@windyroad/itil 1.2.0 → 2.0.0-preview.1111

package/skills-codex/capture-rfc/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+---
+name: wr-itil:capture-rfc
+description: Draw a problem-traced RFC release row on a story map and attach at least one delivery story. Uses the existing delivery-planning vehicle instead of creating an RFC document.
+allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Grep, Glob, Skill, request_user_input
+---
+
+<!-- Generated from the runtime-neutral skill source. Do not edit. -->
+
+> Codex runtime note: use `request_user_input` only where this contract
+> explicitly requires a human decision. Resolve `<itil-plugin-root>` from
+> this installed `SKILL.md`: it is two directories above the skill
+> directory. Run bundled commands from `<itil-plugin-root>/bin/`; do not
+> search the adopter repository or rely on those commands being on `PATH`.
+> Spawn `wr-itil:hang-off-check` with the native Codex subagent tool, wait
+> for it, and close that same agent.
+
+
+# Capture RFC
+
+Draw a lightweight RFC release row on an existing story map. An RFC is a planning row, not a standalone document.
+
+## Arguments
+
+```text
+/wr-itil:capture-rfc <problem-trace> <description> [--story-map STORY-MAP-NNN] [--stories STORY-NNN,...] [--fix-time]
+```
+
+`<problem-trace>` is one or more comma-separated `P<NNN>` identifiers. `--fix-time` is retained as a compatibility alias and does not change the row-based workflow.
+
+## Workflow
+
+1. Require every problem trace to resolve under `docs/problems/`. If a trace is missing, stop and direct the caller to `/wr-itil:capture-problem`; never infer or create a problem silently.
+2. Reuse the existing delivery-planning vehicle. Prefer the supplied `--story-map`; otherwise select an approved story map whose journey contains the fix. Never create a duplicate vehicle.
+3. If no existing map, activity, job, or ratified decision can carry the proposed work, brief the missing substance and use `request_user_input`. In unattended work, queue the question and continue with other actionable work. Do not create a row until the direction is supplied.
+4. Allocate the RFC identity mechanically with `<itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-next-rfc-id`; never scan one directory or reuse a retired identity.
+5. Reuse the ordered stories supplied by `--stories`, or capture the smallest delivery stories needed for the fix. Every story must name the driving problem trace.
+6. Run `<itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-story-map add-band` to add one release row and `<itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-story-map add-card` for each story. The row must include the RFC identity, description, problem trace, and ordered story identifiers.
+7. Render the story map, update the driving problem's RFC references, and run the relevant reconciliation checks.
+8. Commit the map, stories, problem references, and regenerated render together in one focused commit.
+
+## Prohibitions
+
+- Never create a new file under `docs/rfcs/`.
+- Never amend a ratified decision to introduce new substance. Create a proposed superseding decision and obtain ratification first.
+- Never treat `--fix-time` as permission to bypass the story map, story, or decision gates.

package/skills-codex/capture-rfc/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "WR ITIL: Capture RFC"
+  short_description: "Draw a traced RFC release row with at least one story."

package/skills-codex/capture-story/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,407 @@
+---
+name: wr-itil:capture-story
+description: Lightweight story-capture skill for aside-invocation during foreground work — mandatory leading problem-trace AND JTBD-trace per the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule I6 + I9 invariants, mandatory `--story-map` trace (I8 enforced AT CAPTURE per the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule, refuse-and-route if absent) + optional `--rfc` (I7 at accepted) + real user-value + >=1 acceptance criterion at capture (I10 content subset / the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule), skeleton story file at `docs/stories/draft/STORY-NNN-<slug>.md`, single commit per capture, no inline README refresh. Defers full INVEST shape + acceptance transition to /wr-itil:manage-story. Use when the user (or agent) wants to capture a story quickly with clear problem + JTBD anchoring. For full lifecycle management, use /wr-itil:manage-story.
+allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Grep, Glob
+---
+
+<!-- Generated from the runtime-neutral skill source. Do not edit. -->
+
+> Codex runtime note: use `request_user_input` only where this contract
+> explicitly requires a human decision. Resolve `<itil-plugin-root>` from
+> this installed `SKILL.md`: it is two directories above the skill
+> directory. Run bundled commands from `<itil-plugin-root>/bin/`; do not
+> search the adopter repository or rely on those commands being on `PATH`.
+> Spawn `wr-itil:hang-off-check` with the native Codex subagent tool, wait
+> for it, and close that same agent.
+
+
+# Capture Story Skill
+
+Capture an INVEST-shaped story ticket quickly during foreground work. Lightweight aside-invocation surface that complements the heavyweight `/wr-itil:manage-story` flow. Mirrors `/wr-itil:capture-rfc` shape per the "Governance skill invocation patterns — foreground + background with deferred-question resumption" architecture rule lightweight + heavyweight skill split, extended for the story tier's stricter trace-mandate (problem, JTBD, AND story-map at capture — I8 enforced at capture per the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule; RFC deferred to accepted).
+
+This skill is one half of the capture-then-manage story framework introduced by the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule (Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology, accepted 2026-05-05; Phase 2 amendment 2026-05-12 introducing the story tier). The other half is `/wr-itil:manage-story` (heavyweight intake + INVEST-gated lifecycle management).
+
+**Related JTBDs**: the ": Decompose a Fix Into Coordinated Changes" user outcome (primary — Decompose a Fix Into Coordinated Changes; story is the INVEST-shaped sub-workstream entity the ": Decompose a Fix Into Coordinated Changes" user outcome line 20 names), the ": Enforce Governance Without Slowing Down" user outcome (extended scope — story-level governance via INVEST gates at acceptance + auto-transition on RFC-closes + acceptance-criteria all-ticked), the "Extend the Suite with New Plugins" user outcome (atomic-fix-adopter friction guard — capture-story remains opt-in; atomic-RFC fallback per the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule line 262 means atomic adopters never invoke capture-story).
+
+## When to invoke
+
+- **Slicing an RFC into INVEST-shaped sub-workstreams**: agent / user has captured an RFC and is now decomposing its scope into the ordered `stories:` array per the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule's working-the-problem flow (line 300-320). Each slice on a story-map's backbone → ribs → slices grid becomes one story.
+- **Placing a story on its map at capture**: per the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule a story is born on a story map — `--story-map` is MANDATORY at capture (I8 refuse-and-route if absent). `--rfc` stays optional (I7 enforces at the `draft → accepted` transition); a draft story may exist with NO `rfcs:` until the design firms up, but NEVER with an empty `story-maps:`.
+- **Retrospective bootstrap migration** (Slice 15 of the "Problem tickets strain as fixes decompose into multiple coordinated changes — need an RFC framework that ties all changes back to problems (and unifies technical with user/business problems)" problem Phase 2): extracting existing slices from `docs/plans/170-rfc-framework-story-map.md` into individual story files. The bootstrap-exempt marker (the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule A4 / the "`@windyroad/*` plugin / skill / agent / hook maturity taxonomy" architecture rule) permits the retrospective sequence to bypass the capture-time I8 hard-block for migration stories ONLY; `rfcs:` still fills in before the manage-story <NNN> accepted gate (I7).
+- **Forward dogfood capture**: a new story for in-flight work, captured at the start of implementation, runs to `done` via `Refs: STORY-NNN` trailer detection + acceptance-criteria all-ticked.
+
+**Use `/wr-itil:manage-story` instead** when:
+- The work is advancing an existing story through its lifecycle (draft → accepted → in-progress → done).
+- The user wants the full INVEST intake flow with structured value-statement + acceptance-criteria + effort-estimation prompts.
+- The story needs the I10 INVEST shape behavioural test to fire at accepted.
+
+## Argument grammar
+
+**Positional (both mandatory)**: `<problem-trace> <jtbd-trace> <description>` where:
+- `<problem-trace>` is `P<NNN>` or comma-separated `P<NNN>,P<NNN>,...` (no spaces inside the trace; multiple problems comma-separated).
+- `<jtbd-trace>` is `JTBD-<NNN>` or comma-separated `JTBD-<NNN>,JTBD-<NNN>,...`.
+
+**Optional flags** (any order, before or after positional args):
+- `--rfc RFC-<NNN>[,RFC-<NNN>,...]` — RFC(s) this story will be referenced by once design firms up.
+- `--story-map STORY-MAP-<NNN>[,STORY-MAP-<NNN>,...]` — story-map(s) this story will be placed on once design firms up.
+
+```
+/wr-itil:capture-story the "Problem tickets strain as fixes decompose into multiple coordinated changes — need an RFC framework that ties all changes back to problems (and unifies technical with user/business problems)" problem the ": Decompose a Fix Into Coordinated Changes" user outcome Build /wr-itil:capture-story-map skill scaffold
+/wr-itil:capture-story the "Problem tickets strain as fixes decompose into multiple coordinated changes — need an RFC framework that ties all changes back to problems (and unifies technical with user/business problems)" problem the ": Decompose a Fix Into Coordinated Changes" user outcome,the ": Enforce Governance Without Slowing Down" user outcome --rfc the ": docs/problems/ flat layout migration — per-state subdirs + adopter auto-migration" release design Ship hook exemption globs across 4 enforce-edit hooks
+/wr-itil:capture-story the "Problem tickets strain as fixes decompose into multiple coordinated changes — need an RFC framework that ties all changes back to problems (and unifies technical with user/business problems)" problem the ": Decompose a Fix Into Coordinated Changes" user outcome --story-map the "RFC framework bootstrap journey map" journey map --rfc the ": docs/problems/ flat layout migration — per-state subdirs + adopter auto-migration" release design Extract Slice 5 T7 shared-migration-routine into STORY-NNN
+```
+
+**the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule § Skills line 291 phrasing footnote**: the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule names "Mandatory: ≥1 problem trace, ≥1 JTBD trace" verbatim. This skill uses the **positional** form (no `--problem` / `--jtbd` prefix on the mandatory pair) to match the lightweight aside-invocation grammar of `capture-rfc` (per the "Governance skill invocation patterns — foreground + background with deferred-question resumption" architecture rule) and because Codex skill arguments don't carry a proper CLI flag parser. The optional `--rfc` / `--story-map` flags exist BECAUSE they are optional — fully positional would require sentinel values for absent traces. The hard-block intent (the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule § Confirmation criterion implied by I6 + I9 — capture fails without both mandatory traces) is preserved verbatim — only the surface syntax differs.
+
+## Rule 6 audit (per the "Governance skill invocation patterns — foreground + background with deferred-question resumption" architecture rule + the "Structured User Interaction for Governance-Skill Decisions" architecture rule + the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule)
+
+This skill has **two direction-setting request_user_input fires** (problem-trace AND JTBD-trace, when arguments are non-empty but malformed) and **one optional taste request_user_input** (title/scope summary, silent-default if unavailable). Every other potentially-interactive decision is framework-mediated per the "— Decision-Delegation Contract: when agents act on the framework vs ask the user" architecture rule:
+
+| Decision | Resolution | Authority class |
+|----------|-----------|-----------------|
+| Problem trace presence | I6 hard-block — refuse on missing trace; emit deny log + halt-with-stderr-directive | direction-setting |
+| Problem trace validation | Mechanical: each `P<NNN>` must exist in `docs/problems/`. Open / Known Error / Verifying = pass; Closed / Parked = advisory-warn but proceed (bounded-escape carve-out — see Step 2) | silent-mechanical |
+| JTBD trace presence | I9 hard-block — refuse on missing JTBD trace; emit deny log + halt-with-stderr-directive | direction-setting |
+| JTBD trace validation | Mechanical: each `JTBD-<NNN>` must resolve to a file under `docs/jtbd/<persona>/JTBD-<NNN>-*.md` (any lifecycle status) | silent-mechanical |
+| Optional `--rfc` trace validation | Mechanical: each provided `RFC-<NNN>` must resolve either to a legacy file under `docs/rfcs/` or to a release row returned by `<itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-story-map-query find-rfc`; advisory-warn on `proposed` / `verifying` legacy files; missing from both surfaces = hard-block on the provided arg | silent-mechanical |
+| Optional `--story-map` trace validation | Same mechanical pattern against `docs/story-maps/*/STORY-MAP-*.html` (HTML data-attribute existence check); advisory-warn on `draft` / `in-progress` story-maps | silent-mechanical |
+| STORY ID allocation | Mechanical: `max(local, origin) + 1`, three-digit padded; enumerates `docs/stories/*/STORY-*.md` + `git ls-tree origin/main docs/stories/`. the "AFK orchestrator preflight: get the repo into a clean state before starting" architecture rule collision-guard inline per Slice 3 design review architect approval (finding 3 option a — inline-only path) | silent-mechanical |
+| Title kebab-slug | Mechanical: first 8-10 non-stopword tokens of description | silent-mechanical |
+| Title prose / scope summary refinement | Optional `request_user_input`; silent-default to derived form when unavailable | taste |
+| File write / frontmatter | Mechanical: shape per `docs/stories/README.md` § Frontmatter shape + the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule lines 220-228 | silent-mechanical |
+| Single commit | Mechanical: `feat(itil): capture STORY-<NNN> <title>` + `Refs: STORY-<NNN>` trailer | silent-mechanical |
+| Empty arguments | Halt-with-stderr-directive: print "capture-story requires `<problem-trace> <jtbd-trace> <description>` — invoke /wr-itil:manage-story instead for the full intake flow" and exit. AFK orchestrators MUST NOT invoke capture-story with empty arguments. | n/a |
+
+Per the "Structured User Interaction for Governance-Skill Decisions" architecture rule Rule 6 fail-safe + the "— Decision-Delegation Contract: when agents act on the framework vs ask the user" architecture rule + the "Agents over-ask in interactive sessions — conflating mechanical-stages with user-interactive-stages of multi-stage skill contracts (inverse-)" problem + inverse-the "Problem 078: Assistant does not offer to capture a problem ticket when the user delivers strong-signal correction" problem: every silent-mechanical branch above resolves without user input, so AFK and interactive contexts behave identically modulo the optional taste prompt.
+
+## Steps
+
+### 0. Preflight (Phase 2 cross-directory)
+
+This skill's preflight uses `<itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-reconcile-readme docs/problems` (the existing problems-README reconciliation contract per the "`docs/problems/README.md` drifts from filesystem truth across sessions despite (refresh-on-create) and (refresh-on-transition) both Closed" problem). Sibling reconcile-stories + reconcile-story-maps scripts land in Slice 5 + Slice 9 of the "Problem tickets strain as fixes decompose into multiple coordinated changes — need an RFC framework that ties all changes back to problems (and unifies technical with user/business problems)" problem Phase 2 — once those ship, swap this preflight to call all three reconciliations (cross-tier integrity holds at all three surfaces).
+
+```bash
+<itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-reconcile-readme docs/problems > /tmp/wr-itil-drift-$$.txt
+reconcile_exit=$?
+if [ "$reconcile_exit" -eq 1 ]; then
+  <itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-classify-readme-drift /tmp/wr-itil-drift-$$.txt docs/problems
+  classify_exit=$?
+  rm -f /tmp/wr-itil-drift-$$.txt
+  # classify_exit 0 (INLINE_REFRESH): proceed (no inline refresh in this skill).
+  # classify_exit 1 (HALT_ROUTE_RECONCILE): halt; invoke /wr-itil:reconcile-readme.
+  # classify_exit 2 (parse error): conservative halt-and-route.
+fi
+```
+
+### 1. Parse arguments
+
+Tokenise the argument string. Optional flags (`--rfc <ids>`, `--story-map <ids>`) may appear in any position. The remaining positional tokens are `<problem-trace> <jtbd-trace> <description>` in that order.
+
+```bash
+# Pseudo:
+rfc_trace=""
+story_map_trace=""
+positional=()
+while [ $# -gt 0 ]; do
+  case "$1" in
+    --rfc) rfc_trace="$2"; shift 2 ;;
+    --story-map) story_map_trace="$2"; shift 2 ;;
+    *) positional+=("$1"); shift ;;
+  esac
+done
+problem_trace="${positional[0]}"
+jtbd_trace="${positional[1]}"
+description="${positional[*]:2}"
+```
+
+If `$problem_trace` does not match `^P[0-9]{3}(,P[0-9]{3})*$` (regex), this is an I6 violation — go to Step 2's deny path. If `$jtbd_trace` does not match `^JTBD-[0-9]{3}(,JTBD-[0-9]{3})*$`, this is an I9 violation. If `$description` is empty, halt with the empty-arguments directive from the Rule 6 audit table.
+
+Derive a kebab-case title slug from the first 8-10 non-stopword tokens of `$description` (matching `capture-rfc` slug derivation).
+
+### 2. Validate problem trace + I6 hard-block enforcement
+
+For each `P<NNN>` in the trace list:
+
+```bash
+# Dual-tolerant ticket discovery (the ": docs/problems/ flat layout migration — per-state subdirs + adopter auto-migration" release design migration window):
+# BOTH flat `docs/problems/<NNN>-<title>.<state>.md` AND per-state
+# subdir `docs/problems/<state>/<NNN>-<title>.md` layouts.
+trace_files=$(ls docs/problems/<NNN>-*.md docs/problems/*/<NNN>-*.md 2>/dev/null)
+```
+
+**I6 hard-block (per the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule line 248)**:
+
+- **Trace token absent OR malformed**: emit deny log entry + halt with stderr directive:
+  ```bash
+  mkdir -p logs
+  printf '{"timestamp":"%s","session_id":"%s","reason":"%s","args":%s}\n' \
+    "$(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)" "$(get_current_session_id 2>/dev/null || echo unknown)" \
+    "<missing|malformed|unresolved>-trace" \
+    "$(printf '%s' "$ARGUMENTS" | jq -Rs .)" \
+    >> logs/story-capture-denials.jsonl
+  echo "/wr-itil:capture-story requires a leading problem-trace argument (P<NNN> or P<NNN>,P<NNN>...). Open the driving problem via /wr-itil:capture-problem first, then re-invoke capture-story with the trace." >&2
+  exit 1
+  ```
+  The deny log feeds the trace-violation-rate reassessment criterion (sibling to RFC's `logs/rfc-capture-denials.jsonl`).
+
+- **Each `P<NNN>` must resolve to a file in `docs/problems/`**. If any does not, emit deny log entry with `reason: unresolved-trace` + the unresolved IDs, halt, exit 1.
+
+**Bounded-escape carve-out for Closed/Verifying/Parked traces**: classify by suffix or path; `.open.md` / `.known-error.md` (or `open/` / `known-error/` subdirs) pass silently; `.verifying.md` (or `verifying/` subdir) passes with advisory note; `.closed.md` (or `closed/` subdir) and `.parked.md` (or `parked/` subdir) pass with advisory-warn (story may be a retrospective extraction).
+
+### 2.5. Validate JTBD trace + I9 hard-block enforcement
+
+For each `JTBD-<NNN>` in the JTBD trace list:
+
+```bash
+jtbd_file=$(ls docs/jtbd/*/JTBD-<NNN>-*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1)
+[ -z "$jtbd_file" ] && unresolved_jtbds+=("JTBD-<NNN>")
+```
+
+**I9 hard-block (per the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule line 251)**:
+
+- **JTBD trace token absent OR malformed**: emit deny log entry + halt with directive: `/wr-itil:capture-story requires a JTBD trace argument (JTBD-<NNN> or JTBD-<NNN>,JTBD-<NNN>...). Author the driving JTBD via /wr-jtbd:update-guide first, then re-invoke capture-story.`
+- **Each `JTBD-<NNN>` must resolve to a file in `docs/jtbd/`**. If any does not, emit deny log with `reason: unresolved-jtbd-trace`, halt, exit 1.
+
+JTBD lifecycle states (`.proposed.md` / `.accepted.md` / `.archived.md`) all pass silently — a story may anchor on a proposed JTBD per the dogfood pattern (Phase 2 itself is being captured against proposed JTBDs).
+
+### 2.6. Validate story-map trace (I8 hard-block AT CAPTURE per the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule) + optional `--rfc`
+
+**I8 story-map membership is enforced at CAPTURE (the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule) — a story is born on a map.** `--story-map` is MANDATORY:
+
+- **`--story-map` absent**: hard-block with **refuse-and-route** (parity with the I6/I9 mandatory-trace gates). Do NOT scaffold `story-maps: []`. Emit the deny log (`reason: missing-story-map-trace`) and halt with:
+  > `/wr-itil:capture-story` requires a story-map trace (the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule / I8): every story is born on a story map. Create a map first via `/wr-itil:capture-story-map` (or extend one via `/wr-itil:manage-story-map`), then re-invoke capture-story with `--story-map STORY-MAP-<NNN>`.
+
+  AFK orchestrators author the map first (born `"humanOversight": "unconfirmed"` in its data island per the "Story maps render from JSON through a canonical template" architecture rule, drained later), then capture the story onto it — nothing halts silently; the map is a prerequisite step.
+- **`--story-map` present**: for each `STORY-MAP-<NNN>`, existence check `ls docs/story-maps/*/STORY-MAP-<NNN>-*.html 2>/dev/null`. Malformed or unresolved → hard-block (`reason: unresolved-story-map-trace`). Lifecycle advisory-warn on `draft` / `in-progress` maps; pass silently on `accepted` / `completed`.
+- **Bootstrap exemption (the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule A4 / the "`@windyroad/*` plugin / skill / agent / hook maturity taxonomy" architecture rule)**: a capture carrying the inline `<!-- bootstrap-exempt: ... -->` marker bypasses the I8 hard-block for migration stories ONLY. A **non-bootstrap** capture carrying the marker is rejected (the marker is not a general capture-time escape hatch — behavioural test asserts).
+
+`--rfc` stays **OPTIONAL** at capture (I7 enforces at the `accepted` transition — a story can legitimately precede its RFC firming up):
+
+```bash
+shopt -s nullglob
+rfc_files=(docs/rfcs/RFC-<NNN>-*.md)
+rfc_rows=$(<itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-story-map-query find-rfc RFC-<NNN>)
+[ ${#rfc_files[@]} -eq 0 ] && [ "$rfc_rows" = "[]" ] && unresolved_rfcs+=("RFC-<NNN>")
+shopt -u nullglob
+```
+
+- `--rfc` token absent: skip (the optional path). Present-but-malformed OR resolves to neither a legacy RFC file nor a release row: hard-block (`reason: unresolved-rfc-trace`). the "A release row is the RFC, and the map is the approval surface" architecture rule makes the row the normal RFC surface; a standalone file is retained only for existing RFCs.
+
+### 3. Compute next STORY ID
+
+Inline `max(local, origin) + 1` formula (per Slice 3 design review architect finding 3 option a — inline-only path; no separate `check-id-collision.sh` script per capture-rfc / capture-problem precedent):
+
+```bash
+local_max=$(ls docs/stories/*/STORY-*.md 2>/dev/null | sed 's|.*/STORY-||;s|-.*||' | grep -oE '^[0-9]+' | sort -n | tail -1)
+origin_max=$(git ls-tree -r --name-only origin/main docs/stories/ 2>/dev/null | sed 's|.*/STORY-||;s|-.*||' | grep -oE '^[0-9]+' | sort -n | tail -1)
+next=$(printf '%03d' $(( 10#$(echo -e "${local_max:-0}\n${origin_max:-0}" | sort -n | tail -1) + 1 )))
+```
+
+Log the renumber decision in the operation report if origin and local diverged. The `git ls-tree -r` recursive flag enumerates the per-state subdir layout — `docs/stories/draft/`, `docs/stories/accepted/`, etc.
+
+### 4. Optional taste prompt for title / scope summary
+
+If interactive (request_user_input available) AND the description is short enough that the derived title slug may not capture intent, fire one `request_user_input` with `header: "Story title"` offering: (a) the derived kebab-slug as default, (b) "edit". This is **taste** authority per the "— Decision-Delegation Contract: when agents act on the framework vs ask the user" architecture rule — silent-default to (a) when request_user_input is unavailable.
+
+### 5. Write the story file
+
+**File path**: `docs/stories/draft/STORY-<NNN>-<kebab-title>.md`
+
+**Template** (mirrors `docs/stories/README.md` § Story frontmatter + body structure):
+
+```markdown
+---
+status: draft
+story-id: <kebab-slug>
+reported: <YYYY-MM-DD>
+decision-makers: [<git config user.name>]
+problems: [P<NNN>, P<NNN>, ...]
+jtbd: [JTBD-<NNN>, JTBD-<NNN>, ...]
+rfcs: [<RFC-<NNN>, ...> or empty]
+story-maps: [<STORY-MAP-<NNN>, ...>]     # >=1 REQUIRED at capture (I8 / the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule)
+estimated-effort: <S|M|L|XL — derived at capture per the ": Cost-based WSJF effort — capture time + cost actuals, tally per ticket, retro-driven RMS calibration (tally-first)" architecture rule (real best-effort value, no deferral marker)>
+---
+
+<!-- NO `human-oversight:` field, and none of its siblings (the "A release row is the RFC, and the map is the approval surface" architecture rule). A story
+     carries no oversight marker: approval is its story map's, derived from the
+     `story-maps:` field above. Writing one here creates a second approval
+     surface that `story_is_approved` deliberately ignores, so it would be
+     inert as well as wrong. -->
+
+<!-- Frontmatter `status:` is the ONLY place a story's lifecycle state lives.
+     Do NOT add a `**Status**:` body line here. It used to mirror the
+     frontmatter, and because the oversight fingerprint excludes the frontmatter
+     key but hashed the body copy, every accept transition drifted the story's
+     own hash — so a story the maintainer had just ratified read as unratified
+     and the no-implement gate denied its own implementing commit. Maintainer
+     direction 2026-07-29 removed the mirror rather than adding a fourth
+     normaliser rule for it (the "Oversight hash treats the `**Status**:` body mirror as substance, so an accept transition self-invalidates its own ratification" problem / the "Story maps and stories carry a drift-invalidated human-oversight marker" architecture rule amendment). -->
+
+# STORY-<NNN>: <Title>
+
+**Reported**: <YYYY-MM-DD>
+**Problems**: <P<NNN> [, P<NNN>, ...]>
+**JTBD**: <JTBD-<NNN> [, ...]>
+**RFCs**: <RFC-<NNN> [, ...]> or (none — populate at accepted transition per I7)
+**Story Maps**: <STORY-MAP-<NNN> [, ...]> (>=1 required at capture — I8 / the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule)
+**Estimated effort**: <S|M|L|XL> — derived at capture as a real best-effort value (the "Repo conflates a "named re-entry point" with a self-firing cadence — deferrals not transitively reachable from an automatic trigger rot" problem / the "Governance skill invocation patterns — foreground + background with deferred-question resumption" architecture rule amendment 2026-06-24; the ": Cost-based WSJF effort — capture time + cost actuals, tally per ticket, retro-driven RMS calibration (tally-first)" architecture rule silent-derivation). NO `deferred` default and no "not estimated" marker — those are deferrals (user correction 2026-06-24). Confirmed/refined at the accepted transition per I10 INVEST Estimable.
+
+## User value (required, INVEST Valuable)
+
+<REQUIRED at capture (I10 Valuable subset / the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule): a real one-paragraph value-first user-facing statement — NOT a placeholder. "In order to <value>, as a <persona>, I want <capability>.">
+
+## Acceptance criteria (accepted-gate, INVEST Testable)
+
+- [ ] <REQUIRED at capture (I10 Testable subset / the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule): >=1 real observable behavioural acceptance criterion — NOT a placeholder>
+
+## Driving problem trace (required — I6 invariant)
+
+<description from arguments — one-line summary linking the story scope to the problem's symptom or RCA finding for each driving problem>
+
+## JTBD trace (required — I9 invariant)
+
+<one-line summary linking each JTBD-<NNN> to the persona-job's desired outcome that this story serves>
+
+## Implementation notes (optional)
+
+(deferred — populate at /wr-itil:manage-story accepted transition or during implementation)
+
+## Dependencies
+
+- **Blocks**: (none — populate at /wr-itil:manage-story if applicable)
+- **Blocked by**: (none — populate at /wr-itil:manage-story; Phase 2 I-invariant prohibits Blocked-by references to unaccepted stories at acceptance time per INVEST Independent)
+
+## Related
+
+(captured via /wr-itil:capture-story; expand at next /wr-itil:manage-story invocation)
+```
+
+**Born with no oversight field (the "A release row is the RFC, and the map is the approval surface" architecture rule).** A new story carries no `human-oversight:` and no `oversight-hash:`. Its approval is derived from the maps in its `story-maps:` field: approved when every one of them is ratified, never approved when it names none. Until then `<itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-detect-unratified-stories-maps` surfaces it and an RFC may not reference it (`<itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-check-rfc-stories-ratified`). Do NOT write an oversight field onto a story — `<itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-mark-story-oversight-confirmed` refuses a story path, and `story_is_approved` ignores any field left behind, so a hand-written one would be wrong AND inert. **Adding a story to its map does NOT re-open the map's ratification** — rows and cards sit outside the fingerprint basis, which is what removed the deadlock the "An AFK loop may accept and implement a story that only decomposes already-ratified substance" architecture rule existed to work around.
+
+The deferred-section pattern matches `capture-rfc`'s placeholder approach — the captured story is intentionally minimal; full INVEST shape lands at the manage-story accepted-transition step.
+
+### 6. Single commit — `## Stories` reverse-trace refresh; no stories README refresh
+
+**Stage list**: the new story file PLUS each driving problem ticket file (refresh `## Stories` reverse-trace section) PLUS each driving JTBD file (refresh `## Stories` reverse-trace section) PLUS each legacy driving RFC file IF `--rfc` resolved to one. A row-backed RFC has no separate reverse-trace document; its card on the story map is the reverse trace. **Do NOT** stage `docs/stories/README.md` (deferred). **Do NOT** stage any story-map HTML files — story-maps are spatially-authored HTML; new stories must be placed on the relevant map manually via `/wr-itil:manage-story-map`. Capture-story emits an advisory stderr line naming the unplaced-on-map state.
+
+The reverse-trace refresh on driving artefacts IS in-commit per the "Governance Skills Commit Their Own Completed Work" architecture rule single-commit grain — the cross-tier `## Stories` table on a problem / JTBD / RFC must stay current the moment a new story traces it. The same justification as capture-rfc's inline `## RFCs` refresh applies.
+
+For each problem ID in `$problem_trace`:
+
+```bash
+for pid_token in $(echo "$problem_trace" | tr ',' ' '); do
+  pid_num="${pid_token#P}"
+  # Dual-tolerant ticket discovery (the ": docs/problems/ flat layout migration — per-state subdirs + adopter auto-migration" release design migration window).
+  problem_file=$(ls docs/problems/${pid_num}-*.md docs/problems/*/${pid_num}-*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1)
+  [ -z "$problem_file" ] && continue
+  <itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-update-problem-references-section "$problem_file" "Stories"
+  git add "$problem_file"
+done
+```
+
+Same shape for each JTBD in `$jtbd_trace`:
+
+```bash
+for jid_token in $(echo "$jtbd_trace" | tr ',' ' '); do
+  jid_num="${jid_token#JTBD-}"
+  jtbd_file=$(ls docs/jtbd/*/JTBD-${jid_num}-*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1)
+  [ -z "$jtbd_file" ] && continue
+  <itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-update-jtbd-references-section "$jtbd_file" "Stories"
+  git add "$jtbd_file"
+done
+```
+
+Same shape for each RFC in `$rfc_trace` (only if non-empty):
+
+```bash
+for rid_token in $(echo "$rfc_trace" | tr ',' ' '); do
+  [ -z "$rid_token" ] && continue
+  rfc_file=$(ls docs/rfcs/${rid_token}-*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1)
+  [ -z "$rfc_file" ] && continue
+  <itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-update-rfc-references-section "$rfc_file" "Stories"
+  git add "$rfc_file"
+done
+```
+
+The helpers (`update-problem-references-section.sh`, `update-jtbd-references-section.sh`, `update-rfc-references-section.sh`) all support `"Stories"` as a section-name token per Slice 2a/2b verified lookup tables. Each helper is idempotent: a no-op section is a no-op stage.
+
+Stage the new story file:
+
+```bash
+git add docs/stories/draft/STORY-<NNN>-<slug>.md
+```
+
+Satisfy the commit gate per the "Governance Skills Commit Their Own Completed Work" architecture rule:
+
+- **Primary**: delegate to subagent type `wr-risk-scorer:pipeline` via the native Codex subagent tool.
+- **Fallback**: invoke `/wr-risk-scorer:assess-release` via the installed skill invocation when the subagent type is unavailable.
+
+Commit message:
+
+```
+feat(itil): capture STORY-<NNN> <title>
+
+Refs: STORY-<NNN>
+```
+
+The `capture` verb mirrors `capture-rfc`'s audit signal (lightweight aside path vs. heavyweight `manage-story` intake). The single `Refs: STORY-<NNN>` trailer is the universal story-trailer vocabulary per the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule line 307 + amendment 2026-05-10 nitpick N2 — capture commits and implementation commits both use `Refs:`; the manage-story skill's `draft → in-progress` auto-transition trigger discriminates by "is this the capture commit (subject starts with `capture`) or a subsequent commit" rather than by trailer verb.
+
+### 7. Report
+
+After the commit, report:
+
+- The new story file path and ID.
+- The traced problems with their lifecycle states.
+- The traced JTBDs with their lifecycle states.
+- Any traced RFCs / story-maps if provided, with lifecycle-state advisory warnings.
+- Any unplaced-on-story-map advisory (always emit when `--story-map STORY-MAP-<NNN>` was provided — the HTML placement is manual per architect finding 2 on Slice 7).
+- Trailing pointer: `Run /wr-itil:manage-story <STORY-<NNN>> next to populate User value + Acceptance criteria + Estimated effort, then advance draft → accepted; refresh docs/stories/README.md.`
+
+The trailing pointer is **not optional** — it is the user-visible signal that the story is intentionally skeleton-only and how to advance it.
+
+## Composition with manage-story
+
+| Concern | manage-story | capture-story |
+|---------|--------------|---------------|
+| Problem-trace I6 enforcement | Re-validated at every lifecycle transition | Hard-block at capture-time; deny logged to `logs/story-capture-denials.jsonl` |
+| JTBD-trace I9 enforcement | Re-validated at every lifecycle transition | Hard-block at capture-time |
+| RFC-trace I7 enforcement | Hard-block at `accepted` transition (allows draft stories to exist before RFC reference firms up) | Advisory-warn at capture-time if `--rfc` provided and resolves to draft/proposed lifecycle |
+| Story-map-trace I8 enforcement | Hard-block AT CAPTURE — refuse-and-route to `/wr-itil:capture-story-map` if absent (the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule) | direction-setting (caller must supply or author a map first) |
+| INVEST shape (I10) | Behavioural checks at `accepted` transition | Out of scope: capture produces a skeleton with deferred-placeholder sections |
+| Skeleton-fill | Full-intake; request_user_input for User value + Acceptance criteria + Estimated effort | Deferred-placeholder pattern; one optional taste prompt only |
+| Status transitions | Step 7 owns draft → accepted → in-progress → done | Out of scope (creation only) |
+| `## Stories` README refresh | the "Problem 094: `/wr-itil:manage-problem` does not refresh `docs/problems/README.md` on ticket creation" problem / the "Problem 062: `manage-problem` does not refresh `docs/problems/README.md` on single-ticket transitions; fast-path cache goes stale silently" problem inline (regenerate + stage in same commit) | Deferred to `/wr-itil:manage-story review` or `<itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-reconcile-stories` (Slice 9) |
+| Commit grain | One commit per intake / per transition | One commit per capture |
+| Use case | Full lifecycle management | Aside-invocation; capture-and-continue |
+
+The two skills share the `/tmp/wr-itil-story-capture-grep-${SESSION_ID}` create-gate marker (sibling to the capture-rfc marker per architect verdict on capture-rfc sub-decision (a)).
+
+## Related
+
+- **the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule** — Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology + Phase 2 amendment 2026-05-12 (story tier).
+- **the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule lines 220-228** — Story frontmatter shape spec.
+- **the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule lines 248-253** — I6-I11 story-tier invariants.
+- **the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule line 291** — capture-story description (this skill's source-of-truth contract).
+- **the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule line 307 + amendment 2026-05-10 nitpick N2** — single-trailer vocabulary (`Refs: STORY-<NNN>`).
+- **the "Problem tickets strain as fixes decompose into multiple coordinated changes — need an RFC framework that ties all changes back to problems (and unifies technical with user/business problems)" problem** — driver problem ticket.
+- **the ": Decompose a Fix Into Coordinated Changes" user outcome** — Decompose a Fix Into Coordinated Changes. Primary persona-anchor.
+- **the ": Enforce Governance Without Slowing Down" user outcome** (extended scope) — change-set-level governance composition.
+- **the "Extend the Suite with New Plugins" user outcome** (atomic-fix-adopter friction guard) — capture-story remains opt-in aside-invocation; atomic-RFC fallback per the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule line 262.
+- **`docs/stories/README.md`** — story tier lifecycle index + frontmatter/body shape spec (the "Problem tickets strain as fixes decompose into multiple coordinated changes — need an RFC framework that ties all changes back to problems (and unifies technical with user/business problems)" problem Phase 2 Slice 1 — committed `8562bbc`).
+- **the "Rename `wr-problem` Plugin to `wr-itil`" architecture rule** — amended skill-granularity: capture-story + manage-story are two skills, not one.
+- **the "Governance Skills Commit Their Own Completed Work" architecture rule** — single-commit grain per capture. Commit-message convention.
+- **the "Problem lifecycle — add a Verification Pending status between Known Error and Closed" architecture rule** — problem lifecycle conventions; story lifecycle mirrors (draft / accepted / in-progress / done / archived).
+- **the "Governance skill invocation patterns — foreground + background with deferred-question resumption" architecture rule** — governance-skill aside-invocation pattern. Lightweight + heavyweight split.
+- **the "Progressive disclosure + once-per-session budget for UserPromptSubmit governance prose" architecture rule** — progressive disclosure. SKILL.md (this file) + future REFERENCE.md split deferred per the "SKILL.md runtime budget policy" architecture rule.
+- **the "— Decision-Delegation Contract: when agents act on the framework vs ask the user" architecture rule** — decision delegation contract. Authority classes named in the Rule 6 audit table.
+- **the "Plugin-bundled scripts invoked from SKILL.md resolve via `bin/` on `$PATH`" architecture rule** — plugin-bundled scripts via `bin/` on `$PATH`. `<itil-plugin-root>/bin/wr-itil-reconcile-stories` shim follows this grammar (Slice 9).
+- **the "`@windyroad/*` plugin READMEs anchor on JTBD job IDs with load-bearing commit-hook + prose-woven framing" architecture rule** — load-bearing-from-the-start. I6 + I9 hard-block ship behaviourally on day one.
+- **the "Behavioural-tests-default for skill testing" architecture rule** — behavioural-tests default. Bats coverage at `<itil-plugin-root>/skills/capture-story/test/capture-story-behavioural.bats` (this slice).
+- **the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule Phase 2 Slice 2a/2b reverse-trace helpers** — `update-problem-references-section.sh`, `update-jtbd-references-section.sh`, `update-rfc-references-section.sh` all support `"Stories"` section-name token (verified lookup-table entries).
+- **Capture-rfc precedent** — `<itil-plugin-root>/skills/capture-rfc/SKILL.md` — sibling skill at the RFC tier; structurally near-identical surface.
+- **the "Problem 078: Assistant does not offer to capture a problem ticket when the user delivers strong-signal correction" problem** capture-on-correction — capture-story may be the correct response to a strong-signal user correction that names a single INVEST-shaped sub-workstream within an existing RFC.
+- **the "Agents over-ask in interactive sessions — conflating mechanical-stages with user-interactive-stages of multi-stage skill contracts (inverse-)" problem + inverse-the "Problem 078: Assistant does not offer to capture a problem ticket when the user delivers strong-signal correction" problem** — mechanical-stage carve-outs prevent over-asking; named in the Rule 6 audit table.
+
+## Phase-out-of-order note
+
+This skill ships BEFORE `/wr-itil:capture-story-map` (Slice 3 of the "Problem tickets strain as fixes decompose into multiple coordinated changes — need an RFC framework that ties all changes back to problems (and unifies technical with user/business problems)" problem Phase 2) due to the voice-tone-hook-on-HTML blocker documented at the "Problem tickets strain as fixes decompose into multiple coordinated changes — need an RFC framework that ties all changes back to problems (and unifies technical with user/business problems)" problem line 297. Building capture-story first was structurally permitted at the time (story-map traces were then optional at capture). **Superseded by the "Story-map membership and story-content completeness are enforced at capture" architecture rule** — I8 now hard-blocks at capture, and `/wr-itil:capture-story-map` has since shipped, so a map must exist before a story is captured. When Slices 3-6 eventually ship the story-map skills, `manage-story <NNN> accepted` will validate the I8 invariant against the then-existing story-map corpus. The deviation from the "Problem-RFC-Story framework with mandatory problem-trace and unified problem ontology" architecture rule's recommended commit-grain order (line 449-454 — sub-slice 3 story-map skills then sub-slice 4 story skills) is auditable here and in this commit's Slice 7 commit message.

package/skills-codex/capture-story/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "WR ITIL: Capture Story"
+  short_description: "Capture a traced delivery story on an existing map."