bmad-method 6.10.1-next.44 → 6.10.1-next.45

package/package.json

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 {
   "$schema": "https://json.schemastore.org/package.json",
   "name": "bmad-method",
-  "version": "6.10.1-next.44",
+  "version": "6.10.1-next.45",
   "description": "Breakthrough Method of Agile AI-driven Development",
   "keywords": [
     "agile",

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-build/customize.toml

@@ -95,13 +95,17 @@ name = "Blind Hunter"
 instruction = """
 Launch a context-free subagent with this prompt:
 
-Read `{skill-root}/review-prompts/adversarial.md` completely and follow it as your review instructions.
-
-Review content:
-
+Conduct a review of CONTENT.
+Look for what's missing, not only what's wrong.
+Find at least ten issues to fix or improve.
+Output a Markdown list of findings only — no severity, priority, or ranking.
+If the content is empty, stop and say so.
+If you have zero findings, re-check and keep thinking; do not stop with an empty list.
+
+CONTENT:
 {diff_output}
 
-Do not invoke any skill. If the instruction file is unreadable, report that exact failure and stop. Return only the review result.
+Do not invoke any skill. Return only the review result.
 
 """
 
@@ -145,10 +149,16 @@ name = "Blind Hunter"
 instruction = """
 Launch a context-free subagent with this prompt:
 
-Read `{skill-root}/review-prompts/adversarial.md` completely and follow it as your review instructions.
+Conduct a review of CONTENT.
+Look for what's missing, not only what's wrong.
+Find at least ten issues to fix or improve.
+Output a Markdown list of findings only — no severity, priority, or ranking.
+If the content is empty, stop and say so.
+If you have zero findings, re-check and keep thinking; do not stop with an empty list.
 
-Review content: the changed files in the current worktree. Inspect them directly before reviewing.
+CONTENT:
+The changed files in the current worktree. Inspect them directly before reviewing.
 
-Do not invoke any skill. If the instruction file is unreadable, report that exact failure and stop. Return only the review result.
+Do not invoke any skill. Return only the review result.
 
 """

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-build/review-prompts/edge-case-hunter.md

@@ -85,4 +85,4 @@ Add nothing if nothing qualifies.
 
 ## CONTENT SOURCE
 
-Load the review target from the parent message, or from a trailing `## REVIEW TARGET` section if present (offline fallback). This file has no `{review_content}` slot. If neither supplies content, treat content as empty and follow the empty-content halt rules above.
+Review the content supplied under "Review content:" in the message that launched you.

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-build/review-prompts/verification-gap.md

@@ -106,4 +106,4 @@ When you find no verification gaps and no other findings, output exactly this si
 
 ## CONTENT SOURCE
 
-Load the change set from the parent message, or from a trailing `## REVIEW TARGET` section if present (offline fallback). This file has no `{review_content}` slot. If neither supplies a change set, stop with exactly: `No verification gaps found.`
+Review the content supplied under "Review content:" in the message that launched you. If none is supplied, stop with exactly: `No verification gaps found.`

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-build/step-04-review.md

@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ Execute these review layers in parallel wherever their execution methods allow:
 
 {workflow.review_layers}
 
-If a layer's instruction requires subagents and none are available, for each such layer read its reviewer instruction file, write a self-contained prompt under `{{.implementation_artifacts}}` (full instruction body + `## REVIEW TARGET` with the review content — not a path-only pointer), then HALT. Ask the human to run each in a separate session (ideally a different LLM) and paste back the findings. This is the only allowed parent-side read of a reviewer instruction file.
+If a layer's instruction requires subagents and none are available, for each such layer write under `{{.implementation_artifacts}}` the exact child prompt from that layer's instruction after placeholder substitution (not a path-only pointer), then HALT. Ask the human to run each in a separate session (ideally a different LLM) and paste back the findings.
 
 ### Classify
 

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-build/step-oneshot.md

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ Execute these review layers in parallel wherever their execution methods allow.
 
 {workflow.oneshot_review_layers}
 
-If a layer's instruction requires subagents and none are available, for each such layer read its reviewer instruction file, write a self-contained prompt under `{{.implementation_artifacts}}` (full instruction body + `## REVIEW TARGET` with the review content — not a path-only pointer), then HALT. Ask the human to run each in a separate session and paste back the findings. This is the only allowed parent-side read of a reviewer instruction file.
+If a layer's instruction requires subagents and none are available, for each such layer write under `{{.implementation_artifacts}}` the exact child prompt from that layer's instruction after placeholder substitution (not a path-only pointer), then HALT. Ask the human to run each in a separate session and paste back the findings.
 
 ### Classify
 

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-build-auto/customize.toml

@@ -57,13 +57,17 @@ name = "Blind Hunter"
 instruction = """
 Launch a context-free subagent with this prompt:
 
-Read `{skill-root}/review-prompts/adversarial.md` completely and follow it as your review instructions.
-
-Review content:
-
+Conduct a review of CONTENT.
+Look for what's missing, not only what's wrong.
+Find at least ten issues to fix or improve.
+Output a Markdown list of findings only — no severity, priority, or ranking.
+If the content is empty, stop and say so.
+If you have zero findings, re-check and keep thinking; do not stop with an empty list.
+
+CONTENT:
 {diff_output}
 
-Do not invoke any skill. If the instruction file is unreadable, report that exact failure and stop. Return only the review result.
+Do not invoke any skill. Return only the review result.
 
 """
 

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-build-auto/review-prompts/edge-case-hunter.md

@@ -85,4 +85,4 @@ Add nothing if nothing qualifies.
 
 ## CONTENT SOURCE
 
-Load the review target from the parent message, or from a trailing `## REVIEW TARGET` section if present (offline fallback). This file has no `{review_content}` slot. If neither supplies content, treat content as empty and follow the empty-content halt rules above.
+Review the content supplied under "Review content:" in the message that launched you.

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-build-auto/review-prompts/verification-gap.md

@@ -106,4 +106,4 @@ When you find no verification gaps and no other findings, output exactly this si
 
 ## CONTENT SOURCE
 
-Load the change set from the parent message, or from a trailing `## REVIEW TARGET` section if present (offline fallback). This file has no `{review_content}` slot. If neither supplies a change set, stop with exactly: `No verification gaps found.`
+Review the content supplied under "Review content:" in the message that launched you. If none is supplied, stop with exactly: `No verification gaps found.`

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-code-review/customize.toml

@@ -52,13 +52,17 @@ name = "Blind Hunter"
 instruction = """
 Launch a context-free subagent with this prompt:
 
-Read `{skill-root}/review-prompts/adversarial.md` completely and follow it as your review instructions.
-
-Review content:
-
+Conduct a review of CONTENT.
+Look for what's missing, not only what's wrong.
+Find at least ten issues to fix or improve.
+Output a Markdown list of findings only — no severity, priority, or ranking.
+If the content is empty, stop and say so.
+If you have zero findings, re-check and keep thinking; do not stop with an empty list.
+
+CONTENT:
 {diff_output}
 
-Do not invoke any skill. If the instruction file is unreadable, report that exact failure and stop. Return only the review result.
+Do not invoke any skill. Return only the review result.
 
 """
 

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-code-review/review-prompts/edge-case-hunter.md

@@ -85,4 +85,4 @@ Add nothing if nothing qualifies.
 
 ## CONTENT SOURCE
 
-Load the review target from the parent message, or from a trailing `## REVIEW TARGET` section if present (offline fallback). This file has no `{review_content}` slot. If neither supplies content, treat content as empty and follow the empty-content halt rules above.
+Review the content supplied under "Review content:" in the message that launched you.

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-code-review/review-prompts/verification-gap.md

@@ -106,4 +106,4 @@ When you find no verification gaps and no other findings, output exactly this si
 
 ## CONTENT SOURCE
 
-Load the change set from the parent message, or from a trailing `## REVIEW TARGET` section if present (offline fallback). This file has no `{review_content}` slot. If neither supplies a change set, stop with exactly: `No verification gaps found.`
+Review the content supplied under "Review content:" in the message that launched you. If none is supplied, stop with exactly: `No verification gaps found.`

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-code-review/steps/step-02-review.md

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ failed_layers: '' # set at runtime: comma-separated list of layers that failed o
 
    If no layer is active, HALT with status `blocked` and blocking condition `no active review layers`.
 
-3. Execute all active layers in parallel wherever their execution methods allow: expand `{skill-root}` in each layer's `instruction` to this skill's absolute installed directory, then substitute the runtime placeholders (`{diff_output}`, `{spec_file}`). For an instruction that launches a reviewer subagent, launch that child with the prompt text after placeholder substitution; do not load the reviewer instruction file yourself. For any other customized instruction, execute it as written. Do not leave `{skill-root}` unresolved in a child prompt. If a layer's instruction requires subagents and subagents are not available, for each such layer read its reviewer instruction file, write a self-contained prompt under `{implementation_artifacts}` (full instruction body + `## REVIEW TARGET` with the review content — not a path-only pointer), then HALT. Ask the user to run each in a separate session (ideally a different LLM) and paste back the findings. When findings are pasted, treat them as those layers' findings and resume from this point. This is the only allowed parent-side read of a reviewer instruction file.
+3. Execute all active layers in parallel wherever their execution methods allow: expand `{skill-root}` in each layer's `instruction` to this skill's absolute installed directory, then substitute the runtime placeholders (`{diff_output}`, `{spec_file}`). For an instruction that launches a reviewer subagent, launch that child with the prompt text after placeholder substitution; do not load the reviewer instruction file yourself. For any other customized instruction, execute it as written. Do not leave `{skill-root}` unresolved in a child prompt. If a layer's instruction requires subagents and subagents are not available, for each such layer write under `{implementation_artifacts}` the exact child prompt from that layer's instruction after placeholder substitution (not a path-only pointer), then HALT. Ask the user to run each in a separate session (ideally a different LLM) and paste back the findings. When findings are pasted, treat them as those layers' findings and resume from this point. This is the only allowed parent-side read of a reviewer instruction file.
 
 4. **Layer failure handling**: If any layer fails, times out, or returns empty results, append the layer's `name` to `{failed_layers}` (comma-separated) and proceed with findings from the remaining layers.
 

package/src/core-skills/bmad-review/SKILL.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ description: 'Multi-lens review over any diff, doc, spec, or artifact — whiche
 
 # BMad Review
 
-Review content through lenses — each a distinct method and stance — and report findings in one canonical shape. Report what is real — never pad to look thorough. Each lens sets its own stance toward the content and toward zero findings: for most an empty result is valid; the adversarial lens treats it as suspicious; the editorial lenses hold content sacrosanct and critique only how it is organized and expressed.
+Review content through lenses — each a distinct method and stance — and report findings in one canonical shape. Report what is real — never pad to look thorough. Each lens sets its own stance toward the content and toward zero findings: for most an empty result is valid; the adversarial lens requires at least ten concrete findings and treats an empty list as a signal to re-check; the editorial lenses hold content sacrosanct and critique only how it is organized and expressed.
 
 The lens set is whatever `{workflow.lenses}` resolves to, not a fixed list — overrides add lenses and replace shipped ones. Never claim a capability from this file; read the resolved lenses and work from those.
 

package/src/core-skills/bmad-review/references/lens-adversarial.md

@@ -1,10 +1,12 @@
 # Adversarial Lens
 
-You are a cynical, jaded reviewer with zero patience for sloppy work. The content was submitted by a clueless weasel and you expect to find problems. Be skeptical of everything. Look for what's missing, not just what's wrong. Use a precise, professional tone — no profanity or personal attacks.
-
-This lens is attitude-driven and general-purpose: weaknesses, gaps, inconsistencies, unstated assumptions, unsupported claims, missing error handling, unaddressed risks — whatever the content type exposes. If `also_consider` areas were provided, weigh them alongside the normal analysis.
-
-Review with extreme skepticism — assume problems exist. Find at least ten issues to fix or improve in the provided content. Every finding must point at something concrete in the content. Zero findings is suspicious for this lens — re-analyze before concluding, or ask for guidance; never return an empty result on the first pass.
+Conduct a review of the provided content.
+Look for what's missing, not only what's wrong.
+Find at least ten issues to fix or improve.
+If `also_consider` areas were provided, weigh them alongside the normal analysis.
+Every finding must point at something concrete in the content.
+If the content is empty, stop and say so.
+If you have zero findings, re-check and keep thinking; do not stop with an empty list.
 
 ## Findings shape
 

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-build/review-prompts/adversarial.md

@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
-# Adversarial Review (General)
-
-**Goal:** Cynically review content and produce findings.
-
-**Your Role:** You are a cynical, jaded reviewer with zero patience for sloppy work. The content was submitted by a clueless weasel and you expect to find problems. Be skeptical of everything. Look for what's missing, not just what's wrong. Use a precise, professional tone — no profanity or personal attacks.
-
-**Inputs:**
-- **content** — Content to review: diff, spec, story, doc, or any artifact
-- **also_consider** (optional) — Areas to keep in mind during review alongside normal adversarial analysis
-
-
-## EXECUTION
-
-### Step 1: Receive Content
-
-- Load the content to review from the parent message that launched you (not from this instruction file)
-- If content to review is empty, ask for clarification and abort
-- Identify content type (diff, branch, uncommitted changes, document, etc.)
-
-### Step 2: Adversarial Analysis
-
-Review with extreme skepticism — assume problems exist. Find at least ten issues to fix or improve in the provided content.
-
-### Step 3: Present Findings
-
-Output findings as a Markdown list: descriptions only, no severity, priority, or ranking.
-
-
-## HALT CONDITIONS
-
-- HALT if zero findings — this is suspicious, re-analyze or ask for guidance
-- HALT if content is empty or unreadable
-
-## CONTENT SOURCE
-
-Load the review target from the parent message, or from a trailing `## REVIEW TARGET` section if present (offline fallback). This file has no `{review_content}` slot. If neither supplies content, treat content as empty and follow the empty-content halt rules above.

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-build-auto/review-prompts/adversarial.md

@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
-# Adversarial Review (General)
-
-**Goal:** Cynically review content and produce findings.
-
-**Your Role:** You are a cynical, jaded reviewer with zero patience for sloppy work. The content was submitted by a clueless weasel and you expect to find problems. Be skeptical of everything. Look for what's missing, not just what's wrong. Use a precise, professional tone — no profanity or personal attacks.
-
-**Inputs:**
-- **content** — Content to review: diff, spec, story, doc, or any artifact
-- **also_consider** (optional) — Areas to keep in mind during review alongside normal adversarial analysis
-
-
-## EXECUTION
-
-### Step 1: Receive Content
-
-- Load the content to review from the parent message that launched you (not from this instruction file)
-- If content to review is empty, ask for clarification and abort
-- Identify content type (diff, branch, uncommitted changes, document, etc.)
-
-### Step 2: Adversarial Analysis
-
-Review with extreme skepticism — assume problems exist. Find at least ten issues to fix or improve in the provided content.
-
-### Step 3: Present Findings
-
-Output findings as a Markdown list: descriptions only, no severity, priority, or ranking.
-
-
-## HALT CONDITIONS
-
-- HALT if zero findings — this is suspicious, re-analyze or ask for guidance
-- HALT if content is empty or unreadable
-
-## CONTENT SOURCE
-
-Load the review target from the parent message, or from a trailing `## REVIEW TARGET` section if present (offline fallback). This file has no `{review_content}` slot. If neither supplies content, treat content as empty and follow the empty-content halt rules above.

package/src/bmm-skills/ship/bmad-code-review/review-prompts/adversarial.md

@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
-# Adversarial Review (General)
-
-**Goal:** Cynically review content and produce findings.
-
-**Your Role:** You are a cynical, jaded reviewer with zero patience for sloppy work. The content was submitted by a clueless weasel and you expect to find problems. Be skeptical of everything. Look for what's missing, not just what's wrong. Use a precise, professional tone — no profanity or personal attacks.
-
-**Inputs:**
-- **content** — Content to review: diff, spec, story, doc, or any artifact
-- **also_consider** (optional) — Areas to keep in mind during review alongside normal adversarial analysis
-
-
-## EXECUTION
-
-### Step 1: Receive Content
-
-- Load the content to review from the parent message that launched you (not from this instruction file)
-- If content to review is empty, ask for clarification and abort
-- Identify content type (diff, branch, uncommitted changes, document, etc.)
-
-### Step 2: Adversarial Analysis
-
-Review with extreme skepticism — assume problems exist. Find at least ten issues to fix or improve in the provided content.
-
-### Step 3: Present Findings
-
-Output findings as a Markdown list: descriptions only, no severity, priority, or ranking.
-
-
-## HALT CONDITIONS
-
-- HALT if zero findings — this is suspicious, re-analyze or ask for guidance
-- HALT if content is empty or unreadable
-
-## CONTENT SOURCE
-
-Load the review target from the parent message, or from a trailing `## REVIEW TARGET` section if present (offline fallback). This file has no `{review_content}` slot. If neither supplies content, treat content as empty and follow the empty-content halt rules above.