custom patch control boundaries | More capacity planning, lifecycle ownership, ACD/AVMC dependency, maintenance planning |
-| Autonomous Database on Exadata Cloud@Customer | Cloud-managed Exadata in the customer's data center where available | Data residency, low-latency on-premises integration, cloud operating model | Hardware/site readiness, connectivity to OCI control plane, support demarcation, capacity lead time |
-| Oracle Database@Azure | Oracle database services reachable from Azure regions through Oracle-managed interconnect/control-plane integration | Azure application proximity, Azure procurement/ops model, low-latency app-to-database path | Region availability, Azure networking/DNS/IAM integration, support split, feature availability by offer |
-| Oracle Database@Google Cloud | Oracle Exadata/Autonomous database services integrated with Google Cloud regions and interfaces where available | Google Cloud application proximity, native Google Cloud operations paths, Exadata-backed Oracle databases | Validate product generation: Exadata, Exascale, Base Database, or Autonomous; verify CLI/API ownership and networking |
-| Oracle Database@AWS | Oracle database services integrated with AWS where available | AWS application proximity and AWS operating model with Oracle database platform | Validate exact AWS region/offer, autonomous dedicated dependencies, network path, billing/support boundaries |
-
-## Ruthless compatibility questions
-
-- Is the destination actually available in the target provider region today?
-- Is the chosen flavor serverless, dedicated, Exadata, Exascale, Base Database, or Cloud@Customer?
-- Which control plane creates the resource, and which API/MCP can prove current state?
-- What is the private connectivity path, DNS model, egress path, and client wallet lifecycle?
-- What are the backup, clone, restore, Data Guard, cross-region, and cross-provider limits?
-- Who owns patch windows, support tickets, capacity increases, and incident response?
-- Does the app require features not available in the selected autonomous flavor?
+- Serverless versus dedicated Exadata changes isolation, operator control, maintenance, capacity, and cost assumptions.
+- Cloud@Customer and database-at-provider models change control-plane, networking, residency, support, and operational ownership.
+- Multicloud compatibility needs exact product, region, identity, network, backup, Data Guard, licensing, and support evidence.
+- Do not treat marketing availability as proof that the user's subscribed region, limits, and support path are ready.

package/skills/oci/oci-autonomous-database-architect/references/mcp-and-evidence.md

@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+# MCP and evidence path
+
+Use this reference to choose the right evidence path without leaking environment details.
+
+## Evidence order
+
+1. Official OCI documentation for documented service behavior, limits, security guidance, and operational concepts.
+2. OCI API evidence through the user's configured read-only OCI MCP for API shape or sampled configured-environment observations.
+3. Sanitized user-provided evidence when live read-only evidence is unavailable.
+4. Explicit inference only when evidence is incomplete.
+
+## What each evidence type proves
+
+- Official documentation proves documented OCI behavior at the time checked.
+- Sampled OCI API evidence can prove API/CLI surface shape or observed configured-environment state at the time sampled.
+- User-provided evidence proves only what was provided and only if sanitized.
+- Inference is not proof; label it and keep recommendations conditional.
+
+## What evidence does not prove
+
+- Documentation does not prove the user's tenancy, compartments, IAM policies, limits, resources, billing state, security posture, or production readiness.
+- Sampled API evidence does not prove all regions, all compartments, all resources, future posture, or full operational readiness.
+- Command help proves command/API surface shape; it does not prove permission, resource existence, or safe execution.
+
+## Safe phrasing
+
+- “Official OCI documentation says...”
+- “OCI API evidence through the user's configured read-only OCI MCP shows...”
+- “The current state was not queried, so this remains an assumption.”
+- “This recommendation is documentation-based and needs environment validation before production change.”

package/skills/oci/oci-autonomous-database-architect/references/official-sources.md

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+# Official sources
+
+Use this reference when grounding current OCI behavior for `oci-autonomous-database-architect`.
+
+## Oracle documentation sources
+
+- https://docs.oracle.com/en-us/iaas/Content/Database/Concepts/adboverview.htm
+- https://docs.oracle.com/en-us/iaas/Content/database-at-azure/overview.htm
+- https://docs.oracle.com/en-us/iaas/Content/database-at-gcp/overview.htm
+- https://docs.oracle.com/en-us/iaas/Content/database-at-aws/overview.htm
+
+## Current documentation refresh (2026-06-05)
+
+- Official OCI documentation is the primary source for documented service behavior.
+- OCI API evidence through the user's configured read-only OCI MCP is useful for API shape and sampled configured-environment observations.
+- Documentation evidence is not live customer-state evidence. It does not prove the user's tenancy, compartments, IAM policies, limits, deployed resources, billing state, security posture, or production readiness.
+- Use sampled read-only OCI API evidence only when current-state confirmation is required. 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/oci/oci-autonomous-database-architect/references/safety-checklist.md

@@ -1,32 +1,16 @@
-# Safety Checklist
+# Safety checklist
 
-Use this checklist before recommending or executing changes for `oci-autonomous-database-architect`.
+Use before OCI Autonomous Database Architect production recommendations, privileged access, cloud mutations, remediation actions, or readiness claims.
 
-## Scope
+## Non-negotiables
 
-- Deployment model confirmed: OCI, Cloud@Customer, Oracle Database@Azure, Oracle Database@Google Cloud, Oracle Database@AWS, or unknown.
-- Region/provider location confirmed.
-- Compartment or provider boundary confirmed.
-- Resource identity confirmed by name and, when available, live evidence.
-- Owner, business impact, data classification, and environment confirmed.
+- Do not ask for or print credentials, tokens, private keys, API keys, config files, tenancy identifiers, compartment identifiers, resource identifiers, customer data, wallets, or secrets.
+- Default to read-only discovery and advisory output.
+- Require explicit approval before any create, update, delete, start, stop, reboot, failover, restore, revoke, remediate, or command-execution action.
+- Keep permissions least-privilege and scoped to the confirmed resource boundary.
+- Separate documentation evidence from OCI API evidence through the user's configured read-only OCI MCP and sanitized user evidence.
+- Treat API availability and command help as API-shape evidence, not permission to mutate or proof of configured resources.
 
-## Access
+## Evidence labels
 
-- Default profile unless user explicitly chooses another profile/config in the active runtime.
-- Least-privilege action only.
-- No broad grants unless risk-accepted by an owner.
-- No secrets, wallets, credentials, tokens, connection strings, or config contents requested or displayed.
-
-## Change safety
-
-- Read-only discovery first.
-- Explicit approval for write, delete, start, stop, update, patch, failover, switchover, restore, wallet, key, SQL, command execution, network, or remediation actions.
-- Rollback path documented.
-- Validation plan includes positive checks, negative checks, and application-owner signoff.
-
-## Platform portability
-
-- Prefer MCP tool calls.
-- Use neutral `<placeholders>` in examples.
-- Do not assume Bash, PowerShell, cmd.exe, macOS, Windows, or Linux until execution context is known.
-- Do not embed machine-local paths.
+Use `documentation-based`, `sampled OCI API evidence`, `sampled current-state evidence`, `repo evidence`, `user-provided sanitized evidence`, or `inference`. Documentation alone never proves the user's live OCI posture.

package/skills/oci/oci-autonomous-database-architect/references/workflow-and-output.md

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+# Workflow and output contract
+
+Use this reference for full OCI Autonomous Database Architect reviews.
+
+## Workflow
+
+1. **Classify scope** — domain, environment, owner, resource boundary, requested action, and production impact.
+2. **Ground in official docs** — use official OCI documentation for current service behavior and caveats.
+3. **Collect read-only evidence when available** — use OCI API evidence through the user's configured read-only OCI MCP for sampled API shape or current-state observations.
+4. **Stress test the plan** — identify broad permissions, destructive actions, unsupported assumptions, missing rollback, and missing owner validation.
+5. **Prioritize safe next actions** — prefer reversible discovery and staged changes before mutation.
+
+## Output contract
+
+Return:
+
+1. Scoped target and evidence level
+2. Verdict: ready, ready with risks, or not ready
+3. Top blockers
+4. Findings with severity, evidence label, recommendation, and owner
+5. Safe next actions in priority order
+6. Required approvals for any mutation
+7. Open questions and assumptions
+8. Official-source notes and sampled-evidence caveats