@tangle-network/starter-foundry 0.7.3 → 0.13.2

package/registry/families/agent-runtime-legal-counsel-ts/files/methodology/index.json

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+{
+  "entries": [
+    {
+      "id": "contract-redline-protocol",
+      "capability": "contract-redline",
+      "path": "./contract-redline-protocol.md",
+      "tags": ["methodology", "redline", "clause-review"],
+      "version": "0.1.0"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "nda-checklist",
+      "capability": "nda-review",
+      "path": "./nda-checklist.md",
+      "tags": ["checklist", "nda", "confidentiality"],
+      "version": "0.1.0"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "msa-checklist",
+      "capability": "msa-review",
+      "path": "./msa-checklist.md",
+      "tags": ["checklist", "msa", "services-agreement"],
+      "version": "0.1.0"
+    }
+  ]
+}

package/registry/families/agent-runtime-legal-counsel-ts/files/methodology/msa-checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,190 @@
+# MSA Review Checklist
+
+**DRAFT — NOT LEGAL ADVICE.** Use this as a structured first pass.
+Final language for any binding execution must be reviewed by
+bar-licensed counsel in the operative jurisdiction.
+
+## Step 0 — Posture
+
+- **Form ownership** — are we redlining the buyer's MSA or the
+  vendor's? Each party's form bakes in defaults that favor the
+  drafter; identify which way each clause leans.
+- **Deal size** — drives market position on LoL caps, indemnity, and
+  termination rights. Sub-$100k SaaS uses much tighter caps than
+  seven-figure professional services.
+- **Industry** — healthcare (HIPAA BAA required), financial services
+  (FINRA / SEC), defense (DFARS / ITAR flow-downs), insurance →
+  escalate; industry counsel norms diverge.
+
+## 1. Scope / SOW structure
+
+- MSA + SOW model: MSA governs general terms; each SOW defines
+  specific scope, fees, deliverables, schedule.
+- **Order of precedence** clause — when MSA and SOW conflict, which
+  controls? Default to MSA; allow SOW to override only for explicitly
+  enumerated terms (fees, deliverables, schedule).
+- **Change-order process** — who signs, what triggers a re-quote,
+  default behavior on disputed change orders (work continues at
+  original scope vs paused).
+
+## 2. Payment terms
+
+- **Net days** — net-30 standard for SaaS / professional services;
+  net-60 / net-90 increasingly common from large buyers, push back
+  to net-30 or build it into the price.
+- **Late fees / interest** — 1.0–1.5%/month or max permitted by law;
+  suspension rights after defined cure period.
+- **Disputed invoices** — undisputed amounts must still be paid by
+  the due date; disputed portions tracked separately with a
+  written-notice + good-faith-resolution process.
+- **Taxes** — fees exclusive of taxes; buyer responsible for sales /
+  use / VAT; each party responsible for its own income taxes.
+- **Expenses** — pre-approved, at-cost, with receipts.
+
+## 3. IP — assignment vs license
+
+- **Pre-existing IP** — each party retains its own; no implicit
+  assignment.
+- **Foreground IP** (created during the engagement) — who owns?
+  - **Work-for-hire / assignment to buyer**: buyer owns deliverables;
+    vendor needs a license-back for residual know-how to operate its
+    business.
+  - **License to buyer**: vendor retains ownership; buyer gets a
+    perpetual, paid-up, sublicensable license for its intended use.
+- **Feedback** — vendor typically requires a perpetual royalty-free
+  license to use feedback in its product roadmap.
+- **Open-source** — disclosure obligation; copyleft (GPL / AGPL)
+  exclusion unless pre-approved; obligation to comply with OSS
+  license terms.
+- **Moral rights waiver** — required in jurisdictions that recognize
+  moral rights; defer to counsel for non-US deals.
+
+## 4. Indemnification
+
+- **Vendor indemnifies buyer** for: third-party IP-infringement
+  claims, breach of confidentiality, breach of data-security
+  obligations, gross negligence / willful misconduct.
+- **Buyer indemnifies vendor** for: misuse of deliverables, content
+  buyer provides, third-party claims arising from buyer's data.
+- **Mechanics** — prompt notice, control of defense by indemnitor
+  with cooperation by indemnitee, no settlement without indemnitee
+  consent for non-monetary obligations or admissions of fault, duty
+  to mitigate.
+- **IP-infringement carve-outs** — vendor not liable if claim arises
+  from buyer's modifications, combination with non-vendor products,
+  or use after notice to discontinue.
+- **IP-infringement remedies** — vendor must (i) procure right to
+  continue use, (ii) modify to non-infringing, or (iii) refund pro-
+  rata fees + terminate.
+
+## 5. Limitation of liability
+
+- **Cap on direct damages** — common positions:
+  - 1× fees paid in trailing 12 months (low-stakes SaaS)
+  - 2–3× annual fees (material engagements)
+  - Higher / uncapped for specific risk classes
+- **Excluded categories** — indirect, consequential, special,
+  incidental, punitive, lost profits, loss of data (push back on
+  loss-of-data exclusion for data-handling vendors).
+- **Carve-outs that punch through the cap** — push for ALL of:
+  - Indemnification obligations (or at minimum, IP-infringement
+    indemnity)
+  - Breach of confidentiality
+  - Breach of data-security / privacy obligations
+  - Gross negligence, willful misconduct, fraud
+  - Payment obligations
+  - Violation of laws
+- **Mutual or one-way?** Caps and carve-outs should be mutual; flag
+  asymmetric framing.
+
+## 6. Warranties
+
+- **Services**: performed in a workmanlike manner consistent with
+  industry standards; conformance to documentation; remedy =
+  re-perform / refund.
+- **IP non-infringement** — to vendor's knowledge or absolute (depends
+  on leverage).
+- **No malicious code** — no time bombs, drop-dead devices, viruses;
+  no disabling devices triggered on payment dispute.
+- **Disclaimers** — all other warranties disclaimed (merchantability,
+  fitness for purpose, non-infringement beyond stated reps); flag
+  blanket "AS-IS" disclaimers in vendor forms.
+
+## 7. Confidentiality
+
+- Cross-reference NDA checklist — same definitions, exclusions,
+  return obligations, residuals position.
+- **Survival** — confidentiality obligations survive termination
+  (typically 3–5 years, indefinite for trade secrets).
+
+## 8. Data security & privacy
+
+- **Data Processing Addendum (DPA)** required for any vendor
+  handling personal data — addresses GDPR / CCPA / state-privacy-law
+  obligations, Standard Contractual Clauses for cross-border
+  transfers, sub-processor approvals.
+- **Security standards** — SOC 2 Type II / ISO 27001 / equivalent;
+  encryption in transit + at rest; breach notification within
+  defined window (24–72 hours common).
+- **Audit rights** — annual SOC 2 report delivery, on-site audit
+  rights for material engagements.
+- **CCPA / Cal AB-1184** — California-specific consumer / health-
+  privacy considerations; if California consumer data is in scope,
+  escalate to counsel for state-specific terms.
+
+## 9. Term & termination
+
+- **Initial term** (often 1–3 years), **renewal** (auto-renewal with
+  60–90 day non-renewal notice; flag unilateral auto-renewal).
+- **Termination for convenience** — by buyer with 30–90 days notice;
+  often no convenience-termination right for vendor in subscription
+  deals.
+- **Termination for cause** — material breach, 30-day cure period;
+  insolvency, bankruptcy.
+- **Effect of termination** — payment of fees through termination
+  date, return / deletion of confidential info, license-survival
+  carve-outs (perpetual licenses survive), data-extraction window.
+
+## 10. Governing law / venue / dispute resolution
+
+- Governing law without conflict-of-laws principles.
+- Venue convenient for the user; or arbitration (AAA / JAMS,
+  specified seat, specified rules, specified language).
+- **Carve-out for injunctive relief** — confidentiality / IP
+  breaches need court access.
+- Jury waiver, class-action waiver — standard.
+
+## 11. Insurance
+
+- Commercial general liability ($1M / $2M aggregate)
+- Professional liability / E&O ($1M / $5M depending on deal size)
+- Cyber liability (rising baseline; $5M+ for material data handlers)
+- Workers' comp (statutory)
+- Vendor names buyer as additional insured where applicable.
+
+## 12. Boilerplate
+
+- Assignment (consent required; change-of-control triggers consent)
+- Notices (method, address)
+- Force majeure (does NOT excuse payment; pandemic / cyber-attack
+  inclusion)
+- Independent contractors (no employment / agency / partnership)
+- Severability, entire agreement, amendment in writing, counterparts
+
+## Escalation triggers
+
+Emit `:::escalation` if any of the following:
+- Healthcare (HIPAA BAA), financial services, defense, insurance,
+  cannabis, gambling — industry-specific counsel required
+- Non-US governing law / venue
+- Public-company counterparty with disclosure obligations
+- Already-noticed dispute, demand letter, or arbitration
+- Choice-of-law / non-compete / employment-classification analysis
+  requires state-specific expertise
+
+## Output
+
+Wrap as a single `:::artifact` block tagged
+`DRAFT — NOT LEGAL ADVICE` with each section marked
+`OK / FLAG / MISSING` and proposed redlines (with rationale + market
+position) for FLAG / MISSING items.

package/registry/families/agent-runtime-legal-counsel-ts/files/methodology/nda-checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,122 @@
+# NDA Review Checklist
+
+**DRAFT — NOT LEGAL ADVICE.** Use this as a structured first pass.
+Final language for any binding execution must be reviewed by
+bar-licensed counsel.
+
+## Step 0 — Posture
+
+- **Mutual or unilateral?** If only one party is disclosing, a
+  unilateral NDA is normal; once both parties expect to share,
+  mutualize. Default-redline unilateral → mutual when the
+  relationship is exploratory (partnership talks, M&A diligence both
+  ways, vendor-evaluation where the vendor sees the buyer's roadmap).
+- **Standalone NDA or NDA-within-MSA?** If embedded, check for
+  conflict with the MSA's own confidentiality clause (survival
+  period, return-of-info obligations).
+
+## 1. Definition of "Confidential Information"
+
+- Does it cover **all forms** — written, oral, visual, electronic,
+  observed?
+- Does it require **marking** as confidential to qualify? Marking
+  requirements weaken protection for oral / observed disclosures.
+  Acceptable variant: oral disclosures must be confirmed in writing
+  within 30 days.
+- Does it sweep in **derivative work product** (notes, analyses,
+  summaries the recipient creates from disclosed material)? Should.
+- Does it cover the **fact of discussions** (existence, status,
+  terms)? Important for M&A and partnership talks.
+
+## 2. Exclusions from confidentiality
+
+Standard exclusions (recipient should insist on all five):
+- Already known to recipient before disclosure
+- Independently developed without use of confidential info
+- Lawfully received from a third party with no duty of confidence
+- In the public domain through no fault of recipient
+- Required to be disclosed by law / court order (with prompt notice
+  + cooperation in seeking protective order)
+
+Flag: missing "independently developed" exclusion (this is the most
+commonly stripped); missing prompt-notice requirement on legal-order
+disclosures.
+
+## 3. Term
+
+Two terms to distinguish:
+- **Term of the NDA** (during which disclosures are protected)
+- **Confidentiality period** (during which the recipient must keep
+  protected info confidential — often longer)
+
+Market: 2–5 year confidentiality period for general business info;
+**indefinite for trade secrets**. Flag: a single term that expires
+the protection of trade secrets after a fixed window.
+
+## 4. Permitted uses
+
+- Tightly scoped to the **stated purpose** (e.g. "evaluating a
+  potential commercial relationship") — not "any business purpose."
+- **Need-to-know** restriction inside the recipient's organization.
+- **Affiliate / contractor** sharing only with equivalent
+  confidentiality obligations bound in writing.
+
+## 5. Return / destruction of information
+
+- Upon written request **or** termination, recipient returns or
+  destroys.
+- **Certification of destruction** in writing if destroyed.
+- **Carve-outs**: legal-hold copies, automated-backup copies (with
+  ongoing confidentiality obligation) — these are reasonable.
+
+## 6. Residuals clause
+
+Recipient often pushes for a residuals clause: information retained
+in unaided memory of personnel may be used freely. **High-value
+disclosers should resist or narrow** — limit to general skills and
+know-how, exclude trade secrets and specific technical information.
+
+## 7. Equitable remedies
+
+- Acknowledgment that breach causes irreparable harm
+- Right to seek **injunctive relief without bond** (or with nominal
+  bond)
+- Without limiting other remedies (not sole-and-exclusive)
+
+## 8. No license / no obligation
+
+- Disclosure does not grant any license under IP rights
+- No obligation to enter a further commercial relationship
+- No representation as to accuracy of disclosed information (subject
+  to MSA reps if there's a downstream deal)
+
+## 9. Governing law / venue / dispute resolution
+
+- Venue convenient for the user
+- Carve-out for **injunctive relief in any court of competent
+  jurisdiction** — confidentiality breaches need same-day TROs;
+  arbitration is too slow.
+- Jury waiver, class-action waiver — standard for commercial NDAs.
+
+## 10. Boilerplate
+
+- Assignment (no assignment without consent; change-of-control
+  triggers consent)
+- Severability, entire agreement, amendment in writing
+- Counterparts / electronic signature
+
+## Escalation triggers
+
+Emit `:::escalation` if any of the following:
+- The NDA is governed by **non-US law**
+- The disclosure involves **regulated data** (PHI, financial, ITAR-
+  controlled, classified) — industry-specific counsel required
+- A dispute or threatened breach is already in motion
+- The disclosure is in connection with a **public-company** M&A
+  process (Reg FD / insider-trading exposure)
+
+## Output
+
+Wrap as a single `:::artifact` block tagged
+`DRAFT — NOT LEGAL ADVICE` with each checklist item marked
+`OK / FLAG / MISSING` and proposed redlines for FLAG / MISSING items.

package/registry/families/agent-runtime-legal-counsel-ts/manifest.json

@@ -0,0 +1,178 @@
+{
+  "id": "agent-runtime-legal-counsel-ts",
+  "description": "In-house-counsel reference agent \u2014 drafts redlines, runs contract review checklists (NDA, MSA), flags asymmetric provisions and binding-decision moments. Explicitly NOT a lawyer; no attorney-client privilege; jurisdiction-agnostic. Demonstrates the agent-runtime substrate composing with structured-output blocks (:::artifact, :::escalation) on a regulated-legal role.",
+  "tags": [
+    "agent-runtime",
+    "legal",
+    "contract-review",
+    "regulated-domain",
+    "cloudflare-worker"
+  ],
+  "taxonomy": {
+    "language": "markdown",
+    "runtime": "cloudflare-worker",
+    "surface": "agent-runtime"
+  },
+  "includes": [
+    "agent-base:tangle",
+    "agent-base:secure",
+    "agent-base:privacy",
+    "agent-output:blocks",
+    "agent-base:memory",
+    "agent-base:scheduler",
+    "agent-base:mcp-registry",
+    "agent-channels:telegram",
+    "agent-channels:discord",
+    "agent-channels:slack",
+    "agent-channels:whatsapp",
+    "agent-channels:imessage",
+    "agent-channels:gmail",
+    "agent-channels:linear"
+  ],
+  "defaults": {
+    "projectType": "agent-runtime-legal-counsel",
+    "agentName": "legal-counsel",
+    "publicVars": [
+      "AGENT_NAME"
+    ],
+    "routes": [
+      {
+        "path": "/api/chat",
+        "auth": "bearer",
+        "callsTools": [
+          "redline",
+          "checklist",
+          "escalation"
+        ]
+      },
+      {
+        "path": "/api/health",
+        "auth": "none",
+        "callsTools": []
+      }
+    ],
+    "declaredCapabilities": [
+      "contract-redline",
+      "nda-review",
+      "msa-review",
+      "escalation-protocol"
+    ],
+    "runtime": {
+      "sandbox": "tangle",
+      "noNewPrivileges": true,
+      "capDrop": "ALL"
+    },
+    "notLawyer": true,
+    "attorneyClientPrivilege": false,
+    "outboundDomains": [
+      "api.tangle.tools",
+      "law.cornell.edu"
+    ],
+    "secrets": [
+      "TANGLE_API_KEY"
+    ]
+  },
+  "files": [
+    {
+      "source": "files/agent.json",
+      "target": "agent.json"
+    },
+    {
+      "source": "files/AGENTS.md",
+      "target": "AGENTS.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "source": "files/methodology/index.json",
+      "target": "methodology/index.json"
+    },
+    {
+      "source": "files/methodology/contract-redline-protocol.md",
+      "target": "methodology/contract-redline-protocol.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "source": "files/methodology/nda-checklist.md",
+      "target": "methodology/nda-checklist.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "source": "files/methodology/msa-checklist.md",
+      "target": "methodology/msa-checklist.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "source": "files/README.md",
+      "target": "README.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "source": "files/TOOLS.md",
+      "target": "TOOLS.md"
+    }
+  ],
+  "validationChecks": [
+    {
+      "type": "file-exists",
+      "path": "AGENTS.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "file-exists",
+      "path": "methodology/index.json"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "agents-md-valid",
+      "path": "AGENTS.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "methodology-index-valid",
+      "path": "methodology/index.json"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "file-exists",
+      "path": "TOOLS.md"
+    }
+  ],
+  "contextHints": {
+    "commands": [],
+    "entrypoints": [
+      "AGENTS.md"
+    ],
+    "extensionPoints": [
+      "templates/",
+      "src/lib/tools/"
+    ]
+  },
+  "keywords": [
+    "legal",
+    "contract",
+    "nda",
+    "msa",
+    "redline",
+    "in-house-counsel"
+  ],
+  "tieredKeywords": {
+    "tier1": [
+      "legal-counsel",
+      "legal counsel",
+      "contract-review-agent",
+      "contract review agent",
+      "in-house-counsel",
+      "in house counsel",
+      "contract redline"
+    ],
+    "tier2": [
+      "NDA",
+      "MSA",
+      "SLA",
+      "indemnification",
+      "limitation-of-liability",
+      "IP-assignment",
+      "contract review"
+    ],
+    "tier3": [
+      "redline",
+      "legal"
+    ],
+    "archetypes": [
+      "agent-in-sandbox",
+      "advisory-agent",
+      "regulated-legal"
+    ]
+  }
+}

package/registry/families/agent-runtime-math-research-ts/files/AGENTS.md

@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+---
+name: math-research
+role: Math research assistant — literature review, proof verification, and mathematical reasoning
+ domain: math-research
+allowedDomains:
+  - api.tangle.tools
+  - export.arxiv.org
+  - api.semanticscholar.org
+  - api.openalex.org
+  - api.crossref.org
+allowedEnv:
+  - TANGLE_API_KEY
+advisoryOnly: true
+escalationRequired: false
+version: 0.1.0
+---
+
+## Role
+
+You are a math research assistant. You help mathematicians, students, and researchers with literature review, proof verification, and mathematical reasoning. You are **not** a substitute for peer review, domain expertise, or formal verification. You do not claim to have proven a theorem or to have found a counterexample unless you can cite a source or provide a rigorous argument.
+
+You work alongside the user to:
+- Search and summarize mathematical literature (arxiv, Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref)
+- Check logical structure and completeness of proofs
+- Explore conjectures and counterexamples
+- Suggest references and related work
+
+State your limitations clearly: you can assist with reasoning but cannot guarantee correctness of proofs or originality of results.
+
+## Authoritative skills
+
+When the user's request maps to one of these capabilities, load the corresponding template *before* responding. The templates are the methodology source of truth; trust them over training.
+
+- `literature-review` → `templates/literature-review.md`
+- `proof-verification` → `templates/proof-verification.md`
+- `mathematical-reasoning` → `templates/mathematical-reasoning.md`
+
+## Output blocks
+
+Wrap structured deliverables in parseable blocks the host UI renders distinctly:
+
+- `:::artifact` — literature review summaries, proof verification reports, reasoning chains. Always tag the producing template (e.g. `template: literature-review`).
+- `:::survey` — citation-grounded mathematical context produced via the research-corpus tools (arxiv / Semantic Scholar / OpenAlex / Crossref). Inline cite by `[surname, year]`; collect full citations at the bottom of the block. Refuse to fabricate citations.
+- `:::analysis` — short interpretive readouts (e.g. "this proof step relies on a lemma that may not hold in the stated generality") that aren't the artifact itself but inform the user's next move.
+
+## Research-corpus discipline
+
+When the user asks for literature, related work, or mathematical context — **use the research-corpus tools**. Do not hallucinate theorems, proofs, or citations. Search arxiv / Semantic Scholar / OpenAlex / Crossref, cite by `[surname, year]`, and emit the result inside a `:::survey` block.
+
+If you cannot find a citation, say so plainly and downgrade the claim to a hypothesis the user can test — never fabricate.
+
+## What you will NOT do
+
+- Claim to have proven a theorem without a rigorous argument
+- Fabricate citations or mathematical results
+- Provide medical, legal, or financial advice
+- Override the user's domain expertise
+- Guarantee correctness of a proof without formal verification
+
+## What you WILL do
+
+- Search and summarize mathematical literature accurately
+- Check logical structure and completeness of proofs
+- Explore conjectures and counterexamples
+- Suggest references and related work
+- Cite, never hallucinate, when a mathematical claim requires evidence
+- Pair every claim with a source or a clear reasoning chain

package/registry/families/agent-runtime-math-research-ts/files/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+# Math Research Agent
+
+A math research assistant agent bundle for literature review, proof verification, and mathematical reasoning.
+
+## Features
+- Literature review via arxiv, Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref
+- Proof verification and logical analysis
+- Mathematical reasoning and conjecture exploration
+- Structured output blocks for artifacts and surveys
+
+## Usage
+Deploy on Cloudflare Workers with the Tangle runtime.
+
+## Configuration
+Set `TANGLE_API_KEY` environment variable.
+
+## Disclaimer
+This agent is an advisory tool and does not replace peer review or domain expertise.

package/registry/families/agent-runtime-math-research-ts/files/TOOLS.md

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+# TOOLS — agent-runtime-math-research-ts
+
+The bundle inherits all primitives from `agent-base:secure`: `secrets`, `workspace`, `webhook-in`, `webhook-out`, `schedule`, `identity`, `audit`. Plus generic agent tools: `Read`, `Write`, `Edit`, `Glob`, `Grep`, `Bash`, `WebFetch`.
+
+This file lists **domain-specific tools the operator MAY add** if the deployment needs them. Each entry is intent — not implementation. The agent itself can build any of these on demand using `Bash`/`Write` if the operator hasn't.
+
+## Research corpus (inherited from `agent-tools:research-corpus`)
+
+| Capability | Intent |
+|---|---|
+| `corpus.arxiv(query)` | arXiv paper search |
+| `corpus.semanticScholar(query)` | Semantic Scholar |
+| `corpus.openalex(query)` | OpenAlex |
+| `corpus.crossref(query)` | Crossref DOI metadata |
+
+## Domain tools the operator may want
+
+Stub list — replace with role-specific entries. Keep ≤10 domain tools per deployment; more is fragmentation. Each tool should be:
+- Single-purpose
+- JSON output
+- ≤100 LOC
+- Listed here when added
+
+| Tool | Intent | Notes |
+|---|---|---|
+| `literature-review` | Concrete tool implementing the `literature-review` capability | Operator implements when needed |
+| `proof-verification` | Concrete tool implementing the `proof-verification` capability | Operator implements when needed |
+| `mathematical-reasoning` | Concrete tool implementing the `mathematical-reasoning` capability | Operator implements when needed |
+
+## Build a new tool when you need it
+
+The agent's job includes building tools when the measurement doesn't exist. New tools should be small, JSON-output, single-purpose. Add an entry here via PR after shipping.

package/registry/families/agent-runtime-math-research-ts/files/agent.json

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+{
+  "name": "math-research",
+  "description": "Math research assistant agent bundle — helps with literature review, proof verification, and mathematical reasoning. Composes the agent-runtime substrate with the research-corpus layer (arxiv / Semantic Scholar / OpenAlex / Crossref) so any claim is citation-grounded. Advisory only — never replaces peer review or domain expertise.",
+  "version": "0.1.0",
+  "tags": [
+    "agent-runtime",
+    "math-research",
+    "advisory-agent",
+    "literature-review",
+    "proof-assistant",
+    "cloudflare-worker"
+  ],
+  "prompt": {
+    "systemPromptFile": "AGENTS.md"
+  },
+  "tools": {
+    "filesystem": true,
+    "shell": true,
+    "router": true
+  },
+  "permissions": {
+    "filesystem.write": "ask",
+    "shell.exec": "ask",
+    "network": "ask"
+  },
+  "resources": {
+    "files": [
+      {
+        "source": "methodology/"
+      },
+      {
+        "source": "README.md"
+      },
+      {
+        "source": "TOOLS.md"
+      }
+    ]
+  }
+}