@soleri/forge 8.1.0 → 9.0.1

package/src/skills/second-opinion.md

@@ -1,149 +0,0 @@
----
-name: second-opinion
-description: Use when the user asks "should I", "what do you think about", "which approach", "compare options", "what would you recommend", "pros and cons", "trade-offs", or faces any technical decision and wants an informed recommendation backed by vault knowledge, brain patterns, and web research.
----
-
-# Second Opinion — Decision Support From All Sources
-
-Before making any technical decision, get an informed recommendation that synthesizes vault knowledge, brain patterns, cross-project experience, and web research. Never decide in a vacuum.
-
-## When to Use
-
-- "Should I use Redis or Memcached?"
-- "What's the best way to handle auth?"
-- "Which testing framework?"
-- "Microservices or monolith?"
-- Any fork-in-the-road technical decision
-
-## The Magic: Multi-Source Decision Intelligence
-
-### Step 1: Understand the Decision
-
-Classify the intent to understand what kind of decision this is:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:route_intent
-  params: { prompt: "<user's question>" }
-```
-
-### Step 2: Search All Knowledge Sources (in order)
-
-**Vault — has this been decided before?**
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:search_intelligent
-  params: { query: "<the decision or options being considered>" }
-```
-
-Look specifically for:
-
-- Previous decisions on this topic (type: "decision")
-- Patterns that favor one approach
-- Anti-patterns that warn against an approach
-
-**Brain — what's proven to work?**
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:brain_strengths
-```
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:brain_recommend
-  params: { projectName: "<current project>" }
-```
-
-**Cross-project — what did other projects choose?**
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:memory_cross_project_search
-  params: { query: "<the decision topic>", crossProject: true }
-```
-
-**Memory — any relevant context from past sessions?**
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:memory_search
-  params: { query: "<decision topic>" }
-```
-
-**Web — what does the broader community say?**
-Search the web for:
-
-- Comparison articles (X vs Y for [use case])
-- Benchmarks and performance data
-- Community consensus on best practices
-- Known limitations and gotchas
-
-### Step 3: Synthesize and Present
-
-Format the recommendation as a decision brief:
-
-```
-## Decision: [Question]
-
-### What the Vault Says
-[Existing decisions, patterns, and anti-patterns from vault]
-
-### What the Brain Recommends
-[Proven patterns, cross-project insights]
-
-### What the Web Says
-[Community consensus, benchmarks, comparison data]
-
-### Options Analysis
-
-| Criteria | Option A | Option B | Option C |
-|----------|----------|----------|----------|
-| [criteria 1] | ... | ... | ... |
-| [criteria 2] | ... | ... | ... |
-| Vault support | [existing patterns?] | [existing patterns?] | — |
-| Brain confidence | [strength score] | [strength score] | — |
-
-### Recommendation
-[Clear recommendation with reasoning]
-
-### Risks
-[What could go wrong with the recommended approach]
-```
-
-### Step 4: Capture the Decision
-
-Once the user decides, capture it to the vault for future reference:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:capture_knowledge
-  params: {
-    title: "<decision title>",
-    description: "<chosen option, rationale, rejected alternatives and why>",
-    type: "decision",
-    category: "<relevant domain>",
-    tags: ["<option-a>", "<option-b>", "decision", "<domain>"]
-  }
-```
-
-This is critical — the next person who faces the same decision will find it in the vault.
-
-## The Magic
-
-This feels like magic because the user asks "should I use X?" and instead of a generic AI opinion, they get:
-
-1. What their own project decided before (vault)
-2. What's proven to work across projects (brain)
-3. What other linked projects chose (cross-project)
-4. What the broader community recommends (web)
-5. A synthesized recommendation with trade-offs
-6. The decision captured for the next person who asks
-
-It's like having a senior architect who remembers every decision ever made.
-
-## Agent Tools Reference
-
-| Op                            | When to Use                          |
-| ----------------------------- | ------------------------------------ |
-| `route_intent`                | Classify the decision type           |
-| `search_intelligent`          | Find previous decisions and patterns |
-| `brain_strengths`             | Proven approaches                    |
-| `brain_recommend`             | Project-specific recommendations     |
-| `memory_cross_project_search` | What other projects decided          |
-| `memory_search`               | Session context for this decision    |
-| `capture_knowledge`           | Persist the final decision           |

package/src/skills/systematic-debugging.md

@@ -1,241 +0,0 @@
----
-name: systematic-debugging
-description: Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes
----
-
-<!-- Adapted from superpowers (MIT License) -->
-
-# Systematic Debugging
-
-## Overview
-
-Random fixes waste time and create new bugs. Quick patches mask underlying issues.
-
-**Core principle:** ALWAYS find root cause before attempting fixes. Symptom fixes are failure.
-
-**Violating the letter of this process is violating the spirit of debugging.**
-
-## The Iron Law
-
-```
-NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION FIRST
-```
-
-If you haven't completed Phase 1, you cannot propose fixes.
-
-## When to Use
-
-Use for ANY technical issue:
-
-- Test failures
-- Bugs in production
-- Unexpected behavior
-- Performance problems
-- Build failures
-- Integration issues
-
-**Use this ESPECIALLY when:**
-
-- Under time pressure (emergencies make guessing tempting)
-- "Just one quick fix" seems obvious
-- You've already tried multiple fixes
-- Previous fix didn't work
-- You don't fully understand the issue
-
-## Phase 0: Search Before Investigating
-
-**BEFORE touching any code**, search for existing solutions. Follow this order:
-
-### Vault First
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:search_intelligent
-  params: { query: "<description of the bug or error message>" }
-```
-
-If the vault has a matching anti-pattern or previous fix, it likely contains the root cause and solution — apply it directly. This can save hours of investigation.
-
-Also check brain strengths for relevant debugging patterns:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:brain_strengths
-```
-
-Check memory for similar bugs across sessions:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:memory_search
-  params: { query: "<error or symptom>" }
-```
-
-### Web Search Second
-
-If the vault has nothing, search the web before investigating from scratch:
-
-- **Paste the exact error message** — someone likely hit this before
-- **Check GitHub issues** on relevant libraries
-- **Check Stack Overflow** for the error + framework/library combination
-- **Check official docs** — is this a known limitation or misconfiguration?
-
-A 30-second search that finds "this is a known issue in v3.2, upgrade to v3.3" saves hours of root cause investigation.
-
-### Then Investigate
-
-Only if vault and web search produce no answer, proceed to Phase 1.
-
-## Start a Debug Loop
-
-For complex bugs, start a validation loop to track investigation iterations:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:loop_start
-  params: { prompt: "Debug: <bug description>", mode: "custom" }
-```
-
-## The Four Phases
-
-You MUST complete each phase before proceeding to the next.
-
-### Phase 1: Root Cause Investigation
-
-**BEFORE attempting ANY fix:**
-
-1. Read Error Messages Carefully
-2. Reproduce Consistently
-3. Check Recent Changes
-4. Gather Evidence in Multi-Component Systems (add diagnostic instrumentation at each component boundary)
-5. Trace Data Flow backward through call stack
-
-Track each investigation step:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:loop_iterate
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Pattern Analysis
-
-1. Find Working Examples
-2. Compare Against References (read completely, don't skim)
-3. Identify Differences
-4. Understand Dependencies
-
-Search vault for working patterns to compare against:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:search_intelligent
-  params: { query: "<working feature similar to broken one>" }
-```
-
-### Phase 3: Hypothesis and Testing
-
-1. Form Single Hypothesis ("I think X is the root cause because Y")
-2. Test Minimally (one variable at a time)
-3. Verify Before Continuing
-4. When You Don't Know — say so, ask for help
-
-### Phase 4: Implementation
-
-1. Create Failing Test Case (use test-driven-development skill)
-2. Implement Single Fix (root cause only, one change at a time)
-3. Verify Fix
-4. If Fix Doesn't Work: count attempts. If < 3, return to Phase 1. If >= 3, STOP and question architecture.
-5. If 3+ Fixes Failed: Question Architecture — discuss with human partner before attempting more fixes.
-
-## Phase 5: Capture the Learning
-
-Complete the debug loop:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:loop_complete
-```
-
-**MANDATORY after every resolved bug.** A fix without a capture is an incomplete fix.
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:capture_knowledge
-  params: {
-    title: "<short bug description>",
-    description: "<root cause, solution, and what made it hard to find>",
-    type: "anti-pattern",
-    category: "<relevant domain>",
-    tags: ["<relevant>", "<tags>"]
-  }
-```
-
-For quick captures when the fix is straightforward:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:capture_quick
-  params: {
-    title: "<bug description>",
-    description: "<root cause and fix>"
-  }
-```
-
-Capture a session summary:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:session_capture
-  params: { summary: "<bug, root cause, fix, files modified>" }
-```
-
-This is what makes the agent smarter over time. Next time someone hits a similar bug, Phase 0 vault search will surface your solution immediately.
-
-## Red Flags - STOP and Follow Process
-
-- "Quick fix for now, investigate later"
-- "Just try changing X and see if it works"
-- "Add multiple changes, run tests"
-- "Skip the test, I'll manually verify"
-- "It's probably X, let me fix that"
-- "I don't fully understand but this might work"
-- Proposing solutions before tracing data flow
-- "One more fix attempt" (when already tried 2+)
-- Each fix reveals new problem in different place
-
-**ALL of these mean: STOP. Return to Phase 1.**
-
-## Common Rationalizations
-
-| Excuse                                       | Reality                                                                 |
-| -------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- |
-| "Issue is simple, don't need process"        | Simple issues have root causes too.                                     |
-| "Emergency, no time for process"             | Systematic is FASTER than guess-and-check thrashing.                    |
-| "Just try this first, then investigate"      | First fix sets the pattern. Do it right from the start.                 |
-| "I'll write test after confirming fix works" | Untested fixes don't stick. Test first proves it.                       |
-| "Multiple fixes at once saves time"          | Can't isolate what worked. Causes new bugs.                             |
-| "Reference too long, I'll adapt the pattern" | Partial understanding guarantees bugs. Read it completely.              |
-| "I see the problem, let me fix it"           | Seeing symptoms ≠ understanding root cause.                             |
-| "One more fix attempt" (after 2+ failures)   | 3+ failures = architectural problem. Question pattern, don't fix again. |
-| "Skip the vault, I know this one"            | The vault may know it better. 30 seconds to check saves hours.          |
-
-## Quick Reference
-
-| Phase                 | Key Activities                   | Agent Tools                                              |
-| --------------------- | -------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------- |
-| **0. Search First**   | Vault search, web search, memory | `search_intelligent`, `brain_strengths`, `memory_search` |
-| **1. Root Cause**     | Read errors, reproduce, trace    | `loop_iterate`                                           |
-| **2. Pattern**        | Find working examples, compare   | `search_intelligent`                                     |
-| **3. Hypothesis**     | Form theory, test minimally      | `loop_iterate`                                           |
-| **4. Implementation** | Create test, fix, verify         | `loop_iterate`                                           |
-| **5. Capture**        | Persist root cause, close loop   | `capture_knowledge`, `loop_complete`, `session_capture`  |
-
-## Agent Tools Reference
-
-| Op                   | When to Use                              |
-| -------------------- | ---------------------------------------- |
-| `search_intelligent` | Search vault for known bugs and patterns |
-| `brain_strengths`    | Check proven debugging patterns          |
-| `memory_search`      | Search across session memories           |
-| `loop_start`         | Begin iterative debug cycle              |
-| `loop_iterate`       | Track each investigation/fix attempt     |
-| `loop_complete`      | Finish debug cycle                       |
-| `capture_knowledge`  | Full anti-pattern capture                |
-| `capture_quick`      | Fast capture for simple fixes            |
-| `session_capture`    | Persist session context                  |
-
-**Related skills:**
-
-- test-driven-development
-- verification-before-completion
-- fix-and-learn (combines debugging + capture in one workflow)

package/src/skills/test-driven-development.md

@@ -1,281 +0,0 @@
----
-name: test-driven-development
-description: Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code
----
-
-<!-- Adapted from superpowers (MIT License) -->
-
-# Test-Driven Development (TDD)
-
-## Overview
-
-Write the test first. Watch it fail. Write minimal code to pass.
-
-**Core principle:** If you didn't watch the test fail, you don't know if it tests the right thing.
-
-**Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.**
-
-## When to Use
-
-**Always:**
-
-- New features
-- Bug fixes
-- Refactoring
-- Behavior changes
-
-**Exceptions (ask your human partner):**
-
-- Throwaway prototypes
-- Generated code
-- Configuration files
-
-Thinking "skip TDD just this once"? Stop. That's rationalization.
-
-## Before You Start — Search First, Code Second
-
-**Never start writing tests blind.** Follow this lookup order:
-
-### 1. Vault First
-
-Check for existing testing patterns in the knowledge base:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:search_intelligent
-  params: { query: "<what you're about to test>" }
-```
-
-Look for:
-
-- **Testing patterns** for similar features (how were they tested before?)
-- **Anti-patterns** — common testing mistakes in this domain
-- **Proven approaches** from brain strengths:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:brain_strengths
-```
-
-If the vault has testing guidance for this domain, follow it. Don't reinvent test strategies that have already been validated.
-
-### 2. Web Search
-
-If the vault has no relevant patterns, search the web for established testing approaches:
-
-- Library-specific testing patterns (e.g., how to test React hooks, Express middleware)
-- Best practices for the specific type of test (integration, e2e, unit)
-- Known gotchas in the testing framework being used
-
-### 3. Then Write the Test
-
-Only after consulting vault and web, proceed to write the failing test. You'll write better tests when informed by existing knowledge.
-
-## Start a TDD Loop
-
-For multi-test TDD cycles, start a validation loop to track iterations:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:loop_start
-  params: { prompt: "TDD: <feature being implemented>", mode: "custom" }
-```
-
-## The Iron Law
-
-```
-NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST
-```
-
-Write code before the test? Delete it. Start over.
-
-**No exceptions:**
-
-- Don't keep it as "reference"
-- Don't "adapt" it while writing tests
-- Don't look at it
-- Delete means delete
-
-Implement fresh from tests. Period.
-
-## Red-Green-Refactor
-
-### RED - Write Failing Test
-
-Write one minimal test showing what should happen.
-
-Good: clear name, tests real behavior, one thing
-Bad: vague name, tests mock not code
-
-**Requirements:**
-
-- One behavior
-- Clear name
-- Real code (no mocks unless unavoidable)
-
-### Verify RED - Watch It Fail
-
-**MANDATORY. Never skip.**
-
-Run: `npm test path/to/test.test.ts`
-
-Confirm:
-
-- Test fails (not errors)
-- Failure message is expected
-- Fails because feature missing (not typos)
-
-**Test passes?** You're testing existing behavior. Fix test.
-**Test errors?** Fix error, re-run until it fails correctly.
-
-Track the iteration:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:loop_iterate
-```
-
-### GREEN - Minimal Code
-
-Write simplest code to pass the test. Don't add features, refactor other code, or "improve" beyond the test.
-
-### Verify GREEN - Watch It Pass
-
-**MANDATORY.**
-
-Run: `npm test path/to/test.test.ts`
-
-Confirm:
-
-- Test passes
-- Other tests still pass
-- Output pristine (no errors, warnings)
-
-**Test fails?** Fix code, not test.
-**Other tests fail?** Fix now.
-
-Track the iteration:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:loop_iterate
-```
-
-### REFACTOR - Clean Up
-
-After green only:
-
-- Remove duplication
-- Improve names
-- Extract helpers
-
-Keep tests green. Don't add behavior.
-
-### Repeat
-
-Next failing test for next feature.
-
-## Good Tests
-
-| Quality          | Good                                | Bad                                                 |
-| ---------------- | ----------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------- |
-| **Minimal**      | One thing. "and" in name? Split it. | `test('validates email and domain and whitespace')` |
-| **Clear**        | Name describes behavior             | `test('test1')`                                     |
-| **Shows intent** | Demonstrates desired API            | Obscures what code should do                        |
-
-## Why Order Matters
-
-Tests written after code pass immediately — proving nothing. Test-first forces you to watch the test fail, proving it actually tests something.
-
-## Common Rationalizations
-
-| Excuse                                 | Reality                                                                 |
-| -------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- |
-| "Too simple to test"                   | Simple code breaks. Test takes 30 seconds.                              |
-| "I'll test after"                      | Tests passing immediately prove nothing.                                |
-| "Tests after achieve same goals"       | Tests-after = "what does this do?" Tests-first = "what should this do?" |
-| "Already manually tested"              | Ad-hoc ≠ systematic. No record, can't re-run.                           |
-| "Deleting X hours is wasteful"         | Sunk cost fallacy. Keeping unverified code is technical debt.           |
-| "Keep as reference, write tests first" | You'll adapt it. That's testing after. Delete means delete.             |
-| "Need to explore first"                | Fine. Throw away exploration, start with TDD.                           |
-| "Test hard = design unclear"           | Listen to test. Hard to test = hard to use.                             |
-| "TDD will slow me down"                | TDD faster than debugging. Pragmatic = test-first.                      |
-| "Manual test faster"                   | Manual doesn't prove edge cases. You'll re-test every change.           |
-| "Existing code has no tests"           | You're improving it. Add tests for existing code.                       |
-
-## Red Flags - STOP and Start Over
-
-- Code before test
-- Test after implementation
-- Test passes immediately
-- Can't explain why test failed
-- Tests added "later"
-- Rationalizing "just this once"
-- "I already manually tested it"
-- "Tests after achieve the same purpose"
-- "It's about spirit not ritual"
-- "Keep as reference" or "adapt existing code"
-- "Already spent X hours, deleting is wasteful"
-- "TDD is dogmatic, I'm being pragmatic"
-- "This is different because..."
-
-**All of these mean: Delete code. Start over with TDD.**
-
-## Verification Checklist
-
-Before marking work complete:
-
-- [ ] Every new function/method has a test
-- [ ] Watched each test fail before implementing
-- [ ] Each test failed for expected reason (feature missing, not typo)
-- [ ] Wrote minimal code to pass each test
-- [ ] All tests pass
-- [ ] Output pristine (no errors, warnings)
-- [ ] Tests use real code (mocks only if unavoidable)
-- [ ] Edge cases and errors covered
-
-Can't check all boxes? You skipped TDD. Start over.
-
-## After TDD — Capture and Complete
-
-Complete the loop:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:loop_complete
-```
-
-If you discovered a new testing pattern, edge case, or anti-pattern during the TDD cycle, capture it:
-
-```
-YOUR_AGENT_core op:capture_quick
-  params: {
-    title: "<testing pattern or anti-pattern>",
-    description: "<what you learned, when it applies, why it matters>"
-  }
-```
-
-This compounds across sessions — next time someone works on similar code, the vault will surface your testing insight.
-
-## When Stuck
-
-| Problem                | Solution                                                             |
-| ---------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------- |
-| Don't know how to test | Write wished-for API. Write assertion first. Ask your human partner. |
-| Test too complicated   | Design too complicated. Simplify interface.                          |
-| Must mock everything   | Code too coupled. Use dependency injection.                          |
-| Test setup huge        | Extract helpers. Still complex? Simplify design.                     |
-
-## Final Rule
-
-```
-Production code → test exists and failed first
-Otherwise → not TDD
-```
-
-No exceptions without your human partner's permission.
-
-## Agent Tools Reference
-
-| Op                   | When to Use                           |
-| -------------------- | ------------------------------------- |
-| `search_intelligent` | Find testing patterns before starting |
-| `brain_strengths`    | Check proven testing approaches       |
-| `loop_start`         | Begin TDD validation loop             |
-| `loop_iterate`       | Track each red-green cycle            |
-| `loop_complete`      | Finish TDD loop                       |
-| `capture_quick`      | Capture new testing patterns          |