bmad-module-skill-forge 1.6.0 → 1.7.0

package/src/skf-verify-stack/references/report.md

@@ -5,7 +5,9 @@
 # so every stage sees the same path.
 outputFile: '{outputFolderPath}/feasibility-report-{project_slug}-{timestamp}.md'
 outputFileLatest: '{outputFolderPath}/feasibility-report-{project_slug}-latest.md'
-feasibilitySchemaRef: 'src/shared/references/feasibility-report-schema.md'
+feasibilitySchemaProbeOrder:
+  - '{project-root}/_bmad/skf/shared/references/feasibility-report-schema.md'
+  - '{project-root}/src/shared/references/feasibility-report-schema.md'
 atomicWriteProbeOrder:
   - '{project-root}/_bmad/skf/shared/scripts/skf-atomic-write.py'
   - '{project-root}/src/shared/scripts/skf-atomic-write.py'
@@ -31,6 +33,8 @@ Present the complete feasibility report to the user. Display the overall verdict
 
 Read the entire `{outputFile}` to have all data available for presentation.
 
+**Resolve `{feasibilitySchemaRef}`** from `{feasibilitySchemaProbeOrder}`; first existing path wins (installed SKF module path first, dev-checkout `src/` fallback).
+
 Verify all expected sections are present in order per `{feasibilitySchemaRef}`: `## Executive Summary`, `## Coverage Analysis`, `## Integration Verdicts`, `## Recommendations`, `## Evidence Sources`. If any section is missing or out of order, HALT (exit code 5, `halt_reason: "schema-violation"`) and report the schema violation — do not display partial results. In headless, emit the error envelope per SKILL.md "Result Contract (Headless)" with `report_path: "{outputFile}"`, `overall_verdict: null`.
 
 **Extract metrics from `{outputFile}` frontmatter** (per shared schema in `{feasibilitySchemaRef}`): `skillsAnalyzed`, `coveragePercentage`, `pairsVerified` (as `verified_count`), `pairsPlausible` (as `plausible_count`), `pairsRisky` (as `risky_count`), `pairsBlocked` (as `blocked_count`), `requirementsFulfilled` (as `fulfilled_count`), `requirementsPartial` (as `partial_count`), `requirementsNotAddressed` (as `not_addressed_count`), `requirementsPass`, `overallVerdict`, and `recommendationCount`. Use these mapped display names in the summary table and next steps below.

package/src/skf-verify-stack/references/requirements.md

@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
 ---
 nextStepFile: 'synthesize.md'
-feasibilitySchemaRef: 'src/shared/references/feasibility-report-schema.md'
+feasibilitySchemaProbeOrder:
+  - '{project-root}/_bmad/skf/shared/references/feasibility-report-schema.md'
+  - '{project-root}/src/shared/references/feasibility-report-schema.md'
 atomicWriteProbeOrder:
   - '{project-root}/_bmad/skf/shared/scripts/skf-atomic-write.py'
   - '{project-root}/src/shared/scripts/skf-atomic-write.py'

package/src/skf-verify-stack/references/synthesize.md

@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
 ---
 nextStepFile: 'report.md'
-feasibilitySchemaRef: 'src/shared/references/feasibility-report-schema.md'
+feasibilitySchemaProbeOrder:
+  - '{project-root}/_bmad/skf/shared/references/feasibility-report-schema.md'
+  - '{project-root}/src/shared/references/feasibility-report-schema.md'
 atomicWriteProbeOrder:
   - '{project-root}/_bmad/skf/shared/scripts/skf-atomic-write.py'
   - '{project-root}/src/shared/scripts/skf-atomic-write.py'
@@ -25,7 +27,7 @@ Calculate the overall feasibility verdict based on all three analysis passes, ge
 
 ### 1. Calculate Overall Verdict
 
-**Zero-coverage short-circuit (evaluate before anything else):** Read `coveragePercentage` from `{outputFile}` frontmatter. If `coveragePercentage == 0`, force `overallVerdict: NOT_FEASIBLE` with rationale "no coverage — analysis vacuous: zero generated skills match the architecture's referenced technologies, so integration and requirements verdicts cannot produce meaningful evidence." Skip the remainder of the verdict ladder; proceed directly to section 2 to generate recommendations for the Missing skills surfaced by Step 02.
+**Zero-coverage short-circuit (evaluate before anything else):** Read `coveragePercentage` from `{outputFile}` frontmatter. If `coveragePercentage == 0`, force `overallVerdict: NOT_FEASIBLE` with rationale "no coverage — analysis vacuous: zero generated skills match the architecture's referenced technologies, so integration and requirements verdicts cannot produce meaningful evidence." Skip the remainder of the verdict ladder; proceed directly to section 2 to generate recommendations for the Missing and/or Replaced technologies surfaced by Step 02.
 
 Apply the following decision logic using findings from all completed passes:
 
@@ -37,7 +39,7 @@ Apply the following decision logic using findings from all completed passes:
 
 **CONDITIONALLY_FEASIBLE (evaluate second):**
 If ANY of the following apply, the verdict is `CONDITIONALLY_FEASIBLE`. Include ALL matching conditions in the rationale:
-- Any technology is **Missing** from coverage (no skill exists)
+- Any technology is **Missing** from coverage (no skill exists). Technologies marked **Replaced** in Step 02 are intentionally being removed and do NOT count as Missing — they never trigger CONDITIONALLY_FEASIBLE or a [CS]/[QS] recommendation.
 - Any integration is **Risky** (but none Blocked)
 - Requirements have any **Not Addressed** items
 - Requirements have any **Partially Fulfilled** items
@@ -62,6 +64,10 @@ For each non-verified finding across all passes, generate an actionable next ste
 **Missing skill (from Step 02):**
 - "Run **[CS] Create Skill** or **[QS] Quick Skill** for `{library_name}`, then re-run **[VS]** to verify coverage."
 
+**Replaced / being-removed technology (from Step 02):**
+- "`{library_name}` is marked for removal/replacement in the architecture document — no skill is needed. Remove it from the architecture document (or, if it is in fact staying, correct the document to drop the removal marker), then re-run **[VS]**."
+- Do NOT emit a [CS]/[QS] recommendation for a Replaced technology — forging a skill for a technology that is being deleted is exactly the misfire this category prevents.
+
 **Risky integration (from Step 03):**
 - If protocol mismatch → "Consider adding a bridge layer between `{lib_a}` and `{lib_b}` (e.g., HTTP adapter, message queue). Document the bridge in the architecture."
 - If type incompatibility → "Add a serialization/conversion layer between `{lib_a}` and `{lib_b}` to resolve the type mismatch identified in their API surfaces."
@@ -125,6 +131,8 @@ Assemble the following for the report:
 
 **Resolve `{atomicWriteHelper}`** from `{atomicWriteProbeOrder}`; first existing path wins. HALT if no candidate exists.
 
+**Resolve `{feasibilitySchemaRef}`** from `{feasibilitySchemaProbeOrder}`; first existing path wins (installed SKF module path first, dev-checkout `src/` fallback).
+
 Write the **Recommendations** and **Evidence Sources** sections to `{outputFile}` (per the fixed heading order in `{feasibilitySchemaRef}`):
 - Include overall verdict with rationale in the `## Executive Summary` section (replace the placeholder text from the template)
 - Include prioritized recommendation list under `## Recommendations`

package/tools/cli/lib/installer.js

@@ -227,6 +227,7 @@ class Installer {
       project_name: config.project_name || 'Untitled Project',
       communication_language: 'en',
       document_output_language: 'en',
+      output_folder: config.output_folder || '_bmad-output',
       skills_output_folder: config.skills_output_folder || 'skills',
       forge_data_folder: config.forge_data_folder || 'forge-data',
       sidecar_path: '_bmad/_memory/forger-sidecar',