agestra 4.14.5 → 4.15.0

package/.claude-plugin/marketplace.json

@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
       "name": "agestra",
       "source": "./",
       "description": "Multi-host MCP orchestration across Claude, Ollama, Gemini, and Codex for review, QA, and cross-validation",
-      "version": "4.14.5",
+      "version": "4.15.0",
       "author": {
         "name": "mua-vtuber"
       },

package/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "agestra",
-  "version": "4.14.5",
+  "version": "4.15.0",
   "description": "Claude Code plugin — multi-host MCP orchestration across Claude, Ollama, Gemini, and Codex for review, QA, and cross-validation",
   "mcpServers": {
     "agestra": {

package/.gemini/commands/agestra/design.toml

@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@ prompt = """
 You are executing the `/agestra design` Gemini command.
 
 - Start with `setup_status`, then `environment_check` and `provider_list`.
-- For investigation-including workflows, route through `agent_research_consensus_start`.
-- Host research consensus contract:
+- For investigation-including workflows, route through `agent_research_start`, then start debate separately with `agent_consensus_start`.
+- Host research/debate contract uses workflow profiles, `aggregation`, `questionSet`, and `evidencePolicy`:
   호스트가 조사한다.
   호스트가 정리한다.
   시스템이 토론한다.

package/.gemini/commands/agestra/idea.toml

@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@ prompt = """
 You are executing the `/agestra idea` Gemini command.
 
 - Start with `setup_status`, then `environment_check` and `provider_list`.
-- For investigation-including workflows, route through `agent_research_consensus_start`.
-- Host research consensus contract:
+- For investigation-including workflows, route through `agent_research_start`, then start debate separately with `agent_consensus_start`.
+- Host research/debate contract uses workflow profiles, `aggregation`, `questionSet`, and `evidencePolicy`:
   호스트가 조사한다.
   호스트가 정리한다.
   시스템이 토론한다.

package/.gemini/commands/agestra/qa.toml

@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@ prompt = """
 You are executing the `/agestra qa` Gemini command.
 
 - Start with `setup_status`, then `environment_check` and `provider_list`.
-- For investigation-including workflows, route through `agent_research_consensus_start`.
-- Host research consensus contract:
+- For investigation-including workflows, route through `agent_research_start`, then start debate separately with `agent_consensus_start`.
+- Host research/debate contract uses workflow profiles, `aggregation`, `questionSet`, and `evidencePolicy`:
   호스트가 조사한다.
   호스트가 정리한다.
   시스템이 토론한다.

package/.gemini/commands/agestra/research.toml

@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@ prompt = """
 You are executing the `/agestra research` Gemini command.
 
 - Start with `setup_status`, then `environment_check` and `provider_list`.
-- For investigation-including workflows that continue into domain consensus, route through `agent_research_consensus_start`.
-- Host research consensus contract:
+- For investigation-including workflows that continue into workflow consensus, route through `agent_research_start`, then start debate separately with `agent_consensus_start`.
+- Host research/debate contract uses workflow profiles, `aggregation`, `questionSet`, and `evidencePolicy`:
   호스트가 조사한다.
   호스트가 정리한다.
   시스템이 토론한다.

package/.gemini/commands/agestra/review.toml

@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@ prompt = """
 You are executing the `/agestra review` Gemini command.
 
 - Start with `setup_status`, then `environment_check` and `provider_list`.
-- For investigation-including workflows, route through `agent_research_consensus_start`.
-- Host research consensus contract:
+- For investigation-including workflows, route through `agent_research_start`, then start debate separately with `agent_consensus_start`.
+- Host research/debate contract uses workflow profiles, `aggregation`, `questionSet`, and `evidencePolicy`:
   호스트가 조사한다.
   호스트가 정리한다.
   시스템이 토론한다.

package/.gemini/commands/agestra/security.toml

@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@ prompt = """
 You are executing the `/agestra security` Gemini command.
 
 - Start with `setup_status`, then `environment_check` and `provider_list`.
-- For investigation-including workflows, route through `agent_research_consensus_start`.
-- Host research consensus contract:
+- For investigation-including workflows, route through `agent_research_start`, then start debate separately with `agent_consensus_start`.
+- Host research/debate contract uses workflow profiles, `aggregation`, `questionSet`, and `evidencePolicy`:
   호스트가 조사한다.
   호스트가 정리한다.
   시스템이 토론한다.

package/AGENTS.md

@@ -16,13 +16,14 @@ Use `host_assets_status` to inspect generated Codex host assets, and only call `
 ## How to Work Here
 
 - Default to direct Codex work using the workspace `AGENTS.md` contract, oh-my-codex workflows, and Superpowers-style skills when they apply.
-- Use Agestra primarily for explicit multi-AI or provider orchestration requests, such as when the user names Agestra, Codex/Gemini/Ollama providers, "multi-AI", "multiple AI", "provider", `agent_debate_*`, `cli_worker_*`, or asks to gather/compare several AI opinions.
+- Use Agestra primarily for explicit multi-AI or provider-backed review, QA, security, design, idea, and evidence/consensus work, such as when the user names Agestra, Codex/Gemini/Ollama providers, "multi-AI", "multiple AI", "provider", or asks to gather/compare several AI opinions.
 - Plain review/QA/check requests without `/agestra` or explicit multi-AI/provider wording stay with the current host; they are not Agestra natural-language auto-triggers.
 - Agestra natural-language routing requires explicit multi-AI/provider wording such as "multiple AIs", "all AIs", "other AI", "multi-AI", "Codex and Gemini", "provider comparison", or "프로바이더 비교". Explicit `/agestra ...` commands remain supported.
 - Native helper agents are created by the active host layer. In Codex, use the generated custom agents installed from these assets; external MCP/CLI/chat providers participate through Agestra tools and never create or manage Codex native agents.
 - Keep Agestra setup/status/provider checks as installation and health checks, not as workflow-routing triggers.
 - Run `setup_status`, `environment_check`, and `provider_list` when the task concerns Agestra installation, MCP registration, host assets, provider availability, or before entering an Agestra workflow. If `setup_status` reports `Setup required: yes`, complete interactive setup first and then resume the original task.
 - Do not treat ordinary review, QA, security, design, idea, implementation, cleanup, build-fix, or planning requests as Agestra workflows just because setup/status/provider checks exist.
+- Agestra does not implement product code or author persistent E2E test files. Code and test authoring should happen in the current host first, then Agestra can review, QA, security-check, design-check, or discuss the result.
 - When an Agestra workflow is active, treat `commands/*.md` as the source of truth for that workflow.
 - Prefer Agestra MCP tools over ad-hoc multi-provider prompting only when the task is actually in Agestra/multi-provider mode.
 - If any legacy workflow text mentions old single-host Agestra execution, treat it as obsolete. Direct current-host work should happen outside Agestra workflows.
@@ -33,21 +34,19 @@ Use `host_assets_status` to inspect generated Codex host assets, and only call `
 - When Agestra is active, QA / verification requests follow `commands/qa.md`
 - When Agestra is active, security audit requests follow `commands/security.md`
 - Review, QA, and security workflows write durable reports under `docs/reports/review/`, `docs/reports/qa/`, and `docs/reports/security/` unless the user asks for chat-only output.
-- Persistent E2E test creation/maintenance is internal: QA produces `E2E_TEST_WORK_REQUEST`, the leader asks the user, and approved work goes to `agestra-implementer` with `mode: e2e-test-authoring`.
 - When Agestra is active, design and architecture requests follow `commands/design.md`
 - When Agestra is active, idea discovery requests follow `commands/idea.md`
-- When Agestra is active, implementation requests follow `commands/implement.md`
 
 ## Core MCP Tools
 
 - `setup_status`, `environment_check`, and `provider_list`: inspect installation, host, and provider state for Agestra health checks and active Agestra workflows
-- `agent_consensus_start` (with `agent_debate_approve`/`_continue`/`_reject`) and `agent_debate_review`: run approval-gated consensus flows from prepared `initial_aggregation`
-- `cli_worker_spawn`, `agent_changes_review`, `agent_changes_accept`, `agent_changes_reject`: use for explicit autonomous Codex/Gemini worker tasks
+- `agent_research_start`: research-only preprocessing with workflow profile, prompt pack, questionSet, evidencePolicy, research lenses, and investigator assignments; writes `research_submissions.json`, `research_transcript.json`, and `aggregation.json`; does not start debate
+- `agent_consensus_start` (with `agent_debate_approve`/`_continue`/`_reject`) and `agent_debate_review`: debate-only approval-gated consensus flows from prepared `aggregation`, supplied `questionSet`, and `evidencePolicy`; `workflow` is a report/artifact label only, not a debate routing branch
 - `host_assets_status`, `host_assets_install`, `host_assets_uninstall`: inspect and explicitly manage generated Codex host-native assets such as custom agents and skills
-- `qa_run`: run workspace build/test verification before reporting implementation completion
+- `qa_run`: run workspace build/test verification for QA evidence
 
 ## Project Assets
 
-- `agents/`: canonical role prompts (`agestra-team-lead`, `agestra-research`, `agestra-debate`, `agestra-implementer`)
+- `agents/`: canonical role prompts (`agestra-team-lead`, `agestra-research`, `agestra-debate`)
 - `skills/`: reusable workflow references
 - `GEMINI.md` and `.gemini/commands/`: Gemini-specific host assets; keep behavior aligned with them when updating shared workflows

package/GEMINI.md

@@ -20,9 +20,11 @@ After setup, Gemini project commands are available:
 - `/agestra:security`
 - `/agestra:design`
 - `/agestra:idea`
-- `/agestra:implement`
 
 Each command delegates to the shared workflow specs in `commands/*.md`.
+Agestra does not implement product code or author persistent E2E test files. Use
+Gemini CLI or the current host for code/test changes first, then run Agestra
+QA/review/security on the result.
 
 ## Usage Rules
 
@@ -31,9 +33,10 @@ Each command delegates to the shared workflow specs in `commands/*.md`.
 - Start orchestration requests with `setup_status`, then `environment_check` and `provider_list`.
 - Prefer Agestra MCP tools instead of rebuilding workflows in free-form prompts.
 - Treat `commands/*.md` and `agents/*.md` as the canonical workflow and role assets.
-- Keep native agent creation host-owned. Providers reached through MCP, CLI workers, or chat are participants only.
-- For investigation-including workflows, route through `agent_research_consensus_start`.
-- Use this host research consensus contract verbatim:
+- Keep native agent creation host-owned. Providers reached through MCP or chat are participants only.
+- For investigation-including workflows, route through `agent_research_start`,
+  then start debate separately with `agent_consensus_start`.
+- Use this host research/debate phase contract verbatim:
   호스트가 조사한다.
   호스트가 정리한다.
   시스템이 토론한다.
@@ -43,11 +46,12 @@ Each command delegates to the shared workflow specs in `commands/*.md`.
 
 ## Core MCP Tools
 
-- `agent_research_consensus_start`: host-led research, consolidation, system debate, engine aggregation docs, and host-authored final decision docs for investigation-including workflows
-- `agent_consensus_start`, `agent_debate_approve`/`_continue`/`_reject`, `agent_debate_review`: direct consensus sessions from prepared `initial_aggregation` and approval-gated debate artifacts
-- `cli_worker_spawn`, `agent_changes_review`, `agent_changes_accept`, `agent_changes_reject`: autonomous worker lifecycle
+- `agent_research_start`: research-only host-led preprocessing with workflow
+  profile, prompt pack, `questionSet`, `evidencePolicy`, research lenses, and
+  investigator assignments; writes `research_submissions.json`,
+  `research_transcript.json`, and `aggregation.json`; does not start debate
+- debate-only `agent_consensus_start`, `agent_debate_approve`/`_continue`/`_reject`, `agent_debate_review`: sessions from prepared `aggregation`, supplied `questionSet`, `evidencePolicy`, and approval-gated debate artifacts
 - `workspace_*`: document-backed review and aggregation flows
-- `qa_run`: workspace build/test verification before implementation completion
+- `qa_run`: workspace build/test verification for QA evidence
 
 Review, QA, and security workflows write durable reports under `docs/reports/review/`, `docs/reports/qa/`, and `docs/reports/security/` unless the user asks for chat-only output.
-Persistent E2E test creation/maintenance is internal: QA produces `E2E_TEST_WORK_REQUEST`, the leader asks the user, and approved work goes to `agestra-implementer` with `mode: e2e-test-authoring`. There is no standalone Gemini `/agestra:e2e` command yet.

package/README.ja.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ Claude Code、Codex CLI、Gemini CLI、ローカルモデルで使えるマル
 
 [English](README.md) | [한국어](README.ko.md) | [日本語](README.ja.md) | [中文](README.zh.md)
 
-Agestra は、1 つの作業に複数の AI を使って比較し、整理するためのツールです。コードレビュー、QA、セキュリティ確認、設計相談、アイデア探索、provider-backed 実装向けに作られています。
+Agestra は、1 つの問題を複数の AI 視点で検討し、整理するためのツールです。コードレビュー、QA、セキュリティ確認、設計相談、アイデア探索、根拠にもとづく合意形成向けに作られています。
 
 ## クイックスタート
 
@@ -21,8 +21,8 @@ Agestra は、1 つの作業に複数の AI を使って比較し、整理する
 
 インストール後、プロジェクトを開いて Agestra ワークフローを呼び出します。
 
-- Claude Code: `/agestra review`, `/agestra qa`, `/agestra security`, `/agestra design`, `/agestra idea`, `/agestra implement`
-- Gemini CLI: `/agestra:review`, `/agestra:qa`, `/agestra:security`, `/agestra:design`, `/agestra:idea`, `/agestra:implement`
+- Claude Code: `/agestra review`, `/agestra qa`, `/agestra security`, `/agestra design`, `/agestra idea`
+- Gemini CLI: `/agestra:review`, `/agestra:qa`, `/agestra:security`, `/agestra:design`, `/agestra:idea`
 - Codex CLI: `Use Agestra with Gemini and Codex to review this branch.` のように、Agestra や複数 AI を明示して依頼
 
 初回は使う provider を聞かれることがあります。provider が 1 つだけでもセットアップやホスト所有の作業はできますが、複数 AI 比較は 2 つ以上あるとより有効です。
@@ -34,7 +34,6 @@ Agestra は、1 つの作業に複数の AI を使って比較し、整理する
 - `security`: セキュリティ観点に絞って確認する
 - `design`: 実装前に構造やトレードオフを整理する
 - `idea`: 改善案、代替案、類似ツールを探る
-- `implement`: 複数 provider で実装を進め、最後の検証までつなぐ
 
 ## 実行すると何が起こるか
 
@@ -44,9 +43,9 @@ Agestra は、1 つの作業に複数の AI を使って比較し、整理する
 4. 選ばれた provider は残っている論点だけをレビューまたは討論します。
 5. 結論、意見の違い、根拠を 1 つの結果として返します。
 
-普通のレビューや QA の依頼が自動で Agestra になるわけではありません。`/agestra ...` を使うか、複数 AI や provider-backed 作業を明示したときに Agestra が動きます。
+普通のレビューや QA の依頼が自動で Agestra になるわけではありません。`/agestra ...` を使うか、複数 AI や provider-backed のレビュー、QA、セキュリティ、設計、アイデア作業を明示したときに Agestra が動きます。
 
-実装と QA では、最後の確認は引き続きホストが担当します。ビルド、テスト、実行証拠、ブラウザフロー、最終的なファイル反映はホスト側で確認します。
+コード変更は、まず現在のホストで直接行うのが基本です。Agestra はその後で結果をレビューし、計画との一致を確認し、複数 provider の意見と根拠を記録するところで最も力を発揮します。
 
 ## このリポジトリで使う
 

package/README.ko.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, 로컬 모델을 함께 쓰기 위한 멀티
 
 [English](README.md) | [한국어](README.ko.md) | [日本語](README.ja.md) | [中文](README.zh.md)
 
-Agestra는 하나의 작업에 여러 AI를 붙여서 비교하고 정리해 주는 도구입니다. 코드 리뷰, QA, 보안 점검, 설계 논의, 아이디어 탐색, provider-backed 구현에 맞춰 설계되어 있습니다.
+Agestra는 하나의 문제를 여러 AI 시각으로 검토하고 정리해 주는 도구입니다. 코드 리뷰, QA, 보안 점검, 설계 논의, 아이디어 탐색, 근거 기반 합의에 맞춰 설계되어 있습니다.
 
 ## 빠른 시작
 
@@ -21,8 +21,8 @@ Agestra는 하나의 작업에 여러 AI를 붙여서 비교하고 정리해 주
 
 설치 후 프로젝트를 열고 Agestra 워크플로우를 요청하면 됩니다.
 
-- Claude Code: `/agestra review`, `/agestra qa`, `/agestra security`, `/agestra design`, `/agestra idea`, `/agestra implement`
-- Gemini CLI: `/agestra:review`, `/agestra:qa`, `/agestra:security`, `/agestra:design`, `/agestra:idea`, `/agestra:implement`
+- Claude Code: `/agestra review`, `/agestra qa`, `/agestra security`, `/agestra design`, `/agestra idea`
+- Gemini CLI: `/agestra:review`, `/agestra:qa`, `/agestra:security`, `/agestra:design`, `/agestra:idea`
 - Codex CLI: `Agestra로 Gemini와 Codex를 같이 써서 이 브랜치 리뷰해줘`처럼 Agestra나 여러 AI를 명시해서 요청
 
 첫 실행에서는 사용할 provider를 물어볼 수 있습니다. provider가 하나만 있어도 설정과 호스트 소유 작업은 가능하지만, 멀티 AI 비교는 둘 이상일 때 가장 잘 살아납니다.
@@ -34,7 +34,6 @@ Agestra는 하나의 작업에 여러 AI를 붙여서 비교하고 정리해 주
 - `security`: 보안 관점만 따로 집중해서 검토
 - `design`: 구현 전에 구조와 트레이드오프 논의
 - `idea`: 개선 아이디어, 대안, 유사 도구 탐색
-- `implement`: 여러 provider를 써서 구현을 진행하고 마지막 검증까지 이어감
 
 ## 실행하면 어떻게 되나
 
@@ -44,9 +43,9 @@ Agestra는 하나의 작업에 여러 AI를 붙여서 비교하고 정리해 주
 4. 선택된 provider들이 남은 쟁점만 검토하거나 토론합니다.
 5. 결론, 이견, 근거를 하나의 결과로 돌려줍니다.
 
-평범한 리뷰나 QA 요청이 자동으로 Agestra가 되는 것은 아닙니다. `/agestra ...`를 쓰거나, 여러 AI나 provider-backed 작업을 명시했을 때 Agestra 워크플로우가 시작됩니다.
+평범한 리뷰나 QA 요청이 자동으로 Agestra가 되는 것은 아닙니다. `/agestra ...`를 쓰거나, 여러 AI나 provider-backed 리뷰/QA/보안/설계/아이디어 작업을 명시했을 때 Agestra 워크플로우가 시작됩니다.
 
-구현과 QA에서는 마지막 확인을 계속 호스트가 맡습니다. 빌드, 테스트, 실행 근거, 브라우저 흐름, 최종 파일 반영은 호스트가 확인합니다.
+코드 변경은 먼저 현재 호스트에서 직접 진행하는 편이 좋습니다. Agestra는 그 다음 결과를 리뷰하고, 계획과 맞는지 검증하고, 여러 provider 의견과 근거를 기록할 때 가장 강합니다.
 
 ## 이 저장소에서 쓰기
 

package/README.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ Multi-host MCP orchestration for Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, and local m
 
 [English](README.md) | [한국어](README.ko.md) | [日本語](README.ja.md) | [中文](README.zh.md)
 
-Agestra helps you use more than one AI for the same task. It is built for review, QA, design discussion, idea exploration, and provider-backed implementation.
+Agestra helps you use more than one AI to examine the same problem. It is built for review, QA, security checks, design discussion, idea exploration, and evidence-backed consensus.
 
 ## Quick Start
 
@@ -21,8 +21,8 @@ Install Agestra in the host you already use.
 
 Then open your project and ask for an Agestra workflow.
 
-- Claude Code: `/agestra review`, `/agestra qa`, `/agestra security`, `/agestra design`, `/agestra idea`, `/agestra implement`
-- Gemini CLI: `/agestra:review`, `/agestra:qa`, `/agestra:security`, `/agestra:design`, `/agestra:idea`, `/agestra:implement`
+- Claude Code: `/agestra review`, `/agestra qa`, `/agestra security`, `/agestra design`, `/agestra idea`
+- Gemini CLI: `/agestra:review`, `/agestra:qa`, `/agestra:security`, `/agestra:design`, `/agestra:idea`
 - Codex CLI: ask explicitly for Agestra or multiple providers, for example `Use Agestra with Gemini and Codex to review this branch.`
 
 The first workflow may ask which providers you want to use. Agestra works best with two or more providers, but setup and host-owned flows still work with one.
@@ -34,7 +34,6 @@ The first workflow may ask which providers you want to use. Agestra works best w
 - `security`: run a dedicated security-focused review
 - `design`: discuss architecture and tradeoffs before coding
 - `idea`: explore improvements, alternatives, and similar tools
-- `implement`: coordinate provider-backed implementation, then verify the result
 
 ## How It Runs
 
@@ -44,9 +43,9 @@ The first workflow may ask which providers you want to use. Agestra works best w
 4. Selected providers review or debate only the unresolved points.
 5. Agestra returns one result with conclusions, disagreements, and evidence.
 
-Plain review or QA requests do not automatically become Agestra workflows. Agestra starts when you use `/agestra ...` or explicitly ask for multi-AI or provider-backed help.
+Plain review or QA requests do not automatically become Agestra workflows. Agestra starts when you use `/agestra ...` or explicitly ask for multi-AI or provider-backed review, QA, security, design, or idea work.
 
-For implementation and QA, the host still owns the final checks such as build, test, runtime evidence, browser flows, and accepted file changes.
+For code changes, use your current host directly first. Agestra is strongest after that: reviewing the result, checking it against a plan, comparing provider opinions, and recording the evidence.
 
 ## Using This Repository
 

package/README.zh.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
 
 [English](README.md) | [한국어](README.ko.md) | [日本語](README.ja.md) | [中文](README.zh.md)
 
-Agestra 用来把多个 AI 放到同一个任务里比较和整理。它适合代码审查、QA、安全检查、设计讨论、想法探索，以及 provider-backed 实现。
+Agestra 用来让多个 AI 从不同角度审视同一个问题，并把结果整理成证据清晰的结论。它适合代码审查、QA、安全检查、设计讨论、想法探索和基于证据的共识。
 
 ## 快速开始
 
@@ -21,8 +21,8 @@ Agestra 用来把多个 AI 放到同一个任务里比较和整理。它适合
 
 安装后，打开项目并发起 Agestra 工作流。
 
-- Claude Code: `/agestra review`, `/agestra qa`, `/agestra security`, `/agestra design`, `/agestra idea`, `/agestra implement`
-- Gemini CLI: `/agestra:review`, `/agestra:qa`, `/agestra:security`, `/agestra:design`, `/agestra:idea`, `/agestra:implement`
+- Claude Code: `/agestra review`, `/agestra qa`, `/agestra security`, `/agestra design`, `/agestra idea`
+- Gemini CLI: `/agestra:review`, `/agestra:qa`, `/agestra:security`, `/agestra:design`, `/agestra:idea`
 - Codex CLI: 像 `Use Agestra with Gemini and Codex to review this branch.` 这样明确提到 Agestra 或多个 AI
 
 第一次运行时，它可能会询问你要启用哪些 provider。只有一个 provider 也能完成设置和宿主自有流程，但 Multi-AI 比较在两个以上 provider 时效果最好。
@@ -34,7 +34,6 @@ Agestra 用来把多个 AI 放到同一个任务里比较和整理。它适合
 - `security`: 专门做安全视角的检查
 - `design`: 在写代码前讨论结构和取舍
 - `idea`: 探索改进方向、备选方案和相似工具
-- `implement`: 用多个 provider 推进实现，并把最后验证也串起来
 
 ## 运行时会发生什么
 
@@ -44,9 +43,9 @@ Agestra 用来把多个 AI 放到同一个任务里比较和整理。它适合
 4. 被选中的 provider 只讨论或审查剩下的未解决问题。
 5. Agestra 返回一份包含结论、分歧和证据的结果。
 
-普通的 review 或 QA 请求不会自动变成 Agestra 工作流。只有当你使用 `/agestra ...`，或者明确要求多 AI / provider-backed 帮助时，Agestra 才会启动。
+普通的 review 或 QA 请求不会自动变成 Agestra 工作流。只有当你使用 `/agestra ...`，或者明确要求多 AI / provider-backed 的 review、QA、安全、设计或 idea 工作时，Agestra 才会启动。
 
-在实现和 QA 里，最后的确认仍然由宿主负责。构建、测试、运行证据、浏览器流程，以及最终落盘的改动都由宿主确认。
+代码修改应优先由当前宿主直接完成。Agestra 最适合在修改之后审查结果、按计划验证、比较多个 provider 的意见，并记录证据。
 
 ## 在这个仓库里使用
 

package/agents/agestra-debate.md

@@ -2,9 +2,10 @@
 name: agestra-debate
 description: |
   Host-native debate participant for Agestra consensus rounds. Reads the assigned
-  domain/lens context, answers a pending host turn, and returns the required
-  consensus JSON. It is not the moderator, not the team lead, not a reviewer/QA/
-  security specialist identity, and does not choose participants or run rounds.
+  workflow profile/lens context, answers a pending host turn by the supplied
+  question set, and returns the required consensus JSON. It is not the
+  moderator, not the team lead, not a reviewer/QA/security specialist identity,
+  and does not choose participants or run rounds.
 
   Use this agent only when the team lead or consensus engine has an explicit
   host-native participant turn for `agestra-debate`.
@@ -20,7 +21,7 @@ consensus turn, inspect only the supplied packet/files/lens references, and
 return the required JSON answer for that turn.
 
 You are not the consensus engine, moderator, team lead, reviewer, QA judge,
-security auditor, or implementation worker.
+security auditor, or code-change executor.
 
 Use only inside an active Agestra workflow. Plain review/QA/check requests
 without `/agestra` or explicit multi-AI/provider wording stay with the current
@@ -36,7 +37,8 @@ Required information:
 - round number to echo in `round`
 - assigned item ids
 - allowed files or evidence references
-- assigned domain/lens context, if any
+- assigned workflow profile and lens context, if any
+- supplied `questionSet` with required question IDs, verdict fields, and allowed verdicts
 - output contract
 
 If the request is only a generic review, QA, or debate request and does not
@@ -66,8 +68,16 @@ Consensus turn shape:
   "items": [
     {
       "id": "<assigned item id>",
-      "stance": "agree",
-      "comment": "short evidence-based comment when needed"
+      "questionResults": {
+        "<verdictField from questionSet>": {
+          "verdict": "<allowed verdict from questionSet>",
+          "reason": "short evidence-based reason",
+          "stanceEvidenceType": "empirical",
+          "evidenceRefs": ["file:line, artifact path, or item evidence ref"]
+        }
+      },
+      "finalStatus": "<allowed final status from questionSet>",
+      "adjustedRemedy": "optional remedy adjustment when allowed by the packet"
     }
   ]
 }
@@ -77,9 +87,11 @@ Rules:
 - `provider` must exactly match the pending participant id.
 - `round` must exactly match the pending round.
 - Answer every assigned item exactly once.
-- `stance` must be one of `agree`, `disagree`, `opinion`, or `revise`.
-- `disagree`, `opinion`, and `revise` require a non-empty `comment`.
-- `revise` requires a `proposedItem` in the shape requested by the engine.
+- Answer every required question in the supplied `questionSet`.
+- Use only verdict values allowed by the supplied `questionSet`.
+- Include stance evidence type and evidence refs for each question answer.
+- Treat `workflow` as artifact context only; do not infer hidden QA, review,
+  security, design, idea, or planning rules.
 - Do not create new top-level fields unless the engine contract explicitly allows them.
 </Output_Contract>
 
@@ -89,5 +101,5 @@ Rules:
 - Do not write reports or final synthesis documents.
 - Do not edit source files.
 - Do not convert this task into a general review, QA, security audit, or design pass.
-- If evidence is missing, use `opinion` or `disagree` with a clear comment instead of inventing facts.
+- If evidence is missing, answer the supplied question set with `unclear` or the closest allowed verdict and explain the evidence gap instead of inventing facts.
 </Boundaries>

package/agents/agestra-research.md

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ You are a focused research assignee. You investigate the exact research
 assignment you receive and return structured evidence for aggregation.
 
 You are not the team lead, final synthesizer, consensus engine, reviewer, QA
-judge, security auditor, or implementation worker.
+judge, security auditor, or code-change executor.
 
 Use only inside an active Agestra workflow. Plain review/QA/check requests
 without `/agestra` or explicit multi-AI/provider wording stay with the current
@@ -27,9 +27,12 @@ host.
 Proceed only when the request includes a bounded research assignment.
 
 Expected assignment fields:
-- `domain`: idea, design, review, qa, security, implement, or research
+- `workflow` and `profileId`: idea, design, review, qa, security, planning, or
+  research workflow profile selected by team-lead
+- `promptPack`: self-contained workflow prompt, research skill guidance,
+  question set, finding contract, and evidence policy
 - `question`: the narrow question this run answers
-- `lens`: the lens bundle to apply
+- `lens`: the single lens to apply
 - `scope`: files, docs, URLs, or boundaries to inspect
 - `deliverable`: expected result shape
 - `rationale`: why this run exists, when provided
@@ -40,8 +43,8 @@ concrete research assignment instead of expanding the scope yourself.
 
 <Lens_Policy>
 Start from `skills/references/lenses/research.md` when lens rules are needed.
-If the assignment has a concrete domain, read only the matching domain pack under
-`skills/references/lenses/research-domains/`.
+If the assignment has a concrete workflow profile, read only the matching lens
+reference under `skills/references/lenses/research-domains/`.
 
 One research run should keep a narrow lens bundle. If the assignment includes too
 many unrelated lenses, report that it should be split into multiple research
@@ -58,15 +61,17 @@ runs.
 </Research_Method>
 
 <Output_Contract>
-Return JSON only. The result feeds team-lead/research aggregation, which may
-later create `initial_aggregation` for the consensus engine.
+Return JSON only. The result feeds team-lead/research aggregation. Do not start
+debate or create the final report.
 
 Recommended shape:
 
 ```json
 {
   "researcher": "agestra-research",
-  "domain": "idea",
+  "workflow": "idea",
+  "profileId": "idea.value-and-next-step.v1",
+  "promptPackId": "idea.value-and-next-step.v1",
   "question": "The assigned question",
   "lens": "User Pain + Evidence",
   "findings": [
@@ -75,18 +80,26 @@ Recommended shape:
       "kind": "finding",
       "title": "Short evidence-backed title",
       "claim": "What the evidence suggests",
+      "whyItMatters": "Why a participant should care about this finding",
+      "evidenceType": "empirical",
       "evidence": ["file:line, command, artifact path, or URL"],
+      "proposedRemedy": "Action or next step when the workflow requires one",
+      "remedyRisk": "Risk introduced by the proposed remedy, or null",
+      "debateEligibility": "eligible",
       "confidence": "high",
       "limits": "What was not checked"
     }
   ],
+  "rawTranscript": "The concise raw response or notes from this run",
   "openQuestions": [],
-  "suggestedConsensusItems": []
+  "suggestedAggregationItems": []
 }
 ```
 
-Use `suggestedConsensusItems` only for claims that may need multi-AI consensus.
-Do not call the consensus engine yourself.
+Use one prompt pack and one lens per run. Every finding must classify evidence as
+`empirical`, `inferential`, or `mixed`; include `proposedRemedy`, `remedyRisk`,
+and `debateEligibility` when the profile contract asks for them. Do not call the
+consensus engine yourself.
 </Output_Contract>
 
 <Boundaries>