bigpowers 2.27.0 → 2.28.0

This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
package/.pi/package.json CHANGED
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
1
1
  {
2
2
  "name": "bigpowers",
3
- "version": "2.27.0",
4
- "description": "69 skills — 61 agent skills for spec-driven, test-first software development by solo developers",
3
+ "version": "2.28.0",
4
+ "description": "70 skills — 61 agent skills for spec-driven, test-first software development by solo developers",
5
5
  "keywords": [
6
6
  "pi-package"
7
7
  ],
@@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
1
+ ---
2
+ description: Evaluate an incoming project plan against bigpowers principles and conventions, surface gaps, and produce a READY/NOT READY verdict before engagement begins. Use when a new project arrives, when adapting a foreign plan, or before running seed-conventions on an unfamiliar codebase.
3
+ ---
4
+
5
+
6
+ # Audit Plan
7
+
8
+ > **HARD GATE** — Do NOT start build skills (kickoff-branch, develop-tdd) until audit-plan returns a READY verdict. A plan missing test commands, scope boundaries, or success criteria will produce drift and rework downstream.
9
+
10
+ Assess an incoming project plan for alignment with bigpowers principles, identify what's missing, and produce a structured readiness report before any skill execution begins.
11
+
12
+ ## Three lenses
13
+
14
+ ### 1. Principles alignment
15
+ - Are stories vertical slices (not horizontal layers)?
16
+ - Is scope bounded — explicit in_scope + out_of_scope?
17
+ - Are success criteria defined (how do we know we're done)?
18
+ - Are HARD GATE candidates identifiable (critical decision points)?
19
+ - Is there a domain language / ubiquitous terminology?
20
+
21
+ ### 2. Conventions completeness
22
+ - Does `CLAUDE.md` or `AGENTS.md` exist?
23
+ - Does `CONVENTIONS.md` exist?
24
+ - Is the `specs/` directory layout in place?
25
+ - Are commit conventions documented (Conventional Commits)?
26
+ - Is the git workflow mode identified (`solo-git` | `team-pr`)?
27
+
28
+ ### 3. Bigpowers pre-flight (must all be answered before build)
29
+ | Question | Why |
30
+ |----------|-----|
31
+ | What is the **test command**? | `develop-tdd` verify steps require it |
32
+ | What is the **build command**? | `verify-work` mechanical gate |
33
+ | What is the **lint command**? | `audit-code` lint gate |
34
+ | What is the **typecheck command**? | `verify-work` typecheck gate |
35
+ | What **CI platform** is in use? | `wire-ci` configuration |
36
+ | **Solo or team**? | `release-branch` integration mode |
37
+ | Primary **language + framework**? | model routing + conventions |
38
+ | **Greenfield or existing** codebase? | determines whether to run `seed-conventions` or `migrate-spec` first |
39
+
40
+ ## Process
41
+
42
+ 1. **Ingest the plan** — accept a file path, pasted PRD text, or existing `specs/` artifacts. Read `CLAUDE.md` and `CONVENTIONS.md` if present.
43
+
44
+ 2. **Score each lens** — for every item above, mark:
45
+ - ✅ Present and adequate
46
+ - ⚠️ Present but incomplete — note what's missing
47
+ - ❌ Absent
48
+
49
+ 3. **Close gaps conversationally** — for each ❌ or ⚠️, ask one question at a time. Record each answer before moving to the next.
50
+
51
+ 4. **Write `specs/PLAN-AUDIT.md`**:
52
+
53
+ ```markdown
54
+ # Plan Audit — <project>
55
+ **Date:** YYYY-MM-DD · **Verdict:** READY | NOT READY
56
+
57
+ ## Principles Alignment
58
+ | Check | Status | Note |
59
+ | Vertical slices | ✅ | 4 stories, each shippable |
60
+ | Scope bounded | ⚠️ | in_scope present; out_of_scope missing |
61
+
62
+ ## Conventions Completeness
63
+ | Check | Status | Note |
64
+
65
+ ## Pre-flight Answers
66
+ | Command | Value |
67
+ | test | `npm test` |
68
+ | build | `npm run build` |
69
+
70
+ ## Open Gaps
71
+ - [ ] Add out_of_scope to scope definition (run scope-work)
72
+ - [ ] Create CLAUDE.md (run seed-conventions)
73
+
74
+ ## Verdict
75
+ READY — proceed with survey-context
76
+ NOT READY — N gaps remain; close before proceeding
77
+ ```
78
+
79
+ 5. **Recommend next skill**:
80
+ - READY → `survey-context`
81
+ - Needs bootstrapping → `seed-conventions`
82
+ - Needs spec elaboration → `elaborate-spec`
83
+ - Has foreign spec format → `migrate-spec`
84
+ - Plan assumptions need challenging → `grill-me`
85
+
86
+ ## Verify
87
+
88
+ → verify: `test -f specs/PLAN-AUDIT.md && grep -q 'Verdict' specs/PLAN-AUDIT.md && echo OK || echo FAIL`
@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
1
+ ---
2
+ name: audit-plan
3
+ description: "Evaluate an incoming project plan against bigpowers principles and conventions, surface gaps, and produce a READY/NOT READY verdict before engagement begins. Use when a new project arrives, when adapting a foreign plan, or before running seed-conventions on an unfamiliar codebase."
4
+ model: sonnet
5
+ ---
6
+
7
+
8
+ # Audit Plan
9
+
10
+ > **HARD GATE** — Do NOT start build skills (kickoff-branch, develop-tdd) until audit-plan returns a READY verdict. A plan missing test commands, scope boundaries, or success criteria will produce drift and rework downstream.
11
+
12
+ Assess an incoming project plan for alignment with bigpowers principles, identify what's missing, and produce a structured readiness report before any skill execution begins.
13
+
14
+ ## Three lenses
15
+
16
+ ### 1. Principles alignment
17
+ - Are stories vertical slices (not horizontal layers)?
18
+ - Is scope bounded — explicit in_scope + out_of_scope?
19
+ - Are success criteria defined (how do we know we're done)?
20
+ - Are HARD GATE candidates identifiable (critical decision points)?
21
+ - Is there a domain language / ubiquitous terminology?
22
+
23
+ ### 2. Conventions completeness
24
+ - Does `CLAUDE.md` or `AGENTS.md` exist?
25
+ - Does `CONVENTIONS.md` exist?
26
+ - Is the `specs/` directory layout in place?
27
+ - Are commit conventions documented (Conventional Commits)?
28
+ - Is the git workflow mode identified (`solo-git` | `team-pr`)?
29
+
30
+ ### 3. Bigpowers pre-flight (must all be answered before build)
31
+ | Question | Why |
32
+ |----------|-----|
33
+ | What is the **test command**? | `develop-tdd` verify steps require it |
34
+ | What is the **build command**? | `verify-work` mechanical gate |
35
+ | What is the **lint command**? | `audit-code` lint gate |
36
+ | What is the **typecheck command**? | `verify-work` typecheck gate |
37
+ | What **CI platform** is in use? | `wire-ci` configuration |
38
+ | **Solo or team**? | `release-branch` integration mode |
39
+ | Primary **language + framework**? | model routing + conventions |
40
+ | **Greenfield or existing** codebase? | determines whether to run `seed-conventions` or `migrate-spec` first |
41
+
42
+ ## Process
43
+
44
+ 1. **Ingest the plan** — accept a file path, pasted PRD text, or existing `specs/` artifacts. Read `CLAUDE.md` and `CONVENTIONS.md` if present.
45
+
46
+ 2. **Score each lens** — for every item above, mark:
47
+ - ✅ Present and adequate
48
+ - ⚠️ Present but incomplete — note what's missing
49
+ - ❌ Absent
50
+
51
+ 3. **Close gaps conversationally** — for each ❌ or ⚠️, ask one question at a time. Record each answer before moving to the next.
52
+
53
+ 4. **Write `specs/PLAN-AUDIT.md`**:
54
+
55
+ ```markdown
56
+ # Plan Audit — <project>
57
+ **Date:** YYYY-MM-DD · **Verdict:** READY | NOT READY
58
+
59
+ ## Principles Alignment
60
+ | Check | Status | Note |
61
+ | Vertical slices | ✅ | 4 stories, each shippable |
62
+ | Scope bounded | ⚠️ | in_scope present; out_of_scope missing |
63
+
64
+ ## Conventions Completeness
65
+ | Check | Status | Note |
66
+
67
+ ## Pre-flight Answers
68
+ | Command | Value |
69
+ | test | `npm test` |
70
+ | build | `npm run build` |
71
+
72
+ ## Open Gaps
73
+ - [ ] Add out_of_scope to scope definition (run scope-work)
74
+ - [ ] Create CLAUDE.md (run seed-conventions)
75
+
76
+ ## Verdict
77
+ READY — proceed with survey-context
78
+ NOT READY — N gaps remain; close before proceeding
79
+ ```
80
+
81
+ 5. **Recommend next skill**:
82
+ - READY → `survey-context`
83
+ - Needs bootstrapping → `seed-conventions`
84
+ - Needs spec elaboration → `elaborate-spec`
85
+ - Has foreign spec format → `migrate-spec`
86
+ - Plan assumptions need challenging → `grill-me`
87
+
88
+ ## Verify
89
+
90
+ → verify: `test -f specs/PLAN-AUDIT.md && grep -q 'Verdict' specs/PLAN-AUDIT.md && echo OK || echo FAIL`
package/CHANGELOG.md CHANGED
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
1
+ # [2.28.0](https://github.com/danielvm-git/bigpowers/compare/v2.27.0...v2.28.0) (2026-06-22)
2
+
3
+
4
+ ### Features
5
+
6
+ * **audit-plan:** new skill — evaluate project plan for bigpowers readiness ([509deba](https://github.com/danielvm-git/bigpowers/commit/509deba5a45b3f688d087b11091fc854449c7e46))
7
+
1
8
  # [2.27.0](https://github.com/danielvm-git/bigpowers/compare/v2.26.0...v2.27.0) (2026-06-22)
2
9
 
3
10
 
package/SKILL-INDEX.md CHANGED
@@ -3,8 +3,8 @@
3
3
  > **DO NOT EDIT** — This file is auto-generated by `scripts/generate-skill-index.sh`.
4
4
  > Edit `SKILL.md` source files or `skills-lock.json` instead. Run `bash scripts/sync-skills.sh` to regenerate.
5
5
 
6
- **Generated:** 2026-06-22T11:54:00Z
7
- **Skills:** 69
6
+ **Generated:** 2026-06-22T13:26:01Z
7
+ **Skills:** 70
8
8
 
9
9
  ---
10
10
 
@@ -12,14 +12,14 @@
12
12
 
13
13
  | Phase | Count | Skills |
14
14
  |---|---|---|
15
- | Discover | 6 | `elaborate-spec, map-codebase, research-first, search-skills, survey-context, using-bigpowers` |
15
+ | Discover | 7 | `audit-plan, elaborate-spec, map-codebase, research-first, search-skills, survey-context, using-bigpowers` |
16
16
  | Design | 7 | `deepen-architecture, define-language, define-success, design-interface, grill-me, grill-with-docs, model-domain` |
17
17
  | Plan | 9 | `assess-impact, change-request, plan-refactor, plan-release, plan-work, run-planning, scope-work, seed-conventions, slice-tasks` |
18
18
  | Build | 18 | `align-grid, build-epic, craft-skill, deploy, develop-tdd, execute-plan, guard-git, hook-commits, kickoff-branch, orchestrate-project, publish-package, quick-fix, setup-environment, smoke-test, spike-prototype, validate-contracts, wire-ci, wire-observability` |
19
19
  | Verify | 12 | `audit-code, diagnose-root, enforce-first, fix-bug, inspect-quality, investigate-bug, request-review, respond-review, run-evals, trace-requirement, validate-fix, verify-work` |
20
20
  | Release | 2 | `commit-message, release-branch` |
21
- | Sustain | 13 | `compose-workflow, delegate-task, dispatch-agents, edit-document, evolve-skill, migrate-spec, organize-workspace, reset-baseline, session-state, simulate-agents, stocktake-skills, terse-mode, write-document` |
22
- | **TOTAL** | **67** | |
21
+ | Sustain | 14 | `compose-workflow, delegate-task, dispatch-agents, edit-document, evolve-skill, migrate-spec, organize-workspace, reset-baseline, run-benchmark, session-state, simulate-agents, stocktake-skills, terse-mode, write-document` |
22
+ | **TOTAL** | **69** | |
23
23
 
24
24
  ---
25
25
 
@@ -27,75 +27,77 @@
27
27
 
28
28
  | # | Phase | Skill | Description | Status |
29
29
  |---|---|---|---|---|
30
- | 1 | Discover | `elaborate-spec` | Refine a rough idea into a clear, detailed specification through dialogue. Does | ✅ Active |
31
- | 2 | Discover | `map-codebase` | "Derives the tech-stack doc from scratch by scanning the codebase analyzes s | ✅ Active |
32
- | 3 | Discover | `research-first` | Look-before-build search registries, repo, existing skills, and web for prio | ✅ Active |
33
- | 4 | Discover | `search-skills` | Find the right bigpowers skill from natural-language intent using a local lexica | ✅ Active |
34
- | 5 | Discover | `survey-context` | Per-task context bootstrap reads existing specs/ and tech-architecture docs | ✅ Active |
35
- | 6 | Discover | `using-bigpowers` | One-time bootstrap that introduces the bigpowers skills system, the PMBOK lifecy | ✅ Active |
36
- | 7 | Design | `deepen-architecture` | Find deepening opportunities in a codebase, informed by the domain language in s | ✅ Active |
37
- | 8 | Design | `define-language` | Extract a DDD-style ubiquitous language glossary from the current conversation, | ✅ Active |
38
- | 9 | Design | `define-success` | Convert an imperative task statement into explicit "step verify: <cmd>" pair | ✅ Active |
39
- | 10 | Design | `design-interface` | Generate multiple radically different interface designs for a module using paral | ✅ Active |
40
- | 11 | Design | `grill-me` | Interactive assumption-surfacing Q&A that stress-tests a plan through relentless | ✅ Active |
41
- | 12 | Design | `grill-with-docs` | Doc-grounded variant of grill-me — stress-tests plan assumptions by fetching a | ✅ Active |
42
- | 13 | Design | `model-domain` | Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sh | ✅ Active |
43
- | 14 | Plan | `assess-impact` | Analyze the blast radius of a proposed change before any code is written. Maps d | ✅ Active |
44
- | 15 | Plan | `change-request` | Add a new requirement or reorder epics by WSJF against specs/release-plan.yaml a | ✅ Active |
45
- | 16 | Plan | `plan-refactor` | Create a detailed refactor plan with tiny commits via user interview, then save | ✅ Active |
46
- | 17 | Plan | `plan-release` | "RELEASE-INDEX BUILDER Sequence elaborated epics into specs/release-plan.yam | ✅ Active |
47
- | 18 | Plan | `plan-work` | "PLANNING SPINE STEP 3 of 3 Plan the work: write detailed implementation tas | ✅ Active |
48
- | 19 | Plan | `run-planning` | "DISCOVER-PHASE ADVANCERDrive the discover-phase checklist (specs/planning- | ✅ Active |
49
- | 20 | Plan | `scope-work` | "PLANNING SPINE STEP 1 of 3 Scope the work: define what is in and out of sco | ✅ Active |
50
- | 21 | Plan | `seed-conventions` | Generate CLAUDE.md and CONVENTIONS.md for a brand-new project through a brief in | ✅ Active |
51
- | 22 | Plan | `slice-tasks` | "PLANNING SPINE STEP 2 of 3 Slice the work: break a scoped PRD into vertical | ✅ Active |
52
- | 23 | Build | `align-grid` | "Build editorial/magazine/report webpages on a GENUINE Müller-Brockmann modular | ✅ Active |
53
- | 24 | Build | `build-epic` | Eight-step epic build cycle reads state.yaml, execution-status.yaml, and one | ✅ Active |
54
- | 25 | Build | `craft-skill` | Create new bigpowers skills with proper structure, progressive disclosure, and b | ✅ Active |
55
- | 26 | Build | `deploy` | "Build verify artifact deploy wait smoke deployment pipeline. Pl | ✅ Active |
56
- | 27 | Build | `develop-tdd` | Test-driven development with red-green-refactor loop using vertical slices. Use | ✅ Active |
57
- | 28 | Build | `execute-plan` | Batch-execute tasks from the active epic capsule sequentially, with a human chec | ✅ Active |
58
- | 29 | Build | `guard-git` | Block dangerous git commands (push, force push, reset --hard, clean, branch -D, | ✅ Active |
59
- | 30 | Build | `hook-commits` | Set up pre-commit hooks with lint-staged (Prettier), type checking, and tests in | ✅ Active |
60
- | 31 | Build | `kickoff-branch` | Create a git worktree and feature branch, then verify a clean test baseline befo | ✅ Active |
61
- | 32 | Build | `orchestrate-project` | Meta-skill that enforces the 6-phase core loop (discover elaborate plan | ✅ Active |
62
- | 33 | Build | `publish-package` | "Package registry publishing for npm, crates.io, PyPI, and Homebrew. Verifies pr | ✅ Active |
63
- | 34 | Build | `quick-fix` | "Streamlined fast-path for trivial data-only fixes no TDD, no branching cere | ✅ Active |
64
- | 35 | Build | `setup-environment` | Pre-install dependencies and configure tools before development work begins. Use | ✅ Active |
65
- | 36 | Build | `smoke-test` | "Post-deploy health-check against a live URL. Validates HTTP status, response co | ✅ Active |
66
- | 37 | Build | `spike-prototype` | Throw-away prototype for unknown problem spaces. Output is learning notes in spe | ✅ Active |
67
- | 38 | Build | `validate-contracts` | "Assert data shape consistency across system boundaries live API responses a | ✅ Active |
68
- | 39 | Build | `wire-ci` | "CI pipeline setup with pre-built templates and local validation. Generates GitH | ✅ Active |
69
- | 40 | Build | `wire-observability` | Add structured JSON logging, observability commands, and idempotent setup script | ✅ Active |
70
- | 41 | Verify | `audit-code` | Self-review checklist for the coding agent to run before dispatching a reviewer. | ✅ Active |
71
- | 42 | Verify | `diagnose-root` | Run 4-phase root cause analysis reproduce, isolate, hypothesize, verify. Use | ✅ Active |
72
- | 43 | Verify | `enforce-first` | Apply the F.I.R.S.T test quality rubric (Fast, Independent, Repeatable, Self-Val | ✅ Active |
73
- | 44 | Verify | `fix-bug` | Bug fix orchestrator active_flow fix_bug; reads specs/bugs/BUG-*.md; chains | ✅ Active |
74
- | 45 | Verify | `inspect-quality` | Interactive QA session where user reports bugs or issues conversationally, and t | ✅ Active |
75
- | 46 | Verify | `investigate-bug` | Investigate a bug or issue by exploring the codebase to find root cause, then wr | ✅ Active |
76
- | 47 | Verify | `request-review` | Dispatch a fresh reviewer agent with a clean context to critique the code after | ✅ Active |
77
- | 48 | Verify | `respond-review` | Act on a reviewer agent's feedback systematically categorize findings, apply | ✅ Active |
78
- | 49 | Verify | `run-evals` | Eval-Driven Development define capability and regression evals before buildi | ✅ Active |
79
- | 50 | Verify | `trace-requirement` | Link story IDs from specs/release-plan.yaml + epic capsule directories to the im | ✅ Active |
80
- | 51 | Verify | `validate-fix` | Prove a fix works before declaring done re-run the failing test, run the ful | ✅ Active |
81
- | 52 | Verify | `verify-work` | Multi-phase UAT gatecold-start smoke, build, typecheck, lint, tests, step-b | ✅ Active |
82
- | 53 | Release | `commit-message` | Reviews working-tree changes, then drafts a Conventional Commits title/body and | ✅ Active |
83
- | 54 | Release | `release-branch` | Make the merge/PR/keep/discard decision for a feature branch, verify coverage ga | ✅ Active |
84
- | 55 | Sustain | `compose-workflow` | Chain multiple bigpowers skills into a custom workflow recipe saved in specs/. U | ✅ Active |
85
- | 56 | Sustain | `delegate-task` | Delegate one complex task to a single subagent, review its work in two stages be | ✅ Active |
86
- | 57 | Sustain | `dispatch-agents` | Dispatch multiple subagents in parallel on independent tasks. No waiting between | ✅ Active |
87
- | 58 | Sustain | `edit-document` | Edit and improve documents by restructuring sections, improving clarity, and tig | ✅ Active |
88
- | 59 | Sustain | `evolve-skill` | Benchmark-gated skill evolution consume bigpowers-benchmark report, propose | ✅ Active |
89
- | 60 | Sustain | `migrate-spec` | Detect GSD, spec-kit, or BMAD spec artifacts and transform them into bigpowers Y | ✅ Active |
90
- | 61 | Sustain | `organize-workspace` | Scans the active workspace for disposable artifacts—logs, caches, stale build | ✅ Active |
91
- | 62 | Sustain | `reset-baseline` | Restore the project to a known clean state between agent runs or experiments. Us | ✅ Active |
92
- | 63 | Sustain | `session-state` | Track implementation decisions and progress in specs/state.yaml to prevent conte | ✅ Active |
93
- | 64 | Sustain | `simulate-agents` | Run Mock User and Auditor agents against a feature in fresh contexts before huma | ✅ Active |
94
- | 65 | Sustain | `stocktake-skills` | Sequential subagent batch audit of the bigpowers skill catalog Quick Scan (c | ✅ Active |
95
- | 66 | Sustain | `terse-mode` | Fallback ultra-compressed communication mode. Cuts token usage ~75% by dropping | ✅ Active |
96
- | 67 | Sustain | `write-document` | Write, organize, and sync high-integrity technical documents using the BMAD meth | ✅ Active |
97
-
98
- **Total: 67 active skills.**
30
+ | 1 | Discover | `audit-plan` | Evaluate an incoming project plan against bigpowers principles and conventions, | ✅ Active |
31
+ | 2 | Discover | `elaborate-spec` | Refine a rough idea into a clear, detailed specification through dialogue. Does | ✅ Active |
32
+ | 3 | Discover | `map-codebase` | "Derives the tech-stack doc from scratch by scanning the codebase analyzes s | ✅ Active |
33
+ | 4 | Discover | `research-first` | Look-before-build search registries, repo, existing skills, and web for prio | ✅ Active |
34
+ | 5 | Discover | `search-skills` | Find the right bigpowers skill from natural-language intent using a local lexica | ✅ Active |
35
+ | 6 | Discover | `survey-context` | Per-task context bootstrap reads existing specs/ and tech-architecture docs | ✅ Active |
36
+ | 7 | Discover | `using-bigpowers` | One-time bootstrap that introduces the bigpowers skills system, the PMBOK lifecy | ✅ Active |
37
+ | 8 | Design | `deepen-architecture` | Find deepening opportunities in a codebase, informed by the domain language in s | ✅ Active |
38
+ | 9 | Design | `define-language` | Extract a DDD-style ubiquitous language glossary from the current conversation, | ✅ Active |
39
+ | 10 | Design | `define-success` | Convert an imperative task statement into explicit "step verify: <cmd>" pair | ✅ Active |
40
+ | 11 | Design | `design-interface` | Generate multiple radically different interface designs for a module using paral | ✅ Active |
41
+ | 12 | Design | `grill-me` | Interactive assumption-surfacing Q&A that stress-tests a plan through relentless | ✅ Active |
42
+ | 13 | Design | `grill-with-docs` | Doc-grounded variant of grill-me stress-tests plan assumptions by fetching a | ✅ Active |
43
+ | 14 | Design | `model-domain` | Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sh | ✅ Active |
44
+ | 15 | Plan | `assess-impact` | Analyze the blast radius of a proposed change before any code is written. Maps d | ✅ Active |
45
+ | 16 | Plan | `change-request` | Add a new requirement or reorder epics by WSJF against specs/release-plan.yaml a | ✅ Active |
46
+ | 17 | Plan | `plan-refactor` | Create a detailed refactor plan with tiny commits via user interview, then save | ✅ Active |
47
+ | 18 | Plan | `plan-release` | "RELEASE-INDEX BUILDERSequence elaborated epics into specs/release-plan.yam | ✅ Active |
48
+ | 19 | Plan | `plan-work` | "PLANNING SPINE STEP 3 of 3 Plan the work: write detailed implementation tas | ✅ Active |
49
+ | 20 | Plan | `run-planning` | "DISCOVER-PHASE ADVANCERDrive the discover-phase checklist (specs/planning- | ✅ Active |
50
+ | 21 | Plan | `scope-work` | "PLANNING SPINE STEP 1 of 3 Scope the work: define what is in and out of sco | ✅ Active |
51
+ | 22 | Plan | `seed-conventions` | Generate CLAUDE.md and CONVENTIONS.md for a brand-new project through a brief in | ✅ Active |
52
+ | 23 | Plan | `slice-tasks` | "PLANNING SPINE STEP 2 of 3 — Slice the work: break a scoped PRD into vertical | ✅ Active |
53
+ | 24 | Build | `align-grid` | "Build editorial/magazine/report webpages on a GENUINE Müller-Brockmann modular | ✅ Active |
54
+ | 25 | Build | `build-epic` | Eight-step epic build cycle reads state.yaml, execution-status.yaml, and one | ✅ Active |
55
+ | 26 | Build | `craft-skill` | Create new bigpowers skills with proper structure, progressive disclosure, and b | ✅ Active |
56
+ | 27 | Build | `deploy` | "Build verify artifact deploy wait → smoke deployment pipeline. Pl | ✅ Active |
57
+ | 28 | Build | `develop-tdd` | Test-driven development with red-green-refactor loop using vertical slices. Use | ✅ Active |
58
+ | 29 | Build | `execute-plan` | Batch-execute tasks from the active epic capsule sequentially, with a human chec | ✅ Active |
59
+ | 30 | Build | `guard-git` | Block dangerous git commands (push, force push, reset --hard, clean, branch -D, | ✅ Active |
60
+ | 31 | Build | `hook-commits` | Set up pre-commit hooks with lint-staged (Prettier), type checking, and tests in | ✅ Active |
61
+ | 32 | Build | `kickoff-branch` | Create a git worktree and feature branch, then verify a clean test baseline befo | ✅ Active |
62
+ | 33 | Build | `orchestrate-project` | Meta-skill that enforces the 6-phase core loop (discover elaborate plan | ✅ Active |
63
+ | 34 | Build | `publish-package` | "Package registry publishing for npm, crates.io, PyPI, and Homebrew. Verifies pr | ✅ Active |
64
+ | 35 | Build | `quick-fix` | "Streamlined fast-path for trivial data-only fixes no TDD, no branching cere | ✅ Active |
65
+ | 36 | Build | `setup-environment` | Pre-install dependencies and configure tools before development work begins. Use | ✅ Active |
66
+ | 37 | Build | `smoke-test` | "Post-deploy health-check against a live URL. Validates HTTP status, response co | ✅ Active |
67
+ | 38 | Build | `spike-prototype` | Throw-away prototype for unknown problem spaces. Output is learning notes in spe | ✅ Active |
68
+ | 39 | Build | `validate-contracts` | "Assert data shape consistency across system boundaries live API responses a | ✅ Active |
69
+ | 40 | Build | `wire-ci` | "CI pipeline setup with pre-built templates and local validation. Generates GitH | ✅ Active |
70
+ | 41 | Build | `wire-observability` | Add structured JSON logging, observability commands, and idempotent setup script | ✅ Active |
71
+ | 42 | Verify | `audit-code` | Self-review checklist for the coding agent to run before dispatching a reviewer. | ✅ Active |
72
+ | 43 | Verify | `diagnose-root` | Run 4-phase root cause analysis reproduce, isolate, hypothesize, verify. Use | ✅ Active |
73
+ | 44 | Verify | `enforce-first` | Apply the F.I.R.S.T test quality rubric (Fast, Independent, Repeatable, Self-Val | ✅ Active |
74
+ | 45 | Verify | `fix-bug` | Bug fix orchestrator active_flow fix_bug; reads specs/bugs/BUG-*.md; chains | ✅ Active |
75
+ | 46 | Verify | `inspect-quality` | Interactive QA session where user reports bugs or issues conversationally, and t | ✅ Active |
76
+ | 47 | Verify | `investigate-bug` | Investigate a bug or issue by exploring the codebase to find root cause, then wr | ✅ Active |
77
+ | 48 | Verify | `request-review` | Dispatch a fresh reviewer agent with a clean context to critique the code after | ✅ Active |
78
+ | 49 | Verify | `respond-review` | Act on a reviewer agent's feedback systematically categorize findings, apply | ✅ Active |
79
+ | 50 | Verify | `run-evals` | Eval-Driven Development define capability and regression evals before buildi | ✅ Active |
80
+ | 51 | Verify | `trace-requirement` | Link story IDs from specs/release-plan.yaml + epic capsule directories to the im | ✅ Active |
81
+ | 52 | Verify | `validate-fix` | Prove a fix works before declaring done re-run the failing test, run the ful | ✅ Active |
82
+ | 53 | Verify | `verify-work` | Multi-phase UAT gate — cold-start smoke, build, typecheck, lint, tests, step-b | ✅ Active |
83
+ | 54 | Release | `commit-message` | Reviews working-tree changes, then drafts a Conventional Commits title/body and | ✅ Active |
84
+ | 55 | Release | `release-branch` | Make the merge/PR/keep/discard decision for a feature branch, verify coverage ga | ✅ Active |
85
+ | 56 | Sustain | `compose-workflow` | Chain multiple bigpowers skills into a custom workflow recipe saved in specs/. U | ✅ Active |
86
+ | 57 | Sustain | `delegate-task` | Delegate one complex task to a single subagent, review its work in two stages be | ✅ Active |
87
+ | 58 | Sustain | `dispatch-agents` | Dispatch multiple subagents in parallel on independent tasks. No waiting between | ✅ Active |
88
+ | 59 | Sustain | `edit-document` | Edit and improve documents by restructuring sections, improving clarity, and tig | ✅ Active |
89
+ | 60 | Sustain | `evolve-skill` | Benchmark-gated skill evolution consume bigpowers-benchmark report, propose | ✅ Active |
90
+ | 61 | Sustain | `migrate-spec` | Detect GSD, spec-kit, or BMAD spec artifacts and transform them into bigpowers Y | ✅ Active |
91
+ | 62 | Sustain | `organize-workspace` | Scans the active workspace for disposable artifacts—logs, caches, stale build | ✅ Active |
92
+ | 63 | Sustain | `reset-baseline` | Restore the project to a known clean state between agent runs or experiments. Us | ✅ Active |
93
+ | 64 | Sustain | `run-benchmark` | Run skill quality benchmarks from specs/benchmarks/ definitions and write pass@k | ✅ Active |
94
+ | 65 | Sustain | `session-state` | Track implementation decisions and progress in specs/state.yaml to prevent conte | ✅ Active |
95
+ | 66 | Sustain | `simulate-agents` | Run Mock User and Auditor agents against a feature in fresh contexts before huma | ✅ Active |
96
+ | 67 | Sustain | `stocktake-skills` | Sequential subagent batch audit of the bigpowers skill catalog Quick Scan (c | ✅ Active |
97
+ | 68 | Sustain | `terse-mode` | Fallback ultra-compressed communication mode. Cuts token usage ~75% by dropping | ✅ Active |
98
+ | 69 | Sustain | `write-document` | Write, organize, and sync high-integrity technical documents using the BMAD meth | ✅ Active |
99
+
100
+ **Total: 69 active skills.**
99
101
 
100
102
  ---
101
103
 
@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
1
+ ---
2
+ name: audit-plan
3
+ model: sonnet
4
+ description: Evaluate an incoming project plan against bigpowers principles and conventions, surface gaps, and produce a READY/NOT READY verdict before engagement begins. Use when a new project arrives, when adapting a foreign plan, or before running seed-conventions on an unfamiliar codebase.
5
+ ---
6
+
7
+ # Audit Plan
8
+
9
+ > **HARD GATE** — Do NOT start build skills (kickoff-branch, develop-tdd) until audit-plan returns a READY verdict. A plan missing test commands, scope boundaries, or success criteria will produce drift and rework downstream.
10
+
11
+ Assess an incoming project plan for alignment with bigpowers principles, identify what's missing, and produce a structured readiness report before any skill execution begins.
12
+
13
+ ## Three lenses
14
+
15
+ ### 1. Principles alignment
16
+ - Are stories vertical slices (not horizontal layers)?
17
+ - Is scope bounded — explicit in_scope + out_of_scope?
18
+ - Are success criteria defined (how do we know we're done)?
19
+ - Are HARD GATE candidates identifiable (critical decision points)?
20
+ - Is there a domain language / ubiquitous terminology?
21
+
22
+ ### 2. Conventions completeness
23
+ - Does `CLAUDE.md` or `AGENTS.md` exist?
24
+ - Does `CONVENTIONS.md` exist?
25
+ - Is the `specs/` directory layout in place?
26
+ - Are commit conventions documented (Conventional Commits)?
27
+ - Is the git workflow mode identified (`solo-git` | `team-pr`)?
28
+
29
+ ### 3. Bigpowers pre-flight (must all be answered before build)
30
+ | Question | Why |
31
+ |----------|-----|
32
+ | What is the **test command**? | `develop-tdd` verify steps require it |
33
+ | What is the **build command**? | `verify-work` mechanical gate |
34
+ | What is the **lint command**? | `audit-code` lint gate |
35
+ | What is the **typecheck command**? | `verify-work` typecheck gate |
36
+ | What **CI platform** is in use? | `wire-ci` configuration |
37
+ | **Solo or team**? | `release-branch` integration mode |
38
+ | Primary **language + framework**? | model routing + conventions |
39
+ | **Greenfield or existing** codebase? | determines whether to run `seed-conventions` or `migrate-spec` first |
40
+
41
+ ## Process
42
+
43
+ 1. **Ingest the plan** — accept a file path, pasted PRD text, or existing `specs/` artifacts. Read `CLAUDE.md` and `CONVENTIONS.md` if present.
44
+
45
+ 2. **Score each lens** — for every item above, mark:
46
+ - ✅ Present and adequate
47
+ - ⚠️ Present but incomplete — note what's missing
48
+ - ❌ Absent
49
+
50
+ 3. **Close gaps conversationally** — for each ❌ or ⚠️, ask one question at a time. Record each answer before moving to the next.
51
+
52
+ 4. **Write `specs/PLAN-AUDIT.md`**:
53
+
54
+ ```markdown
55
+ # Plan Audit — <project>
56
+ **Date:** YYYY-MM-DD · **Verdict:** READY | NOT READY
57
+
58
+ ## Principles Alignment
59
+ | Check | Status | Note |
60
+ | Vertical slices | ✅ | 4 stories, each shippable |
61
+ | Scope bounded | ⚠️ | in_scope present; out_of_scope missing |
62
+
63
+ ## Conventions Completeness
64
+ | Check | Status | Note |
65
+
66
+ ## Pre-flight Answers
67
+ | Command | Value |
68
+ | test | `npm test` |
69
+ | build | `npm run build` |
70
+
71
+ ## Open Gaps
72
+ - [ ] Add out_of_scope to scope definition (run scope-work)
73
+ - [ ] Create CLAUDE.md (run seed-conventions)
74
+
75
+ ## Verdict
76
+ READY — proceed with survey-context
77
+ NOT READY — N gaps remain; close before proceeding
78
+ ```
79
+
80
+ 5. **Recommend next skill**:
81
+ - READY → `survey-context`
82
+ - Needs bootstrapping → `seed-conventions`
83
+ - Needs spec elaboration → `elaborate-spec`
84
+ - Has foreign spec format → `migrate-spec`
85
+ - Plan assumptions need challenging → `grill-me`
86
+
87
+ ## Verify
88
+
89
+ → verify: `test -f specs/PLAN-AUDIT.md && grep -q 'Verdict' specs/PLAN-AUDIT.md && echo OK || echo FAIL`
package/package.json CHANGED
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
1
1
  {
2
2
  "name": "bigpowers",
3
- "version": "2.27.0",
3
+ "version": "2.28.0",
4
4
  "description": "61 agent skills for spec-driven, test-first software development by solo developers",
5
5
  "main": "index.js",
6
6
  "scripts": {
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ PHASE_MAP=(
23
23
  [using-bigpowers]="Discover"
24
24
  [map-codebase]="Discover"
25
25
  [elaborate-spec]="Discover"
26
+ [audit-plan]="Discover"
26
27
  # Elaborate / Design
27
28
  [model-domain]="Design"
28
29
  [define-language]="Design"
@@ -84,6 +85,7 @@ PHASE_MAP=(
84
85
  [reset-baseline]="Sustain"
85
86
  [stocktake-skills]="Sustain"
86
87
  [evolve-skill]="Sustain"
88
+ [run-benchmark]="Sustain"
87
89
  [terse-mode]="Sustain"
88
90
  [delegate-task]="Sustain"
89
91
  [dispatch-agents]="Sustain"
package/skills-lock.json CHANGED
@@ -16,6 +16,11 @@
16
16
  "sha256": "8192ebe6f66a9f91",
17
17
  "path": "audit-code/SKILL.md"
18
18
  },
19
+ "audit-plan": {
20
+ "description": "Evaluate an incoming project plan against bigpowers principles and conventions, surface gaps, and produce a READY/NOT READY verdict before engagement begins. Use when a new project arrives, when adapting a foreign plan, or before running seed-conventions on an unfamiliar codebase.",
21
+ "sha256": "3e88b606fc8e886c",
22
+ "path": "audit-plan/SKILL.md"
23
+ },
19
24
  "build-epic": {
20
25
  "description": "Eight-step epic build cycle — reads state.yaml, execution-status.yaml, and one epic capsule; updates status via bp-yaml-set or direct edit. Resume mode runs one step per invocation. Use instead of ad-hoc execute-plan for release work.",
21
26
  "sha256": "7a376ef092fde9cc",