all-for-claudecode 2.10.0 → 2.11.0

package/.claude-plugin/marketplace.json

@@ -6,14 +6,14 @@
   },
   "metadata": {
     "description": "Automated pipeline for Claude Code — spec → plan → implement → review → clean",
-    "version": "2.10.0"
+    "version": "2.11.0"
   },
   "plugins": [
     {
       "name": "afc",
       "source": "./",
       "description": "Automated pipeline for Claude Code. Automates the full development cycle: spec → plan → implement → review → clean.",
-      "version": "2.10.0",
+      "version": "2.11.0",
       "category": "automation",
       "tags": ["pipeline", "automation", "spec", "plan", "implement", "review", "critic-loop"]
     }

package/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "afc",
-  "version": "2.10.0",
+  "version": "2.11.0",
   "description": "Automated pipeline for Claude Code. Automates the full development cycle: spec → plan → implement → review → clean.",
   "author": { "name": "jhlee0409", "email": "relee6203@gmail.com" },
   "homepage": "https://github.com/jhlee0409/all-for-claudecode",

package/README.md

@@ -52,6 +52,10 @@ Spec (1/5) → Plan (2/5) → Implement (3/5) → Review (4/5) → Clean (5/5)
   │              └─ File change map, ADR recording, research persistence
   └─ Acceptance criteria, pre-implementation gates
 
+Skill Advisor checkpoints (A–E) between phases dynamically invoke
+auxiliary skills (ideate, consult, architect, security, test, qa, learner)
+when LLM evaluation detects they would add value. Budget: max 5 per run.
+
 Hooks run automatically at each step.
 CI failure → debug-based RCA (not blind retry).
 Critic Loops verify quality at each gate until convergence.

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "all-for-claudecode",
-  "version": "2.10.0",
+  "version": "2.11.0",
   "description": "Claude Code plugin that automates the full dev cycle — spec, plan, implement, review, clean.",
   "bin": {
     "all-for-claudecode": "bin/cli.mjs"

package/scripts/afc-consistency-check.sh

@@ -113,6 +113,8 @@ check_agent_names() {
   local count=0
   local invalid=0
   for ref in $referenced_agents; do
+    # Skip dynamic template patterns (e.g., afc-{domain}-expert)
+    case "$ref" in *"{"*) continue ;; esac
     count=$((count + 1))
     if ! printf '%s\n' "$defined_agents" | grep -qxF "$ref"; then
       fail "subagent_type 'afc:$ref' referenced but no agents/$ref.md found"

package/skills/analyze/SKILL.md

@@ -32,16 +32,18 @@ If neither rules file nor config exists: read `CLAUDE.md` for architecture info.
 
 ### 1. Parse Analysis Intent
 
-Classify `$ARGUMENTS` into one of these analysis modes:
+Read the user's question semantically. What does the user actually want to understand? Select the mode that best serves their learning goal.
 
-| Mode | Trigger Keywords | Focus |
-|------|-----------------|-------|
-| **Root Cause** | "why", "cause", "bug", "error", "broken" | Error trace → data flow → hypothesis |
-| **Structural** | "how", "architecture", "flow", "trace", "structure" | Component relationships, call graphs, data flow |
-| **Exploratory** | "what", "find", "where", "which", "list" | File/function discovery, pattern matching |
-| **Comparative** | "difference", "compare", "vs", "between" | Side-by-side analysis of implementations |
+| Mode | When to select | Focus |
+|------|---------------|-------|
+| **Root Cause** | User wants to understand WHY something is broken, failing, or behaving unexpectedly — the goal is diagnosing a problem | Error trace → data flow → hypothesis |
+| **Structural** | User wants to understand HOW a system is built or how components relate — the goal is comprehension of design or flow | Component relationships, call graphs, data flow |
+| **Exploratory** | User wants to discover WHAT exists in the codebase — the goal is finding, listing, or locating things | File/function discovery, pattern matching |
+| **Comparative** | User wants to understand the DIFFERENCE between two or more things — the goal is contrast and tradeoff evaluation | Side-by-side analysis of implementations |
 
-If the intent doesn't clearly match a mode, default to **Exploratory**.
+If the question spans multiple modes, select the PRIMARY mode that best matches the user's core learning goal, and note secondary aspects to incorporate during analysis.
+
+If the intent doesn't clearly match a single mode, default to **Exploratory**.
 
 ### 2. Codebase Exploration
 

package/skills/architect/SKILL.md

@@ -53,8 +53,8 @@ Analyze `$ARGUMENTS` to identify the task type:
 
 Use Agent Teams for wide analysis scope (3+ modules) with parallel exploration:
 ```
-Task("analyze features/timeline", subagent_type: Explore)
-Task("analyze widgets/timeline", subagent_type: Explore)
+Task("analyze features/timeline", subagent_type: "Explore")
+Task("analyze widgets/timeline", subagent_type: "Explore")
 ```
 
 **Cross-Module Import Chain Verification** (after Explore agents return):
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ Structure analysis results and **print to console**:
 
 > **Always** read `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/docs/critic-loop-rules.md` first and follow it.
 
-Run the critic loop until convergence. Safety cap: 7 passes (higher than the standard 5 because architecture analysis involves broader exploration across modules and layers).
+Run the critic loop until convergence. Safety cap: 5 passes.
 
 | Criterion | Validation |
 |-----------|------------|