cclaw-cli 0.55.2 → 1.0.0

package/dist/content/stage-schema.js

@@ -90,25 +90,23 @@ function defaultReturnSchemaForAgent(agent) {
         case "spec-validator":
             return "spec-validation-return";
         case "spec-document-reviewer":
+        case "coherence-reviewer":
+        case "scope-guardian-reviewer":
+        case "feasibility-reviewer":
             return "review-return";
         case "slice-implementer":
             return "worker-return";
-        case "performance-reviewer":
-            return "performance-return";
-        case "compatibility-reviewer":
-            return "compatibility-return";
-        case "observability-reviewer":
-            return "observability-return";
         case "release-reviewer":
             return "release-return";
         case "planner":
             return "planning-return";
-        case "product-manager":
-        case "product-strategist":
+        case "product-discovery":
             return "product-return";
+        case "divergent-thinker":
         case "critic":
             return "critic-return";
         case "reviewer":
+        case "integration-overseer":
             return "review-return";
         case "security-reviewer":
             return "security-return";
@@ -118,14 +116,12 @@ function defaultReturnSchemaForAgent(agent) {
             return "docs-return";
         case "fixer":
             return "fixer-return";
-        case "implementer":
-            return "worker-return";
     }
 }
 function dispatchClassForRow(row) {
     if (row.dispatchClass)
         return row.dispatchClass;
-    if (row.agent === "implementer" || row.agent === "fixer" || row.agent === "slice-implementer")
+    if (row.agent === "fixer" || row.agent === "slice-implementer")
         return "worker";
     return row.skill?.includes("review") || row.agent === "reviewer" || row.agent === "security-reviewer" || row.agent.endsWith("-reviewer")
         ? "review-lens"
@@ -298,8 +294,7 @@ const REQUIRED_GATE_IDS = {
         "review_layer2_security",
         "review_layer_coverage_complete",
         "review_criticals_resolved",
-        "review_army_json_valid",
-        ...(track === "quick" ? [] : ["review_trace_matrix_clean"])
+        "review_army_json_valid"
     ],
     ship: [
         "ship_review_verdict_valid",
@@ -447,11 +442,18 @@ const STAGE_SCHEMA_MAP = {
 const STAGE_AUTO_SUBAGENT_DISPATCH = {
     brainstorm: [
         {
-            agent: "product-manager",
+            agent: "product-discovery",
             mode: "mandatory",
             requiredAtTier: "standard",
             when: "Always for standard/deep brainstorm to validate value, persona/JTBD, success metric, and why-now framing.",
-            purpose: "Pressure-test problem/value fit and produce product-discovery evidence for the Problem Decision Record.",
+            purpose: "Run product-discovery mode to pressure-test problem/value fit and produce product evidence for the Problem Decision Record.",
+            requiresUserGate: false
+        },
+        {
+            agent: "divergent-thinker",
+            mode: "proactive",
+            when: "When brainstorm has >1 candidate direction or user signals openness to alternatives.",
+            purpose: "Expand option-space with alternative framings and approaches before planner/critic convergence.",
             requiresUserGate: false
         },
         {
@@ -459,8 +461,9 @@ const STAGE_AUTO_SUBAGENT_DISPATCH = {
             mode: "mandatory",
             requiredAtTier: "standard",
             when: "Always for standard/deep brainstorm to challenge the premise, do-nothing path, and higher-upside alternatives.",
-            purpose: "Attack assumptions and surface non-goals before direction approval.",
-            requiresUserGate: false
+            purpose: "Attack assumptions and surface non-goals before direction approval, with pre-commitment predictions validated against evidence.",
+            requiresUserGate: false,
+            skill: "critic-multi-perspective"
         },
         {
             agent: "researcher",
@@ -479,13 +482,21 @@ const STAGE_AUTO_SUBAGENT_DISPATCH = {
             purpose: "Challenge premise, map alternatives, and produce explicit in/out contract.",
             requiresUserGate: false
         },
+        {
+            agent: "divergent-thinker",
+            mode: "proactive",
+            when: "When scope mode is SCOPE EXPANSION or SELECTIVE EXPANSION, or scope contract has fewer than 3 alternatives considered.",
+            purpose: "Generate additional framings and approach variants before scope convergence hardens.",
+            requiresUserGate: false
+        },
         {
             agent: "critic",
             mode: "mandatory",
             requiredAtTier: "standard",
             when: "Always during scope shaping for standard/deep work.",
-            purpose: "Test whether the selected scope mode is too timid, too broad, or hiding a smaller useful slice.",
-            requiresUserGate: false
+            purpose: "Test whether the selected scope mode is too timid, too broad, or hiding a smaller useful slice, using pre-commitment predictions and validation.",
+            requiresUserGate: false,
+            skill: "critic-multi-perspective"
         },
         {
             agent: "researcher",
@@ -495,19 +506,27 @@ const STAGE_AUTO_SUBAGENT_DISPATCH = {
             requiresUserGate: false
         },
         {
-            agent: "product-manager",
+            agent: "product-discovery",
             mode: "proactive",
-            when: "When scope choices change user value, success metrics, or product positioning.",
-            purpose: "Keep accepted/deferred reference ideas tied to user value and measurable success.",
+            when: "When scope choices change user value, success metrics, or product positioning (Mode: discovery).",
+            purpose: "Keep accepted/deferred reference ideas tied to user value and measurable success under product-discovery mode.",
             requiresUserGate: false
         },
         {
-            agent: "product-strategist",
+            agent: "product-discovery",
             mode: "proactive",
             requiredAtTier: "standard",
-            when: "When scope mode resolves to SCOPE EXPANSION or SELECTIVE EXPANSION.",
-            purpose: "Drive 10x vision and concrete expansion proposals before locking the scope contract.",
+            when: "When scope mode resolves to SCOPE EXPANSION or SELECTIVE EXPANSION (Mode: strategist).",
+            purpose: "Drive 10x vision and concrete expansion proposals before locking the scope contract via product-discovery strategist mode.",
             requiresUserGate: false
+        },
+        {
+            agent: "scope-guardian-reviewer",
+            mode: "proactive",
+            when: "When scope mode is SCOPE EXPANSION or SELECTIVE EXPANSION, or scope contract has many accepted ideas.",
+            purpose: "Challenge complexity growth and enforce minimum-change scope discipline before scope lock.",
+            requiresUserGate: false,
+            skill: "document-scope-guard"
         }
     ],
     design: [
@@ -530,9 +549,10 @@ const STAGE_AUTO_SUBAGENT_DISPATCH = {
         {
             agent: "critic",
             mode: "proactive",
-            when: "When architecture alternatives, coupling, cost, or rollback risk remain debatable.",
-            purpose: "Produce a shadow alternative, switch trigger, and cheaper-path challenge for the engineering lock.",
-            requiresUserGate: false
+            when: "When architecture alternatives, coupling, cost, or rollback risk remain debatable, or when security/auth/authz trust boundaries are involved.",
+            purpose: "Produce a shadow alternative, switch trigger, and cheaper-path challenge for the engineering lock with pre-commitment predictions and validation.",
+            requiresUserGate: false,
+            skill: "critic-multi-perspective"
         },
         {
             agent: "researcher",
@@ -549,20 +569,20 @@ const STAGE_AUTO_SUBAGENT_DISPATCH = {
             requiresUserGate: false
         },
         {
-            agent: "compatibility-reviewer",
+            agent: "coherence-reviewer",
             mode: "proactive",
-            requiredAtTier: "lightweight",
-            when: "When public API, config, persisted data, CLI, generated clients, or cross-version behavior can change.",
-            purpose: "Identify backward-compatibility and migration hazards before spec/plan.",
-            requiresUserGate: false
+            when: "When design touches multiple subsystems or includes multiple alternatives sections.",
+            purpose: "Detect internal contradictions, terminology drift, and broken cross-section references in design docs.",
+            requiresUserGate: false,
+            skill: "document-coherence-pass"
         },
         {
-            agent: "observability-reviewer",
+            agent: "feasibility-reviewer",
             mode: "proactive",
-            requiredAtTier: "lightweight",
-            when: "When runtime/debuggability, rollout, failure detection, or supportability matters.",
-            purpose: "Validate logs/metrics/traces, alerting, and rescue-path visibility before implementation.",
-            requiresUserGate: false
+            when: "When design assumes runtime conditions, scaling behavior, or external service availability.",
+            purpose: "Validate that design assumptions remain feasible in real runtime and rollout constraints.",
+            requiresUserGate: false,
+            skill: "document-feasibility-pass"
         }
     ],
     spec: [
@@ -588,6 +608,14 @@ const STAGE_AUTO_SUBAGENT_DISPATCH = {
             when: "When Spec Self-Review reports gaps (Status: Issues Found) or subsystem boundaries drift beyond one coherent plan slice.",
             purpose: "Run a final document-level quality pass for completeness, consistency, clarity, and scope fit before handoff to plan.",
             requiresUserGate: false
+        },
+        {
+            agent: "coherence-reviewer",
+            mode: "proactive",
+            when: "When spec has more than five acceptance criteria or multiple assumptions sections.",
+            purpose: "Check cross-section coherence, terminology consistency, and internal references before plan handoff.",
+            requiresUserGate: false,
+            skill: "document-coherence-pass"
         }
     ],
     plan: [
@@ -605,6 +633,30 @@ const STAGE_AUTO_SUBAGENT_DISPATCH = {
             when: "When plan tasks touch unfamiliar areas or reference-pattern adoption needs source verification.",
             purpose: "Confirm context/search evidence before plan packets rely on discovered patterns.",
             requiresUserGate: false
+        },
+        {
+            agent: "coherence-reviewer",
+            mode: "proactive",
+            when: "When plan packets touch more than one subsystem or map more than five dependency edges.",
+            purpose: "Verify internal consistency across batches, dependencies, and handoff narratives.",
+            requiresUserGate: false,
+            skill: "document-coherence-pass"
+        },
+        {
+            agent: "scope-guardian-reviewer",
+            mode: "proactive",
+            when: "When plan introduces new abstractions or generic utility layers.",
+            purpose: "Challenge unnecessary abstraction and enforce minimum viable implementation scope.",
+            requiresUserGate: false,
+            skill: "document-scope-guard"
+        },
+        {
+            agent: "feasibility-reviewer",
+            mode: "proactive",
+            when: "When plan carries runtime, environment, dependency, or resource assumptions.",
+            purpose: "Validate execution and rollout feasibility before implementation starts.",
+            requiresUserGate: false,
+            skill: "document-feasibility-pass"
         }
     ],
     tdd: [
@@ -625,6 +677,13 @@ const STAGE_AUTO_SUBAGENT_DISPATCH = {
             purpose: "Implement the minimal passing slice inside explicit file boundaries and return strict worker evidence.",
             requiresUserGate: false
         },
+        {
+            agent: "integration-overseer",
+            mode: "proactive",
+            when: "When TDD fan-out used 2+ parallel slice-implementers, or when slices touch shared interfaces.",
+            purpose: "Verify cohesion-contract integrity across shared types, touchpoints, invariants, and integration test outcomes after fan-in.",
+            requiresUserGate: false
+        },
         {
             agent: "reviewer",
             mode: "proactive",
@@ -646,7 +705,7 @@ const STAGE_AUTO_SUBAGENT_DISPATCH = {
             mode: "mandatory",
             requiredAtTier: "lightweight",
             when: "Always in review stage.",
-            purpose: "Layer 1 spec compliance plus integrated Layer 2 review across correctness, architecture, and external-safety tags with source-tagged findings.",
+            purpose: "Layer 1 spec compliance plus integrated Layer 2 review across correctness, architecture, and inline performance/compatibility/observability lens coverage with source-tagged findings. Escalate to optional dedicated lens skills only when diff scope/risk justifies a deeper pass.",
             requiresUserGate: false,
             skill: "review-spec-pass"
         },
@@ -659,30 +718,6 @@ const STAGE_AUTO_SUBAGENT_DISPATCH = {
             requiresUserGate: false,
             skill: "security-audit"
         },
-        {
-            agent: "performance-reviewer",
-            mode: "proactive",
-            requiredAtTier: "lightweight",
-            when: "When hot paths, IO, data volume, rendering, caching, or algorithmic cost can move.",
-            purpose: "Run a focused performance lens and report evidence-backed regressions or no-impact rationale.",
-            requiresUserGate: false
-        },
-        {
-            agent: "compatibility-reviewer",
-            mode: "proactive",
-            requiredAtTier: "lightweight",
-            when: "When public API, CLI/config, persisted data, generated clients, or dependency versions change.",
-            purpose: "Check compatibility, migrations, and consumer-facing contract stability.",
-            requiresUserGate: false
-        },
-        {
-            agent: "observability-reviewer",
-            mode: "proactive",
-            requiredAtTier: "lightweight",
-            when: "When failure diagnosis, logging/metrics/traces, rollout, or operational support matters.",
-            purpose: "Check observability and supportability evidence against the design/review artifact.",
-            requiresUserGate: false
-        },
         {
             agent: "reviewer",
             mode: "proactive",
@@ -709,6 +744,15 @@ const STAGE_AUTO_SUBAGENT_DISPATCH = {
         }
     ],
     ship: [
+        {
+            agent: "architect",
+            mode: "mandatory",
+            requiredAtTier: "lightweight",
+            when: "Always before final ship — verify cross-stage cohesion across scope/design/spec/plan/code.",
+            purpose: "Final cross-stage cohesion gate before release finalization.",
+            requiresUserGate: false,
+            skill: "architect-cross-stage-verification"
+        },
         {
             agent: "release-reviewer",
             mode: "mandatory",

package/dist/content/stages/review.js

@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ export const REVIEW = {
             "Change-Size Check — ~100 lines = normal. ~300 lines = consider splitting. ~1000+ lines = strongly recommend stacked PRs. Flag large diffs to the user.",
             "Risk-Based Second Opinion — compute changed-line count, files-touched count, and trust-boundary movement. Dispatch an adversarial reviewer only when trust boundaries changed, Critical/Important ambiguity remains, or the diff is both large and high-risk; otherwise record `not triggered`.",
             "Load upstream evidence — read TDD artifact (RED + GREEN + REFACTOR), spec, and the active track's upstream source items.",
-            "Run traceability matrix when the active track enforces it; otherwise confirm spec acceptance/reproduction slices are covered directly.",
+            "Confirm spec acceptance criteria and reproduction slices are covered directly in the review artifact evidence.",
             "Layer 1: Spec Compliance — check every acceptance criterion against implementation. Verdict: pass/fail per criterion.",
             "Review Evidence Scope — record base/head, files inspected, changed-file coverage, diagnostics run, dependency/version audit when relevant, and any files intentionally not inspected with explicit reason.",
             "Layer 2: Integrated findings — one structured pass tagged by category: correctness, security, performance, architecture, external-safety. Every finding uses file:line; if impossible, include an explicit no-line reason.",
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ export const REVIEW = {
             "Structured Review reconciliation — normalize findings into `07-review-army.json`, dedup by fingerprint, and mark multi-specialist confirmations when multiple lenses agree.",
             "Meta-Review — Were tests/diagnostics actually run? Do test names match what they test? Are there real assertions? Is the dependency/version surface unchanged or audited?",
             "Classify findings — Critical (blocks ship), Important (should fix), Suggestion (optional improvement).",
-            "Victory Detector — before verdict, confirm Layer 1, Layer 2, security sweep, structured findings, trace evidence, and unresolved-critical status are complete; otherwise iterate findings or route back to TDD.",
+            "Victory Detector — before verdict, confirm Layer 1, Layer 2, security sweep, structured findings, acceptance/reproduction coverage evidence, and unresolved-critical status are complete; otherwise iterate findings or route back to TDD.",
             "Produce verdict — APPROVED, APPROVED_WITH_CONCERNS, or BLOCKED.",
             "If verdict is BLOCKED, emit remediation route token `ROUTE_BACK_TO_TDD`, include the managed command `npx cclaw-cli internal rewind tdd \"review_blocked_by_critical <finding-ids>\"`, list the critical finding IDs and required TDD evidence to repair, and satisfy the special transition guard `review_verdict_blocked` instead of `review_criticals_resolved`. After TDD rework, clear the stale marker with `npx cclaw-cli internal rewind --ack tdd` before `/cc`."
         ],
@@ -73,13 +73,12 @@ export const REVIEW = {
             { id: "review_layer2_security", description: "Security review completed." },
             { id: "review_layer_coverage_complete", description: "Layer coverage map in 07-review-army.json confirms spec/correctness/security/performance/architecture/external-safety tags were considered." },
             { id: "review_criticals_resolved", description: "Normal APPROVED or APPROVED_WITH_CONCERNS path only: no unresolved critical blockers remain. BLOCKED routes use review_verdict_blocked instead." },
-            { id: "review_army_json_valid", description: "07-review-army.json passes schema validation (validateReviewArmy)." },
-            { id: "review_trace_matrix_clean", description: "Trace matrix has no orphaned source items or test slices for the active run, and evidence cites a discovered real test command before ship handoff." }
+            { id: "review_army_json_valid", description: "07-review-army.json passes schema validation (validateReviewArmy)." }
         ],
         requiredEvidence: [
             "Artifact written to `.cclaw/artifacts/07-review.md`.",
             "Artifact written to `.cclaw/artifacts/07-review-army.json`.",
-            "Traceability matrix run recorded (no orphaned source items or tests for enforced tracks).",
+            "Acceptance/reproduction coverage evidence recorded in the review artifact (AC and source-item/slice coverage snapshot).",
             "Layer 1 verdict captured with per-criterion pass/fail.",
             "Review Evidence Scope lists files inspected, changed-file coverage, diagnostics run, and omitted files with explicit reason.",
             "Layer 2 sections completed across correctness, security, performance, architecture, and external-safety findings.",
@@ -87,9 +86,9 @@ export const REVIEW = {
             "No-finding attestation is explicit when no issues are found.",
             "Dependency/version audit is recorded when manifests, lockfiles, generated clients, CI, runtime config, or external APIs are relevant.",
             "Severity log includes critical/important/suggestion buckets.",
-            "Victory Detector recorded: Layer 1, Layer 2, security sweep, structured findings, trace evidence, and unresolved-critical status are complete, or BLOCKED route is explicit.",
+            "Victory Detector recorded: Layer 1, Layer 2, security sweep, structured findings, acceptance/reproduction coverage evidence, and unresolved-critical status are complete, or BLOCKED route is explicit.",
             "Explicit final verdict: APPROVED, APPROVED_WITH_CONCERNS, or BLOCKED.",
-            "Fresh verification command discovery recorded, and the command cited in `review_trace_matrix_clean` evidence before ship handoff.",
+            "Fresh verification command discovery recorded before ship handoff, with command and result captured in review evidence.",
             "If BLOCKED: include explicit remediation route (`ROUTE_BACK_TO_TDD`) with blocking finding IDs, managed rewind command, and post-rework ack instruction."
         ],
         inputs: ["implementation diff", "upstream artifacts", "test/build evidence"],
@@ -125,13 +124,14 @@ export const REVIEW = {
             { section: "Changed-File Coverage", required: true, validationRule: "Each changed file is covered, intentionally omitted with no-impact reason, or linked to a broader inspected module." },
             { section: "Layer 1 Verdict", required: true, validationRule: "Per-criterion pass/fail with references." },
             { section: "Layer 2 Findings", required: false, validationRule: "Each finding has severity, category, file:line or explicit no-line reason, description, and resolution status across correctness/security/performance/architecture/external-safety. If there are no findings, include a no-finding attestation." },
+            { section: "Lens Coverage", required: true, validationRule: "Reviewer must report inline lens outcomes: Performance/Compatibility/Observability as `NO_IMPACT` or `FOUND_<n>`, plus `Security: routed to security-reviewer`." },
             { section: "Security Sweep Attestation", required: false, validationRule: "Dedicated security-reviewer result: findings or `NO_CHANGE_ATTESTATION` / `NO_SECURITY_IMPACT` with inspected surfaces and rationale." },
             { section: "Dependency & Version Audit", required: false, validationRule: "Required when manifests, lockfiles, generated clients, CI, runtime config, or external APIs changed; otherwise record no-impact rationale." },
             { section: "Review Findings Contract", required: true, validationRule: "Structured findings in 07-review-army.json include id/severity/confidence/fingerprint/reportedBy/status and source tags from {spec, correctness, security, performance, architecture, external-safety} with dedup reconciliation summary." },
             { section: "Review Readiness Snapshot", required: false, validationRule: "Optional compact summary: completed checks, delegation-log status, staleness signal, open critical blockers, ship recommendation, and Victory Detector pass/fail." },
             { section: "Completeness Snapshot", required: false, validationRule: "Optional compact coverage summary for AC coverage, source item coverage, test-slice coverage, and adversarial-review status when triggered." },
             { section: "Incoming Feedback Queue", required: false, validationRule: "When external review feedback exists, include a queue summary with per-item disposition (resolved / accepted-risk / rejected-with-evidence) and evidence refs." },
-            { section: "Trace Matrix Check", required: false, validationRule: "Records source-item/test orphan counts (all zero on enforced tracks) with command output reference." },
+            { section: "Coverage Check", required: false, validationRule: "Records AC/source-item/slice coverage status with explicit no-orphan rationale and evidence references." },
             { section: "Blocked Route", required: false, validationRule: "When Final Verdict is BLOCKED: includes `ROUTE_BACK_TO_TDD`, rewind target `tdd`, and blocked finding IDs." },
             { section: "Severity Summary", required: true, validationRule: "Per-severity count lines for critical, important, and suggestion buckets." },
             { section: "Final Verdict", required: true, validationRule: "Exactly one of: APPROVED, APPROVED_WITH_CONCERNS, BLOCKED." }

package/dist/content/stages/schema-types.d.ts

@@ -20,9 +20,9 @@ export interface ArtifactValidation {
     tier?: "required" | "recommended";
     validationRule: string;
 }
-export type StageSubagentName = "researcher" | "architect" | "spec-validator" | "spec-document-reviewer" | "slice-implementer" | "performance-reviewer" | "compatibility-reviewer" | "observability-reviewer" | "release-reviewer" | "planner" | "product-manager" | "product-strategist" | "critic" | "reviewer" | "security-reviewer" | "test-author" | "doc-updater" | "implementer" | "fixer";
+export type StageSubagentName = "researcher" | "architect" | "spec-validator" | "spec-document-reviewer" | "coherence-reviewer" | "scope-guardian-reviewer" | "feasibility-reviewer" | "slice-implementer" | "release-reviewer" | "planner" | "product-discovery" | "divergent-thinker" | "critic" | "reviewer" | "security-reviewer" | "integration-overseer" | "test-author" | "doc-updater" | "fixer";
 export type StageSubagentDispatchClass = "stage-specialist" | "worker" | "review-lens";
-export type StageSubagentReturnSchema = "planning-return" | "product-return" | "critic-return" | "review-return" | "security-return" | "tdd-return" | "docs-return" | "worker-return" | "fixer-return" | "research-return" | "architecture-return" | "spec-validation-return" | "performance-return" | "compatibility-return" | "observability-return" | "release-return";
+export type StageSubagentReturnSchema = "planning-return" | "product-return" | "critic-return" | "review-return" | "security-return" | "tdd-return" | "docs-return" | "worker-return" | "fixer-return" | "research-return" | "architecture-return" | "spec-validation-return" | "release-return";
 export interface StageAutoSubagentDispatch {
     agent: StageSubagentName;
     /**

package/dist/content/stages/scope.js

@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ export const SCOPE = {
             "In-scope and out-of-scope lists are explicit.",
             "Discretion areas are explicit (or marked as `None`).",
             "Selected mode and rationale are documented using HOLD SCOPE, SELECTIVE EXPANSION, SCOPE EXPANSION, or SCOPE REDUCTION.",
-            "When selected mode is SCOPE EXPANSION or SELECTIVE EXPANSION, active-run delegation ledger includes a completed `product-strategist` row with non-empty `evidenceRefs`.",
+            "When selected mode is SCOPE EXPANSION or SELECTIVE EXPANSION, active-run delegation ledger includes a completed `product-discovery` row with non-empty `evidenceRefs`.",
             "Scope Contract captures requirements, locked decisions, discretion areas, accepted/rejected/deferred reference ideas from the Reference Pattern Registry, success definition, and design handoff.",
             "Decision Drivers section records weighted criteria and per-option scores used to choose mode and boundary moves.",
             "Scope Completeness Score is recorded (0.00-1.00) with the explicit blocker list for any remaining uncertainty.",

package/dist/content/stages/ship.js

@@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ export const SHIP = {
             { section: "Monitoring", required: false, validationRule: "If applicable: what metrics/logs to watch post-deploy. Risk note if no monitoring." },
             { section: "Finalization", required: true, validationRule: "Exactly one finalization enum token selected (FINALIZE_MERGE_LOCAL | FINALIZE_OPEN_PR | FINALIZE_KEEP_BRANCH | FINALIZE_DISCARD_BRANCH | FINALIZE_NO_VCS). Execution result documented. Worktree cleaned if applicable." },
             { section: "Completion Status", required: false, validationRule: "If present: exactly one of SHIPPED, SHIPPED_WITH_EXCEPTIONS, BLOCKED. Exceptions documented when applicable. BLOCKED is required when the Victory Detector has stale or missing evidence." },
-            { section: "Compound Step", required: false, validationRule: "Optional retrospective: include overlap assessment before appending duplicate knowledge; distinguish bug-track fixes/tests from knowledge-track process/project guidance; use supersedes/superseded_by only for clear refreshes; or include an explicit 'No compound insight this run.' line." }
+            { section: "Compound Step", required: false, validationRule: "Optional retrospective: include overlap assessment before appending duplicate knowledge; distinguish bug-track fixes/tests from knowledge-track process/project guidance; or include an explicit 'No compound insight this run.' line." }
         ]
     },
     reviewLens: {

package/dist/content/status-command.js

@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ a read-only command.
 
 - Keep output compact (≤ 40 lines) — status, not narrative.
 - Start with the same operator rows as \`/cc\` when possible:
-  \`Current\`, \`Stage\`, \`Progress\`, \`Gates\`, \`Delegations\`, \`Risks\`, \`Blocked by\`, \`Next\`, \`Evidence needed\`. Use labels like \`gate: tdd_green_full_suite\`, \`delegation proof: reviewer evidenceRefs\`, and \`closeout: compound_review\` instead of raw JSON tone.
+  \`Current\`, \`Stage\`, \`Progress\`, \`Gates\`, \`Delegations\`, \`Risks\`, \`Blocked by\`, \`Next\`, \`Evidence needed\`. Use labels like \`gate: tdd_green_full_suite\`, \`delegation proof: reviewer evidenceRefs\`, and \`closeout: post_ship_review\` instead of raw JSON tone.
 - When blocked, include a plain-English action block:
   \`Current: <stage or closeout substate>\`; \`Blocked by: <gate/delegation/blocker code>\`; \`Next: <exact command or managed remediation>\`; \`Evidence needed: <artifact/test/review/delegation evidence>\`.
 - Report counts, not full artifact contents. Include active subagent count from \`${subagentsPath()}\` and proof gaps from \`${delegationEventsPath()}\` when present. Convert gate/delegation state into human labels: \`passed\`, \`blocked\`, \`missing proof\`, \`waived with reason\`, \`stale\`, \`ready to advance\`, or the closeout substate label.
@@ -98,12 +98,12 @@ a read-only command.
 
 ## Anti-patterns
 
-- Rebuilding trace-matrix or running sync from \`/cc-view status\` — those belong to dedicated tools.
+- Re-running heavy artifact workflows from \`/cc-view status\` — status is read-only and should not trigger sync or mutation paths.
 - Treating absence of delegation log as "all delegations complete".
 - Collapsing \`◎ missing-evidence\` into \`✓ completed\` — role-switch gaps must stay
   visible so the stage cannot advance silently.
 - Omitting the closeout row when \`shipSubstate !== "idle"\`; it is the only signal
-  that tells the user why \`/cc\` is about to run retro/compound/archive.
+  that tells the user why \`/cc\` is about to run post-ship closeout/archive.
 - Mutating state to "clean up" during a status check.
 `;
 }

package/dist/content/subagent-context-skills.js

@@ -112,11 +112,166 @@ Use after the default reviewer/security-reviewer passes when repo signals identi
 - Keep the default general reviewer pass intact; this is additive context, not a replacement.
 `;
 }
+function criticMultiPerspectiveSkill() {
+    return `${skillFrontmatter("critic-multi-perspective", "Multi-perspective critic protocol with pre-commitment predictions and realist checks.")}# Critic Multi-Perspective Pass
+
+Use with the \`critic\` delegation in \`brainstorm\`, \`scope\`, and \`design\`.
+
+## Required Output
+
+- Before investigation, emit \`predictions[]\` with explicit hypotheses.
+- Analyze through context-aware angles:
+  - plan/spec/scope: executor, stakeholder, skeptic
+  - design/code: security, operator, new-hire
+- Include a dedicated gap analysis (what is missing, not only what is wrong).
+- Move low-confidence concerns (<=4/10) into \`openQuestions[]\`.
+- For every critical/major concern, include a \`realistCheckResults[]\` verdict.
+- End with \`predictionsValidated[]\` mapping each prediction to confirmed/disproven.
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- Do not block solely on low-confidence concerns.
+- Suppress or downgrade implausible critical findings during realist checks.
+- Escalate to adversarial mode when reviewers disagree, confidence is low, or trust boundaries are involved.
+`;
+}
+function documentCoherencePassSkill() {
+    return `${skillFrontmatter("document-coherence-pass", "Consistency-focused pass for cross-section coherence in spec/plan/design documents.")}# Document Coherence Pass
+
+Use with \`coherence-reviewer\` on spec/plan/design artifacts.
+
+## Required Output
+
+- List contradictions between sections and where they occur.
+- Flag terminology drift where one concept is named inconsistently.
+- Flag broken internal references, forward references, and dependency narrative mismatches.
+- Return calibrated findings with concrete anchors and one-line corrections.
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- Do not score overall quality; focus on consistency and coherence only.
+- Do not invent contradictions without citation to concrete sections/lines.
+`;
+}
+function documentScopeGuardSkill() {
+    return `${skillFrontmatter("document-scope-guard", "Complexity and minimum-change guardrail for scope/plan/design documents.")}# Document Scope Guard
+
+Use with \`scope-guardian-reviewer\` when expansion pressure or abstraction creep is likely.
+
+## Required Output
+
+- Surface where existing solutions can be reused instead of adding new abstractions.
+- Identify minimum-change alternative when current proposal is broader than needed.
+- Call out complexity smells (speculative generic utilities, framework-ahead-of-need structures).
+- Return calibrated findings with explicit impact on scope boundaries.
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- Challenge unnecessary breadth, but do not silently shrink required user outcomes.
+- Tie every scope reduction recommendation to a concrete cost/risk rationale.
+`;
+}
+function documentFeasibilityPassSkill() {
+    return `${skillFrontmatter("document-feasibility-pass", "Feasibility validation for runtime/resource/dependency assumptions in plan/design artifacts.")}# Document Feasibility Pass
+
+Use with \`feasibility-reviewer\` on plan/design docs that rely on runtime or operational assumptions.
+
+## Required Output
+
+- Enumerate resource/time/runtime assumptions and whether they are validated.
+- Flag external dependency availability or reliability risks.
+- Flag rollout assumptions that are not backed by operational evidence.
+- Return PASS/PASS_WITH_GAPS/FAIL/BLOCKED rationale grounded in cited assumptions.
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- Focus on practical viability; do not redesign architecture unless feasibility is blocked.
+- Distinguish unknowns that need evidence from hard blockers that require rework.
+`;
+}
+function reviewPerfLensSkill() {
+    return `${skillFrontmatter("review-perf-lens", "Optional deep performance lens for large or high-risk review surfaces.")}# Review Performance Lens
+
+Use as an optional follow-up lens when the default reviewer pass flags non-trivial performance risk.
+
+## Required Output
+
+- Hot-path or algorithmic-risk summary with touched files.
+- Potential regressions and estimated blast radius.
+- Clear NO_IMPACT or FOUND_<n> result with evidence.
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- Run only when justified by diff scope or explicit trigger.
+- Do not replace the mandatory reviewer pass; this lens is additive.
+`;
+}
+function reviewCompatLensSkill() {
+    return `${skillFrontmatter("review-compat-lens", "Optional compatibility lens for high-risk API/config/schema changes.")}# Review Compatibility Lens
+
+Use as an optional follow-up lens when contracts, config, persistence schema, or generated clients might break consumers.
+
+## Required Output
+
+- Surface inventory: APIs/config/schema/CLI/client contracts touched.
+- Compatibility risk assessment (backward, forward, migration path).
+- Clear NO_IMPACT or FOUND_<n> result with evidence.
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- Focus on externally observable contracts and migration safety.
+- Do not duplicate baseline reviewer findings verbatim.
+`;
+}
+function reviewObservabilityLensSkill() {
+    return `${skillFrontmatter("review-observability-lens", "Optional observability lens for diagnosability and rollback safety.")}# Review Observability Lens
+
+Use as an optional follow-up lens when failure diagnosis, telemetry, or operational rollback confidence is at risk.
+
+## Required Output
+
+- Signals checked: logs, metrics, traces, alerts, debug handles.
+- Gaps that could block diagnosis or rollback during incidents.
+- Clear NO_IMPACT or FOUND_<n> result with evidence.
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- Escalate only diagnosis-impacting gaps; avoid style-only telemetry suggestions.
+- Keep scope tied to touched code paths and rollout-critical behavior.
+`;
+}
+function architectCrossStageVerificationSkill() {
+    return `${skillFrontmatter("architect-cross-stage-verification", "Cross-stage cohesion verification before ship finalization.")}# Architect Cross-Stage Verification
+
+Use with the \`architect\` delegation in the \`ship\` stage.
+
+## Required Output
+
+- Read scope/design/spec/plan/review artifacts plus shipped diff/code surfaces.
+- Validate that locked decisions and acceptance mappings still match shipped behavior.
+- Flag drift between intended architecture and implemented boundaries.
+- Return exactly one status token: \`CROSS_STAGE_VERIFIED\`, \`DRIFT_DETECTED\`, or \`BLOCKED\`.
+- Provide evidence refs for every drift claim and identify the smallest corrective route.
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- Do not defer unresolved drift to post-ship follow-up without explicit waiver.
+- If evidence is insufficient to verify cohesion, return \`BLOCKED\` with missing inputs.
+`;
+}
 export const SUBAGENT_CONTEXT_SKILLS = {
     "tdd-cycle-evidence": tddCycleEvidenceSkill(),
     "review-spec-pass": reviewSpecPassSkill(),
     "security-audit": securityAuditSkill(),
     "adversarial-review": adversarialReviewSkill(),
     "receiving-code-review": receivingCodeReviewSkill(),
-    "stack-aware-review": stackAwareReviewSkill()
+    "stack-aware-review": stackAwareReviewSkill(),
+    "critic-multi-perspective": criticMultiPerspectiveSkill(),
+    "document-coherence-pass": documentCoherencePassSkill(),
+    "document-scope-guard": documentScopeGuardSkill(),
+    "document-feasibility-pass": documentFeasibilityPassSkill(),
+    "review-perf-lens": reviewPerfLensSkill(),
+    "review-compat-lens": reviewCompatLensSkill(),
+    "review-observability-lens": reviewObservabilityLensSkill(),
+    "architect-cross-stage-verification": architectCrossStageVerificationSkill()
 };

package/dist/content/subagents.d.ts

@@ -1,8 +1,3 @@
 export declare function subagentDrivenDevSkill(): string;
 export declare function parallelAgentsSkill(): string;
-/**
- * Returns markdown fragments augmenting each specialist persona with Task tool
- * delegation guidance. Combine with the existing `body` field from `core-agents.ts`.
- */
-export declare function enhancedAgentBody(agentName: string): string;
 export declare function subagentsAgentsMdBlock(): string;