@windyroad/architect 0.15.2 → 0.15.3-preview.583

package/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -123,5 +123,5 @@
     }
   },
   "name": "wr-architect",
-  "version": "0.15.2"
+  "version": "0.15.3"
 }

package/hooks/architect-enforce-edit.sh

@@ -105,6 +105,13 @@ case "$FILE_PATH" in
     exit 0 ;;
   */docs/stories/*|docs/stories/*)
     exit 0 ;;
+  # Retros — ask-hygiene + run-retro narrative trail written routinely by
+  # `/wr-retrospective:run-retro` (Step 2d + Step 5). Not architecture
+  # content; the gate firing on every retro append forces a subagent
+  # round-trip before a non-load-bearing narrative artefact can land.
+  # Mirrors docs/problems and docs/jtbd peer-plugin-policy exemptions. P203.
+  */docs/retros/*|docs/retros/*)
+    exit 0 ;;
 esac
 
 # Check gate

package/hooks/test/architect-enforce-scope.bats

@@ -96,3 +96,22 @@ assert_path_allowed() {
 @test "architect: exempts docs/stories/README.md (P170 / ADR-060)" {
   assert_path_allowed "$PWD/docs/stories/README.md"
 }
+
+# --- Retros exemption (P203) ---
+# `docs/retros/*` is the ask-hygiene + run-retro narrative trail written
+# routinely by `/wr-retrospective:run-retro` Step 2d + Step 5. Routine
+# appends should not fire the architect gate — they are not load-bearing
+# architecture content. Mirrors the docs/problems and docs/jtbd peer-
+# plugin-policy exemptions.
+
+@test "architect: exempts docs/retros/ ask-hygiene file (P203)" {
+  assert_path_allowed "$PWD/docs/retros/2026-06-06-some-iter-ask-hygiene.md"
+}
+
+@test "architect: exempts docs/retros/ analyze-context file (P203)" {
+  assert_path_allowed "$PWD/docs/retros/2026-06-06-context-analysis.md"
+}
+
+@test "architect: exempts docs/retros/ retro narrative file (P203)" {
+  assert_path_allowed "$PWD/docs/retros/2026-06-06-session-wrap.md"
+}

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@windyroad/architect",
-  "version": "0.15.2",
+  "version": "0.15.3-preview.583",
   "description": "Architecture decision enforcement for AI coding agents",
   "bin": {
     "windyroad-architect": "./bin/install.mjs"

package/skills/create-adr/SKILL.md

@@ -85,6 +85,8 @@ Before writing the ADR file, perform a decision-boundary analysis on the gathere
 
 **Non-interactive fallback**: When `AskUserQuestion` is unavailable (e.g., non-interactive/AFK mode), automatically split into separate ADRs with consecutive IDs and note the auto-split in output. Do not block creation.
 
+**ADR-013 Rule 6 carve-out audit (P352, 2026-06-06 amendment)**: the universal AFK default is **queue-and-continue**; this site is a documented **AUTO-DEFAULT** carve-out. Authorising principle: policy-authorised safe default per ADR-044 category 4 (silent framework). Splitting is fully reversible (manual combine via supersession), the framework's WSJF / lifecycle model rewards explicit per-decision ranking, and "split when in doubt" is the persona-correct safe heuristic for JTBD-006 (the loop progresses; over-splits are cheap to combine; halt would cost more loop throughput than the over-split risk). Note: the Step 5 substance-confirm HALT below is a separate carve-out authorised by ADR-074 — substance-confirm cannot AUTO-DEFAULT because the dependent work (Decision Outcome / Consequences / Confirmation / Pros and Cons drafting) is built ON the chosen option.
+
 **Split implementation**: When splitting, assign consecutive IDs. Cross-reference each ADR in the other's Related section or as a linked decision in the consequences.
 
 **Scope**: Scoped to new ADR creation only (steps 2–5). Does not apply to supersession handling (step 6), where the scope of the new decision is already known and bounded.
@@ -238,6 +240,8 @@ oversight-date: YYYY-MM-DD   # today
 
 The `wr-architect-mark-oversight-confirmed` call writes the session-scoped evidence marker (`/tmp/oversight-confirmed-<sha>-<sid>`) that the `architect-oversight-marker-discipline.sh` PreToolUse hook reads to authorise the subsequent Edit/Write — without the helper call, the hook will DENY the marker write. AFK iter subprocesses spawned via `claude -p` have no `AskUserQuestion` access; they MUST write `human-oversight: unconfirmed` instead (the AFK fallback enum value codified in ADR-066 amendment 2026-06-02), which the drain (`/wr-architect:review-decisions`) later promotes interactively. Calling the helper without a real user substance-confirm event is the P348 hollow-marker bug — every legitimate marker write traces back to an `AskUserQuestion` answer in the same turn.
 
+**ADR-013 Rule 6 carve-out audit (P352, 2026-06-06 amendment)**: the universal AFK default is queue-and-continue. This Step 5 substance-confirm HALT-and-write-`human-oversight: unconfirmed` shape is a documented carve-out, authorised by **ADR-074** (Confirm decision substance before building dependent work). Rationale: an ADR with `human-oversight: confirmed` enters the world born-confirmed (it does not appear in `/wr-architect:review-decisions`' unoversighted set), so dependent work — every implementation that cites this ADR as authority — would be built on substance that was never user-affirmed. AFK writing `human-oversight: unconfirmed` IS the queue-and-continue shape: the loop continues; the substance-confirm decision is queued to the next interactive drain. Persona-correct for JTBD-006 ("queued for my return, not guessed at"); the carve-out is from the auto-confirm shape, not from queue-and-continue itself.
+
 **Mismatch handling.** If the substance-confirm answer selects a DIFFERENT option than the draft was authored against:
 
 - DO NOT write the marker.