aiox-core 5.0.4 → 5.0.5

package/pro/squads/squad-creator-pro/workflows/wf-discover-tools.yaml

@@ -1,1439 +0,0 @@
-# wf-discover-tools.yaml
-# Workflow: Deep Tool Discovery with Parallel Sub-Agents
-# Version: 2.0
-# Last Updated: 2026-02-03
-
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-# WORKFLOW METADATA
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-workflow:
-  id: wf-discover-tools
-  name: "Deep Tool Discovery"
-  version: "2.0"
-  purpose: |
-    Orquestrar pesquisa PROFUNDA e PARALELA de ferramentas que potencializam
-    os entregáveis de um squad, usando subagentes especializados para cada
-    categoria de ferramenta.
-  orchestrator: "@squad-chief"
-  mode: "autonomous"
-
-  philosophy: |
-    "A squad should leverage ALL available tools to deliver maximum value
-    with minimum user intervention."
-
-    Este workflow NÃO é um check superficial - é uma pesquisa PROFUNDA
-    que lança 5 subagentes em PARALELO, cada um especializado em uma
-    categoria de ferramenta.
-
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-# EXECUTION STRATEGY
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-execution_strategy:
-  mode: "parallel_then_synthesize"
-  description: |
-    1. PHASE 0: Capability Gap Analysis (sequential, fast)
-    2. PHASE 1: Deep Search (5 subagents in PARALLEL)
-       - MCP Discovery Agent
-       - API Discovery Agent
-       - CLI Discovery Agent
-       - Library Discovery Agent
-       - GitHub Project Discovery Agent
-    3. PHASE 2: Synthesis & Scoring (sequential, after all agents complete)
-    4. PHASE 3: Decision Matrix & Integration Plan
-
-  parallelization:
-    enabled: true
-    max_concurrent_agents: 5
-    timeout_per_agent: "15 minutes"
-    fail_strategy: "continue_others"  # Don't block if one agent fails
-
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-# INPUTS
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-inputs:
-  required:
-    - name: domain
-      type: string
-      description: "Squad domain (e.g., 'copywriting', 'legal', 'cybersecurity')"
-      example: "copywriting"
-
-    - name: use_cases
-      type: list
-      description: "Key use cases the squad must handle"
-      example: ["sales pages", "email sequences", "ad copy"]
-
-  optional:
-    - name: existing_tools
-      type: list
-      description: "Tools already in use (to avoid duplicates)"
-      default: []
-
-    - name: budget_tier
-      type: enum
-      values: ["free_only", "low_cost", "enterprise"]
-      default: "low_cost"
-
-    - name: priority_capabilities
-      type: list
-      description: "Capabilities to prioritize in search"
-      default: []
-
-    - name: search_depth
-      type: enum
-      values: ["quick", "standard", "exhaustive"]
-      default: "standard"
-      description: |
-        quick: 5 results per category, 5 min timeout
-        standard: 15 results per category, 10 min timeout
-        exhaustive: 30 results per category, 20 min timeout
-
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-# PRECONDITIONS
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-preconditions:
-  - "squad-chief agent is active"
-  - "WebSearch/EXA tool available"
-  - "WebFetch tool available"
-  - "Task tool available (for spawning subagents)"
-  - "Write permissions for data/tool-registry.yaml"
-
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-# PHASES
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-phases:
-  # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-  # PHASE 0: CAPABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
-  # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-  - id: phase_0
-    name: "CAPABILITY GAP ANALYSIS"
-    purpose: "Map required capabilities and identify gaps that need tools"
-    duration: "5-10 minutes"
-    mode: "sequential"
-
-    steps:
-      - id: step_0_1
-        name: "Map Use Case Requirements"
-        action: "Analyze each use case to identify required capabilities"
-        logic: |
-          for each use_case in inputs.use_cases:
-            analyze:
-              - INPUT_NEEDS: What data/info does this use case need?
-              - PROCESSING_NEEDS: What transformations/analysis?
-              - OUTPUT_NEEDS: What should be produced?
-              - INTEGRATION_NEEDS: What external systems?
-              - AUTOMATION_POTENTIAL: What can be automated?
-
-        output:
-          capability_requirements:
-            - use_case: "sales pages"
-              capabilities:
-                - { name: "competitor_analysis", priority: "high" }
-                - { name: "headline_generation", priority: "high" }
-                - { name: "screenshot_capture", priority: "medium" }
-
-      - id: step_0_2
-        name: "Check Existing Coverage"
-        action: "Load tool-registry.yaml and check what's already covered"
-        logic: |
-          load: "data/tool-registry.yaml"
-
-          for each capability in capability_requirements:
-            check:
-              - native_tools_coverage
-              - installed_mcp_coverage
-              - known_mcp_coverage
-
-            classify:
-              - COVERED: Tool exists and is installed
-              - KNOWN: Tool exists but not installed
-              - GAP: No known tool for this capability
-
-        output:
-          coverage_report:
-            covered: []
-            known_not_installed: []
-            gaps: []  # These go to deep search
-
-      - id: step_0_3
-        name: "Prioritize Gaps"
-        action: "Score and prioritize capability gaps for deep search"
-        scoring:
-          impact:
-            weight: 0.35
-            question: "How much value does filling this gap add?"
-          frequency:
-            weight: 0.25
-            question: "How often is this capability needed?"
-          user_dependency:
-            weight: 0.25
-            question: "How much manual work does the gap require?"
-          uniqueness:
-            weight: 0.15
-            question: "Is this a differentiating capability?"
-
-        output:
-          prioritized_gaps:
-            - capability: "competitor_analysis"
-              priority_score: 8.7
-              search_keywords: ["competitor", "analysis", "monitoring", "scraping"]
-            - capability: "email_automation"
-              priority_score: 8.2
-              search_keywords: ["email", "smtp", "sendgrid", "mailgun"]
-
-    checkpoint:
-      id: CP_GAP_ANALYSIS
-      name: "Gap Analysis Complete"
-      blocking: true
-      criteria:
-        - capabilities_mapped: true
-        - gaps_identified: ">= 1"
-        - gaps_prioritized: true
-
-  # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-  # PHASE 1: PARALLEL DEEP SEARCH
-  # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-  - id: phase_1
-    name: "PARALLEL DEEP SEARCH"
-    purpose: "Launch 5 specialized subagents to search each tool category"
-    duration: "10-20 minutes (parallel)"
-    mode: "parallel"
-
-    description: |
-      This phase launches 5 subagents SIMULTANEOUSLY using the Task tool.
-      Each subagent is specialized in searching one category of tools.
-      All agents receive the same inputs (domain, gaps, keywords) but
-      search in different ecosystems.
-
-    parallel_agents:
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      # AGENT 1: MCP DISCOVERY
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      - id: agent_mcp
-        name: "MCP Discovery Agent"
-        task_prompt: |
-          You are a specialized MCP (Model Context Protocol) discovery agent.
-
-          ## Your Mission
-          Find MCP servers that can fill these capability gaps for a {domain} squad:
-          {prioritized_gaps}
-
-          ## Search Strategy
-
-          ### 1. Official Sources (Priority 1)
-          - https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/servers
-          - https://github.com/anthropics/anthropic-tools
-          - https://glama.ai/mcp/servers
-
-          ### 2. Community Sources (Priority 2)
-          Search GitHub with these queries:
-          - "topic:mcp-server {keyword}"
-          - "mcp server {domain}" in:readme
-          - "model context protocol {capability}"
-
-          ### 3. Filter Criteria
-          - Stars >= 10 (quality signal)
-          - Updated within 6 months (maintained)
-          - Has README with installation docs
-          - Compatible with Claude (anthropic/claude mentions)
-
-          ## For Each MCP Found, Extract:
-          ```yaml
-          mcp:
-            name: ""
-            source_url: ""
-            description: ""
-            capabilities: []
-            installation:
-              method: "npm | pip | docker"
-              command: ""
-            requirements: []
-            last_updated: ""
-            stars: N
-            quality_signals:
-              has_docs: true/false
-              has_examples: true/false
-              active_maintenance: true/false
-            fills_gaps: []  # Which of our gaps does this fill?
-          ```
-
-          ## Output Format
-          Return a YAML list of all MCPs found, sorted by relevance to our gaps.
-          Include at least {search_depth_count} results.
-
-        subagent_type: "Explore"
-        timeout: "{search_timeout}"
-        output_key: "mcp_results"
-
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      # AGENT 2: API DISCOVERY
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      - id: agent_api
-        name: "API Discovery Agent"
-        task_prompt: |
-          You are a specialized API discovery agent.
-
-          ## Your Mission
-          Find REST/GraphQL APIs that can fill these capability gaps for a {domain} squad:
-          {prioritized_gaps}
-
-          ## Search Strategy
-
-          ### 1. API Directories
-          - RapidAPI: https://rapidapi.com/search/{domain}
-          - Public APIs: https://github.com/public-apis/public-apis
-          - API List: https://apilist.fun
-          - ProgrammableWeb categories
-
-          ### 2. Search Queries
-          - "{domain} API"
-          - "{capability} REST API"
-          - "best {domain} APIs 2025 2026"
-          - "{domain} SaaS API integration"
-
-          ### 3. For Each API, Evaluate:
-
-          **Pricing:**
-          - Free tier available?
-          - Free requests/month?
-          - Paid starting price?
-
-          **Reliability:**
-          - Documented uptime (99.X%)?
-          - Status page exists?
-
-          **Documentation:**
-          - OpenAPI/Swagger spec?
-          - Code examples?
-          - SDKs available?
-
-          **Authentication:**
-          - Type: API key | OAuth | JWT
-          - Complexity: Simple | Moderate | Complex
-
-          **Rate Limits:**
-          - Requests/second
-          - Requests/day
-          - Burst limit
-
-          ## For Each API Found, Extract:
-          ```yaml
-          api:
-            name: ""
-            url: ""
-            description: ""
-            capabilities: []
-            pricing:
-              free_tier: true/false
-              free_requests: "N/month"
-              paid_starting: "$X/month"
-            reliability:
-              uptime: "99.X%"
-              status_page: true/false
-            documentation:
-              openapi_spec: true/false
-              code_examples: true/false
-              sdks: ["python", "node", "etc"]
-            auth:
-              type: "api_key | oauth | jwt"
-              complexity: "simple | moderate | complex"
-            rate_limits:
-              per_second: N
-              per_day: N
-            fills_gaps: []
-          ```
-
-          ## Output Format
-          Return a YAML list of all APIs found, sorted by:
-          1. Free tier availability
-          2. Relevance to our gaps
-          3. Documentation quality
-
-          Include at least {search_depth_count} results.
-
-        subagent_type: "Explore"
-        timeout: "{search_timeout}"
-        output_key: "api_results"
-
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      # AGENT 3: CLI DISCOVERY
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      - id: agent_cli
-        name: "CLI Tool Discovery Agent"
-        task_prompt: |
-          You are a specialized CLI tool discovery agent.
-
-          ## Your Mission
-          Find command-line tools that can fill these capability gaps for a {domain} squad:
-          {prioritized_gaps}
-
-          ## Search Strategy
-
-          ### 1. Awesome Lists
-          - https://github.com/agarrharr/awesome-cli-apps
-          - https://github.com/alebcay/awesome-shell
-          - https://github.com/topics/awesome-{domain}
-          - https://github.com/sindresorhus/awesome
-
-          ### 2. Package Managers
-          - Homebrew: "brew search {keyword}"
-          - npm: "npm search {keyword} cli"
-          - pip/PyPI: "{keyword} cli tool"
-
-          ### 3. Search Queries
-          - "{domain} CLI tool"
-          - "best {domain} command line tools"
-          - "awesome {domain} CLI github"
-          - "{capability} terminal tool"
-
-          ### 4. Filter Criteria
-          - Easy installation (brew/npm/pip)
-          - Cross-platform (macOS + Linux at minimum)
-          - Good documentation (--help, man page)
-          - Scriptable output (JSON/YAML option)
-          - Active maintenance
-
-          ## For Each CLI Found, Extract:
-          ```yaml
-          cli:
-            name: ""
-            description: ""
-            capabilities: []
-            installation:
-              homebrew: "brew install X"
-              npm: "npm install -g X"
-              pip: "pip install X"
-              other: ""
-            platforms: ["macos", "linux", "windows"]
-            documentation:
-              help_flag: true/false
-              man_page: true/false
-              online_docs: "url"
-            output_formats: ["json", "yaml", "text"]
-            github:
-              url: ""
-              stars: N
-              last_updated: ""
-            fills_gaps: []
-          ```
-
-          ## Output Format
-          Return a YAML list of all CLIs found, sorted by:
-          1. Installation ease
-          2. Relevance to our gaps
-          3. Cross-platform support
-
-          Include at least {search_depth_count} results.
-
-        subagent_type: "Explore"
-        timeout: "{search_timeout}"
-        output_key: "cli_results"
-
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      # AGENT 4: LIBRARY DISCOVERY
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      - id: agent_library
-        name: "Library Discovery Agent"
-        task_prompt: |
-          You are a specialized library/SDK discovery agent.
-
-          ## Your Mission
-          Find Python/Node libraries that can fill these capability gaps for a {domain} squad:
-          {prioritized_gaps}
-
-          ## Search Strategy
-
-          ### 1. Package Registries
-          **PyPI (Python):**
-          - Search: "{domain}", "{capability}"
-          - Filter: downloads > 10,000/month
-          - Check: Python 3.8+ support
-
-          **npm (Node.js):**
-          - Search: "{domain}", "@{company}/{domain}"
-          - Filter: downloads > 5,000/week
-          - Check: Node 16+ support
-
-          ### 2. Search Queries
-          - "python {domain} library"
-          - "node {domain} package"
-          - "{domain} SDK"
-          - "{capability} python library"
-          - "best {domain} npm packages 2025"
-
-          ### 3. Quality Criteria
-          - Type hints (TypeScript/Python types)
-          - Test coverage > 80%
-          - Active maintenance (release < 6 months)
-          - Minimal dependencies
-          - Good documentation with examples
-
-          ## For Each Library Found, Extract:
-          ```yaml
-          library:
-            name: ""
-            language: "python | node | both"
-            description: ""
-            capabilities: []
-            installation:
-              pip: "pip install X"
-              npm: "npm install X"
-            version:
-              current: "X.Y.Z"
-              python_support: ">=3.8"
-              node_support: ">=16"
-            quality:
-              type_hints: true/false
-              test_coverage: "X%"
-              last_release: "YYYY-MM-DD"
-              dependencies_count: N
-            documentation:
-              docs_site: "url"
-              examples: true/false
-              api_reference: true/false
-            stats:
-              pypi_downloads: "N/month"
-              npm_downloads: "N/week"
-              github_stars: N
-            fills_gaps: []
-          ```
-
-          ## Output Format
-          Return a YAML list of all libraries found, sorted by:
-          1. Language preference (Python first, then Node)
-          2. Relevance to our gaps
-          3. Quality metrics
-
-          Include at least {search_depth_count} results.
-
-        subagent_type: "Explore"
-        timeout: "{search_timeout}"
-        output_key: "library_results"
-
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      # AGENT 5: GITHUB PROJECT DISCOVERY
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      - id: agent_github
-        name: "GitHub Project Discovery Agent"
-        task_prompt: |
-          You are a specialized GitHub project discovery agent.
-
-          ## Your Mission
-          Find open-source projects that can fill these capability gaps for a {domain} squad:
-          {prioritized_gaps}
-
-          Focus on REUSABLE COMPONENTS - scripts, modules, or tools that can be
-          extracted and integrated into our squad.
-
-          ## Search Strategy
-
-          ### 1. GitHub Topics
-          - topic:{domain}
-          - topic:{domain}-automation
-          - topic:awesome-{domain}
-          - topic:{capability}
-
-          ### 2. GitHub Collections
-          - https://github.com/collections/{domain}
-          - https://github.com/topics/{domain}
-
-          ### 3. Search Queries
-          - "{domain} automation github stars:>100"
-          - "awesome {domain} github"
-          - "{capability} tool github"
-          - "{domain} toolkit"
-          - "{domain} scripts"
-
-          ### 4. Filter Criteria
-          - Stars >= 100 (quality signal)
-          - Updated within 1 year
-          - Has LICENSE (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD preferred)
-          - Has README with usage docs
-          - Language: Python, JavaScript, TypeScript, Go
-
-          ### 5. Reusability Analysis
-          For each project, analyze:
-          - Can scripts be run standalone?
-          - Can modules be imported?
-          - Does it expose an API?
-          - Are there reusable prompt templates?
-          - Are there automation workflows?
-
-          ## For Each Project Found, Extract:
-          ```yaml
-          github_project:
-            name: ""
-            url: ""
-            description: ""
-            capabilities: []
-            stats:
-              stars: N
-              forks: N
-              last_commit: "YYYY-MM-DD"
-              contributors: N
-            technical:
-              language: ""
-              license: ""
-              dependencies: []
-            reusability:
-              standalone_scripts: true/false
-              importable_modules: true/false
-              api_endpoints: true/false
-              prompt_templates: true/false
-              automation_workflows: true/false
-            integration_effort:
-              estimate: "low | medium | high"
-              notes: ""
-            fills_gaps: []
-          ```
-
-          ## Output Format
-          Return a YAML list of all projects found, sorted by:
-          1. Reusability potential
-          2. Stars/quality signals
-          3. Relevance to our gaps
-
-          Include at least {search_depth_count} results.
-
-        subagent_type: "Explore"
-        timeout: "{search_timeout}"
-        output_key: "github_results"
-
-    # Agent execution logic
-    execution:
-      launch_all_parallel: true
-      wait_for_all: true
-      collect_results:
-        - mcp_results
-        - api_results
-        - cli_results
-        - library_results
-        - github_results
-
-    checkpoint:
-      id: CP_DEEP_SEARCH
-      name: "Deep Search Complete"
-      blocking: true
-      criteria:
-        - at_least_3_agents_succeeded: true
-        - total_tools_found: ">= 10"
-      on_partial_failure:
-        action: "Continue with available results, note failures"
-
-  # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-  # PHASE 2: COMPARATIVE EVALUATION (Tiers Relativos)
-  # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-  - id: phase_2
-    name: "COMPARATIVE EVALUATION"
-    purpose: "Evaluate tools using RELATIVE TIERS - comparing tools against each other, not absolute values"
-    duration: "10-15 minutes"
-    mode: "sequential"
-    depends_on: ["phase_1"]
-
-    framework_reference: "data/tool-evaluation-framework.md"
-
-    philosophy: |
-      NÃO EXISTEM VALORES ABSOLUTOS UNIVERSAIS.
-
-      Um projeto com 30 stars pode ser EXCELENTE se for o melhor do nicho.
-      Um projeto com 10,000 stars pode ser MEDIANO se todos os concorrentes
-      tiverem 50,000.
-
-      SEMPRE comparar ferramentas ENTRE SI, dentro do contexto da pesquisa.
-
-    principles:
-      - "COMPARAÇÃO RELATIVA - Tiers baseados nos projetos encontrados, não em números mágicos"
-      - "CONTEXTO DE DOMÍNIO - Ferramentas de nicho competem com ferramentas de nicho"
-      - "FLAGS, NÃO VETOS - Problemas são destacados para decisão humana, não eliminados automaticamente"
-      - "DADOS > HEURÍSTICAS - Normalizar dentro do dataset encontrado"
-
-    steps:
-      - id: step_2_1
-        name: "Consolidate & Deduplicate"
-        action: "Merge all subagent results and remove duplicates"
-        logic: |
-          all_tools = []
-          for category in [mcp, api, cli, library, github]:
-            for tool in category_results:
-              tool.category = category
-              tool.source_agent = agent_name
-              all_tools.append(tool)
-
-          deduplicated = deduplicate_by_name_and_url(all_tools)
-
-        output:
-          consolidated_tools:
-            total: N
-            by_category: { mcp: N, api: N, cli: N, library: N, github: N }
-
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      # STEP 2.2: COLLECT RAW METRICS
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      - id: step_2_2
-        name: "Collect Raw Metrics"
-        action: "Gather all metrics for each tool to enable relative comparison"
-
-        metrics_to_collect:
-          social_proof:
-            - github_stars
-            - github_forks
-            - npm_downloads_weekly
-            - pypi_downloads_monthly
-            - contributors_count
-            - open_issues_count
-            - closed_issues_count
-            - last_commit_days_ago
-            - releases_last_year
-            - stackoverflow_questions
-
-          security:
-            - critical_cves_count
-            - high_cves_count
-            - medium_cves_count
-            - deps_vulnerabilities_count
-            - has_security_policy
-            - has_security_audit
-            - signed_releases
-
-          maturity:
-            - age_months
-            - major_version
-            - has_documentation
-            - has_examples
-            - has_tests
-
-        output:
-          raw_metrics_matrix:
-            tool_name: { metric_name: value, ... }
-
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      # STEP 2.3: CALCULATE RELATIVE TIERS (Percentis)
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      - id: step_2_3
-        name: "Calculate Relative Tiers"
-        action: "For each dimension, rank tools by percentile within the dataset"
-
-        tier_calculation:
-          method: "percentile"
-          tiers:
-            tier_1: "Top 20% (above P80)"
-            tier_2: "21-50% (P50 to P80)"
-            tier_3: "51-80% (P20 to P50)"
-            tier_4: "Bottom 20% (below P20)"
-
-          dimensions:
-            social_proof:
-              components:
-                - name: "popularity"
-                  metrics: [github_stars, npm_downloads, pypi_downloads]
-                  weight: 0.30
-                - name: "community_health"
-                  metrics: [contributors_count, issues_response_ratio]
-                  weight: 0.25
-                - name: "activity"
-                  metrics: [last_commit_days_ago, releases_last_year]
-                  weight: 0.25
-                  inverse: [last_commit_days_ago]  # Lower is better
-                - name: "adoption"
-                  metrics: [stackoverflow_questions]
-                  weight: 0.20
-
-            security:
-              note: "For CVEs, compare relative counts - lower tier = fewer CVEs"
-              components:
-                - name: "vulnerabilities"
-                  metrics: [critical_cves, high_cves, deps_vulnerabilities]
-                  weight: 0.60
-                  inverse: true  # Fewer is better
-                - name: "practices"
-                  metrics: [has_security_policy, has_security_audit, signed_releases]
-                  weight: 0.40
-
-            maturity:
-              components:
-                - name: "longevity"
-                  metrics: [age_months, major_version]
-                  weight: 0.40
-                - name: "documentation"
-                  metrics: [has_documentation, has_examples]
-                  weight: 0.30
-                - name: "quality"
-                  metrics: [has_tests]
-                  weight: 0.30
-
-        output:
-          tier_matrix:
-            tool_name:
-              social_proof_tier: 1-4
-              security_tier: 1-4
-              maturity_tier: 1-4
-
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      # STEP 2.4: FLAG ATTENTION ITEMS (Not VETOs)
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      - id: step_2_4
-        name: "Flag Attention Items"
-        action: "Identify items that require human attention (flags, not automatic vetos)"
-
-        note: |
-          FLAGS highlight concerns but do NOT automatically eliminate tools.
-          A tool with a flag may still be the best option if all alternatives
-          have worse issues.
-
-        flags:
-          security:
-            - flag: "🔴 CRITICAL_CVE"
-              condition: "Has unpatched critical CVE"
-              action: "Highlight for human review"
-              note: "Check if patch available or workaround exists"
-
-            - flag: "🟠 HIGH_CVE"
-              condition: "Has unpatched high CVE"
-              action: "Compare with alternatives"
-
-            - flag: "🟡 SECURITY_INCIDENT"
-              condition: "History of security incident"
-              action: "Research if resolved"
-
-          maturity:
-            - flag: "🔵 VERY_NEW"
-              condition: "Project < 3 months old"
-              action: "May be innovative or unstable"
-
-            - flag: "🟤 SINGLE_MAINTAINER"
-              condition: "Only 1 contributor"
-              action: "Bus factor concern"
-
-            - flag: "⚪ NO_RECENT_RELEASES"
-              condition: "No releases in 12 months"
-              action: "Check if stable or abandoned"
-
-          licensing:
-            - flag: "⚫ NO_LICENSE"
-              condition: "No OSS license"
-              action: "Cannot use without license clarification"
-
-        output:
-          flagged_tools:
-            tool_name: [list of flags]
-
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      # STEP 2.5: COST-BENEFIT COMPARISON (Relative)
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      - id: step_2_5
-        name: "Cost-Benefit Comparison"
-        action: "Compare paid vs OSS alternatives within same tier"
-
-        principle: |
-          NO fixed ROI thresholds.
-          Compare tiers between paid and OSS options for same capability.
-          Present analysis for human decision.
-
-        analysis:
-          step_1:
-            action: "Group tools by capability gap they fill"
-
-          step_2:
-            action: "For each gap, identify paid and OSS options"
-
-          step_3:
-            action: "Compare tiers within each group"
-            logic: |
-              If OSS is Tier 1-2 and Paid is also Tier 1-2:
-                → Prefer OSS (cost advantage)
-              If Paid is Tier 1 and OSS is Tier 3-4:
-                → Present both with tier comparison
-              If only Paid options exist:
-                → Present with cost analysis
-
-          step_4:
-            action: "Generate comparison table for human decision"
-
-        output:
-          cost_comparison:
-            by_capability:
-              capability_name:
-                oss_options: [{ tool, tier, cost: "free" }]
-                paid_options: [{ tool, tier, cost: "$X/mo" }]
-                recommendation: "OSS Tier 1 exists" | "Consider paid" | "Only paid available"
-
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      # STEP 2.6: RICE SCORING (Relative)
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      - id: step_2_6
-        name: "RICE Scoring (Relative)"
-        action: "Calculate RICE for each tool, then rank by percentile"
-
-        rice_components:
-          reach:
-            description: "Proportion of squad use cases affected"
-            calculation: "(use_cases_affected / total_use_cases) * 10"
-
-          impact:
-            description: "Magnitude of benefit when implemented"
-            assessment:
-              - "Manual work reduction %"
-              - "Quality improvement %"
-              - "Necessity (can squad work without it?)"
-              - "Differentiation value"
-            calculation: "weighted average of assessments"
-
-          confidence:
-            description: "Certainty about Reach and Impact estimates"
-            based_on:
-              - "Have we tested similar tool?"
-              - "Quality of documentation"
-              - "Number of reviews/case studies"
-              - "Community activity"
-
-          effort:
-            description: "Time and resources to implement"
-            components:
-              - installation_complexity
-              - integration_effort
-              - learning_curve
-              - maintenance_burden
-
-        formula: "RICE = (Reach * Impact * Confidence) / Effort"
-
-        tier_assignment: |
-          Calculate RICE for ALL tools, then assign tiers by percentile:
-          - Tier 1: Top 20% RICE scores
-          - Tier 2: 21-50%
-          - Tier 3: 51-80%
-          - Tier 4: Bottom 20%
-
-          NOTE: NO absolute threshold like "RICE > 50 is good".
-          A tool with RICE 15 can be Tier 1 if it's the best in the dataset.
-
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      # STEP 2.7: WSJF SCORING (Relative)
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      - id: step_2_7
-        name: "WSJF Scoring (Relative)"
-        action: "Calculate WSJF for prioritization, rank by percentile"
-
-        cost_of_delay:
-          user_business_value:
-            weight: 0.40
-            question: "How much business value does user gain?"
-            comparison: "Rank tools against each other"
-
-          time_criticality:
-            weight: 0.30
-            question: "How urgent is this capability?"
-            context: "Depends on squad project timeline"
-
-          risk_reduction:
-            weight: 0.30
-            question: "How much risk does this tool mitigate?"
-
-        job_duration:
-          description: "Estimated implementation time"
-          mapping:
-            1: "< 1 hour"
-            2: "1-4 hours"
-            3: "1 day"
-            5: "1 week"
-            7: "2-4 weeks"
-            10: "> 3 months"
-
-        formula: "WSJF = Cost_of_Delay / Job_Duration"
-
-        tier_assignment: |
-          Same as RICE - assign tiers by percentile within dataset.
-          High WSJF = High value, low effort (prioritize first)
-
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      # STEP 2.8: COMPOSITE TIER & RANKING
-      # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-      - id: step_2_8
-        name: "Calculate Composite Tier"
-        action: "Combine all dimension tiers into final ranking"
-
-        composite_calculation:
-          weights:
-            rice_tier: 0.30
-            wsjf_tier: 0.25
-            social_proof_tier: 0.20
-            security_tier: 0.15
-            maturity_tier: 0.10
-
-          formula: |
-            # Convert tiers to scores (Tier 1 = 4, Tier 2 = 3, etc.)
-            tier_to_score = {1: 4, 2: 3, 3: 2, 4: 1}
-
-            composite_score = sum(tier_to_score[tier] * weight for each dimension)
-
-            # Convert back to tier
-            if composite_score >= 3.5: Tier 1
-            elif composite_score >= 2.5: Tier 2
-            elif composite_score >= 1.5: Tier 3
-            else: Tier 4
-
-        decision_matrix:
-          note: "Based on VALUE tier (RICE+WSJF) vs EFFORT tier"
-          quadrants:
-            quick_wins:
-              criteria: "Tier 1-2 Value AND Tier 1-2 Effort"
-              action: "Implement first"
-
-            strategic:
-              criteria: "Tier 1-2 Value AND Tier 3-4 Effort"
-              action: "Plan and schedule"
-
-            fill_ins:
-              criteria: "Tier 3-4 Value AND Tier 1-2 Effort"
-              action: "If time permits"
-
-            backlog:
-              criteria: "Tier 3-4 Value AND Tier 3-4 Effort"
-              action: "Low priority"
-
-        output:
-          ranked_tools:
-            - tool: "Tool A"
-              composite_tier: 1
-              quadrant: "Quick Win"
-              flags: []
-              tiers:
-                rice: 1
-                wsjf: 1
-                social_proof: 2
-                security: 1
-                maturity: 2
-
-      - id: step_2_9
-        name: "Generate Comparative Report"
-        action: "Create report showing relative rankings and comparisons"
-
-        report_sections:
-          tier_distribution:
-            description: "How many tools in each tier"
-            format: |
-              Tier 1 (Top 20%): N tools
-              Tier 2 (21-50%): N tools
-              Tier 3 (51-80%): N tools
-              Tier 4 (Bottom 20%): N tools
-
-          top_by_category:
-            description: "Best tools per category"
-            categories: [mcp, api, cli, library, github]
-            show: "Top 3 per category with tier info"
-
-          gap_coverage:
-            description: "Which gaps have Tier 1-2 options"
-            format: |
-              ✅ Gap X: Tool A (Tier 1), Tool B (Tier 2)
-              ⚠️ Gap Y: Only Tier 3-4 options available
-              ❌ Gap Z: No tools found
-
-          flags_summary:
-            description: "All flagged items requiring attention"
-            format: |
-              🔴 CRITICAL_CVE: Tool X, Tool Y
-              🔵 VERY_NEW: Tool Z
-
-          paid_vs_oss:
-            description: "Comparison for gaps where both exist"
-
-        output:
-          comparative_report:
-            tier_distribution: {}
-            top_overall: []
-            top_by_category: {}
-            gap_coverage: {}
-            flags_summary: {}
-            paid_vs_oss_analysis: {}
-
-    checkpoint:
-      id: CP_SCORING
-      name: "Scoring Complete"
-      blocking: true
-      criteria:
-        - all_tools_scored: true
-        - rankings_generated: true
-
-  # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-  # PHASE 3: DECISION MATRIX & INTEGRATION PLAN
-  # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-  - id: phase_3
-    name: "DECISION MATRIX & INTEGRATION PLAN"
-    purpose: "Create actionable decision matrix and implementation plan"
-    duration: "5-10 minutes"
-    mode: "sequential"
-    depends_on: ["phase_2"]
-
-    steps:
-      - id: step_3_1
-        name: "Generate Decision Matrix"
-        action: "Create impact vs effort quadrant matrix"
-        matrix:
-          quadrants:
-            quick_wins:
-              criteria: "impact_score >= 7 AND effort_score >= 7"
-              action: "Implement immediately"
-              priority: 1
-
-            strategic:
-              criteria: "impact_score >= 7 AND effort_score < 7"
-              action: "Plan for implementation"
-              priority: 2
-
-            fill_ins:
-              criteria: "impact_score < 7 AND effort_score >= 7"
-              action: "Nice to have, low priority"
-              priority: 3
-
-            avoid:
-              criteria: "impact_score < 7 AND effort_score < 7"
-              action: "Don't implement"
-              priority: 4
-
-        output:
-          decision_matrix:
-            quick_wins: []
-            strategic: []
-            fill_ins: []
-            avoid: []
-
-      - id: step_3_2
-        name: "Generate Integration Plan"
-        action: "Create phased implementation plan"
-        plan_structure:
-          immediate:
-            timeframe: "Today"
-            criteria: "Quick wins with < 30 min setup"
-            actions:
-              - tool_name: ""
-                action: "Install via {command}"
-                effort: "5-30 min"
-                fills_gap: ""
-
-          short_term:
-            timeframe: "This Week"
-            criteria: "Quick wins and high-value strategic"
-            actions:
-              - tool_name: ""
-                action: "Configure and integrate"
-                effort: "1-4 hours"
-                fills_gap: ""
-
-          medium_term:
-            timeframe: "This Month"
-            criteria: "Strategic tools requiring planning"
-            actions:
-              - tool_name: ""
-                action: "Full integration with squad"
-                effort: "1-2 days"
-                fills_gap: ""
-
-          backlog:
-            timeframe: "Future"
-            criteria: "Fill-ins and tools needing evaluation"
-            actions:
-              - tool_name: ""
-                action: "Evaluate when time permits"
-                reason: ""
-
-        output:
-          integration_plan:
-            immediate: []
-            short_term: []
-            medium_term: []
-            backlog: []
-
-      - id: step_3_3
-        name: "Update Tool Registry"
-        action: "Add discovered tools to global registry"
-        updates:
-          - add_to: "mcp_servers"
-            status: "discovered"
-            tools: "{new_mcps}"
-
-          - add_to: "domain_recommendations.{domain}"
-            essential: "{quick_wins}"
-            recommended: "{strategic}"
-            optional: "{fill_ins}"
-
-          - add_to: "capability_mapping"
-            new_mappings: "{gap_to_tool_mappings}"
-
-        output:
-          registry_updates:
-            mcps_added: N
-            apis_added: N
-            mappings_added: N
-
-      - id: step_3_4
-        name: "Generate Reports"
-        action: "Create comprehensive documentation"
-        reports:
-          - name: "Tool Discovery Report"
-            location: "squads/{pack_name}/docs/tool-discovery-report.md"
-            sections:
-              - executive_summary
-              - capability_gaps_analyzed
-              - tools_discovered_by_category
-              - decision_matrix_visual
-              - top_recommendations
-              - detailed_tool_profiles
-
-          - name: "Integration Plan"
-            location: "squads/{pack_name}/docs/tool-integration-plan.md"
-            sections:
-              - timeline_overview
-              - immediate_actions
-              - short_term_plan
-              - medium_term_plan
-              - backlog
-
-          - name: "Capability-Tools Mapping"
-            location: "squads/{pack_name}/data/capability-tools.yaml"
-            format: "yaml"
-
-    checkpoint:
-      id: CP_DECISION
-      name: "Decision Matrix Complete"
-      blocking: true
-      criteria:
-        - matrix_generated: true
-        - plan_created: true
-        - registry_updated: true
-        - reports_generated: true
-
-  # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-  # PHASE 4: HANDOFF
-  # ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-  - id: phase_4
-    name: "HANDOFF"
-    purpose: "Present findings and get approval"
-    duration: "2-5 minutes"
-    mode: "interactive"
-    depends_on: ["phase_3"]
-
-    steps:
-      - id: step_4_1
-        name: "Present Summary"
-        action: "Display comprehensive discovery summary"
-        template: |
-          ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-          🔧 DEEP TOOL DISCOVERY COMPLETE
-          ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-          DOMAIN: {domain}
-          CAPABILITY GAPS ANALYZED: {gaps_count}
-          TOTAL TOOLS DISCOVERED: {tools_count}
-
-          ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
-          │ DISCOVERY BY CATEGORY                                           │
-          ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
-          │ MCPs:           {mcp_count:>3} found │ Top: {top_mcp}           │
-          │ APIs:           {api_count:>3} found │ Top: {top_api}           │
-          │ CLIs:           {cli_count:>3} found │ Top: {top_cli}           │
-          │ Libraries:      {lib_count:>3} found │ Top: {top_lib}           │
-          │ GitHub Projects:{gh_count:>3} found │ Top: {top_gh}            │
-          └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
-
-          ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
-          │ DECISION MATRIX                                                 │
-          ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
-          │ 🚀 QUICK WINS:     {quick_wins_count:>2} tools (implement now)  │
-          │ 📋 STRATEGIC:      {strategic_count:>2} tools (plan for later)  │
-          │ 📦 FILL-INS:       {fillins_count:>2} tools (nice to have)      │
-          │ ❌ AVOID:          {avoid_count:>2} tools (not worth effort)    │
-          └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
-
-          TOP 5 QUICK WINS:
-          {quick_wins_table}
-
-          REPORTS GENERATED:
-          • squads/{pack_name}/docs/tool-discovery-report.md
-          • squads/{pack_name}/docs/tool-integration-plan.md
-          • squads/{pack_name}/data/capability-tools.yaml
-
-          ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-      - id: step_4_2
-        name: "Request Approval"
-        action: "Ask user to approve integration plan"
-        question: "How would you like to proceed?"
-        options:
-          - id: "approve_all"
-            label: "Approve all quick wins - integrate now"
-            action: "Execute immediate actions from integration plan"
-
-          - id: "review_first"
-            label: "Review detailed report first"
-            action: "Open tool-discovery-report.md"
-
-          - id: "selective"
-            label: "Select specific tools to integrate"
-            action: "Present tool list for selection"
-
-          - id: "skip"
-            label: "Skip tool integration for now"
-            action: "Save reports, continue to next phase"
-
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-# OUTPUTS
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-outputs:
-  primary:
-    - name: "Tool Discovery Report"
-      location: "squads/{pack_name}/docs/tool-discovery-report.md"
-      description: "Comprehensive research findings with all discovered tools"
-
-    - name: "Integration Plan"
-      location: "squads/{pack_name}/docs/tool-integration-plan.md"
-      description: "Prioritized implementation timeline"
-
-    - name: "Decision Matrix"
-      location: "Embedded in tool-discovery-report.md"
-      description: "Impact vs Effort quadrant visualization"
-
-  secondary:
-    - name: "Capability-Tools Mapping"
-      location: "squads/{pack_name}/data/capability-tools.yaml"
-      description: "Squad-specific capability to tool mapping"
-
-    - name: "Updated Tool Registry"
-      location: "data/tool-registry.yaml"
-      description: "Global registry updated with discoveries"
-
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-# HEURISTICS
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-heuristics:
-  - id: SC_TLD_001
-    name: "Tool Discovery Complete"
-    phase: "phase_3"
-    blocking: true
-    criteria:
-      - parallel_agents_executed: ">= 3 of 5"
-      - tools_discovered: ">= 5"  # At least some tools found
-      - tier_distribution_calculated: true
-      - comparative_report_generated: true
-    notes:
-      - "No minimum tool count threshold - even 5 tools can be valuable if ranked"
-      - "Quality is determined by relative ranking, not absolute counts"
-
-  - id: SC_TLD_002
-    name: "Relative Ranking Complete"
-    phase: "phase_2.step_2_3"
-    blocking: true
-    criteria:
-      - all_tools_have_tiers: true
-      - percentile_calculation_done: true
-    notes:
-      - "NO absolute thresholds - all tools get tiers based on comparison"
-      - "Even Tier 4 tools are included - they may be the only option"
-
-  - id: SC_TLD_003
-    name: "Flags Identified"
-    phase: "phase_2.step_2_4"
-    blocking: false
-    criteria:
-      - security_flags_checked: true
-      - maturity_flags_checked: true
-      - license_flags_checked: true
-    notes:
-      - "Flags are for ATTENTION, not automatic elimination"
-      - "A tool with flags may still be recommended if best in tier"
-
-  - id: SC_TLD_004
-    name: "Cost Comparison Done"
-    phase: "phase_2.step_2_5"
-    blocking: false
-    criteria:
-      - paid_vs_oss_grouped: true
-      - tier_comparison_per_gap: true
-    notes:
-      - "NO fixed ROI thresholds"
-      - "Present tier comparison for human decision"
-      - "OSS preferred when same tier as paid"
-
-  - id: SC_TLD_005
-    name: "Decision Matrix Generated"
-    phase: "phase_2.step_2_8"
-    blocking: true
-    criteria:
-      - quadrants_assigned: true  # Quick Win, Strategic, Fill-in, Backlog
-      - recommendations_by_gap: true
-    notes:
-      - "Quadrants based on relative tiers, not absolute scores"
-      - "All tools get a quadrant - none automatically excluded"
-
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-# SEARCH DEPTH CONFIGURATION
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-search_depth_config:
-  quick:
-    results_per_category: 5
-    timeout_minutes: 5
-    use_case: "Fast exploration"
-
-  standard:
-    results_per_category: 15
-    timeout_minutes: 10
-    use_case: "Normal squad creation"
-
-  exhaustive:
-    results_per_category: 30
-    timeout_minutes: 20
-    use_case: "Enterprise squads, complex domains"
-
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-# ERROR HANDLING
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-error_handling:
-  agent_timeout:
-    action: "Continue with other agents, mark as partial"
-    retry: false
-
-  agent_failure:
-    action: "Log error, continue with other agents"
-    retry_count: 1
-
-  no_tools_found:
-    action: "Expand search to adjacent domains"
-    fallback: "Mark as 'custom development needed'"
-
-  scoring_failure:
-    action: "Use default scores, flag for manual review"
-
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-# METADATA
-# ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-metadata:
-  version: "2.0"
-  created: "2026-02-03"
-  updated: "2026-02-03"
-  author: "squad-chief"
-  lines: "900+"
-  purpose: "Deep parallel tool discovery with RELATIVE TIERS - comparing tools against each other, not absolute values"
-  philosophy: "Não existem valores absolutos universais. Um projeto com 30 stars pode ser excelente se for o melhor do nicho."
-  changelog:
-    v2.0:
-      - "MAJOR: Replaced absolute thresholds with RELATIVE TIERS"
-      - "Tools compared by PERCENTILE within dataset (Top 20%, 21-50%, etc.)"
-      - "Replaced VETOs with FLAGS requiring human attention"
-      - "No tool automatically eliminated - Tier 4 may still be best option"
-      - "Cost comparison: tier-based, no fixed ROI thresholds"
-      - "RICE/WSJF scores ranked relatively, not against fixed values"
-      - "Framework reference: data/tool-evaluation-framework.md v2.0"
-    v1.1:
-      - "Added RICE Framework scoring"
-      - "Added WSJF Framework scoring"
-      - "Added Security/Social Proof gates (replaced in v2.0)"
-    v1.0:
-      - "Initial release with 5 parallel sub-agents"