@windyroad/itil 0.50.0-preview.694 → 0.50.1-preview.707

package/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -497,5 +497,5 @@
     }
   },
   "name": "wr-itil",
-  "version": "0.50.0"
+  "version": "0.50.1"
 }

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@windyroad/itil",
-  "version": "0.50.0-preview.694",
+  "version": "0.50.1-preview.707",
   "description": "ITIL-aligned IT service management for Claude Code (problem, and future incident/change skills)",
   "bin": {
     "windyroad-itil": "./bin/install.mjs"

package/skills/manage-incident/SKILL.md

@@ -60,6 +60,8 @@ Prefer **reversible** mitigations over forward fixes:
 
 Record every attempt, successful or not.
 
+**Mitigation SELECTION is agent-owned — do NOT defer "which mitigation" to the user (ADR-044 framework-mediated surface; category-4 silent-framework family).** Choosing *which* mitigation to attempt — traversing the ladder above, backed by cited evidence, within risk appetite — is the agent's call, not a user-authority decision. The framework already resolved it (the ladder is the selection mechanism, the evidence-first gate is the quality bar, RISK-POLICY appetite is the bound). Do NOT surface "which mitigation should I attempt?" via `AskUserQuestion` **or** a prose-ask ("I'll wait for your direction on which mitigation to attempt"). Authority: ADR-013 Rule 5; JTBD-201 ("reversible mitigations are preferred"); user direction 2026-05-10 — *"mitigations don't belong to me. You are empowered."* (P180). Genuine user-authority surfaces are unchanged: the evidence-gate bypass (ADR-044 category-2, Step 6) and the risk-above-appetite commit (category-3, Step 14). Mitigation execution is delegated to `/wr-itil:mitigate-incident` (Step 7), which carries the same empowerment annotation.
+
 ## Severity, not WSJF
 
 Incidents are severity-driven and time-boxed. **WSJF does not apply to incidents** — the "effort" divisor is meaningless during a live event. WSJF applies to the resulting problem created via handoff.
@@ -345,7 +347,7 @@ Otherwise, after the commit in step 14 lands, drain the release queue so the fix
 ## Related
 
 - **P136** (`docs/problems/136-adr-044-alignment-audit-master.open.md`) — ADR-044 alignment audit master. This skill is the third high-ask SKILL audited under Phase 2 (after work-problem singular and mitigate-incident).
-- **ADR-044** (`docs/decisions/044-decision-delegation-contract.proposed.md`) — Decision-Delegation Contract. The skill's AskUserQuestion surfaces align with the 6-class authority taxonomy: Step 2 duplicate-check is **category-1 (direction-setting)**; Step 4 is **category-4 (silent-framework)** on Title / Symptoms / Start time / Severity-when-evidence-present + **category-1 (direction-setting)** on Scope + **category-5 (taste)** fallback on Severity-on-ambiguity (P132 derive-first refactor 2026-05-15 re-classified Step 4 from "single cat-1 declaration" to "derive-first dispatch with cat-1 / cat-5 fallback only"); Step 6 evidence-gate is **category-2 (deviation-approval)**; Step 14 risk-above-appetite is **category-3 (one-time-override)**.
+- **ADR-044** (`docs/decisions/044-decision-delegation-contract.proposed.md`) — Decision-Delegation Contract. The skill's AskUserQuestion surfaces align with the 6-class authority taxonomy: Step 2 duplicate-check is **category-1 (direction-setting)**; Step 4 is **category-4 (silent-framework)** on Title / Symptoms / Start time / Severity-when-evidence-present + **category-1 (direction-setting)** on Scope + **category-5 (taste)** fallback on Severity-on-ambiguity (P132 derive-first refactor 2026-05-15 re-classified Step 4 from "single cat-1 declaration" to "derive-first dispatch with cat-1 / cat-5 fallback only"); Step 6 evidence-gate is **category-2 (deviation-approval)**; Step 14 risk-above-appetite is **category-3 (one-time-override)**; the **Mitigation preference** ladder's mitigation-SELECTION surface is **framework-mediated / category-4 silent-framework family** — agent-owned, no AskUserQuestion and no prose-ask (P180 declarative-layer fix; see "Mitigation preference").
 - **P132** (`docs/problems/known-error/132-agents-over-ask-in-interactive-sessions-conflating-mechanical-stages-with-user-interactive-stages.md`) — Agents over-ask in interactive sessions (inverse-P078). Step 4 derive-first refactor closes the 2026-05-06 I001 declaration regression where 3 of 4 sub-questions were lazy classifications. Composes with P185 (capture-problem Step 1.5 derive-first refactor — the in-tree worked-example precedent).
 - **P185** (`docs/problems/...`) — capture-problem Step 1.5 derive-first refactor. Step 4 mirrors the same dispatch shape (silent classifier + stderr advisory + AskUserQuestion only on ambiguity).
 - **ADR-013 amended Rule 1** (`docs/decisions/013-structured-user-interaction-for-governance-decisions.proposed.md`) — structured user interaction; narrowed in P135 to defer to ADR-044 for framework-resolution boundary. All four surfaces retain `AskUserQuestion` as genuine user-authority surfaces under categories enumerated in ADR-044.

package/skills/mitigate-incident/SKILL.md

@@ -32,6 +32,8 @@ Prefer **reversible** mitigations over forward fixes:
 
 Record every attempt, successful or not. Failed mitigations are as important to the audit trail as successful ones — they narrow hypothesis space for future investigation.
 
+**Mitigation SELECTION is agent-owned — do NOT defer "which mitigation" to the user (ADR-044 framework-mediated surface; category-4 silent-framework family).** Choosing *which* mitigation to attempt — traversing the reversible-preference ladder above, backed by cited evidence, within risk appetite — is the agent's call. The framework has already resolved it: the ladder IS the selection mechanism, the evidence-first gate (below) is the quality bar, and RISK-POLICY appetite is the bound. Do NOT surface "which mitigation should I attempt?" as a user-authority decision via `AskUserQuestion` **or** a prose-ask ("I'll wait for your direction on which mitigation to attempt", "let me know which option you'd prefer"). That deferral re-asks a decision the framework mediated and adds latency to the very job this skill exists to accelerate. Authority: ADR-013 Rule 5 (policy-authorised silent proceed for within-appetite reversible actions); JTBD-201 ("Reversible mitigations [...] are preferred"); user direction 2026-05-10 — *"mitigations don't belong to me. You are empowered."* (P180). The genuine user-authority surfaces are unchanged and remain interactive: the evidence-first gate bypass (ADR-044 category-2 deviation-approval, Step 3) and the risk-above-appetite commit (category-3 one-time-override, Step 8). Select-and-act; the audit trail (every attempt recorded) is the oversight surface, not a pre-action consent gate.
+
 ## Evidence-first gate (ADR-011; ADR-044 category-2 deviation-approval)
 
 **Pre-flight check before the first mitigation attempt**: the incident file must contain at least one hypothesis with cited evidence in the `## Hypotheses` section. If not, block the transition and ask via `AskUserQuestion`. This is the **ADR-044 category-2 (deviation-approval)** surface: ADR-011's evidence-first rule is the existing decision; "Record anyway" is the user-approved deviation in this specific case (the rule isn't being amended; this case is being excepted with audit trail). The user IS the right authority for the bypass shape.
@@ -211,7 +213,8 @@ If the user wants any of the above, the skill reports the appropriate sibling an
 - **ADR-011** (`docs/decisions/011-manage-incident-skill-wrapping.proposed.md`) — incident lifecycle file-suffix conventions (`.investigating.md` / `.mitigating.md` / `.restored.md` / `.closed.md`) + evidence-first rule + reversible-mitigation preference + Sev 4-5 lightweight path.
 - **ADR-013 amended Rule 1** — structured user interaction; narrowed in P135 to defer to ADR-044 for framework-resolution boundary. Surface 1 (argument-backfill) no longer fires `AskUserQuestion` (framework-mediated); Surfaces 2 + 3 retain it under ADR-044 categories 2 + 3.
 - **ADR-013** Rule 6 — policy-within-appetite non-interactive actions (release drain). Step 9 unchanged.
-- **ADR-044** (`docs/decisions/044-decision-delegation-contract.proposed.md`) — Decision-Delegation Contract. Surface 1 (argument-backfill) is framework-mediated per the ADR; Surface 2 (evidence-first gate) is category-2 (deviation-approval); Surface 3 (risk-above-appetite commit) is category-3 (one-time-override).
+- **ADR-044** (`docs/decisions/044-decision-delegation-contract.proposed.md`) — Decision-Delegation Contract. Surface 1 (argument-backfill) is framework-mediated per the ADR; Surface 2 (evidence-first gate) is category-2 (deviation-approval); Surface 3 (risk-above-appetite commit) is category-3 (one-time-override); **Surface 4 (mitigation SELECTION within the reversible-preference ladder) is framework-mediated / category-4 silent-framework family — agent-owned, no AskUserQuestion and no prose-ask (P180; see "Reversible preference").**
+- **P180** (`docs/problems/.../180-agent-defers-mitigation-selection-to-user-during-active-incident.md`) — agent deferred mitigation selection to the user during I002 ("I'll wait for your direction on which mitigation to attempt"); user correction "mitigations don't belong to me. You are empowered." The "Reversible preference" empowerment annotation is the declarative-layer fix (sibling of P132's closed inverse-P078 over-ask class on the mitigation-selection surface).
 - **ADR-014** — governance skills commit their own work.
 - **ADR-015** — release scorer delegation pattern.
 - **ADR-020** — auto-release when changesets are queued.