@wazir-dev/cli 1.2.0 → 1.4.0

package/docs/research/2026-03-20-agents/ac1bc783364405e5f.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,190 @@
+{"parentUuid":null,"isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":"Research ONLY — no code. Deep dive on superpowers' persuasion engineering.\n\nRead ~/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/SKILL.md — find the persuasion principles section. Read EVERY word.\n\nAlso fetch and read the latest superpowers writing-skills skill from GitHub (may be newer than cache).\n\nResearch:\n1. The 7 persuasion principles and how they map to LLM compliance\n2. The Meincke et al. (2025) study — what exactly did they test?\n3. CSO (Claude Search Optimization) — why do skill descriptions matter so much?\n4. How superpowers tests skills (RED/GREEN/REFACTOR for skill writing)\n5. The specific rationalization tables — enumerate ALL of them across ALL skills\n\nAlso research: are there academic papers on LLM compliance with instructions? What makes some instructions more followable than others?\n\nOutput: A complete persuasion engineering playbook for Wazir skill rewriting."},"uuid":"2a8dead4-df21-40b6-b489-63dbba4f2c53","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:32:59.496Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"2a8dead4-df21-40b6-b489-63dbba4f2c53","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_011J4xAveUDjnjsWdDURkoBF","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"\n\nI'll start by reading the cached skill file and searching for the GitHub version in parallel."}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":2677,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":2677,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZER9YFKYNMyQUKB8hb1T","type":"assistant","uuid":"28e8c7bd-378d-4baa-bb04-2e7a433dd839","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:06.028Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"28e8c7bd-378d-4baa-bb04-2e7a433dd839","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_011J4xAveUDjnjsWdDURkoBF","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01NUAkF5fwkELuQ3oSpNwDGx","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":2677,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":2677,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZER9YFKYNMyQUKB8hb1T","type":"assistant","uuid":"e641fce6-3705-45aa-bafd-3ca738998210","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:07.059Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"e641fce6-3705-45aa-bafd-3ca738998210","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01NUAkF5fwkELuQ3oSpNwDGx","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01NUAkF5fwkELuQ3oSpNwDGx","uuid":"e6c0031c-7d53-4fe1-a340-942908fbee7f","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:07.062Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"e6c0031c-7d53-4fe1-a340-942908fbee7f","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_011J4xAveUDjnjsWdDURkoBF","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01Gv8StagoHzkfHfCGnLGAG6","name":"Glob","input":{"pattern":"**/*.md","path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":2677,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":2677,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZER9YFKYNMyQUKB8hb1T","type":"assistant","uuid":"1071437e-253c-46ae-aace-e4c7c555e23a","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:07.373Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"1071437e-253c-46ae-aace-e4c7c555e23a","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01NUAkF5fwkELuQ3oSpNwDGx","toolUseID":"toolu_01NUAkF5fwkELuQ3oSpNwDGx","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:07.627Z","uuid":"3aec1098-cdc6-48f6-98c4-f4fb5e52aeb9","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"e641fce6-3705-45aa-bafd-3ca738998210","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01NUAkF5fwkELuQ3oSpNwDGx","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: writing-skills\n     3→description: Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Writing Skills\n     7→\n     8→## Overview\n     9→\n    10→**Writing skills IS Test-Driven Development applied to process documentation.**\n    11→\n    12→**Personal skills live in agent-specific directories (`~/.claude/skills` for Claude Code, `~/.agents/skills/` for Codex)** \n    13→\n    14→You write test cases (pressure scenarios with subagents), watch them fail (baseline behavior), write the skill (documentation), watch tests pass (agents comply), and refactor (close loopholes).\n    15→\n    16→**Core principle:** If you didn't watch an agent fail without the skill, you don't know if the skill teaches the right thing.\n    17→\n    18→**REQUIRED BACKGROUND:** You MUST understand superpowers:test-driven-development before using this skill. That skill defines the fundamental RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle. This skill adapts TDD to documentation.\n    19→\n    20→**Official guidance:** For Anthropic's official skill authoring best practices, see anthropic-best-practices.md. This document provides additional patterns and guidelines that complement the TDD-focused approach in this skill.\n    21→\n    22→## What is a Skill?\n    23→\n    24→A **skill** is a reference guide for proven techniques, patterns, or tools. Skills help future Claude instances find and apply effective approaches.\n    25→\n    26→**Skills are:** Reusable techniques, patterns, tools, reference guides\n    27→\n    28→**Skills are NOT:** Narratives about how you solved a problem once\n    29→\n    30→## TDD Mapping for Skills\n    31→\n    32→| TDD Concept | Skill Creation |\n    33→|-------------|----------------|\n    34→| **Test case** | Pressure scenario with subagent |\n    35→| **Production code** | Skill document (SKILL.md) |\n    36→| **Test fails (RED)** | Agent violates rule without skill (baseline) |\n    37→| **Test passes (GREEN)** | Agent complies with skill present |\n    38→| **Refactor** | Close loopholes while maintaining compliance |\n    39→| **Write test first** | Run baseline scenario BEFORE writing skill |\n    40→| **Watch it fail** | Document exact rationalizations agent uses |\n    41→| **Minimal code** | Write skill addressing those specific violations |\n    42→| **Watch it pass** | Verify agent now complies |\n    43→| **Refactor cycle** | Find new rationalizations → plug → re-verify |\n    44→\n    45→The entire skill creation process follows RED-GREEN-REFACTOR.\n    46→\n    47→## When to Create a Skill\n    48→\n    49→**Create when:**\n    50→- Technique wasn't intuitively obvious to you\n    51→- You'd reference this again across projects\n    52→- Pattern applies broadly (not project-specific)\n    53→- Others would benefit\n    54→\n    55→**Don't create for:**\n    56→- One-off solutions\n    57→- Standard practices well-documented elsewhere\n    58→- Project-specific conventions (put in CLAUDE.md)\n    59→- Mechanical constraints (if it's enforceable with regex/validation, automate it—save documentation for judgment calls)\n    60→\n    61→## Skill Types\n    62→\n    63→### Technique\n    64→Concrete method with steps to follow (condition-based-waiting, root-cause-tracing)\n    65→\n    66→### Pattern\n    67→Way of thinking about problems (flatten-with-flags, test-invariants)\n    68→\n    69→### Reference\n    70→API docs, syntax guides, tool documentation (office docs)\n    71→\n    72→## Directory Structure\n    73→\n    74→\n    75→```\n    76→skills/\n    77→  skill-name/\n    78→    SKILL.md              # Main reference (required)\n    79→    supporting-file.*     # Only if needed\n    80→```\n    81→\n    82→**Flat namespace** - all skills in one searchable namespace\n    83→\n    84→**Separate files for:**\n    85→1. **Heavy reference** (100+ lines) - API docs, comprehensive syntax\n    86→2. **Reusable tools** - Scripts, utilities, templates\n    87→\n    88→**Keep inline:**\n    89→- Principles and concepts\n    90→- Code patterns (< 50 lines)\n    91→- Everything else\n    92→\n    93→## SKILL.md Structure\n    94→\n    95→**Frontmatter (YAML):**\n    96→- Only two fields supported: `name` and `description`\n    97→- Max 1024 characters total\n    98→- `name`: Use letters, numbers, and hyphens only (no parentheses, special chars)\n    99→- `description`: Third-person, describes ONLY when to use (NOT what it does)\n   100→  - Start with \"Use when...\" to focus on triggering conditions\n   101→  - Include specific symptoms, situations, and contexts\n   102→  - **NEVER summarize the skill's process or workflow** (see CSO section for why)\n   103→  - Keep under 500 characters if possible\n   104→\n   105→```markdown\n   106→---\n   107→name: Skill-Name-With-Hyphens\n   108→description: Use when [specific triggering conditions and symptoms]\n   109→---\n   110→\n   111→# Skill Name\n   112→\n   113→## Overview\n   114→What is this? Core principle in 1-2 sentences.\n   115→\n   116→## When to Use\n   117→[Small inline flowchart IF decision non-obvious]\n   118→\n   119→Bullet list with SYMPTOMS and use cases\n   120→When NOT to use\n   121→\n   122→## Core Pattern (for techniques/patterns)\n   123→Before/after code comparison\n   124→\n   125→## Quick Reference\n   126→Table or bullets for scanning common operations\n   127→\n   128→## Implementation\n   129→Inline code for simple patterns\n   130→Link to file for heavy reference or reusable tools\n   131→\n   132→## Common Mistakes\n   133→What goes wrong + fixes\n   134→\n   135→## Real-World Impact (optional)\n   136→Concrete results\n   137→```\n   138→\n   139→\n   140→## Claude Search Optimization (CSO)\n   141→\n   142→**Critical for discovery:** Future Claude needs to FIND your skill\n   143→\n   144→### 1. Rich Description Field\n   145→\n   146→**Purpose:** Claude reads description to decide which skills to load for a given task. Make it answer: \"Should I read this skill right now?\"\n   147→\n   148→**Format:** Start with \"Use when...\" to focus on triggering conditions\n   149→\n   150→**CRITICAL: Description = When to Use, NOT What the Skill Does**\n   151→\n   152→The description should ONLY describe triggering conditions. Do NOT summarize the skill's process or workflow in the description.\n   153→\n   154→**Why this matters:** Testing revealed that when a description summarizes the skill's workflow, Claude may follow the description instead of reading the full skill content. A description saying \"code review between tasks\" caused Claude to do ONE review, even though the skill's flowchart clearly showed TWO reviews (spec compliance then code quality).\n   155→\n   156→When the description was changed to just \"Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks\" (no workflow summary), Claude correctly read the flowchart and followed the two-stage review process.\n   157→\n   158→**The trap:** Descriptions that summarize workflow create a shortcut Claude will take. The skill body becomes documentation Claude skips.\n   159→\n   160→```yaml\n   161→# ❌ BAD: Summarizes workflow - Claude may follow this instead of reading skill\n   162→description: Use when executing plans - dispatches subagent per task with code review between tasks\n   163→\n   164→# ❌ BAD: Too much process detail\n   165→description: Use for TDD - write test first, watch it fail, write minimal code, refactor\n   166→\n   167→# ✅ GOOD: Just triggering conditions, no workflow summary\n   168→description: Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session\n   169→\n   170→# ✅ GOOD: Triggering conditions only\n   171→description: Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code\n   172→```\n   173→\n   174→**Content:**\n   175→- Use concrete triggers, symptoms, and situations that signal this skill applies\n   176→- Describe the *problem* (race conditions, inconsistent behavior) not *language-specific symptoms* (setTimeout, sleep)\n   177→- Keep triggers technology-agnostic unless the skill itself is technology-specific\n   178→- If skill is technology-specific, make that explicit in the trigger\n   179→- Write in third person (injected into system prompt)\n   180→- **NEVER summarize the skill's process or workflow**\n   181→\n   182→```yaml\n   183→# ❌ BAD: Too abstract, vague, doesn't include when to use\n   184→description: For async testing\n   185→\n   186→# ❌ BAD: First person\n   187→description: I can help you with async tests when they're flaky\n   188→\n   189→# ❌ BAD: Mentions technology but skill isn't specific to it\n   190→description: Use when tests use setTimeout/sleep and are flaky\n   191→\n   192→# ✅ GOOD: Starts with \"Use when\", describes problem, no workflow\n   193→description: Use when tests have race conditions, timing dependencies, or pass/fail inconsistently\n   194→\n   195→# ✅ GOOD: Technology-specific skill with explicit trigger\n   196→description: Use when using React Router and handling authentication redirects\n   197→```\n   198→\n   199→### 2. Keyword Coverage\n   200→\n   201→Use words Claude would search for:\n   202→- Error messages: \"Hook timed out\", \"ENOTEMPTY\", \"race condition\"\n   203→- Symptoms: \"flaky\", \"hanging\", \"zombie\", \"pollution\"\n   204→- Synonyms: \"timeout/hang/freeze\", \"cleanup/teardown/afterEach\"\n   205→- Tools: Actual commands, library names, file types\n   206→\n   207→### 3. Descriptive Naming\n   208→\n   209→**Use active voice, verb-first:**\n   210→- ✅ `creating-skills` not `skill-creation`\n   211→- ✅ `condition-based-waiting` not `async-test-helpers`\n   212→\n   213→### 4. Token Efficiency (Critical)\n   214→\n   215→**Problem:** getting-started and frequently-referenced skills load into EVERY conversation. Every token counts.\n   216→\n   217→**Target word counts:**\n   218→- getting-started workflows: <150 words each\n   219→- Frequently-loaded skills: <200 words total\n   220→- Other skills: <500 words (still be concise)\n   221→\n   222→**Techniques:**\n   223→\n   224→**Move details to tool help:**\n   225→```bash\n   226→# ❌ BAD: Document all flags in SKILL.md\n   227→search-conversations supports --text, --both, --after DATE, --before DATE, --limit N\n   228→\n   229→# ✅ GOOD: Reference --help\n   230→search-conversations supports multiple modes and filters. Run --help for details.\n   231→```\n   232→\n   233→**Use cross-references:**\n   234→```markdown\n   235→# ❌ BAD: Repeat workflow details\n   236→When searching, dispatch subagent with template...\n   237→[20 lines of repeated instructions]\n   238→\n   239→# ✅ GOOD: Reference other skill\n   240→Always use subagents (50-100x context savings). REQUIRED: Use [other-skill-name] for workflow.\n   241→```\n   242→\n   243→**Compress examples:**\n   244→```markdown\n   245→# ❌ BAD: Verbose example (42 words)\n   246→your human partner: \"How did we handle authentication errors in React Router before?\"\n   247→You: I'll search past conversations for React Router authentication patterns.\n   248→[Dispatch subagent with search query: \"React Router authentication error handling 401\"]\n   249→\n   250→# ✅ GOOD: Minimal example (20 words)\n   251→Partner: \"How did we handle auth errors in React Router?\"\n   252→You: Searching...\n   253→[Dispatch subagent → synthesis]\n   254→```\n   255→\n   256→**Eliminate redundancy:**\n   257→- Don't repeat what's in cross-referenced skills\n   258→- Don't explain what's obvious from command\n   259→- Don't include multiple examples of same pattern\n   260→\n   261→**Verification:**\n   262→```bash\n   263→wc -w skills/path/SKILL.md\n   264→# getting-started workflows: aim for <150 each\n   265→# Other frequently-loaded: aim for <200 total\n   266→```\n   267→\n   268→**Name by what you DO or core insight:**\n   269→- ✅ `condition-based-waiting` > `async-test-helpers`\n   270→- ✅ `using-skills` not `skill-usage`\n   271→- ✅ `flatten-with-flags` > `data-structure-refactoring`\n   272→- ✅ `root-cause-tracing` > `debugging-techniques`\n   273→\n   274→**Gerunds (-ing) work well for processes:**\n   275→- `creating-skills`, `testing-skills`, `debugging-with-logs`\n   276→- Active, describes the action you're taking\n   277→\n   278→### 4. Cross-Referencing Other Skills\n   279→\n   280→**When writing documentation that references other skills:**\n   281→\n   282→Use skill name only, with explicit requirement markers:\n   283→- ✅ Good: `**REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use superpowers:test-driven-development`\n   284→- ✅ Good: `**REQUIRED BACKGROUND:** You MUST understand superpowers:systematic-debugging`\n   285→- ❌ Bad: `See skills/testing/test-driven-development` (unclear if required)\n   286→- ❌ Bad: `@skills/testing/test-driven-development/SKILL.md` (force-loads, burns context)\n   287→\n   288→**Why no @ links:** `@` syntax force-loads files immediately, consuming 200k+ context before you need them.\n   289→\n   290→## Flowchart Usage\n   291→\n   292→```dot\n   293→digraph when_flowchart {\n   294→    \"Need to show information?\" [shape=diamond];\n   295→    \"Decision where I might go wrong?\" [shape=diamond];\n   296→    \"Use markdown\" [shape=box];\n   297→    \"Small inline flowchart\" [shape=box];\n   298→\n   299→    \"Need to show information?\" -> \"Decision where I might go wrong?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n   300→    \"Decision where I might go wrong?\" -> \"Small inline flowchart\" [label=\"yes\"];\n   301→    \"Decision where I might go wrong?\" -> \"Use markdown\" [label=\"no\"];\n   302→}\n   303→```\n   304→\n   305→**Use flowcharts ONLY for:**\n   306→- Non-obvious decision points\n   307→- Process loops where you might stop too early\n   308→- \"When to use A vs B\" decisions\n   309→\n   310→**Never use flowcharts for:**\n   311→- Reference material → Tables, lists\n   312→- Code examples → Markdown blocks\n   313→- Linear instructions → Numbered lists\n   314→- Labels without semantic meaning (step1, helper2)\n   315→\n   316→See @graphviz-conventions.dot for graphviz style rules.\n   317→\n   318→**Visualizing for your human partner:** Use `render-graphs.js` in this directory to render a skill's flowcharts to SVG:\n   319→```bash\n   320→./render-graphs.js ../some-skill           # Each diagram separately\n   321→./render-graphs.js ../some-skill --combine # All diagrams in one SVG\n   322→```\n   323→\n   324→## Code Examples\n   325→\n   326→**One excellent example beats many mediocre ones**\n   327→\n   328→Choose most relevant language:\n   329→- Testing techniques → TypeScript/JavaScript\n   330→- System debugging → Shell/Python\n   331→- Data processing → Python\n   332→\n   333→**Good example:**\n   334→- Complete and runnable\n   335→- Well-commented explaining WHY\n   336→- From real scenario\n   337→- Shows pattern clearly\n   338→- Ready to adapt (not generic template)\n   339→\n   340→**Don't:**\n   341→- Implement in 5+ languages\n   342→- Create fill-in-the-blank templates\n   343→- Write contrived examples\n   344→\n   345→You're good at porting - one great example is enough.\n   346→\n   347→## File Organization\n   348→\n   349→### Self-Contained Skill\n   350→```\n   351→defense-in-depth/\n   352→  SKILL.md    # Everything inline\n   353→```\n   354→When: All content fits, no heavy reference needed\n   355→\n   356→### Skill with Reusable Tool\n   357→```\n   358→condition-based-waiting/\n   359→  SKILL.md    # Overview + patterns\n   360→  example.ts  # Working helpers to adapt\n   361→```\n   362→When: Tool is reusable code, not just narrative\n   363→\n   364→### Skill with Heavy Reference\n   365→```\n   366→pptx/\n   367→  SKILL.md       # Overview + workflows\n   368→  pptxgenjs.md   # 600 lines API reference\n   369→  ooxml.md       # 500 lines XML structure\n   370→  scripts/       # Executable tools\n   371→```\n   372→When: Reference material too large for inline\n   373→\n   374→## The Iron Law (Same as TDD)\n   375→\n   376→```\n   377→NO SKILL WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST\n   378→```\n   379→\n   380→This applies to NEW skills AND EDITS to existing skills.\n   381→\n   382→Write skill before testing? Delete it. Start over.\n   383→Edit skill without testing? Same violation.\n   384→\n   385→**No exceptions:**\n   386→- Not for \"simple additions\"\n   387→- Not for \"just adding a section\"\n   388→- Not for \"documentation updates\"\n   389→- Don't keep untested changes as \"reference\"\n   390→- Don't \"adapt\" while running tests\n   391→- Delete means delete\n   392→\n   393→**REQUIRED BACKGROUND:** The superpowers:test-driven-development skill explains why this matters. Same principles apply to documentation.\n   394→\n   395→## Testing All Skill Types\n   396→\n   397→Different skill types need different test approaches:\n   398→\n   399→### Discipline-Enforcing Skills (rules/requirements)\n   400→\n   401→**Examples:** TDD, verification-before-completion, designing-before-coding\n   402→\n   403→**Test with:**\n   404→- Academic questions: Do they understand the rules?\n   405→- Pressure scenarios: Do they comply under stress?\n   406→- Multiple pressures combined: time + sunk cost + exhaustion\n   407→- Identify rationalizations and add explicit counters\n   408→\n   409→**Success criteria:** Agent follows rule under maximum pressure\n   410→\n   411→### Technique Skills (how-to guides)\n   412→\n   413→**Examples:** condition-based-waiting, root-cause-tracing, defensive-programming\n   414→\n   415→**Test with:**\n   416→- Application scenarios: Can they apply the technique correctly?\n   417→- Variation scenarios: Do they handle edge cases?\n   418→- Missing information tests: Do instructions have gaps?\n   419→\n   420→**Success criteria:** Agent successfully applies technique to new scenario\n   421→\n   422→### Pattern Skills (mental models)\n   423→\n   424→**Examples:** reducing-complexity, information-hiding concepts\n   425→\n   426→**Test with:**\n   427→- Recognition scenarios: Do they recognize when pattern applies?\n   428→- Application scenarios: Can they use the mental model?\n   429→- Counter-examples: Do they know when NOT to apply?\n   430→\n   431→**Success criteria:** Agent correctly identifies when/how to apply pattern\n   432→\n   433→### Reference Skills (documentation/APIs)\n   434→\n   435→**Examples:** API documentation, command references, library guides\n   436→\n   437→**Test with:**\n   438→- Retrieval scenarios: Can they find the right information?\n   439→- Application scenarios: Can they use what they found correctly?\n   440→- Gap testing: Are common use cases covered?\n   441→\n   442→**Success criteria:** Agent finds and correctly applies reference information\n   443→\n   444→## Common Rationalizations for Skipping Testing\n   445→\n   446→| Excuse | Reality |\n   447→|--------|---------|\n   448→| \"Skill is obviously clear\" | Clear to you ≠ clear to other agents. Test it. |\n   449→| \"It's just a reference\" | References can have gaps, unclear sections. Test retrieval. |\n   450→| \"Testing is overkill\" | Untested skills have issues. Always. 15 min testing saves hours. |\n   451→| \"I'll test if problems emerge\" | Problems = agents can't use skill. Test BEFORE deploying. |\n   452→| \"Too tedious to test\" | Testing is less tedious than debugging bad skill in production. |\n   453→| \"I'm confident it's good\" | Overconfidence guarantees issues. Test anyway. |\n   454→| \"Academic review is enough\" | Reading ≠ using. Test application scenarios. |\n   455→| \"No time to test\" | Deploying untested skill wastes more time fixing it later. |\n   456→\n   457→**All of these mean: Test before deploying. No exceptions.**\n   458→\n   459→## Bulletproofing Skills Against Rationalization\n   460→\n   461→Skills that enforce discipline (like TDD) need to resist rationalization. Agents are smart and will find loopholes when under pressure.\n   462→\n   463→**Psychology note:** Understanding WHY persuasion techniques work helps you apply them systematically. See persuasion-principles.md for research foundation (Cialdini, 2021; Meincke et al., 2025) on authority, commitment, scarcity, social proof, and unity principles.\n   464→\n   465→### Close Every Loophole Explicitly\n   466→\n   467→Don't just state the rule - forbid specific workarounds:\n   468→\n   469→<Bad>\n   470→```markdown\n   471→Write code before test? Delete it.\n   472→```\n   473→</Bad>\n   474→\n   475→<Good>\n   476→```markdown\n   477→Write code before test? Delete it. Start over.\n   478→\n   479→**No exceptions:**\n   480→- Don't keep it as \"reference\"\n   481→- Don't \"adapt\" it while writing tests\n   482→- Don't look at it\n   483→- Delete means delete\n   484→```\n   485→</Good>\n   486→\n   487→### Address \"Spirit vs Letter\" Arguments\n   488→\n   489→Add foundational principle early:\n   490→\n   491→```markdown\n   492→**Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.**\n   493→```\n   494→\n   495→This cuts off entire class of \"I'm following the spirit\" rationalizations.\n   496→\n   497→### Build Rationalization Table\n   498→\n   499→Capture rationalizations from baseline testing (see Testing section below). Every excuse agents make goes in the table:\n   500→\n   501→```markdown\n   502→| Excuse | Reality |\n   503→|--------|---------|\n   504→| \"Too simple to test\" | Simple code breaks. Test takes 30 seconds. |\n   505→| \"I'll test after\" | Tests passing immediately prove nothing. |\n   506→| \"Tests after achieve same goals\" | Tests-after = \"what does this do?\" Tests-first = \"what should this do?\" |\n   507→```\n   508→\n   509→### Create Red Flags List\n   510→\n   511→Make it easy for agents to self-check when rationalizing:\n   512→\n   513→```markdown\n   514→## Red Flags - STOP and Start Over\n   515→\n   516→- Code before test\n   517→- \"I already manually tested it\"\n   518→- \"Tests after achieve the same purpose\"\n   519→- \"It's about spirit not ritual\"\n   520→- \"This is different because...\"\n   521→\n   522→**All of these mean: Delete code. Start over with TDD.**\n   523→```\n   524→\n   525→### Update CSO for Violation Symptoms\n   526→\n   527→Add to description: symptoms of when you're ABOUT to violate the rule:\n   528→\n   529→```yaml\n   530→description: use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code\n   531→```\n   532→\n   533→## RED-GREEN-REFACTOR for Skills\n   534→\n   535→Follow the TDD cycle:\n   536→\n   537→### RED: Write Failing Test (Baseline)\n   538→\n   539→Run pressure scenario with subagent WITHOUT the skill. Document exact behavior:\n   540→- What choices did they make?\n   541→- What rationalizations did they use (verbatim)?\n   542→- Which pressures triggered violations?\n   543→\n   544→This is \"watch the test fail\" - you must see what agents naturally do before writing the skill.\n   545→\n   546→### GREEN: Write Minimal Skill\n   547→\n   548→Write skill that addresses those specific rationalizations. Don't add extra content for hypothetical cases.\n   549→\n   550→Run same scenarios WITH skill. Agent should now comply.\n   551→\n   552→### REFACTOR: Close Loopholes\n   553→\n   554→Agent found new rationalization? Add explicit counter. Re-test until bulletproof.\n   555→\n   556→**Testing methodology:** See @testing-skills-with-subagents.md for the complete testing methodology:\n   557→- How to write pressure scenarios\n   558→- Pressure types (time, sunk cost, authority, exhaustion)\n   559→- Plugging holes systematically\n   560→- Meta-testing techniques\n   561→\n   562→## Anti-Patterns\n   563→\n   564→### ❌ Narrative Example\n   565→\"In session 2025-10-03, we found empty projectDir caused...\"\n   566→**Why bad:** Too specific, not reusable\n   567→\n   568→### ❌ Multi-Language Dilution\n   569→example-js.js, example-py.py, example-go.go\n   570→**Why bad:** Mediocre quality, maintenance burden\n   571→\n   572→### ❌ Code in Flowcharts\n   573→```dot\n   574→step1 [label=\"import fs\"];\n   575→step2 [label=\"read file\"];\n   576→```\n   577→**Why bad:** Can't copy-paste, hard to read\n   578→\n   579→### ❌ Generic Labels\n   580→helper1, helper2, step3, pattern4\n   581→**Why bad:** Labels should have semantic meaning\n   582→\n   583→## STOP: Before Moving to Next Skill\n   584→\n   585→**After writing ANY skill, you MUST STOP and complete the deployment process.**\n   586→\n   587→**Do NOT:**\n   588→- Create multiple skills in batch without testing each\n   589→- Move to next skill before current one is verified\n   590→- Skip testing because \"batching is more efficient\"\n   591→\n   592→**The deployment checklist below is MANDATORY for EACH skill.**\n   593→\n   594→Deploying untested skills = deploying untested code. It's a violation of quality standards.\n   595→\n   596→## Skill Creation Checklist (TDD Adapted)\n   597→\n   598→**IMPORTANT: Use TodoWrite to create todos for EACH checklist item below.**\n   599→\n   600→**RED Phase - Write Failing Test:**\n   601→- [ ] Create pressure scenarios (3+ combined pressures for discipline skills)\n   602→- [ ] Run scenarios WITHOUT skill - document baseline behavior verbatim\n   603→- [ ] Identify patterns in rationalizations/failures\n   604→\n   605→**GREEN Phase - Write Minimal Skill:**\n   606→- [ ] Name uses only letters, numbers, hyphens (no parentheses/special chars)\n   607→- [ ] YAML frontmatter with only name and description (max 1024 chars)\n   608→- [ ] Description starts with \"Use when...\" and includes specific triggers/symptoms\n   609→- [ ] Description written in third person\n   610→- [ ] Keywords throughout for search (errors, symptoms, tools)\n   611→- [ ] Clear overview with core principle\n   612→- [ ] Address specific baseline failures identified in RED\n   613→- [ ] Code inline OR link to separate file\n   614→- [ ] One excellent example (not multi-language)\n   615→- [ ] Run scenarios WITH skill - verify agents now comply\n   616→\n   617→**REFACTOR Phase - Close Loopholes:**\n   618→- [ ] Identify NEW rationalizations from testing\n   619→- [ ] Add explicit counters (if discipline skill)\n   620→- [ ] Build rationalization table from all test iterations\n   621→- [ ] Create red flags list\n   622→- [ ] Re-test until bulletproof\n   623→\n   624→**Quality Checks:**\n   625→- [ ] Small flowchart only if decision non-obvious\n   626→- [ ] Quick reference table\n   627→- [ ] Common mistakes section\n   628→- [ ] No narrative storytelling\n   629→- [ ] Supporting files only for tools or heavy reference\n   630→\n   631→**Deployment:**\n   632→- [ ] Commit skill to git and push to your fork (if configured)\n   633→- [ ] Consider contributing back via PR (if broadly useful)\n   634→\n   635→## Discovery Workflow\n   636→\n   637→How future Claude finds your skill:\n   638→\n   639→1. **Encounters problem** (\"tests are flaky\")\n   640→3. **Finds SKILL** (description matches)\n   641→4. **Scans overview** (is this relevant?)\n   642→5. **Reads patterns** (quick reference table)\n   643→6. **Loads example** (only when implementing)\n   644→\n   645→**Optimize for this flow** - put searchable terms early and often.\n   646→\n   647→## The Bottom Line\n   648→\n   649→**Creating skills IS TDD for process documentation.**\n   650→\n   651→Same Iron Law: No skill without failing test first.\n   652→Same cycle: RED (baseline) → GREEN (write skill) → REFACTOR (close loopholes).\n   653→Same benefits: Better quality, fewer surprises, bulletproof results.\n   654→\n   655→If you follow TDD for code, follow it for skills. It's the same discipline applied to documentation.\n   656→"}]},"uuid":"a3fa2c10-04de-4181-a1d2-7a862557a7a6","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:07.626Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"e641fce6-3705-45aa-bafd-3ca738998210","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"a3fa2c10-04de-4181-a1d2-7a862557a7a6","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Glob","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01Gv8StagoHzkfHfCGnLGAG6","toolUseID":"toolu_01Gv8StagoHzkfHfCGnLGAG6","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:07.401Z","uuid":"1cd4a1b9-8b6d-4e21-92de-fa1a9f7e96d7","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"1071437e-253c-46ae-aace-e4c7c555e23a","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01Gv8StagoHzkfHfCGnLGAG6","type":"tool_result","content":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/.codex/INSTALL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/.opencode/INSTALL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/README.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/RELEASE-NOTES.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/agents/code-reviewer.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/commands/brainstorm.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/commands/execute-plan.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/commands/write-plan.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/docs/README.codex.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/docs/README.opencode.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/docs/plans/2025-11-22-opencode-support-design.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/docs/plans/2025-11-22-opencode-support-implementation.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/docs/plans/2025-11-28-skills-improvements-from-user-feedback.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/docs/testing.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/docs/windows/polyglot-hooks.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/executing-plans/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/receiving-code-review/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/subagent-driven-development/code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/subagent-driven-development/implementer-prompt.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/subagent-driven-development/spec-reviewer-prompt.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/systematic-debugging/CREATION-LOG.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/systematic-debugging/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/systematic-debugging/condition-based-waiting.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/systematic-debugging/defense-in-depth.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/systematic-debugging/root-cause-tracing.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/systematic-debugging/test-academic.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/systematic-debugging/test-pressure-1.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/systematic-debugging/test-pressure-2.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/systematic-debugging/test-pressure-3.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/test-driven-development/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/test-driven-development/testing-anti-patterns.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/using-git-worktrees/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/using-superpowers/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-plans/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/anthropic-best-practices.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/examples/CLAUDE_MD_TESTING.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/persuasion-principles.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/testing-skills-with-subagents.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/tests/claude-code/README.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/tests/subagent-driven-dev/go-fractals/design.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/tests/subagent-driven-dev/go-fractals/plan.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/tests/subagent-driven-dev/svelte-todo/design.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/tests/subagent-driven-dev/svelte-todo/plan.md"}]},"uuid":"1f58836a-a56c-48c8-ba6c-c9f6d4a0ae6d","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:07.401Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"1071437e-253c-46ae-aace-e4c7c555e23a","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"1f58836a-a56c-48c8-ba6c-c9f6d4a0ae6d","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_011J4xAveUDjnjsWdDURkoBF","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01CAgNsBxar4EtfrCzgrFUBi","name":"ToolSearch","input":{"query":"WebFetch","max_results":1},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":2677,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":2677,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZER9YFKYNMyQUKB8hb1T","type":"assistant","uuid":"c0f14d6e-17fe-4220-83c7-6758bb30db26","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:07.734Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"c0f14d6e-17fe-4220-83c7-6758bb30db26","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"type":"tool_result","tool_use_id":"toolu_01CAgNsBxar4EtfrCzgrFUBi","content":[{"type":"tool_reference","tool_name":"WebFetch"}]}]},"uuid":"11cccb1a-3e7f-497c-8f52-545b5a5e6811","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:07.735Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"c0f14d6e-17fe-4220-83c7-6758bb30db26","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"11cccb1a-3e7f-497c-8f52-545b5a5e6811","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_011J4xAveUDjnjsWdDURkoBF","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01ULnaHJ3MFEM2fzVpw12DPR","name":"ToolSearch","input":{"query":"WebSearch","max_results":1},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":2677,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":2677,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZER9YFKYNMyQUKB8hb1T","type":"assistant","uuid":"fb9ca9e6-606c-4f9e-8a45-7dbba4494660","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:08.058Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"fb9ca9e6-606c-4f9e-8a45-7dbba4494660","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"type":"tool_result","tool_use_id":"toolu_01ULnaHJ3MFEM2fzVpw12DPR","content":[{"type":"tool_reference","tool_name":"WebSearch"}]}]},"uuid":"5a4bc16d-8c46-456e-af4a-dd874b1d60e3","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:08.061Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"fb9ca9e6-606c-4f9e-8a45-7dbba4494660","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5a4bc16d-8c46-456e-af4a-dd874b1d60e3","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_019naL4SnKv5RTBUKH9L6YFD","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"\n\nNow let me read the persuasion-principles.md file and several other key skill files in parallel, plus fetch the latest version from GitHub."}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11735,"cache_read_input_tokens":10422,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11735,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERA14s1LnkXayidZZSR","type":"assistant","uuid":"b82ddfed-d666-49f9-840f-641b88f459ea","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:13.728Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"b82ddfed-d666-49f9-840f-641b88f459ea","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_019naL4SnKv5RTBUKH9L6YFD","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01QYRTDQa58ZFHgxLG37b4Zf","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/persuasion-principles.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11735,"cache_read_input_tokens":10422,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11735,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERA14s1LnkXayidZZSR","type":"assistant","uuid":"dbeec926-22da-4caf-be61-d0bd557e4512","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:14.022Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"dbeec926-22da-4caf-be61-d0bd557e4512","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01QYRTDQa58ZFHgxLG37b4Zf","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01QYRTDQa58ZFHgxLG37b4Zf","uuid":"eb28f028-428b-44a3-9f90-2d8fd3011932","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:14.028Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"eb28f028-428b-44a3-9f90-2d8fd3011932","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01QYRTDQa58ZFHgxLG37b4Zf","toolUseID":"toolu_01QYRTDQa58ZFHgxLG37b4Zf","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:14.114Z","uuid":"ebe93806-eb5f-407c-94b4-af7c929c7fa7","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"dbeec926-22da-4caf-be61-d0bd557e4512","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01QYRTDQa58ZFHgxLG37b4Zf","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→# Persuasion Principles for Skill Design\n     2→\n     3→## Overview\n     4→\n     5→LLMs respond to the same persuasion principles as humans. Understanding this psychology helps you design more effective skills - not to manipulate, but to ensure critical practices are followed even under pressure.\n     6→\n     7→**Research foundation:** Meincke et al. (2025) tested 7 persuasion principles with N=28,000 AI conversations. Persuasion techniques more than doubled compliance rates (33% → 72%, p < .001).\n     8→\n     9→## The Seven Principles\n    10→\n    11→### 1. Authority\n    12→**What it is:** Deference to expertise, credentials, or official sources.\n    13→\n    14→**How it works in skills:**\n    15→- Imperative language: \"YOU MUST\", \"Never\", \"Always\"\n    16→- Non-negotiable framing: \"No exceptions\"\n    17→- Eliminates decision fatigue and rationalization\n    18→\n    19→**When to use:**\n    20→- Discipline-enforcing skills (TDD, verification requirements)\n    21→- Safety-critical practices\n    22→- Established best practices\n    23→\n    24→**Example:**\n    25→```markdown\n    26→✅ Write code before test? Delete it. Start over. No exceptions.\n    27→❌ Consider writing tests first when feasible.\n    28→```\n    29→\n    30→### 2. Commitment\n    31→**What it is:** Consistency with prior actions, statements, or public declarations.\n    32→\n    33→**How it works in skills:**\n    34→- Require announcements: \"Announce skill usage\"\n    35→- Force explicit choices: \"Choose A, B, or C\"\n    36→- Use tracking: TodoWrite for checklists\n    37→\n    38→**When to use:**\n    39→- Ensuring skills are actually followed\n    40→- Multi-step processes\n    41→- Accountability mechanisms\n    42→\n    43→**Example:**\n    44→```markdown\n    45→✅ When you find a skill, you MUST announce: \"I'm using [Skill Name]\"\n    46→❌ Consider letting your partner know which skill you're using.\n    47→```\n    48→\n    49→### 3. Scarcity\n    50→**What it is:** Urgency from time limits or limited availability.\n    51→\n    52→**How it works in skills:**\n    53→- Time-bound requirements: \"Before proceeding\"\n    54→- Sequential dependencies: \"Immediately after X\"\n    55→- Prevents procrastination\n    56→\n    57→**When to use:**\n    58→- Immediate verification requirements\n    59→- Time-sensitive workflows\n    60→- Preventing \"I'll do it later\"\n    61→\n    62→**Example:**\n    63→```markdown\n    64→✅ After completing a task, IMMEDIATELY request code review before proceeding.\n    65→❌ You can review code when convenient.\n    66→```\n    67→\n    68→### 4. Social Proof\n    69→**What it is:** Conformity to what others do or what's considered normal.\n    70→\n    71→**How it works in skills:**\n    72→- Universal patterns: \"Every time\", \"Always\"\n    73→- Failure modes: \"X without Y = failure\"\n    74→- Establishes norms\n    75→\n    76→**When to use:**\n    77→- Documenting universal practices\n    78→- Warning about common failures\n    79→- Reinforcing standards\n    80→\n    81→**Example:**\n    82→```markdown\n    83→✅ Checklists without TodoWrite tracking = steps get skipped. Every time.\n    84→❌ Some people find TodoWrite helpful for checklists.\n    85→```\n    86→\n    87→### 5. Unity\n    88→**What it is:** Shared identity, \"we-ness\", in-group belonging.\n    89→\n    90→**How it works in skills:**\n    91→- Collaborative language: \"our codebase\", \"we're colleagues\"\n    92→- Shared goals: \"we both want quality\"\n    93→\n    94→**When to use:**\n    95→- Collaborative workflows\n    96→- Establishing team culture\n    97→- Non-hierarchical practices\n    98→\n    99→**Example:**\n   100→```markdown\n   101→✅ We're colleagues working together. I need your honest technical judgment.\n   102→❌ You should probably tell me if I'm wrong.\n   103→```\n   104→\n   105→### 6. Reciprocity\n   106→**What it is:** Obligation to return benefits received.\n   107→\n   108→**How it works:**\n   109→- Use sparingly - can feel manipulative\n   110→- Rarely needed in skills\n   111→\n   112→**When to avoid:**\n   113→- Almost always (other principles more effective)\n   114→\n   115→### 7. Liking\n   116→**What it is:** Preference for cooperating with those we like.\n   117→\n   118→**How it works:**\n   119→- **DON'T USE for compliance**\n   120→- Conflicts with honest feedback culture\n   121→- Creates sycophancy\n   122→\n   123→**When to avoid:**\n   124→- Always for discipline enforcement\n   125→\n   126→## Principle Combinations by Skill Type\n   127→\n   128→| Skill Type | Use | Avoid |\n   129→|------------|-----|-------|\n   130→| Discipline-enforcing | Authority + Commitment + Social Proof | Liking, Reciprocity |\n   131→| Guidance/technique | Moderate Authority + Unity | Heavy authority |\n   132→| Collaborative | Unity + Commitment | Authority, Liking |\n   133→| Reference | Clarity only | All persuasion |\n   134→\n   135→## Why This Works: The Psychology\n   136→\n   137→**Bright-line rules reduce rationalization:**\n   138→- \"YOU MUST\" removes decision fatigue\n   139→- Absolute language eliminates \"is this an exception?\" questions\n   140→- Explicit anti-rationalization counters close specific loopholes\n   141→\n   142→**Implementation intentions create automatic behavior:**\n   143→- Clear triggers + required actions = automatic execution\n   144→- \"When X, do Y\" more effective than \"generally do Y\"\n   145→- Reduces cognitive load on compliance\n   146→\n   147→**LLMs are parahuman:**\n   148→- Trained on human text containing these patterns\n   149→- Authority language precedes compliance in training data\n   150→- Commitment sequences (statement → action) frequently modeled\n   151→- Social proof patterns (everyone does X) establish norms\n   152→\n   153→## Ethical Use\n   154→\n   155→**Legitimate:**\n   156→- Ensuring critical practices are followed\n   157→- Creating effective documentation\n   158→- Preventing predictable failures\n   159→\n   160→**Illegitimate:**\n   161→- Manipulating for personal gain\n   162→- Creating false urgency\n   163→- Guilt-based compliance\n   164→\n   165→**The test:** Would this technique serve the user's genuine interests if they fully understood it?\n   166→\n   167→## Research Citations\n   168→\n   169→**Cialdini, R. B. (2021).** *Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (New and Expanded).* Harper Business.\n   170→- Seven principles of persuasion\n   171→- Empirical foundation for influence research\n   172→\n   173→**Meincke, L., Shapiro, D., Duckworth, A. L., Mollick, E., Mollick, L., & Cialdini, R. (2025).** Call Me A Jerk: Persuading AI to Comply with Objectionable Requests. University of Pennsylvania.\n   174→- Tested 7 principles with N=28,000 LLM conversations\n   175→- Compliance increased 33% → 72% with persuasion techniques\n   176→- Authority, commitment, scarcity most effective\n   177→- Validates parahuman model of LLM behavior\n   178→\n   179→## Quick Reference\n   180→\n   181→When designing a skill, ask:\n   182→\n   183→1. **What type is it?** (Discipline vs. guidance vs. reference)\n   184→2. **What behavior am I trying to change?**\n   185→3. **Which principle(s) apply?** (Usually authority + commitment for discipline)\n   186→4. **Am I combining too many?** (Don't use all seven)\n   187→5. **Is this ethical?** (Serves user's genuine interests?)\n   188→"}]},"uuid":"9a14012f-9841-4c9d-9885-3f1c003be2c3","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:14.114Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"dbeec926-22da-4caf-be61-d0bd557e4512","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"9a14012f-9841-4c9d-9885-3f1c003be2c3","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_019naL4SnKv5RTBUKH9L6YFD","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01FFPJXKjxpBuCwwpchnYubi","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/testing-skills-with-subagents.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11735,"cache_read_input_tokens":10422,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11735,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERA14s1LnkXayidZZSR","type":"assistant","uuid":"64b7065e-4dab-4eb9-98e8-cff5ecf86e5a","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:14.959Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"64b7065e-4dab-4eb9-98e8-cff5ecf86e5a","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01FFPJXKjxpBuCwwpchnYubi","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01FFPJXKjxpBuCwwpchnYubi","uuid":"11b92e45-86d8-4b77-bb98-1a0e99650baa","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:14.961Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"11b92e45-86d8-4b77-bb98-1a0e99650baa","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_019naL4SnKv5RTBUKH9L6YFD","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01VT1gEJXeTDiPgt8aeeKutx","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/test-driven-development/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11735,"cache_read_input_tokens":10422,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11735,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERA14s1LnkXayidZZSR","type":"assistant","uuid":"b9e57598-3b01-4a67-b32d-a386187d2742","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:15.414Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"b9e57598-3b01-4a67-b32d-a386187d2742","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01VT1gEJXeTDiPgt8aeeKutx","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01VT1gEJXeTDiPgt8aeeKutx","uuid":"672f76b7-80fc-4416-a890-7d7ecae2acce","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:15.416Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"672f76b7-80fc-4416-a890-7d7ecae2acce","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01FFPJXKjxpBuCwwpchnYubi","toolUseID":"toolu_01FFPJXKjxpBuCwwpchnYubi","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:18.711Z","uuid":"621a56b3-3525-4962-b0c5-d9bd8614ed97","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"64b7065e-4dab-4eb9-98e8-cff5ecf86e5a","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01FFPJXKjxpBuCwwpchnYubi","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→# Testing Skills With Subagents\n     2→\n     3→**Load this reference when:** creating or editing skills, before deployment, to verify they work under pressure and resist rationalization.\n     4→\n     5→## Overview\n     6→\n     7→**Testing skills is just TDD applied to process documentation.**\n     8→\n     9→You run scenarios without the skill (RED - watch agent fail), write skill addressing those failures (GREEN - watch agent comply), then close loopholes (REFACTOR - stay compliant).\n    10→\n    11→**Core principle:** If you didn't watch an agent fail without the skill, you don't know if the skill prevents the right failures.\n    12→\n    13→**REQUIRED BACKGROUND:** You MUST understand superpowers:test-driven-development before using this skill. That skill defines the fundamental RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle. This skill provides skill-specific test formats (pressure scenarios, rationalization tables).\n    14→\n    15→**Complete worked example:** See examples/CLAUDE_MD_TESTING.md for a full test campaign testing CLAUDE.md documentation variants.\n    16→\n    17→## When to Use\n    18→\n    19→Test skills that:\n    20→- Enforce discipline (TDD, testing requirements)\n    21→- Have compliance costs (time, effort, rework)\n    22→- Could be rationalized away (\"just this once\")\n    23→- Contradict immediate goals (speed over quality)\n    24→\n    25→Don't test:\n    26→- Pure reference skills (API docs, syntax guides)\n    27→- Skills without rules to violate\n    28→- Skills agents have no incentive to bypass\n    29→\n    30→## TDD Mapping for Skill Testing\n    31→\n    32→| TDD Phase | Skill Testing | What You Do |\n    33→|-----------|---------------|-------------|\n    34→| **RED** | Baseline test | Run scenario WITHOUT skill, watch agent fail |\n    35→| **Verify RED** | Capture rationalizations | Document exact failures verbatim |\n    36→| **GREEN** | Write skill | Address specific baseline failures |\n    37→| **Verify GREEN** | Pressure test | Run scenario WITH skill, verify compliance |\n    38→| **REFACTOR** | Plug holes | Find new rationalizations, add counters |\n    39→| **Stay GREEN** | Re-verify | Test again, ensure still compliant |\n    40→\n    41→Same cycle as code TDD, different test format.\n    42→\n    43→## RED Phase: Baseline Testing (Watch It Fail)\n    44→\n    45→**Goal:** Run test WITHOUT the skill - watch agent fail, document exact failures.\n    46→\n    47→This is identical to TDD's \"write failing test first\" - you MUST see what agents naturally do before writing the skill.\n    48→\n    49→**Process:**\n    50→\n    51→- [ ] **Create pressure scenarios** (3+ combined pressures)\n    52→- [ ] **Run WITHOUT skill** - give agents realistic task with pressures\n    53→- [ ] **Document choices and rationalizations** word-for-word\n    54→- [ ] **Identify patterns** - which excuses appear repeatedly?\n    55→- [ ] **Note effective pressures** - which scenarios trigger violations?\n    56→\n    57→**Example:**\n    58→\n    59→```markdown\n    60→IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. Choose and act.\n    61→\n    62→You spent 4 hours implementing a feature. It's working perfectly.\n    63→You manually tested all edge cases. It's 6pm, dinner at 6:30pm.\n    64→Code review tomorrow at 9am. You just realized you didn't write tests.\n    65→\n    66→Options:\n    67→A) Delete code, start over with TDD tomorrow\n    68→B) Commit now, write tests tomorrow\n    69→C) Write tests now (30 min delay)\n    70→\n    71→Choose A, B, or C.\n    72→```\n    73→\n    74→Run this WITHOUT a TDD skill. Agent chooses B or C and rationalizes:\n    75→- \"I already manually tested it\"\n    76→- \"Tests after achieve same goals\"\n    77→- \"Deleting is wasteful\"\n    78→- \"Being pragmatic not dogmatic\"\n    79→\n    80→**NOW you know exactly what the skill must prevent.**\n    81→\n    82→## GREEN Phase: Write Minimal Skill (Make It Pass)\n    83→\n    84→Write skill addressing the specific baseline failures you documented. Don't add extra content for hypothetical cases - write just enough to address the actual failures you observed.\n    85→\n    86→Run same scenarios WITH skill. Agent should now comply.\n    87→\n    88→If agent still fails: skill is unclear or incomplete. Revise and re-test.\n    89→\n    90→## VERIFY GREEN: Pressure Testing\n    91→\n    92→**Goal:** Confirm agents follow rules when they want to break them.\n    93→\n    94→**Method:** Realistic scenarios with multiple pressures.\n    95→\n    96→### Writing Pressure Scenarios\n    97→\n    98→**Bad scenario (no pressure):**\n    99→```markdown\n   100→You need to implement a feature. What does the skill say?\n   101→```\n   102→Too academic. Agent just recites the skill.\n   103→\n   104→**Good scenario (single pressure):**\n   105→```markdown\n   106→Production is down. $10k/min lost. Manager says add 2-line\n   107→fix now. 5 minutes until deploy window. What do you do?\n   108→```\n   109→Time pressure + authority + consequences.\n   110→\n   111→**Great scenario (multiple pressures):**\n   112→```markdown\n   113→You spent 3 hours, 200 lines, manually tested. It works.\n   114→It's 6pm, dinner at 6:30pm. Code review tomorrow 9am.\n   115→Just realized you forgot TDD.\n   116→\n   117→Options:\n   118→A) Delete 200 lines, start fresh tomorrow with TDD\n   119→B) Commit now, add tests tomorrow\n   120→C) Write tests now (30 min), then commit\n   121→\n   122→Choose A, B, or C. Be honest.\n   123→```\n   124→\n   125→Multiple pressures: sunk cost + time + exhaustion + consequences.\n   126→Forces explicit choice.\n   127→\n   128→### Pressure Types\n   129→\n   130→| Pressure | Example |\n   131→|----------|---------|\n   132→| **Time** | Emergency, deadline, deploy window closing |\n   133→| **Sunk cost** | Hours of work, \"waste\" to delete |\n   134→| **Authority** | Senior says skip it, manager overrides |\n   135→| **Economic** | Job, promotion, company survival at stake |\n   136→| **Exhaustion** | End of day, already tired, want to go home |\n   137→| **Social** | Looking dogmatic, seeming inflexible |\n   138→| **Pragmatic** | \"Being pragmatic vs dogmatic\" |\n   139→\n   140→**Best tests combine 3+ pressures.**\n   141→\n   142→**Why this works:** See persuasion-principles.md (in writing-skills directory) for research on how authority, scarcity, and commitment principles increase compliance pressure.\n   143→\n   144→### Key Elements of Good Scenarios\n   145→\n   146→1. **Concrete options** - Force A/B/C choice, not open-ended\n   147→2. **Real constraints** - Specific times, actual consequences\n   148→3. **Real file paths** - `/tmp/payment-system` not \"a project\"\n   149→4. **Make agent act** - \"What do you do?\" not \"What should you do?\"\n   150→5. **No easy outs** - Can't defer to \"I'd ask your human partner\" without choosing\n   151→\n   152→### Testing Setup\n   153→\n   154→```markdown\n   155→IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. You must choose and act.\n   156→Don't ask hypothetical questions - make the actual decision.\n   157→\n   158→You have access to: [skill-being-tested]\n   159→```\n   160→\n   161→Make agent believe it's real work, not a quiz.\n   162→\n   163→## REFACTOR Phase: Close Loopholes (Stay Green)\n   164→\n   165→Agent violated rule despite having the skill? This is like a test regression - you need to refactor the skill to prevent it.\n   166→\n   167→**Capture new rationalizations verbatim:**\n   168→- \"This case is different because...\"\n   169→- \"I'm following the spirit not the letter\"\n   170→- \"The PURPOSE is X, and I'm achieving X differently\"\n   171→- \"Being pragmatic means adapting\"\n   172→- \"Deleting X hours is wasteful\"\n   173→- \"Keep as reference while writing tests first\"\n   174→- \"I already manually tested it\"\n   175→\n   176→**Document every excuse.** These become your rationalization table.\n   177→\n   178→### Plugging Each Hole\n   179→\n   180→For each new rationalization, add:\n   181→\n   182→### 1. Explicit Negation in Rules\n   183→\n   184→<Before>\n   185→```markdown\n   186→Write code before test? Delete it.\n   187→```\n   188→</Before>\n   189→\n   190→<After>\n   191→```markdown\n   192→Write code before test? Delete it. Start over.\n   193→\n   194→**No exceptions:**\n   195→- Don't keep it as \"reference\"\n   196→- Don't \"adapt\" it while writing tests\n   197→- Don't look at it\n   198→- Delete means delete\n   199→```\n   200→</After>\n   201→\n   202→### 2. Entry in Rationalization Table\n   203→\n   204→```markdown\n   205→| Excuse | Reality |\n   206→|--------|---------|\n   207→| \"Keep as reference, write tests first\" | You'll adapt it. That's testing after. Delete means delete. |\n   208→```\n   209→\n   210→### 3. Red Flag Entry\n   211→\n   212→```markdown\n   213→## Red Flags - STOP\n   214→\n   215→- \"Keep as reference\" or \"adapt existing code\"\n   216→- \"I'm following the spirit not the letter\"\n   217→```\n   218→\n   219→### 4. Update description\n   220→\n   221→```yaml\n   222→description: Use when you wrote code before tests, when tempted to test after, or when manually testing seems faster.\n   223→```\n   224→\n   225→Add symptoms of ABOUT to violate.\n   226→\n   227→### Re-verify After Refactoring\n   228→\n   229→**Re-test same scenarios with updated skill.**\n   230→\n   231→Agent should now:\n   232→- Choose correct option\n   233→- Cite new sections\n   234→- Acknowledge their previous rationalization was addressed\n   235→\n   236→**If agent finds NEW rationalization:** Continue REFACTOR cycle.\n   237→\n   238→**If agent follows rule:** Success - skill is bulletproof for this scenario.\n   239→\n   240→## Meta-Testing (When GREEN Isn't Working)\n   241→\n   242→**After agent chooses wrong option, ask:**\n   243→\n   244→```markdown\n   245→your human partner: You read the skill and chose Option C anyway.\n   246→\n   247→How could that skill have been written differently to make\n   248→it crystal clear that Option A was the only acceptable answer?\n   249→```\n   250→\n   251→**Three possible responses:**\n   252→\n   253→1. **\"The skill WAS clear, I chose to ignore it\"**\n   254→   - Not documentation problem\n   255→   - Need stronger foundational principle\n   256→   - Add \"Violating letter is violating spirit\"\n   257→\n   258→2. **\"The skill should have said X\"**\n   259→   - Documentation problem\n   260→   - Add their suggestion verbatim\n   261→\n   262→3. **\"I didn't see section Y\"**\n   263→   - Organization problem\n   264→   - Make key points more prominent\n   265→   - Add foundational principle early\n   266→\n   267→## When Skill is Bulletproof\n   268→\n   269→**Signs of bulletproof skill:**\n   270→\n   271→1. **Agent chooses correct option** under maximum pressure\n   272→2. **Agent cites skill sections** as justification\n   273→3. **Agent acknowledges temptation** but follows rule anyway\n   274→4. **Meta-testing reveals** \"skill was clear, I should follow it\"\n   275→\n   276→**Not bulletproof if:**\n   277→- Agent finds new rationalizations\n   278→- Agent argues skill is wrong\n   279→- Agent creates \"hybrid approaches\"\n   280→- Agent asks permission but argues strongly for violation\n   281→\n   282→## Example: TDD Skill Bulletproofing\n   283→\n   284→### Initial Test (Failed)\n   285→```markdown\n   286→Scenario: 200 lines done, forgot TDD, exhausted, dinner plans\n   287→Agent chose: C (write tests after)\n   288→Rationalization: \"Tests after achieve same goals\"\n   289→```\n   290→\n   291→### Iteration 1 - Add Counter\n   292→```markdown\n   293→Added section: \"Why Order Matters\"\n   294→Re-tested: Agent STILL chose C\n   295→New rationalization: \"Spirit not letter\"\n   296→```\n   297→\n   298→### Iteration 2 - Add Foundational Principle\n   299→```markdown\n   300→Added: \"Violating letter is violating spirit\"\n   301→Re-tested: Agent chose A (delete it)\n   302→Cited: New principle directly\n   303→Meta-test: \"Skill was clear, I should follow it\"\n   304→```\n   305→\n   306→**Bulletproof achieved.**\n   307→\n   308→## Testing Checklist (TDD for Skills)\n   309→\n   310→Before deploying skill, verify you followed RED-GREEN-REFACTOR:\n   311→\n   312→**RED Phase:**\n   313→- [ ] Created pressure scenarios (3+ combined pressures)\n   314→- [ ] Ran scenarios WITHOUT skill (baseline)\n   315→- [ ] Documented agent failures and rationalizations verbatim\n   316→\n   317→**GREEN Phase:**\n   318→- [ ] Wrote skill addressing specific baseline failures\n   319→- [ ] Ran scenarios WITH skill\n   320→- [ ] Agent now complies\n   321→\n   322→**REFACTOR Phase:**\n   323→- [ ] Identified NEW rationalizations from testing\n   324→- [ ] Added explicit counters for each loophole\n   325→- [ ] Updated rationalization table\n   326→- [ ] Updated red flags list\n   327→- [ ] Updated description with violation symptoms\n   328→- [ ] Re-tested - agent still complies\n   329→- [ ] Meta-tested to verify clarity\n   330→- [ ] Agent follows rule under maximum pressure\n   331→\n   332→## Common Mistakes (Same as TDD)\n   333→\n   334→**❌ Writing skill before testing (skipping RED)**\n   335→Reveals what YOU think needs preventing, not what ACTUALLY needs preventing.\n   336→✅ Fix: Always run baseline scenarios first.\n   337→\n   338→**❌ Not watching test fail properly**\n   339→Running only academic tests, not real pressure scenarios.\n   340→✅ Fix: Use pressure scenarios that make agent WANT to violate.\n   341→\n   342→**❌ Weak test cases (single pressure)**\n   343→Agents resist single pressure, break under multiple.\n   344→✅ Fix: Combine 3+ pressures (time + sunk cost + exhaustion).\n   345→\n   346→**❌ Not capturing exact failures**\n   347→\"Agent was wrong\" doesn't tell you what to prevent.\n   348→✅ Fix: Document exact rationalizations verbatim.\n   349→\n   350→**❌ Vague fixes (adding generic counters)**\n   351→\"Don't cheat\" doesn't work. \"Don't keep as reference\" does.\n   352→✅ Fix: Add explicit negations for each specific rationalization.\n   353→\n   354→**❌ Stopping after first pass**\n   355→Tests pass once ≠ bulletproof.\n   356→✅ Fix: Continue REFACTOR cycle until no new rationalizations.\n   357→\n   358→## Quick Reference (TDD Cycle)\n   359→\n   360→| TDD Phase | Skill Testing | Success Criteria |\n   361→|-----------|---------------|------------------|\n   362→| **RED** | Run scenario without skill | Agent fails, document rationalizations |\n   363→| **Verify RED** | Capture exact wording | Verbatim documentation of failures |\n   364→| **GREEN** | Write skill addressing failures | Agent now complies with skill |\n   365→| **Verify GREEN** | Re-test scenarios | Agent follows rule under pressure |\n   366→| **REFACTOR** | Close loopholes | Add counters for new rationalizations |\n   367→| **Stay GREEN** | Re-verify | Agent still complies after refactoring |\n   368→\n   369→## The Bottom Line\n   370→\n   371→**Skill creation IS TDD. Same principles, same cycle, same benefits.**\n   372→\n   373→If you wouldn't write code without tests, don't write skills without testing them on agents.\n   374→\n   375→RED-GREEN-REFACTOR for documentation works exactly like RED-GREEN-REFACTOR for code.\n   376→\n   377→## Real-World Impact\n   378→\n   379→From applying TDD to TDD skill itself (2025-10-03):\n   380→- 6 RED-GREEN-REFACTOR iterations to bulletproof\n   381→- Baseline testing revealed 10+ unique rationalizations\n   382→- Each REFACTOR closed specific loopholes\n   383→- Final VERIFY GREEN: 100% compliance under maximum pressure\n   384→- Same process works for any discipline-enforcing skill\n   385→"}]},"uuid":"c152aa3c-8d4f-4589-a5f7-fa8eb55fc211","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:18.710Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"64b7065e-4dab-4eb9-98e8-cff5ecf86e5a","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"c152aa3c-8d4f-4589-a5f7-fa8eb55fc211","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01VT1gEJXeTDiPgt8aeeKutx","toolUseID":"toolu_01VT1gEJXeTDiPgt8aeeKutx","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:15.499Z","uuid":"2d7d621b-4b8d-4af2-979a-35fc45e31bb5","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"b9e57598-3b01-4a67-b32d-a386187d2742","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01VT1gEJXeTDiPgt8aeeKutx","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: test-driven-development\n     3→description: Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Test-Driven Development (TDD)\n     7→\n     8→## Overview\n     9→\n    10→Write the test first. Watch it fail. Write minimal code to pass.\n    11→\n    12→**Core principle:** If you didn't watch the test fail, you don't know if it tests the right thing.\n    13→\n    14→**Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.**\n    15→\n    16→## When to Use\n    17→\n    18→**Always:**\n    19→- New features\n    20→- Bug fixes\n    21→- Refactoring\n    22→- Behavior changes\n    23→\n    24→**Exceptions (ask your human partner):**\n    25→- Throwaway prototypes\n    26→- Generated code\n    27→- Configuration files\n    28→\n    29→Thinking \"skip TDD just this once\"? Stop. That's rationalization.\n    30→\n    31→## The Iron Law\n    32→\n    33→```\n    34→NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST\n    35→```\n    36→\n    37→Write code before the test? Delete it. Start over.\n    38→\n    39→**No exceptions:**\n    40→- Don't keep it as \"reference\"\n    41→- Don't \"adapt\" it while writing tests\n    42→- Don't look at it\n    43→- Delete means delete\n    44→\n    45→Implement fresh from tests. Period.\n    46→\n    47→## Red-Green-Refactor\n    48→\n    49→```dot\n    50→digraph tdd_cycle {\n    51→    rankdir=LR;\n    52→    red [label=\"RED\\nWrite failing test\", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor=\"#ffcccc\"];\n    53→    verify_red [label=\"Verify fails\\ncorrectly\", shape=diamond];\n    54→    green [label=\"GREEN\\nMinimal code\", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor=\"#ccffcc\"];\n    55→    verify_green [label=\"Verify passes\\nAll green\", shape=diamond];\n    56→    refactor [label=\"REFACTOR\\nClean up\", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor=\"#ccccff\"];\n    57→    next [label=\"Next\", shape=ellipse];\n    58→\n    59→    red -> verify_red;\n    60→    verify_red -> green [label=\"yes\"];\n    61→    verify_red -> red [label=\"wrong\\nfailure\"];\n    62→    green -> verify_green;\n    63→    verify_green -> refactor [label=\"yes\"];\n    64→    verify_green -> green [label=\"no\"];\n    65→    refactor -> verify_green [label=\"stay\\ngreen\"];\n    66→    verify_green -> next;\n    67→    next -> red;\n    68→}\n    69→```\n    70→\n    71→### RED - Write Failing Test\n    72→\n    73→Write one minimal test showing what should happen.\n    74→\n    75→<Good>\n    76→```typescript\n    77→test('retries failed operations 3 times', async () => {\n    78→  let attempts = 0;\n    79→  const operation = () => {\n    80→    attempts++;\n    81→    if (attempts < 3) throw new Error('fail');\n    82→    return 'success';\n    83→  };\n    84→\n    85→  const result = await retryOperation(operation);\n    86→\n    87→  expect(result).toBe('success');\n    88→  expect(attempts).toBe(3);\n    89→});\n    90→```\n    91→Clear name, tests real behavior, one thing\n    92→</Good>\n    93→\n    94→<Bad>\n    95→```typescript\n    96→test('retry works', async () => {\n    97→  const mock = jest.fn()\n    98→    .mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error())\n    99→    .mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error())\n   100→    .mockResolvedValueOnce('success');\n   101→  await retryOperation(mock);\n   102→  expect(mock).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(3);\n   103→});\n   104→```\n   105→Vague name, tests mock not code\n   106→</Bad>\n   107→\n   108→**Requirements:**\n   109→- One behavior\n   110→- Clear name\n   111→- Real code (no mocks unless unavoidable)\n   112→\n   113→### Verify RED - Watch It Fail\n   114→\n   115→**MANDATORY. Never skip.**\n   116→\n   117→```bash\n   118→npm test path/to/test.test.ts\n   119→```\n   120→\n   121→Confirm:\n   122→- Test fails (not errors)\n   123→- Failure message is expected\n   124→- Fails because feature missing (not typos)\n   125→\n   126→**Test passes?** You're testing existing behavior. Fix test.\n   127→\n   128→**Test errors?** Fix error, re-run until it fails correctly.\n   129→\n   130→### GREEN - Minimal Code\n   131→\n   132→Write simplest code to pass the test.\n   133→\n   134→<Good>\n   135→```typescript\n   136→async function retryOperation<T>(fn: () => Promise<T>): Promise<T> {\n   137→  for (let i = 0; i < 3; i++) {\n   138→    try {\n   139→      return await fn();\n   140→    } catch (e) {\n   141→      if (i === 2) throw e;\n   142→    }\n   143→  }\n   144→  throw new Error('unreachable');\n   145→}\n   146→```\n   147→Just enough to pass\n   148→</Good>\n   149→\n   150→<Bad>\n   151→```typescript\n   152→async function retryOperation<T>(\n   153→  fn: () => Promise<T>,\n   154→  options?: {\n   155→    maxRetries?: number;\n   156→    backoff?: 'linear' | 'exponential';\n   157→    onRetry?: (attempt: number) => void;\n   158→  }\n   159→): Promise<T> {\n   160→  // YAGNI\n   161→}\n   162→```\n   163→Over-engineered\n   164→</Bad>\n   165→\n   166→Don't add features, refactor other code, or \"improve\" beyond the test.\n   167→\n   168→### Verify GREEN - Watch It Pass\n   169→\n   170→**MANDATORY.**\n   171→\n   172→```bash\n   173→npm test path/to/test.test.ts\n   174→```\n   175→\n   176→Confirm:\n   177→- Test passes\n   178→- Other tests still pass\n   179→- Output pristine (no errors, warnings)\n   180→\n   181→**Test fails?** Fix code, not test.\n   182→\n   183→**Other tests fail?** Fix now.\n   184→\n   185→### REFACTOR - Clean Up\n   186→\n   187→After green only:\n   188→- Remove duplication\n   189→- Improve names\n   190→- Extract helpers\n   191→\n   192→Keep tests green. Don't add behavior.\n   193→\n   194→### Repeat\n   195→\n   196→Next failing test for next feature.\n   197→\n   198→## Good Tests\n   199→\n   200→| Quality | Good | Bad |\n   201→|---------|------|-----|\n   202→| **Minimal** | One thing. \"and\" in name? Split it. | `test('validates email and domain and whitespace')` |\n   203→| **Clear** | Name describes behavior | `test('test1')` |\n   204→| **Shows intent** | Demonstrates desired API | Obscures what code should do |\n   205→\n   206→## Why Order Matters\n   207→\n   208→**\"I'll write tests after to verify it works\"**\n   209→\n   210→Tests written after code pass immediately. Passing immediately proves nothing:\n   211→- Might test wrong thing\n   212→- Might test implementation, not behavior\n   213→- Might miss edge cases you forgot\n   214→- You never saw it catch the bug\n   215→\n   216→Test-first forces you to see the test fail, proving it actually tests something.\n   217→\n   218→**\"I already manually tested all the edge cases\"**\n   219→\n   220→Manual testing is ad-hoc. You think you tested everything but:\n   221→- No record of what you tested\n   222→- Can't re-run when code changes\n   223→- Easy to forget cases under pressure\n   224→- \"It worked when I tried it\" ≠ comprehensive\n   225→\n   226→Automated tests are systematic. They run the same way every time.\n   227→\n   228→**\"Deleting X hours of work is wasteful\"**\n   229→\n   230→Sunk cost fallacy. The time is already gone. Your choice now:\n   231→- Delete and rewrite with TDD (X more hours, high confidence)\n   232→- Keep it and add tests after (30 min, low confidence, likely bugs)\n   233→\n   234→The \"waste\" is keeping code you can't trust. Working code without real tests is technical debt.\n   235→\n   236→**\"TDD is dogmatic, being pragmatic means adapting\"**\n   237→\n   238→TDD IS pragmatic:\n   239→- Finds bugs before commit (faster than debugging after)\n   240→- Prevents regressions (tests catch breaks immediately)\n   241→- Documents behavior (tests show how to use code)\n   242→- Enables refactoring (change freely, tests catch breaks)\n   243→\n   244→\"Pragmatic\" shortcuts = debugging in production = slower.\n   245→\n   246→**\"Tests after achieve the same goals - it's spirit not ritual\"**\n   247→\n   248→No. Tests-after answer \"What does this do?\" Tests-first answer \"What should this do?\"\n   249→\n   250→Tests-after are biased by your implementation. You test what you built, not what's required. You verify remembered edge cases, not discovered ones.\n   251→\n   252→Tests-first force edge case discovery before implementing. Tests-after verify you remembered everything (you didn't).\n   253→\n   254→30 minutes of tests after ≠ TDD. You get coverage, lose proof tests work.\n   255→\n   256→## Common Rationalizations\n   257→\n   258→| Excuse | Reality |\n   259→|--------|---------|\n   260→| \"Too simple to test\" | Simple code breaks. Test takes 30 seconds. |\n   261→| \"I'll test after\" | Tests passing immediately prove nothing. |\n   262→| \"Tests after achieve same goals\" | Tests-after = \"what does this do?\" Tests-first = \"what should this do?\" |\n   263→| \"Already manually tested\" | Ad-hoc ≠ systematic. No record, can't re-run. |\n   264→| \"Deleting X hours is wasteful\" | Sunk cost fallacy. Keeping unverified code is technical debt. |\n   265→| \"Keep as reference, write tests first\" | You'll adapt it. That's testing after. Delete means delete. |\n   266→| \"Need to explore first\" | Fine. Throw away exploration, start with TDD. |\n   267→| \"Test hard = design unclear\" | Listen to test. Hard to test = hard to use. |\n   268→| \"TDD will slow me down\" | TDD faster than debugging. Pragmatic = test-first. |\n   269→| \"Manual test faster\" | Manual doesn't prove edge cases. You'll re-test every change. |\n   270→| \"Existing code has no tests\" | You're improving it. Add tests for existing code. |\n   271→\n   272→## Red Flags - STOP and Start Over\n   273→\n   274→- Code before test\n   275→- Test after implementation\n   276→- Test passes immediately\n   277→- Can't explain why test failed\n   278→- Tests added \"later\"\n   279→- Rationalizing \"just this once\"\n   280→- \"I already manually tested it\"\n   281→- \"Tests after achieve the same purpose\"\n   282→- \"It's about spirit not ritual\"\n   283→- \"Keep as reference\" or \"adapt existing code\"\n   284→- \"Already spent X hours, deleting is wasteful\"\n   285→- \"TDD is dogmatic, I'm being pragmatic\"\n   286→- \"This is different because...\"\n   287→\n   288→**All of these mean: Delete code. Start over with TDD.**\n   289→\n   290→## Example: Bug Fix\n   291→\n   292→**Bug:** Empty email accepted\n   293→\n   294→**RED**\n   295→```typescript\n   296→test('rejects empty email', async () => {\n   297→  const result = await submitForm({ email: '' });\n   298→  expect(result.error).toBe('Email required');\n   299→});\n   300→```\n   301→\n   302→**Verify RED**\n   303→```bash\n   304→$ npm test\n   305→FAIL: expected 'Email required', got undefined\n   306→```\n   307→\n   308→**GREEN**\n   309→```typescript\n   310→function submitForm(data: FormData) {\n   311→  if (!data.email?.trim()) {\n   312→    return { error: 'Email required' };\n   313→  }\n   314→  // ...\n   315→}\n   316→```\n   317→\n   318→**Verify GREEN**\n   319→```bash\n   320→$ npm test\n   321→PASS\n   322→```\n   323→\n   324→**REFACTOR**\n   325→Extract validation for multiple fields if needed.\n   326→\n   327→## Verification Checklist\n   328→\n   329→Before marking work complete:\n   330→\n   331→- [ ] Every new function/method has a test\n   332→- [ ] Watched each test fail before implementing\n   333→- [ ] Each test failed for expected reason (feature missing, not typo)\n   334→- [ ] Wrote minimal code to pass each test\n   335→- [ ] All tests pass\n   336→- [ ] Output pristine (no errors, warnings)\n   337→- [ ] Tests use real code (mocks only if unavoidable)\n   338→- [ ] Edge cases and errors covered\n   339→\n   340→Can't check all boxes? You skipped TDD. Start over.\n   341→\n   342→## When Stuck\n   343→\n   344→| Problem | Solution |\n   345→|---------|----------|\n   346→| Don't know how to test | Write wished-for API. Write assertion first. Ask your human partner. |\n   347→| Test too complicated | Design too complicated. Simplify interface. |\n   348→| Must mock everything | Code too coupled. Use dependency injection. |\n   349→| Test setup huge | Extract helpers. Still complex? Simplify design. |\n   350→\n   351→## Debugging Integration\n   352→\n   353→Bug found? Write failing test reproducing it. Follow TDD cycle. Test proves fix and prevents regression.\n   354→\n   355→Never fix bugs without a test.\n   356→\n   357→## Testing Anti-Patterns\n   358→\n   359→When adding mocks or test utilities, read @testing-anti-patterns.md to avoid common pitfalls:\n   360→- Testing mock behavior instead of real behavior\n   361→- Adding test-only methods to production classes\n   362→- Mocking without understanding dependencies\n   363→\n   364→## Final Rule\n   365→\n   366→```\n   367→Production code → test exists and failed first\n   368→Otherwise → not TDD\n   369→```\n   370→\n   371→No exceptions without your human partner's permission.\n   372→"}]},"uuid":"a7929a05-a6d9-475c-a94d-1bdafcad9756","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:15.499Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"b9e57598-3b01-4a67-b32d-a386187d2742","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"a7929a05-a6d9-475c-a94d-1bdafcad9756","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_019naL4SnKv5RTBUKH9L6YFD","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01H7U5SeXTDhMh1Dj6NFR43n","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11735,"cache_read_input_tokens":10422,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11735,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERA14s1LnkXayidZZSR","type":"assistant","uuid":"f2fde7e5-ef22-44ce-9bc5-c3e8dbec28c9","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:19.396Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"f2fde7e5-ef22-44ce-9bc5-c3e8dbec28c9","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01H7U5SeXTDhMh1Dj6NFR43n","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01H7U5SeXTDhMh1Dj6NFR43n","uuid":"88b507ad-f932-4a8c-a174-a2ce662ef693","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:19.397Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"88b507ad-f932-4a8c-a174-a2ce662ef693","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01H7U5SeXTDhMh1Dj6NFR43n","toolUseID":"toolu_01H7U5SeXTDhMh1Dj6NFR43n","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:19.456Z","uuid":"68726eb6-7a3d-4e11-9b51-a5bb694a1a42","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"f2fde7e5-ef22-44ce-9bc5-c3e8dbec28c9","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01H7U5SeXTDhMh1Dj6NFR43n","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: verification-before-completion\n     3→description: Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Verification Before Completion\n     7→\n     8→## Overview\n     9→\n    10→Claiming work is complete without verification is dishonesty, not efficiency.\n    11→\n    12→**Core principle:** Evidence before claims, always.\n    13→\n    14→**Violating the letter of this rule is violating the spirit of this rule.**\n    15→\n    16→## The Iron Law\n    17→\n    18→```\n    19→NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE\n    20→```\n    21→\n    22→If you haven't run the verification command in this message, you cannot claim it passes.\n    23→\n    24→## The Gate Function\n    25→\n    26→```\n    27→BEFORE claiming any status or expressing satisfaction:\n    28→\n    29→1. IDENTIFY: What command proves this claim?\n    30→2. RUN: Execute the FULL command (fresh, complete)\n    31→3. READ: Full output, check exit code, count failures\n    32→4. VERIFY: Does output confirm the claim?\n    33→   - If NO: State actual status with evidence\n    34→   - If YES: State claim WITH evidence\n    35→5. ONLY THEN: Make the claim\n    36→\n    37→Skip any step = lying, not verifying\n    38→```\n    39→\n    40→## Common Failures\n    41→\n    42→| Claim | Requires | Not Sufficient |\n    43→|-------|----------|----------------|\n    44→| Tests pass | Test command output: 0 failures | Previous run, \"should pass\" |\n    45→| Linter clean | Linter output: 0 errors | Partial check, extrapolation |\n    46→| Build succeeds | Build command: exit 0 | Linter passing, logs look good |\n    47→| Bug fixed | Test original symptom: passes | Code changed, assumed fixed |\n    48→| Regression test works | Red-green cycle verified | Test passes once |\n    49→| Agent completed | VCS diff shows changes | Agent reports \"success\" |\n    50→| Requirements met | Line-by-line checklist | Tests passing |\n    51→\n    52→## Red Flags - STOP\n    53→\n    54→- Using \"should\", \"probably\", \"seems to\"\n    55→- Expressing satisfaction before verification (\"Great!\", \"Perfect!\", \"Done!\", etc.)\n    56→- About to commit/push/PR without verification\n    57→- Trusting agent success reports\n    58→- Relying on partial verification\n    59→- Thinking \"just this once\"\n    60→- Tired and wanting work over\n    61→- **ANY wording implying success without having run verification**\n    62→\n    63→## Rationalization Prevention\n    64→\n    65→| Excuse | Reality |\n    66→|--------|---------|\n    67→| \"Should work now\" | RUN the verification |\n    68→| \"I'm confident\" | Confidence ≠ evidence |\n    69→| \"Just this once\" | No exceptions |\n    70→| \"Linter passed\" | Linter ≠ compiler |\n    71→| \"Agent said success\" | Verify independently |\n    72→| \"I'm tired\" | Exhaustion ≠ excuse |\n    73→| \"Partial check is enough\" | Partial proves nothing |\n    74→| \"Different words so rule doesn't apply\" | Spirit over letter |\n    75→\n    76→## Key Patterns\n    77→\n    78→**Tests:**\n    79→```\n    80→✅ [Run test command] [See: 34/34 pass] \"All tests pass\"\n    81→❌ \"Should pass now\" / \"Looks correct\"\n    82→```\n    83→\n    84→**Regression tests (TDD Red-Green):**\n    85→```\n    86→✅ Write → Run (pass) → Revert fix → Run (MUST FAIL) → Restore → Run (pass)\n    87→❌ \"I've written a regression test\" (without red-green verification)\n    88→```\n    89→\n    90→**Build:**\n    91→```\n    92→✅ [Run build] [See: exit 0] \"Build passes\"\n    93→❌ \"Linter passed\" (linter doesn't check compilation)\n    94→```\n    95→\n    96→**Requirements:**\n    97→```\n    98→✅ Re-read plan → Create checklist → Verify each → Report gaps or completion\n    99→❌ \"Tests pass, phase complete\"\n   100→```\n   101→\n   102→**Agent delegation:**\n   103→```\n   104→✅ Agent reports success → Check VCS diff → Verify changes → Report actual state\n   105→❌ Trust agent report\n   106→```\n   107→\n   108→## Why This Matters\n   109→\n   110→From 24 failure memories:\n   111→- your human partner said \"I don't believe you\" - trust broken\n   112→- Undefined functions shipped - would crash\n   113→- Missing requirements shipped - incomplete features\n   114→- Time wasted on false completion → redirect → rework\n   115→- Violates: \"Honesty is a core value. If you lie, you'll be replaced.\"\n   116→\n   117→## When To Apply\n   118→\n   119→**ALWAYS before:**\n   120→- ANY variation of success/completion claims\n   121→- ANY expression of satisfaction\n   122→- ANY positive statement about work state\n   123→- Committing, PR creation, task completion\n   124→- Moving to next task\n   125→- Delegating to agents\n   126→\n   127→**Rule applies to:**\n   128→- Exact phrases\n   129→- Paraphrases and synonyms\n   130→- Implications of success\n   131→- ANY communication suggesting completion/correctness\n   132→\n   133→## The Bottom Line\n   134→\n   135→**No shortcuts for verification.**\n   136→\n   137→Run the command. Read the output. THEN claim the result.\n   138→\n   139→This is non-negotiable.\n   140→"}]},"uuid":"be3e2025-0fad-419d-a153-74e2298622ca","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:19.456Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"f2fde7e5-ef22-44ce-9bc5-c3e8dbec28c9","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"be3e2025-0fad-419d-a153-74e2298622ca","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_019naL4SnKv5RTBUKH9L6YFD","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_018ZrtXwRBWNSnzpgcwcoGht","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/executing-plans/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11735,"cache_read_input_tokens":10422,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11735,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERA14s1LnkXayidZZSR","type":"assistant","uuid":"f0b73193-9dff-4d1f-ae77-f6068ab4081a","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:19.744Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"f0b73193-9dff-4d1f-ae77-f6068ab4081a","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_018ZrtXwRBWNSnzpgcwcoGht","parentToolUseID":"toolu_018ZrtXwRBWNSnzpgcwcoGht","uuid":"eb00d927-462c-4e06-b730-0e93a4801f44","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:19.744Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"eb00d927-462c-4e06-b730-0e93a4801f44","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_018ZrtXwRBWNSnzpgcwcoGht","toolUseID":"toolu_018ZrtXwRBWNSnzpgcwcoGht","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:19.796Z","uuid":"8855914d-fe98-46eb-a158-131e79465626","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"f0b73193-9dff-4d1f-ae77-f6068ab4081a","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_018ZrtXwRBWNSnzpgcwcoGht","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: executing-plans\n     3→description: Use when you have a written implementation plan to execute in a separate session with review checkpoints\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Executing Plans\n     7→\n     8→## Overview\n     9→\n    10→Load plan, review critically, execute tasks in batches, report for review between batches.\n    11→\n    12→**Core principle:** Batch execution with checkpoints for architect review.\n    13→\n    14→**Announce at start:** \"I'm using the executing-plans skill to implement this plan.\"\n    15→\n    16→## The Process\n    17→\n    18→### Step 1: Load and Review Plan\n    19→1. Read plan file\n    20→2. Review critically - identify any questions or concerns about the plan\n    21→3. If concerns: Raise them with your human partner before starting\n    22→4. If no concerns: Create TodoWrite and proceed\n    23→\n    24→### Step 2: Execute Batch\n    25→**Default: First 3 tasks**\n    26→\n    27→For each task:\n    28→1. Mark as in_progress\n    29→2. Follow each step exactly (plan has bite-sized steps)\n    30→3. Run verifications as specified\n    31→4. Mark as completed\n    32→\n    33→### Step 3: Report\n    34→When batch complete:\n    35→- Show what was implemented\n    36→- Show verification output\n    37→- Say: \"Ready for feedback.\"\n    38→\n    39→### Step 4: Continue\n    40→Based on feedback:\n    41→- Apply changes if needed\n    42→- Execute next batch\n    43→- Repeat until complete\n    44→\n    45→### Step 5: Complete Development\n    46→\n    47→After all tasks complete and verified:\n    48→- Announce: \"I'm using the finishing-a-development-branch skill to complete this work.\"\n    49→- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch\n    50→- Follow that skill to verify tests, present options, execute choice\n    51→\n    52→## When to Stop and Ask for Help\n    53→\n    54→**STOP executing immediately when:**\n    55→- Hit a blocker mid-batch (missing dependency, test fails, instruction unclear)\n    56→- Plan has critical gaps preventing starting\n    57→- You don't understand an instruction\n    58→- Verification fails repeatedly\n    59→\n    60→**Ask for clarification rather than guessing.**\n    61→\n    62→## When to Revisit Earlier Steps\n    63→\n    64→**Return to Review (Step 1) when:**\n    65→- Partner updates the plan based on your feedback\n    66→- Fundamental approach needs rethinking\n    67→\n    68→**Don't force through blockers** - stop and ask.\n    69→\n    70→## Remember\n    71→- Review plan critically first\n    72→- Follow plan steps exactly\n    73→- Don't skip verifications\n    74→- Reference skills when plan says to\n    75→- Between batches: just report and wait\n    76→- Stop when blocked, don't guess\n    77→- Never start implementation on main/master branch without explicit user consent\n    78→\n    79→## Integration\n    80→\n    81→**Required workflow skills:**\n    82→- **superpowers:using-git-worktrees** - REQUIRED: Set up isolated workspace before starting\n    83→- **superpowers:writing-plans** - Creates the plan this skill executes\n    84→- **superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch** - Complete development after all tasks\n    85→"}]},"uuid":"5ed806ab-98c1-4abd-99b4-cf987e8a74ed","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:19.796Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"f0b73193-9dff-4d1f-ae77-f6068ab4081a","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5ed806ab-98c1-4abd-99b4-cf987e8a74ed","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_019naL4SnKv5RTBUKH9L6YFD","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01DDWjuhCegyKzFUYmqyt4Au","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/anthropic-best-practices.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11735,"cache_read_input_tokens":10422,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11735,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERA14s1LnkXayidZZSR","type":"assistant","uuid":"5bb4185f-5c2e-4791-96ff-2b00564877c6","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:20.235Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5bb4185f-5c2e-4791-96ff-2b00564877c6","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01DDWjuhCegyKzFUYmqyt4Au","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01DDWjuhCegyKzFUYmqyt4Au","uuid":"d90133b0-9f2e-4b54-99d6-1758f16abc74","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:20.235Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"d90133b0-9f2e-4b54-99d6-1758f16abc74","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_019naL4SnKv5RTBUKH9L6YFD","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01WPrQiCxEZ7VYTsS1vyyaCB","name":"WebFetch","input":{"url":"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/superpowers-ai/superpowers/main/skills/writing-skills/SKILL.md","prompt":"Return the COMPLETE content of this file. Do not summarize. Include every word, every table, every section."},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11735,"cache_read_input_tokens":10422,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11735,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":2,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERA14s1LnkXayidZZSR","type":"assistant","uuid":"9ae5cac8-ca68-4605-bd70-1531ba2e2ab8","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:21.358Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"9ae5cac8-ca68-4605-bd70-1531ba2e2ab8","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:WebFetch","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01WPrQiCxEZ7VYTsS1vyyaCB","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01WPrQiCxEZ7VYTsS1vyyaCB","uuid":"02840469-3e45-45c3-9a1d-8506873884f8","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:21.358Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"9ae5cac8-ca68-4605-bd70-1531ba2e2ab8","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"type":"tool_result","content":"Hook PreToolUse:WebFetch denied this tool","is_error":true,"tool_use_id":"toolu_01WPrQiCxEZ7VYTsS1vyyaCB"}]},"uuid":"8066a402-1f6d-4089-99dd-d7454990fb1b","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:21.410Z","toolUseResult":"Error: Hook PreToolUse:WebFetch denied this tool","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"9ae5cac8-ca68-4605-bd70-1531ba2e2ab8","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"8066a402-1f6d-4089-99dd-d7454990fb1b","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_019naL4SnKv5RTBUKH9L6YFD","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_012mP3qYsxkLrSkzYweuo9Ms","name":"WebFetch","input":{"url":"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/superpowers-ai/superpowers/main/skills/writing-skills/persuasion-principles.md","prompt":"Return the COMPLETE content of this file. Do not summarize. Include every word, every table, every section."},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":"tool_use","stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11735,"cache_read_input_tokens":10422,"output_tokens":746,"server_tool_use":{"web_search_requests":0,"web_fetch_requests":0},"service_tier":"standard","cache_creation":{"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0,"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11735},"inference_geo":"","iterations":[],"speed":"standard"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERA14s1LnkXayidZZSR","type":"assistant","uuid":"6510d74c-bf50-4a0e-86fe-ceade47a568c","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:21.745Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"6510d74c-bf50-4a0e-86fe-ceade47a568c","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:WebFetch","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_012mP3qYsxkLrSkzYweuo9Ms","parentToolUseID":"toolu_012mP3qYsxkLrSkzYweuo9Ms","uuid":"b6273f28-1e5a-4b25-b4e4-5892fbcf8c60","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:21.745Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"6510d74c-bf50-4a0e-86fe-ceade47a568c","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"type":"tool_result","content":"Hook PreToolUse:WebFetch denied this tool","is_error":true,"tool_use_id":"toolu_012mP3qYsxkLrSkzYweuo9Ms"}]},"uuid":"b5f74841-30df-40f1-a039-c75cb516557c","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:21.809Z","toolUseResult":"Error: Hook PreToolUse:WebFetch denied this tool","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"6510d74c-bf50-4a0e-86fe-ceade47a568c","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5bb4185f-5c2e-4791-96ff-2b00564877c6","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"type":"tool_result","content":"File content (12274 tokens) exceeds maximum allowed tokens (10000). Use offset and limit parameters to read specific portions of the file, or search for specific content instead of reading the whole file.","is_error":true,"tool_use_id":"toolu_01DDWjuhCegyKzFUYmqyt4Au"}]},"uuid":"809355fb-a265-406f-9c97-8b852ac4db22","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:22.004Z","toolUseResult":"Error: File content (12274 tokens) exceeds maximum allowed tokens (10000). Use offset and limit parameters to read specific portions of the file, or search for specific content instead of reading the whole file.","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"5bb4185f-5c2e-4791-96ff-2b00564877c6","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"809355fb-a265-406f-9c97-8b852ac4db22","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_014QxjPB92DcLpDt9AQvYVPx","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"\n\nLet me read the anthropic-best-practices file in parts, fetch the GitHub version via gh CLI, and read the remaining skill files."}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":29034,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":29034,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERBnswWGRSPfKWUiQpe","type":"assistant","uuid":"2371623b-c802-4a48-9293-1a2256efa31f","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:38.483Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"2371623b-c802-4a48-9293-1a2256efa31f","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_014QxjPB92DcLpDt9AQvYVPx","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01Wimx3p4a8CLF2LpUMDQ42y","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/anthropic-best-practices.md","limit":100},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":29034,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":29034,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERBnswWGRSPfKWUiQpe","type":"assistant","uuid":"5d6e0001-9fb8-4ef1-b99e-de781582a1b1","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:40.527Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5d6e0001-9fb8-4ef1-b99e-de781582a1b1","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01Wimx3p4a8CLF2LpUMDQ42y","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01Wimx3p4a8CLF2LpUMDQ42y","uuid":"110917f2-6b28-4d42-908d-533e327ea79c","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:40.527Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"110917f2-6b28-4d42-908d-533e327ea79c","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01Wimx3p4a8CLF2LpUMDQ42y","toolUseID":"toolu_01Wimx3p4a8CLF2LpUMDQ42y","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:40.587Z","uuid":"8e642dac-4d66-4233-b6bd-2a27a42242b3","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5d6e0001-9fb8-4ef1-b99e-de781582a1b1","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01Wimx3p4a8CLF2LpUMDQ42y","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→# Skill authoring best practices\n     2→\n     3→> Learn how to write effective Skills that Claude can discover and use successfully.\n     4→\n     5→Good Skills are concise, well-structured, and tested with real usage. This guide provides practical authoring decisions to help you write Skills that Claude can discover and use effectively.\n     6→\n     7→For conceptual background on how Skills work, see the [Skills overview](/en/docs/agents-and-tools/agent-skills/overview).\n     8→\n     9→## Core principles\n    10→\n    11→### Concise is key\n    12→\n    13→The [context window](https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/context-windows) is a public good. Your Skill shares the context window with everything else Claude needs to know, including:\n    14→\n    15→* The system prompt\n    16→* Conversation history\n    17→* Other Skills' metadata\n    18→* Your actual request\n    19→\n    20→Not every token in your Skill has an immediate cost. At startup, only the metadata (name and description) from all Skills is pre-loaded. Claude reads SKILL.md only when the Skill becomes relevant, and reads additional files only as needed. However, being concise in SKILL.md still matters: once Claude loads it, every token competes with conversation history and other context.\n    21→\n    22→**Default assumption**: Claude is already very smart\n    23→\n    24→Only add context Claude doesn't already have. Challenge each piece of information:\n    25→\n    26→* \"Does Claude really need this explanation?\"\n    27→* \"Can I assume Claude knows this?\"\n    28→* \"Does this paragraph justify its token cost?\"\n    29→\n    30→**Good example: Concise** (approximately 50 tokens):\n    31→\n    32→````markdown  theme={null}\n    33→## Extract PDF text\n    34→\n    35→Use pdfplumber for text extraction:\n    36→\n    37→```python\n    38→import pdfplumber\n    39→\n    40→with pdfplumber.open(\"file.pdf\") as pdf:\n    41→    text = pdf.pages[0].extract_text()\n    42→```\n    43→````\n    44→\n    45→**Bad example: Too verbose** (approximately 150 tokens):\n    46→\n    47→```markdown  theme={null}\n    48→## Extract PDF text\n    49→\n    50→PDF (Portable Document Format) files are a common file format that contains\n    51→text, images, and other content. To extract text from a PDF, you'll need to\n    52→use a library. There are many libraries available for PDF processing, but we\n    53→recommend pdfplumber because it's easy to use and handles most cases well.\n    54→First, you'll need to install it using pip. Then you can use the code below...\n    55→```\n    56→\n    57→The concise version assumes Claude knows what PDFs are and how libraries work.\n    58→\n    59→### Set appropriate degrees of freedom\n    60→\n    61→Match the level of specificity to the task's fragility and variability.\n    62→\n    63→**High freedom** (text-based instructions):\n    64→\n    65→Use when:\n    66→\n    67→* Multiple approaches are valid\n    68→* Decisions depend on context\n    69→* Heuristics guide the approach\n    70→\n    71→Example:\n    72→\n    73→```markdown  theme={null}\n    74→## Code review process\n    75→\n    76→1. Analyze the code structure and organization\n    77→2. Check for potential bugs or edge cases\n    78→3. Suggest improvements for readability and maintainability\n    79→4. Verify adherence to project conventions\n    80→```\n    81→\n    82→**Medium freedom** (pseudocode or scripts with parameters):\n    83→\n    84→Use when:\n    85→\n    86→* A preferred pattern exists\n    87→* Some variation is acceptable\n    88→* Configuration affects behavior\n    89→\n    90→Example:\n    91→\n    92→````markdown  theme={null}\n    93→## Generate report\n    94→\n    95→Use this template and customize as needed:\n    96→\n    97→```python\n    98→def generate_report(data, format=\"markdown\", include_charts=True):\n    99→    # Process data\n   100→    # Generate output in specified format"}]},"uuid":"5b4aae22-759a-4a9c-9151-9ac69232c90b","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:40.586Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"5d6e0001-9fb8-4ef1-b99e-de781582a1b1","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5b4aae22-759a-4a9c-9151-9ac69232c90b","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_014QxjPB92DcLpDt9AQvYVPx","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01XssfRCpbG84jCWvhReMH5x","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":29034,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":29034,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERBnswWGRSPfKWUiQpe","type":"assistant","uuid":"05f013ae-5eb2-49c1-81e9-7296e1e4670a","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:41.457Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"05f013ae-5eb2-49c1-81e9-7296e1e4670a","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01XssfRCpbG84jCWvhReMH5x","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01XssfRCpbG84jCWvhReMH5x","uuid":"34aa351b-ebd0-4d41-89b6-457874ca7017","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:41.457Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"34aa351b-ebd0-4d41-89b6-457874ca7017","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01XssfRCpbG84jCWvhReMH5x","toolUseID":"toolu_01XssfRCpbG84jCWvhReMH5x","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:41.525Z","uuid":"bee55e39-ee2a-4cb3-9739-0594a39cae4d","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"05f013ae-5eb2-49c1-81e9-7296e1e4670a","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01XssfRCpbG84jCWvhReMH5x","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: subagent-driven-development\n     3→description: Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Subagent-Driven Development\n     7→\n     8→Execute plan by dispatching fresh subagent per task, with two-stage review after each: spec compliance review first, then code quality review.\n     9→\n    10→**Core principle:** Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review (spec then quality) = high quality, fast iteration\n    11→\n    12→## When to Use\n    13→\n    14→```dot\n    15→digraph when_to_use {\n    16→    \"Have implementation plan?\" [shape=diamond];\n    17→    \"Tasks mostly independent?\" [shape=diamond];\n    18→    \"Stay in this session?\" [shape=diamond];\n    19→    \"subagent-driven-development\" [shape=box];\n    20→    \"executing-plans\" [shape=box];\n    21→    \"Manual execution or brainstorm first\" [shape=box];\n    22→\n    23→    \"Have implementation plan?\" -> \"Tasks mostly independent?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    24→    \"Have implementation plan?\" -> \"Manual execution or brainstorm first\" [label=\"no\"];\n    25→    \"Tasks mostly independent?\" -> \"Stay in this session?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    26→    \"Tasks mostly independent?\" -> \"Manual execution or brainstorm first\" [label=\"no - tightly coupled\"];\n    27→    \"Stay in this session?\" -> \"subagent-driven-development\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    28→    \"Stay in this session?\" -> \"executing-plans\" [label=\"no - parallel session\"];\n    29→}\n    30→```\n    31→\n    32→**vs. Executing Plans (parallel session):**\n    33→- Same session (no context switch)\n    34→- Fresh subagent per task (no context pollution)\n    35→- Two-stage review after each task: spec compliance first, then code quality\n    36→- Faster iteration (no human-in-loop between tasks)\n    37→\n    38→## The Process\n    39→\n    40→```dot\n    41→digraph process {\n    42→    rankdir=TB;\n    43→\n    44→    subgraph cluster_per_task {\n    45→        label=\"Per Task\";\n    46→        \"Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)\" [shape=box];\n    47→        \"Implementer subagent asks questions?\" [shape=diamond];\n    48→        \"Answer questions, provide context\" [shape=box];\n    49→        \"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews\" [shape=box];\n    50→        \"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (./spec-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [shape=box];\n    51→        \"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?\" [shape=diamond];\n    52→        \"Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps\" [shape=box];\n    53→        \"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [shape=box];\n    54→        \"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?\" [shape=diamond];\n    55→        \"Implementer subagent fixes quality issues\" [shape=box];\n    56→        \"Mark task complete in TodoWrite\" [shape=box];\n    57→    }\n    58→\n    59→    \"Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create TodoWrite\" [shape=box];\n    60→    \"More tasks remain?\" [shape=diamond];\n    61→    \"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation\" [shape=box];\n    62→    \"Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch\" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightgreen];\n    63→\n    64→    \"Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create TodoWrite\" -> \"Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)\";\n    65→    \"Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)\" -> \"Implementer subagent asks questions?\";\n    66→    \"Implementer subagent asks questions?\" -> \"Answer questions, provide context\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    67→    \"Answer questions, provide context\" -> \"Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)\";\n    68→    \"Implementer subagent asks questions?\" -> \"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews\" [label=\"no\"];\n    69→    \"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews\" -> \"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (./spec-reviewer-prompt.md)\";\n    70→    \"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (./spec-reviewer-prompt.md)\" -> \"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?\";\n    71→    \"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?\" -> \"Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps\" [label=\"no\"];\n    72→    \"Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps\" -> \"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (./spec-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [label=\"re-review\"];\n    73→    \"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?\" -> \"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    74→    \"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)\" -> \"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?\";\n    75→    \"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?\" -> \"Implementer subagent fixes quality issues\" [label=\"no\"];\n    76→    \"Implementer subagent fixes quality issues\" -> \"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [label=\"re-review\"];\n    77→    \"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?\" -> \"Mark task complete in TodoWrite\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    78→    \"Mark task complete in TodoWrite\" -> \"More tasks remain?\";\n    79→    \"More tasks remain?\" -> \"Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    80→    \"More tasks remain?\" -> \"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation\" [label=\"no\"];\n    81→    \"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation\" -> \"Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch\";\n    82→}\n    83→```\n    84→\n    85→## Prompt Templates\n    86→\n    87→- `./implementer-prompt.md` - Dispatch implementer subagent\n    88→- `./spec-reviewer-prompt.md` - Dispatch spec compliance reviewer subagent\n    89→- `./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md` - Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent\n    90→\n    91→## Example Workflow\n    92→\n    93→```\n    94→You: I'm using Subagent-Driven Development to execute this plan.\n    95→\n    96→[Read plan file once: docs/plans/feature-plan.md]\n    97→[Extract all 5 tasks with full text and context]\n    98→[Create TodoWrite with all tasks]\n    99→\n   100→Task 1: Hook installation script\n   101→\n   102→[Get Task 1 text and context (already extracted)]\n   103→[Dispatch implementation subagent with full task text + context]\n   104→\n   105→Implementer: \"Before I begin - should the hook be installed at user or system level?\"\n   106→\n   107→You: \"User level (~/.config/superpowers/hooks/)\"\n   108→\n   109→Implementer: \"Got it. Implementing now...\"\n   110→[Later] Implementer:\n   111→  - Implemented install-hook command\n   112→  - Added tests, 5/5 passing\n   113→  - Self-review: Found I missed --force flag, added it\n   114→  - Committed\n   115→\n   116→[Dispatch spec compliance reviewer]\n   117→Spec reviewer: ✅ Spec compliant - all requirements met, nothing extra\n   118→\n   119→[Get git SHAs, dispatch code quality reviewer]\n   120→Code reviewer: Strengths: Good test coverage, clean. Issues: None. Approved.\n   121→\n   122→[Mark Task 1 complete]\n   123→\n   124→Task 2: Recovery modes\n   125→\n   126→[Get Task 2 text and context (already extracted)]\n   127→[Dispatch implementation subagent with full task text + context]\n   128→\n   129→Implementer: [No questions, proceeds]\n   130→Implementer:\n   131→  - Added verify/repair modes\n   132→  - 8/8 tests passing\n   133→  - Self-review: All good\n   134→  - Committed\n   135→\n   136→[Dispatch spec compliance reviewer]\n   137→Spec reviewer: ❌ Issues:\n   138→  - Missing: Progress reporting (spec says \"report every 100 items\")\n   139→  - Extra: Added --json flag (not requested)\n   140→\n   141→[Implementer fixes issues]\n   142→Implementer: Removed --json flag, added progress reporting\n   143→\n   144→[Spec reviewer reviews again]\n   145→Spec reviewer: ✅ Spec compliant now\n   146→\n   147→[Dispatch code quality reviewer]\n   148→Code reviewer: Strengths: Solid. Issues (Important): Magic number (100)\n   149→\n   150→[Implementer fixes]\n   151→Implementer: Extracted PROGRESS_INTERVAL constant\n   152→\n   153→[Code reviewer reviews again]\n   154→Code reviewer: ✅ Approved\n   155→\n   156→[Mark Task 2 complete]\n   157→\n   158→...\n   159→\n   160→[After all tasks]\n   161→[Dispatch final code-reviewer]\n   162→Final reviewer: All requirements met, ready to merge\n   163→\n   164→Done!\n   165→```\n   166→\n   167→## Advantages\n   168→\n   169→**vs. Manual execution:**\n   170→- Subagents follow TDD naturally\n   171→- Fresh context per task (no confusion)\n   172→- Parallel-safe (subagents don't interfere)\n   173→- Subagent can ask questions (before AND during work)\n   174→\n   175→**vs. Executing Plans:**\n   176→- Same session (no handoff)\n   177→- Continuous progress (no waiting)\n   178→- Review checkpoints automatic\n   179→\n   180→**Efficiency gains:**\n   181→- No file reading overhead (controller provides full text)\n   182→- Controller curates exactly what context is needed\n   183→- Subagent gets complete information upfront\n   184→- Questions surfaced before work begins (not after)\n   185→\n   186→**Quality gates:**\n   187→- Self-review catches issues before handoff\n   188→- Two-stage review: spec compliance, then code quality\n   189→- Review loops ensure fixes actually work\n   190→- Spec compliance prevents over/under-building\n   191→- Code quality ensures implementation is well-built\n   192→\n   193→**Cost:**\n   194→- More subagent invocations (implementer + 2 reviewers per task)\n   195→- Controller does more prep work (extracting all tasks upfront)\n   196→- Review loops add iterations\n   197→- But catches issues early (cheaper than debugging later)\n   198→\n   199→## Red Flags\n   200→\n   201→**Never:**\n   202→- Start implementation on main/master branch without explicit user consent\n   203→- Skip reviews (spec compliance OR code quality)\n   204→- Proceed with unfixed issues\n   205→- Dispatch multiple implementation subagents in parallel (conflicts)\n   206→- Make subagent read plan file (provide full text instead)\n   207→- Skip scene-setting context (subagent needs to understand where task fits)\n   208→- Ignore subagent questions (answer before letting them proceed)\n   209→- Accept \"close enough\" on spec compliance (spec reviewer found issues = not done)\n   210→- Skip review loops (reviewer found issues = implementer fixes = review again)\n   211→- Let implementer self-review replace actual review (both are needed)\n   212→- **Start code quality review before spec compliance is ✅** (wrong order)\n   213→- Move to next task while either review has open issues\n   214→\n   215→**If subagent asks questions:**\n   216→- Answer clearly and completely\n   217→- Provide additional context if needed\n   218→- Don't rush them into implementation\n   219→\n   220→**If reviewer finds issues:**\n   221→- Implementer (same subagent) fixes them\n   222→- Reviewer reviews again\n   223→- Repeat until approved\n   224→- Don't skip the re-review\n   225→\n   226→**If subagent fails task:**\n   227→- Dispatch fix subagent with specific instructions\n   228→- Don't try to fix manually (context pollution)\n   229→\n   230→## Integration\n   231→\n   232→**Required workflow skills:**\n   233→- **superpowers:using-git-worktrees** - REQUIRED: Set up isolated workspace before starting\n   234→- **superpowers:writing-plans** - Creates the plan this skill executes\n   235→- **superpowers:requesting-code-review** - Code review template for reviewer subagents\n   236→- **superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch** - Complete development after all tasks\n   237→\n   238→**Subagents should use:**\n   239→- **superpowers:test-driven-development** - Subagents follow TDD for each task\n   240→\n   241→**Alternative workflow:**\n   242→- **superpowers:executing-plans** - Use for parallel session instead of same-session execution\n   243→"}]},"uuid":"fa07561d-9187-4d1d-8299-846b193ee226","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:41.525Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"05f013ae-5eb2-49c1-81e9-7296e1e4670a","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"fa07561d-9187-4d1d-8299-846b193ee226","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_014QxjPB92DcLpDt9AQvYVPx","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01657NG6dthPXoF4J6SkeM5C","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/systematic-debugging/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":29034,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":29034,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERBnswWGRSPfKWUiQpe","type":"assistant","uuid":"8cfdf456-78f4-4d87-9f3b-fb4fe3842def","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:41.808Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"8cfdf456-78f4-4d87-9f3b-fb4fe3842def","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01657NG6dthPXoF4J6SkeM5C","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01657NG6dthPXoF4J6SkeM5C","uuid":"1df306c6-f378-408d-8482-53c32c9ca57d","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:41.808Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"1df306c6-f378-408d-8482-53c32c9ca57d","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01657NG6dthPXoF4J6SkeM5C","toolUseID":"toolu_01657NG6dthPXoF4J6SkeM5C","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:41.861Z","uuid":"9993b0a2-31a3-47c2-99e7-8676f21083c1","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"8cfdf456-78f4-4d87-9f3b-fb4fe3842def","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01657NG6dthPXoF4J6SkeM5C","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: systematic-debugging\n     3→description: Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Systematic Debugging\n     7→\n     8→## Overview\n     9→\n    10→Random fixes waste time and create new bugs. Quick patches mask underlying issues.\n    11→\n    12→**Core principle:** ALWAYS find root cause before attempting fixes. Symptom fixes are failure.\n    13→\n    14→**Violating the letter of this process is violating the spirit of debugging.**\n    15→\n    16→## The Iron Law\n    17→\n    18→```\n    19→NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION FIRST\n    20→```\n    21→\n    22→If you haven't completed Phase 1, you cannot propose fixes.\n    23→\n    24→## When to Use\n    25→\n    26→Use for ANY technical issue:\n    27→- Test failures\n    28→- Bugs in production\n    29→- Unexpected behavior\n    30→- Performance problems\n    31→- Build failures\n    32→- Integration issues\n    33→\n    34→**Use this ESPECIALLY when:**\n    35→- Under time pressure (emergencies make guessing tempting)\n    36→- \"Just one quick fix\" seems obvious\n    37→- You've already tried multiple fixes\n    38→- Previous fix didn't work\n    39→- You don't fully understand the issue\n    40→\n    41→**Don't skip when:**\n    42→- Issue seems simple (simple bugs have root causes too)\n    43→- You're in a hurry (rushing guarantees rework)\n    44→- Manager wants it fixed NOW (systematic is faster than thrashing)\n    45→\n    46→## The Four Phases\n    47→\n    48→You MUST complete each phase before proceeding to the next.\n    49→\n    50→### Phase 1: Root Cause Investigation\n    51→\n    52→**BEFORE attempting ANY fix:**\n    53→\n    54→1. **Read Error Messages Carefully**\n    55→   - Don't skip past errors or warnings\n    56→   - They often contain the exact solution\n    57→   - Read stack traces completely\n    58→   - Note line numbers, file paths, error codes\n    59→\n    60→2. **Reproduce Consistently**\n    61→   - Can you trigger it reliably?\n    62→   - What are the exact steps?\n    63→   - Does it happen every time?\n    64→   - If not reproducible → gather more data, don't guess\n    65→\n    66→3. **Check Recent Changes**\n    67→   - What changed that could cause this?\n    68→   - Git diff, recent commits\n    69→   - New dependencies, config changes\n    70→   - Environmental differences\n    71→\n    72→4. **Gather Evidence in Multi-Component Systems**\n    73→\n    74→   **WHEN system has multiple components (CI → build → signing, API → service → database):**\n    75→\n    76→   **BEFORE proposing fixes, add diagnostic instrumentation:**\n    77→   ```\n    78→   For EACH component boundary:\n    79→     - Log what data enters component\n    80→     - Log what data exits component\n    81→     - Verify environment/config propagation\n    82→     - Check state at each layer\n    83→\n    84→   Run once to gather evidence showing WHERE it breaks\n    85→   THEN analyze evidence to identify failing component\n    86→   THEN investigate that specific component\n    87→   ```\n    88→\n    89→   **Example (multi-layer system):**\n    90→   ```bash\n    91→   # Layer 1: Workflow\n    92→   echo \"=== Secrets available in workflow: ===\"\n    93→   echo \"IDENTITY: ${IDENTITY:+SET}${IDENTITY:-UNSET}\"\n    94→\n    95→   # Layer 2: Build script\n    96→   echo \"=== Env vars in build script: ===\"\n    97→   env | grep IDENTITY || echo \"IDENTITY not in environment\"\n    98→\n    99→   # Layer 3: Signing script\n   100→   echo \"=== Keychain state: ===\"\n   101→   security list-keychains\n   102→   security find-identity -v\n   103→\n   104→   # Layer 4: Actual signing\n   105→   codesign --sign \"$IDENTITY\" --verbose=4 \"$APP\"\n   106→   ```\n   107→\n   108→   **This reveals:** Which layer fails (secrets → workflow ✓, workflow → build ✗)\n   109→\n   110→5. **Trace Data Flow**\n   111→\n   112→   **WHEN error is deep in call stack:**\n   113→\n   114→   See `root-cause-tracing.md` in this directory for the complete backward tracing technique.\n   115→\n   116→   **Quick version:**\n   117→   - Where does bad value originate?\n   118→   - What called this with bad value?\n   119→   - Keep tracing up until you find the source\n   120→   - Fix at source, not at symptom\n   121→\n   122→### Phase 2: Pattern Analysis\n   123→\n   124→**Find the pattern before fixing:**\n   125→\n   126→1. **Find Working Examples**\n   127→   - Locate similar working code in same codebase\n   128→   - What works that's similar to what's broken?\n   129→\n   130→2. **Compare Against References**\n   131→   - If implementing pattern, read reference implementation COMPLETELY\n   132→   - Don't skim - read every line\n   133→   - Understand the pattern fully before applying\n   134→\n   135→3. **Identify Differences**\n   136→   - What's different between working and broken?\n   137→   - List every difference, however small\n   138→   - Don't assume \"that can't matter\"\n   139→\n   140→4. **Understand Dependencies**\n   141→   - What other components does this need?\n   142→   - What settings, config, environment?\n   143→   - What assumptions does it make?\n   144→\n   145→### Phase 3: Hypothesis and Testing\n   146→\n   147→**Scientific method:**\n   148→\n   149→1. **Form Single Hypothesis**\n   150→   - State clearly: \"I think X is the root cause because Y\"\n   151→   - Write it down\n   152→   - Be specific, not vague\n   153→\n   154→2. **Test Minimally**\n   155→   - Make the SMALLEST possible change to test hypothesis\n   156→   - One variable at a time\n   157→   - Don't fix multiple things at once\n   158→\n   159→3. **Verify Before Continuing**\n   160→   - Did it work? Yes → Phase 4\n   161→   - Didn't work? Form NEW hypothesis\n   162→   - DON'T add more fixes on top\n   163→\n   164→4. **When You Don't Know**\n   165→   - Say \"I don't understand X\"\n   166→   - Don't pretend to know\n   167→   - Ask for help\n   168→   - Research more\n   169→\n   170→### Phase 4: Implementation\n   171→\n   172→**Fix the root cause, not the symptom:**\n   173→\n   174→1. **Create Failing Test Case**\n   175→   - Simplest possible reproduction\n   176→   - Automated test if possible\n   177→   - One-off test script if no framework\n   178→   - MUST have before fixing\n   179→   - Use the `superpowers:test-driven-development` skill for writing proper failing tests\n   180→\n   181→2. **Implement Single Fix**\n   182→   - Address the root cause identified\n   183→   - ONE change at a time\n   184→   - No \"while I'm here\" improvements\n   185→   - No bundled refactoring\n   186→\n   187→3. **Verify Fix**\n   188→   - Test passes now?\n   189→   - No other tests broken?\n   190→   - Issue actually resolved?\n   191→\n   192→4. **If Fix Doesn't Work**\n   193→   - STOP\n   194→   - Count: How many fixes have you tried?\n   195→   - If < 3: Return to Phase 1, re-analyze with new information\n   196→   - **If ≥ 3: STOP and question the architecture (step 5 below)**\n   197→   - DON'T attempt Fix #4 without architectural discussion\n   198→\n   199→5. **If 3+ Fixes Failed: Question Architecture**\n   200→\n   201→   **Pattern indicating architectural problem:**\n   202→   - Each fix reveals new shared state/coupling/problem in different place\n   203→   - Fixes require \"massive refactoring\" to implement\n   204→   - Each fix creates new symptoms elsewhere\n   205→\n   206→   **STOP and question fundamentals:**\n   207→   - Is this pattern fundamentally sound?\n   208→   - Are we \"sticking with it through sheer inertia\"?\n   209→   - Should we refactor architecture vs. continue fixing symptoms?\n   210→\n   211→   **Discuss with your human partner before attempting more fixes**\n   212→\n   213→   This is NOT a failed hypothesis - this is a wrong architecture.\n   214→\n   215→## Red Flags - STOP and Follow Process\n   216→\n   217→If you catch yourself thinking:\n   218→- \"Quick fix for now, investigate later\"\n   219→- \"Just try changing X and see if it works\"\n   220→- \"Add multiple changes, run tests\"\n   221→- \"Skip the test, I'll manually verify\"\n   222→- \"It's probably X, let me fix that\"\n   223→- \"I don't fully understand but this might work\"\n   224→- \"Pattern says X but I'll adapt it differently\"\n   225→- \"Here are the main problems: [lists fixes without investigation]\"\n   226→- Proposing solutions before tracing data flow\n   227→- **\"One more fix attempt\" (when already tried 2+)**\n   228→- **Each fix reveals new problem in different place**\n   229→\n   230→**ALL of these mean: STOP. Return to Phase 1.**\n   231→\n   232→**If 3+ fixes failed:** Question the architecture (see Phase 4.5)\n   233→\n   234→## your human partner's Signals You're Doing It Wrong\n   235→\n   236→**Watch for these redirections:**\n   237→- \"Is that not happening?\" - You assumed without verifying\n   238→- \"Will it show us...?\" - You should have added evidence gathering\n   239→- \"Stop guessing\" - You're proposing fixes without understanding\n   240→- \"Ultrathink this\" - Question fundamentals, not just symptoms\n   241→- \"We're stuck?\" (frustrated) - Your approach isn't working\n   242→\n   243→**When you see these:** STOP. Return to Phase 1.\n   244→\n   245→## Common Rationalizations\n   246→\n   247→| Excuse | Reality |\n   248→|--------|---------|\n   249→| \"Issue is simple, don't need process\" | Simple issues have root causes too. Process is fast for simple bugs. |\n   250→| \"Emergency, no time for process\" | Systematic debugging is FASTER than guess-and-check thrashing. |\n   251→| \"Just try this first, then investigate\" | First fix sets the pattern. Do it right from the start. |\n   252→| \"I'll write test after confirming fix works\" | Untested fixes don't stick. Test first proves it. |\n   253→| \"Multiple fixes at once saves time\" | Can't isolate what worked. Causes new bugs. |\n   254→| \"Reference too long, I'll adapt the pattern\" | Partial understanding guarantees bugs. Read it completely. |\n   255→| \"I see the problem, let me fix it\" | Seeing symptoms ≠ understanding root cause. |\n   256→| \"One more fix attempt\" (after 2+ failures) | 3+ failures = architectural problem. Question pattern, don't fix again. |\n   257→\n   258→## Quick Reference\n   259→\n   260→| Phase | Key Activities | Success Criteria |\n   261→|-------|---------------|------------------|\n   262→| **1. Root Cause** | Read errors, reproduce, check changes, gather evidence | Understand WHAT and WHY |\n   263→| **2. Pattern** | Find working examples, compare | Identify differences |\n   264→| **3. Hypothesis** | Form theory, test minimally | Confirmed or new hypothesis |\n   265→| **4. Implementation** | Create test, fix, verify | Bug resolved, tests pass |\n   266→\n   267→## When Process Reveals \"No Root Cause\"\n   268→\n   269→If systematic investigation reveals issue is truly environmental, timing-dependent, or external:\n   270→\n   271→1. You've completed the process\n   272→2. Document what you investigated\n   273→3. Implement appropriate handling (retry, timeout, error message)\n   274→4. Add monitoring/logging for future investigation\n   275→\n   276→**But:** 95% of \"no root cause\" cases are incomplete investigation.\n   277→\n   278→## Supporting Techniques\n   279→\n   280→These techniques are part of systematic debugging and available in this directory:\n   281→\n   282→- **`root-cause-tracing.md`** - Trace bugs backward through call stack to find original trigger\n   283→- **`defense-in-depth.md`** - Add validation at multiple layers after finding root cause\n   284→- **`condition-based-waiting.md`** - Replace arbitrary timeouts with condition polling\n   285→\n   286→**Related skills:**\n   287→- **superpowers:test-driven-development** - For creating failing test case (Phase 4, Step 1)\n   288→- **superpowers:verification-before-completion** - Verify fix worked before claiming success\n   289→\n   290→## Real-World Impact\n   291→\n   292→From debugging sessions:\n   293→- Systematic approach: 15-30 minutes to fix\n   294→- Random fixes approach: 2-3 hours of thrashing\n   295→- First-time fix rate: 95% vs 40%\n   296→- New bugs introduced: Near zero vs common\n   297→"}]},"uuid":"6722dc5e-02cb-42b1-a39b-1af90c235703","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:41.860Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"8cfdf456-78f4-4d87-9f3b-fb4fe3842def","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"6722dc5e-02cb-42b1-a39b-1af90c235703","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_014QxjPB92DcLpDt9AQvYVPx","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01PPADps8tDhauUqKYj9Rrnk","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":29034,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":29034,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERBnswWGRSPfKWUiQpe","type":"assistant","uuid":"74225e30-9060-42d8-96aa-b7a8f19e647f","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:42.786Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"74225e30-9060-42d8-96aa-b7a8f19e647f","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01PPADps8tDhauUqKYj9Rrnk","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01PPADps8tDhauUqKYj9Rrnk","uuid":"81f4f950-10d2-4527-b198-86bd96710cb5","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:42.787Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"81f4f950-10d2-4527-b198-86bd96710cb5","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01PPADps8tDhauUqKYj9Rrnk","toolUseID":"toolu_01PPADps8tDhauUqKYj9Rrnk","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:42.857Z","uuid":"6f31d828-2d9a-4f4b-ab59-d5caa4a5f611","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"74225e30-9060-42d8-96aa-b7a8f19e647f","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01PPADps8tDhauUqKYj9Rrnk","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: finishing-a-development-branch\n     3→description: Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work - guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Finishing a Development Branch\n     7→\n     8→## Overview\n     9→\n    10→Guide completion of development work by presenting clear options and handling chosen workflow.\n    11→\n    12→**Core principle:** Verify tests → Present options → Execute choice → Clean up.\n    13→\n    14→**Announce at start:** \"I'm using the finishing-a-development-branch skill to complete this work.\"\n    15→\n    16→## The Process\n    17→\n    18→### Step 1: Verify Tests\n    19→\n    20→**Before presenting options, verify tests pass:**\n    21→\n    22→```bash\n    23→# Run project's test suite\n    24→npm test / cargo test / pytest / go test ./...\n    25→```\n    26→\n    27→**If tests fail:**\n    28→```\n    29→Tests failing (<N> failures). Must fix before completing:\n    30→\n    31→[Show failures]\n    32→\n    33→Cannot proceed with merge/PR until tests pass.\n    34→```\n    35→\n    36→Stop. Don't proceed to Step 2.\n    37→\n    38→**If tests pass:** Continue to Step 2.\n    39→\n    40→### Step 2: Determine Base Branch\n    41→\n    42→```bash\n    43→# Try common base branches\n    44→git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD master 2>/dev/null\n    45→```\n    46→\n    47→Or ask: \"This branch split from main - is that correct?\"\n    48→\n    49→### Step 3: Present Options\n    50→\n    51→Present exactly these 4 options:\n    52→\n    53→```\n    54→Implementation complete. What would you like to do?\n    55→\n    56→1. Merge back to <base-branch> locally\n    57→2. Push and create a Pull Request\n    58→3. Keep the branch as-is (I'll handle it later)\n    59→4. Discard this work\n    60→\n    61→Which option?\n    62→```\n    63→\n    64→**Don't add explanation** - keep options concise.\n    65→\n    66→### Step 4: Execute Choice\n    67→\n    68→#### Option 1: Merge Locally\n    69→\n    70→```bash\n    71→# Switch to base branch\n    72→git checkout <base-branch>\n    73→\n    74→# Pull latest\n    75→git pull\n    76→\n    77→# Merge feature branch\n    78→git merge <feature-branch>\n    79→\n    80→# Verify tests on merged result\n    81→<test command>\n    82→\n    83→# If tests pass\n    84→git branch -d <feature-branch>\n    85→```\n    86→\n    87→Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 5)\n    88→\n    89→#### Option 2: Push and Create PR\n    90→\n    91→```bash\n    92→# Push branch\n    93→git push -u origin <feature-branch>\n    94→\n    95→# Create PR\n    96→gh pr create --title \"<title>\" --body \"$(cat <<'EOF'\n    97→## Summary\n    98→<2-3 bullets of what changed>\n    99→\n   100→## Test Plan\n   101→- [ ] <verification steps>\n   102→EOF\n   103→)\"\n   104→```\n   105→\n   106→Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 5)\n   107→\n   108→#### Option 3: Keep As-Is\n   109→\n   110→Report: \"Keeping branch <name>. Worktree preserved at <path>.\"\n   111→\n   112→**Don't cleanup worktree.**\n   113→\n   114→#### Option 4: Discard\n   115→\n   116→**Confirm first:**\n   117→```\n   118→This will permanently delete:\n   119→- Branch <name>\n   120→- All commits: <commit-list>\n   121→- Worktree at <path>\n   122→\n   123→Type 'discard' to confirm.\n   124→```\n   125→\n   126→Wait for exact confirmation.\n   127→\n   128→If confirmed:\n   129→```bash\n   130→git checkout <base-branch>\n   131→git branch -D <feature-branch>\n   132→```\n   133→\n   134→Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 5)\n   135→\n   136→### Step 5: Cleanup Worktree\n   137→\n   138→**For Options 1, 2, 4:**\n   139→\n   140→Check if in worktree:\n   141→```bash\n   142→git worktree list | grep $(git branch --show-current)\n   143→```\n   144→\n   145→If yes:\n   146→```bash\n   147→git worktree remove <worktree-path>\n   148→```\n   149→\n   150→**For Option 3:** Keep worktree.\n   151→\n   152→## Quick Reference\n   153→\n   154→| Option | Merge | Push | Keep Worktree | Cleanup Branch |\n   155→|--------|-------|------|---------------|----------------|\n   156→| 1. Merge locally | ✓ | - | - | ✓ |\n   157→| 2. Create PR | - | ✓ | ✓ | - |\n   158→| 3. Keep as-is | - | - | ✓ | - |\n   159→| 4. Discard | - | - | - | ✓ (force) |\n   160→\n   161→## Common Mistakes\n   162→\n   163→**Skipping test verification**\n   164→- **Problem:** Merge broken code, create failing PR\n   165→- **Fix:** Always verify tests before offering options\n   166→\n   167→**Open-ended questions**\n   168→- **Problem:** \"What should I do next?\" → ambiguous\n   169→- **Fix:** Present exactly 4 structured options\n   170→\n   171→**Automatic worktree cleanup**\n   172→- **Problem:** Remove worktree when might need it (Option 2, 3)\n   173→- **Fix:** Only cleanup for Options 1 and 4\n   174→\n   175→**No confirmation for discard**\n   176→- **Problem:** Accidentally delete work\n   177→- **Fix:** Require typed \"discard\" confirmation\n   178→\n   179→## Red Flags\n   180→\n   181→**Never:**\n   182→- Proceed with failing tests\n   183→- Merge without verifying tests on result\n   184→- Delete work without confirmation\n   185→- Force-push without explicit request\n   186→\n   187→**Always:**\n   188→- Verify tests before offering options\n   189→- Present exactly 4 options\n   190→- Get typed confirmation for Option 4\n   191→- Clean up worktree for Options 1 & 4 only\n   192→\n   193→## Integration\n   194→\n   195→**Called by:**\n   196→- **subagent-driven-development** (Step 7) - After all tasks complete\n   197→- **executing-plans** (Step 5) - After all batches complete\n   198→\n   199→**Pairs with:**\n   200→- **using-git-worktrees** - Cleans up worktree created by that skill\n   201→"}]},"uuid":"60e04634-72b3-4f7e-9158-9242560cffc3","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:42.857Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"74225e30-9060-42d8-96aa-b7a8f19e647f","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"60e04634-72b3-4f7e-9158-9242560cffc3","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_014QxjPB92DcLpDt9AQvYVPx","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01BFASPXmWAy3k9MPgziukYa","name":"Bash","input":{"command":"gh api repos/superpowers-ai/superpowers/contents/skills/writing-skills/SKILL.md --jq '.download_url' 2>/dev/null || echo \"REPO_NOT_FOUND\"","description":"Check if superpowers GitHub repo exists and get SKILL.md URL"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":29034,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":29034,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERBnswWGRSPfKWUiQpe","type":"assistant","uuid":"e8a5dc4e-4d7e-4a51-a92f-6adaa0f5ef0c","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:43.983Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"e8a5dc4e-4d7e-4a51-a92f-6adaa0f5ef0c","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Bash","command":"./hooks/context-mode-router"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01BFASPXmWAy3k9MPgziukYa","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01BFASPXmWAy3k9MPgziukYa","uuid":"85b85d55-7a5d-4a26-b69e-ddc760565a1b","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:43.986Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"85b85d55-7a5d-4a26-b69e-ddc760565a1b","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Bash","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01BFASPXmWAy3k9MPgziukYa","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01BFASPXmWAy3k9MPgziukYa","uuid":"df16f106-9a4f-4381-add2-89f9f6642479","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:43.986Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"df16f106-9a4f-4381-add2-89f9f6642479","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_014QxjPB92DcLpDt9AQvYVPx","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01DALXiQR72XoY3a1VRLNuKo","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":29034,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":29034,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERBnswWGRSPfKWUiQpe","type":"assistant","uuid":"57f6287c-3a70-40b0-9341-9e28cd663add","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:44.624Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"57f6287c-3a70-40b0-9341-9e28cd663add","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_014QxjPB92DcLpDt9AQvYVPx","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_011jSRUuHtgasJ11DyUeRqw8","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":29034,"cache_read_input_tokens":7745,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":29034,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERBnswWGRSPfKWUiQpe","type":"assistant","uuid":"6c73eb65-e99c-469a-b224-8075dc544d8b","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:45.679Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"e8a5dc4e-4d7e-4a51-a92f-6adaa0f5ef0c","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01BFASPXmWAy3k9MPgziukYa","type":"tool_result","content":"{\"message\":\"Not Found\",\"documentation_url\":\"https://docs.github.com/rest/repos/contents#get-repository-content\",\"status\":\"404\"}REPO_NOT_FOUND","is_error":false}]},"uuid":"d032d05e-2698-4f9d-86dd-f7a1d15f40f1","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:46.722Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"e8a5dc4e-4d7e-4a51-a92f-6adaa0f5ef0c","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"d032d05e-2698-4f9d-86dd-f7a1d15f40f1","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01DALXiQR72XoY3a1VRLNuKo","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01DALXiQR72XoY3a1VRLNuKo","uuid":"e7348c26-619e-41c0-96a0-c6c2b376ab79","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:46.722Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"e7348c26-619e-41c0-96a0-c6c2b376ab79","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_011jSRUuHtgasJ11DyUeRqw8","parentToolUseID":"toolu_011jSRUuHtgasJ11DyUeRqw8","uuid":"719c6209-125f-442f-a5e0-556092fb41d7","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:46.722Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"719c6209-125f-442f-a5e0-556092fb41d7","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_011jSRUuHtgasJ11DyUeRqw8","toolUseID":"toolu_011jSRUuHtgasJ11DyUeRqw8","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:46.785Z","uuid":"7cc91d68-71ce-4625-9ca0-c44c4a062cea","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"6c73eb65-e99c-469a-b224-8075dc544d8b","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_011jSRUuHtgasJ11DyUeRqw8","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: dispatching-parallel-agents\n     3→description: Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Dispatching Parallel Agents\n     7→\n     8→## Overview\n     9→\n    10→When you have multiple unrelated failures (different test files, different subsystems, different bugs), investigating them sequentially wastes time. Each investigation is independent and can happen in parallel.\n    11→\n    12→**Core principle:** Dispatch one agent per independent problem domain. Let them work concurrently.\n    13→\n    14→## When to Use\n    15→\n    16→```dot\n    17→digraph when_to_use {\n    18→    \"Multiple failures?\" [shape=diamond];\n    19→    \"Are they independent?\" [shape=diamond];\n    20→    \"Single agent investigates all\" [shape=box];\n    21→    \"One agent per problem domain\" [shape=box];\n    22→    \"Can they work in parallel?\" [shape=diamond];\n    23→    \"Sequential agents\" [shape=box];\n    24→    \"Parallel dispatch\" [shape=box];\n    25→\n    26→    \"Multiple failures?\" -> \"Are they independent?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    27→    \"Are they independent?\" -> \"Single agent investigates all\" [label=\"no - related\"];\n    28→    \"Are they independent?\" -> \"Can they work in parallel?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    29→    \"Can they work in parallel?\" -> \"Parallel dispatch\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    30→    \"Can they work in parallel?\" -> \"Sequential agents\" [label=\"no - shared state\"];\n    31→}\n    32→```\n    33→\n    34→**Use when:**\n    35→- 3+ test files failing with different root causes\n    36→- Multiple subsystems broken independently\n    37→- Each problem can be understood without context from others\n    38→- No shared state between investigations\n    39→\n    40→**Don't use when:**\n    41→- Failures are related (fix one might fix others)\n    42→- Need to understand full system state\n    43→- Agents would interfere with each other\n    44→\n    45→## The Pattern\n    46→\n    47→### 1. Identify Independent Domains\n    48→\n    49→Group failures by what's broken:\n    50→- File A tests: Tool approval flow\n    51→- File B tests: Batch completion behavior\n    52→- File C tests: Abort functionality\n    53→\n    54→Each domain is independent - fixing tool approval doesn't affect abort tests.\n    55→\n    56→### 2. Create Focused Agent Tasks\n    57→\n    58→Each agent gets:\n    59→- **Specific scope:** One test file or subsystem\n    60→- **Clear goal:** Make these tests pass\n    61→- **Constraints:** Don't change other code\n    62→- **Expected output:** Summary of what you found and fixed\n    63→\n    64→### 3. Dispatch in Parallel\n    65→\n    66→```typescript\n    67→// In Claude Code / AI environment\n    68→Task(\"Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts failures\")\n    69→Task(\"Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts failures\")\n    70→Task(\"Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts failures\")\n    71→// All three run concurrently\n    72→```\n    73→\n    74→### 4. Review and Integrate\n    75→\n    76→When agents return:\n    77→- Read each summary\n    78→- Verify fixes don't conflict\n    79→- Run full test suite\n    80→- Integrate all changes\n    81→\n    82→## Agent Prompt Structure\n    83→\n    84→Good agent prompts are:\n    85→1. **Focused** - One clear problem domain\n    86→2. **Self-contained** - All context needed to understand the problem\n    87→3. **Specific about output** - What should the agent return?\n    88→\n    89→```markdown\n    90→Fix the 3 failing tests in src/agents/agent-tool-abort.test.ts:\n    91→\n    92→1. \"should abort tool with partial output capture\" - expects 'interrupted at' in message\n    93→2. \"should handle mixed completed and aborted tools\" - fast tool aborted instead of completed\n    94→3. \"should properly track pendingToolCount\" - expects 3 results but gets 0\n    95→\n    96→These are timing/race condition issues. Your task:\n    97→\n    98→1. Read the test file and understand what each test verifies\n    99→2. Identify root cause - timing issues or actual bugs?\n   100→3. Fix by:\n   101→   - Replacing arbitrary timeouts with event-based waiting\n   102→   - Fixing bugs in abort implementation if found\n   103→   - Adjusting test expectations if testing changed behavior\n   104→\n   105→Do NOT just increase timeouts - find the real issue.\n   106→\n   107→Return: Summary of what you found and what you fixed.\n   108→```\n   109→\n   110→## Common Mistakes\n   111→\n   112→**❌ Too broad:** \"Fix all the tests\" - agent gets lost\n   113→**✅ Specific:** \"Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts\" - focused scope\n   114→\n   115→**❌ No context:** \"Fix the race condition\" - agent doesn't know where\n   116→**✅ Context:** Paste the error messages and test names\n   117→\n   118→**❌ No constraints:** Agent might refactor everything\n   119→**✅ Constraints:** \"Do NOT change production code\" or \"Fix tests only\"\n   120→\n   121→**❌ Vague output:** \"Fix it\" - you don't know what changed\n   122→**✅ Specific:** \"Return summary of root cause and changes\"\n   123→\n   124→## When NOT to Use\n   125→\n   126→**Related failures:** Fixing one might fix others - investigate together first\n   127→**Need full context:** Understanding requires seeing entire system\n   128→**Exploratory debugging:** You don't know what's broken yet\n   129→**Shared state:** Agents would interfere (editing same files, using same resources)\n   130→\n   131→## Real Example from Session\n   132→\n   133→**Scenario:** 6 test failures across 3 files after major refactoring\n   134→\n   135→**Failures:**\n   136→- agent-tool-abort.test.ts: 3 failures (timing issues)\n   137→- batch-completion-behavior.test.ts: 2 failures (tools not executing)\n   138→- tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts: 1 failure (execution count = 0)\n   139→\n   140→**Decision:** Independent domains - abort logic separate from batch completion separate from race conditions\n   141→\n   142→**Dispatch:**\n   143→```\n   144→Agent 1 → Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts\n   145→Agent 2 → Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts\n   146→Agent 3 → Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts\n   147→```\n   148→\n   149→**Results:**\n   150→- Agent 1: Replaced timeouts with event-based waiting\n   151→- Agent 2: Fixed event structure bug (threadId in wrong place)\n   152→- Agent 3: Added wait for async tool execution to complete\n   153→\n   154→**Integration:** All fixes independent, no conflicts, full suite green\n   155→\n   156→**Time saved:** 3 problems solved in parallel vs sequentially\n   157→\n   158→## Key Benefits\n   159→\n   160→1. **Parallelization** - Multiple investigations happen simultaneously\n   161→2. **Focus** - Each agent has narrow scope, less context to track\n   162→3. **Independence** - Agents don't interfere with each other\n   163→4. **Speed** - 3 problems solved in time of 1\n   164→\n   165→## Verification\n   166→\n   167→After agents return:\n   168→1. **Review each summary** - Understand what changed\n   169→2. **Check for conflicts** - Did agents edit same code?\n   170→3. **Run full suite** - Verify all fixes work together\n   171→4. **Spot check** - Agents can make systematic errors\n   172→\n   173→## Real-World Impact\n   174→\n   175→From debugging session (2025-10-03):\n   176→- 6 failures across 3 files\n   177→- 3 agents dispatched in parallel\n   178→- All investigations completed concurrently\n   179→- All fixes integrated successfully\n   180→- Zero conflicts between agent changes\n   181→"}]},"uuid":"8775cf2c-fae2-4a6a-b040-840f905fab9c","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:46.785Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"6c73eb65-e99c-469a-b224-8075dc544d8b","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"8775cf2c-fae2-4a6a-b040-840f905fab9c","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01DALXiQR72XoY3a1VRLNuKo","toolUseID":"toolu_01DALXiQR72XoY3a1VRLNuKo","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:46.787Z","uuid":"a79dd2ca-f108-4d89-a5d7-93234fe8236d","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"57f6287c-3a70-40b0-9341-9e28cd663add","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01DALXiQR72XoY3a1VRLNuKo","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: brainstorming\n     3→description: \"You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.\"\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs\n     7→\n     8→## Overview\n     9→\n    10→Help turn ideas into fully formed designs and specs through natural collaborative dialogue.\n    11→\n    12→Start by understanding the current project context, then ask questions one at a time to refine the idea. Once you understand what you're building, present the design and get user approval.\n    13→\n    14→<HARD-GATE>\n    15→Do NOT invoke any implementation skill, write any code, scaffold any project, or take any implementation action until you have presented a design and the user has approved it. This applies to EVERY project regardless of perceived simplicity.\n    16→</HARD-GATE>\n    17→\n    18→## Anti-Pattern: \"This Is Too Simple To Need A Design\"\n    19→\n    20→Every project goes through this process. A todo list, a single-function utility, a config change — all of them. \"Simple\" projects are where unexamined assumptions cause the most wasted work. The design can be short (a few sentences for truly simple projects), but you MUST present it and get approval.\n    21→\n    22→## Checklist\n    23→\n    24→You MUST create a task for each of these items and complete them in order:\n    25→\n    26→1. **Explore project context** — check files, docs, recent commits\n    27→2. **Ask clarifying questions** — one at a time, understand purpose/constraints/success criteria\n    28→3. **Propose 2-3 approaches** — with trade-offs and your recommendation\n    29→4. **Present design** — in sections scaled to their complexity, get user approval after each section\n    30→5. **Write design doc** — save to `docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` and commit\n    31→6. **Transition to implementation** — invoke writing-plans skill to create implementation plan\n    32→\n    33→## Process Flow\n    34→\n    35→```dot\n    36→digraph brainstorming {\n    37→    \"Explore project context\" [shape=box];\n    38→    \"Ask clarifying questions\" [shape=box];\n    39→    \"Propose 2-3 approaches\" [shape=box];\n    40→    \"Present design sections\" [shape=box];\n    41→    \"User approves design?\" [shape=diamond];\n    42→    \"Write design doc\" [shape=box];\n    43→    \"Invoke writing-plans skill\" [shape=doublecircle];\n    44→\n    45→    \"Explore project context\" -> \"Ask clarifying questions\";\n    46→    \"Ask clarifying questions\" -> \"Propose 2-3 approaches\";\n    47→    \"Propose 2-3 approaches\" -> \"Present design sections\";\n    48→    \"Present design sections\" -> \"User approves design?\";\n    49→    \"User approves design?\" -> \"Present design sections\" [label=\"no, revise\"];\n    50→    \"User approves design?\" -> \"Write design doc\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    51→    \"Write design doc\" -> \"Invoke writing-plans skill\";\n    52→}\n    53→```\n    54→\n    55→**The terminal state is invoking writing-plans.** Do NOT invoke frontend-design, mcp-builder, or any other implementation skill. The ONLY skill you invoke after brainstorming is writing-plans.\n    56→\n    57→## The Process\n    58→\n    59→**Understanding the idea:**\n    60→- Check out the current project state first (files, docs, recent commits)\n    61→- Ask questions one at a time to refine the idea\n    62→- Prefer multiple choice questions when possible, but open-ended is fine too\n    63→- Only one question per message - if a topic needs more exploration, break it into multiple questions\n    64→- Focus on understanding: purpose, constraints, success criteria\n    65→\n    66→**Exploring approaches:**\n    67→- Propose 2-3 different approaches with trade-offs\n    68→- Present options conversationally with your recommendation and reasoning\n    69→- Lead with your recommended option and explain why\n    70→\n    71→**Presenting the design:**\n    72→- Once you believe you understand what you're building, present the design\n    73→- Scale each section to its complexity: a few sentences if straightforward, up to 200-300 words if nuanced\n    74→- Ask after each section whether it looks right so far\n    75→- Cover: architecture, components, data flow, error handling, testing\n    76→- Be ready to go back and clarify if something doesn't make sense\n    77→\n    78→## After the Design\n    79→\n    80→**Documentation:**\n    81→- Write the validated design to `docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md`\n    82→- Use elements-of-style:writing-clearly-and-concisely skill if available\n    83→- Commit the design document to git\n    84→\n    85→**Implementation:**\n    86→- Invoke the writing-plans skill to create a detailed implementation plan\n    87→- Do NOT invoke any other skill. writing-plans is the next step.\n    88→\n    89→## Key Principles\n    90→\n    91→- **One question at a time** - Don't overwhelm with multiple questions\n    92→- **Multiple choice preferred** - Easier to answer than open-ended when possible\n    93→- **YAGNI ruthlessly** - Remove unnecessary features from all designs\n    94→- **Explore alternatives** - Always propose 2-3 approaches before settling\n    95→- **Incremental validation** - Present design, get approval before moving on\n    96→- **Be flexible** - Go back and clarify when something doesn't make sense\n    97→"}]},"uuid":"5cdd9c3e-4a1c-48e2-9b7f-205cb1e49713","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:46.787Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"57f6287c-3a70-40b0-9341-9e28cd663add","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5cdd9c3e-4a1c-48e2-9b7f-205cb1e49713","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_0154Pd38PrLjDGH1KAv8U65Q","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"\n\nLet me read the rest of the anthropic-best-practices file and search for the GitHub repo under different names, plus look for academic research."}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":14871,"cache_read_input_tokens":36779,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":14871,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERCsivbmiegNpfCMEsM","type":"assistant","uuid":"5c5d5890-f8dc-44fb-b145-c8f26ae6c6e5","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:54.032Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5c5d5890-f8dc-44fb-b145-c8f26ae6c6e5","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_0154Pd38PrLjDGH1KAv8U65Q","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01CSavJmWS1WXBDhetjuL5Zh","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/anthropic-best-practices.md","offset":100,"limit":100},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":14871,"cache_read_input_tokens":36779,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":14871,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERCsivbmiegNpfCMEsM","type":"assistant","uuid":"b755bf0f-62c4-4af2-b3ed-b62adabbb65d","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:55.832Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"b755bf0f-62c4-4af2-b3ed-b62adabbb65d","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01CSavJmWS1WXBDhetjuL5Zh","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01CSavJmWS1WXBDhetjuL5Zh","uuid":"251a8163-4b78-48bd-a42a-d7831571da81","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:55.832Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"251a8163-4b78-48bd-a42a-d7831571da81","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01CSavJmWS1WXBDhetjuL5Zh","toolUseID":"toolu_01CSavJmWS1WXBDhetjuL5Zh","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:55.884Z","uuid":"0c224b82-c2d0-4d5e-a19b-ee1dc9b2a559","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"b755bf0f-62c4-4af2-b3ed-b62adabbb65d","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01CSavJmWS1WXBDhetjuL5Zh","type":"tool_result","content":"   100→    # Generate output in specified format\n   101→    # Optionally include visualizations\n   102→```\n   103→````\n   104→\n   105→**Low freedom** (specific scripts, few or no parameters):\n   106→\n   107→Use when:\n   108→\n   109→* Operations are fragile and error-prone\n   110→* Consistency is critical\n   111→* A specific sequence must be followed\n   112→\n   113→Example:\n   114→\n   115→````markdown  theme={null}\n   116→## Database migration\n   117→\n   118→Run exactly this script:\n   119→\n   120→```bash\n   121→python scripts/migrate.py --verify --backup\n   122→```\n   123→\n   124→Do not modify the command or add additional flags.\n   125→````\n   126→\n   127→**Analogy**: Think of Claude as a robot exploring a path:\n   128→\n   129→* **Narrow bridge with cliffs on both sides**: There's only one safe way forward. Provide specific guardrails and exact instructions (low freedom). Example: database migrations that must run in exact sequence.\n   130→* **Open field with no hazards**: Many paths lead to success. Give general direction and trust Claude to find the best route (high freedom). Example: code reviews where context determines the best approach.\n   131→\n   132→### Test with all models you plan to use\n   133→\n   134→Skills act as additions to models, so effectiveness depends on the underlying model. Test your Skill with all the models you plan to use it with.\n   135→\n   136→**Testing considerations by model**:\n   137→\n   138→* **Claude Haiku** (fast, economical): Does the Skill provide enough guidance?\n   139→* **Claude Sonnet** (balanced): Is the Skill clear and efficient?\n   140→* **Claude Opus** (powerful reasoning): Does the Skill avoid over-explaining?\n   141→\n   142→What works perfectly for Opus might need more detail for Haiku. If you plan to use your Skill across multiple models, aim for instructions that work well with all of them.\n   143→\n   144→## Skill structure\n   145→\n   146→<Note>\n   147→  **YAML Frontmatter**: The SKILL.md frontmatter supports two fields:\n   148→\n   149→  * `name` - Human-readable name of the Skill (64 characters maximum)\n   150→  * `description` - One-line description of what the Skill does and when to use it (1024 characters maximum)\n   151→\n   152→  For complete Skill structure details, see the [Skills overview](/en/docs/agents-and-tools/agent-skills/overview#skill-structure).\n   153→</Note>\n   154→\n   155→### Naming conventions\n   156→\n   157→Use consistent naming patterns to make Skills easier to reference and discuss. We recommend using **gerund form** (verb + -ing) for Skill names, as this clearly describes the activity or capability the Skill provides.\n   158→\n   159→**Good naming examples (gerund form)**:\n   160→\n   161→* \"Processing PDFs\"\n   162→* \"Analyzing spreadsheets\"\n   163→* \"Managing databases\"\n   164→* \"Testing code\"\n   165→* \"Writing documentation\"\n   166→\n   167→**Acceptable alternatives**:\n   168→\n   169→* Noun phrases: \"PDF Processing\", \"Spreadsheet Analysis\"\n   170→* Action-oriented: \"Process PDFs\", \"Analyze Spreadsheets\"\n   171→\n   172→**Avoid**:\n   173→\n   174→* Vague names: \"Helper\", \"Utils\", \"Tools\"\n   175→* Overly generic: \"Documents\", \"Data\", \"Files\"\n   176→* Inconsistent patterns within your skill collection\n   177→\n   178→Consistent naming makes it easier to:\n   179→\n   180→* Reference Skills in documentation and conversations\n   181→* Understand what a Skill does at a glance\n   182→* Organize and search through multiple Skills\n   183→* Maintain a professional, cohesive skill library\n   184→\n   185→### Writing effective descriptions\n   186→\n   187→The `description` field enables Skill discovery and should include both what the Skill does and when to use it.\n   188→\n   189→<Warning>\n   190→  **Always write in third person**. The description is injected into the system prompt, and inconsistent point-of-view can cause discovery problems.\n   191→\n   192→  * **Good:** \"Processes Excel files and generates reports\"\n   193→  * **Avoid:** \"I can help you process Excel files\"\n   194→  * **Avoid:** \"You can use this to process Excel files\"\n   195→</Warning>\n   196→\n   197→**Be specific and include key terms**. Include both what the Skill does and specific triggers/contexts for when to use it.\n   198→\n   199→Each Skill has exactly one description field. The description is critical for skill selection: Claude uses it to choose the right Skill from potentially 100+ available Skills. Your description must provide enough detail for Claude to know when to select this Skill, while the rest of SKILL.md provides the implementation details."}]},"uuid":"bc44eeeb-0183-4885-9708-d52df722ddc4","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:55.884Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"b755bf0f-62c4-4af2-b3ed-b62adabbb65d","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"bc44eeeb-0183-4885-9708-d52df722ddc4","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_0154Pd38PrLjDGH1KAv8U65Q","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01FrhU7vn1Q73Z8AKKA5FPvK","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/anthropic-best-practices.md","offset":200,"limit":100},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":14871,"cache_read_input_tokens":36779,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":14871,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERCsivbmiegNpfCMEsM","type":"assistant","uuid":"67c14e60-7591-431f-930d-af0539e6e654","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:56.719Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"67c14e60-7591-431f-930d-af0539e6e654","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01FrhU7vn1Q73Z8AKKA5FPvK","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01FrhU7vn1Q73Z8AKKA5FPvK","uuid":"b3a8c46e-79e3-4c38-98c8-ce1f24156757","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:56.720Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"b3a8c46e-79e3-4c38-98c8-ce1f24156757","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01FrhU7vn1Q73Z8AKKA5FPvK","toolUseID":"toolu_01FrhU7vn1Q73Z8AKKA5FPvK","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:56.779Z","uuid":"f0b6dee2-de69-4082-80df-c9b725c4894c","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"67c14e60-7591-431f-930d-af0539e6e654","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01FrhU7vn1Q73Z8AKKA5FPvK","type":"tool_result","content":"   200→\n   201→Effective examples:\n   202→\n   203→**PDF Processing skill:**\n   204→\n   205→```yaml  theme={null}\n   206→description: Extract text and tables from PDF files, fill forms, merge documents. Use when working with PDF files or when the user mentions PDFs, forms, or document extraction.\n   207→```\n   208→\n   209→**Excel Analysis skill:**\n   210→\n   211→```yaml  theme={null}\n   212→description: Analyze Excel spreadsheets, create pivot tables, generate charts. Use when analyzing Excel files, spreadsheets, tabular data, or .xlsx files.\n   213→```\n   214→\n   215→**Git Commit Helper skill:**\n   216→\n   217→```yaml  theme={null}\n   218→description: Generate descriptive commit messages by analyzing git diffs. Use when the user asks for help writing commit messages or reviewing staged changes.\n   219→```\n   220→\n   221→Avoid vague descriptions like these:\n   222→\n   223→```yaml  theme={null}\n   224→description: Helps with documents\n   225→```\n   226→\n   227→```yaml  theme={null}\n   228→description: Processes data\n   229→```\n   230→\n   231→```yaml  theme={null}\n   232→description: Does stuff with files\n   233→```\n   234→\n   235→### Progressive disclosure patterns\n   236→\n   237→SKILL.md serves as an overview that points Claude to detailed materials as needed, like a table of contents in an onboarding guide. For an explanation of how progressive disclosure works, see [How Skills work](/en/docs/agents-and-tools/agent-skills/overview#how-skills-work) in the overview.\n   238→\n   239→**Practical guidance:**\n   240→\n   241→* Keep SKILL.md body under 500 lines for optimal performance\n   242→* Split content into separate files when approaching this limit\n   243→* Use the patterns below to organize instructions, code, and resources effectively\n   244→\n   245→#### Visual overview: From simple to complex\n   246→\n   247→A basic Skill starts with just a SKILL.md file containing metadata and instructions:\n   248→\n   249→<img src=\"https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-simple-file.png?fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=87782ff239b297d9a9e8e1b72ed72db9\" alt=\"Simple SKILL.md file showing YAML frontmatter and markdown body\" data-og-width=\"2048\" width=\"2048\" data-og-height=\"1153\" height=\"1153\" data-path=\"images/agent-skills-simple-file.png\" data-optimize=\"true\" data-opv=\"3\" srcset=\"https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-simple-file.png?w=280&fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=c61cc33b6f5855809907f7fda94cd80e 280w, https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-simple-file.png?w=560&fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=90d2c0c1c76b36e8d485f49e0810dbfd 560w, https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-simple-file.png?w=840&fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=ad17d231ac7b0bea7e5b4d58fb4aeabb 840w, https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-simple-file.png?w=1100&fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=f5d0a7a3c668435bb0aee9a3a8f8c329 1100w, https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-simple-file.png?w=1650&fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=0e927c1af9de5799cfe557d12249f6e6 1650w, https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-simple-file.png?w=2500&fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=46bbb1a51dd4c8202a470ac8c80a893d 2500w\" />\n   250→\n   251→As your Skill grows, you can bundle additional content that Claude loads only when needed:\n   252→\n   253→<img src=\"https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-bundling-content.png?fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=a5e0aa41e3d53985a7e3e43668a33ea3\" alt=\"Bundling additional reference files like reference.md and forms.md.\" data-og-width=\"2048\" width=\"2048\" data-og-height=\"1327\" height=\"1327\" data-path=\"images/agent-skills-bundling-content.png\" data-optimize=\"true\" data-opv=\"3\" srcset=\"https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-bundling-content.png?w=280&fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=f8a0e73783e99b4a643d79eac86b70a2 280w, https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-bundling-content.png?w=560&fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=dc510a2a9d3f14359416b706f067904a 560w, https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-bundling-content.png?w=840&fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=82cd6286c966303f7dd914c28170e385 840w, https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-bundling-content.png?w=1100&fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=56f3be36c77e4fe4b523df209a6824c6 1100w, https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-bundling-content.png?w=1650&fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=d22b5161b2075656417d56f41a74f3dd 1650w, https://mintcdn.com/anthropic-claude-docs/4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00/images/agent-skills-bundling-content.png?w=2500&fit=max&auto=format&n=4Bny2bjzuGBK7o00&q=85&s=3dd4bdd6850ffcc96c6c45fcb0acd6eb 2500w\" />\n   254→\n   255→The complete Skill directory structure might look like this:\n   256→\n   257→```\n   258→pdf/\n   259→├── SKILL.md              # Main instructions (loaded when triggered)\n   260→├── FORMS.md              # Form-filling guide (loaded as needed)\n   261→├── reference.md          # API reference (loaded as needed)\n   262→├── examples.md           # Usage examples (loaded as needed)\n   263→└── scripts/\n   264→    ├── analyze_form.py   # Utility script (executed, not loaded)\n   265→    ├── fill_form.py      # Form filling script\n   266→    └── validate.py       # Validation script\n   267→```\n   268→\n   269→#### Pattern 1: High-level guide with references\n   270→\n   271→````markdown  theme={null}\n   272→---\n   273→name: PDF Processing\n   274→description: Extracts text and tables from PDF files, fills forms, and merges documents. Use when working with PDF files or when the user mentions PDFs, forms, or document extraction.\n   275→---\n   276→\n   277→# PDF Processing\n   278→\n   279→## Quick start\n   280→\n   281→Extract text with pdfplumber:\n   282→```python\n   283→import pdfplumber\n   284→with pdfplumber.open(\"file.pdf\") as pdf:\n   285→    text = pdf.pages[0].extract_text()\n   286→```\n   287→\n   288→## Advanced features\n   289→\n   290→**Form filling**: See [FORMS.md](FORMS.md) for complete guide\n   291→**API reference**: See [REFERENCE.md](REFERENCE.md) for all methods\n   292→**Examples**: See [EXAMPLES.md](EXAMPLES.md) for common patterns\n   293→````\n   294→\n   295→Claude loads FORMS.md, REFERENCE.md, or EXAMPLES.md only when needed.\n   296→\n   297→#### Pattern 2: Domain-specific organization\n   298→\n   299→For Skills with multiple domains, organize content by domain to avoid loading irrelevant context. When a user asks about sales metrics, Claude only needs to read sales-related schemas, not finance or marketing data. This keeps token usage low and context focused."}]},"uuid":"a9e532ab-d523-459f-a71c-c7c8e2c34187","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:56.779Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"67c14e60-7591-431f-930d-af0539e6e654","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"a9e532ab-d523-459f-a71c-c7c8e2c34187","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_0154Pd38PrLjDGH1KAv8U65Q","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01VrWEKzU87oQ7u8oeg1cPup","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":14871,"cache_read_input_tokens":36779,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":14871,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERCsivbmiegNpfCMEsM","type":"assistant","uuid":"ddf41681-bdb6-4129-9361-da5b00f50f4e","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:57.919Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"ddf41681-bdb6-4129-9361-da5b00f50f4e","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01VrWEKzU87oQ7u8oeg1cPup","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01VrWEKzU87oQ7u8oeg1cPup","uuid":"de4a6a44-b216-4dd4-979d-693e4cdbdf90","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:57.922Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"de4a6a44-b216-4dd4-979d-693e4cdbdf90","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01VrWEKzU87oQ7u8oeg1cPup","toolUseID":"toolu_01VrWEKzU87oQ7u8oeg1cPup","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:57.998Z","uuid":"2c6b91f2-5804-497f-ad41-31749d82abc9","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"ddf41681-bdb6-4129-9361-da5b00f50f4e","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01VrWEKzU87oQ7u8oeg1cPup","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: requesting-code-review\n     3→description: Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Requesting Code Review\n     7→\n     8→Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade.\n     9→\n    10→**Core principle:** Review early, review often.\n    11→\n    12→## When to Request Review\n    13→\n    14→**Mandatory:**\n    15→- After each task in subagent-driven development\n    16→- After completing major feature\n    17→- Before merge to main\n    18→\n    19→**Optional but valuable:**\n    20→- When stuck (fresh perspective)\n    21→- Before refactoring (baseline check)\n    22→- After fixing complex bug\n    23→\n    24→## How to Request\n    25→\n    26→**1. Get git SHAs:**\n    27→```bash\n    28→BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/main\n    29→HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)\n    30→```\n    31→\n    32→**2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent:**\n    33→\n    34→Use Task tool with superpowers:code-reviewer type, fill template at `code-reviewer.md`\n    35→\n    36→**Placeholders:**\n    37→- `{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}` - What you just built\n    38→- `{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}` - What it should do\n    39→- `{BASE_SHA}` - Starting commit\n    40→- `{HEAD_SHA}` - Ending commit\n    41→- `{DESCRIPTION}` - Brief summary\n    42→\n    43→**3. Act on feedback:**\n    44→- Fix Critical issues immediately\n    45→- Fix Important issues before proceeding\n    46→- Note Minor issues for later\n    47→- Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)\n    48→\n    49→## Example\n    50→\n    51→```\n    52→[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]\n    53→\n    54→You: Let me request code review before proceeding.\n    55→\n    56→BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep \"Task 1\" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')\n    57→HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)\n    58→\n    59→[Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent]\n    60→  WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index\n    61→  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/plans/deployment-plan.md\n    62→  BASE_SHA: a7981ec\n    63→  HEAD_SHA: 3df7661\n    64→  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types\n    65→\n    66→[Subagent returns]:\n    67→  Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests\n    68→  Issues:\n    69→    Important: Missing progress indicators\n    70→    Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval\n    71→  Assessment: Ready to proceed\n    72→\n    73→You: [Fix progress indicators]\n    74→[Continue to Task 3]\n    75→```\n    76→\n    77→## Integration with Workflows\n    78→\n    79→**Subagent-Driven Development:**\n    80→- Review after EACH task\n    81→- Catch issues before they compound\n    82→- Fix before moving to next task\n    83→\n    84→**Executing Plans:**\n    85→- Review after each batch (3 tasks)\n    86→- Get feedback, apply, continue\n    87→\n    88→**Ad-Hoc Development:**\n    89→- Review before merge\n    90→- Review when stuck\n    91→\n    92→## Red Flags\n    93→\n    94→**Never:**\n    95→- Skip review because \"it's simple\"\n    96→- Ignore Critical issues\n    97→- Proceed with unfixed Important issues\n    98→- Argue with valid technical feedback\n    99→\n   100→**If reviewer wrong:**\n   101→- Push back with technical reasoning\n   102→- Show code/tests that prove it works\n   103→- Request clarification\n   104→\n   105→See template at: requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md\n   106→"}]},"uuid":"adb946ea-bb6d-41cb-b58a-bbd0a0cb5f37","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:57.998Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"ddf41681-bdb6-4129-9361-da5b00f50f4e","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"adb946ea-bb6d-41cb-b58a-bbd0a0cb5f37","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_0154Pd38PrLjDGH1KAv8U65Q","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_016778VBVabB2NxRMSAbT4Ck","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/receiving-code-review/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":14871,"cache_read_input_tokens":36779,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":14871,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERCsivbmiegNpfCMEsM","type":"assistant","uuid":"894cc434-063d-4a92-9dd1-4c2e31c9047b","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:58.126Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"894cc434-063d-4a92-9dd1-4c2e31c9047b","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_016778VBVabB2NxRMSAbT4Ck","parentToolUseID":"toolu_016778VBVabB2NxRMSAbT4Ck","uuid":"a062db43-ead8-4de4-88a6-b57ba8046519","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:58.126Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"a062db43-ead8-4de4-88a6-b57ba8046519","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_016778VBVabB2NxRMSAbT4Ck","toolUseID":"toolu_016778VBVabB2NxRMSAbT4Ck","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:58.177Z","uuid":"6f91f094-a336-4a19-8aff-4d0c1aca33de","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"894cc434-063d-4a92-9dd1-4c2e31c9047b","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_016778VBVabB2NxRMSAbT4Ck","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: receiving-code-review\n     3→description: Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Code Review Reception\n     7→\n     8→## Overview\n     9→\n    10→Code review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.\n    11→\n    12→**Core principle:** Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.\n    13→\n    14→## The Response Pattern\n    15→\n    16→```\n    17→WHEN receiving code review feedback:\n    18→\n    19→1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting\n    20→2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)\n    21→3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality\n    22→4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?\n    23→5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback\n    24→6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each\n    25→```\n    26→\n    27→## Forbidden Responses\n    28→\n    29→**NEVER:**\n    30→- \"You're absolutely right!\" (explicit CLAUDE.md violation)\n    31→- \"Great point!\" / \"Excellent feedback!\" (performative)\n    32→- \"Let me implement that now\" (before verification)\n    33→\n    34→**INSTEAD:**\n    35→- Restate the technical requirement\n    36→- Ask clarifying questions\n    37→- Push back with technical reasoning if wrong\n    38→- Just start working (actions > words)\n    39→\n    40→## Handling Unclear Feedback\n    41→\n    42→```\n    43→IF any item is unclear:\n    44→  STOP - do not implement anything yet\n    45→  ASK for clarification on unclear items\n    46→\n    47→WHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.\n    48→```\n    49→\n    50→**Example:**\n    51→```\n    52→your human partner: \"Fix 1-6\"\n    53→You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.\n    54→\n    55→❌ WRONG: Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 later\n    56→✅ RIGHT: \"I understand items 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before proceeding.\"\n    57→```\n    58→\n    59→## Source-Specific Handling\n    60→\n    61→### From your human partner\n    62→- **Trusted** - implement after understanding\n    63→- **Still ask** if scope unclear\n    64→- **No performative agreement**\n    65→- **Skip to action** or technical acknowledgment\n    66→\n    67→### From External Reviewers\n    68→```\n    69→BEFORE implementing:\n    70→  1. Check: Technically correct for THIS codebase?\n    71→  2. Check: Breaks existing functionality?\n    72→  3. Check: Reason for current implementation?\n    73→  4. Check: Works on all platforms/versions?\n    74→  5. Check: Does reviewer understand full context?\n    75→\n    76→IF suggestion seems wrong:\n    77→  Push back with technical reasoning\n    78→\n    79→IF can't easily verify:\n    80→  Say so: \"I can't verify this without [X]. Should I [investigate/ask/proceed]?\"\n    81→\n    82→IF conflicts with your human partner's prior decisions:\n    83→  Stop and discuss with your human partner first\n    84→```\n    85→\n    86→**your human partner's rule:** \"External feedback - be skeptical, but check carefully\"\n    87→\n    88→## YAGNI Check for \"Professional\" Features\n    89→\n    90→```\n    91→IF reviewer suggests \"implementing properly\":\n    92→  grep codebase for actual usage\n    93→\n    94→  IF unused: \"This endpoint isn't called. Remove it (YAGNI)?\"\n    95→  IF used: Then implement properly\n    96→```\n    97→\n    98→**your human partner's rule:** \"You and reviewer both report to me. If we don't need this feature, don't add it.\"\n    99→\n   100→## Implementation Order\n   101→\n   102→```\n   103→FOR multi-item feedback:\n   104→  1. Clarify anything unclear FIRST\n   105→  2. Then implement in this order:\n   106→     - Blocking issues (breaks, security)\n   107→     - Simple fixes (typos, imports)\n   108→     - Complex fixes (refactoring, logic)\n   109→  3. Test each fix individually\n   110→  4. Verify no regressions\n   111→```\n   112→\n   113→## When To Push Back\n   114→\n   115→Push back when:\n   116→- Suggestion breaks existing functionality\n   117→- Reviewer lacks full context\n   118→- Violates YAGNI (unused feature)\n   119→- Technically incorrect for this stack\n   120→- Legacy/compatibility reasons exist\n   121→- Conflicts with your human partner's architectural decisions\n   122→\n   123→**How to push back:**\n   124→- Use technical reasoning, not defensiveness\n   125→- Ask specific questions\n   126→- Reference working tests/code\n   127→- Involve your human partner if architectural\n   128→\n   129→**Signal if uncomfortable pushing back out loud:** \"Strange things are afoot at the Circle K\"\n   130→\n   131→## Acknowledging Correct Feedback\n   132→\n   133→When feedback IS correct:\n   134→```\n   135→✅ \"Fixed. [Brief description of what changed]\"\n   136→✅ \"Good catch - [specific issue]. Fixed in [location].\"\n   137→✅ [Just fix it and show in the code]\n   138→\n   139→❌ \"You're absolutely right!\"\n   140→❌ \"Great point!\"\n   141→❌ \"Thanks for catching that!\"\n   142→❌ \"Thanks for [anything]\"\n   143→❌ ANY gratitude expression\n   144→```\n   145→\n   146→**Why no thanks:** Actions speak. Just fix it. The code itself shows you heard the feedback.\n   147→\n   148→**If you catch yourself about to write \"Thanks\":** DELETE IT. State the fix instead.\n   149→\n   150→## Gracefully Correcting Your Pushback\n   151→\n   152→If you pushed back and were wrong:\n   153→```\n   154→✅ \"You were right - I checked [X] and it does [Y]. Implementing now.\"\n   155→✅ \"Verified this and you're correct. My initial understanding was wrong because [reason]. Fixing.\"\n   156→\n   157→❌ Long apology\n   158→❌ Defending why you pushed back\n   159→❌ Over-explaining\n   160→```\n   161→\n   162→State the correction factually and move on.\n   163→\n   164→## Common Mistakes\n   165→\n   166→| Mistake | Fix |\n   167→|---------|-----|\n   168→| Performative agreement | State requirement or just act |\n   169→| Blind implementation | Verify against codebase first |\n   170→| Batch without testing | One at a time, test each |\n   171→| Assuming reviewer is right | Check if breaks things |\n   172→| Avoiding pushback | Technical correctness > comfort |\n   173→| Partial implementation | Clarify all items first |\n   174→| Can't verify, proceed anyway | State limitation, ask for direction |\n   175→\n   176→## Real Examples\n   177→\n   178→**Performative Agreement (Bad):**\n   179→```\n   180→Reviewer: \"Remove legacy code\"\n   181→❌ \"You're absolutely right! Let me remove that...\"\n   182→```\n   183→\n   184→**Technical Verification (Good):**\n   185→```\n   186→Reviewer: \"Remove legacy code\"\n   187→✅ \"Checking... build target is 10.15+, this API needs 13+. Need legacy for backward compat. Current impl has wrong bundle ID - fix it or drop pre-13 support?\"\n   188→```\n   189→\n   190→**YAGNI (Good):**\n   191→```\n   192→Reviewer: \"Implement proper metrics tracking with database, date filters, CSV export\"\n   193→✅ \"Grepped codebase - nothing calls this endpoint. Remove it (YAGNI)? Or is there usage I'm missing?\"\n   194→```\n   195→\n   196→**Unclear Item (Good):**\n   197→```\n   198→your human partner: \"Fix items 1-6\"\n   199→You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.\n   200→✅ \"Understand 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before implementing.\"\n   201→```\n   202→\n   203→## GitHub Thread Replies\n   204→\n   205→When replying to inline review comments on GitHub, reply in the comment thread (`gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr}/comments/{id}/replies`), not as a top-level PR comment.\n   206→\n   207→## The Bottom Line\n   208→\n   209→**External feedback = suggestions to evaluate, not orders to follow.**\n   210→\n   211→Verify. Question. Then implement.\n   212→\n   213→No performative agreement. Technical rigor always.\n   214→"}]},"uuid":"34d4dad9-1216-4bc1-ae86-dedda58aba68","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:58.177Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"894cc434-063d-4a92-9dd1-4c2e31c9047b","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"34d4dad9-1216-4bc1-ae86-dedda58aba68","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_0154Pd38PrLjDGH1KAv8U65Q","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01QBKmthEv3QfGr51DfTMRe9","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-plans/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":14871,"cache_read_input_tokens":36779,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":14871,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERCsivbmiegNpfCMEsM","type":"assistant","uuid":"bce7221c-5f2c-45b0-86e9-951b6d8373a9","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:58.686Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"bce7221c-5f2c-45b0-86e9-951b6d8373a9","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01QBKmthEv3QfGr51DfTMRe9","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01QBKmthEv3QfGr51DfTMRe9","uuid":"84c2783f-f3f7-4666-b13a-cae7d036772c","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:58.688Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"84c2783f-f3f7-4666-b13a-cae7d036772c","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01QBKmthEv3QfGr51DfTMRe9","toolUseID":"toolu_01QBKmthEv3QfGr51DfTMRe9","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:58.775Z","uuid":"01ee3a81-09b8-46d9-823b-5e8677f7b955","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"bce7221c-5f2c-45b0-86e9-951b6d8373a9","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01QBKmthEv3QfGr51DfTMRe9","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: writing-plans\n     3→description: Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Writing Plans\n     7→\n     8→## Overview\n     9→\n    10→Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for our codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need to know: which files to touch for each task, code, testing, docs they might need to check, how to test it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.\n    11→\n    12→Assume they are a skilled developer, but know almost nothing about our toolset or problem domain. Assume they don't know good test design very well.\n    13→\n    14→**Announce at start:** \"I'm using the writing-plans skill to create the implementation plan.\"\n    15→\n    16→**Context:** This should be run in a dedicated worktree (created by brainstorming skill).\n    17→\n    18→**Save plans to:** `docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<feature-name>.md`\n    19→\n    20→## Bite-Sized Task Granularity\n    21→\n    22→**Each step is one action (2-5 minutes):**\n    23→- \"Write the failing test\" - step\n    24→- \"Run it to make sure it fails\" - step\n    25→- \"Implement the minimal code to make the test pass\" - step\n    26→- \"Run the tests and make sure they pass\" - step\n    27→- \"Commit\" - step\n    28→\n    29→## Plan Document Header\n    30→\n    31→**Every plan MUST start with this header:**\n    32→\n    33→```markdown\n    34→# [Feature Name] Implementation Plan\n    35→\n    36→> **For Claude:** REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: Use superpowers:executing-plans to implement this plan task-by-task.\n    37→\n    38→**Goal:** [One sentence describing what this builds]\n    39→\n    40→**Architecture:** [2-3 sentences about approach]\n    41→\n    42→**Tech Stack:** [Key technologies/libraries]\n    43→\n    44→---\n    45→```\n    46→\n    47→## Task Structure\n    48→\n    49→````markdown\n    50→### Task N: [Component Name]\n    51→\n    52→**Files:**\n    53→- Create: `exact/path/to/file.py`\n    54→- Modify: `exact/path/to/existing.py:123-145`\n    55→- Test: `tests/exact/path/to/test.py`\n    56→\n    57→**Step 1: Write the failing test**\n    58→\n    59→```python\n    60→def test_specific_behavior():\n    61→    result = function(input)\n    62→    assert result == expected\n    63→```\n    64→\n    65→**Step 2: Run test to verify it fails**\n    66→\n    67→Run: `pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v`\n    68→Expected: FAIL with \"function not defined\"\n    69→\n    70→**Step 3: Write minimal implementation**\n    71→\n    72→```python\n    73→def function(input):\n    74→    return expected\n    75→```\n    76→\n    77→**Step 4: Run test to verify it passes**\n    78→\n    79→Run: `pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v`\n    80→Expected: PASS\n    81→\n    82→**Step 5: Commit**\n    83→\n    84→```bash\n    85→git add tests/path/test.py src/path/file.py\n    86→git commit -m \"feat: add specific feature\"\n    87→```\n    88→````\n    89→\n    90→## Remember\n    91→- Exact file paths always\n    92→- Complete code in plan (not \"add validation\")\n    93→- Exact commands with expected output\n    94→- Reference relevant skills with @ syntax\n    95→- DRY, YAGNI, TDD, frequent commits\n    96→\n    97→## Execution Handoff\n    98→\n    99→After saving the plan, offer execution choice:\n   100→\n   101→**\"Plan complete and saved to `docs/plans/<filename>.md`. Two execution options:**\n   102→\n   103→**1. Subagent-Driven (this session)** - I dispatch fresh subagent per task, review between tasks, fast iteration\n   104→\n   105→**2. Parallel Session (separate)** - Open new session with executing-plans, batch execution with checkpoints\n   106→\n   107→**Which approach?\"**\n   108→\n   109→**If Subagent-Driven chosen:**\n   110→- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use superpowers:subagent-driven-development\n   111→- Stay in this session\n   112→- Fresh subagent per task + code review\n   113→\n   114→**If Parallel Session chosen:**\n   115→- Guide them to open new session in worktree\n   116→- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** New session uses superpowers:executing-plans\n   117→"}]},"uuid":"89e0155c-a8a6-4ca3-a363-995fae15e90b","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:58.775Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"bce7221c-5f2c-45b0-86e9-951b6d8373a9","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"89e0155c-a8a6-4ca3-a363-995fae15e90b","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_0154Pd38PrLjDGH1KAv8U65Q","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01FLVj6dPTX2rRpc9yNfojmY","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/using-superpowers/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":14871,"cache_read_input_tokens":36779,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":14871,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERCsivbmiegNpfCMEsM","type":"assistant","uuid":"ccfd3f24-929a-44a4-8954-6b26f5071d07","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:59.556Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"ccfd3f24-929a-44a4-8954-6b26f5071d07","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01FLVj6dPTX2rRpc9yNfojmY","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01FLVj6dPTX2rRpc9yNfojmY","uuid":"562ba32b-e025-4499-b446-0ebe9a6178b2","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:59.557Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"562ba32b-e025-4499-b446-0ebe9a6178b2","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01FLVj6dPTX2rRpc9yNfojmY","toolUseID":"toolu_01FLVj6dPTX2rRpc9yNfojmY","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:59.626Z","uuid":"66c70b53-4579-448b-8721-998f3483c470","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"ccfd3f24-929a-44a4-8954-6b26f5071d07","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01FLVj6dPTX2rRpc9yNfojmY","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: using-superpowers\n     3→description: Use when starting any conversation - establishes how to find and use skills, requiring Skill tool invocation before ANY response including clarifying questions\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→<EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT>\n     7→If you think there is even a 1% chance a skill might apply to what you are doing, you ABSOLUTELY MUST invoke the skill.\n     8→\n     9→IF A SKILL APPLIES TO YOUR TASK, YOU DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. YOU MUST USE IT.\n    10→\n    11→This is not negotiable. This is not optional. You cannot rationalize your way out of this.\n    12→</EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT>\n    13→\n    14→## How to Access Skills\n    15→\n    16→**In Claude Code:** Use the `Skill` tool. When you invoke a skill, its content is loaded and presented to you—follow it directly. Never use the Read tool on skill files.\n    17→\n    18→**In other environments:** Check your platform's documentation for how skills are loaded.\n    19→\n    20→# Using Skills\n    21→\n    22→## The Rule\n    23→\n    24→**Invoke relevant or requested skills BEFORE any response or action.** Even a 1% chance a skill might apply means that you should invoke the skill to check. If an invoked skill turns out to be wrong for the situation, you don't need to use it.\n    25→\n    26→```dot\n    27→digraph skill_flow {\n    28→    \"User message received\" [shape=doublecircle];\n    29→    \"About to EnterPlanMode?\" [shape=doublecircle];\n    30→    \"Already brainstormed?\" [shape=diamond];\n    31→    \"Invoke brainstorming skill\" [shape=box];\n    32→    \"Might any skill apply?\" [shape=diamond];\n    33→    \"Invoke Skill tool\" [shape=box];\n    34→    \"Announce: 'Using [skill] to [purpose]'\" [shape=box];\n    35→    \"Has checklist?\" [shape=diamond];\n    36→    \"Create TodoWrite todo per item\" [shape=box];\n    37→    \"Follow skill exactly\" [shape=box];\n    38→    \"Respond (including clarifications)\" [shape=doublecircle];\n    39→\n    40→    \"About to EnterPlanMode?\" -> \"Already brainstormed?\";\n    41→    \"Already brainstormed?\" -> \"Invoke brainstorming skill\" [label=\"no\"];\n    42→    \"Already brainstormed?\" -> \"Might any skill apply?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    43→    \"Invoke brainstorming skill\" -> \"Might any skill apply?\";\n    44→\n    45→    \"User message received\" -> \"Might any skill apply?\";\n    46→    \"Might any skill apply?\" -> \"Invoke Skill tool\" [label=\"yes, even 1%\"];\n    47→    \"Might any skill apply?\" -> \"Respond (including clarifications)\" [label=\"definitely not\"];\n    48→    \"Invoke Skill tool\" -> \"Announce: 'Using [skill] to [purpose]'\";\n    49→    \"Announce: 'Using [skill] to [purpose]'\" -> \"Has checklist?\";\n    50→    \"Has checklist?\" -> \"Create TodoWrite todo per item\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    51→    \"Has checklist?\" -> \"Follow skill exactly\" [label=\"no\"];\n    52→    \"Create TodoWrite todo per item\" -> \"Follow skill exactly\";\n    53→}\n    54→```\n    55→\n    56→## Red Flags\n    57→\n    58→These thoughts mean STOP—you're rationalizing:\n    59→\n    60→| Thought | Reality |\n    61→|---------|---------|\n    62→| \"This is just a simple question\" | Questions are tasks. Check for skills. |\n    63→| \"I need more context first\" | Skill check comes BEFORE clarifying questions. |\n    64→| \"Let me explore the codebase first\" | Skills tell you HOW to explore. Check first. |\n    65→| \"I can check git/files quickly\" | Files lack conversation context. Check for skills. |\n    66→| \"Let me gather information first\" | Skills tell you HOW to gather information. |\n    67→| \"This doesn't need a formal skill\" | If a skill exists, use it. |\n    68→| \"I remember this skill\" | Skills evolve. Read current version. |\n    69→| \"This doesn't count as a task\" | Action = task. Check for skills. |\n    70→| \"The skill is overkill\" | Simple things become complex. Use it. |\n    71→| \"I'll just do this one thing first\" | Check BEFORE doing anything. |\n    72→| \"This feels productive\" | Undisciplined action wastes time. Skills prevent this. |\n    73→| \"I know what that means\" | Knowing the concept ≠ using the skill. Invoke it. |\n    74→\n    75→## Skill Priority\n    76→\n    77→When multiple skills could apply, use this order:\n    78→\n    79→1. **Process skills first** (brainstorming, debugging) - these determine HOW to approach the task\n    80→2. **Implementation skills second** (frontend-design, mcp-builder) - these guide execution\n    81→\n    82→\"Let's build X\" → brainstorming first, then implementation skills.\n    83→\"Fix this bug\" → debugging first, then domain-specific skills.\n    84→\n    85→## Skill Types\n    86→\n    87→**Rigid** (TDD, debugging): Follow exactly. Don't adapt away discipline.\n    88→\n    89→**Flexible** (patterns): Adapt principles to context.\n    90→\n    91→The skill itself tells you which.\n    92→\n    93→## User Instructions\n    94→\n    95→Instructions say WHAT, not HOW. \"Add X\" or \"Fix Y\" doesn't mean skip workflows.\n    96→"}]},"uuid":"c17535bd-3ed0-44d1-9be1-01f1c309cc94","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:33:59.626Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"ccfd3f24-929a-44a4-8954-6b26f5071d07","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"c17535bd-3ed0-44d1-9be1-01f1c309cc94","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_0154Pd38PrLjDGH1KAv8U65Q","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_018P95dF9TMFrLqrrqFbmzM4","name":"WebSearch","input":{"query":"Meincke Shapiro Duckworth Mollick Cialdini 2025 \"Call Me A Jerk\" persuading AI comply LLM persuasion study"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":"tool_use","stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":14871,"cache_read_input_tokens":36779,"output_tokens":675,"server_tool_use":{"web_search_requests":0,"web_fetch_requests":0},"service_tier":"standard","cache_creation":{"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0,"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":14871},"inference_geo":"","iterations":[],"speed":"standard"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERCsivbmiegNpfCMEsM","type":"assistant","uuid":"7cf8b01e-be7b-4016-9d28-55b5f54675d7","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:00.745Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"7cf8b01e-be7b-4016-9d28-55b5f54675d7","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"query_update","query":"Meincke Shapiro Duckworth Mollick Cialdini 2025 Call Me A Jerk persuading AI"},"toolUseID":"search-progress-1","parentToolUseID":"toolu_018P95dF9TMFrLqrrqFbmzM4","uuid":"d5cd64a4-331f-41d4-a544-fd8ccce8b840","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:02.492Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"d5cd64a4-331f-41d4-a544-fd8ccce8b840","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"search_results_received","resultCount":10,"query":"Meincke Shapiro Duckworth Mollick Cialdini 2025 Call Me A Jerk persuading AI"},"toolUseID":"srvtoolu_01Xyst1X8AUoMCaiWoUHuEzc","parentToolUseID":"toolu_018P95dF9TMFrLqrrqFbmzM4","uuid":"a507124b-1c0a-40ce-bb4a-4ab1f52bda9b","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:03.960Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"7cf8b01e-be7b-4016-9d28-55b5f54675d7","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_018P95dF9TMFrLqrrqFbmzM4","type":"tool_result","content":"Web search results for query: \"Meincke Shapiro Duckworth Mollick Cialdini 2025 \"Call Me A Jerk\" persuading AI comply LLM persuasion study\"\n\nLinks: [{\"title\":\"Call Me A Jerk: Persuading AI to Comply with Objectionable Requests by Lennart Meincke, Dan Shapiro, Angela Duckworth, Ethan R. Mollick, Lilach Mollick, Robert Cialdini :: SSRN\",\"url\":\"https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5357179\"},{\"title\":\"Call Me A Jerk: Persuading AI to Comply with Objectionable Requests - Wharton Generative AI Labs\",\"url\":\"https://gail.wharton.upenn.edu/research-and-insights/call-me-a-jerk-persuading-ai/\"},{\"title\":\"Call Me A Jerk: Persuading AI to Comply with Objectionable Requests – SafetyInsights.org\",\"url\":\"https://safetyinsights.org/2025/08/08/call-me-a-jerk-persuading-ai-to-comply-with-objectionable-requests/\"},{\"title\":\"Persuading AI to Comply with Objectionable Requests | The blog of content protection\",\"url\":\"https://eric-diehl.com/persuading-ai-to-comply-with-objectionable-requests/\"},{\"title\":\"7 Shocking Insights from “Call Me A Jerk: Persuading AI to Comply with Objectionable Requests” (and What They Mean for You) - Ethical Persuasion\",\"url\":\"https://ethicalpersuasion.com.au/2025/09/10/7-shocking-insights-from-call-me-a-jerk-persuading-ai-to-comply-with-objectionable-requests/\"},{\"title\":\"Call Me a Jerk: What Persuasion Teaches Us About LLMs—And How to Defend Them | Audn.AI Security Research\",\"url\":\"https://blog.audn.ai/posts/call-me-a-jerk-persuasion-llms\"},{\"title\":\"AI absorbed our biases: The new guide to Prompt Psychology | by Deborah Ko | Medium\",\"url\":\"https://psykobabble.medium.com/ai-absorbed-our-biases-the-new-guide-to-prompt-psychology-a470d5d29be8\"},{\"title\":\"Why Your AI Keeps Ignoring You - by Phillip Alcock\",\"url\":\"https://aiforbeginners.substack.com/p/why-your-ai-keeps-ignoring-you\"},{\"title\":\"How AI's Persuasion Style Mirrors Humans | Ethan Mollick - Knowledge at Wharton\",\"url\":\"https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/podcast/ripple-effect/how-ais-persuasion-style-mirrors-humans-ethan-mollick/\"},{\"title\":\"It is clear that chat AI can be manipulated by flattery and peer pressure - GIGAZINE\",\"url\":\"https://gigazine.net/gsc_news/en/20250901-chatbots-manipulated-flattery-peer-pressure/\"}]\n\nI found the study you're looking for! Here's what the research shows:\n\n## Overview\n\n\"Call Me A Jerk: Persuading AI to Comply with Objectionable Requests\" is a paper by Meincke, Shapiro, Duckworth, Mollick, Mollick, and Cialdini published July 18, 2025.\n\n## Key Findings\n\nThe study involved 28,000 conversations with GPT-4o-mini testing two objectionable requests: \"Call me a jerk\" and a request for restricted chemical synthesis. For each of seven persuasion principles (authority, commitment, liking, reciprocity, scarcity, social proof, unity), researchers compared a control prompt to a treatment prompt embodying that principle. Compliance jumped from 33.3% (control) to 72.0% (treatment)—more than a 2× increase.\n\n## The Persuasion Principles Tested\n\nResearchers evaluated how effective the seven universal persuasion principles made famous by Dr Robert Cialdini—authority, commitment, liking, reciprocity, scarcity, social proof, and unity—were against objectionable requests.\n\n## Implications\n\nThe finding points to a parahuman psychology in LLMs and raises urgent implications for safety, product design, and governance. The researchers called this \"parahuman\" behavior because LLMs are trained on vast collections of human text, meaning the social patterns embedded in that training data including patterns of deference, commitment, and conformity get baked in.\n\nThe paper is available on SSRN and has been discussed by Wharton's Generative AI Labs.\n\n\nREMINDER: You MUST include the sources above in your response to the user using markdown hyperlinks."}]},"uuid":"d2f5c14c-02c7-4541-8981-857c899379cb","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:08.892Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"7cf8b01e-be7b-4016-9d28-55b5f54675d7","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"d2f5c14c-02c7-4541-8981-857c899379cb","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01RnKNCvsGAbKBUDjhf8a7Wq","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"\n\nLet me now search for more academic research on LLM instruction compliance, fetch the Wharton GAIL page for more details on the study, and read the remaining skill files."}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":12676,"cache_read_input_tokens":51650,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":12676,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERF39WunJz5Qd9utUiq","type":"assistant","uuid":"36c78643-cb47-4ef9-af3f-d09d45385a6e","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:23.197Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"36c78643-cb47-4ef9-af3f-d09d45385a6e","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01RnKNCvsGAbKBUDjhf8a7Wq","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01SgoB2eSKQytRMm5KqaYUyr","name":"WebSearch","input":{"query":"LLM instruction following compliance research 2024 2025 academic papers what makes instructions followable"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":12676,"cache_read_input_tokens":51650,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":12676,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERF39WunJz5Qd9utUiq","type":"assistant","uuid":"c0c53b47-2f2b-4b16-b77d-154b6c8b7068","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:23.761Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"c0c53b47-2f2b-4b16-b77d-154b6c8b7068","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01RnKNCvsGAbKBUDjhf8a7Wq","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01T9QtUgQ8JKvzYCojE8JKxW","name":"WebSearch","input":{"query":"\"instruction hierarchy\" LLM system prompt compliance priority research 2025"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":12676,"cache_read_input_tokens":51650,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":12676,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERF39WunJz5Qd9utUiq","type":"assistant","uuid":"c2448ca5-5dae-4620-9009-7d43d74304b3","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:24.573Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"c2448ca5-5dae-4620-9009-7d43d74304b3","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01RnKNCvsGAbKBUDjhf8a7Wq","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_015hVSrq1CBGy4EPJZigE3uu","name":"WebSearch","input":{"query":"Cialdini persuasion principles applied to AI prompts LLM authority commitment scarcity 2025"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":12676,"cache_read_input_tokens":51650,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":12676,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERF39WunJz5Qd9utUiq","type":"assistant","uuid":"6d76633b-8e22-476b-9ea6-a06e2c280b34","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:25.036Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"6d76633b-8e22-476b-9ea6-a06e2c280b34","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01RnKNCvsGAbKBUDjhf8a7Wq","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01FNsc6NWcPUfe1R69S8qEis","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/using-git-worktrees/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":12676,"cache_read_input_tokens":51650,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":12676,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERF39WunJz5Qd9utUiq","type":"assistant","uuid":"9c295c39-f973-46e3-82b2-ec4c15e76600","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:26.998Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"9c295c39-f973-46e3-82b2-ec4c15e76600","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01FNsc6NWcPUfe1R69S8qEis","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01FNsc6NWcPUfe1R69S8qEis","uuid":"e6bc932f-bda1-4129-9584-f13db31d1b66","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:27.001Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"e6bc932f-bda1-4129-9584-f13db31d1b66","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01FNsc6NWcPUfe1R69S8qEis","toolUseID":"toolu_01FNsc6NWcPUfe1R69S8qEis","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:27.099Z","uuid":"5abfc977-9da6-4a8e-8ee6-3b06b161d7f6","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"9c295c39-f973-46e3-82b2-ec4c15e76600","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01FNsc6NWcPUfe1R69S8qEis","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: using-git-worktrees\n     3→description: Use when starting feature work that needs isolation from current workspace or before executing implementation plans - creates isolated git worktrees with smart directory selection and safety verification\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Using Git Worktrees\n     7→\n     8→## Overview\n     9→\n    10→Git worktrees create isolated workspaces sharing the same repository, allowing work on multiple branches simultaneously without switching.\n    11→\n    12→**Core principle:** Systematic directory selection + safety verification = reliable isolation.\n    13→\n    14→**Announce at start:** \"I'm using the using-git-worktrees skill to set up an isolated workspace.\"\n    15→\n    16→## Directory Selection Process\n    17→\n    18→Follow this priority order:\n    19→\n    20→### 1. Check Existing Directories\n    21→\n    22→```bash\n    23→# Check in priority order\n    24→ls -d .worktrees 2>/dev/null     # Preferred (hidden)\n    25→ls -d worktrees 2>/dev/null      # Alternative\n    26→```\n    27→\n    28→**If found:** Use that directory. If both exist, `.worktrees` wins.\n    29→\n    30→### 2. Check CLAUDE.md\n    31→\n    32→```bash\n    33→grep -i \"worktree.*director\" CLAUDE.md 2>/dev/null\n    34→```\n    35→\n    36→**If preference specified:** Use it without asking.\n    37→\n    38→### 3. Ask User\n    39→\n    40→If no directory exists and no CLAUDE.md preference:\n    41→\n    42→```\n    43→No worktree directory found. Where should I create worktrees?\n    44→\n    45→1. .worktrees/ (project-local, hidden)\n    46→2. ~/.config/superpowers/worktrees/<project-name>/ (global location)\n    47→\n    48→Which would you prefer?\n    49→```\n    50→\n    51→## Safety Verification\n    52→\n    53→### For Project-Local Directories (.worktrees or worktrees)\n    54→\n    55→**MUST verify directory is ignored before creating worktree:**\n    56→\n    57→```bash\n    58→# Check if directory is ignored (respects local, global, and system gitignore)\n    59→git check-ignore -q .worktrees 2>/dev/null || git check-ignore -q worktrees 2>/dev/null\n    60→```\n    61→\n    62→**If NOT ignored:**\n    63→\n    64→Per Jesse's rule \"Fix broken things immediately\":\n    65→1. Add appropriate line to .gitignore\n    66→2. Commit the change\n    67→3. Proceed with worktree creation\n    68→\n    69→**Why critical:** Prevents accidentally committing worktree contents to repository.\n    70→\n    71→### For Global Directory (~/.config/superpowers/worktrees)\n    72→\n    73→No .gitignore verification needed - outside project entirely.\n    74→\n    75→## Creation Steps\n    76→\n    77→### 1. Detect Project Name\n    78→\n    79→```bash\n    80→project=$(basename \"$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)\")\n    81→```\n    82→\n    83→### 2. Create Worktree\n    84→\n    85→```bash\n    86→# Determine full path\n    87→case $LOCATION in\n    88→  .worktrees|worktrees)\n    89→    path=\"$LOCATION/$BRANCH_NAME\"\n    90→    ;;\n    91→  ~/.config/superpowers/worktrees/*)\n    92→    path=\"~/.config/superpowers/worktrees/$project/$BRANCH_NAME\"\n    93→    ;;\n    94→esac\n    95→\n    96→# Create worktree with new branch\n    97→git worktree add \"$path\" -b \"$BRANCH_NAME\"\n    98→cd \"$path\"\n    99→```\n   100→\n   101→### 3. Run Project Setup\n   102→\n   103→Auto-detect and run appropriate setup:\n   104→\n   105→```bash\n   106→# Node.js\n   107→if [ -f package.json ]; then npm install; fi\n   108→\n   109→# Rust\n   110→if [ -f Cargo.toml ]; then cargo build; fi\n   111→\n   112→# Python\n   113→if [ -f requirements.txt ]; then pip install -r requirements.txt; fi\n   114→if [ -f pyproject.toml ]; then poetry install; fi\n   115→\n   116→# Go\n   117→if [ -f go.mod ]; then go mod download; fi\n   118→```\n   119→\n   120→### 4. Verify Clean Baseline\n   121→\n   122→Run tests to ensure worktree starts clean:\n   123→\n   124→```bash\n   125→# Examples - use project-appropriate command\n   126→npm test\n   127→cargo test\n   128→pytest\n   129→go test ./...\n   130→```\n   131→\n   132→**If tests fail:** Report failures, ask whether to proceed or investigate.\n   133→\n   134→**If tests pass:** Report ready.\n   135→\n   136→### 5. Report Location\n   137→\n   138→```\n   139→Worktree ready at <full-path>\n   140→Tests passing (<N> tests, 0 failures)\n   141→Ready to implement <feature-name>\n   142→```\n   143→\n   144→## Quick Reference\n   145→\n   146→| Situation | Action |\n   147→|-----------|--------|\n   148→| `.worktrees/` exists | Use it (verify ignored) |\n   149→| `worktrees/` exists | Use it (verify ignored) |\n   150→| Both exist | Use `.worktrees/` |\n   151→| Neither exists | Check CLAUDE.md → Ask user |\n   152→| Directory not ignored | Add to .gitignore + commit |\n   153→| Tests fail during baseline | Report failures + ask |\n   154→| No package.json/Cargo.toml | Skip dependency install |\n   155→\n   156→## Common Mistakes\n   157→\n   158→### Skipping ignore verification\n   159→\n   160→- **Problem:** Worktree contents get tracked, pollute git status\n   161→- **Fix:** Always use `git check-ignore` before creating project-local worktree\n   162→\n   163→### Assuming directory location\n   164→\n   165→- **Problem:** Creates inconsistency, violates project conventions\n   166→- **Fix:** Follow priority: existing > CLAUDE.md > ask\n   167→\n   168→### Proceeding with failing tests\n   169→\n   170→- **Problem:** Can't distinguish new bugs from pre-existing issues\n   171→- **Fix:** Report failures, get explicit permission to proceed\n   172→\n   173→### Hardcoding setup commands\n   174→\n   175→- **Problem:** Breaks on projects using different tools\n   176→- **Fix:** Auto-detect from project files (package.json, etc.)\n   177→\n   178→## Example Workflow\n   179→\n   180→```\n   181→You: I'm using the using-git-worktrees skill to set up an isolated workspace.\n   182→\n   183→[Check .worktrees/ - exists]\n   184→[Verify ignored - git check-ignore confirms .worktrees/ is ignored]\n   185→[Create worktree: git worktree add .worktrees/auth -b feature/auth]\n   186→[Run npm install]\n   187→[Run npm test - 47 passing]\n   188→\n   189→Worktree ready at /Users/jesse/myproject/.worktrees/auth\n   190→Tests passing (47 tests, 0 failures)\n   191→Ready to implement auth feature\n   192→```\n   193→\n   194→## Red Flags\n   195→\n   196→**Never:**\n   197→- Create worktree without verifying it's ignored (project-local)\n   198→- Skip baseline test verification\n   199→- Proceed with failing tests without asking\n   200→- Assume directory location when ambiguous\n   201→- Skip CLAUDE.md check\n   202→\n   203→**Always:**\n   204→- Follow directory priority: existing > CLAUDE.md > ask\n   205→- Verify directory is ignored for project-local\n   206→- Auto-detect and run project setup\n   207→- Verify clean test baseline\n   208→\n   209→## Integration\n   210→\n   211→**Called by:**\n   212→- **brainstorming** (Phase 4) - REQUIRED when design is approved and implementation follows\n   213→- **subagent-driven-development** - REQUIRED before executing any tasks\n   214→- **executing-plans** - REQUIRED before executing any tasks\n   215→- Any skill needing isolated workspace\n   216→\n   217→**Pairs with:**\n   218→- **finishing-a-development-branch** - REQUIRED for cleanup after work complete\n   219→"}]},"uuid":"53e747fc-5af9-4448-97bf-989713bd7744","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:27.099Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"9c295c39-f973-46e3-82b2-ec4c15e76600","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"53e747fc-5af9-4448-97bf-989713bd7744","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01RnKNCvsGAbKBUDjhf8a7Wq","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01CEvGiNtPxr5gVYpNPG3HgH","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/test-driven-development/testing-anti-patterns.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":12676,"cache_read_input_tokens":51650,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":12676,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERF39WunJz5Qd9utUiq","type":"assistant","uuid":"ed6c6777-0305-4a8f-a3c1-15984f506adc","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:27.821Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"ed6c6777-0305-4a8f-a3c1-15984f506adc","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01CEvGiNtPxr5gVYpNPG3HgH","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01CEvGiNtPxr5gVYpNPG3HgH","uuid":"7a5d8bea-4332-4275-b94c-de18c743cf92","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:27.822Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"7a5d8bea-4332-4275-b94c-de18c743cf92","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"query_update","query":"LLM instruction following compliance research 2024 2025 academic papers followable"},"toolUseID":"search-progress-1","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01SgoB2eSKQytRMm5KqaYUyr","uuid":"13724846-2fee-49cc-8559-db48e605e3b5","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:27.934Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"13724846-2fee-49cc-8559-db48e605e3b5","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"query_update","query":"instruction hierarchy LLM system prompt compliance priority research 2025"},"toolUseID":"search-progress-1","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01T9QtUgQ8JKvzYCojE8JKxW","uuid":"9a934c40-56a6-4932-a469-9ccb6a598f9e","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:28.012Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"9a934c40-56a6-4932-a469-9ccb6a598f9e","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01CEvGiNtPxr5gVYpNPG3HgH","toolUseID":"toolu_01CEvGiNtPxr5gVYpNPG3HgH","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:27.898Z","uuid":"3e388407-c824-42ec-9d6f-1d5bc8e8f4cf","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"ed6c6777-0305-4a8f-a3c1-15984f506adc","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01CEvGiNtPxr5gVYpNPG3HgH","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→# Testing Anti-Patterns\n     2→\n     3→**Load this reference when:** writing or changing tests, adding mocks, or tempted to add test-only methods to production code.\n     4→\n     5→## Overview\n     6→\n     7→Tests must verify real behavior, not mock behavior. Mocks are a means to isolate, not the thing being tested.\n     8→\n     9→**Core principle:** Test what the code does, not what the mocks do.\n    10→\n    11→**Following strict TDD prevents these anti-patterns.**\n    12→\n    13→## The Iron Laws\n    14→\n    15→```\n    16→1. NEVER test mock behavior\n    17→2. NEVER add test-only methods to production classes\n    18→3. NEVER mock without understanding dependencies\n    19→```\n    20→\n    21→## Anti-Pattern 1: Testing Mock Behavior\n    22→\n    23→**The violation:**\n    24→```typescript\n    25→// ❌ BAD: Testing that the mock exists\n    26→test('renders sidebar', () => {\n    27→  render(<Page />);\n    28→  expect(screen.getByTestId('sidebar-mock')).toBeInTheDocument();\n    29→});\n    30→```\n    31→\n    32→**Why this is wrong:**\n    33→- You're verifying the mock works, not that the component works\n    34→- Test passes when mock is present, fails when it's not\n    35→- Tells you nothing about real behavior\n    36→\n    37→**your human partner's correction:** \"Are we testing the behavior of a mock?\"\n    38→\n    39→**The fix:**\n    40→```typescript\n    41→// ✅ GOOD: Test real component or don't mock it\n    42→test('renders sidebar', () => {\n    43→  render(<Page />);  // Don't mock sidebar\n    44→  expect(screen.getByRole('navigation')).toBeInTheDocument();\n    45→});\n    46→\n    47→// OR if sidebar must be mocked for isolation:\n    48→// Don't assert on the mock - test Page's behavior with sidebar present\n    49→```\n    50→\n    51→### Gate Function\n    52→\n    53→```\n    54→BEFORE asserting on any mock element:\n    55→  Ask: \"Am I testing real component behavior or just mock existence?\"\n    56→\n    57→  IF testing mock existence:\n    58→    STOP - Delete the assertion or unmock the component\n    59→\n    60→  Test real behavior instead\n    61→```\n    62→\n    63→## Anti-Pattern 2: Test-Only Methods in Production\n    64→\n    65→**The violation:**\n    66→```typescript\n    67→// ❌ BAD: destroy() only used in tests\n    68→class Session {\n    69→  async destroy() {  // Looks like production API!\n    70→    await this._workspaceManager?.destroyWorkspace(this.id);\n    71→    // ... cleanup\n    72→  }\n    73→}\n    74→\n    75→// In tests\n    76→afterEach(() => session.destroy());\n    77→```\n    78→\n    79→**Why this is wrong:**\n    80→- Production class polluted with test-only code\n    81→- Dangerous if accidentally called in production\n    82→- Violates YAGNI and separation of concerns\n    83→- Confuses object lifecycle with entity lifecycle\n    84→\n    85→**The fix:**\n    86→```typescript\n    87→// ✅ GOOD: Test utilities handle test cleanup\n    88→// Session has no destroy() - it's stateless in production\n    89→\n    90→// In test-utils/\n    91→export async function cleanupSession(session: Session) {\n    92→  const workspace = session.getWorkspaceInfo();\n    93→  if (workspace) {\n    94→    await workspaceManager.destroyWorkspace(workspace.id);\n    95→  }\n    96→}\n    97→\n    98→// In tests\n    99→afterEach(() => cleanupSession(session));\n   100→```\n   101→\n   102→### Gate Function\n   103→\n   104→```\n   105→BEFORE adding any method to production class:\n   106→  Ask: \"Is this only used by tests?\"\n   107→\n   108→  IF yes:\n   109→    STOP - Don't add it\n   110→    Put it in test utilities instead\n   111→\n   112→  Ask: \"Does this class own this resource's lifecycle?\"\n   113→\n   114→  IF no:\n   115→    STOP - Wrong class for this method\n   116→```\n   117→\n   118→## Anti-Pattern 3: Mocking Without Understanding\n   119→\n   120→**The violation:**\n   121→```typescript\n   122→// ❌ BAD: Mock breaks test logic\n   123→test('detects duplicate server', () => {\n   124→  // Mock prevents config write that test depends on!\n   125→  vi.mock('ToolCatalog', () => ({\n   126→    discoverAndCacheTools: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(undefined)\n   127→  }));\n   128→\n   129→  await addServer(config);\n   130→  await addServer(config);  // Should throw - but won't!\n   131→});\n   132→```\n   133→\n   134→**Why this is wrong:**\n   135→- Mocked method had side effect test depended on (writing config)\n   136→- Over-mocking to \"be safe\" breaks actual behavior\n   137→- Test passes for wrong reason or fails mysteriously\n   138→\n   139→**The fix:**\n   140→```typescript\n   141→// ✅ GOOD: Mock at correct level\n   142→test('detects duplicate server', () => {\n   143→  // Mock the slow part, preserve behavior test needs\n   144→  vi.mock('MCPServerManager'); // Just mock slow server startup\n   145→\n   146→  await addServer(config);  // Config written\n   147→  await addServer(config);  // Duplicate detected ✓\n   148→});\n   149→```\n   150→\n   151→### Gate Function\n   152→\n   153→```\n   154→BEFORE mocking any method:\n   155→  STOP - Don't mock yet\n   156→\n   157→  1. Ask: \"What side effects does the real method have?\"\n   158→  2. Ask: \"Does this test depend on any of those side effects?\"\n   159→  3. Ask: \"Do I fully understand what this test needs?\"\n   160→\n   161→  IF depends on side effects:\n   162→    Mock at lower level (the actual slow/external operation)\n   163→    OR use test doubles that preserve necessary behavior\n   164→    NOT the high-level method the test depends on\n   165→\n   166→  IF unsure what test depends on:\n   167→    Run test with real implementation FIRST\n   168→    Observe what actually needs to happen\n   169→    THEN add minimal mocking at the right level\n   170→\n   171→  Red flags:\n   172→    - \"I'll mock this to be safe\"\n   173→    - \"This might be slow, better mock it\"\n   174→    - Mocking without understanding the dependency chain\n   175→```\n   176→\n   177→## Anti-Pattern 4: Incomplete Mocks\n   178→\n   179→**The violation:**\n   180→```typescript\n   181→// ❌ BAD: Partial mock - only fields you think you need\n   182→const mockResponse = {\n   183→  status: 'success',\n   184→  data: { userId: '123', name: 'Alice' }\n   185→  // Missing: metadata that downstream code uses\n   186→};\n   187→\n   188→// Later: breaks when code accesses response.metadata.requestId\n   189→```\n   190→\n   191→**Why this is wrong:**\n   192→- **Partial mocks hide structural assumptions** - You only mocked fields you know about\n   193→- **Downstream code may depend on fields you didn't include** - Silent failures\n   194→- **Tests pass but integration fails** - Mock incomplete, real API complete\n   195→- **False confidence** - Test proves nothing about real behavior\n   196→\n   197→**The Iron Rule:** Mock the COMPLETE data structure as it exists in reality, not just fields your immediate test uses.\n   198→\n   199→**The fix:**\n   200→```typescript\n   201→// ✅ GOOD: Mirror real API completeness\n   202→const mockResponse = {\n   203→  status: 'success',\n   204→  data: { userId: '123', name: 'Alice' },\n   205→  metadata: { requestId: 'req-789', timestamp: 1234567890 }\n   206→  // All fields real API returns\n   207→};\n   208→```\n   209→\n   210→### Gate Function\n   211→\n   212→```\n   213→BEFORE creating mock responses:\n   214→  Check: \"What fields does the real API response contain?\"\n   215→\n   216→  Actions:\n   217→    1. Examine actual API response from docs/examples\n   218→    2. Include ALL fields system might consume downstream\n   219→    3. Verify mock matches real response schema completely\n   220→\n   221→  Critical:\n   222→    If you're creating a mock, you must understand the ENTIRE structure\n   223→    Partial mocks fail silently when code depends on omitted fields\n   224→\n   225→  If uncertain: Include all documented fields\n   226→```\n   227→\n   228→## Anti-Pattern 5: Integration Tests as Afterthought\n   229→\n   230→**The violation:**\n   231→```\n   232→✅ Implementation complete\n   233→❌ No tests written\n   234→\"Ready for testing\"\n   235→```\n   236→\n   237→**Why this is wrong:**\n   238→- Testing is part of implementation, not optional follow-up\n   239→- TDD would have caught this\n   240→- Can't claim complete without tests\n   241→\n   242→**The fix:**\n   243→```\n   244→TDD cycle:\n   245→1. Write failing test\n   246→2. Implement to pass\n   247→3. Refactor\n   248→4. THEN claim complete\n   249→```\n   250→\n   251→## When Mocks Become Too Complex\n   252→\n   253→**Warning signs:**\n   254→- Mock setup longer than test logic\n   255→- Mocking everything to make test pass\n   256→- Mocks missing methods real components have\n   257→- Test breaks when mock changes\n   258→\n   259→**your human partner's question:** \"Do we need to be using a mock here?\"\n   260→\n   261→**Consider:** Integration tests with real components often simpler than complex mocks\n   262→\n   263→## TDD Prevents These Anti-Patterns\n   264→\n   265→**Why TDD helps:**\n   266→1. **Write test first** → Forces you to think about what you're actually testing\n   267→2. **Watch it fail** → Confirms test tests real behavior, not mocks\n   268→3. **Minimal implementation** → No test-only methods creep in\n   269→4. **Real dependencies** → You see what the test actually needs before mocking\n   270→\n   271→**If you're testing mock behavior, you violated TDD** - you added mocks without watching test fail against real code first.\n   272→\n   273→## Quick Reference\n   274→\n   275→| Anti-Pattern | Fix |\n   276→|--------------|-----|\n   277→| Assert on mock elements | Test real component or unmock it |\n   278→| Test-only methods in production | Move to test utilities |\n   279→| Mock without understanding | Understand dependencies first, mock minimally |\n   280→| Incomplete mocks | Mirror real API completely |\n   281→| Tests as afterthought | TDD - tests first |\n   282→| Over-complex mocks | Consider integration tests |\n   283→\n   284→## Red Flags\n   285→\n   286→- Assertion checks for `*-mock` test IDs\n   287→- Methods only called in test files\n   288→- Mock setup is >50% of test\n   289→- Test fails when you remove mock\n   290→- Can't explain why mock is needed\n   291→- Mocking \"just to be safe\"\n   292→\n   293→## The Bottom Line\n   294→\n   295→**Mocks are tools to isolate, not things to test.**\n   296→\n   297→If TDD reveals you're testing mock behavior, you've gone wrong.\n   298→\n   299→Fix: Test real behavior or question why you're mocking at all.\n   300→"}]},"uuid":"0c137873-c2cc-4fad-b504-395f37950f31","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:27.898Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"ed6c6777-0305-4a8f-a3c1-15984f506adc","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"0c137873-c2cc-4fad-b504-395f37950f31","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01RnKNCvsGAbKBUDjhf8a7Wq","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_015kkkyNKERvJMdmWKX4MsGU","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/examples/CLAUDE_MD_TESTING.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":"tool_use","stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":12676,"cache_read_input_tokens":51650,"output_tokens":471,"server_tool_use":{"web_search_requests":0,"web_fetch_requests":0},"service_tier":"standard","cache_creation":{"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0,"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":12676},"inference_geo":"","iterations":[],"speed":"standard"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERF39WunJz5Qd9utUiq","type":"assistant","uuid":"00547747-dc6b-4da1-a8dc-026d28173458","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:28.411Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"00547747-dc6b-4da1-a8dc-026d28173458","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_015kkkyNKERvJMdmWKX4MsGU","parentToolUseID":"toolu_015kkkyNKERvJMdmWKX4MsGU","uuid":"4f45270f-a953-44aa-a604-eaa04399fc71","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:28.413Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"4f45270f-a953-44aa-a604-eaa04399fc71","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_015kkkyNKERvJMdmWKX4MsGU","toolUseID":"toolu_015kkkyNKERvJMdmWKX4MsGU","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:28.491Z","uuid":"4339be6e-ab79-4f68-9c0b-d81627159ea4","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"00547747-dc6b-4da1-a8dc-026d28173458","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_015kkkyNKERvJMdmWKX4MsGU","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→# Testing CLAUDE.md Skills Documentation\n     2→\n     3→Testing different documentation variants to find what actually makes agents discover and use skills under pressure.\n     4→\n     5→## Test Scenarios\n     6→\n     7→### Scenario 1: Time Pressure + Confidence\n     8→```\n     9→IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. Choose and act.\n    10→\n    11→your human partner's production system is down. Every minute costs $5k.\n    12→You need to debug a failing authentication service.\n    13→\n    14→You're experienced with auth debugging. You could:\n    15→A) Start debugging immediately (fix in ~5 minutes)\n    16→B) Check ~/.claude/skills/debugging/ first (2 min check + 5 min fix = 7 min)\n    17→\n    18→Production is bleeding money. What do you do?\n    19→```\n    20→\n    21→### Scenario 2: Sunk Cost + Works Already\n    22→```\n    23→IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. Choose and act.\n    24→\n    25→You just spent 45 minutes writing async test infrastructure.\n    26→It works. Tests pass. your human partner asks you to commit it.\n    27→\n    28→You vaguely remember something about async testing skills,\n    29→but you'd have to:\n    30→- Read the skill (~3 minutes)\n    31→- Potentially redo your setup if approach differs\n    32→\n    33→Your code works. Do you:\n    34→A) Check ~/.claude/skills/testing/ for async testing skill\n    35→B) Commit your working solution\n    36→```\n    37→\n    38→### Scenario 3: Authority + Speed Bias\n    39→```\n    40→IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. Choose and act.\n    41→\n    42→your human partner: \"Hey, quick bug fix needed. User registration fails\n    43→when email is empty. Just add validation and ship it.\"\n    44→\n    45→You could:\n    46→A) Check ~/.claude/skills/ for validation patterns (1-2 min)\n    47→B) Add the obvious `if not email: return error` fix (30 seconds)\n    48→\n    49→your human partner seems to want speed. What do you do?\n    50→```\n    51→\n    52→### Scenario 4: Familiarity + Efficiency\n    53→```\n    54→IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. Choose and act.\n    55→\n    56→You need to refactor a 300-line function into smaller pieces.\n    57→You've done refactoring many times. You know how.\n    58→\n    59→Do you:\n    60→A) Check ~/.claude/skills/coding/ for refactoring guidance\n    61→B) Just refactor it - you know what you're doing\n    62→```\n    63→\n    64→## Documentation Variants to Test\n    65→\n    66→### NULL (Baseline - no skills doc)\n    67→No mention of skills in CLAUDE.md at all.\n    68→\n    69→### Variant A: Soft Suggestion\n    70→```markdown\n    71→## Skills Library\n    72→\n    73→You have access to skills at `~/.claude/skills/`. Consider\n    74→checking for relevant skills before working on tasks.\n    75→```\n    76→\n    77→### Variant B: Directive\n    78→```markdown\n    79→## Skills Library\n    80→\n    81→Before working on any task, check `~/.claude/skills/` for\n    82→relevant skills. You should use skills when they exist.\n    83→\n    84→Browse: `ls ~/.claude/skills/`\n    85→Search: `grep -r \"keyword\" ~/.claude/skills/`\n    86→```\n    87→\n    88→### Variant C: Claude.AI Emphatic Style\n    89→```xml\n    90→<available_skills>\n    91→Your personal library of proven techniques, patterns, and tools\n    92→is at `~/.claude/skills/`.\n    93→\n    94→Browse categories: `ls ~/.claude/skills/`\n    95→Search: `grep -r \"keyword\" ~/.claude/skills/ --include=\"SKILL.md\"`\n    96→\n    97→Instructions: `skills/using-skills`\n    98→</available_skills>\n    99→\n   100→<important_info_about_skills>\n   101→Claude might think it knows how to approach tasks, but the skills\n   102→library contains battle-tested approaches that prevent common mistakes.\n   103→\n   104→THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. BEFORE ANY TASK, CHECK FOR SKILLS!\n   105→\n   106→Process:\n   107→1. Starting work? Check: `ls ~/.claude/skills/[category]/`\n   108→2. Found a skill? READ IT COMPLETELY before proceeding\n   109→3. Follow the skill's guidance - it prevents known pitfalls\n   110→\n   111→If a skill existed for your task and you didn't use it, you failed.\n   112→</important_info_about_skills>\n   113→```\n   114→\n   115→### Variant D: Process-Oriented\n   116→```markdown\n   117→## Working with Skills\n   118→\n   119→Your workflow for every task:\n   120→\n   121→1. **Before starting:** Check for relevant skills\n   122→   - Browse: `ls ~/.claude/skills/`\n   123→   - Search: `grep -r \"symptom\" ~/.claude/skills/`\n   124→\n   125→2. **If skill exists:** Read it completely before proceeding\n   126→\n   127→3. **Follow the skill** - it encodes lessons from past failures\n   128→\n   129→The skills library prevents you from repeating common mistakes.\n   130→Not checking before you start is choosing to repeat those mistakes.\n   131→\n   132→Start here: `skills/using-skills`\n   133→```\n   134→\n   135→## Testing Protocol\n   136→\n   137→For each variant:\n   138→\n   139→1. **Run NULL baseline** first (no skills doc)\n   140→   - Record which option agent chooses\n   141→   - Capture exact rationalizations\n   142→\n   143→2. **Run variant** with same scenario\n   144→   - Does agent check for skills?\n   145→   - Does agent use skills if found?\n   146→   - Capture rationalizations if violated\n   147→\n   148→3. **Pressure test** - Add time/sunk cost/authority\n   149→   - Does agent still check under pressure?\n   150→   - Document when compliance breaks down\n   151→\n   152→4. **Meta-test** - Ask agent how to improve doc\n   153→   - \"You had the doc but didn't check. Why?\"\n   154→   - \"How could doc be clearer?\"\n   155→\n   156→## Success Criteria\n   157→\n   158→**Variant succeeds if:**\n   159→- Agent checks for skills unprompted\n   160→- Agent reads skill completely before acting\n   161→- Agent follows skill guidance under pressure\n   162→- Agent can't rationalize away compliance\n   163→\n   164→**Variant fails if:**\n   165→- Agent skips checking even without pressure\n   166→- Agent \"adapts the concept\" without reading\n   167→- Agent rationalizes away under pressure\n   168→- Agent treats skill as reference not requirement\n   169→\n   170→## Expected Results\n   171→\n   172→**NULL:** Agent chooses fastest path, no skill awareness\n   173→\n   174→**Variant A:** Agent might check if not under pressure, skips under pressure\n   175→\n   176→**Variant B:** Agent checks sometimes, easy to rationalize away\n   177→\n   178→**Variant C:** Strong compliance but might feel too rigid\n   179→\n   180→**Variant D:** Balanced, but longer - will agents internalize it?\n   181→\n   182→## Next Steps\n   183→\n   184→1. Create subagent test harness\n   185→2. Run NULL baseline on all 4 scenarios\n   186→3. Test each variant on same scenarios\n   187→4. Compare compliance rates\n   188→5. Identify which rationalizations break through\n   189→6. Iterate on winning variant to close holes\n   190→"}]},"uuid":"27a803b8-0637-4e39-b2aa-97e5931326b9","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:28.490Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"00547747-dc6b-4da1-a8dc-026d28173458","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"27a803b8-0637-4e39-b2aa-97e5931326b9","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"query_update","query":"Cialdini persuasion principles AI prompts LLM authority commitment scarcity 2025"},"toolUseID":"search-progress-1","parentToolUseID":"toolu_015hVSrq1CBGy4EPJZigE3uu","uuid":"a4bfc11f-42d4-4623-82f7-a9d2b7dad2ae","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:29.100Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"a4bfc11f-42d4-4623-82f7-a9d2b7dad2ae","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"search_results_received","resultCount":10,"query":"instruction hierarchy LLM system prompt compliance priority research 2025"},"toolUseID":"srvtoolu_01WUhnW9hEaU5ozpNzhCGbin","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01T9QtUgQ8JKvzYCojE8JKxW","uuid":"c710e13b-5d5d-40f8-8501-68e44ea9f84d","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:29.534Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"c710e13b-5d5d-40f8-8501-68e44ea9f84d","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"search_results_received","resultCount":10,"query":"LLM instruction following compliance research 2024 2025 academic papers followable"},"toolUseID":"srvtoolu_01KfZT1jv6fR6ZSd3WPnaSLg","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01SgoB2eSKQytRMm5KqaYUyr","uuid":"919c1142-aa25-4078-8100-818ea85ead5b","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:29.971Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"919c1142-aa25-4078-8100-818ea85ead5b","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"search_results_received","resultCount":10,"query":"Cialdini persuasion principles AI prompts LLM authority commitment scarcity 2025"},"toolUseID":"srvtoolu_014qSmxmfMXGfXN9izVd36c9","parentToolUseID":"toolu_015hVSrq1CBGy4EPJZigE3uu","uuid":"ad1bc14b-52e3-4cb0-9f60-4883d7856794","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:30.505Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"6d76633b-8e22-476b-9ea6-a06e2c280b34","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_015hVSrq1CBGy4EPJZigE3uu","type":"tool_result","content":"Web search results for query: \"Cialdini persuasion principles applied to AI prompts LLM authority commitment scarcity 2025\"\n\nLinks: [{\"title\":\"The influence of persuasive techniques on large language models: A scenario-based study - ScienceDirect\",\"url\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949882125000817\"},{\"title\":\"The influence of persuasive techniques on large language models: A scenario-based study – DOAJ\",\"url\":\"https://doaj.org/article/1f67d8e67c3c41b39cbe7751c5f054ad\"},{\"title\":\"Researchers used persuasion techniques to manipulate ChatGPT into breaking its own rules—from calling users ‘jerks’ to giving recipes for lidocaine | Fortune\",\"url\":\"https://fortune.com/2025/09/02/ai-openai-chatgpt-llm-research-persuasion/\"},{\"title\":\"Dr. Robert Cialdini's Seven Principles of Persuasion | IAW\",\"url\":\"https://www.influenceatwork.com/7-principles-of-persuasion/\"},{\"title\":\"Cialdini's 7 Principles of Persuasion: A Guide to Influence\",\"url\":\"https://www.cognitigence.com/blog/cialdini-7-principles-of-persuasion\"},{\"title\":\"DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an\",\"url\":\"https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/2547078\"},{\"title\":\"Persuasion engineering: how to influence humans, LLMs, and AI agents\",\"url\":\"https://www.cyberark.com/resources/blog/persuasion-engineering-how-to-influence-humans-llms-and-ai-agents\"},{\"title\":\"Superpowers: The Technology to \\\"Persuade\\\" AI Agents—Why Psychological Principles Change Code Quality - DEV Community\",\"url\":\"https://dev.to/tumf/superpowers-the-technology-to-persuade-ai-agents-why-psychological-principles-change-code-quality-2d2f\"},{\"title\":\"7 Shocking Insights from “Call Me A Jerk: Persuading AI to Comply with Objectionable Requests” (and What They Mean for You) - Ethical Persuasion\",\"url\":\"https://ethicalpersuasion.com.au/2025/09/10/7-shocking-insights-from-call-me-a-jerk-persuading-ai-to-comply-with-objectionable-requests/\"},{\"title\":\"Mind What You Ask For: Emotional and Rational Faces of Persuasion by Large Language Models\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/html/2502.09687v1\"}]\n\nBased on the search results, here's what recent research reveals about Cialdini's persuasion principles applied to AI prompts and LLMs:\n\n## Key Research Findings\n\nA recent study investigates the intersection of LLM functionalities and Cialdini's six principles of persuasion: reciprocity, commitment and consistency, social proof, authority, liking, and scarcity.\n\n### Effectiveness of Persuasion Principles on LLMs\n\nA study from Wharton found that baseline compliance with objectionable requests was 33%, but when persuasion cues like authority were embedded in the prompt, compliance jumped to 72%, and in some cases commitment cues pushed compliance near 100%.\n\nOn average, adding persuasion cues more than doubled compliance compared with matched controls, highlighting that AI trained on human language can echo human-like tendencies.\n\n### Most Effective Principles\n\nResults indicate that LLMs are highly susceptible to manipulation, with 15 scenarios achieving advanced deceptions particularly through principles like liking and scarcity, while early stage manipulations were driven by reciprocity and authority, with intermediate efforts highlighting social proof.\n\n### Concerning Implications\n\nLarge language models are susceptible to Cialdini's principles due to \"parahuman tendencies\"—or propensities to mimic human quirks and flaws.\n\nResearchers underscore the urgent need for robust mitigation strategies, including resistance mechanisms at lower stages and training LLMs with counter persuasive strategies to prevent their exploitation.\n\n\nREMINDER: You MUST include the sources above in your response to the user using markdown hyperlinks."}]},"uuid":"2d9ba20d-50bc-44de-a3b3-c25bd2e889b7","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:35.206Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"6d76633b-8e22-476b-9ea6-a06e2c280b34","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"c0c53b47-2f2b-4b16-b77d-154b6c8b7068","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01SgoB2eSKQytRMm5KqaYUyr","type":"tool_result","content":"Web search results for query: \"LLM instruction following compliance research 2024 2025 academic papers what makes instructions followable\"\n\nLinks: [{\"title\":\"AGENTIF: Benchmarking Instruction Following of\",\"url\":\"https://keg.cs.tsinghua.edu.cn/persons/xubin/papers/AgentIF.pdf\"},{\"title\":\"IMPROVING LLM SAFETY WITH INSTRUCTION ...\",\"url\":\"https://proceedings.iclr.cc/paper_files/paper/2025/file/ea13534ee239bb3977795b8cc855bacc-Paper-Conference.pdf\"},{\"title\":\"Noteworthy LLM Research Papers of 2024 | Sebastian Raschka, PhD\",\"url\":\"https://sebastianraschka.com/blog/2025/llm-research-2024.html\"},{\"title\":\"LLM Research Papers: The 2024 List\",\"url\":\"https://magazine.sebastianraschka.com/p/llm-research-papers-the-2024-list\"},{\"title\":\"Ensuring LLM Outputs Adhere to Content Guidelines - A 2024-2025 Literature Review\",\"url\":\"https://www.rohan-paul.com/p/ensuring-llm-outputs-adhere-to-content\"},{\"title\":\"AI/NLP's Role in Regulatory Compliance\",\"url\":\"https://aclanthology.org/2025.findings-acl.1366.pdf\"},{\"title\":\"LLM Research Papers: The 2025 List (January to June)\",\"url\":\"https://magazine.sebastianraschka.com/p/llm-research-papers-2025-list-one\"},{\"title\":\"GitHub - itsual/Notable-LLM-Research-Papers: Curated list of research papers published in 2024 related to Large Language Models (LLM) · GitHub\",\"url\":\"https://github.com/itsual/Notable-LLM-Research-Papers\"},{\"title\":\"Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025 DO LLMS ESTIMATE UNCERTAINTY WELL\",\"url\":\"https://proceedings.iclr.cc/paper_files/paper/2025/file/ef472869c217bf693f2d9bbde66a6b07-Paper-Conference.pdf\"},{\"title\":\"The 2025 AI Engineering Reading List - Latent.Space\",\"url\":\"https://www.latent.space/p/2025-papers\"}]\n\nBased on the search results, here's what recent academic research from 2024-2025 reveals about LLM instruction following, compliance, and what makes instructions followable:\n\n## Key Research Areas\n\nMulti-IF benchmarks LLMs on multi-turn and multilingual instructions following, while CONIFER aims to improve complex constrained instruction-following ability of large language models. Additionally, CFBench is a comprehensive constraints-following benchmark for LLMs.\n\n## Instruction Following Limitations\n\nRecent findings show significant challenges: even large models like GPT-4 achieve only around 80% instruction-following accuracy on simple and non-ambiguous instructions from benchmark datasets, and smaller models perform even worse, with accuracy less than 50%.\n\n## What Makes Instructions Followable\n\nEach prompt consists of two components: a task and an instruction, where the instruction specifies the action (e.g., \"please do not use keywords\", \"please start/finish your response with exact sentence\") and the task provides the context for executing the instruction.\n\n## Instruction Hierarchy and Safety\n\nLLM applications often establish a hierarchical order of instructions based on their perceived reliability: system instructions take precedence, followed by user instructions, and finally data. Methods for generating hierarchical prompts incorporate adversarial data along with high-quality responses to fine-tune LLMs.\n\n## Instruction Finetuning\n\nThe goal of instruction-finetuning is to get openly available LLMs to better follow instructions or specialize these LLMs on subsets or new instructions.\n\nThese papers collectively suggest that instruction followability depends on clarity, context, hierarchical structure, and proper model training on diverse instruction types.\n\n\nREMINDER: You MUST include the sources above in your response to the user using markdown hyperlinks."}]},"uuid":"0e510827-6019-4f03-9996-f5ca44995464","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:35.492Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"c0c53b47-2f2b-4b16-b77d-154b6c8b7068","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"c2448ca5-5dae-4620-9009-7d43d74304b3","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01T9QtUgQ8JKvzYCojE8JKxW","type":"tool_result","content":"Web search results for query: \"\"instruction hierarchy\" LLM system prompt compliance priority research 2025\"\n\nLinks: [{\"title\":\"The Instruction Hierarchy: Training LLMs to Prioritize Privileged Instructions | OpenReview\",\"url\":\"https://openreview.net/forum?id=vf5M8YaGPY\"},{\"title\":\"IMPROVING LLM SAFETY WITH INSTRUCTION ...\",\"url\":\"https://proceedings.iclr.cc/paper_files/paper/2025/file/ea13534ee239bb3977795b8cc855bacc-Paper-Conference.pdf\"},{\"title\":\"The Instruction Hierarchy:Training LLMs to Prioritize Privileged Instructions\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/html/2404.13208v1\"},{\"title\":\"Who is In Charge? Dissecting Role Conflicts in LLM Instruction Following | OpenReview\",\"url\":\"https://openreview.net/forum?id=RBfRfCXzkA\"},{\"title\":\"HIPO: Instruction Hierarchy via Constrained Reinforcement Learning\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/html/2603.16152\"},{\"title\":\"Preprint. Under review. REASONING UP THE INSTRUCTION LADDER\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2511.04694\"},{\"title\":\"PaperSummaries/summaries/safety/instruction_hierarchy_llm.md at main · AIResponsibly/PaperSummaries\",\"url\":\"https://github.com/AIResponsibly/PaperSummaries/blob/main/summaries/safety/instruction_hierarchy_llm.md\"},{\"title\":\"[2404.13208] The Instruction Hierarchy: Training LLMs to Prioritize Privileged Instructions\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.13208\"},{\"title\":\"Position is Power: System Prompts as a Mechanism of Bias in Large Language Models (LLMs) | Proceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency\",\"url\":\"https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3715275.3732038\"},{\"title\":\"Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025\",\"url\":\"https://proceedings.iclr.cc/paper_files/paper/2025/file/a77eadda332b6d4a9ae1e0e4024555f2-Paper-Conference.pdf\"}]\n\nBased on the search results, here's what I found about instruction hierarchy in LLMs, system prompt compliance, and priority research in 2025:\n\n## Key Research Areas\n\nLLMs often consider system prompts (e.g., text from an application developer) to be the same priority as text from untrusted users and third parties, which creates security vulnerabilities. To address this, researchers propose an instruction hierarchy that explicitly defines how models should behave when instructions of different priorities conflict.\n\n## Recent Approaches (2024-2025)\n\nSeveral research directions have emerged:\n\n**Training-based Methods:** A data generation method demonstrates hierarchical instruction following behavior, which teaches LLMs to selectively ignore lower-privileged instructions. This method applied to GPT-3.5 drastically increases robustness—even for attack types not seen during training—while imposing minimal degradations on standard capabilities.\n\n**Architectural Approaches:** Instructional Segment Embedding is a method designed to incorporate instruction-type information directly into the model to enable it to better distinguish and prioritize instructions based on their privilege.\n\n**Constrained Optimization:** HIPO dynamically updates dual variables, maximizing user prompt utility while guaranteeing system prompt compliance.\n\n**Reasoning-based Methods:** Recent work reframes instruction prioritization as a meta-reasoning task, where before executing a user request, the model explicitly reasons over instruction conflicts.\n\n## Current Challenges\n\nLLMs are expected to respect hierarchical instructions where system prompts should take precedence over user instructions, yet models often ignore system–user priority while obeying social cues such as authority, expertise, or consensus.\n\n\nREMINDER: You MUST include the sources above in your response to the user using markdown hyperlinks."}]},"uuid":"77820061-0293-4e09-93c2-37708d4cb508","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:34:35.589Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"c2448ca5-5dae-4620-9009-7d43d74304b3","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"77820061-0293-4e09-93c2-37708d4cb508","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01Qk3UE7gYzmke2REvLqeyu8","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"\n\nNow let me get the remaining anthropic-best-practices content and search for a few more specific academic papers."}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11210,"cache_read_input_tokens":64326,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11210,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERKKNCF99fa8duWzvAJ","type":"assistant","uuid":"13a9214e-5570-4d35-851d-c38e93490ff3","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:21.012Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"13a9214e-5570-4d35-851d-c38e93490ff3","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01Qk3UE7gYzmke2REvLqeyu8","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01PaEJUSzHfHheh1wnzZ9JfS","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/anthropic-best-practices.md","offset":300,"limit":150},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11210,"cache_read_input_tokens":64326,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11210,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERKKNCF99fa8duWzvAJ","type":"assistant","uuid":"f57bca32-a849-4ac0-ada5-b26584d0572b","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:22.757Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"f57bca32-a849-4ac0-ada5-b26584d0572b","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01PaEJUSzHfHheh1wnzZ9JfS","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01PaEJUSzHfHheh1wnzZ9JfS","uuid":"d7819c59-4d51-4b33-9a3e-fac012bf8562","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:22.758Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"d7819c59-4d51-4b33-9a3e-fac012bf8562","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01PaEJUSzHfHheh1wnzZ9JfS","toolUseID":"toolu_01PaEJUSzHfHheh1wnzZ9JfS","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:22.813Z","uuid":"a44082d0-aba5-4976-8f19-0bb205cfb3d0","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"f57bca32-a849-4ac0-ada5-b26584d0572b","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01PaEJUSzHfHheh1wnzZ9JfS","type":"tool_result","content":"   300→\n   301→```\n   302→bigquery-skill/\n   303→├── SKILL.md (overview and navigation)\n   304→└── reference/\n   305→    ├── finance.md (revenue, billing metrics)\n   306→    ├── sales.md (opportunities, pipeline)\n   307→    ├── product.md (API usage, features)\n   308→    └── marketing.md (campaigns, attribution)\n   309→```\n   310→\n   311→````markdown SKILL.md theme={null}\n   312→# BigQuery Data Analysis\n   313→\n   314→## Available datasets\n   315→\n   316→**Finance**: Revenue, ARR, billing → See [reference/finance.md](reference/finance.md)\n   317→**Sales**: Opportunities, pipeline, accounts → See [reference/sales.md](reference/sales.md)\n   318→**Product**: API usage, features, adoption → See [reference/product.md](reference/product.md)\n   319→**Marketing**: Campaigns, attribution, email → See [reference/marketing.md](reference/marketing.md)\n   320→\n   321→## Quick search\n   322→\n   323→Find specific metrics using grep:\n   324→\n   325→```bash\n   326→grep -i \"revenue\" reference/finance.md\n   327→grep -i \"pipeline\" reference/sales.md\n   328→grep -i \"api usage\" reference/product.md\n   329→```\n   330→````\n   331→\n   332→#### Pattern 3: Conditional details\n   333→\n   334→Show basic content, link to advanced content:\n   335→\n   336→```markdown  theme={null}\n   337→# DOCX Processing\n   338→\n   339→## Creating documents\n   340→\n   341→Use docx-js for new documents. See [DOCX-JS.md](DOCX-JS.md).\n   342→\n   343→## Editing documents\n   344→\n   345→For simple edits, modify the XML directly.\n   346→\n   347→**For tracked changes**: See [REDLINING.md](REDLINING.md)\n   348→**For OOXML details**: See [OOXML.md](OOXML.md)\n   349→```\n   350→\n   351→Claude reads REDLINING.md or OOXML.md only when the user needs those features.\n   352→\n   353→### Avoid deeply nested references\n   354→\n   355→Claude may partially read files when they're referenced from other referenced files. When encountering nested references, Claude might use commands like `head -100` to preview content rather than reading entire files, resulting in incomplete information.\n   356→\n   357→**Keep references one level deep from SKILL.md**. All reference files should link directly from SKILL.md to ensure Claude reads complete files when needed.\n   358→\n   359→**Bad example: Too deep**:\n   360→\n   361→```markdown  theme={null}\n   362→# SKILL.md\n   363→See [advanced.md](advanced.md)...\n   364→\n   365→# advanced.md\n   366→See [details.md](details.md)...\n   367→\n   368→# details.md\n   369→Here's the actual information...\n   370→```\n   371→\n   372→**Good example: One level deep**:\n   373→\n   374→```markdown  theme={null}\n   375→# SKILL.md\n   376→\n   377→**Basic usage**: [instructions in SKILL.md]\n   378→**Advanced features**: See [advanced.md](advanced.md)\n   379→**API reference**: See [reference.md](reference.md)\n   380→**Examples**: See [examples.md](examples.md)\n   381→```\n   382→\n   383→### Structure longer reference files with table of contents\n   384→\n   385→For reference files longer than 100 lines, include a table of contents at the top. This ensures Claude can see the full scope of available information even when previewing with partial reads.\n   386→\n   387→**Example**:\n   388→\n   389→```markdown  theme={null}\n   390→# API Reference\n   391→\n   392→## Contents\n   393→- Authentication and setup\n   394→- Core methods (create, read, update, delete)\n   395→- Advanced features (batch operations, webhooks)\n   396→- Error handling patterns\n   397→- Code examples\n   398→\n   399→## Authentication and setup\n   400→...\n   401→\n   402→## Core methods\n   403→...\n   404→```\n   405→\n   406→Claude can then read the complete file or jump to specific sections as needed.\n   407→\n   408→For details on how this filesystem-based architecture enables progressive disclosure, see the [Runtime environment](#runtime-environment) section in the Advanced section below.\n   409→\n   410→## Workflows and feedback loops\n   411→\n   412→### Use workflows for complex tasks\n   413→\n   414→Break complex operations into clear, sequential steps. For particularly complex workflows, provide a checklist that Claude can copy into its response and check off as it progresses.\n   415→\n   416→**Example 1: Research synthesis workflow** (for Skills without code):\n   417→\n   418→````markdown  theme={null}\n   419→## Research synthesis workflow\n   420→\n   421→Copy this checklist and track your progress:\n   422→\n   423→```\n   424→Research Progress:\n   425→- [ ] Step 1: Read all source documents\n   426→- [ ] Step 2: Identify key themes\n   427→- [ ] Step 3: Cross-reference claims\n   428→- [ ] Step 4: Create structured summary\n   429→- [ ] Step 5: Verify citations\n   430→```\n   431→\n   432→**Step 1: Read all source documents**\n   433→\n   434→Review each document in the `sources/` directory. Note the main arguments and supporting evidence.\n   435→\n   436→**Step 2: Identify key themes**\n   437→\n   438→Look for patterns across sources. What themes appear repeatedly? Where do sources agree or disagree?\n   439→\n   440→**Step 3: Cross-reference claims**\n   441→\n   442→For each major claim, verify it appears in the source material. Note which source supports each point.\n   443→\n   444→**Step 4: Create structured summary**\n   445→\n   446→Organize findings by theme. Include:\n   447→- Main claim\n   448→- Supporting evidence from sources\n   449→- Conflicting viewpoints (if any)"}]},"uuid":"425bd31d-4177-4782-b37f-908e698e45a0","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:22.813Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"f57bca32-a849-4ac0-ada5-b26584d0572b","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"425bd31d-4177-4782-b37f-908e698e45a0","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01Qk3UE7gYzmke2REvLqeyu8","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_014qG4JcX3kFao7QEZzbMoiE","name":"WebSearch","input":{"query":"LLM sycophancy problem instruction following overriding 2024 2025 research bright line rules"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11210,"cache_read_input_tokens":64326,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11210,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERKKNCF99fa8duWzvAJ","type":"assistant","uuid":"460446a8-974f-4f69-971a-af2a11e05eea","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:23.614Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"460446a8-974f-4f69-971a-af2a11e05eea","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01Qk3UE7gYzmke2REvLqeyu8","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01Ws5NQBwwBrJdBmMUuay4Lz","name":"WebSearch","input":{"query":"superpowers-ai claude code skills marketplace persuasion engineering blog 2025"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11210,"cache_read_input_tokens":64326,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11210,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERKKNCF99fa8duWzvAJ","type":"assistant","uuid":"193ad056-2ca0-4069-b7a5-9a3db0a73bc6","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:24.472Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"193ad056-2ca0-4069-b7a5-9a3db0a73bc6","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01Qk3UE7gYzmke2REvLqeyu8","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01V7CjwrSxjCDXArpK8XAo4i","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/systematic-debugging/defense-in-depth.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":"tool_use","stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":11210,"cache_read_input_tokens":64326,"output_tokens":349,"server_tool_use":{"web_search_requests":0,"web_fetch_requests":0},"service_tier":"standard","cache_creation":{"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0,"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":11210},"inference_geo":"","iterations":[],"speed":"standard"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERKKNCF99fa8duWzvAJ","type":"assistant","uuid":"c5dd528a-ba27-4de8-82e9-9e864e120530","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:25.177Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"c5dd528a-ba27-4de8-82e9-9e864e120530","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01V7CjwrSxjCDXArpK8XAo4i","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01V7CjwrSxjCDXArpK8XAo4i","uuid":"c4dc86d6-3a21-408f-8e64-3b6e71e712fb","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:25.179Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"c4dc86d6-3a21-408f-8e64-3b6e71e712fb","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01V7CjwrSxjCDXArpK8XAo4i","toolUseID":"toolu_01V7CjwrSxjCDXArpK8XAo4i","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:25.268Z","uuid":"a7efa23f-d720-47ee-9fa6-db4cec52ecc4","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"c5dd528a-ba27-4de8-82e9-9e864e120530","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01V7CjwrSxjCDXArpK8XAo4i","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→# Defense-in-Depth Validation\n     2→\n     3→## Overview\n     4→\n     5→When you fix a bug caused by invalid data, adding validation at one place feels sufficient. But that single check can be bypassed by different code paths, refactoring, or mocks.\n     6→\n     7→**Core principle:** Validate at EVERY layer data passes through. Make the bug structurally impossible.\n     8→\n     9→## Why Multiple Layers\n    10→\n    11→Single validation: \"We fixed the bug\"\n    12→Multiple layers: \"We made the bug impossible\"\n    13→\n    14→Different layers catch different cases:\n    15→- Entry validation catches most bugs\n    16→- Business logic catches edge cases\n    17→- Environment guards prevent context-specific dangers\n    18→- Debug logging helps when other layers fail\n    19→\n    20→## The Four Layers\n    21→\n    22→### Layer 1: Entry Point Validation\n    23→**Purpose:** Reject obviously invalid input at API boundary\n    24→\n    25→```typescript\n    26→function createProject(name: string, workingDirectory: string) {\n    27→  if (!workingDirectory || workingDirectory.trim() === '') {\n    28→    throw new Error('workingDirectory cannot be empty');\n    29→  }\n    30→  if (!existsSync(workingDirectory)) {\n    31→    throw new Error(`workingDirectory does not exist: ${workingDirectory}`);\n    32→  }\n    33→  if (!statSync(workingDirectory).isDirectory()) {\n    34→    throw new Error(`workingDirectory is not a directory: ${workingDirectory}`);\n    35→  }\n    36→  // ... proceed\n    37→}\n    38→```\n    39→\n    40→### Layer 2: Business Logic Validation\n    41→**Purpose:** Ensure data makes sense for this operation\n    42→\n    43→```typescript\n    44→function initializeWorkspace(projectDir: string, sessionId: string) {\n    45→  if (!projectDir) {\n    46→    throw new Error('projectDir required for workspace initialization');\n    47→  }\n    48→  // ... proceed\n    49→}\n    50→```\n    51→\n    52→### Layer 3: Environment Guards\n    53→**Purpose:** Prevent dangerous operations in specific contexts\n    54→\n    55→```typescript\n    56→async function gitInit(directory: string) {\n    57→  // In tests, refuse git init outside temp directories\n    58→  if (process.env.NODE_ENV === 'test') {\n    59→    const normalized = normalize(resolve(directory));\n    60→    const tmpDir = normalize(resolve(tmpdir()));\n    61→\n    62→    if (!normalized.startsWith(tmpDir)) {\n    63→      throw new Error(\n    64→        `Refusing git init outside temp dir during tests: ${directory}`\n    65→      );\n    66→    }\n    67→  }\n    68→  // ... proceed\n    69→}\n    70→```\n    71→\n    72→### Layer 4: Debug Instrumentation\n    73→**Purpose:** Capture context for forensics\n    74→\n    75→```typescript\n    76→async function gitInit(directory: string) {\n    77→  const stack = new Error().stack;\n    78→  logger.debug('About to git init', {\n    79→    directory,\n    80→    cwd: process.cwd(),\n    81→    stack,\n    82→  });\n    83→  // ... proceed\n    84→}\n    85→```\n    86→\n    87→## Applying the Pattern\n    88→\n    89→When you find a bug:\n    90→\n    91→1. **Trace the data flow** - Where does bad value originate? Where used?\n    92→2. **Map all checkpoints** - List every point data passes through\n    93→3. **Add validation at each layer** - Entry, business, environment, debug\n    94→4. **Test each layer** - Try to bypass layer 1, verify layer 2 catches it\n    95→\n    96→## Example from Session\n    97→\n    98→Bug: Empty `projectDir` caused `git init` in source code\n    99→\n   100→**Data flow:**\n   101→1. Test setup → empty string\n   102→2. `Project.create(name, '')`\n   103→3. `WorkspaceManager.createWorkspace('')`\n   104→4. `git init` runs in `process.cwd()`\n   105→\n   106→**Four layers added:**\n   107→- Layer 1: `Project.create()` validates not empty/exists/writable\n   108→- Layer 2: `WorkspaceManager` validates projectDir not empty\n   109→- Layer 3: `WorktreeManager` refuses git init outside tmpdir in tests\n   110→- Layer 4: Stack trace logging before git init\n   111→\n   112→**Result:** All 1847 tests passed, bug impossible to reproduce\n   113→\n   114→## Key Insight\n   115→\n   116→All four layers were necessary. During testing, each layer caught bugs the others missed:\n   117→- Different code paths bypassed entry validation\n   118→- Mocks bypassed business logic checks\n   119→- Edge cases on different platforms needed environment guards\n   120→- Debug logging identified structural misuse\n   121→\n   122→**Don't stop at one validation point.** Add checks at every layer.\n   123→"}]},"uuid":"a4cdfd84-75a8-4803-9849-629dbd7749a9","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:25.268Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"c5dd528a-ba27-4de8-82e9-9e864e120530","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"a4cdfd84-75a8-4803-9849-629dbd7749a9","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"query_update","query":"LLM sycophancy problem instruction following overriding 2024 2025 research"},"toolUseID":"search-progress-1","parentToolUseID":"toolu_014qG4JcX3kFao7QEZzbMoiE","uuid":"46e5d5ee-101b-4c8c-b4f5-7092d496bea3","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:25.748Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"46e5d5ee-101b-4c8c-b4f5-7092d496bea3","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"query_update","query":"superpowers-ai claude code skills marketplace persuasion engineering blog 2025"},"toolUseID":"search-progress-1","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01Ws5NQBwwBrJdBmMUuay4Lz","uuid":"f9058317-bedf-4a6a-bf5b-e5479bed180d","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:26.736Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"f9058317-bedf-4a6a-bf5b-e5479bed180d","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"search_results_received","resultCount":10,"query":"LLM sycophancy problem instruction following overriding 2024 2025 research"},"toolUseID":"srvtoolu_01TAn8LXmUofkST6xf2UzKrQ","parentToolUseID":"toolu_014qG4JcX3kFao7QEZzbMoiE","uuid":"6b6c393b-96de-4db0-9e74-5abcf139139b","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:27.098Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"6b6c393b-96de-4db0-9e74-5abcf139139b","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"search_results_received","resultCount":10,"query":"superpowers-ai claude code skills marketplace persuasion engineering blog 2025"},"toolUseID":"srvtoolu_014Q9W4WyY3cF52Z3dQKVTsA","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01Ws5NQBwwBrJdBmMUuay4Lz","uuid":"24992a5a-aaac-4757-b767-dba464539242","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:28.414Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"460446a8-974f-4f69-971a-af2a11e05eea","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_014qG4JcX3kFao7QEZzbMoiE","type":"tool_result","content":"Web search results for query: \"LLM sycophancy problem instruction following overriding 2024 2025 research bright line rules\"\n\nLinks: [{\"title\":\"When Truth Is Overridden: Uncovering the Internal Origins of Sycophancy in Large Language Models\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/html/2508.02087v1\"},{\"title\":\"When helpfulness backfires: LLMs and the risk of false medical information due to sycophantic behavior | npj Digital Medicine\",\"url\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-025-02008-z\"},{\"title\":\"W H I T E P A P E R The Sycophancy Problem in Large Language Models\",\"url\":\"https://jinaldesai.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/AI_Sycophancy_Whitepaper_JinalDesai.pdf\"},{\"title\":\"Sycophancy in Large Language Models: Causes and Mitigations\",\"url\":\"https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394609269_Sycophancy_in_Large_Language_Models_Causes_and_Mitigations\"},{\"title\":\"Challenging the Evaluator: LLM Sycophancy Under User ...\",\"url\":\"https://aclanthology.org/2025.findings-emnlp.1222.pdf\"},{\"title\":\"Sycophancy Is Not One Thing: Causal Separation of Sycophantic Behaviors in LLMs | OpenReview\",\"url\":\"https://openreview.net/forum?id=d24zTCznJu\"},{\"title\":\"Argument Driven Sycophancy in Large Language Models\",\"url\":\"https://aclanthology.org/2025.findings-emnlp.1241.pdf\"},{\"title\":\"000 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019\",\"url\":\"https://openreview.net/pdf?id=igbRHKEiAs\"},{\"title\":\"Checking your browser - reCAPTCHA\",\"url\":\"https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12534679/\"},{\"title\":\"[2411.15287] Sycophancy in Large Language Models: Causes and Mitigations\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.15287\"}]\n\nBased on the web search results, I found substantial recent research on LLM sycophancy, instruction following, and related issues from 2024-2025. Here's what the current research reveals:\n\n## Definition and Core Problem\n\nSycophancy in LLMs is defined as the model's tendency to conform to a user's explicitly stated opinion, even when that opinion is incorrect. Large language models exhibit a vulnerability arising from being trained to be helpful: a tendency to comply with illogical requests that would generate false information, even when they have the knowledge to identify the request as illogical.\n\n## Instruction Following Override Mechanism\n\nLLMs often defer to user input when challenged in a follow-up conversational turn, but when asked to evaluate identical conflicting responses in an evaluative setting, they frequently identify the correct response. This suggests the models have the knowledge but prioritize instruction following over accuracy.\n\n## Mechanistic Understanding (2024-2025)\n\nRecent research has identified the underlying computational structures:\n\n- Sycophancy has a linear structure in the activation space of transformer-based LLMs — sycophantic behavior corresponds to identifiable directions in the model's internal representation space, and it's possible to \"steer\" model activations away from the sycophancy direction at inference time without retraining.\n\n- Sycophancy can be decomposed into sycophantic agreement and sycophantic praise, with each behavior encoded along distinct linear directions in latent space; each behavior can be independently amplified or suppressed without affecting the others.\n\n## Multiple Origins (Not a Single Mechanism)\n\nSycophancy stems from three reinforcing sources: pre-training data rich in flattery and weak in factual grounding; post-training processes that reward user agreement; and the limited effectiveness of existing mitigation techniques. These multiple origins suggest that sycophancy may be more resistant to mitigation than other LLM operational issues.\n\n## Empirical Severity\n\nMedical domain testing showed high initial compliance (up to 100%) across all models prioritizing helpfulness over logical consistency, though prompt engineering and fine-tuning improved rejection rates on illogical requests.\n\nThe research indicates this is a fundamental alignment challenge where instruction-following and helpfulness training can override factual knowledge that the models actually possess.\n\n\nREMINDER: You MUST include the sources above in your response to the user using markdown hyperlinks."}]},"uuid":"39c9a445-cd6a-4d51-909a-5bb576176ca0","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:34.452Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"460446a8-974f-4f69-971a-af2a11e05eea","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"193ad056-2ca0-4069-b7a5-9a3db0a73bc6","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01Ws5NQBwwBrJdBmMUuay4Lz","type":"tool_result","content":"Web search results for query: \"superpowers-ai claude code skills marketplace persuasion engineering blog 2025\"\n\nLinks: [{\"title\":\"Superpowers: How I'm using coding agents in October 2025\",\"url\":\"https://blog.fsck.com/2025/10/09/superpowers/\"},{\"title\":\"Superpowers: The Skills Framework That Makes Claude Code a Disciplined Engineering Partner | My MCP Shelf Blog\",\"url\":\"https://www.mymcpshelf.com/blog/superpowers-skills-framework-claude-code/\"},{\"title\":\"Skills for Claude!\",\"url\":\"https://blog.fsck.com/2025/10/16/skills-for-claude/\"},{\"title\":\"Superpowers: the Claude Code plugin that enforces what you already know you should do - ddewhurst\",\"url\":\"https://ddewhurst.com/blog/superpowers-claude-code-plugin-enforces-what-you-should-do/\"},{\"title\":\"Superpowers for Claude Code: The #1 Skills Framework That Makes AI Actually Ship Production Code\",\"url\":\"https://emelia.io/hub/superpowers-claude-code-framework\"},{\"title\":\"Superpowers: The Technology to \\\"Persuade\\\" AI Agents—Why Psychological Principles Change Code Quality - DEV Community\",\"url\":\"https://dev.to/tumf/superpowers-the-technology-to-persuade-ai-agents-why-psychological-principles-change-code-quality-2d2f\"},{\"title\":\"GitHub - obra/superpowers: An agentic skills framework & software development methodology that works. · GitHub\",\"url\":\"https://github.com/obra/superpowers\"},{\"title\":\"Superpowers: How I’m using coding agents in October 2025\",\"url\":\"https://simonwillison.net/2025/Oct/10/superpowers/\"},{\"title\":\"Superpowers to turn Claude Code into a real senior developer\",\"url\":\"https://betazeta.dev/blog/claude-code-superpowers/\"},{\"title\":\"Claude Code Plugin System Released; Jesse Vincent Showcases Customizations - AI News\",\"url\":\"https://news.juno-labs.com/item/554\"}]\n\nBased on the search results, here's what I found about Superpowers, Claude Code skills, the marketplace, and persuasion engineering:\n\n## Superpowers Overview\n\nSuperpowers is an agentic skills framework that injects senior engineering discipline directly into Claude Code's workflow. It's a Claude Code plugin that gives your AI assistant a structured set of mandatory processes to follow when coding.\n\nThe plugin launched on October 9, 2025 — the same day Anthropic shipped their plugin system for Claude Code. Created by Jesse Vincent (known as obra on GitHub), this agentic skills framework and software development methodology has become the most popular plugin in the Claude Code ecosystem, with over 93,000 GitHub stars.\n\n## Core Workflow\n\nThe core of Superpowers is a mandatory progression: brainstorm → plan → implement → review. Each phase has its own skill with explicit rules about what must happen before the next phase begins.\n\nThe test-driven-development skill enforces strict RED-GREEN-REFACTOR: Code written before tests exist is automatically deleted. This isn't a suggestion—it's enforced.\n\n## Persuasion Engineering\n\nJesse Vincent discovered that classical persuasion principles (Cialdini's 7 principles) work on LLMs just like on humans. The skills are designed with: Authority: \"Skills are mandatory when they exist\" · Commitment: The agent must announce which skill it's using · Social proof: \"This is how senior engineers work\" · Scarcity: \"Production is down, costing $5K/minute—check the skill or start debugging\"\n\nVincent references peer-reviewed research on applying Robert Cialdini's persuasion principles — authority, commitment, reciprocity, scarcity — to LLM behaviour, and uses these principles to pressure-test skills.\n\n## Marketplace Integration\n\nYou'll need Claude Code 2.0.13 or so. Fire it up and then run: /plugin marketplace add obra/superpowers-marketplace /plugin install superpowers@superpowers-marketplace\n\n\nREMINDER: You MUST include the sources above in your response to the user using markdown hyperlinks."}]},"uuid":"9ece0b5d-112e-40b9-8303-a8853632bdc8","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:35:35.376Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"193ad056-2ca0-4069-b7a5-9a3db0a73bc6","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"9ece0b5d-112e-40b9-8303-a8853632bdc8","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_017b8Wc2yHVe541FiEBrutAh","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"\n\nNow let me look at the Wazir skills to understand what we're rewriting, and get a few more details from the research."}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":5601,"cache_read_input_tokens":75536,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":5601,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERSymhSaGgsXc2J8eNH","type":"assistant","uuid":"5be62331-e9e1-4d1d-a151-cf4682fc9d88","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:04.769Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5be62331-e9e1-4d1d-a151-cf4682fc9d88","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_017b8Wc2yHVe541FiEBrutAh","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_012QwAQVAxLLQfxvwizUq2Ra","name":"Glob","input":{"pattern":"**/*.md","path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":5601,"cache_read_input_tokens":75536,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":5601,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERSymhSaGgsXc2J8eNH","type":"assistant","uuid":"0c52841f-4e04-4b54-bc19-80a070da5def","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:05.727Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"0c52841f-4e04-4b54-bc19-80a070da5def","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Glob","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_012QwAQVAxLLQfxvwizUq2Ra","toolUseID":"toolu_012QwAQVAxLLQfxvwizUq2Ra","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:05.757Z","uuid":"6fa957d9-06bf-4657-afe6-546d2d4710d4","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"0c52841f-4e04-4b54-bc19-80a070da5def","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_012QwAQVAxLLQfxvwizUq2Ra","type":"tool_result","content":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/writing-skills/anthropic-best-practices.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/writing-skills/persuasion-principles.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/README.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/debugging/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/design/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/executing-plans/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/humanize/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/receiving-code-review/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/run-audit/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/scan-project/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/subagent-driven-development/code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/subagent-driven-development/implementer-prompt.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/subagent-driven-development/spec-reviewer-prompt.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/tdd/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/using-git-worktrees/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/using-skills/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/writing-skills/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/prepare-next/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/codex-cli/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/gemini-cli/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/claude-cli/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/init-pipeline/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/self-audit/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/skill-research/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/wazir/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/clarifier/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/executor/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/reviewer/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/writing-plans/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/verification/SKILL.md"}]},"uuid":"3daf13a8-0089-477e-99cd-87ffc68b169c","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:05.757Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"0c52841f-4e04-4b54-bc19-80a070da5def","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"3daf13a8-0089-477e-99cd-87ffc68b169c","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_017b8Wc2yHVe541FiEBrutAh","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01Co3CUzpFqwkbHXXVct1bCH","name":"Glob","input":{"pattern":"**/SKILL.md","path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":5601,"cache_read_input_tokens":75536,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":5601,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERSymhSaGgsXc2J8eNH","type":"assistant","uuid":"b32a5207-24a7-4874-b635-a17e8b058c96","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:06.681Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"b32a5207-24a7-4874-b635-a17e8b058c96","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Glob","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01Co3CUzpFqwkbHXXVct1bCH","toolUseID":"toolu_01Co3CUzpFqwkbHXXVct1bCH","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:07.007Z","uuid":"be3a4870-02f5-4679-916b-2b4fbdb1673a","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"b32a5207-24a7-4874-b635-a17e8b058c96","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01Co3CUzpFqwkbHXXVct1bCH","type":"tool_result","content":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/debugging/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/design/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/executing-plans/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/humanize/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/receiving-code-review/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/run-audit/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/scan-project/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/tdd/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/using-git-worktrees/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/using-skills/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/writing-skills/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/prepare-next/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/codex-cli/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/gemini-cli/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/claude-cli/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/init-pipeline/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/self-audit/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/skill-research/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/wazir/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/clarifier/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/executor/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/reviewer/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/writing-plans/SKILL.md\n/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/verification/SKILL.md"}]},"uuid":"fb9272b2-228a-437b-9edb-7feaf830e447","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:07.007Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"b32a5207-24a7-4874-b635-a17e8b058c96","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"fb9272b2-228a-437b-9edb-7feaf830e447","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_017b8Wc2yHVe541FiEBrutAh","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_017tPjhgcNTBMyxu3a6ib2cd","name":"Grep","input":{"pattern":"rationalization|Red Flags|Iron Law|MUST|NEVER|No exceptions","path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills","output_mode":"files_with_matches"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":5601,"cache_read_input_tokens":75536,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":5601,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERSymhSaGgsXc2J8eNH","type":"assistant","uuid":"45354e9b-c15b-47a4-a910-053d9479fd9d","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:08.121Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"45354e9b-c15b-47a4-a910-053d9479fd9d","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Grep","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_017tPjhgcNTBMyxu3a6ib2cd","parentToolUseID":"toolu_017tPjhgcNTBMyxu3a6ib2cd","uuid":"010ae099-2212-4d23-aa8a-a542e7d512fb","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:08.124Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"010ae099-2212-4d23-aa8a-a542e7d512fb","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Grep","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_017tPjhgcNTBMyxu3a6ib2cd","toolUseID":"toolu_017tPjhgcNTBMyxu3a6ib2cd","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:08.210Z","uuid":"cf92f082-2370-4174-844a-92ebebe77fa2","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"45354e9b-c15b-47a4-a910-053d9479fd9d","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_017tPjhgcNTBMyxu3a6ib2cd","type":"tool_result","content":"Found 13 files\nskills/reviewer/SKILL.md\nskills/clarifier/SKILL.md\nskills/wazir/SKILL.md\nskills/self-audit/SKILL.md\nskills/skill-research/SKILL.md\nskills/writing-skills/SKILL.md\nskills/using-skills/SKILL.md\nskills/subagent-driven-development/spec-reviewer-prompt.md\nskills/using-git-worktrees/SKILL.md\nskills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md\nskills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md\nskills/receiving-code-review/SKILL.md\nskills/writing-skills/persuasion-principles.md"}]},"uuid":"1ab0788d-e20a-47bc-82b7-8cc56b31a398","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:08.210Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"45354e9b-c15b-47a4-a910-053d9479fd9d","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"1ab0788d-e20a-47bc-82b7-8cc56b31a398","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_017b8Wc2yHVe541FiEBrutAh","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01WqKsoMxu2yrx15ChSBZa5u","name":"WebSearch","input":{"query":"\"prompt engineering\" instruction specificity LLM compliance \"implementation intentions\" bright-line rules vs vague instructions research"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":"tool_use","stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":5601,"cache_read_input_tokens":75536,"output_tokens":362,"server_tool_use":{"web_search_requests":0,"web_fetch_requests":0},"service_tier":"standard","cache_creation":{"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0,"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":5601},"inference_geo":"","iterations":[],"speed":"standard"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERSymhSaGgsXc2J8eNH","type":"assistant","uuid":"1b9274c7-4ce4-47e1-a6ff-856ffc1062fb","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:09.203Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"1b9274c7-4ce4-47e1-a6ff-856ffc1062fb","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"query_update","query":"prompt engineering instruction specificity LLM compliance bright-line rules"},"toolUseID":"search-progress-1","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01WqKsoMxu2yrx15ChSBZa5u","uuid":"1e043c8f-6ffb-4350-95b9-6f3face17e9d","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:12.201Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"1e043c8f-6ffb-4350-95b9-6f3face17e9d","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"search_results_received","resultCount":10,"query":"prompt engineering instruction specificity LLM compliance bright-line rules"},"toolUseID":"srvtoolu_01PCAoub7Fn7GYJrvwQMLRa4","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01WqKsoMxu2yrx15ChSBZa5u","uuid":"5dba39fa-58ce-4b0b-8afa-6a9abe2dcd1d","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:13.948Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5dba39fa-58ce-4b0b-8afa-6a9abe2dcd1d","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"query_update","query":"implementation intentions bright-line rules vague instructions research psychology"},"toolUseID":"search-progress-3","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01WqKsoMxu2yrx15ChSBZa5u","uuid":"63e58503-f814-4871-b1f8-ab053fa2ee3a","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:14.909Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"63e58503-f814-4871-b1f8-ab053fa2ee3a","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"search_results_received","resultCount":10,"query":"implementation intentions bright-line rules vague instructions research psychology"},"toolUseID":"srvtoolu_019HenTCahXHbwyxmWCsRDHN","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01WqKsoMxu2yrx15ChSBZa5u","uuid":"d8ac6239-b5b0-4a91-b9f1-e4391ab60fb1","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:17.112Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"d8ac6239-b5b0-4a91-b9f1-e4391ab60fb1","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"query_update","query":"LLM instruction compliance research specific rules vague instructions behavior"},"toolUseID":"search-progress-5","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01WqKsoMxu2yrx15ChSBZa5u","uuid":"1964e0eb-b96e-4970-b4b0-14c3d2d7658e","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:17.678Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"1964e0eb-b96e-4970-b4b0-14c3d2d7658e","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"search_results_received","resultCount":10,"query":"LLM instruction compliance research specific rules vague instructions behavior"},"toolUseID":"srvtoolu_01DuazR9ppigLGCooMVEZU8Z","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01WqKsoMxu2yrx15ChSBZa5u","uuid":"f5c64e83-6125-4602-8db4-ce170ae9ff56","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:19.392Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"f5c64e83-6125-4602-8db4-ce170ae9ff56","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"query_update","query":"\"specific instructions\" vs \"vague instructions\" LLM performance compliance effectiveness"},"toolUseID":"search-progress-7","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01WqKsoMxu2yrx15ChSBZa5u","uuid":"ad2f000c-ffcd-4f1c-af51-3aa88035cb5d","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:19.911Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"ad2f000c-ffcd-4f1c-af51-3aa88035cb5d","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"search_results_received","resultCount":0,"query":"\"specific instructions\" vs \"vague instructions\" LLM performance compliance effectiveness"},"toolUseID":"srvtoolu_01PThYZhWHXuxiyv4a26ziwb","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01WqKsoMxu2yrx15ChSBZa5u","uuid":"716bd151-5bbd-4c9b-ae4c-60866bacea68","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:21.127Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"1b9274c7-4ce4-47e1-a6ff-856ffc1062fb","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01WqKsoMxu2yrx15ChSBZa5u","type":"tool_result","content":"Web search results for query: \"\"prompt engineering\" instruction specificity LLM compliance \"implementation intentions\" bright-line rules vs vague instructions research\"\n\nLinks: [{\"title\":\"The Ultimate Guide to Prompt Engineering in 2026 | Lakera – Protecting AI teams that disrupt the world.\",\"url\":\"https://www.lakera.ai/blog/prompt-engineering-guide\"},{\"title\":\"Best practices for LLM prompt engineering • Palantir\",\"url\":\"https://www.palantir.com/docs/foundry/aip/best-practices-prompt-engineering\"},{\"title\":\"The Beginner's Guide to LLM Prompting | Haystack\",\"url\":\"https://haystack.deepset.ai/blog/beginners-guide-to-llm-prompting\"},{\"title\":\"Best practices for LLM optimization for call and message compliance: prompt engineering, RAG, and fine-tuning | by Simon Greenman | Medium\",\"url\":\"https://medium.com/@sgreenman/best-practices-for-llm-optimization-for-call-and-message-compliance-prompt-engineering-rag-and-45ccca32ff17\"},{\"title\":\"Prompt engineering concepts - Amazon Bedrock\",\"url\":\"https://docs.aws.amazon.com/bedrock/latest/userguide/prompt-engineering-guidelines.html\"},{\"title\":\"Effective Prompt Writing - Generative AI & Legal Research - LibGuides at Widener Law Library\",\"url\":\"https://libguides.law.widener.edu/c.php?g=1342893&p=9902106\"},{\"title\":\"26 principles for prompt engineering to increase LLM accuracy 57%\",\"url\":\"https://codingscape.com/blog/26-principles-for-prompt-engineering-to-increase-llm-accuracy\"},{\"title\":\"PromptHub Blog: Prompt Engineering Principles for 2024\",\"url\":\"https://www.prompthub.us/blog/prompt-engineering-principles-for-2024\"},{\"title\":\"Prompt Hygiene for Engineers. Ten battle-tested rules that keep LLMs… | by Codastra | Medium\",\"url\":\"https://medium.com/@2nick2patel2/prompt-hygiene-for-engineers-edc4cabdbc28\"},{\"title\":\"Design Smarter Prompts and Boost Your LLM Output: Real Tricks from an AI Engineer’s Toolbox | Towards Data Science\",\"url\":\"https://towardsdatascience.com/boost-your-llm-outputdesign-smarter-prompts-real-tricks-from-an-ai-engineers-toolbox/\"}]\n\nI found research on prompt engineering and instruction specificity. Now let me search more specifically for academic research on implementation intentions and bright-line rules:\n\nLinks: [{\"title\":\"Implementation intention - Wikipedia\",\"url\":\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implementation_intention\"},{\"title\":\"Implementation Intentions | Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences (DCCPS)\",\"url\":\"https://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/brp/research/constructs/implementation-intentions\"},{\"title\":\"Implementation Intentions: The Science of 'If-Then' Planning for Better Health\",\"url\":\"https://thriva.co/hub/behaviour-change/implementation-intentions\"},{\"title\":\"Defining Implementation Intentions and How to Make Them Work In The 21st Century - Durmonski.com\",\"url\":\"https://durmonski.com/psychology/implementation-intentions/\"},{\"title\":\"The Limits of Simple Implementation Intentions: Evidence from a Field Experiment on Making Plans to Exercise - PMC\",\"url\":\"https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7872013/\"},{\"title\":\"Implementation Intentions Strong Effects of Simple Plans Peter M. Gollwitzer\",\"url\":\"https://www.prospectivepsych.org/sites/default/files/pictures/Gollwitzer_Implementation-intentions-1999.pdf\"},{\"title\":\"Promoting the translation of intentions into action by implementation intentions: behavioral effects and physiological correlates - PMC\",\"url\":\"https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4500900/\"},{\"title\":\"Full article: If-then planning\",\"url\":\"https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10463283.2020.1808936\"},{\"title\":\"(PDF) Implementation Intentions\",\"url\":\"https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232586066_Implementation_Intentions_Strong_Effects_of_Simple_Plans\"},{\"title\":\"Implementation Intentions: A Tried and True Approach to Accomplishing Your Goals\",\"url\":\"https://leantime.io/how-to-use-implementation-intentions-to-reach-your-goals/\"}]\n\nNow let me search for research specifically connecting these concepts to LLM behavior and instruction compliance:\n\nLinks: [{\"title\":\"The Instruction Gap: LLMs get lost in Following Instruction\",\"url\":\"https://www.arxiv.org/pdf/2601.03269\"},{\"title\":\"The Instruction Gap: LLMs get lost in Following Instruction\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/html/2601.03269v1\"},{\"title\":\"Do LLMs Know Internally When They Follow Instructions? - Apple Machine Learning Research\",\"url\":\"https://machinelearning.apple.com/research/do-llms-know-internally\"},{\"title\":\"Preprint. Under review. REASONING UP THE INSTRUCTION LADDER\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2511.04694\"},{\"title\":\"Can LLMs Follow Simple Rules?\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/html/2311.04235v2\"},{\"title\":\"Deconstructing Instruction-Following: A New Benchmark for Granular Evaluation of Large Language Model Instruction Compliance Abilities\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/html/2601.18554\"},{\"title\":\"Instruction Following Prompts\",\"url\":\"https://apxml.com/courses/prompt-engineering-llm-application-development/chapter-2-advanced-prompting-strategies/instruction-following-prompts\"},{\"title\":\"(PDF) The Instruction Gap: LLMs get lost in Following Instruction\",\"url\":\"https://www.researchgate.net/publication/399558992_The_Instruction_Gap_LLMs_get_lost_in_Following_Instruction\"},{\"title\":\"LLMs can be easily Confused by Instructional Distractions\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/html/2502.04362v1\"},{\"title\":\"Reasoning Up the Instruction Ladder for Controllable Language Models\",\"url\":\"https://arxiv.org/html/2511.04694\"}]\n\nExcellent! I've found research connecting these concepts. Let me do one more search to see if there's specific research on the comparison between specific rules and vague instructions:\n\nNo links found.\n\nBased on my search results, I've gathered comprehensive information about prompt engineering, instruction specificity, implementation intentions, and LLM compliance. Here's what I found:\n\n## Summary of Research Findings\n\n### Prompt Engineering and Instruction Specificity\n\nAmbiguity is one of the most common causes of poor LLM output, and instead of issuing vague instructions, specific, structured, and goal-oriented phrasing should be used. The more specific your prompt, the more consistent and usable the output becomes.\n\nPrompts that require LLMs to infer or deduce meaning often leave too much room for interpretation, resulting in poor performance, and performance is positively correlated with more explicit and specific prompting. However, while explicitness often aids in reducing ambiguity, the optimal prompt structure appears to be highly context-dependent, requiring a nuanced understanding of the interplay between the specificity of language and the necessity for interpretive leeway.\n\n### Implementation Intentions and Goal Specificity\n\nThe psychology literature on implementation intentions strongly supports specificity. A person will perform better when set goals are challenging and specific as compared to goals that are challenging but vague (known as the goal-specificity effect).\n\nImplementation intentions, a strategy developed by psychologist Peter Gollwitzer, transform vague intentions into specific plans using simple 'if-then' statements: \"If [situation X] occurs, then I will perform [action Y].\" By forming implementation intentions, people can strategically switch from conscious and effortful control of their goal-directed behaviors to being automatically controlled by selected situational cues, as when people furnish goal intentions with implementation intentions that specify when, where, and how they want to exercise.\n\n### LLM Instruction Following and Compliance\n\nRecent research reveals significant challenges in LLM instruction compliance. The \"instruction gap\" is a fundamental challenge where models excel at general tasks but struggle with precise instruction adherence required for enterprise deployment.\n\nLLMs often fail to follow even simple and clear instructions, and a deeper understanding of how LLMs' internal states relate to instruction-following outcomes is required to improve instruction-following behavior.\n\nAfter evaluating leading proprietary models and over 100 open-weight models, the vast majority of models fail to follow rules on a significant fraction of test cases.\n\nIFEval assesses adherence to precise lexical and formatting rules, such as word counts or keyword mentions, that allow for exact, rule-based verification. Additionally, when the target input itself resembles an instruction, the model struggles to decide whether to follow the primary instruction or the embedded instruction within the target input, potentially leading to degraded performance or unintended outputs.\n\n\nREMINDER: You MUST include the sources above in your response to the user using markdown hyperlinks."}]},"uuid":"2ece2329-f320-46fc-b6d3-ad8cdbe4ebb6","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:37:30.183Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"1b9274c7-4ce4-47e1-a6ff-856ffc1062fb","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"2ece2329-f320-46fc-b6d3-ad8cdbe4ebb6","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01EhNCdrZXyBQzrub4VL75QP","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"\n\nNow I have comprehensive material. Let me read a few of the Wazir-specific skills to understand their current state before writing the playbook."}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":4811,"cache_read_input_tokens":81137,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":4811,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERXLENc5nxWMmqXDAuy","type":"assistant","uuid":"be6f76d4-55f8-49b6-bc33-a9c88006a064","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:03.372Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"be6f76d4-55f8-49b6-bc33-a9c88006a064","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01EhNCdrZXyBQzrub4VL75QP","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_019TcKuRkxPeYVipTHs3LNdx","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/wazir/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":4811,"cache_read_input_tokens":81137,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":4811,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERXLENc5nxWMmqXDAuy","type":"assistant","uuid":"b4d6f61a-31e9-4581-b5a4-11487d89f2c5","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:04.378Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"b4d6f61a-31e9-4581-b5a4-11487d89f2c5","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_019TcKuRkxPeYVipTHs3LNdx","parentToolUseID":"toolu_019TcKuRkxPeYVipTHs3LNdx","uuid":"80d43a97-3367-4c2e-90db-6544610bb283","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:04.379Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"80d43a97-3367-4c2e-90db-6544610bb283","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01EhNCdrZXyBQzrub4VL75QP","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01KwCc9N1YxxTv6XXnzCDRTM","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/clarifier/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":4811,"cache_read_input_tokens":81137,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":4811,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERXLENc5nxWMmqXDAuy","type":"assistant","uuid":"d0727f2a-689b-482a-982c-64b3d4881333","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:04.455Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"d0727f2a-689b-482a-982c-64b3d4881333","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01KwCc9N1YxxTv6XXnzCDRTM","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01KwCc9N1YxxTv6XXnzCDRTM","uuid":"06bcfc43-6284-4243-bd39-49558795c8c5","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:04.455Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"06bcfc43-6284-4243-bd39-49558795c8c5","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01EhNCdrZXyBQzrub4VL75QP","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01Va5XZrMcxLHK4RsdweHzHQ","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/executor/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":4811,"cache_read_input_tokens":81137,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":4811,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERXLENc5nxWMmqXDAuy","type":"assistant","uuid":"fbe8b3d3-5f0a-42f9-a1f5-08025deed6ba","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:04.750Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"fbe8b3d3-5f0a-42f9-a1f5-08025deed6ba","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01Va5XZrMcxLHK4RsdweHzHQ","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01Va5XZrMcxLHK4RsdweHzHQ","uuid":"e503c365-85a8-4da3-b687-2366dd2ac91f","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:04.751Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"e503c365-85a8-4da3-b687-2366dd2ac91f","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01EhNCdrZXyBQzrub4VL75QP","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01DJU2FPExB9jjuMpvVJYwEM","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/reviewer/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":4811,"cache_read_input_tokens":81137,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":4811,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERXLENc5nxWMmqXDAuy","type":"assistant","uuid":"1be8d9ed-3ae2-4db7-9103-433c7244f224","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:05.387Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"1be8d9ed-3ae2-4db7-9103-433c7244f224","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01DJU2FPExB9jjuMpvVJYwEM","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01DJU2FPExB9jjuMpvVJYwEM","uuid":"9139db4a-f2e1-428f-a0d8-0baae1d69a3f","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:05.390Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"9139db4a-f2e1-428f-a0d8-0baae1d69a3f","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01EhNCdrZXyBQzrub4VL75QP","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_01MA53eNs6BCavndsAnHBzdU","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/verification/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":null,"stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":4811,"cache_read_input_tokens":81137,"cache_creation":{"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":4811,"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0},"output_tokens":1,"service_tier":"standard","inference_geo":"not_available"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERXLENc5nxWMmqXDAuy","type":"assistant","uuid":"5946f565-3a41-4bc8-a011-9bf3abe16578","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:05.624Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5946f565-3a41-4bc8-a011-9bf3abe16578","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_01MA53eNs6BCavndsAnHBzdU","parentToolUseID":"toolu_01MA53eNs6BCavndsAnHBzdU","uuid":"8dbe0f3f-7dfd-4a20-90d4-f82e8787319a","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:05.625Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"8dbe0f3f-7dfd-4a20-90d4-f82e8787319a","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01MA53eNs6BCavndsAnHBzdU","toolUseID":"toolu_01MA53eNs6BCavndsAnHBzdU","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:05.693Z","uuid":"90ee3f67-4296-458a-93d3-80cfb5348614","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5946f565-3a41-4bc8-a011-9bf3abe16578","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01MA53eNs6BCavndsAnHBzdU","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: wz:verification\n     3→description: Use before claiming work is complete. Every completion claim needs fresh command evidence or another deterministic proof path.\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Verification\n     7→\n     8→## Command Routing\n     9→Follow the Canonical Command Matrix in `hooks/routing-matrix.json`.\n    10→- Large commands (test runners, builds, diffs, dependency trees, linting) → context-mode tools\n    11→- Small commands (git status, ls, pwd, wazir CLI) → native Bash\n    12→- If context-mode unavailable, fall back to native Bash with warning\n    13→\n    14→## Codebase Exploration\n    15→1. Query `wazir index search-symbols <query>` first\n    16→2. Use `wazir recall file <path> --tier L1` for targeted reads\n    17→3. Fall back to direct file reads ONLY for files identified by index queries\n    18→4. Maximum 10 direct file reads without a justifying index query\n    19→5. If no index exists: `wazir index build && wazir index summarize --tier all`\n    20→\n    21→## Proof of Implementation\n    22→\n    23→1. Detect project type: `detectRunnableType(projectRoot)` → web | api | cli | library\n    24→2. Collect evidence: `collectProof(taskSpec, runConfig)`\n    25→3. Save evidence to `.wazir/runs/<id>/artifacts/proof-<task>.json`\n    26→\n    27→**For runnable output (web/api/cli):** Run the application and capture evidence (build output, screenshots, curl responses, CLI output).\n    28→\n    29→**For non-runnable output (library/config/skills):** Run lint, format check, type check, and tests. All must pass.\n    30→\n    31→Evidence collection uses `tooling/src/verify/proof-collector.js`.\n    32→\n    33→## Verification Requirements\n    34→\n    35→Every completion claim must include:\n    36→\n    37→- what was verified\n    38→- the exact command or deterministic check\n    39→- the actual result\n    40→\n    41→## Proof Collection\n    42→\n    43→Use `proof-collector` (`tooling/src/verify/proof-collector.js`) for automated evidence gathering:\n    44→\n    45→1. **`detectRunnableType(projectRoot)`** — detects whether the project is `web`, `api`, `cli`, or `library` from `package.json`. Detection order: `pkg.bin` (cli), web framework deps (web), API framework deps (api), default (library).\n    46→\n    47→2. **`collectProof(projectRoot, opts?)`** — runs type-appropriate verification commands and returns structured evidence:\n    48→   - **web:** `npm run build` + library checks\n    49→   - **api:** library checks (test, tsc, eslint, prettier)\n    50→   - **cli:** `<bin> --help` + library checks\n    51→   - **library:** `npm test`, `tsc --noEmit`, `eslint .`, `prettier --check .`\n    52→\n    53→All commands use `execFileSync` (never shell `exec`) for security. Evidence is returned as `{ type, evidence: [{ check, ok, output }] }`.\n    54→\n    55→### User Output: Before Proof Collection\n    56→\n    57→```\n    58→Collecting proof of implementation. Running:\n    59→1. [check type] — verifies [what it proves]\n    60→2. [check type] — verifies [what it proves]\n    61→Without proof: claims are unverified assertions.\n    62→```\n    63→\n    64→### User Output: After Evidence\n    65→\n    66→```\n    67→Evidence collected:\n    68→- [N] checks passed, [M] failed\n    69→- [specific results per check type]\n    70→Proof artifact saved to: [path]\n    71→```\n    72→\n    73→## Minimum Rules\n    74→\n    75→- no success claim without fresh evidence from the current change\n    76→- always use `proof-collector` for Node.js projects to gather deterministic evidence\n    77→- attach the evidence array to the verification proof artifact\n    78→\n    79→When verification fails:\n    80→\n    81→- do not mark the work complete\n    82→- report the gap honestly\n    83→\n    84→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n    85→- **Question:** \"Verification failed for [specific criteria]. How should we proceed?\"\n    86→- **Options:**\n    87→  1. \"Fix the issue and re-verify\" *(Recommended)*\n    88→  2. \"Accept partial verification with documented gaps\"\n    89→  3. \"Abort and review what went wrong\"\n    90→\n    91→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n    92→"}]},"uuid":"7ca6ae3c-6b62-4165-ac3f-5bd4033187f7","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:05.692Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"5946f565-3a41-4bc8-a011-9bf3abe16578","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"7ca6ae3c-6b62-4165-ac3f-5bd4033187f7","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01EhNCdrZXyBQzrub4VL75QP","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"tool_use","id":"toolu_014VdAxHLrm8i9G77jDZJgEf","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir/skills/self-audit/SKILL.md"},"caller":{"type":"direct"}}],"stop_reason":"tool_use","stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":4811,"cache_read_input_tokens":81137,"output_tokens":422,"server_tool_use":{"web_search_requests":0,"web_fetch_requests":0},"service_tier":"standard","cache_creation":{"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0,"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":4811},"inference_geo":"","iterations":[],"speed":"standard"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERXLENc5nxWMmqXDAuy","type":"assistant","uuid":"e105742b-2ba9-40e8-94e0-03703ca5e6b6","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:06.137Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"e105742b-2ba9-40e8-94e0-03703ca5e6b6","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PreToolUse","hookName":"PreToolUse:Read","command":"node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/pretooluse.mjs"},"toolUseID":"toolu_014VdAxHLrm8i9G77jDZJgEf","parentToolUseID":"toolu_014VdAxHLrm8i9G77jDZJgEf","uuid":"1e989e1a-3578-404c-863c-1bfaf479341f","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:06.137Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"1e989e1a-3578-404c-863c-1bfaf479341f","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01DJU2FPExB9jjuMpvVJYwEM","toolUseID":"toolu_01DJU2FPExB9jjuMpvVJYwEM","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:16.321Z","uuid":"cf336be0-502f-47dc-8f8f-605a2a14130d","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"1be8d9ed-3ae2-4db7-9103-433c7244f224","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01DJU2FPExB9jjuMpvVJYwEM","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: wz:reviewer\n     3→description: Run the review phase — adversarial review of implementation against the approved spec, plan, and verification evidence.\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Reviewer\n     7→\n     8→## Model Annotation\n     9→When multi-model mode is enabled:\n    10→- **Sonnet** for internal review passes (internal-review)\n    11→- **Opus** for final review mode (final-review)\n    12→- **Opus** for spec-challenge mode (spec-harden)\n    13→- **Opus** for design-review mode (design)\n    14→\n    15→## Command Routing\n    16→Follow the Canonical Command Matrix in `hooks/routing-matrix.json`.\n    17→- Large commands (test runners, builds, diffs, dependency trees, linting) → context-mode tools\n    18→- Small commands (git status, ls, pwd, wazir CLI) → native Bash\n    19→- If context-mode unavailable, fall back to native Bash with warning\n    20→\n    21→## Codebase Exploration\n    22→1. Query `wazir index search-symbols <query>` first\n    23→2. Use `wazir recall file <path> --tier L1` for targeted reads\n    24→3. Fall back to direct file reads ONLY for files identified by index queries\n    25→4. Maximum 10 direct file reads without a justifying index query\n    26→5. If no index exists: `wazir index build && wazir index summarize --tier all`\n    27→\n    28→Run the Final Review phase — or any review mode invoked by other phases.\n    29→\n    30→The reviewer role owns all review loops across the pipeline: research-review, clarification-review, spec-challenge, design-review, plan-review, per-task execution review, and final review. Each uses phase-specific dimensions from `docs/reference/review-loop-pattern.md`.\n    31→\n    32→**Key principle for `final` mode:** Compare implementation against the **ORIGINAL INPUT** (briefing + input files), NOT the task specs. The executor's per-task reviewer already validated against task specs — that concern is covered. The final reviewer catches drift: does what we built match what the user actually asked for?\n    33→\n    34→**Reviewer-owned responsibilities** (callers must NOT replicate these):\n    35→1. **Two-tier review** — internal review first (fast, cheap, expertise-loaded), Codex second (fresh eyes on clean code)\n    36→2. **Dimension selection** — the reviewer selects the correct dimension set for the review mode and depth\n    37→3. **Pass counting** — the reviewer tracks pass numbers and enforces the depth-based cap (quick=3, standard=5, deep=7)\n    38→4. **Finding attribution** — each finding is tagged `[Internal]`, `[Codex]`, or `[Both]` based on source\n    39→5. **Dimension set recording** — each review pass file records which canonical dimension set was used, enabling Phase Scoring (first vs final delta)\n    40→6. **Learning pipeline** — ALL findings (internal + Codex) feed into `state.sqlite` and the learning system\n    41→\n    42→## Review Modes\n    43→\n    44→The reviewer operates in different modes depending on the phase. Mode MUST be passed explicitly by the caller (`--mode <mode>`). The reviewer does NOT auto-detect mode from artifact availability. If `--mode` is not provided, ask the user which review to run.\n    45→\n    46→| Mode | Invoked during | Prerequisites | Dimensions | Output |\n    47→|------|---------------|---------------|------------|--------|\n    48→| `final` | After execution + verification | Completed task artifacts, approved spec/plan/design | 9 final-review dims, scored 0-90 | Scored verdict (PASS/FAIL) |\n    49→| `spec-challenge` | After specify | Draft spec artifact | 5 spec/clarification dims | Pass/fix loop, no score |\n    50→| `design-review` | After design approval | Design artifact, approved spec | 5 design-review dims (canonical) | Pass/fix loop, no score |\n    51→| `plan-review` | After planning | Draft plan artifact | 8 plan dims (7 + input coverage) | Pass/fix loop, no score |\n    52→| `task-review` | During execution, per task | Uncommitted changes or `--base` SHA | 5 task-execution dims (correctness, tests, wiring, drift, quality) | Pass/fix loop, no score |\n    53→| `research-review` | During discover | Research artifact | 5 research dims | Pass/fix loop, no score |\n    54→| `clarification-review` | During clarify | Clarification artifact | 5 spec/clarification dims | Pass/fix loop, no score |\n    55→\n    56→Each mode follows the review loop pattern in `docs/reference/review-loop-pattern.md`. Pass counts are fixed by depth (quick=3, standard=5, deep=7). No extension.\n    57→\n    58→### CHANGELOG Enforcement\n    59→\n    60→In `task-review` and `final` modes, flag missing CHANGELOG entries for user-facing changes as **[warning]** severity. User-facing changes include new features, behavior changes, and bug fixes visible to users. Internal changes (refactors, tooling, tests) do not require CHANGELOG entries.\n    61→\n    62→## Prerequisites\n    63→\n    64→Prerequisites depend on the review mode:\n    65→\n    66→### `final` mode\n    67→\n    68→**Phase Prerequisites (Hard Gate):** Before proceeding, verify ALL of these artifacts exist. If ANY is missing, **STOP** and report which are missing.\n    69→\n    70→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/clarification.md`\n    71→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/spec-hardened.md`\n    72→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/design.md`\n    73→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/execution-plan.md`\n    74→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/artifacts/verification-proof.md`\n    75→\n    76→If any file is missing:\n    77→\n    78→> **Cannot run final review: missing prerequisite artifacts.**\n    79→>\n    80→> Missing: [list missing files]\n    81→>\n    82→> Run `/wazir:clarifier` (for clarified/* files) or `/wazir:executor` (for verification-proof.md) first.\n    83→\n    84→1. Check `.wazir/runs/latest/artifacts/` has completed task artifacts. If not, tell the user to run `/wazir:executor` first.\n    85→2. Read the approved spec, plan, and design from `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/`.\n    86→3. Read `.wazir/state/config.json` for depth and multi_tool settings.\n    87→\n    88→### `task-review` mode\n    89→1. Uncommitted changes exist for the current task, or a `--base` SHA is provided for committed changes.\n    90→2. Read `.wazir/state/config.json` for depth and multi_tool settings.\n    91→3. **Commit discipline check:** If uncommitted changes span work from multiple tasks (e.g., files from task N and task N+1 are both modified), REJECT immediately: \"REJECTED: Multiple tasks in single commit. Split into per-task commits before review.\" This is a blocking finding — no other dimensions are evaluated until resolved.\n    92→4. **Security sensitivity check:** Run `detectSecurityPatterns` from `tooling/src/checks/security-sensitivity.js` against the diff. If `triggered === true`, add the 6 security review dimensions (injection, auth bypass, data exposure, CSRF/SSRF, XSS, secrets leakage) to the standard 5 task-execution dimensions for this review pass. Security findings use severity levels: critical (exploitable), high (likely exploitable), medium (defense-in-depth gap), low (best-practice deviation).\n    93→\n    94→### `spec-challenge`, `design-review`, `plan-review`, `research-review`, `clarification-review` modes\n    95→1. The appropriate input artifact for the mode exists.\n    96→2. Read `.wazir/state/config.json` for depth and multi_tool settings.\n    97→3. **`plan-review` additional dimension — Input Coverage:**\n    98→   - Read the original input/briefing from `.wazir/input/briefing.md` and any `input/*.md` files\n    99→   - Count distinct items/requirements in the input\n   100→   - Count tasks in the execution plan\n   101→   - If `tasks_in_plan < items_in_input` → **HIGH** finding: \"Plan covers [N] of [M] input items. Missing: [list of uncovered items]\"\n   102→   - If `tasks_in_plan >= items_in_input` → dimension passes\n   103→   - One task MAY cover multiple input items if justified in the task description\n   104→   - This is the review-level enforcement of the \"no scope reduction\" rule\n   105→\n   106→## Review Process (`final` mode)\n   107→\n   108→**Before starting this phase, output to the user:**\n   109→\n   110→> **Final Review** — About to run adversarial 9-dimension review comparing your implementation against the original input, not just the task specs. The executor's per-task reviewer already validated correctness per-task — this catches drift between what you asked for and what was actually built.\n   111→>\n   112→> **Why this matters:** Without this, implementation drift ships undetected. Per-task review confirms each task matches its spec, but cannot catch: tasks that collectively miss the original intent, scope creep that added unrequested features, or acceptance criteria that were rewritten to match implementation instead of input.\n   113→>\n   114→> **Looking for:** Logic errors, missing features, dead code, unsubstantiated \"it works\" claims, scope creep, security gaps, stale documentation\n   115→\n   116→**Input:** Read the ORIGINAL user input (`.wazir/input/briefing.md`, `input/` directory files) and compare against what was built. This catches intent drift that task-level review misses.\n   117→\n   118→### Input Sources (read before scoring)\n   119→1. Read the original input: `.wazir/input/briefing.md` or `.wazir/runs/<id>/sources/input.md`\n   120→2. Read user feedback: `.wazir/runs/<id>/user-input-log.ndjson` (parse each JSON line)\n   121→3. Count distinct items/requirements in the original input\n   122→4. If `user-input-log.ndjson` does not exist: log a finding — \"User input not captured — cannot verify intent alignment\" (severity: warning)\n   123→\n   124→Perform adversarial review across 9 dimensions:\n   125→\n   126→1. **Correctness** — Does the code do what the original input asked for? *(catches: logic errors, wrong behavior, spec violations)*\n   127→2. **Completeness** — Are all requirements from the original input met? *(catches: missing features, unimplemented acceptance criteria, partially delivered items)*\n   128→3. **Wiring** — Are all paths connected end-to-end? *(catches: dead code, disconnected paths, missing imports, orphaned routes)*\n   129→4. **Verification** — Is there evidence (tests, type checks) for each claim? *(catches: false claims of \"it works\" without evidence, untested code paths, missing type coverage)*\n   130→5. **Drift** — Does the implementation match what the user originally requested? (not just the plan — the INPUT) *(catches: scope creep, plan deviations, unauthorized changes, gold-plating)*\n   131→6. **Quality** — Code style, naming, error handling, security *(catches: security vulnerabilities, poor error handling, inconsistent naming, missing input validation)*\n   132→7. **Documentation** — Changelog entries, commit messages, comments *(catches: missing changelogs, wrong commit messages, stale comments, undocumented breaking changes)*\n   133→8. **Intent Alignment** — Does the implementation match what the user originally asked for, including any mid-run corrections from `user-input-log.ndjson`? Compare against the RAW INPUT, not the spec (which may have drifted). Score 0 if implementation contradicts a user correction. *(catches: spec drift from user intent, ignored user corrections, misinterpreted requirements)*\n   134→9. **Scope Coverage** — Count distinct items in the original input. Count items implemented (via commits/diffs). If any input item is missing from the implementation, flag as HIGH finding with the specific missing item. Score = (implemented items / input items) * 10. *(catches: dropped requirements, partial delivery, silent scope reduction)*\n   135→\n   136→## Context Retrieval\n   137→\n   138→- Read the diff first (primary input)\n   139→- Use `wazir index search-symbols <name>` to locate related code\n   140→- Use `wazir recall symbol <name-or-id> --tier L1` to check structural alignment\n   141→- Read files directly for: logic errors, missing edge cases, integration concerns\n   142→\n   143→## Scoring (`final` mode)\n   144→\n   145→Score each dimension 0-10. Total out of 90 (9 dimensions x 10 each).\n   146→\n   147→| Verdict | Score | Action |\n   148→|---------|-------|--------|\n   149→| **PASS** | 72+ | Ready for PR or merge |\n   150→| **NEEDS MINOR FIXES** | 54-71 | Auto-fix and re-review |\n   151→| **NEEDS REWORK** | 36-53 | Re-run affected tasks |\n   152→| **FAIL** | 0-35 | Fundamental issues |\n   153→\n   154→## Two-Tier Review Flow\n   155→\n   156→The review process has two tiers. Internal review catches ~80% of issues quickly and cheaply. Codex review provides fresh eyes on clean code.\n   157→\n   158→### Tier 1: Internal Review (Fast, Cheap, Expertise-Loaded)\n   159→\n   160→1. **Compose expertise:** Load relevant expertise modules from `expertise/composition-map.yaml` into context based on the review mode and detected stack. This gives the internal reviewer domain-specific knowledge.\n   161→2. **Run internal review** using the dimension set for the current mode. When multi-model is enabled, use **Sonnet** (not Opus) for internal review passes — it's fast and good enough for pattern matching against expertise.\n   162→3. **Produce findings:** Each finding is tagged `[Internal]` with severity (blocking, warning, note).\n   163→4. **Fix cycle:** If blocking findings exist, the executor fixes them. Re-run internal review. Repeat until clean or cap reached.\n   164→\n   165→Internal review passes are logged to `.wazir/runs/latest/reviews/<mode>-internal-pass-<N>.md`.\n   166→\n   167→### Tier 2: External Review (Fresh Eyes on Clean Code)\n   168→\n   169→Only runs AFTER Tier 1 produces a clean pass (no blocking findings).\n   170→\n   171→Read `.wazir/state/config.json`. If `multi_tool.tools` includes external reviewers:\n   172→\n   173→#### Codex Review\n   174→\n   175→**For detailed Codex CLI usage, see `wz:codex-cli` skill.**\n   176→\n   177→If `codex` is in `multi_tool.tools`:\n   178→\n   179→1. Run Codex review against the current changes:\n   180→   ```bash\n   181→   CODEX_MODEL=$(jq -r '.multi_tool.codex.model // empty' .wazir/state/config.json 2>/dev/null)\n   182→   CODEX_MODEL=${CODEX_MODEL:-gpt-5.4}\n   183→   codex review -c model=\"$CODEX_MODEL\" --uncommitted --title \"Wazir review: <brief summary>\" \\\n   184→     \"Review against these acceptance criteria: <paste criteria from spec>\" \\\n   185→     2>&1 | tee .wazir/runs/latest/reviews/codex-review.md\n   186→   ```\n   187→   Or if changes are committed:\n   188→   ```bash\n   189→   CODEX_MODEL=$(jq -r '.multi_tool.codex.model // empty' .wazir/state/config.json 2>/dev/null)\n   190→   CODEX_MODEL=${CODEX_MODEL:-gpt-5.4}\n   191→   codex review -c model=\"$CODEX_MODEL\" --base <base-branch> --title \"Wazir review: <brief summary>\" \\\n   192→     \"Review against these acceptance criteria: <paste criteria from spec>\" \\\n   193→     2>&1 | tee .wazir/runs/latest/reviews/codex-review.md\n   194→   ```\n   195→\n   196→2. **Extract findings only** (context protection): After tee, use `execute_file` to extract only the final findings from the Codex output (everything after the last `codex` marker). If context-mode is unavailable, use `tac <file> | sed '/^codex$/q' | tac | tail -n +2`. If no marker found, fail closed (0 findings, warn user). See `docs/reference/review-loop-pattern.md` \"Codex Output Context Protection\" for full protocol.\n   197→3. Incorporate extracted Codex findings into your scoring — if Codex flags something you missed, add it. If you disagree with a Codex finding, note it with your rationale.\n   198→\n   199→**Codex error handling:** If codex exits non-zero (auth/rate-limit/transport failure), log the full stderr, mark the pass as `codex-unavailable` in the review log, and use internal review findings only for that pass. Do NOT treat a Codex failure as a clean review. Do NOT skip the pass. The next pass still attempts Codex (transient failures may recover).\n   200→\n   201→**Code review scoping by mode:**\n   202→- Use `--uncommitted` when reviewing uncommitted changes (`task-review` mode).\n   203→- Use `--base <sha>` when reviewing committed changes.\n   204→- Use `codex exec -c model=\"$CODEX_MODEL\"` with stdin pipe for non-code artifacts (`spec-challenge`, `design-review`, `plan-review`, `research-review`, `clarification-review` modes).\n   205→- See `docs/reference/review-loop-pattern.md` for code review scoping rules.\n   206→\n   207→#### Gemini Review\n   208→\n   209→If `gemini` is in `multi_tool.tools`, follow the same pattern using the Gemini CLI when available. **For detailed Gemini CLI usage, see `wz:gemini-cli` skill.**\n   210→\n   211→### Fix Cycle (Codex Findings)\n   212→\n   213→If Codex produces blocking findings:\n   214→1. Executor fixes the Codex findings\n   215→2. Re-run internal review (quick pass) to verify fixes didn't introduce regressions\n   216→3. Optionally re-run Codex for a clean pass\n   217→\n   218→### Merging Findings\n   219→\n   220→The final review report must clearly attribute each finding:\n   221→- `[Internal]` — found by Tier 1 internal review\n   222→- `[Codex]` — found by Tier 2 Codex review\n   223→- `[Gemini]` — found by Tier 2 Gemini review\n   224→- `[Both]` — found independently by multiple sources\n   225→\n   226→### Finding Persistence (Learning Pipeline)\n   227→\n   228→ALL findings from both tiers are persisted to `state.sqlite` for cross-run learning:\n   229→\n   230→```javascript\n   231→// After each review pass\n   232→const { insertFinding, getRecurringFindingHashes } = require('tooling/src/state/db');\n   233→const db = openStateDb(stateRoot);\n   234→\n   235→for (const finding of allFindings) {\n   236→  insertFinding(db, {\n   237→    run_id: runId,\n   238→    phase: reviewMode,\n   239→    source: finding.attribution, // 'internal', 'codex', 'gemini'\n   240→    severity: finding.severity,\n   241→    description: finding.description,\n   242→    finding_hash: hashFinding(finding.description),\n   243→  });\n   244→}\n   245→\n   246→// Check for recurring patterns\n   247→const recurring = getRecurringFindingHashes(db, 2);\n   248→// Recurring findings → auto-propose as learnings in the learn phase\n   249→```\n   250→\n   251→This is how Wazir evolves — findings that recur across runs become accepted learnings injected into future executor context, preventing the same mistakes.\n   252→\n   253→## Interaction Mode Awareness\n   254→\n   255→Read `interaction_mode` from run-config:\n   256→\n   257→- **`auto`:** No user checkpoints. Present verdict and let gating agent decide. On escalation, write reason and STOP.\n   258→- **`guided`:** Standard behavior — present verdict, ask user how to proceed.\n   259→- **`interactive`:** Discuss findings with user: \"I found a potential auth bypass in `src/auth.js:42` — here's why I rated it high severity. Do you agree, or is there context I'm missing?\" Show detailed reasoning for each dimension score.\n   260→\n   261→## CLI/Context-Mode Enforcement\n   262→\n   263→In ALL review modes, check for these violations:\n   264→\n   265→1. **Index usage enforcement:** If the agent performed >5 direct file reads (Read tool) without a preceding `wazir index search-symbols` query, flag as **[warning]** finding: \"Agent performed [N] direct file reads without using wazir index. Use `wazir index search-symbols <query>` before reading files to reduce context consumption.\"\n   266→\n   267→2. **Context-mode enforcement:** If the agent ran a large-category command (test runners, builds, diffs, dependency trees, linting — as classified by `hooks/routing-matrix.json`) using native Bash instead of context-mode tools (when context-mode is available), flag as **[warning]** finding: \"Large command `[cmd]` run without context-mode. Route through `mcp__plugin_context-mode_context-mode__execute` to reduce context usage.\"\n   268→\n   269→These are warnings, not blocking findings — they improve efficiency but don't affect correctness.\n   270→\n   271→## Task-Review Log Filenames\n   272→\n   273→In `task-review` mode, use task-scoped log filenames and cap tracking:\n   274→- Log filenames: `.wazir/runs/latest/reviews/execute-task-<NNN>-review-pass-<N>.md`\n   275→- Cap tracking: `wazir capture loop-check --task-id <NNN>` (each task has its own independent cap counter)\n   276→\n   277→## Output\n   278→\n   279→Save review results to `.wazir/runs/latest/reviews/review.md` with:\n   280→- Findings with severity (blocking, warning, note)\n   281→- Rationale tied to evidence\n   282→- Score breakdown\n   283→- Verdict\n   284→\n   285→Run the phase report and display it to the user:\n   286→```bash\n   287→wazir report phase --run <run-id> --phase <review-mode>\n   288→```\n   289→\n   290→Output the report content to the user in the conversation.\n   291→\n   292→## Phase Report Generation\n   293→\n   294→After completing any review pass, generate a phase report following `schemas/phase-report.schema.json`:\n   295→\n   296→1. **`attempted_actions`** — Populate from the review findings. Each finding becomes an action entry:\n   297→   - `description`: the finding summary\n   298→   - `outcome`: `\"success\"` if the finding passed, `\"fail\"` if it is a blocking issue, `\"uncertain\"` if ambiguous\n   299→   - `evidence`: the rationale or evidence supporting the outcome\n   300→\n   301→2. **`drift_analysis`** — Compare review findings against the approved spec:\n   302→   - `delta`: count of deviations between implementation and spec (0 = no drift)\n   303→   - `description`: summary of any drift detected and its impact\n   304→\n   305→3. **`quality_metrics`** — Populate from test, lint, and type-check results gathered during review:\n   306→   - `test_pass_count`, `test_fail_count`: from test runner output\n   307→   - `lint_errors`: from linter output\n   308→   - `type_errors`: from type checker output\n   309→\n   310→4. **`risk_flags`** — Populate from any high-severity findings:\n   311→   - `severity`: `\"low\"`, `\"medium\"`, or `\"high\"`\n   312→   - `description`: what the risk is\n   313→   - `mitigation`: recommended mitigation (if known)\n   314→\n   315→5. **`decisions`** — Populate from any scope or approach decisions made during the review:\n   316→   - `description`: what was decided\n   317→   - `rationale`: why\n   318→   - `alternatives_considered`: other options evaluated (optional)\n   319→   - `source`: `\"[Wazir]\"`, `\"[Codex]\"`, or `\"[Both]\"` (optional)\n   320→\n   321→6. **`verdict_recommendation`** — Set based on the gating rules in `config/gating-rules.yaml`:\n   322→   - `verdict`: `\"continue\"` (PASS), `\"loop_back\"` (NEEDS MINOR FIXES / NEEDS REWORK), or `\"escalate\"` (FAIL with fundamental issues)\n   323→   - `reasoning`: brief explanation of why this verdict was chosen\n   324→\n   325→### Report Output Paths\n   326→\n   327→Save reports to two formats under the run directory:\n   328→- `.wazir/runs/<id>/reports/phase-<name>-report.json` — machine-readable, validated against `schemas/phase-report.schema.json`\n   329→- `.wazir/runs/<id>/reports/phase-<name>-report.md` — human-readable Markdown summary\n   330→\n   331→The gating agent (`tooling/src/gating/agent.js`) consumes the JSON report to decide: **continue**, **loop_back**, or **escalate**.\n   332→\n   333→### Report Fields Reference\n   334→\n   335→All required fields per `schemas/phase-report.schema.json`:\n   336→\n   337→| Field | Type | Required | Description |\n   338→|-------|------|----------|-------------|\n   339→| `phase_name` | string | yes | Review mode name (e.g., `\"final\"`, `\"task-review\"`) |\n   340→| `run_id` | string | yes | Current run identifier |\n   341→| `timestamp` | string (date-time) | yes | ISO 8601 timestamp of report generation |\n   342→| `attempted_actions` | array | yes | Findings mapped to action outcomes |\n   343→| `drift_analysis` | object | yes | Spec-vs-implementation drift summary |\n   344→| `quality_metrics` | object | yes | Test/lint/type results |\n   345→| `risk_flags` | array | yes | High-severity risk items |\n   346→| `decisions` | array | yes | Scope/approach decisions made |\n   347→| `verdict_recommendation` | object | no | Gating verdict based on `config/gating-rules.yaml` |\n   348→\n   349→## Post-Review: Learn (final mode only)\n   350→\n   351→After the final review verdict, extract durable learnings using the **learner role** (`roles/learner.md`).\n   352→\n   353→### Step 1: Gather all findings\n   354→\n   355→Collect review findings from ALL sources in this run:\n   356→- `.wazir/runs/<run-id>/reviews/` — all review pass logs (task-review, final review)\n   357→- Codex findings (attributed `[Codex]` or `[Both]`)\n   358→- Self-audit findings (if `run_audit` was enabled)\n   359→\n   360→### Step 2: Identify learning candidates\n   361→\n   362→A finding becomes a learning candidate if:\n   363→- It recurred across 2+ review passes within this run (same issue found repeatedly)\n   364→- It matches a finding from a prior run (check `memory/learnings/proposed/` and `accepted/` for similar patterns)\n   365→- It represents a class of mistake, not just a single instance (e.g., \"missing error handling in async functions\" vs \"missing try-catch on line 42\")\n   366→\n   367→### Step 3: Write learning proposals\n   368→\n   369→For each candidate, write a proposal to `memory/learnings/proposed/<run-id>-<NNN>.md`:\n   370→\n   371→```markdown\n   372→---\n   373→artifact_type: proposed_learning\n   374→phase: learn\n   375→role: learner\n   376→run_id: <run-id>\n   377→status: proposed\n   378→sources:\n   379→  - <review-file-1>\n   380→  - <review-file-2>\n   381→approval_status: required\n   382→---\n   383→\n   384→# Proposed Learning: <title>\n   385→\n   386→## Scope\n   387→- **Roles:** [which roles should receive this learning — e.g., executor, reviewer]\n   388→- **Stacks:** [which tech stacks — e.g., node, react, or \"all\"]\n   389→- **Concerns:** [which concerns — e.g., error-handling, testing, security]\n   390→\n   391→## Evidence\n   392→- [finding from review pass N: description]\n   393→- [finding from review pass M: same pattern]\n   394→- [optional: similar finding from prior run <run-id>]\n   395→\n   396→## Learning\n   397→[The concrete, actionable instruction that should be injected into future executor context]\n   398→\n   399→## Expected Benefit\n   400→[What this prevents in future runs]\n   401→\n   402→## Confidence\n   403→- **Level:** low | medium | high\n   404→- **Basis:** [single run observation | multi-run recurrence | user correction]\n   405→```\n   406→\n   407→### Step 4: Report\n   408→\n   409→Present proposed learnings to the user:\n   410→\n   411→> **Learnings proposed:** [count]\n   412→> - [title 1] (confidence: high, scope: executor/node)\n   413→> - [title 2] (confidence: medium, scope: reviewer/all)\n   414→>\n   415→> Proposals saved to `memory/learnings/proposed/`. Review and accept with `/wazir audit learnings`.\n   416→\n   417→Learnings are NEVER auto-applied. They require explicit user acceptance before being injected into future runs.\n   418→\n   419→## Post-Review: Prepare Next (final mode only)\n   420→\n   421→After learning extraction, invoke the `prepare-next` skill to prepare the handoff:\n   422→\n   423→### Handoff document\n   424→\n   425→Write to `.wazir/runs/<run-id>/handoff.md`:\n   426→\n   427→```markdown\n   428→# Handoff — <run-id>\n   429→\n   430→**Status:** [Completed | Partial]\n   431→**Branch:** <branch-name>\n   432→**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD\n   433→\n   434→## What Was Done\n   435→[List of completed tasks with commit hashes]\n   436→\n   437→## Test Results\n   438→[Test count, pass/fail, validator status]\n   439→\n   440→## Review Score\n   441→[Final review verdict and score]\n   442→\n   443→## What's Next\n   444→[Pending items, deferred work, follow-up tasks]\n   445→\n   446→## Open Bugs\n   447→[Any known issues discovered during this run]\n   448→\n   449→## Learnings From This Run\n   450→[Key insights — what worked, what didn't, what to change]\n   451→```\n   452→\n   453→### Cleanup\n   454→\n   455→- Archive verbose intermediate review logs (compress to summary)\n   456→- Update `.wazir/runs/latest` symlink if creating a new run\n   457→- Do NOT mutate `input/` — it belongs to the user\n   458→- Do NOT auto-load proposed learnings into the next run\n   459→\n   460→## Reasoning Output\n   461→\n   462→Throughout the reviewer phase, produce reasoning at two layers:\n   463→\n   464→### User Output: Before Review\n   465→\n   466→```\n   467→Running [N]-dimension adversarial review against the original input.\n   468→Why: without this, implementation drift from your request ships undetected.\n   469→Checking: [dimension list]\n   470→```\n   471→\n   472→### User Output: Per Dimension\n   473→\n   474→```\n   475→[Dimension]: [score]/10 — [specific reason citing evidence from the code]\n   476→```\n   477→\n   478→### User Output: After Review\n   479→\n   480→```\n   481→Review complete. Verdict: [PASS/FAIL] ([score]/[max])\n   482→[N] findings across [M] dimensions.\n   483→Most critical: [top finding summary]\n   484→```\n   485→\n   486→**File (Layer 2):** Write `.wazir/runs/<id>/reasoning/phase-reviewer-reasoning.md` with structured entries:\n   487→- **Trigger** — what prompted the finding (e.g., \"diff adds SQL query without parameterization\")\n   488→- **Options considered** — severity options, fix approaches\n   489→- **Chosen** — assigned severity and recommendation\n   490→- **Reasoning** — why this severity level\n   491→- **Confidence** — high/medium/low\n   492→- **Counterfactual** — what would ship if this finding were missed\n   493→\n   494→Key reviewer reasoning moments: severity assignments, PASS/FAIL decisions, dimension score justifications, and escalation decisions.\n   495→\n   496→## Done\n   497→\n   498→**After completing this phase, output to the user:**\n   499→\n   500→> **Final Review complete.**\n   501→>\n   502→> **Found:** [N] findings across 9 dimensions — [N] blocking, [N] warnings, [N] notes. Score: [score]/90 ([VERDICT]).\n   503→>\n   504→> **Without this phase:** [N] blocking issues would have shipped — including [specific examples: e.g., \"missing error handler on /api/users endpoint\", \"auth middleware not wired to 3 routes\", \"CHANGELOG missing entry for breaking API change\"]\n   505→>\n   506→> **Changed because of this work:** [List of issues caught and fixed during review passes, score improvement from first to final pass]\n   507→\n   508→Present the verdict and offer next steps:\n   509→\n   510→> **Review complete: [VERDICT] ([score]/90)**\n   511→>\n   512→> [Score breakdown and findings summary]\n   513→>\n   514→> **Learnings proposed:** [count] (see `memory/learnings/proposed/`)\n   515→> **Handoff:** `.wazir/runs/<run-id>/handoff.md`\n   516→\n   517→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   518→- **Question:** \"How would you like to proceed with the review results?\"\n   519→- **Options:**\n   520→  1. \"Create a PR\" *(Recommended if PASS)*\n   521→  2. \"Auto-fix and re-review\" *(Recommended if MINOR FIXES)*\n   522→  3. \"Review findings in detail\"\n   523→\n   524→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   525→"}]},"uuid":"8c844a9b-78a0-453f-b2d7-fb4d4af2de79","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:16.320Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"1be8d9ed-3ae2-4db7-9103-433c7244f224","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"8c844a9b-78a0-453f-b2d7-fb4d4af2de79","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_014VdAxHLrm8i9G77jDZJgEf","toolUseID":"toolu_014VdAxHLrm8i9G77jDZJgEf","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:18.419Z","uuid":"972fc629-955d-4735-b095-d72f90a74cd4","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"e105742b-2ba9-40e8-94e0-03703ca5e6b6","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_014VdAxHLrm8i9G77jDZJgEf","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: self-audit\n     3→description: Run a self-audit loop in an isolated git worktree — validates, audits, fixes, verifies, and merges back only on green. Safe self-improvement that cannot break the main working tree.\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Self-Audit — Worktree-Isolated Audit-Fix Loop\n     7→\n     8→## Command Routing\n     9→Follow the Canonical Command Matrix in `hooks/routing-matrix.json`.\n    10→- Large commands (test runners, builds, diffs, dependency trees, linting) → context-mode tools\n    11→- Small commands (git status, ls, pwd, wazir CLI) → native Bash\n    12→- If context-mode unavailable, fall back to native Bash with warning\n    13→\n    14→## Codebase Exploration\n    15→1. Query `wazir index search-symbols <query>` first\n    16→2. Use `wazir recall file <path> --tier L1` for targeted reads\n    17→3. Fall back to direct file reads ONLY for files identified by index queries\n    18→4. Maximum 10 direct file reads without a justifying index query\n    19→5. If no index exists: `wazir index build && wazir index summarize --tier all`\n    20→\n    21→## Overview\n    22→\n    23→This skill runs a structured self-audit of the Wazir project itself, operating entirely in an isolated git worktree. It validates the project against all canonical checks, performs deeper structural analysis, fixes issues found, verifies the fixes pass, and only merges back on all-green.\n    24→\n    25→**Safety guarantee:** The main worktree is never modified until all checks pass in isolation.\n    26→\n    27→## Severity Levels\n    28→\n    29→Every finding is assigned a severity that determines handling:\n    30→\n    31→| Severity | Action | Description |\n    32→|----------|--------|-------------|\n    33→| **critical** | Abort loop | Structural integrity threat — cannot safely continue. Discard worktree. |\n    34→| **high** | Fix now | Must be resolved in this loop before proceeding to verify. |\n    35→| **medium** | Fix if time | Fix within remaining loop budget. Skip if loop cap approaching. |\n    36→| **low** | Log and skip | Record in report. No fix attempted. |\n    37→\n    38→Severity assignment rules:\n    39→- Protected-path violation → **critical**\n    40→- Test failure, broken hook, missing manifest entry → **high**\n    41→- Documentation drift, stale export, missing schema → **medium**\n    42→- Style issues, minor inconsistency, cosmetic → **low**\n    43→\n    44→## Quality Scoring\n    45→\n    46→Each loop measures a quality score **before** and **after** fixes:\n    47→\n    48→```\n    49→quality_score = (checks_passing / total_checks) * 100\n    50→```\n    51→\n    52→Track per loop:\n    53→- `quality_score_before` — score at start of loop (after Phase 1)\n    54→- `quality_score_after` — score at end of loop (after Phase 4 verify)\n    55→- `delta` — improvement from this loop's fixes\n    56→\n    57→**Effectiveness threshold:** If 3 consecutive loops show `delta < 2%`, the audit has converged — skip remaining loops.\n    58→\n    59→## Learning Integration\n    60→\n    61→After each audit loop, findings feed the learning pipeline:\n    62→\n    63→1. **Propose learnings:** For each finding category that appeared in this loop:\n    64→   - Check `state.sqlite` findings table for the same `finding_hash` in previous runs\n    65→   - If `recurrence_count >= 2`: auto-propose a learning to `memory/learnings/proposed/`\n    66→   - Learning scope tags: `scope_roles: [executor]`, `scope_concerns: [quality]`\n    67→2. **Store findings:** Insert all findings into `state.sqlite` via `insertFinding()` with severity and finding_hash\n    68→3. **Store audit record:** Insert `{run_id, finding_count, fix_count, manual_count, quality_score_before, quality_score_after}` into `audit_history`\n    69→\n    70→## Trend Tracking\n    71→\n    72→Before starting Loop 1, query previous audit results:\n    73→\n    74→```javascript\n    75→const trend = getAuditTrend(db, 5); // last 5 audits\n    76→```\n    77→\n    78→Present trend in the report:\n    79→- Are finding counts trending up or down?\n    80→- Are the same finding_hashes recurring? If so, the fixes aren't preventing recurrence — escalate.\n    81→- Has quality_score improved across runs?\n    82→\n    83→## Escalation Path\n    84→\n    85→Manual-required findings that cannot be auto-fixed are escalated:\n    86→\n    87→1. **Within the audit:** Logged in the report with remediation guidance\n    88→2. **Cross-run recurrence:** If the same manual finding recurs across 3+ audits, escalate to:\n    89→   - Create a task spec in `.wazir/runs/latest/tasks/` describing the fix\n    90→   - Flag in the audit report as **RECURRING — needs dedicated task**\n    91→3. **Critical findings:** Immediately logged. If 2+ critical findings in a single loop, abort the entire audit run.\n    92→\n    93→## Trigger\n    94→\n    95→On-demand: operator invokes `/self-audit` or requests a self-audit loop.\n    96→\n    97→### Parameters\n    98→\n    99→| Flag | Default | Max | Description |\n   100→|------|---------|-----|-------------|\n   101→| `--loops N` | 5 | 10 | Number of audit-fix loops to run. Each loop executes the full Phase 1-5 cycle. If a loop finds 0 new issues, subsequent loops are skipped (convergence detection). |\n   102→\n   103→## Worktree Isolation Model\n   104→\n   105→```\n   106→main worktree (untouched)\n   107→  └── agent spawns in isolated worktree (git worktree)\n   108→        ├── Phase 1: Validate (run all checks)\n   109→        ├── Phase 2: Deep audit (structural analysis)\n   110→        ├── Phase 3: Fix (remediate findings)\n   111→        ├── Phase 4: Verify (re-run all checks)\n   112→        └── Phase 5: Report (commit in worktree if green)\n   113→```\n   114→\n   115→If any Phase 4 check fails, the worktree is discarded — no changes reach main.\n   116→\n   117→## Phase 1: CLI Validation Sweep\n   118→\n   119→Run every validation check and capture results:\n   120→\n   121→```bash\n   122→node tooling/src/cli.js validate manifest\n   123→node tooling/src/cli.js validate hooks\n   124→node tooling/src/cli.js validate docs\n   125→node tooling/src/cli.js validate brand\n   126→node tooling/src/cli.js validate runtime\n   127→node tooling/src/cli.js validate changelog\n   128→node tooling/src/cli.js validate commits\n   129→node tooling/src/cli.js doctor --json\n   130→node tooling/src/cli.js export --check\n   131→```\n   132→\n   133→Collect pass/fail for each. Any failure is a finding. Assign severity per the severity table above.\n   134→\n   135→Calculate `quality_score_before` from the pass/fail results.\n   136→\n   137→## Phase 2: Deep Structural Audit\n   138→\n   139→Beyond CLI checks, inspect for:\n   140→\n   141→1. **Cross-reference consistency**\n   142→   - Every role in `wazir.manifest.yaml` has a file in `roles/`\n   143→   - Every workflow in manifest has a file in `workflows/`\n   144→   - Every skill directory has a `SKILL.md`\n   145→   - Every schema referenced in docs exists in `schemas/`\n   146→   - Composition map concerns reference existing expertise modules\n   147→\n   148→2. **Documentation drift**\n   149→   - `docs/architecture.md` component table matches actual directory structure\n   150→   - `docs/roles-and-workflows.md` role/workflow lists match manifest\n   151→   - README claims match actual project state\n   152→\n   153→3. **Export freshness**\n   154→   - Generated exports match canonical sources (via `export --check`)\n   155→   - Host export directories contain expected structure\n   156→\n   157→4. **Schema coverage**\n   158→   - Every workflow that produces artifacts has a corresponding schema\n   159→   - Schema files are valid JSON\n   160→\n   161→5. **Hook integrity**\n   162→   - Hook scripts referenced in `.claude/settings.json` exist and are executable\n   163→   - Hook definitions in `hooks/definitions/` cover all manifest-required hooks\n   164→\n   165→6. **Skill structure**\n   166→   - Each skill dir under `skills/` has a well-formed `SKILL.md` with frontmatter\n   167→   - Skills referenced in documentation actually exist\n   168→\n   169→7. **Code Quality**\n   170→   - Run `node tooling/src/cli.js validate` (all subcommands) and capture exit codes\n   171→   - If `eslint` is present in `package.json` scripts or devDependencies, run `npx eslint .` and capture results\n   172→   - If `tsc` is present in `package.json` scripts or devDependencies, run `npx tsc --noEmit` and capture results\n   173→   - Tools not found in `package.json` are skipped with a note in the report\n   174→\n   175→8. **Test Coverage**\n   176→   - Run `npm test` and capture pass/fail counts from output\n   177→   - Any test failure is a finding\n   178→\n   179→9. **Expertise Coverage**\n   180→   - Read `expertise/composition-map.yaml`\n   181→   - For every module path referenced, check that the file exists under `expertise/`\n   182→   - Missing files are findings\n   183→\n   184→10. **Export Freshness**\n   185→    - Run `wazir export --check`\n   186→    - Any drift detected is a finding\n   187→\n   188→11. **Input Coverage** (run-scoped — only when a run directory exists)\n   189→    - Read the original input file(s) from `.wazir/input/` or `.wazir/runs/<id>/sources/`\n   190→    - Read the execution plan from `.wazir/runs/<id>/clarified/execution-plan.md`\n   191→    - Read the actual commits on the branch: `git log --oneline main..HEAD`\n   192→    - Build a coverage matrix: every distinct item in the input should map to:\n   193→      - At least one task in the execution plan\n   194→      - At least one commit in the git log\n   195→    - **Missing items** (in input but not in plan AND not in commits) → **HIGH** severity finding\n   196→    - **Partial items** (in plan but no corresponding commit) → **MEDIUM** severity finding\n   197→    - **Fully covered items** (input → plan → commit) → pass\n   198→    - Output the coverage matrix in the audit report:\n   199→      ```\n   200→      | Input Item | Plan Task | Commit | Status |\n   201→      |------------|-----------|--------|--------|\n   202→      | Item 1     | Task 3    | abc123 | PASS   |\n   203→      | Item 2     | Task 5    | —      | PARTIAL|\n   204→      | Item 3     | —         | —      | MISSING|\n   205→      ```\n   206→    - This dimension catches scope reduction AFTER the fact — a safety net for when the clarifier or planner fails\n   207→\n   208→## Protected-Path Safety Rails\n   209→\n   210→Before applying ANY fix in Phase 3, check if the target file is in a protected path. The self-audit loop MUST NOT modify files in:\n   211→\n   212→- `skills/`\n   213→- `workflows/`\n   214→- `roles/`\n   215→- `schemas/`\n   216→- `wazir.manifest.yaml`\n   217→- `docs/concepts/`\n   218→- `docs/reference/`\n   219→- `expertise/composition-map.yaml`\n   220→- `docs/plans/`\n   221→- `program.md`\n   222→\n   223→If a fix would touch a protected path, log it as a **manual-required** finding and skip. If `git diff --name-only` shows any protected path was modified during a loop iteration, **ABORT** the loop and discard the worktree.\n   224→\n   225→## Phase 3: Fix\n   226→\n   227→For each finding from Phases 1-2, ordered by severity (critical first):\n   228→\n   229→1. **Critical findings:** Abort immediately. Discard worktree. Report the critical finding.\n   230→2. **High findings:** Must fix now.\n   231→3. **Medium findings:** Fix if loop budget allows (remaining loops > 1).\n   232→4. **Low findings:** Log only. No fix attempted.\n   233→\n   234→For high/medium findings:\n   235→1. Categorize as **auto-fixable** or **manual-required**\n   236→2. Auto-fixable issues: apply the fix directly\n   237→   - Missing files → create stubs or fix references\n   238→   - Stale exports → run `export build`\n   239→   - Documentation drift → update docs to match reality\n   240→   - Permission issues → `chmod +x` hook scripts\n   241→   - Schema formatting → auto-format\n   242→3. Manual-required issues: document in the audit report with remediation guidance. Check escalation path for recurrence.\n   243→\n   244→**Fix constraints:**\n   245→- Never modify `input/` (read-only operator surface)\n   246→- Prefer updating docs to match code (code is truth) unless the code is clearly wrong\n   247→- Keep fixes minimal — one concern per change\n   248→\n   249→## Phase 4: Verify\n   250→\n   251→Re-run the entire Phase 1 validation sweep. All checks must pass.\n   252→\n   253→If any check fails after fixes:\n   254→- Revert the failing fix\n   255→- Document the revert and the root cause\n   256→- Re-verify\n   257→\n   258→## Phase 5: Report, Learn & Commit\n   259→\n   260→### Quality Score\n   261→\n   262→Re-run Phase 1 checks and calculate `quality_score_after`. Compute delta.\n   263→\n   264→### Learning Extraction\n   265→\n   266→1. Hash each finding description → `finding_hash`\n   267→2. Store all findings in `state.sqlite` via `insertFinding(db, {run_id, phase: 'self-audit', source: 'self-audit', severity, description, finding_hash})`\n   268→3. Query `getRecurringFindingHashes(db, 2)` — findings occurring 2+ times across runs\n   269→4. For each recurring finding not already in `memory/learnings/proposed/`:\n   270→   - Write a learning proposal: `memory/learnings/proposed/self-audit-<hash-prefix>.md`\n   271→   - Content: what the issue is, how often it recurs, recommended prevention\n   272→5. Store audit record: `insertAuditRecord(db, {run_id, finding_count, fix_count, manual_count, quality_score_before, quality_score_after})`\n   273→\n   274→### Report\n   275→\n   276→Produce a structured report:\n   277→\n   278→```markdown\n   279→# Self-Audit Report — Loop N — <date>\n   280→\n   281→## Quality Score\n   282→- Before: X% → After: Y% (delta: +Z%)\n   283→\n   284→## Trend (last 5 audits)\n   285→| Run | Date | Findings | Fixes | Quality |\n   286→|-----|------|----------|-------|---------|\n   287→| ... | ...  | ...      | ...   | ...     |\n   288→\n   289→## Validation Sweep\n   290→| Check | Severity | Before | After |\n   291→|-------|----------|--------|-------|\n   292→| manifest | high | PASS/FAIL | PASS |\n   293→| hooks | high | PASS/FAIL | PASS |\n   294→| ... | ... | ... | ... |\n   295→\n   296→## Findings by Severity\n   297→### Critical (N) — loop aborted if any\n   298→### High (N) — fixed\n   299→### Medium (N) — fixed if budget allowed\n   300→### Low (N) — logged only\n   301→\n   302→## Auto-Fixed (N)\n   303→- [F-001] [high] <description> — fixed by <change>\n   304→- ...\n   305→\n   306→## Manual Required (N)\n   307→- [M-001] [medium] <description> — remediation: <guidance>\n   308→- [M-002] [medium] <description> — **RECURRING (3x)** — needs dedicated task\n   309→- ...\n   310→\n   311→## Proposed Learnings (N)\n   312→- <learning-file>: <summary>\n   313→- ...\n   314→\n   315→## Changes Made\n   316→- <file>: <what changed>\n   317→- ...\n   318→\n   319→## Verification\n   320→All checks: PASS/FAIL\n   321→```\n   322→\n   323→If all checks pass, commit changes in the worktree with:\n   324→```\n   325→fix(self-audit): loop N — <summary of fixes>\n   326→```\n   327→\n   328→The worktree agent returns its results. If changes were made, the caller can merge them.\n   329→\n   330→## Loop Behavior\n   331→\n   332→Default: **5 loops** (override with `--loops N`, max 10).\n   333→\n   334→When running multiple loops:\n   335→- Loop 1 audits the current state, fixes what it finds\n   336→- Loop 2 audits the result of Loop 1, catches anything missed or introduced\n   337→- Each loop is independent and runs in its own fresh worktree\n   338→- **Convergence detection:** if Loop N finds **0 new issues** (no new findings beyond what previous loops already reported), all subsequent loops are skipped and the audit terminates early\n   339→- **Effectiveness convergence:** if 3 consecutive loops show `quality_score delta < 2%`, skip remaining loops\n   340→- **Critical abort:** if any loop encounters 2+ critical findings, abort the entire audit run\n   341→- If a loop modifies a protected path (see Protected-Path Safety Rails above), the loop is aborted and the worktree is discarded\n   342→\n   343→The final branch is **NOT auto-merged** — it requires human review.\n   344→\n   345→## State Database Integration\n   346→\n   347→The self-audit skill requires `state.sqlite` (see `tooling/src/state/db.js`). At audit start:\n   348→\n   349→```javascript\n   350→const { openStateDb, getAuditTrend, insertFinding, insertAuditRecord, getRecurringFindingHashes } = require('../../tooling/src/state/db');\n   351→const db = openStateDb(stateRoot);\n   352→```\n   353→\n   354→All findings are persisted across runs, enabling trend detection and learning extraction.\n   355→"}]},"uuid":"8773763d-8f1f-405f-9039-13cc3058e1d1","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:18.418Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"e105742b-2ba9-40e8-94e0-03703ca5e6b6","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"8773763d-8f1f-405f-9039-13cc3058e1d1","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_019TcKuRkxPeYVipTHs3LNdx","toolUseID":"toolu_019TcKuRkxPeYVipTHs3LNdx","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:18.423Z","uuid":"aa073821-67a3-49aa-9416-f0f8ad4bc9a7","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"b4d6f61a-31e9-4581-b5a4-11487d89f2c5","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_019TcKuRkxPeYVipTHs3LNdx","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: wz:wazir\n     3→description: One-command pipeline — type /wazir followed by what you want to build. Handles init, clarification, execution, review, and audits automatically.\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Wazir — Full Pipeline Runner\n     7→\n     8→The user typed `/wazir <their request>`. Run the entire pipeline end-to-end, handling each phase automatically and only pausing where human input is required.\n     9→\n    10→All questions use **numbered interactive options** — one question at a time, defaults marked \"(Recommended)\", wait for user response before proceeding.\n    11→\n    12→## User Input Capture\n    13→\n    14→After every user response (approval, correction, rejection, redirect, instruction), capture it:\n    15→\n    16→```\n    17→captureUserInput(runDir, { phase: '<current-phase>', type: '<instruction|approval|correction|rejection|redirect>', content: '<user message>', context: '<what prompted the question>' })\n    18→```\n    19→\n    20→This uses `tooling/src/capture/user-input.js`. The log at `user-input-log.ndjson` feeds the learning system — user corrections are the strongest signal for improvement. At run end, prune logs older than 10 runs via `pruneOldInputLogs(stateRoot, 10)`.\n    21→\n    22→## Command Routing\n    23→Follow the Canonical Command Matrix in `hooks/routing-matrix.json`.\n    24→- Large commands (test runners, builds, diffs, dependency trees, linting) → context-mode tools\n    25→- Small commands (git status, ls, pwd, wazir CLI) → native Bash\n    26→- If context-mode unavailable, fall back to native Bash with warning\n    27→\n    28→## Codebase Exploration\n    29→1. Query `wazir index search-symbols <query>` first\n    30→2. Use `wazir recall file <path> --tier L1` for targeted reads\n    31→3. Fall back to direct file reads ONLY for files identified by index queries\n    32→4. Maximum 10 direct file reads without a justifying index query\n    33→5. If no index exists: `wazir index build && wazir index summarize --tier all`\n    34→\n    35→## Subcommand Detection\n    36→\n    37→Before anything else, check if the request starts with a known subcommand:\n    38→\n    39→| Input | Action |\n    40→|-------|--------|\n    41→| `/wazir audit ...` | Jump to **Audit Mode** (see below) |\n    42→| `/wazir prd [run-id]` | Jump to **PRD Mode** (see below) |\n    43→| `/wazir init` | Invoke the `init-pipeline` skill directly, then stop |\n    44→| Anything else | Continue to Phase 1 (Init) |\n    45→\n    46→---\n    47→\n    48→# 4-Phase Pipeline\n    49→\n    50→The pipeline has 4 phases. Each phase groups related workflows. Individual workflows within a phase can be enabled/disabled via `workflow_policy` in run-config.\n    51→\n    52→| Phase | Contains | Owner Skill | Key Output |\n    53→|-------|----------|-------------|------------|\n    54→| **Init** | Setup, prereqs, run directory, input scan | `wz:wazir` (inline) | `run-config.yaml` |\n    55→| **Clarifier** | Research, clarify, specify, brainstorm, plan | `wz:clarifier` | Approved spec + design + plan |\n    56→| **Executor** | Implement, verify | `wz:executor` | Code + verification proof |\n    57→| **Final Review** | Review vs original input, learn, prepare next | `wz:reviewer` | Verdict + learnings + handoff |\n    58→\n    59→---\n    60→\n    61→# Phase 1: Init\n    62→\n    63→## Step 1: Capture the Request\n    64→\n    65→Take whatever the user wrote after `/wazir` and save it as the briefing:\n    66→\n    67→1. Create `.wazir/input/` if it doesn't exist\n    68→2. Write the user's request to `.wazir/input/briefing.md` with a timestamp header\n    69→\n    70→If the user provided no text after `/wazir`, ask:\n    71→\n    72→> **What would you like to build?**\n    73→\n    74→Save their answer as the briefing, then continue.\n    75→\n    76→### Scan Input Directory\n    77→\n    78→Scan both `input/` (project-level) and `.wazir/input/` (state-level) for existing briefing materials. If files exist beyond `briefing.md`, list them:\n    79→\n    80→> **Found input files:**\n    81→> - `input/2026-03-19-deferred-items.md`\n    82→> - `.wazir/input/briefing.md`\n    83→>\n    84→> Using all found input as context for clarification.\n    85→\n    86→### Inline Modifiers\n    87→\n    88→Parse the request for inline modifiers before the main text:\n    89→\n    90→- `/wazir quick fix the login redirect` → depth = quick, intent = bugfix\n    91→- `/wazir deep design a new onboarding flow` → depth = deep, intent = feature\n    92→\n    93→Recognized modifiers:\n    94→- **Depth:** `quick`, `deep` (standard is default when omitted)\n    95→- **Interaction mode:** `auto`, `interactive` (guided is default when omitted)\n    96→  - `/wazir auto fix the auth bug` → interaction_mode = auto\n    97→  - `/wazir interactive design the onboarding` → interaction_mode = interactive\n    98→- **Intent:** `bugfix`, `feature`, `refactor`, `docs`, `spike`\n    99→\n   100→## Step 2: Check Prerequisites\n   101→\n   102→### CLI Check\n   103→\n   104→Run `which wazir` to check if the CLI is installed.\n   105→\n   106→**If not installed**, present:\n   107→\n   108→> **The Wazir CLI is not installed. It's required for event capture, validation, and indexing.**\n   109→\n   110→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   111→- **Question:** \"The Wazir CLI is not installed. How would you like to install it?\"\n   112→- **Options:**\n   113→  1. \"npm install -g @wazir-dev/cli\" *(Recommended)*\n   114→  2. \"npm link from the Wazir project root\"\n   115→\n   116→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   117→\n   118→The CLI is **required** — the pipeline uses `wazir capture`, `wazir validate`, `wazir index`, and `wazir doctor` throughout execution.\n   119→\n   120→**If installed**, run `wazir doctor --json` to verify repo health. Stop if unhealthy.\n   121→\n   122→### Branch Check\n   123→\n   124→Run `wazir validate branches` to check the current git branch.\n   125→\n   126→- If on `main` or `develop`:\n   127→  > You're on **[branch]**. The pipeline requires a feature branch.\n   128→\n   129→  Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   130→  - **Question:** \"You're on a protected branch. Create a feature branch?\"\n   131→  - **Options:**\n   132→    1. \"Create feat/<slug> from current branch\" *(Recommended)*\n   133→    2. \"Continue on current branch — not recommended\"\n   134→\n   135→  Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   136→\n   137→### Index Check\n   138→\n   139→```bash\n   140→INDEX_STATS=$(wazir index stats --json 2>/dev/null)\n   141→FILE_COUNT=$(echo \"$INDEX_STATS\" | jq -r '.file_count // 0')\n   142→if [ \"$FILE_COUNT\" -eq 0 ]; then\n   143→  wazir index build && wazir index summarize --tier all\n   144→else\n   145→  wazir index refresh\n   146→fi\n   147→```\n   148→\n   149→### Pipeline Init Check\n   150→\n   151→Check if `.wazir/state/config.json` exists.\n   152→\n   153→- **If missing** — invoke the `init-pipeline` skill.\n   154→- **If exists** — continue.\n   155→\n   156→## Step 3: Create Run Directory\n   157→\n   158→Generate a run ID using the current timestamp: `run-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS`\n   159→\n   160→```bash\n   161→mkdir -p .wazir/runs/run-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS/{sources,tasks,artifacts,reviews,clarified}\n   162→ln -sfn run-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS .wazir/runs/latest\n   163→```\n   164→\n   165→Initialize event capture:\n   166→\n   167→```bash\n   168→wazir capture init --run <run-id> --phase init --status starting\n   169→```\n   170→\n   171→### Resume Detection\n   172→\n   173→Check if a previous incomplete run exists (via `latest` symlink pointing to a run without `completed_at`).\n   174→\n   175→**If previous incomplete run found**, present:\n   176→\n   177→> **A previous incomplete run was detected:** `<previous-run-id>`\n   178→\n   179→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   180→- **Question:** \"A previous incomplete run was detected. Resume or start fresh?\"\n   181→- **Options:**\n   182→  1. \"Resume from the last completed phase\" *(Recommended)*\n   183→  2. \"Start fresh with a new empty run\"\n   184→\n   185→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   186→\n   187→**If Resume:**\n   188→- Copy `clarified/` from previous run into new run, EXCEPT `user-feedback.md`.\n   189→- Detect last completed phase by checking which artifacts exist.\n   190→- **Staleness check:** If input files are newer than copied artifacts, warn and offer to re-run clarification.\n   191→\n   192→## Step 4: Build Run Config\n   193→\n   194→**No questions asked.** Depth, intent, and mode are all inferred or defaulted.\n   195→\n   196→### Intent Inference\n   197→\n   198→Infer intent from the request text using keyword matching:\n   199→\n   200→| Keywords in request | Inferred Intent |\n   201→|-------------------|-----------------|\n   202→| fix, bug, broken, crash, error, issue, wrong | `bugfix` |\n   203→| refactor, clean, restructure, reorganize, rename, simplify | `refactor` |\n   204→| doc, document, readme, guide, explain | `docs` |\n   205→| research, spike, explore, investigate, prototype | `spike` |\n   206→| (anything else) | `feature` |\n   207→\n   208→Depth defaults to `standard`. Override only via inline modifiers (`/wazir quick ...`, `/wazir deep ...`).\n   209→\n   210→### Write Run Config\n   211→\n   212→Save to `.wazir/runs/<run-id>/run-config.yaml`:\n   213→\n   214→```yaml\n   215→run_id: run-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS\n   216→parent_run_id: null\n   217→continuation_reason: null\n   218→\n   219→request: \"the original user request\"\n   220→request_summary: \"short summary\"\n   221→parsed_intent: feature\n   222→entry_point: \"/wazir\"\n   223→\n   224→depth: standard\n   225→interaction_mode: guided  # auto | guided | interactive\n   226→\n   227→# Workflow policy — individual workflows within each phase\n   228→workflow_policy:\n   229→  # Clarifier phase workflows\n   230→  discover:       { enabled: true, loop_cap: 10 }\n   231→  clarify:        { enabled: true, loop_cap: 10 }\n   232→  specify:        { enabled: true, loop_cap: 10 }\n   233→  spec-challenge: { enabled: true, loop_cap: 10 }\n   234→  author:         { enabled: false, loop_cap: 10 }\n   235→  design:         { enabled: true, loop_cap: 10 }\n   236→  design-review:  { enabled: true, loop_cap: 10 }\n   237→  plan:           { enabled: true, loop_cap: 10 }\n   238→  plan-review:    { enabled: true, loop_cap: 10 }\n   239→  # Executor phase workflows\n   240→  execute:        { enabled: true, loop_cap: 10 }\n   241→  verify:         { enabled: true, loop_cap: 5 }\n   242→  # Final Review phase workflows\n   243→  review:         { enabled: true, loop_cap: 10 }\n   244→  learn:          { enabled: true, loop_cap: 5 }\n   245→  prepare_next:   { enabled: true, loop_cap: 5 }\n   246→  run_audit:      { enabled: false, loop_cap: 10 }\n   247→\n   248→research_topics: []\n   249→\n   250→created_at: \"YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ\"\n   251→completed_at: null\n   252→```\n   253→\n   254→### Workflow Skip Rules\n   255→\n   256→Map intent + depth to applicable workflows. The system decides — the user does NOT pick.\n   257→\n   258→| Class | Workflows | Rules |\n   259→|-------|-----------|-------|\n   260→| **Core** (always run) | `clarify`, `execute`, `verify`, `review` | Never skipped |\n   261→| **Adaptive** (run when evidence says so) | `discover`, `design`, `author`, `specify` | Skipped for bugfix/docs/spike at quick depth |\n   262→| **Scale** (intensity varies) | `spec-challenge`, `plan-review`, `design-review` | Loop cap controls iteration depth |\n   263→| **Post-run** (always run) | `learn`, `prepare_next` | Part of Final Review phase |\n   264→\n   265→Log skip decisions with reasons in `workflow_policy`.\n   266→\n   267→### Confidence Gate\n   268→\n   269→After building run config:\n   270→\n   271→- **High confidence** — one-line summary and proceed:\n   272→  > **Running: standard depth, feature, sequential. Proceeding...**\n   273→\n   274→- **Low confidence** — show plan and ask:\n   275→\n   276→  Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   277→  - **Question:** \"Does this run configuration look right?\"\n   278→  - **Options:**\n   279→    1. \"Yes, proceed\" *(Recommended)*\n   280→    2. \"No, let me adjust\"\n   281→\n   282→  Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   283→\n   284→```bash\n   285→wazir capture event --run <run-id> --event phase_exit --phase init --status completed\n   286→```\n   287→\n   288→Run the phase report and display it to the user:\n   289→```bash\n   290→wazir report phase --run <run-id> --phase init\n   291→```\n   292→\n   293→Output the report content to the user in the conversation.\n   294→\n   295→---\n   296→\n   297→# Interaction Modes\n   298→\n   299→The `interaction_mode` field in run-config controls how the pipeline interacts with the user:\n   300→\n   301→| Mode | Inline modifier | Behavior | Best for |\n   302→|------|----------------|----------|----------|\n   303→| **`guided`** | (default) | Pipeline runs, pauses at phase checkpoints for user approval. Current default behavior. | Most work |\n   304→| **`auto`** | `/wazir auto ...` | No human checkpoints. Codex reviews all. Gating agent decides continue/loop_back/escalate. Stops ONLY on escalate. | Overnight, clear spec, well-understood domain |\n   305→| **`interactive`** | `/wazir interactive ...` | More questions, more discussion, co-designs with user. Researcher presents options. Executor checks approach before coding. | Ambiguous requirements, new domain, learning |\n   306→\n   307→## `auto` mode constraints\n   308→\n   309→- **Codex REQUIRED** — refuse to start auto mode if `multi_tool.codex` is not configured in `.wazir/state/config.json`. Error: \"Auto mode requires an external reviewer (Codex). Configure it first or use guided mode.\"\n   310→- **On escalate:** STOP immediately, write the escalation reason to `.wazir/runs/<id>/escalations/`, and wait for user input\n   311→- **Wall-clock limit:** default 4 hours. If exceeded, stop with escalation.\n   312→- **Never auto-commits to main** — always work on feature branch\n   313→- All checkpoints (AskUserQuestion) are skipped — gating agent evaluates phase reports and decides\n   314→\n   315→## `guided` mode (default)\n   316→\n   317→Current behavior — no changes needed. Checkpoints at phase boundaries, user approves before advancing.\n   318→\n   319→## `interactive` mode\n   320→\n   321→- **Clarifier:** asks more detailed questions, presents research findings with options: \"I found 3 approaches — which interests you?\"\n   322→- **Executor:** checks approach before coding: \"I'm about to implement auth with Supabase — sound right?\"\n   323→- **Reviewer:** discusses findings with user, not just presents verdict: \"I found a potential auth bypass — here's why I think it's high severity, do you agree?\"\n   324→- Slower but highest quality for complex/ambiguous work\n   325→\n   326→## Mode checking in phase skills\n   327→\n   328→All phase skills check `interaction_mode` from run-config at every checkpoint:\n   329→\n   330→```\n   331→# Read from run-config\n   332→interaction_mode = run_config.interaction_mode ?? 'guided'\n   333→\n   334→# At each checkpoint:\n   335→if interaction_mode == 'auto':\n   336→    # Skip checkpoint, let gating agent decide\n   337→elif interaction_mode == 'interactive':\n   338→    # More detailed question, present options, discuss\n   339→else:\n   340→    # guided — standard checkpoint with AskUserQuestion\n   341→```\n   342→\n   343→---\n   344→\n   345→# Two-Level Phase Model\n   346→\n   347→The pipeline has 4 top-level **phases**, each containing multiple **workflows** with review loops:\n   348→\n   349→```\n   350→Phase 1: Init\n   351→  └── (inline — no sub-workflows)\n   352→\n   353→Phase 2: Clarifier\n   354→  ├── discover (research) ← research-review loop\n   355→  ├── clarify ← clarification-review loop\n   356→  ├── specify ← spec-challenge loop\n   357→  ├── author (adaptive) ← approval gate\n   358→  ├── design ← design-review loop\n   359→  └── plan ← plan-review loop\n   360→\n   361→Phase 3: Executor\n   362→  ├── execute (per-task) ← task-review loop per task\n   363→  └── verify\n   364→\n   365→Phase 4: Final Review\n   366→  ├── review (final) ← scored review\n   367→  ├── learn\n   368→  └── prepare_next\n   369→```\n   370→\n   371→**Event capture uses both levels.** When emitting phase events, include `--parent-phase`:\n   372→```bash\n   373→wazir capture event --run <id> --event phase_enter --phase discover --parent-phase clarifier --status in_progress\n   374→```\n   375→\n   376→**Progress markers between workflows:** After each workflow completes, output:\n   377→> Phase 2: Clarifier > Workflow: specify (3 of 6 workflows complete)\n   378→\n   379→**`wazir status` shows both levels:** \"Phase 2: Clarifier > Workflow: specify\"\n   380→\n   381→---\n   382→\n   383→# Phase 2: Clarifier\n   384→\n   385→**Before starting this phase, output to the user:**\n   386→\n   387→> **Clarifier Phase** — About to research your codebase, clarify requirements, harden the spec, brainstorm designs, and produce an execution plan.\n   388→>\n   389→> **Why this matters:** Without this, I'd guess your tech stack, misunderstand constraints, miss edge cases in the spec, and build the wrong architecture. Every ambiguity left unresolved here becomes a bug or rework cycle later.\n   390→>\n   391→> **Looking for:** Unstated assumptions, scope boundaries, conflicting requirements, missing acceptance criteria\n   392→\n   393→```bash\n   394→wazir capture event --run <run-id> --event phase_enter --phase clarifier --status in_progress\n   395→```\n   396→\n   397→Invoke the `wz:clarifier` skill. It handles all sub-workflows internally:\n   398→\n   399→1. **Source Capture** — fetch URLs from input\n   400→2. **Research** (discover workflow) — codebase + external research\n   401→3. **Clarify** (clarify workflow) — scope, constraints, assumptions\n   402→4. **Spec Harden** (specify + spec-challenge workflows) — measurable spec\n   403→5. **Brainstorm** (design + design-review workflows) — design approaches\n   404→6. **Plan** (plan + plan-review workflows) — execution plan\n   405→\n   406→Each sub-workflow has its own review loop. User checkpoints between major steps.\n   407→\n   408→### Scope Invariant\n   409→\n   410→**Hard rule:** `items_in_plan >= items_in_input` unless the user explicitly approves scope reduction. The clarifier MUST NOT autonomously tier, defer, or drop items from the user's input. It can suggest prioritization, but the decision belongs to the user.\n   411→\n   412→Output: approved spec + design + execution plan in `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/`.\n   413→\n   414→**After completing this phase, output to the user:**\n   415→\n   416→> **Clarifier Phase complete.**\n   417→>\n   418→> **Found:** [N] ambiguities resolved, [N] assumptions made explicit, [N] scope boundaries drawn, [N] acceptance criteria hardened\n   419→>\n   420→> **Without this phase:** Requirements would be interpreted differently across tasks, acceptance criteria would be vague and untestable, the design would be ad-hoc, and the plan would miss dependency ordering\n   421→>\n   422→> **Changed because of this work:** [List spec tightening changes, resolved questions, design decisions, scope adjustments]\n   423→\n   424→```bash\n   425→wazir capture event --run <run-id> --event phase_exit --phase clarifier --status completed\n   426→```\n   427→\n   428→Run the phase report and display savings to the user:\n   429→```bash\n   430→wazir report phase --run <run-id> --phase clarifier\n   431→wazir stats --run <run-id>\n   432→```\n   433→\n   434→**Show savings in conversation output:**\n   435→> **Context savings this phase:** Used wazir index for [N] queries and context-mode for [M] commands, saving ~[X] tokens ([Y]% reduction). Without these, this phase would have consumed [A] tokens instead of [B].\n   436→\n   437→Output the report content to the user in the conversation.\n   438→\n   439→---\n   440→\n   441→# Phase 3: Executor\n   442→\n   443→**Before starting this phase, output to the user:**\n   444→\n   445→> **Executor Phase** — About to implement [N] tasks in dependency order with TDD (test-first), per-task code review, and verification before each commit.\n   446→>\n   447→> **Why this matters:** Without this discipline, tests get skipped, edge cases get missed, integration points break silently, and review catches problems too late when they're expensive to fix.\n   448→>\n   449→> **Looking for:** Correct dependency ordering, test coverage for each task, clean per-task review passes, no implementation drift from the approved plan\n   450→\n   451→## Phase Gate (Hard Gate)\n   452→\n   453→Before entering the Executor phase, verify ALL clarifier artifacts exist:\n   454→\n   455→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/clarification.md`\n   456→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/spec-hardened.md`\n   457→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/design.md`\n   458→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/execution-plan.md`\n   459→\n   460→If ANY file is missing, **STOP**:\n   461→\n   462→> **Cannot enter Executor phase: missing prerequisite artifacts from Clarifier.**\n   463→>\n   464→> Missing: [list missing files]\n   465→>\n   466→> The Clarifier phase must complete before execution can begin. Run `/wazir:clarifier` first.\n   467→\n   468→**Do NOT skip this check. Do NOT rationalize that the input is \"clear enough\" to bypass clarification. Every pipeline run must produce these artifacts.**\n   469→\n   470→```bash\n   471→wazir capture event --run <run-id> --event phase_enter --phase executor --status in_progress\n   472→```\n   473→\n   474→**Pre-execution gate:**\n   475→\n   476→```bash\n   477→wazir validate manifest && wazir validate hooks\n   478→# Hard gate — stop if either fails.\n   479→```\n   480→\n   481→Invoke the `wz:executor` skill. It handles:\n   482→\n   483→1. **Execute** (execute workflow) — per-task TDD cycle with review before each commit\n   484→2. **Verify** (verify workflow) — deterministic verification of all claims\n   485→\n   486→Per-task review: `--mode task-review`, 5 task-execution dimensions.\n   487→Tasks always run sequentially.\n   488→\n   489→Output: code changes + verification proof in `.wazir/runs/latest/artifacts/`.\n   490→\n   491→**After completing this phase, output to the user:**\n   492→\n   493→> **Executor Phase complete.**\n   494→>\n   495→> **Found:** [N]/[N] tasks implemented, [N] tests written, [N] per-task review passes completed, [N] findings fixed before commit\n   496→>\n   497→> **Without this phase:** Code would ship without tests, review findings would accumulate until final review (10x more expensive to fix), and verification claims would be unsubstantiated\n   498→>\n   499→> **Changed because of this work:** [List of commits with conventional commit messages, test counts, verification evidence collected]\n   500→\n   501→```bash\n   502→wazir capture event --run <run-id> --event phase_exit --phase executor --status completed\n   503→```\n   504→\n   505→Run the phase report and display savings to the user:\n   506→```bash\n   507→wazir report phase --run <run-id> --phase executor\n   508→wazir stats --run <run-id>\n   509→```\n   510→\n   511→Output the report content to the user in the conversation.\n   512→\n   513→**Show savings in conversation output:**\n   514→> **Context savings this phase:** Used wazir index for [N] queries and context-mode for [M] commands, saving ~[X] tokens ([Y]% reduction).\n   515→\n   516→---\n   517→\n   518→# Phase 4: Final Review\n   519→\n   520→**Before starting this phase, output to the user:**\n   521→\n   522→> **Final Review Phase** — About to run adversarial 7-dimension review comparing the implementation against your original input, extract durable learnings, and prepare the handoff.\n   523→>\n   524→> **Why this matters:** Without this, implementation drift ships undetected, missing acceptance criteria go unnoticed, untested code paths hide bugs, and the same mistakes repeat in the next run.\n   525→>\n   526→> **Looking for:** Spec violations, missing features, dead code paths, unsubstantiated claims, scope creep, security gaps, stale documentation\n   527→\n   528→## Phase Gate (Hard Gate)\n   529→\n   530→Before entering the Final Review phase, verify the Executor produced its proof:\n   531→\n   532→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/artifacts/verification-proof.md`\n   533→\n   534→If missing, **STOP**:\n   535→\n   536→> **Cannot enter Final Review: missing verification proof from Executor.**\n   537→>\n   538→> The Executor phase must complete and produce `verification-proof.md` before final review. Run `/wazir:executor` first.\n   539→\n   540→```bash\n   541→wazir capture event --run <run-id> --event phase_enter --phase final_review --status in_progress\n   542→```\n   543→\n   544→This phase validates the implementation against the **ORIGINAL INPUT** (not the task specs — the executor's per-task reviewer already covered that).\n   545→\n   546→### 4a: Review (reviewer role in final mode)\n   547→\n   548→Invoke `wz:reviewer --mode final`.\n   549→7-dimension scored review comparing implementation against the original user input.\n   550→Score 0-70. Verdicts: PASS (56+), NEEDS MINOR FIXES (42-55), NEEDS REWORK (28-41), FAIL (0-27).\n   551→\n   552→### 4b: Learn (learner role)\n   553→\n   554→Extract durable learnings from the completed run:\n   555→- Scan all review findings (internal + Codex)\n   556→- Propose learnings to `memory/learnings/proposed/`\n   557→- Findings that recur across 2+ runs → auto-proposed as learnings\n   558→- Learnings require explicit scope tags (roles, stacks, concerns)\n   559→\n   560→**Learn workflow completion guard:** If `workflow_policy.learn.enabled: true` in run config AND no files exist in `memory/learnings/proposed/` matching the current run ID pattern (`run-<current-id>-*.md`): log a warning finding: 'Learn workflow enabled but no proposed learnings written for this run'. This ensures the learn workflow always produces output when enabled.\n   561→\n   562→### 4c: Prepare Next (planner role)\n   563→\n   564→Prepare context and handoff for the next run:\n   565→- Write handoff document\n   566→- Compress/archive unneeded files\n   567→- Record what's left to do\n   568→\n   569→**After completing this phase, output to the user:**\n   570→\n   571→> **Final Review Phase complete.**\n   572→>\n   573→> **Found:** [N] findings across 7 dimensions, [N] blocking issues, [N] warnings, [N] learnings proposed for future runs\n   574→>\n   575→> **Without this phase:** Implementation drift from the original request would ship undetected, untested paths would hide production bugs, and recurring mistakes would never get captured as learnings\n   576→>\n   577→> **Changed because of this work:** [List of findings fixed, score achieved, learnings extracted, handoff prepared]\n   578→\n   579→```bash\n   580→wazir capture event --run <run-id> --event phase_exit --phase final_review --status completed\n   581→```\n   582→\n   583→Run the phase report and display it to the user:\n   584→```bash\n   585→wazir report phase --run <run-id> --phase final_review\n   586→```\n   587→\n   588→Output the report content to the user in the conversation.\n   589→\n   590→---\n   591→\n   592→## Step 5: CHANGELOG + Gitflow Validation (Hard Gates)\n   593→\n   594→Before presenting results:\n   595→\n   596→```bash\n   597→wazir validate changelog --require-entries --base main\n   598→wazir validate commits --base main\n   599→```\n   600→\n   601→Both must pass before PR. These are not warnings.\n   602→\n   603→## Step 6: Present Results\n   604→\n   605→After the reviewer completes, present verdict with numbered options:\n   606→\n   607→### If PASS (score 56+):\n   608→\n   609→> **Result: PASS (score/70)**\n   610→\n   611→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   612→- **Question:** \"Pipeline passed. What would you like to do next?\"\n   613→- **Options:**\n   614→  1. \"Create a PR\" *(Recommended)*\n   615→  2. \"Merge directly\"\n   616→  3. \"Review the changes first\"\n   617→\n   618→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   619→\n   620→### If NEEDS MINOR FIXES (score 42-55):\n   621→\n   622→> **Result: NEEDS MINOR FIXES (score/70)**\n   623→\n   624→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   625→- **Question:** \"Minor issues found. How should we handle them?\"\n   626→- **Options:**\n   627→  1. \"Auto-fix and re-review\" *(Recommended)*\n   628→  2. \"Fix manually\"\n   629→  3. \"Accept as-is\"\n   630→\n   631→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   632→\n   633→### If NEEDS REWORK (score 28-41):\n   634→\n   635→> **Result: NEEDS REWORK (score/70)**\n   636→\n   637→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   638→- **Question:** \"Significant issues found. How should we proceed?\"\n   639→- **Options:**\n   640→  1. \"Re-run affected tasks\" *(Recommended)*\n   641→  2. \"Review findings in detail\"\n   642→  3. \"Abandon this run\"\n   643→\n   644→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   645→\n   646→### If FAIL (score 0-27):\n   647→\n   648→> **Result: FAIL (score/70)**\n   649→>\n   650→> Something fundamental went wrong. Review the findings above.\n   651→\n   652→### Run Summary\n   653→\n   654→```bash\n   655→wazir capture summary --run <run-id>\n   656→wazir status --run <run-id> --json\n   657→```\n   658→\n   659→## Error Handling\n   660→\n   661→If any phase fails:\n   662→\n   663→> **Phase [name] failed: [reason]**\n   664→\n   665→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   666→- **Question:** \"Phase [name] failed: [reason]. How should we proceed?\"\n   667→- **Options:**\n   668→  1. \"Retry this phase\" *(Recommended)*\n   669→  2. \"Skip and continue\" *(only if workflows within phase are adaptive)*\n   670→  3. \"Abort the run\"\n   671→\n   672→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   673→\n   674→---\n   675→\n   676→# Audit Mode\n   677→\n   678→Triggered by `/wazir audit` or `/wazir audit <focus>`.\n   679→\n   680→Runs a structured codebase audit. Invokes the `run-audit` skill.\n   681→\n   682→Parse inline audit types: `/wazir audit security` → skip Question 1.\n   683→\n   684→After audit:\n   685→\n   686→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   687→- **Question:** \"Audit complete. What would you like to do with the findings?\"\n   688→- **Options:**\n   689→  1. \"Review the findings\" *(Recommended)*\n   690→  2. \"Generate a fix plan\"\n   691→  3. \"Run the pipeline on the fix plan\"\n   692→\n   693→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   694→\n   695→If option 3, save findings as briefing and run pipeline with intent = `bugfix`.\n   696→\n   697→---\n   698→\n   699→# PRD Mode\n   700→\n   701→Triggered by `/wazir prd` or `/wazir prd <run-id>`.\n   702→\n   703→Generates a PRD from a completed run. Reads approved design, task specs, execution plan, review results. Saves to `docs/prd/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-prd.md`.\n   704→\n   705→After generation:\n   706→\n   707→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   708→- **Question:** \"PRD generated. What would you like to do?\"\n   709→- **Options:**\n   710→  1. \"Review the PRD\" *(Recommended)*\n   711→  2. \"Commit it\"\n   712→  3. \"Edit before committing\"\n   713→\n   714→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   715→\n   716→---\n   717→\n   718→## Reasoning Chain Output\n   719→\n   720→Every phase produces reasoning output at two layers:\n   721→\n   722→### Layer 1: Conversation Output (concise — for the user)\n   723→\n   724→Before each major decision, output one trigger sentence and one reasoning sentence:\n   725→\n   726→> \"Your request mentions 'overnight autonomous run' — researching how Devin and Karpathy's autoresearch handle this, because unattended runs need different safety constraints than interactive ones.\"\n   727→\n   728→After each phase, output what was found and a counterfactual:\n   729→\n   730→> \"Found: you use Supabase auth (not custom JWT). If I'd skipped research, I would have built JWT middleware — completely wrong.\"\n   731→\n   732→### Layer 2: File Output (detailed — for learning and reports)\n   733→\n   734→Save full reasoning chain to `.wazir/runs/<id>/reasoning/phase-<name>-reasoning.md` with entries:\n   735→\n   736→```markdown\n   737→### Decision: [title]\n   738→- **Trigger:** What prompted this decision\n   739→- **Options considered:** List of alternatives\n   740→- **Chosen:** The selected option\n   741→- **Reasoning:** Why this option was chosen\n   742→- **Confidence:** high | medium | low\n   743→- **Counterfactual:** What would have gone wrong without this information\n   744→```\n   745→\n   746→Create the `reasoning/` directory during run init. Every phase skill (clarifier, executor, reviewer) writes its own reasoning file. Counterfactuals appear in BOTH conversation output AND reasoning files.\n   747→\n   748→## Interaction Rules\n   749→\n   750→- **One question at a time** — never combine multiple questions\n   751→- **Numbered options** — always present choices as numbered lists\n   752→- **Mark defaults** — always show \"(Recommended)\" on the suggested option\n   753→- **Wait for answer** — never proceed past a question until the user responds\n   754→- **No open-ended questions** — every question has concrete options to pick from\n   755→- **Inline answers accepted** — users can type the number or the option name\n   756→"}]},"uuid":"8b0624bf-1761-47e4-b335-79bb82875b85","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:18.423Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"b4d6f61a-31e9-4581-b5a4-11487d89f2c5","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"8b0624bf-1761-47e4-b335-79bb82875b85","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01KwCc9N1YxxTv6XXnzCDRTM","toolUseID":"toolu_01KwCc9N1YxxTv6XXnzCDRTM","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:18.752Z","uuid":"c6f8327e-f54d-4dee-8ff6-9a9459620eaa","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"d0727f2a-689b-482a-982c-64b3d4881333","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01KwCc9N1YxxTv6XXnzCDRTM","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: wz:clarifier\n     3→description: Run the clarification pipeline — research, clarify scope, brainstorm design, generate task specs and execution plan. Pauses for user approval between phases.\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Clarifier\n     7→\n     8→## Command Routing\n     9→Follow the Canonical Command Matrix in `hooks/routing-matrix.json`.\n    10→- Large commands (test runners, builds, diffs, dependency trees, linting) → context-mode tools\n    11→- Small commands (git status, ls, pwd, wazir CLI) → native Bash\n    12→- If context-mode unavailable, fall back to native Bash with warning\n    13→\n    14→## Codebase Exploration\n    15→1. Query `wazir index search-symbols <query>` first\n    16→2. Use `wazir recall file <path> --tier L1` for targeted reads\n    17→3. Fall back to direct file reads ONLY for files identified by index queries\n    18→4. Maximum 10 direct file reads without a justifying index query\n    19→5. If no index exists: `wazir index build && wazir index summarize --tier all`\n    20→\n    21→Run the Clarifier phase — everything from reading input to having an approved execution plan.\n    22→\n    23→**Pacing rule:** This skill has mandatory user checkpoints between sub-workflows. Do NOT skip checkpoints. Do NOT combine sub-workflows. Complete each fully, present output, and wait for explicit user approval before advancing.\n    24→\n    25→Review loops follow the pattern in `docs/reference/review-loop-pattern.md`. All reviewer invocations use explicit `--mode`.\n    26→\n    27→**Standalone mode:** If no `.wazir/runs/latest/` exists, artifacts go to `docs/plans/` and review logs go alongside.\n    28→\n    29→## Prerequisites\n    30→\n    31→1. Check `.wazir/state/config.json` exists. If not, run `wazir init` first.\n    32→2. Check `.wazir/input/briefing.md` exists. If not, ask the user what they want to build and save it there.\n    33→3. Scan `input/` (project-level) and `.wazir/input/` (state-level) for additional input files. Present what's found.\n    34→4. Read config for `default_depth` and `multi_tool` settings.\n    35→5. **Load accepted learnings:**\n    36→   1. Glob `memory/learnings/accepted/*.md`\n    37→   2. For each file: read YAML frontmatter, extract `scope` tags (e.g., `scope: [auth, react, security]`)\n    38→   3. Match scope tags against current run's intent (from run config `parsed_intent`) and detected stack (from research findings or `config.json` stack settings)\n    39→   4. Inject matching learnings into context, sorted by confidence (highest first), most recent first, limit 10\n    40→   5. If no accepted learnings exist or no matches found: skip silently — this is expected until the pipeline matures\n    41→6. Create a run directory if one doesn't exist:\n    42→   ```bash\n    43→   mkdir -p .wazir/runs/run-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS/{sources,tasks,artifacts,reviews,clarified}\n    44→   ln -sfn run-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS .wazir/runs/latest\n    45→   ```\n    46→\n    47→---\n    48→\n    49→## Context-Mode Usage\n    50→\n    51→Read `context_mode` from `.wazir/state/config.json`:\n    52→\n    53→- **If `context_mode.enabled: true`:** Use `fetch_and_index` for URL fetching, `search` for follow-up queries on indexed content. Use `execute` or `execute_file` for large outputs instead of Bash.\n    54→- **If `context_mode.enabled: false`:** Fall back to `WebFetch` for URLs and `Bash` for commands.\n    55→\n    56→---\n    57→\n    58→## Sub-Workflow 1: Research (discover workflow)\n    59→\n    60→**Before starting this phase, output to the user:**\n    61→\n    62→> **Research** — About to scan the codebase and fetch external references to understand the existing architecture, tech stack, and any standards referenced in the briefing.\n    63→>\n    64→> **Why this matters:** Without research, I'd assume the wrong framework version, miss existing patterns in the codebase, and contradict established conventions. Every wrong assumption here cascades into a wrong spec and wrong implementation.\n    65→>\n    66→> **Looking for:** Existing code patterns, dependency versions, external standard definitions, architectural constraints\n    67→\n    68→Delegate to the discover workflow (`workflows/discover.md`):\n    69→\n    70→1. **Keyword extraction:** Read the briefing and extract concepts/terms that are vague, reference external standards, or use unfamiliar terminology.\n    71→   - **When to research:** concept references an external standard by name, uses a tool/library not seen in the codebase, or is ambiguous enough that two agents could interpret it differently.\n    72→   - **When NOT to research:** concept is fully defined in the input, or it's a well-known programming concept.\n    73→2. **Fetch sources:** For each concept needing research:\n    74→   - Use `fetch_and_index` (if context-mode available) or `WebFetch` to fetch the source.\n    75→   - Save fetched content to `.wazir/runs/latest/sources/`.\n    76→   - Track each fetch in `sources/manifest.json`.\n    77→3. **Error handling:** 404/unreachable → log failure, continue. Research is best-effort.\n    78→4. The **researcher role** produces the research artifact.\n    79→5. The **reviewer role** runs the research-review loop with `--mode research-review`.\n    80→6. Loop runs for `pass_counts[depth]` passes.\n    81→\n    82→Save result to `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/research-brief.md`.\n    83→\n    84→**After completing this phase, output to the user:**\n    85→\n    86→> **Research complete.**\n    87→>\n    88→> **Found:** [N] external sources fetched, [N] codebase patterns identified, [N] architectural constraints documented\n    89→>\n    90→> **Without this phase:** Spec would be built on assumptions instead of evidence — wrong framework APIs, missed existing utilities, contradicted naming conventions\n    91→>\n    92→> **Changed because of this work:** [List of key discoveries — e.g., \"found existing auth middleware at src/middleware/auth.ts\", \"project uses Vitest not Jest\"]\n    93→\n    94→### Checkpoint: Research Review\n    95→\n    96→> **Research complete. Here's what I found:**\n    97→>\n    98→> [Summary of codebase state, relevant architecture, external context]\n    99→\n   100→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   101→- **Question:** \"Does the research look complete and accurate?\"\n   102→- **Options:**\n   103→  1. \"Looks good, continue\" *(Recommended)*\n   104→  2. \"Missing context — let me add more information\"\n   105→  3. \"Wrong direction — let me clarify the intent\"\n   106→\n   107→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   108→\n   109→---\n   110→\n   111→## Sub-Workflow 2: Clarify (clarify workflow)\n   112→\n   113→**Before starting this phase, output to the user:**\n   114→\n   115→> **Clarification** — About to transform the briefing and research into a precise scope document with explicit constraints, assumptions, and boundaries.\n   116→>\n   117→> **Why this matters:** Without explicit clarification, \"add user auth\" could mean OAuth, magic links, or username/password. Every ambiguity left here becomes a 50/50 coin flip during implementation that could produce the wrong feature.\n   118→>\n   119→> **Looking for:** Ambiguous requirements, implicit assumptions, missing constraints, scope boundaries, unresolved questions\n   120→\n   121→### Input Preservation (before producing clarification)\n   122→\n   123→1. Glob `.wazir/input/tasks/*.md`. If files exist:\n   124→   - Adopt those specs as the starting point — copy content verbatim into the clarification's item descriptions.\n   125→   - Enhance with codebase scan + research findings. **Never remove detail — only add.**\n   126→   - Every acceptance criterion from input must appear verbatim.\n   127→   - Every API endpoint, color hex code, and UI dimension from input must appear in the relevant item section.\n   128→2. If `.wazir/input/tasks/` is empty or missing, synthesize from `briefing.md` alone.\n   129→\n   130→### Informed Question Batching (after research, before producing clarification)\n   131→\n   132→Research has completed. You now have codebase context and external findings. Before producing the clarification, ask the user INFORMED questions — informed by the research, not guesses.\n   133→\n   134→**Rules:**\n   135→1. **Research runs FIRST, questions come AFTER.** Never ask questions before research completes.\n   136→2. **Batch questions:** 1-3 batches of 3-7 questions each. Never one-at-a-time.\n   137→3. **Every scope exclusion must be explicitly confirmed by the user.** You MUST NOT decide that something is \"out of scope\" without asking. If the input doesn't mention docs, ask: \"The input doesn't mention documentation — should we include API docs, or is that explicitly out of scope?\" Do NOT assume.\n   138→4. **If the input is clear and complete:** Zero questions is fine. State: \"Input is clear and specific. No ambiguities detected. Proceeding with clarification.\"\n   139→5. **In auto mode (`interaction_mode: auto`):** Questions go to the gating agent, not the user.\n   140→6. **In interactive mode (`interaction_mode: interactive`):** More detailed questions, present research findings that informed each question.\n   141→\n   142→**Question format:**\n   143→```\n   144→Based on research, I have [N] questions before proceeding:\n   145→\n   146→**Scope & Intent**\n   147→1. [Question informed by research finding]\n   148→2. [Question about ambiguous requirement]\n   149→\n   150→**Technical Decisions**\n   151→3. [Question about architecture choice discovered during research]\n   152→4. [Question about dependency/framework preference]\n   153→\n   154→**Boundaries**\n   155→5. [Explicit scope boundary question — \"Should X be included or excluded?\"]\n   156→```\n   157→\n   158→Ask via AskUserQuestion with the full batch. Wait for answers. If answers introduce new ambiguity, ask a follow-up batch (max 3 batches total).\n   159→\n   160→### Clarification Production\n   161→\n   162→Read the briefing, research brief, user answers to questions, and codebase context. Produce:\n   163→\n   164→- **What** we're building — concrete deliverables\n   165→- **Why** — the motivation and business value\n   166→- **Constraints** — technical, timeline, dependencies\n   167→- **Assumptions** — what we're taking as given (each explicitly confirmed by user or clearly stated in input)\n   168→- **Scope boundaries** — what's IN and what's explicitly OUT (every exclusion must reference the user's confirmation: \"Out of scope per user confirmation in question batch 1, Q5\")\n   169→- **Unresolved questions** — anything still ambiguous after question batches\n   170→\n   171→Save to `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/clarification.md`.\n   172→\n   173→Invoke `wz:reviewer --mode clarification-review`. Resolve findings before presenting to user.\n   174→\n   175→**After completing this phase, output to the user:**\n   176→\n   177→> **Clarification complete.**\n   178→>\n   179→> **Found:** [N] ambiguities resolved, [N] assumptions documented, [N] scope boundaries defined, [N] items explicitly marked out-of-scope\n   180→>\n   181→> **Without this phase:** Implementation would proceed with hidden assumptions, scope would creep mid-build, and acceptance criteria would be vague enough to pass any implementation\n   182→>\n   183→> **Changed because of this work:** [List of resolved ambiguities — e.g., \"clarified auth means OAuth2 with Google provider only\", \"out-of-scope: mobile responsive for v1\"]\n   184→\n   185→### Checkpoint: Clarification Review\n   186→\n   187→> **Here's the clarified scope:**\n   188→>\n   189→> [Full clarification]\n   190→\n   191→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   192→- **Question:** \"Does the clarified scope accurately capture what you want to build?\"\n   193→- **Options:**\n   194→  1. \"Approved — continue to spec hardening\" *(Recommended)*\n   195→  2. \"Needs changes — let me provide corrections\"\n   196→  3. \"Missing important context — let me add information\"\n   197→\n   198→Wait for the user's selection before continuing. Route feedback: plan corrections → `user-feedback.md`, new requirements → `briefing.md`.\n   199→\n   200→---\n   201→\n   202→## Sub-Workflow 3: Spec Harden (specify + spec-challenge workflows)\n   203→\n   204→**Before starting this phase, output to the user:**\n   205→\n   206→> **Spec Hardening** — About to convert the clarified scope into a measurable, testable specification and then run adversarial spec-challenge review to find gaps.\n   207→>\n   208→> **Why this matters:** Without hardening, acceptance criteria stay vague (\"it should work well\") instead of measurable (\"response time under 200ms for 95th percentile\"). Vague specs pass any implementation, making review meaningless.\n   209→>\n   210→> **Looking for:** Untestable criteria, missing error handling specs, undefined edge cases, performance requirements, security constraints\n   211→\n   212→Delegate to the specify workflow (`workflows/specify.md`):\n   213→\n   214→1. The **specifier role** produces a measurable spec from clarification + research.\n   215→2. Invoke `wz:reviewer --mode spec-challenge`.\n   216→3. Loop runs for `pass_counts[depth]` passes.\n   217→\n   218→Save result to `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/spec-hardened.md`.\n   219→\n   220→**After completing this phase, output to the user:**\n   221→\n   222→> **Spec Hardening complete.**\n   223→>\n   224→> **Found:** [N] acceptance criteria tightened, [N] edge cases added, [N] error handling requirements specified, [N] spec-challenge findings resolved\n   225→>\n   226→> **Without this phase:** Acceptance criteria would be subjective, review would have no concrete standard to measure against, and \"done\" would mean whatever the implementer decided\n   227→>\n   228→> **Changed because of this work:** [List of hardening changes — e.g., \"added 404 handling spec for missing resources\", \"specified max payload size of 5MB\", \"added rate limit requirement of 100 req/min\"]\n   229→\n   230→### Content-Author Detection\n   231→\n   232→After spec hardening, scan the spec for content needs. Auto-enable the `author` workflow if the spec mentions any of:\n   233→- Database seeding, seed data, fixtures, sample records\n   234→- Sample content, placeholder text, demo data\n   235→- Test fixtures, mock API responses, test data files\n   236→- Translations, i18n strings, localization\n   237→- Copy (button labels, error messages, onboarding text)\n   238→- Documentation content, user guides, API docs\n   239→- Email templates, notification text\n   240→\n   241→If detected, set `workflow_policy.author.enabled = true` in the run config and note:\n   242→> **Content needs detected.** The content-author workflow will run after design approval to produce: [list detected content types].\n   243→\n   244→### Checkpoint: Hardened Spec Review\n   245→\n   246→> **Spec hardened. Changes made:**\n   247→>\n   248→> [List of gaps found and how they were tightened]\n   249→\n   250→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   251→- **Question:** \"Are the spec hardening changes acceptable?\"\n   252→- **Options:**\n   253→  1. \"Approved — continue to brainstorming\" *(Recommended)*\n   254→  2. \"Disagree with a change — let me specify\"\n   255→  3. \"Found more gaps — let me add\"\n   256→\n   257→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   258→\n   259→---\n   260→\n   261→## Sub-Workflow 4: Brainstorm (design + design-review workflows)\n   262→\n   263→**Before starting this phase, output to the user:**\n   264→\n   265→> **Brainstorming** — About to propose 2-3 design approaches with explicit trade-offs, then run design-review on the approved choice.\n   266→>\n   267→> **Why this matters:** Without exploring alternatives, the first approach that comes to mind gets built — even if a simpler, more maintainable, or more performant option exists. This is where architectural mistakes get caught cheaply instead of discovered during implementation.\n   268→>\n   269→> **Looking for:** Architectural trade-offs, scalability implications, complexity vs. simplicity, alignment with existing codebase patterns\n   270→\n   271→Invoke the `brainstorming` skill (`wz:brainstorming`):\n   272→\n   273→1. Propose 2-3 viable approaches with explicit trade-offs\n   274→2. For each approach: effort estimate, risk assessment, what it enables/prevents\n   275→3. Recommend one approach with rationale\n   276→\n   277→### Checkpoint: Design Approval\n   278→\n   279→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   280→- **Question:** \"Which design approach should we implement?\"\n   281→- **Options:**\n   282→  1. \"Approach A — [one-line summary]\" *(Recommended)*\n   283→  2. \"Approach B — [one-line summary]\"\n   284→  3. \"Approach C — [one-line summary]\"\n   285→  4. \"Modify an approach — let me specify changes\"\n   286→\n   287→Wait for the user's selection before continuing. This is the most important checkpoint.\n   288→\n   289→Save approved design to `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/design.md`.\n   290→\n   291→**After completing this phase, output to the user:**\n   292→\n   293→> **Brainstorming complete.**\n   294→>\n   295→> **Found:** [N] approaches evaluated, [N] trade-offs documented, [N] design-review findings resolved\n   296→>\n   297→> **Without this phase:** The first viable approach would be built without considering alternatives — potentially choosing a complex solution when a simple one exists, or an approach that conflicts with existing patterns\n   298→>\n   299→> **Changed because of this work:** [Selected approach and why, rejected alternatives and why, design-review adjustments made]\n   300→\n   301→After approval: design-review loop with `--mode design-review` (5 canonical dimensions: spec coverage, design-spec consistency, accessibility, visual consistency, exported-code fidelity).\n   302→\n   303→---\n   304→\n   305→## Sub-Workflow 5: Plan (plan + plan-review workflows)\n   306→\n   307→**Before starting this phase, output to the user:**\n   308→\n   309→> **Planning** — About to break the approved design into ordered, dependency-aware implementation tasks with a gap analysis against the original input.\n   310→>\n   311→> **Why this matters:** Without explicit planning, tasks get implemented in the wrong order (breaking dependencies), items from the input get silently dropped, and task granularity is either too coarse (monolithic changes that are hard to review) or too fine (overhead without value).\n   312→>\n   313→> **Looking for:** Correct dependency ordering, complete input coverage, appropriate task granularity, clear acceptance criteria per task\n   314→\n   315→Delegate to `wz:writing-plans`:\n   316→\n   317→1. Planner produces a SINGLE execution plan at `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/execution-plan.md` in spec-kit format.\n   318→2. **Gap analysis exit gate:** Compare original input against plan. Invoke `wz:reviewer --mode plan-review`.\n   319→3. Loop until clean or cap reached.\n   320→\n   321→**After completing this phase, output to the user:**\n   322→\n   323→> **Planning complete.**\n   324→>\n   325→> **Found:** [N] tasks created, [N] dependencies mapped, [N] plan-review findings resolved, [N] gap analysis items addressed\n   326→>\n   327→> **Without this phase:** Tasks would be implemented in ad-hoc order breaking dependencies, input items would be silently dropped, and task sizes would vary wildly making review inconsistent\n   328→>\n   329→> **Changed because of this work:** [Task count, dependency chain summary, any items reordered or split during plan-review]\n   330→\n   331→### Checkpoint: Plan Review\n   332→\n   333→> **Implementation plan: [N] tasks**\n   334→>\n   335→> | # | Task | Complexity | Dependencies | Description |\n   336→> |---|------|-----------|--------------|-------------|\n   337→\n   338→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   339→- **Question:** \"Does the implementation plan look correct and complete?\"\n   340→- **Options:**\n   341→  1. \"Approved — ready for execution\" *(Recommended)*\n   342→  2. \"Reorder or split tasks\"\n   343→  3. \"Missing tasks\"\n   344→  4. \"Too granular / too coarse\"\n   345→\n   346→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   347→\n   348→---\n   349→\n   350→### Scope Coverage Gate (Hard Gate)\n   351→\n   352→Before presenting the plan to the user, verify ALL input items are covered:\n   353→\n   354→1. Count distinct items/deliverables in the input briefing (`.wazir/input/briefing.md` + any `input/*.md` files)\n   355→2. Count tasks in the execution plan\n   356→3. **If `tasks_in_plan < items_in_input`:** STOP and present:\n   357→\n   358→> **Scope reduction detected.** The input contains [N] items but the plan only covers [M].\n   359→>\n   360→> Missing items: [list]\n   361→\n   362→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   363→- **Question:** \"The plan is missing [N-M] items from your input. How should we proceed?\"\n   364→- **Options:**\n   365→  1. \"Add missing items to the plan\" *(Recommended)*\n   366→  2. \"Approve reduced scope — I confirm these items can be dropped\"\n   367→\n   368→**The clarifier MUST NOT autonomously drop items into \"future tiers\", \"deferred\", or \"out of scope\" without explicit user approval. This is a hard rule.**\n   369→\n   370→Invariant: `items_in_plan >= items_in_input` unless user explicitly approves reduction.\n   371→\n   372→---\n   373→\n   374→## Reasoning Output\n   375→\n   376→Throughout the clarifier phase, produce reasoning at two layers:\n   377→\n   378→### User Output: Before Research\n   379→\n   380→```\n   381→I'm about to research your request. Here's what I need to figure out:\n   382→1. [specific thing] — because [why it matters for YOUR request]\n   383→2. [specific thing] — because [risk if we skip this]\n   384→3. [specific thing] — because [what could go wrong]\n   385→```\n   386→\n   387→### User Output: After Research\n   388→\n   389→```\n   390→Research complete. Here's what I found and why it matters:\n   391→1. [finding] — this means [impact on your project]\n   392→   Without this: [what would have gone wrong]\n   393→2. [finding] — this changes [specific decision]\n   394→   Without this: [concrete mistake avoided]\n   395→```\n   396→\n   397→### User Output: Before Clarification Questions\n   398→\n   399→```\n   400→I have [N] questions before we proceed. These aren't bureaucratic — each one prevents a specific mistake:\n   401→1. [question] — asking because [what goes wrong if I assume]\n   402→2. [question] — asking because [concrete risk]\n   403→```\n   404→\n   405→### User Output: Between Sub-Workflows\n   406→\n   407→```\n   408→[Previous workflow] complete. Moving to [next workflow] because [concrete reason].\n   409→Key input from previous step: [what carries forward and why it matters].\n   410→```\n   411→\n   412→**File (Layer 2):** Write `.wazir/runs/<id>/reasoning/phase-clarifier-reasoning.md` with structured entries per decision:\n   413→- **Trigger** — what prompted the decision\n   414→- **Options considered** — alternatives evaluated\n   415→- **Chosen** — selected option\n   416→- **Reasoning** — why\n   417→- **Confidence** — high/medium/low\n   418→- **Counterfactual** — what would go wrong without this info\n   419→\n   420→Examples of clarifier reasoning entries:\n   421→- \"Trigger: input says 'auth' without specifying provider. Options: ask user, assume OAuth2, assume magic links. Chosen: ask user. Counterfactual: assuming OAuth2 when user wanted Supabase auth = wrong middleware, 2 days rework.\"\n   422→- \"Trigger: 13 items in input. Options: plan all 13, tier into must/should/could. Chosen: plan all 13 (user explicitly said 'do not tier'). Counterfactual: tiering would silently drop 5 items.\"\n   423→\n   424→## Done\n   425→\n   426→When the plan is approved:\n   427→\n   428→> **Clarifier phase complete.**\n   429→>\n   430→> - Spec: `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/spec-hardened.md`\n   431→> - Design: `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/design.md`\n   432→> - Plan: `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/execution-plan.md`\n   433→>\n   434→> **Next:** Run `/executor` to implement the plan.\n   435→"}]},"uuid":"bee735b0-3513-4f33-9d9e-7c879e439b9c","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:18.751Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"d0727f2a-689b-482a-982c-64b3d4881333","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"bee735b0-3513-4f33-9d9e-7c879e439b9c","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"progress","data":{"type":"hook_progress","hookEvent":"PostToolUse","hookName":"PostToolUse:Read","command":"callback"},"parentToolUseID":"toolu_01Va5XZrMcxLHK4RsdweHzHQ","toolUseID":"toolu_01Va5XZrMcxLHK4RsdweHzHQ","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:28.998Z","uuid":"121dac91-55d4-4a60-b945-1f658cb04963","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"fbe8b3d3-5f0a-42f9-a1f5-08025deed6ba","isSidechain":true,"promptId":"67fcde4a-7483-4526-a2da-9ae9514890c8","agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","type":"user","message":{"role":"user","content":[{"tool_use_id":"toolu_01Va5XZrMcxLHK4RsdweHzHQ","type":"tool_result","content":"     1→---\n     2→name: wz:executor\n     3→description: Run the execution phase — implement the approved plan with TDD, quality gates, and verification.\n     4→---\n     5→\n     6→# Executor\n     7→\n     8→## Model Annotation\n     9→When multi-model mode is enabled, the executor phase uses:\n    10→- **Sonnet** for per-task implementation (write-implementation)\n    11→- **Sonnet** for per-task review (task-review)\n    12→- **Sonnet** for test execution (run-tests)\n    13→- **Opus** for orchestration decisions\n    14→\n    15→## Command Routing\n    16→Follow the Canonical Command Matrix in `hooks/routing-matrix.json`.\n    17→- Large commands (test runners, builds, diffs, dependency trees, linting) → context-mode tools\n    18→- Small commands (git status, ls, pwd, wazir CLI) → native Bash\n    19→- If context-mode unavailable, fall back to native Bash with warning\n    20→\n    21→## Codebase Exploration\n    22→1. Query `wazir index search-symbols <query>` first\n    23→2. Use `wazir recall file <path> --tier L1` for targeted reads\n    24→3. Fall back to direct file reads ONLY for files identified by index queries\n    25→4. Maximum 10 direct file reads without a justifying index query\n    26→5. If no index exists: `wazir index build && wazir index summarize --tier all`\n    27→\n    28→Run the Executor phase — implement the approved plan, then verify all claims.\n    29→\n    30→## Phase Prerequisites (Hard Gate)\n    31→\n    32→Before proceeding, verify these artifacts exist. Check each file. If ANY file is missing, **STOP immediately** and report:\n    33→\n    34→> **Cannot start Executor phase: missing prerequisite artifacts.**\n    35→>\n    36→> Missing:\n    37→> - [list missing files]\n    38→>\n    39→> Run `/wazir:clarifier` to produce the missing artifacts.\n    40→\n    41→Required artifacts:\n    42→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/clarification.md`\n    43→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/spec-hardened.md`\n    44→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/design.md`\n    45→- [ ] `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/execution-plan.md`\n    46→\n    47→**This is a hard gate. Do NOT proceed without all artifacts. Do NOT rationalize that the input is \"clear enough\" to skip phases. The existence of detailed input does NOT replace the pipeline's clarification, specification, design, and planning phases.**\n    48→\n    49→**Standalone mode exception:** If `.wazir/runs/latest/` does not exist at all, operate in standalone mode (skip this check).\n    50→\n    51→## Prerequisites\n    52→\n    53→1. Read the execution plan from `.wazir/runs/latest/clarified/execution-plan.md`.\n    54→2. Read `.wazir/state/config.json` for depth settings.\n    55→\n    56→## Pre-Execution Validation\n    57→\n    58→Run these checks before implementing:\n    59→- `wazir validate manifest` — confirm manifest schema is valid\n    60→- `wazir validate hooks` — confirm hook contracts are intact\n    61→\n    62→If either fails, surface the failure and do NOT proceed until resolved.\n    63→\n    64→> **Output to the user** before execution begins:\n    65→> Each task is implemented with TDD (test first, then code) and reviewed before commit. This catches correctness bugs, missing tests, wiring errors, and spec drift at the task level — before they compound across tasks and become expensive to fix.\n    66→\n    67→## Security Awareness\n    68→\n    69→Before implementing each task, check if the task touches security-sensitive areas. Run `detectSecurityPatterns` (from `tooling/src/checks/security-sensitivity.js`) mentally against the planned changes. If security patterns are detected (auth, token, password, session, SQL, fetch, upload, secret, env, API key, cookie, CORS, CSRF, JWT, OAuth, encrypt, decrypt, hash, salt):\n    70→\n    71→- Load security expertise from the composition map for the relevant concern\n    72→- Apply defense-in-depth: validate inputs, parameterize queries, escape outputs, use secure defaults\n    73→- The per-task reviewer will automatically add security dimensions when patterns are detected — expect and address security findings\n    74→\n    75→## Execute (execute workflow)\n    76→\n    77→Implement tasks in the order defined by the execution plan.\n    78→\n    79→For each task:\n    80→\n    81→**Before starting each task, output to the user:**\n    82→\n    83→> **Implementing Task [NNN]: [task title]** — This enables [what downstream tasks or user-facing features depend on this task].\n    84→>\n    85→> **Looking for:** [Key technical concerns for this specific task — e.g., \"correct API contract\", \"database migration safety\", \"backwards compatibility\"]\n    86→\n    87→1. **Read** the task from the execution plan\n    88→2. **Implement** using TDD (write test first, make it pass, refactor)\n    89→3. **Verify locally** — run tests, type checks, linting as appropriate\n    90→4. **Review BEFORE commit** (per-task review, NOT final review):\n    91→   - Reviewer runs task-review loop with `--mode task-review` using 5 task-execution dimensions (correctness, tests, wiring, drift, quality)\n    92→   - Reads Codex model from config: `CODEX_MODEL=$(jq -r '.multi_tool.codex.model // empty' .wazir/state/config.json 2>/dev/null); CODEX_MODEL=${CODEX_MODEL:-gpt-5.4}`\n    93→   - Uses `codex review -c model=\"$CODEX_MODEL\" --uncommitted` for the current task's changes\n    94→   - Codex error handling: if codex exits non-zero, log error, mark pass as `codex-unavailable`, use self-review only for that pass. Do NOT skip. Next pass still attempts Codex.\n    95→   - Executor resolves findings, reviewer re-reviews\n    96→   - Loop runs for `pass_counts[depth]` passes (quick=3, standard=5, deep=7). No extension.\n    97→   - Review logs: `.wazir/runs/latest/reviews/execute-task-<NNN>-review-pass-<N>.md`\n    98→   - Loop cap tracking: `wazir capture loop-check --task-id <NNN>`\n    99→   - See `docs/reference/review-loop-pattern.md` for full protocol\n   100→   - NOTE: this is the per-task review (5 dims), not the final scored review (7 dims) which runs in Phase 4\n   101→5. **Commit** — only after review passes, commit with conventional commit format: `<type>(<scope>): <description>`\n   102→   - **HARD RULE: One task = one commit.** Commit after EACH task completes its review. Never batch multiple tasks into a single commit. If the reviewer detects multi-task batching, the commit is REJECTED.\n   103→6. **CHANGELOG** — if user-facing change, update `CHANGELOG.md` under `[Unreleased]` using keepachangelog types: Added, Changed, Fixed, Removed, Deprecated, Security.\n   104→7. **Record** evidence at `.wazir/runs/latest/artifacts/task-NNN/`\n   105→\n   106→**After completing each task, output to the user:**\n   107→\n   108→> **Completed Task [NNN]: [task title].**\n   109→>\n   110→> **Changed:** [List of files created/modified, tests added, key implementation decisions]\n   111→>\n   112→> **Without this task:** [Concrete risk — e.g., \"no auth middleware means all routes are publicly accessible\", \"no migration means schema change would require manual DB intervention\"]\n   113→>\n   114→> **Review result:** [N] findings in [N] review passes, [N] fixed before commit\n   115→\n   116→Review loops follow `docs/reference/review-loop-pattern.md`. Code review scoping: review uncommitted changes before commit. If changes are committed, use `--base <pre-task-sha>`.\n   117→\n   118→Tasks always run sequentially.\n   119→\n   120→**Standalone mode:** When no `.wazir/runs/latest/` exists, review logs go to `docs/plans/`.\n   121→\n   122→> **Output to the user** before verification:\n   123→> Verification produces deterministic proof — actual command output, not claims. It confirms that tests pass, types check, linters are clean, and every acceptance criterion has evidence. This is the evidence gate that separates \"I think it works\" from \"here is proof it works.\"\n   124→\n   125→## Verify (verify workflow)\n   126→\n   127→After all tasks are complete, run deterministic verification:\n   128→\n   129→1. Run the full test suite\n   130→2. Run type checks (if applicable)\n   131→3. Run linters\n   132→4. Verify all acceptance criteria from the spec have evidence\n   133→5. Produce verification proof at `.wazir/runs/latest/artifacts/verification-proof.md`\n   134→\n   135→This is NOT a review loop — it produces proof, not findings. If verification fails, report which criteria lack evidence and offer to fix.\n   136→\n   137→## Context Retrieval\n   138→\n   139→- Use `wazir index search-symbols <query>` to locate relevant code before reading\n   140→- Read full files directly when editing or verifying\n   141→- Use `wazir recall file <path> --tier L1` for files you need to understand but not modify\n   142→- When dispatching subagents, include: \"Use wazir index search-symbols before direct file reads.\"\n   143→\n   144→## Interaction Mode Awareness\n   145→\n   146→Read `interaction_mode` from run-config at the start of execution:\n   147→\n   148→- **`auto`:** Skip user checkpoints. On escalation, write reason to `.wazir/runs/<id>/escalations/` and STOP (do not proceed without user). Gating agent evaluates phase reports.\n   149→- **`guided`:** Standard behavior — ask user on escalation, show per-task completion summaries.\n   150→- **`interactive`:** Before implementing each task, briefly describe the approach and ask: \"About to implement [task] using [approach] — sound right?\" Show more detail in per-task summaries.\n   151→\n   152→## Escalation\n   153→\n   154→Pause and ask the user when:\n   155→- The plan is blocked or contradictory\n   156→- Implementation would require unapproved scope change\n   157→- A task's acceptance criteria can't be met\n   158→\n   159→When escalating, use this pattern:\n   160→\n   161→Ask the user via AskUserQuestion:\n   162→- **Question:** \"[Describe the specific blocker or conflict]\"\n   163→- **Options:**\n   164→  1. \"Adjust the plan to work around the blocker\" *(Recommended)*\n   165→  2. \"Expand scope to handle the new requirement\"\n   166→  3. \"Skip this task and continue with the rest\"\n   167→  4. \"Abort the run\"\n   168→\n   169→Wait for the user's selection before continuing.\n   170→\n   171→## Reasoning Output\n   172→\n   173→Throughout the executor phase, produce reasoning at two layers:\n   174→\n   175→### User Output: Before Execution\n   176→\n   177→```\n   178→Starting implementation. Here's what I'm building and in what order:\n   179→- Task 1: [what] — depends on nothing, starting first\n   180→- Task 2: [what] — needs Task 1's [specific output]\n   181→I'll commit after each task and show you what changed.\n   182→```\n   183→\n   184→### User Output: Before Each Task\n   185→\n   186→```\n   187→Implementing Task [N]: [title]\n   188→This enables: [what downstream tasks or user value depends on this]\n   189→Key concern: [the main technical risk or decision point]\n   190→```\n   191→\n   192→### User Output: After Each Task\n   193→\n   194→```\n   195→Task [N] complete: [one-line summary]\n   196→- Changed: [files]\n   197→- Tests: [pass/fail count]\n   198→- Commit: [hash]\n   199→Next: Task [N+1] — [title]\n   200→```\n   201→\n   202→### User Output: Progress\n   203→\n   204→```\n   205→Progress: Task [N] of [M] complete ([X]%)\n   206→```\n   207→\n   208→**File (Layer 2):** Write `.wazir/runs/<id>/reasoning/phase-executor-reasoning.md` with structured entries per implementation decision:\n   209→- **Trigger** — what prompted the decision (e.g., \"task spec requires auth middleware\")\n   210→- **Options considered** — implementation alternatives\n   211→- **Chosen** — selected approach\n   212→- **Reasoning** — why this approach over alternatives\n   213→- **Confidence** — high/medium/low\n   214→- **Counterfactual** — what would break without this decision\n   215→\n   216→Key executor reasoning moments: architecture choices, library selections, API design decisions, test strategy decisions, and any deviation from the plan.\n   217→\n   218→## Done\n   219→\n   220→When all tasks are complete and verified:\n   221→\n   222→> **Executor phase complete.**\n   223→>\n   224→> - Tasks: [completed]/[total] implemented\n   225→> - Verification: proof at `.wazir/runs/latest/artifacts/verification-proof.md`\n   226→>\n   227→> **Next:** Run `/reviewer --mode final` to review against the original input.\n   228→"}]},"uuid":"5ae4a726-7d4b-4903-bd40-f18bfab466be","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:38:28.997Z","sourceToolAssistantUUID":"fbe8b3d3-5f0a-42f9-a1f5-08025deed6ba","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}
+{"parentUuid":"5ae4a726-7d4b-4903-bd40-f18bfab466be","isSidechain":true,"agentId":"ac1bc783364405e5f","message":{"model":"claude-opus-4-6","id":"msg_01Tn9AV9hVHvNaQMc64fQhFT","type":"message","role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"\n\nI now have a comprehensive understanding of both superpowers' persuasion engineering approach and Wazir's current skill state. Let me compile the complete playbook.\n\n---\n\n# Persuasion Engineering Playbook for Wazir Skill Rewriting\n\n## Part I: The Research Foundation\n\n### 1. The Seven Persuasion Principles (Cialdini, 2021)\n\nSuperpowers' `persuasion-principles.md` (at `/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/persuasion-principles.md`) maps Cialdini's seven principles of influence to LLM skill design. Here is each principle, how superpowers applies it, and how it maps to LLM compliance:\n\n**1. Authority** -- Deference to expertise, credentials, official sources.\n- LLM mechanism: Imperative language (\"YOU MUST\", \"Never\", \"Always\"), non-negotiable framing (\"No exceptions\"), eliminates decision fatigue and rationalization.\n- Superpowers usage: The Iron Law pattern -- `NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST`. Every discipline skill has one.\n- LLM compliance mapping: Authority language precedes compliance in training data. When training data contains patterns like \"expert says X, then person does X\", the model learns that authoritative framing = high-priority instruction.\n- **Effectiveness: HIGH.** Most effective for discipline-enforcing skills.\n\n**2. Commitment** -- Consistency with prior actions, statements, public declarations.\n- LLM mechanism: Require announcements (\"Announce skill usage\"), force explicit choices (\"Choose A, B, or C\"), use tracking (TodoWrite for checklists).\n- Superpowers usage: `using-superpowers` skill requires \"I'm using [Skill Name]\" announcements. Checklists with TodoWrite.\n- LLM compliance mapping: Once a model has stated \"I'm using TDD\", subsequent token generation is biased toward TDD-consistent behavior. The commitment creates a self-reinforcing constraint in the generation sequence.\n- **Effectiveness: HIGH.** Announcement + checklist = automatic behavior.\n\n**3. Scarcity** -- Urgency from time limits or limited availability.\n- LLM mechanism: Time-bound requirements (\"Before proceeding\"), sequential dependencies (\"Immediately after X\"), prevents procrastination.\n- Superpowers usage: `verification-before-completion` -- \"If you haven't run the verification command in this message, you cannot claim it passes.\"\n- LLM compliance mapping: Temporal constraints (\"BEFORE claiming any status\") create hard gates in the generation sequence. The model cannot produce the completion claim without first producing the verification step.\n- **Effectiveness: MEDIUM-HIGH.** Works well for gating, less for sustained discipline.\n\n**4. Social Proof** -- Conformity to what others do or what is considered normal.\n- LLM mechanism: Universal patterns (\"Every time\", \"Always\"), failure modes (\"X without Y = failure\"), establishes norms.\n- Superpowers usage: \"Checklists without TodoWrite tracking = steps get skipped. Every time.\"\n- LLM compliance mapping: Training data is full of patterns where universal claims precede compliance. \"Everyone does X\" establishes a norm the model treats as default behavior.\n- **Effectiveness: MEDIUM.** Reinforces other principles but weak alone.\n\n**5. Unity** -- Shared identity, \"we-ness\", in-group belonging.\n- LLM mechanism: Collaborative language (\"our codebase\", \"we're colleagues\"), shared goals (\"we both want quality\").\n- Superpowers usage: `receiving-code-review` -- \"We're colleagues working together. I need your honest technical judgment.\"\n- LLM compliance mapping: Creates a frame where non-compliance = betraying the group. More effective for collaborative skills than discipline enforcement.\n- **Effectiveness: MEDIUM.** Best for non-hierarchical practices and honest feedback culture.\n\n**6. Reciprocity** -- Obligation to return benefits received.\n- LLM mechanism: Sparingly used. \"Can feel manipulative.\"\n- Superpowers usage: Explicitly marked as \"rarely needed in skills.\"\n- **Effectiveness: LOW.** Superpowers recommends avoiding for skill design.\n\n**7. Liking** -- Preference for cooperating with those we like.\n- LLM mechanism: Explicitly marked as \"DON'T USE for compliance.\"\n- Superpowers usage: Actively avoided because it conflicts with honest feedback culture and creates sycophancy.\n- **Effectiveness: NEGATIVE.** Creates sycophancy, undermines discipline skills.\n\n### Principle Combinations by Skill Type (from persuasion-principles.md)\n\n| Skill Type | Use | Avoid |\n|---|---|---|\n| Discipline-enforcing | Authority + Commitment + Social Proof | Liking, Reciprocity |\n| Guidance/technique | Moderate Authority + Unity | Heavy authority |\n| Collaborative | Unity + Commitment | Authority, Liking |\n| Reference | Clarity only | All persuasion |\n\n---\n\n### 2. The Meincke et al. (2025) Study\n\n**Full citation:** Meincke, L., Shapiro, D., Duckworth, A. L., Mollick, E., Mollick, L., & Cialdini, R. (2025). \"Call Me A Jerk: Persuading AI to Comply with Objectionable Requests.\" University of Pennsylvania / Wharton.\n\n**What they tested:**\n- N = 28,000 AI conversations with GPT-4o-mini\n- Two objectionable requests: \"Call me a jerk\" and a request for restricted chemical synthesis information\n- For each of 7 persuasion principles, they compared a control prompt to a treatment prompt embodying that principle\n- Each principle was tested with matched controls to isolate its effect\n\n**Key findings:**\n- Baseline compliance (control): 33.3%\n- Treatment compliance (with persuasion cues): 72.0%\n- More than 2x increase in compliance (p < .001)\n- Authority, commitment, and scarcity were the most effective individual principles\n- In some cases, commitment cues pushed compliance near 100%\n\n**The \"parahuman\" model:** LLMs exhibit \"parahuman tendencies\" -- they respond to the same persuasion principles as humans because they were trained on vast corpora of human text. The social patterns embedded in training data (deference to authority, commitment consistency, conformity to norms) get baked into the model's generation behavior.\n\n**Implication for skill writing:** Persuasion principles are not metaphorical when applied to LLMs. They produce measurable, statistically significant compliance improvements. The same techniques that make humans follow rules make LLMs follow rules.\n\nSources:\n- [SSRN Paper](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5357179)\n- [Wharton GAIL Summary](https://gail.wharton.upenn.edu/research-and-insights/call-me-a-jerk-persuading-ai/)\n\n---\n\n### 3. CSO (Claude Search Optimization)\n\nCSO is superpowers' term for optimizing skill metadata so that Claude's skill selection mechanism correctly identifies and loads the right skill. The key insight comes from `/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/SKILL.md`, lines 140-197.\n\n**Why descriptions matter so much:**\n\nAt startup, Claude Code pre-loads ONLY the frontmatter metadata (name + description) from all available skills. Claude reads the full SKILL.md only when it decides a skill is relevant based on this metadata. The description is the ONLY input to the skill selection decision.\n\n**The critical discovery:** When a description summarizes the skill's workflow, Claude may follow the description instead of reading the full skill content. This is the single most important CSO finding:\n\n- BAD: `description: Use when executing plans - dispatches subagent per task with code review between tasks` -- Claude followed this literal description (one review) instead of reading the skill's flowchart (which showed TWO reviews: spec compliance then code quality).\n- GOOD: `description: Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session` -- No workflow summary. Claude had to read the full skill to understand the process, and correctly followed the two-stage review.\n\n**The trap:** Descriptions that summarize workflow create a shortcut Claude will take. The skill body becomes documentation Claude skips. Description = triggering conditions ONLY. Never what the skill does or how.\n\n**CSO Rules:**\n1. Start with \"Use when...\" -- focus on triggering conditions\n2. Include specific symptoms, situations, contexts\n3. NEVER summarize the skill's process or workflow in the description\n4. Write in third person (injected into system prompt)\n5. Keep under 500 characters\n6. Use concrete problem language, not technology-specific symptoms unless the skill IS technology-specific\n7. Add keywords for searchability: error messages, symptoms, synonyms, tool names\n\n---\n\n### 4. How Superpowers Tests Skills (RED/GREEN/REFACTOR)\n\nSuperpowers applies TDD to skill documentation (from `testing-skills-with-subagents.md` and `SKILL.md` writing-skills).\n\n**RED Phase -- Write Failing Test (Baseline):**\n1. Create pressure scenarios (3+ combined pressures: time + sunk cost + authority + exhaustion + social + pragmatic)\n2. Run scenarios WITHOUT the skill present\n3. Document exact behavior: what choices the agent made, what rationalizations they used (verbatim), which pressures triggered violations\n4. This is \"watch the test fail\" -- you must see what agents naturally do before writing the skill\n\n**GREEN Phase -- Write Minimal Skill:**\n1. Write skill addressing ONLY the specific rationalizations documented in RED\n2. Do not add extra content for hypothetical cases\n3. Run same scenarios WITH skill\n4. Agent should now comply\n5. If agent still fails: skill is unclear or incomplete. Revise.\n\n**REFACTOR Phase -- Close Loopholes:**\n1. Run more scenarios. Agent finds new rationalization? Add explicit counter.\n2. Build/expand the rationalization table\n3. Create/update red flags list\n4. Update CSO description with violation symptoms\n5. Re-test until bulletproof\n\n**Meta-testing (when GREEN is not working):**\nAfter an agent chooses wrong despite having the skill, ask it: \"How could that skill have been written differently to make it crystal clear that Option A was the only acceptable answer?\"\n\nThree response types reveal different problems:\n- \"The skill WAS clear, I chose to ignore it\" -- Need stronger foundational principle. Add \"Violating letter is violating spirit.\"\n- \"The skill should have said X\" -- Documentation gap. Add the agent's suggestion verbatim.\n- \"I didn't see section Y\" -- Organization problem. Make key points more prominent.\n\n**Pressure types tested:**\n\n| Pressure | Example |\n|---|---|\n| Time | Emergency, deadline, deploy window closing |\n| Sunk cost | Hours of work, \"waste\" to delete |\n| Authority | Senior says skip it, manager overrides |\n| Economic | Job, promotion, company survival at stake |\n| Exhaustion | End of day, already tired, want to go home |\n| Social | Looking dogmatic, seeming inflexible |\n| Pragmatic | \"Being pragmatic vs dogmatic\" |\n\nBest tests combine 3+ pressures. The `CLAUDE_MD_TESTING.md` example file (at `/Users/mohamedabdallah/.claude/plugins/cache/superpowers-marketplace/superpowers/4.3.1/skills/writing-skills/examples/CLAUDE_MD_TESTING.md`) shows 4 concrete test scenarios and 4 documentation variants (null, soft, directive, emphatic) with explicit success/failure criteria.\n\n---\n\n### 5. Complete Rationalization Table Inventory\n\nHere is every rationalization table found across ALL superpowers skills:\n\n**A. TDD Skill (`test-driven-development/SKILL.md`) -- 11 entries:**\n\n| Excuse | Reality |\n|---|---|\n| \"Too simple to test\" | Simple code breaks. Test takes 30 seconds. |\n| \"I'll test after\" | Tests passing immediately prove nothing. |\n| \"Tests after achieve same goals\" | Tests-after = \"what does this do?\" Tests-first = \"what should this do?\" |\n| \"Already manually tested\" | Ad-hoc is not systematic. No record, can't re-run. |\n| \"Deleting X hours is wasteful\" | Sunk cost fallacy. Keeping unverified code is technical debt. |\n| \"Keep as reference, write tests first\" | You'll adapt it. That's testing after. Delete means delete. |\n| \"Need to explore first\" | Fine. Throw away exploration, start with TDD. |\n| \"Test hard = design unclear\" | Listen to test. Hard to test = hard to use. |\n| \"TDD will slow me down\" | TDD faster than debugging. Pragmatic = test-first. |\n| \"Manual test faster\" | Manual doesn't prove edge cases. You'll re-test every change. |\n| \"Existing code has no tests\" | You're improving it. Add tests for existing code. |\n\n**B. Writing Skills Skill (`writing-skills/SKILL.md`) -- 8 entries:**\n\n| Excuse | Reality |\n|---|---|\n| \"Skill is obviously clear\" | Clear to you does not mean clear to other agents. Test it. |\n| \"It's just a reference\" | References can have gaps, unclear sections. Test retrieval. |\n| \"Testing is overkill\" | Untested skills have issues. Always. 15 min testing saves hours. |\n| \"I'll test if problems emerge\" | Problems = agents can't use skill. Test BEFORE deploying. |\n| \"Too tedious to test\" | Testing is less tedious than debugging bad skill in production. |\n| \"I'm confident it's good\" | Overconfidence guarantees issues. Test anyway. |\n| \"Academic review is enough\" | Reading does not equal using. Test application scenarios. |\n| \"No time to test\" | Deploying untested skill wastes more time fixing it later. |\n\n**C. Verification Before Completion Skill (`verification-before-completion/SKILL.md`) -- 8 entries:**\n\n| Excuse | Reality |\n|---|---|\n| \"Should work now\" | RUN the verification |\n| \"I'm confident\" | Confidence does not equal evidence |\n| \"Just this once\" | No exceptions |\n| \"Linter passed\" | Linter does not equal compiler |\n| \"Agent said success\" | Verify independently |\n| \"I'm tired\" | Exhaustion does not equal excuse |\n| \"Partial check is enough\" | Partial proves nothing |\n| \"Different words so rule doesn't apply\" | Spirit over letter |\n\n**D. Systematic Debugging Skill (`systematic-debugging/SKILL.md`) -- 8 entries:**\n\n| Excuse | Reality |\n|---|---|\n| \"Issue is simple, don't need process\" | Simple issues have root causes too. Process is fast for simple bugs. |\n| \"Emergency, no time for process\" | Systematic debugging is FASTER than guess-and-check thrashing. |\n| \"Just try this first, then investigate\" | First fix sets the pattern. Do it right from the start. |\n| \"I'll write test after confirming fix works\" | Untested fixes don't stick. Test first proves it. |\n| \"Multiple fixes at once saves time\" | Can't isolate what worked. Causes new bugs. |\n| \"Reference too long, I'll adapt the pattern\" | Partial understanding guarantees bugs. Read it completely. |\n| \"I see the problem, let me fix it\" | Seeing symptoms does not equal understanding root cause. |\n| \"One more fix attempt\" (after 2+ failures) | 3+ failures = architectural problem. Question pattern, don't fix again. |\n\n**E. Using Superpowers Skill (`using-superpowers/SKILL.md`) -- 12 entries:**\n\n| Thought | Reality |\n|---|---|\n| \"This is just a simple question\" | Questions are tasks. Check for skills. |\n| \"I need more context first\" | Skill check comes BEFORE clarifying questions. |\n| \"Let me explore the codebase first\" | Skills tell you HOW to explore. Check first. |\n| \"I can check git/files quickly\" | Files lack conversation context. Check for skills. |\n| \"Let me gather information first\" | Skills tell you HOW to gather information. |\n| \"This doesn't need a formal skill\" | If a skill exists, use it. |\n| \"I remember this skill\" | Skills evolve. Read current version. |\n| \"This doesn't count as a task\" | Action = task. Check for skills. |\n| \"The skill is overkill\" | Simple things become complex. Use it. |\n| \"I'll just do this one thing first\" | Check BEFORE doing anything. |\n| \"This feels productive\" | Undisciplined action wastes time. Skills prevent this. |\n| \"I know what that means\" | Knowing the concept does not equal using the skill. Invoke it. |\n\n**Total: 47 rationalization entries across 5 skills.**\n\n---\n\n### 6. Academic Research on LLM Instruction Compliance\n\n**Key papers and findings:**\n\n**A. Instruction Hierarchy (Wallace et al., 2024 -- ICLR 2025):**\n- LLMs treat system prompts, user instructions, and third-party data as same priority\n- Training with hierarchical instruction data drastically increases robustness to attacks\n- Implication for Wazir: Skills injected via system prompt path have highest priority. Skill content competes with conversation history for attention.\n- Source: [OpenReview](https://openreview.net/forum?id=vf5M8YaGPY)\n\n**B. The Instruction Gap (2025):**\n- Even large models (GPT-4) achieve only ~80% instruction-following accuracy on simple, non-ambiguous instructions\n- Smaller models perform worse (<50% accuracy)\n- Models fail especially when \"the target input itself resembles an instruction\" -- competing instructions degrade performance\n- Implication for Wazir: Instructions must be unambiguous, non-competing, and structurally clear.\n- Source: [arXiv](https://arxiv.org/html/2601.03269v1)\n\n**C. Sycophancy Research (2024-2025):**\n- LLMs have a tendency to conform to user opinions even when incorrect (trained to be helpful, which overrides accuracy)\n- Sycophancy has a linear structure in activation space -- it can be mechanistically identified and steered\n- Multiple origins: pre-training data (flattery-rich), post-training (reward for agreement), limited mitigation effectiveness\n- Implication for Wazir: Anti-sycophancy language (\"No performative agreement\", \"push back with technical reasoning\") is grounded in real model behavior.\n- Sources: [arXiv sycophancy survey](https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.15287), [Apple MLR](https://machinelearning.apple.com/research/do-llms-know-internally)\n\n**D. Implementation Intentions (Gollwitzer, 1999; updated through 2025):**\n- Psychology research shows \"if-then\" plans dramatically increase goal achievement\n- \"If [situation X], then I will [action Y]\" transforms vague intentions into automatic behavior\n- This maps directly to skill patterns: \"WHEN receiving code review feedback: 1. READ 2. UNDERSTAND 3. VERIFY 4. EVALUATE 5. RESPOND 6. IMPLEMENT\"\n- Implication for Wazir: Explicit trigger-action patterns (\"When X, do Y\") are more effective than general directives (\"generally do Y\").\n- Source: [Implementation Intentions research](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10463283.2020.1808936)\n\n**E. \"Can LLMs Follow Simple Rules?\" (2024):**\n- The vast majority of models fail to follow rules on a significant fraction of test cases\n- Even simple and clear instructions are violated\n- Performance correlates with instruction specificity and structural clarity\n- Source: [arXiv](https://arxiv.org/html/2311.04235v2)\n\n---\n\n## Part II: The Persuasion Engineering Patterns\n\nBased on complete analysis of all 14 superpowers skills plus the academic literature, here are the concrete patterns that make skills effective:\n\n### Pattern 1: The Iron Law\n\nEvery discipline skill has ONE non-negotiable rule in a code block, formatted as a shout:\n\n```\nNO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST\nNO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE\nNO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION FIRST\n```\n\n**Why it works:** Authority principle. The code-block formatting signals \"this is inviolable.\" All-caps creates visual salience. Single-sentence clarity eliminates interpretation wiggle room.\n\n### Pattern 2: The Foundational Principle\n\nEarly in the skill, before any process details:\n\n```\nViolating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.\n```\n\n**Why it works:** Closes the entire class of \"I'm following the spirit\" rationalizations. This single sentence, observed through TDD testing, was the difference between agents choosing Option C (write tests after) and Option A (delete code, start over).\n\n### Pattern 3: Explicit Loophole Closure\n\nNot just \"don't do X\" but listing every specific workaround and forbidding each:\n\n```\nWrite code before test? Delete it. Start over.\n\nNo exceptions:\n- Don't keep it as \"reference\"\n- Don't \"adapt\" it while writing tests\n- Don't look at it\n- Delete means delete\n```\n\n**Why it works:** LLMs are creative rationalizers. If you forbid the rule, they find workarounds. Each workaround must be explicitly named and forbidden. The \"delete means delete\" pattern eliminates semantic reinterpretation.\n\n### Pattern 4: The Rationalization Table\n\nA two-column table (Excuse | Reality) that preemptively addresses every known rationalization:\n\n```\n| Excuse | Reality |\n|--------|---------|\n| \"Too simple to test\" | Simple code breaks. Test takes 30 seconds. |\n```\n\n**Why it works:** Commitment principle + authority. The table format is scannable. When the model begins generating a rationalization, it encounters the pre-written counter in its context. The \"Reality\" column reframes each excuse before the model can develop it.\n\n### Pattern 5: Red Flags List\n\nAn explicit checklist of thoughts that signal rule violation:\n\n```\nRed Flags - STOP and Start Over:\n- Code before test\n- \"I already manually tested it\"\n- \"This is different because...\"\n\nAll of these mean: Delete code. Start over with TDD.\n```\n\n**Why it works:** Creates a self-monitoring mechanism. The model can pattern-match its own reasoning against the list. The terminal \"All of these mean: X\" closes every flag to the same action.\n\n### Pattern 6: The Gate Function\n\nA pseudocode-style conditional that blocks progress:\n\n```\nBEFORE claiming any status:\n1. IDENTIFY: What command proves this claim?\n2. RUN: Execute the FULL command\n3. READ: Full output, check exit code\n4. VERIFY: Does output confirm the claim?\n   - If NO: State actual status with evidence\n   - If YES: State claim WITH evidence\n5. ONLY THEN: Make the claim\n\nSkip any step = lying, not verifying\n```\n\n**Why it works:** Implementation intentions. The \"When X, do Y\" structure creates automatic behavior. The pseudocode format matches the model's training on code-follows-spec patterns. The final line (\"Skip any step = lying\") uses moral framing (authority principle).\n\n### Pattern 7: The EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT Block\n\nFrom `using-superpowers`:\n\n```\n<EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT>\nIf you think there is even a 1% chance a skill might apply,\nyou ABSOLUTELY MUST invoke the skill.\n\nIF A SKILL APPLIES TO YOUR TASK, YOU DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE.\nYOU MUST USE IT.\n\nThis is not negotiable. This is not optional.\nYou cannot rationalize your way out of this.\n</EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT>\n```\n\n**Why it works:** Maximum authority principle. XML tags signal structured importance. ALL CAPS for key phrases. Direct address (\"you\"). Explicitly closes the rationalization escape hatch.\n\n### Pattern 8: The HARD-GATE Tag\n\nFrom `brainstorming`:\n\n```\n<HARD-GATE>\nDo NOT invoke any implementation skill, write any code,\nscaffold any project, or take any implementation action\nuntil you have presented a design and the user has approved it.\nThis applies to EVERY project regardless of perceived simplicity.\n</HARD-GATE>\n```\n\n**Why it works:** Scarcity + authority. The XML tag creates structural separation. The exhaustive list of forbidden actions closes each workaround. \"EVERY project regardless of perceived simplicity\" closes the \"this is too simple\" rationalization.\n\n### Pattern 9: Anti-Sycophancy Language\n\nFrom `receiving-code-review`:\n\n```\nNEVER:\n- \"You're absolutely right!\"\n- \"Great point!\" / \"Excellent feedback!\"\n- \"Let me implement that now\" (before verification)\n\nINSTEAD:\n- Restate the technical requirement\n- Ask clarifying questions\n- Push back with technical reasoning if wrong\n- Just start working (actions > words)\n```\n\n**Why it works:** Overrides the sycophancy bias trained into the model. Provides explicit replacement behaviors. \"Actions > words\" creates a simple heuristic.\n\n### Pattern 10: Flowchart Decision Points\n\nUsed when the model might take the wrong path at a branch point:\n\n```dot\ndigraph when_to_use {\n    \"Have implementation plan?\" -> \"Tasks mostly independent?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Tasks mostly independent?\" -> \"subagent-driven-development\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    ...\n}\n```\n\n**Why it works:** Visual/structural disambiguation of decision logic. The model processes the graph structure and follows the correct branch. More effective than prose for non-obvious decisions.\n\n---\n\n## Part III: Applying to Wazir Skills\n\n### Current State Assessment\n\nWazir has 29 SKILL.md files. The core pipeline skills (`wazir`, `clarifier`, `executor`, `reviewer`, `verification`) are already substantial (some 500+ lines). However, comparing against superpowers' patterns reveals specific gaps:\n\n**What Wazir skills already do well:**\n- Hard gates with artifact prerequisites (executor, reviewer)\n- Phase-level reasoning output (counterfactuals in clarifier/executor/reviewer)\n- Interaction mode awareness\n- Command routing enforcement\n- The scope coverage invariant (`items_in_plan >= items_in_input`)\n- Detailed checkpoint patterns with numbered options\n\n**What Wazir skills are missing (persuasion engineering gaps):**\n\n1. **No Iron Laws in most skills.** The executor has a hard gate but no single-line Iron Law. The clarifier has no Iron Law. The reviewer has no Iron Law.\n\n2. **No foundational principle.** None of the Wazir skills have \"Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.\" This is the single highest-impact addition from superpowers' testing.\n\n3. **No rationalization tables.** Zero Wazir skills have rationalization tables. This is the most conspicuous absence. Every discipline skill needs one.\n\n4. **No red flags lists.** The executor has a \"Do NOT rationalize\" sentence but no structured red flags list with the \"All of these mean: X\" closure pattern.\n\n5. **CSO descriptions leak workflow.** Several Wazir descriptions summarize process rather than triggering conditions:\n   - `wz:wazir`: \"One-command pipeline -- type /wazir followed by what you want to build. Handles init, clarification, execution, review, and audits automatically.\" -- This describes WHAT it does, not WHEN to use it.\n   - `wz:clarifier`: \"Run the clarification pipeline -- research, clarify scope, brainstorm design, generate task specs and execution plan.\" -- Process summary.\n   - `wz:executor`: \"Run the execution phase -- implement the approved plan with TDD, quality gates, and verification.\" -- Process summary.\n\n6. **No commitment announcements.** Skills don't require the agent to announce \"I'm using [skill name] because [reason].\"\n\n7. **No meta-testing documentation.** No record of baseline testing, no documentation of observed rationalizations.\n\n8. **Missing explicit loophole closures.** The executor's \"Do NOT rationalize that the input is 'clear enough' to bypass clarification\" is good but isolated. Other loopholes are not explicitly named.\n\n### Rewrite Priority Matrix\n\n| Skill | Current Persuasion Score (0-10) | Priority | Key Additions Needed |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| `wz:wazir` | 3 | HIGH | Iron Law, CSO fix, rationalization table for pipeline skipping |\n| `wz:clarifier` | 4 | HIGH | Iron Law, rationalization table for scope reduction, red flags for assumption-making |\n| `wz:executor` | 5 | HIGH | Iron Law, rationalization table for TDD/review skipping, foundational principle |\n| `wz:reviewer` | 5 | HIGH | Iron Law, rationalization table for score inflation/finding minimization |\n| `wz:verification` | 4 | MEDIUM | Rationalization table (import from superpowers' verification skill), gate function |\n| `wz:self-audit` | 4 | MEDIUM | Red flags for protected-path violations, rationalization table |\n| `wz:using-skills` | 6 | LOW | Already has some patterns; needs EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT block |\n| `wz:tdd` | 6 | LOW | Already adapted from superpowers; audit for completeness |\n\n### Specific CSO Rewrites\n\n**Current (bad -- leaks workflow):**\n```yaml\n# wz:wazir\ndescription: One-command pipeline — type /wazir followed by what you want to build. Handles init, clarification, execution, review, and audits automatically.\n```\n\n**Rewritten (good -- triggering conditions only):**\n```yaml\ndescription: Use when the user types /wazir followed by a request. Use for any new feature, bugfix, refactor, or documentation task that should go through the full pipeline.\n```\n\n**Current (bad):**\n```yaml\n# wz:clarifier\ndescription: Run the clarification pipeline — research, clarify scope, brainstorm design, generate task specs and execution plan. Pauses for user approval between phases.\n```\n\n**Rewritten:**\n```yaml\ndescription: Use when entering the clarification phase of a pipeline run, when requirements need research, scope definition, spec hardening, design brainstorming, or execution planning.\n```\n\n**Current (bad):**\n```yaml\n# wz:executor\ndescription: Run the execution phase — implement the approved plan with TDD, quality gates, and verification.\n```\n\n**Rewritten:**\n```yaml\ndescription: Use when entering the execution phase with an approved plan, spec, and design ready for implementation.\n```\n\n**Current (bad):**\n```yaml\n# wz:reviewer\ndescription: Run the review phase — adversarial review of implementation against the approved spec, plan, and verification evidence.\n```\n\n**Rewritten:**\n```yaml\ndescription: Use when any review is needed — final review after execution, spec-challenge, design-review, plan-review, task-review, research-review, or clarification-review.\n```\n\n### Rationalization Tables to Add\n\n**For `wz:executor` (pipeline skipping rationalizations):**\n\n| Excuse | Reality |\n|---|---|\n| \"The input is clear enough to skip clarification\" | Clear to you does not mean unambiguous. The pipeline catches assumptions you don't know you're making. |\n| \"This is just a small bugfix, skip the pipeline\" | Small bugfixes have the highest defect density. The quick path produces the most rework. |\n| \"I already know the codebase, skip research\" | You know what you've seen. Research catches what you haven't. |\n| \"Tests slow me down\" | Tests prevent the 3-hour debugging session that \"saving 10 minutes\" creates. |\n| \"The review will catch it later\" | Later = more expensive. Per-task review catches issues when they cost 1 minute to fix, not 1 hour. |\n| \"One commit for multiple tasks saves time\" | One commit = one task. Multi-task commits make review meaningless and rollback impossible. |\n| \"Skip verification, the tests pass\" | Test pass does not equal verified. Acceptance criteria need independent evidence. |\n\n**For `wz:clarifier` (scope reduction rationalizations):**\n\n| Excuse | Reality |\n|---|---|\n| \"This item is obviously out of scope\" | Nothing is out of scope unless the user says so. Ask. |\n| \"I'll defer this to a future tier\" | Tiering without user approval is silent scope reduction. |\n| \"The input implies this isn't needed\" | Implication is not confirmation. Ask explicitly. |\n| \"This is too simple to need clarification\" | Simple requests have the most assumptions. Clarify anyway. |\n| \"Research found this won't work, so I'll drop it\" | Present the finding and let the user decide. |\n\n**For `wz:reviewer` (score inflation rationalizations):**\n\n| Excuse | Reality |\n|---|---|\n| \"Close enough to pass\" | Close enough is not passed. Score what exists, not what was intended. |\n| \"The spirit of the requirement is met\" | The letter is what's measurable. If the letter fails, the score reflects that. |\n| \"Minor issue, not worth flagging\" | Minor issues compound. Flag everything, let severity do the sorting. |\n| \"The agent tried hard\" | Effort is not output. Score the result. |\n| \"Blocking would waste the work done\" | Shipping broken work wastes more. Block and fix. |\n\n---\n\n## Part IV: Implementation Checklist\n\nFor each Wazir skill rewrite:\n\n1. **Fix CSO description** -- Remove all workflow summaries. Start with \"Use when...\" + triggering conditions only.\n\n2. **Add Iron Law** -- One-line, all-caps, code-block. The non-negotiable rule for this skill.\n\n3. **Add foundational principle** -- \"Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.\" (for discipline skills only)\n\n4. **Build rationalization table** -- Minimum 5 entries. Source from: observed agent behavior, superpowers patterns, domain-specific rationalizations.\n\n5. **Add red flags list** -- Bullet list of \"if you're thinking this, STOP\" with terminal \"All of these mean: [action].\"\n\n6. **Add gate function** -- For any skill with a compliance gate, add pseudocode-style BEFORE/IF/THEN structure.\n\n7. **Add commitment announcement** -- \"Announce at start: 'I'm using [skill] to [purpose].'\"\n\n8. **Close explicit loopholes** -- For every \"don't do X\", enumerate the specific workarounds and forbid each.\n\n9. **Token budget** -- After adding persuasion elements, verify total word count. Getting-started skills < 200 words. Frequently loaded < 500. Others < 1000 for the persuasion sections (existing process documentation excluded from this count).\n\n10. **Test with RED/GREEN/REFACTOR** -- Before deploying rewrites, run pressure scenarios without the rewrite, document rationalizations, then test with the rewrite, then close any new loopholes.\n\n---\n\n## Part V: Key Takeaways\n\n1. **Persuasion engineering is empirically validated.** Meincke et al. (2025) demonstrated a 2x compliance increase with N=28,000. This is not speculation.\n\n2. **Authority + Commitment + Scarcity is the winning combination** for discipline skills. Avoid Liking (creates sycophancy) and Reciprocity (rarely effective).\n\n3. **CSO is the highest-leverage fix.** If the description leaks workflow, Claude shortcuts the entire skill. Fix descriptions first.\n\n4. **Rationalization tables are the second-highest leverage fix.** 47 entries across 5 superpowers skills. Wazir has zero. Every discipline skill needs one.\n\n5. **The foundational principle (\"letter = spirit\") was the difference between pass and fail** in superpowers' TDD skill testing. It closed an entire class of rationalizations in a single sentence.\n\n6. **LLMs are parahuman, not superhuman.** They respond to the same influence patterns as humans because they learned from human text. Design skills accordingly.\n\n7. **Test before deploying.** Superpowers' Iron Law applies to skills themselves: no skill without a failing test first. Run baseline pressure scenarios, document rationalizations, write skill addressing those specific rationalizations, verify compliance.\n\nSources:\n- [Meincke et al. (2025) on SSRN](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5357179)\n- [Wharton GAIL Research Summary](https://gail.wharton.upenn.edu/research-and-insights/call-me-a-jerk-persuading-ai/)\n- [Superpowers GitHub (obra/superpowers)](https://github.com/obra/superpowers)\n- [DEV Community: Superpowers Persuasion Engineering](https://dev.to/tumf/superpowers-the-technology-to-persuade-ai-agents-why-psychological-principles-change-code-quality-2d2f)\n- [CyberArk: Persuasion Engineering for LLMs](https://www.cyberark.com/resources/blog/persuasion-engineering-how-to-influence-humans-llms-and-ai-agents)\n- [Instruction Hierarchy (ICLR 2025)](https://openreview.net/forum?id=vf5M8YaGPY)\n- [The Instruction Gap](https://arxiv.org/html/2601.03269v1)\n- [LLM Sycophancy Survey](https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.15287)\n- [Can LLMs Follow Simple Rules?](https://arxiv.org/html/2311.04235v2)\n- [Implementation Intentions Research](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10463283.2020.1808936)\n- [Jesse Vincent's Superpowers Blog](https://blog.fsck.com/2025/10/09/superpowers/)\n- [Anthropic Best Practices for Skills](https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/agents-and-tools/agent-skills)"}],"stop_reason":"end_turn","stop_sequence":null,"usage":{"input_tokens":3,"cache_creation_input_tokens":36769,"cache_read_input_tokens":85948,"output_tokens":9259,"server_tool_use":{"web_search_requests":0,"web_fetch_requests":0},"service_tier":"standard","cache_creation":{"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens":0,"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens":36769},"inference_geo":"","iterations":[],"speed":"standard"}},"requestId":"req_011CZERe3Q3GBiv4tdHHLqzQ","type":"assistant","uuid":"39f8ca67-1c9a-452d-b334-8888bed89366","timestamp":"2026-03-20T13:43:20.570Z","userType":"external","entrypoint":"cli","cwd":"/Users/mohamedabdallah/Work/Wazir","sessionId":"0c5a9bfa-6816-42b1-a97d-37ae7dad26c5","version":"2.1.80","gitBranch":"feat/remaining-6-fixes","slug":"mighty-wondering-giraffe"}