claude-code-workflow 7.2.14 → 7.2.15

package/.codex/skills/analyze-with-file/SKILL.md

@@ -1,1182 +1,1181 @@
----
-name: analyze-with-file
-description: Interactive collaborative analysis with documented discussions, inline exploration, and evolving understanding. Serial execution with no agent delegation.
-argument-hint: "TOPIC=\"<question or topic>\" [--depth=quick|standard|deep] [--continue]"
----
-
-# Codex Analyze-With-File Prompt
-
-## Overview
-
-Interactive collaborative analysis workflow with **documented discussion process**. Records understanding evolution, facilitates multi-round Q&A, and uses inline search tools for deep exploration.
-
-**Core workflow**: Topic → Explore → Discuss → Document → Refine → Conclude → Plan Checklist
-
-**Key features**:
-- **Documented discussion timeline**: Captures understanding evolution across all phases
-- **Decision recording at every critical point**: Mandatory recording of key findings, direction changes, and trade-offs
-- **Multi-perspective analysis**: Supports up to 4 analysis perspectives (serial, inline)
-- **Interactive discussion**: Multi-round Q&A with user feedback and direction adjustments
-- **Plan output**: Generate structured plan checklist for downstream execution (e.g., `$csv-wave-pipeline`)
-
-### Decision Recording Protocol
-
-**CRITICAL**: During analysis, the following situations **MUST** trigger immediate recording to discussion.md:
-
-| Trigger | What to Record | Target Section |
-|---------|---------------|----------------|
-| **Direction choice** | What was chosen, why, what alternatives were discarded | `#### Decision Log` |
-| **Key finding** | Finding content, impact scope, confidence level, hypothesis impact | `#### Key Findings` |
-| **Assumption change** | Old assumption → new understanding, reason, impact | `#### Corrected Assumptions` |
-| **User feedback** | User's original input, rationale for adoption/adjustment | `#### User Input` |
-| **Disagreement & trade-off** | Conflicting viewpoints, trade-off basis, final choice | `#### Decision Log` |
-| **Scope adjustment** | Before/after scope, trigger reason | `#### Decision Log` |
-
-**Decision Record Format**:
-```markdown
-> **Decision**: [Description of the decision]
-> - **Context**: [What triggered this decision]
-> - **Options considered**: [Alternatives evaluated]
-> - **Chosen**: [Selected approach] — **Reason**: [Rationale]
-> - **Rejected**: [Why other options were discarded]
-> - **Impact**: [Effect on analysis direction/conclusions]
-```
-
-**Key Finding Record Format**:
-```markdown
-> **Finding**: [Content]
-> - **Confidence**: [High/Medium/Low] — **Why**: [Evidence basis]
-> - **Hypothesis Impact**: [Confirms/Refutes/Modifies] hypothesis "[name]"
-> - **Scope**: [What areas this affects]
-```
-
-**Recording Principles**:
-- **Immediacy**: Record decisions as they happen, not at the end of a phase
-- **Completeness**: Capture context, options, chosen approach, reason, and rejected alternatives
-- **Traceability**: Later phases must be able to trace back why a decision was made
-- **Depth**: Capture reasoning and hypothesis impact, not just outcomes
-
-## Auto Mode
-
-When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-confirm exploration decisions, use recommended analysis angles, skip interactive scoping.
-
-## Quick Start
-
-```bash
-# Basic usage
-/codex:analyze-with-file TOPIC="How to optimize this project's authentication architecture"
-
-# With depth selection
-/codex:analyze-with-file TOPIC="Performance bottleneck analysis" --depth=deep
-
-# Continue existing session
-/codex:analyze-with-file TOPIC="authentication architecture" --continue
-
-# Auto mode (skip confirmations)
-/codex:analyze-with-file -y TOPIC="Caching strategy analysis"
-```
-
-## Target Topic
-
-**$TOPIC**
-
-## Analysis Flow
-
-```
-Step 0: Session Setup
-   ├─ Parse topic, flags (--depth, --continue, -y)
-   ├─ Generate session ID: ANL-{slug}-{date}
-   └─ Create session folder (or detect existing → continue mode)
-
-Step 1: Topic Understanding
-   ├─ Parse topic, identify analysis dimensions
-   ├─ Initial scoping with user (focus areas, perspectives, depth)
-   └─ Initialize discussion.md
-
-Step 2: Exploration (Inline, No Agents)
-   ├─ Detect codebase → search relevant modules, patterns
-   │   ├─ Run `ccw spec load --category exploration` (if spec system available)
-   │   ├─ Run `ccw spec load --category debug` (known issues and root-cause notes)
-   │   └─ Use Grep, Glob, Read, mcp__ace-tool__search_context
-   ├─ Multi-perspective analysis (if selected, serial)
-   │   ├─ Single: Comprehensive analysis
-   │   └─ Multi (≤4): Serial per-perspective analysis with synthesis
-   ├─ Aggregate findings → explorations.json / perspectives.json
-   ├─ Update discussion.md with Round 1
-   │   ├─ Replace ## Current Understanding with initial findings
-   │   └─ Update ## Table of Contents
-   └─ Initial Intent Coverage Check (early drift detection)
-
-Step 3: Interactive Discussion (Multi-Round, max 5)
-   ├─ Current Understanding Summary (round ≥ 2, before findings)
-   ├─ Present exploration findings
-   ├─ Gather user feedback
-   ├─ Process response:
-   │   ├─ Deepen → context-driven + heuristic options → deeper inline analysis
-   │   ├─ Agree & Suggest → user-directed exploration
-   │   ├─ Adjust → new inline analysis with adjusted focus
-   │   ├─ Questions → direct answers with evidence
-   │   └─ Complete → exit loop for synthesis
-   ├─ Update discussion.md:
-   │   ├─ Append round details + Narrative Synthesis
-   │   ├─ Replace ## Current Understanding with latest state
-   │   └─ Update ## Table of Contents
-   ├─ Intent Drift Check (round ≥ 2, building on Phase 2 initial check)
-   └─ Repeat until user selects complete or max rounds
-
-Step 4: Synthesis & Conclusion
-   ├─ Intent Coverage Verification (mandatory gate)
-   ├─ Consolidate all insights → conclusions.json (with steps[] per recommendation)
-   ├─ Update discussion.md with final synthesis
-   ├─ Interactive Recommendation Review (per-recommendation confirm/modify/reject)
-   └─ Offer options: generate plan / create issue / export / done
-
-Step 5: Plan Generation (Optional - produces plan only, NO code modifications)
-   ├─ Generate inline plan checklist → appended to discussion.md
-   └─ Remind user to execute via $csv-wave-pipeline
-```
-
-## Configuration
-
-| Flag | Default | Description |
-|------|---------|-------------|
-| `-y, --yes` | false | Auto-confirm all decisions |
-| `--continue` | false | Continue existing session |
-| `--depth` | standard | Analysis depth: quick / standard / deep |
-
-**Session ID format**: `ANL-{slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}`
-- slug: lowercase, alphanumeric + CJK characters, max 40 chars
-- date: YYYY-MM-DD (UTC+8)
-- Auto-detect continue: session folder + discussion.md exists → continue mode
-
-## Implementation Details
-
-### Session Initialization
-
-##### Step 0: Initialize Session
-
-```javascript
-const getUtc8ISOString = () => new Date(Date.now() + 8 * 60 * 60 * 1000).toISOString()
-
-// Parse flags
-const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
-const continueMode = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--continue')
-const depthMatch = $ARGUMENTS.match(/--depth[=\s](quick|standard|deep)/)
-const analysisDepth = depthMatch ? depthMatch[1] : 'standard'
-
-// Extract topic
-const topic = $ARGUMENTS.replace(/--yes|-y|--continue|--depth[=\s]\w+|TOPIC=/g, '').replace(/^["']|["']$/g, '').trim()
-
-// Determine project root
-const projectRoot = Bash('git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd').trim()
-
-const slug = topic.toLowerCase().replace(/[^a-z0-9\u4e00-\u9fa5]+/g, '-').substring(0, 40)
-const dateStr = getUtc8ISOString().substring(0, 10)
-const sessionId = `ANL-${slug}-${dateStr}`
-const sessionFolder = `${projectRoot}/.workflow/.analysis/${sessionId}`
-
-// Auto-detect continue: session folder + discussion.md exists → continue mode
-// If continue → load discussion.md + explorations, resume from last round
-Bash(`mkdir -p ${sessionFolder}`)
-```
-
-### Phase 1: Topic Understanding
-
-**Objective**: Parse the topic, identify relevant analysis dimensions, scope the analysis with user input, and initialize the discussion document.
-
-##### Step 1.1: Parse Topic & Identify Dimensions
-
-Match topic keywords against analysis dimensions:
-
-```javascript
-const ANALYSIS_DIMENSIONS = {
-  architecture:    ['架构', 'architecture', 'design', 'structure', '设计', 'pattern'],
-  implementation:  ['实现', 'implement', 'code', 'coding', '代码', 'logic'],
-  performance:     ['性能', 'performance', 'optimize', 'bottleneck', '优化', 'speed'],
-  security:        ['安全', 'security', 'auth', 'permission', '权限', 'vulnerability'],
-  concept:         ['概念', 'concept', 'theory', 'principle', '原理', 'understand'],
-  comparison:      ['比较', 'compare', 'vs', 'difference', '区别', 'versus'],
-  decision:        ['决策', 'decision', 'choice', 'tradeoff', '选择', 'trade-off']
-}
-
-// Match topic text against keyword lists
-// If multiple dimensions match, include all
-// If none match, default to "architecture" and "implementation"
-const dimensions = identifyDimensions(topic, ANALYSIS_DIMENSIONS)
-```
-
-##### Step 1.2: Initial Scoping (New Session Only)
-
-For new sessions, gather user preferences (skipped in auto mode or continue mode):
-
-```javascript
-if (!autoYes && !continueMode) {
-  // 1. Focus areas (multi-select)
-  // Generate directions dynamically from detected dimensions (see Dimension-Direction Mapping)
-  const focusAreas = AskUserQuestion({
-    questions: [{
-      question: "Select analysis focus areas:",
-      header: "Focus",
-      multiSelect: true,
-      options: generateFocusOptions(dimensions) // Dynamic based on dimensions
-    }]
-  })
-
-  // 2. Analysis perspectives (multi-select, max 4)
-  const perspectives = AskUserQuestion({
-    questions: [{
-      question: "Select analysis perspectives (single = focused, multi = broader coverage):",
-      header: "Perspectives",
-      multiSelect: true,
-      options: [
-        { label: "Technical", description: "Implementation patterns, code structure, technical feasibility" },
-        { label: "Architectural", description: "System design, scalability, component interactions" },
-        { label: "Security", description: "Vulnerabilities, authentication, access control" },
-        { label: "Performance", description: "Bottlenecks, optimization, resource utilization" }
-      ]
-    }]
-  })
-
-  // 3. Analysis depth (single-select, unless --depth already set)
-  // Quick: surface level | Standard: moderate depth | Deep: comprehensive
-}
-```
-
-##### Step 1.3: Initialize discussion.md
-
-```javascript
-const discussionMd = `# Analysis Discussion
-
-**Session ID**: ${sessionId}
-**Topic**: ${topic}
-**Started**: ${getUtc8ISOString()}
-**Dimensions**: ${dimensions.join(', ')}
-**Depth**: ${analysisDepth}
-
-## Table of Contents
-<!-- TOC: Auto-updated after each round/phase. Links to major sections. -->
-- [Analysis Context](#analysis-context)
-- [Current Understanding](#current-understanding)
-- [Discussion Timeline](#discussion-timeline)
-- [Decision Trail](#decision-trail)
-
-## Current Understanding
-<!-- REPLACEABLE BLOCK: Overwrite (not append) after each round with latest consolidated understanding.
-     Follow Consolidation Rules: promote confirmed insights, track corrections, focus on current state. -->
-
-> To be populated after exploration.
-
-## Analysis Context
-- Focus areas: ${focusAreas.join(', ')}
-- Perspectives: ${selectedPerspectives.map(p => p.name).join(', ')}
-- Depth: ${analysisDepth}
-
-## Initial Questions
-${generateInitialQuestions(topic, dimensions).map(q => `- ${q}`).join('\n')}
-
-## Initial Decisions
-> Record why these dimensions and focus areas were selected.
-
----
-
-## Discussion Timeline
-
-> Rounds will be appended below as analysis progresses.
-> Each round MUST include a Decision Log section for any decisions made.
-
----
-
-## Decision Trail
-
-> Consolidated critical decisions across all rounds (populated in Phase 4).
-`
-Write(`${sessionFolder}/discussion.md`, discussionMd)
-```
-
-**Success Criteria**:
-- Session folder created with discussion.md initialized
-- Analysis dimensions identified
-- User preferences captured (focus, perspectives, depth)
-- **Initial decisions recorded**: Dimension selection rationale, excluded dimensions with reasons, user preference intent
-
-### Phase 2: Exploration
-
-**Objective**: Gather codebase context and execute analysis to build understanding. All exploration done inline — no agent delegation.
-
-##### Step 2.1: Detect Codebase & Explore
-
-Search the codebase directly using available tools:
-
-```javascript
-const hasCodebase = Bash(`
-  test -f package.json && echo "nodejs" ||
-  test -f go.mod && echo "golang" ||
-  test -f Cargo.toml && echo "rust" ||
-  test -f pyproject.toml && echo "python" ||
-  test -f pom.xml && echo "java" ||
-  test -d src && echo "generic" ||
-  echo "none"
-`).trim()
-
-if (hasCodebase !== 'none') {
-  // 1. Read project metadata (if exists)
-  //    - Run `ccw spec load --category exploration` (load project specs)
-  //    - Run `ccw spec load --category debug` (known issues and root-cause notes)
-  //    - .workflow/specs/*.md (project conventions)
-
-  // 2. Search codebase for relevant content
-  //    Use: Grep, Glob, Read, or mcp__ace-tool__search_context
-  //    Search based on topic keywords and identified dimensions
-  //    Focus on:
-  //      - Modules/components related to the topic
-  //      - Existing patterns and code structure
-  //      - Integration points and constraints
-  //      - Relevant configuration and dependencies
-
-  // 3. Write findings
-  Write(`${sessionFolder}/exploration-codebase.json`, JSON.stringify({
-    project_type: hasCodebase,
-    relevant_files: [...],    // [{path, relevance, summary}]
-    patterns: [...],          // [{pattern, files, description}]
-    constraints: [...],       // Architectural constraints found
-    integration_points: [...], // [{location, description}]
-    key_findings: [...],      // Main insights from code search
-    _metadata: { timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(), exploration_scope: '...' }
-  }, null, 2))
-}
-```
-
-##### Step 2.2: Multi-Perspective Analysis (if selected)
-
-Analyze the topic from each selected perspective. All analysis done inline by the AI.
-
-**Single perspective** (default):
-
-```javascript
-// Analyze comprehensively across all identified dimensions
-// Use exploration-codebase.json as context
-// Focus on: patterns, anti-patterns, potential issues, opportunities
-
-const findings = {
-  session_id: sessionId,
-  timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(),
-  topic: topic,
-  dimensions: dimensions,
-  sources: [...],            // [{type, file, summary}]
-  key_findings: [...],       // Main insights
-  discussion_points: [...],  // Questions for user engagement
-  open_questions: [...]      // Unresolved questions
-}
-Write(`${sessionFolder}/explorations.json`, JSON.stringify(findings, null, 2))
-```
-
-**Multi-perspective** (2-4 perspectives, serial):
-
-```javascript
-// Analyze each perspective sequentially
-// For each perspective:
-//   1. Focus search/analysis on that perspective's concern area
-//   2. Generate perspective-specific insights
-//   3. Write individual findings
-
-selectedPerspectives.forEach(perspective => {
-  // Analyze from this perspective's angle
-  // Use exploration-codebase.json + dimension focus
-  // Write to explorations/{perspective.name}.json
-  Write(`${sessionFolder}/explorations/${perspective.name}.json`, JSON.stringify({
-    perspective: perspective.name,
-    relevant_files: [...],
-    patterns: [...],
-    key_findings: [...],
-    perspective_insights: [...],
-    open_questions: [...],
-    _metadata: { timestamp: getUtc8ISOString() }
-  }, null, 2))
-})
-```
-
-##### Step 2.3: Aggregate Findings
-
-```javascript
-// Single perspective → explorations.json already written
-// Multi-perspective → synthesize into perspectives.json
-
-if (selectedPerspectives.length > 1) {
-  const synthesis = {
-    session_id: sessionId,
-    timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(),
-    topic: topic,
-    dimensions: dimensions,
-
-    // Individual perspective findings
-    perspectives: selectedPerspectives.map(p => ({
-      name: p.name,
-      findings: readJson(`${sessionFolder}/explorations/${p.name}.json`).key_findings,
-      insights: readJson(`${sessionFolder}/explorations/${p.name}.json`).perspective_insights,
-      questions: readJson(`${sessionFolder}/explorations/${p.name}.json`).open_questions
-    })),
-
-    // Cross-perspective synthesis
-    synthesis: {
-      convergent_themes: [...],   // What all perspectives agree on
-      conflicting_views: [...],   // Where perspectives differ
-      unique_contributions: [...]  // Insights unique to specific perspectives
-    },
-
-    aggregated_findings: [...],   // Main insights across all perspectives
-    discussion_points: [...],     // Questions for user engagement
-    open_questions: [...]         // Unresolved questions
-  }
-  Write(`${sessionFolder}/perspectives.json`, JSON.stringify(synthesis, null, 2))
-}
-```
-
-##### Step 2.4: Update discussion.md
-
-Append Round 1 with exploration results:
-
-**Single perspective round 1**:
-- Sources analyzed (files, patterns)
-- Key findings with evidence
-- Discussion points for user
-- Open questions
-
-**Multi-perspective round 1**:
-- Per-perspective summary (brief)
-- Synthesis section:
-  - Convergent themes (what all perspectives agree on)
-  - Conflicting views (where perspectives differ)
-  - Unique contributions (insights from specific perspectives)
-- Discussion points
-- Open questions
-
-##### Step 2.5: Initial Intent Coverage Check
-
-Perform the FIRST intent coverage check before entering Phase 3:
-
-```javascript
-// Re-read original user intent / analysis context from discussion.md header
-// Check each intent item against Round 1 findings
-// Append to discussion.md:
-
-appendToDiscussion(`
-#### Initial Intent Coverage Check (Post-Exploration)
-${originalIntents.map((intent, i) => {
-  const status = assessCoverage(intent, explorationFindings)
-  return `- ${status.icon} Intent ${i+1}: ${intent} — ${status.detail}`
-}).join('\n')}
-
-> 接下来的讨论将重点关注未覆盖 (❌) 和进行中 (🔄) 的意图。
-`)
-
-// Present to user at beginning of Phase 3 for early course correction
-```
-
-**Success Criteria**:
-- exploration-codebase.json created with codebase context (if codebase exists)
-- explorations.json (single) or perspectives.json (multi) created with findings
-- discussion.md updated with Round 1 results
-- **Initial Intent Coverage Check** completed — early drift detection before interactive rounds
-- Ready for interactive discussion
-- **Key findings recorded** with evidence references and confidence levels
-- **Exploration decisions recorded** (why certain perspectives/search strategies were chosen)
-
-### Phase 3: Interactive Discussion
-
-**Objective**: Iteratively refine understanding through multi-round user-guided discussion cycles.
-
-**Max Rounds**: 5 discussion rounds (can exit earlier if user indicates analysis is complete)
-
-##### Step 3.1: Current Understanding Summary & Present Findings
-
-**Current Understanding Summary** (Round >= 2, BEFORE presenting new findings):
-- Generate 1-2 sentence recap of established consensus and last round's direction
-- Example: "到目前为止，我们已确认 [established facts]。上一轮 [key action/direction]。现在，这是新一轮的发现："
-- Purpose: Reset context, prevent cognitive overload, make incremental progress visible
-
-Display current understanding and gather user direction:
-
-```javascript
-// Round >= 2: Display Current Understanding Summary first
-if (round >= 2) {
-  // Generate 1-2 sentence recap from previous round's narrative synthesis
-  // Display before presenting new findings
-}
-
-// Display current findings summary from explorations.json or perspectives.json
-// Show key points, discussion points, open questions
-
-if (!autoYes) {
-  const feedback = AskUserQuestion({
-    questions: [{
-      question: `Analysis round ${round}: Feedback on current findings?`,
-      header: "Direction",
-      multiSelect: false,
-      options: [
-        { label: "Deepen", description: "Analysis direction is correct, investigate deeper" },
-        { label: "Agree & Suggest", description: "Agree with direction, but have specific next step in mind" },
-        { label: "Adjust Direction", description: "Different understanding or focus needed" },
-        { label: "Specific Questions", description: "Have specific questions to ask" },
-        { label: "Analysis Complete", description: "Sufficient information obtained, proceed to synthesis" }
-      ]
-    }]
-  })
-}
-```
-
-##### Step 3.2: Process User Response
-
-**Recording Checkpoint**: Regardless of which option the user selects, the following MUST be recorded to discussion.md:
-- User's original choice and expression
-- Impact of this choice on analysis direction
-- If direction changed, record a full Decision Record
-
-**Deepen** — continue analysis in current direction:
-```javascript
-// Generate deepen direction options dynamically:
-// - 2-3 context-driven options from: unresolved questions, low-confidence findings, unexplored dimensions
-// - 1-2 heuristic options that break current frame:
-//   e.g., "compare with best practices in [related domain]",
-//   "analyze under extreme load scenarios",
-//   "review from security audit perspective",
-//   "explore simpler architectural alternatives"
-// AskUserQuestion with generated options (single-select)
-// Execute selected direction via inline search tools
-// Merge new findings into explorations.json
-// Record: Which assumptions were confirmed, specific angles for deeper exploration
-```
-
-**Agree & Suggest** — user provides specific next step:
-```javascript
-// Ask user for their specific direction (free text input)
-const userSuggestion = AskUserQuestion({
-  questions: [{
-    question: "请描述您希望下一步深入的方向:",
-    header: "Your Direction",
-    multiSelect: false,
-    options: [/* user will select "Other" to type free text */]
-  }]
-})
-// Execute user's specific direction via inline search tools
-// Record: User-driven exploration rationale and findings
-```
-
-**Adjust Direction** — new focus area:
-```javascript
-// Ask user for adjusted focus
-const adjustedFocus = AskUserQuestion({
-  questions: [{
-    question: "What should the new analysis focus be?",
-    header: "New Focus",
-    multiSelect: false,
-    options: [
-      { label: "Code Details", description: "Deeper into implementation specifics" },
-      { label: "Architecture", description: "Broader structural analysis" },
-      { label: "Best Practices", description: "Industry standards and recommendations" }
-    ]
-  }]
-})
-
-// Analyze from adjusted perspective using inline search
-// Compare new insights with prior analysis
-// Identify what was missed and why
-// Update explorations.json with adjusted findings
-// Record Decision: Trigger reason for direction adjustment, old vs new direction, expected impact
-```
-
-**Specific Questions** — answer directly:
-```javascript
-// Capture user questions via AskUserQuestion (text input)
-// Answer each question based on codebase search and analysis
-// Provide evidence and file references
-// Rate confidence for each answer (high/medium/low)
-// Document Q&A in discussion.md
-// Record: Knowledge gaps revealed by the question, new understanding from the answer
-```
-
-**Analysis Complete** — exit loop, proceed to Phase 4.
-```javascript
-// Record: Why concluding at this round (sufficient information / scope fully focused / user satisfied)
-```
-
-##### Step 3.3: Document Each Round
-
-Update discussion.md with results from each discussion round:
-
-**Append** to Discussion Timeline:
-
-| Section | Content |
-|---------|---------|
-| User Direction | Action taken (deepen/adjust/suggest/questions) and focus area |
-| Decision Log | Decisions made this round using Decision Record format (with rejected alternatives) |
-| Key Findings | Findings using Key Finding Record format (with confidence + hypothesis impact) |
-| Analysis Results | Detailed insights, evidence with file references |
-| Corrected Assumptions | Important wrong→right transformations with explanation |
-| Open Items | Remaining questions or areas for future investigation |
-| **Narrative Synthesis** | Round-end summary connecting this round to overall understanding evolution |
-
-**Replace** (not append) these sections:
-
-| Section | Update Rule |
-|---------|-------------|
-| `## Current Understanding` | Overwrite with latest consolidated understanding. Follow Consolidation Rules: promote confirmed insights, track corrections, focus on current state — NOT cumulative history |
-| `## Table of Contents` | Update links to include new Round N sections and any new headings |
-
-**Round Narrative Synthesis** (append after each round update):
-```markdown
-### Round N: Narrative Synthesis
-**起点**: 基于上一轮的 [conclusions/questions]，本轮从 [starting point] 切入。
-**关键进展**: [New findings] [confirmed/refuted/modified] 了之前关于 [hypothesis] 的理解。
-**决策影响**: 用户选择 [feedback type]，导致分析方向 [adjusted/deepened/maintained]。
-**当前理解**: 经过本轮，核心认知更新为 [updated understanding]。
-**遗留问题**: [remaining questions driving next round]
-```
-
-**Documentation Standards**:
-- Clear timestamps for each round
-- Evidence-based findings with file references and confidence levels
-- Explicit tracking of assumption corrections
-- Organized by analysis dimension
-- Narrative synthesis linking rounds into coherent understanding evolution
-
-##### Step 3.4: Intent Drift Check (every round ≥ 2, building on Phase 2 initial check)
-
-Re-read "User Intent" / "Analysis Context" from discussion.md header. Compare against the Initial Intent Coverage Check from Phase 2. For each original intent item, check updated coverage status:
-
-```markdown
-#### Intent Coverage Check
-- ✅ Intent 1: [addressed in Round N]
-- 🔄 Intent 2: [in-progress, current focus]
-- ⚠️ Intent 3: [implicitly absorbed by X — needs explicit confirmation]
-- ❌ Intent 4: [not yet discussed]
-```
-
-- If any item is "implicitly absorbed" (⚠️), note it explicitly in discussion.md — absorbed ≠ addressed
-- If ❌ or ⚠️ items exist → **proactively surface** to user at start of next round: "以下原始意图尚未充分覆盖：[list]。是否需要调整优先级？"
-
-**Success Criteria**:
-- User feedback processed for each round
-- discussion.md updated with all discussion rounds
-- Assumptions documented and corrected
-- Exit condition reached (user selects complete or max rounds)
-- **All decision points recorded** with Decision Record format
-- **Direction changes documented** with before/after comparison and rationale
-
-### Phase 4: Synthesis & Conclusion
-
-**Objective**: Consolidate insights from all discussion rounds, generate conclusions and recommendations.
-
-##### Step 4.0: Intent Coverage Verification (MANDATORY before synthesis)
-
-Re-read all original user intent / analysis context items from discussion.md header. For EACH item, determine coverage status:
-
-- **✅ Addressed**: Explicitly discussed and concluded with clear design/recommendation
-- **🔀 Transformed**: Original intent evolved into a different solution — document the transformation chain
-- **⚠️ Absorbed**: Implicitly covered by a broader solution — flag for explicit confirmation
-- **❌ Missed**: Not discussed — MUST be either addressed now or explicitly listed as out-of-scope with reason
-
-Write "Intent Coverage Matrix" to discussion.md:
-
-```markdown
-### Intent Coverage Matrix
-| # | Original Intent | Status | Where Addressed | Notes |
-|---|----------------|--------|-----------------|-------|
-| 1 | [intent text] | ✅ Addressed | Round N, Conclusion #M | |
-| 2 | [intent text] | 🔀 Transformed | Round N → Round M | Original: X → Final: Y |
-| 3 | [intent text] | ❌ Missed | — | Reason for omission |
-```
-
-**Gate**: If any item is ❌ Missed, MUST either:
-- (a) Add a dedicated discussion round to address it before continuing, OR
-- (b) Explicitly confirm with user that it is intentionally deferred
-
-##### Step 4.1: Consolidate Insights
-
-```javascript
-const conclusions = {
-  session_id: sessionId,
-  topic: topic,
-  completed: getUtc8ISOString(),
-  total_rounds: roundCount,
-  summary: '...',                    // Executive summary
-  key_conclusions: [                 // Main conclusions
-    { point: '...', evidence: '...', confidence: 'high|medium|low' }
-  ],
-  recommendations: [                 // Actionable recommendations
-    {
-      action: '...',                    // What to do (imperative verb + target)
-      rationale: '...',                 // Why this matters
-      priority: 'high|medium|low',
-      evidence_refs: ['file:line', ...], // Supporting evidence locations
-      steps: [                          // Granular sub-steps for execution
-        { description: '...', target: 'file/module', verification: 'how to verify done' }
-      ],
-      review_status: 'accepted|modified|rejected|pending' // Set during Phase 4 review
-    }
-  ],
-  open_questions: [...],             // Unresolved questions
-  follow_up_suggestions: [           // Next steps
-    { type: 'issue|task|research', summary: '...' }
-  ],
-  decision_trail: [                  // Consolidated decisions from all phases
-    { round: 1, decision: '...', context: '...', options_considered: [...], chosen: '...', rejected_reasons: '...', reason: '...', impact: '...' }
-  ],
-  narrative_trail: [                 // From Step 3.3 Narrative Synthesis
-    { round: 1, starting_point: '...', key_progress: '...', hypothesis_impact: '...', updated_understanding: '...', remaining_questions: '...' }
-  ],
-  intent_coverage: [                 // From Step 4.0
-    { intent: '...', status: 'addressed|transformed|absorbed|missed', where_addressed: '...', notes: '...' }
-  ]
-}
-Write(`${sessionFolder}/conclusions.json`, JSON.stringify(conclusions, null, 2))
-```
-
-##### Step 4.2: Final discussion.md Update
-
-Append conclusions section and finalize:
-
-**Synthesis & Conclusions Section**:
-- **Executive Summary**: Overview of analysis findings
-- **Key Conclusions**: Ranked by confidence level with supporting evidence
-- **Recommendations**: Prioritized action items with rationale
-- **Remaining Open Questions**: Unresolved items for future work
-
-**Current Understanding (Final) Section**:
-
-| Subsection | Content |
-|------------|---------|
-| What We Established | Confirmed points and validated findings |
-| What Was Clarified | Important corrections (~~wrong→right~~) |
-| Key Insights | Valuable learnings for future reference |
-
-**Decision Trail Section**:
-
-| Subsection | Content |
-|------------|---------|
-| Critical Decisions | Pivotal decisions that shaped the analysis outcome |
-| Direction Changes | Timeline of scope/focus adjustments with rationale |
-| Trade-offs Made | Key trade-offs and why certain paths were chosen |
-
-**Session Statistics**: Total discussion rounds, key findings count, dimensions covered, artifacts generated, **decision count**.
-
-##### Step 4.3: Interactive Recommendation Review (skip in auto mode)
-
-Walk through each recommendation one-by-one for user confirmation before proceeding:
-
-```javascript
-// Order recommendations by priority: high → medium → low
-const sortedRecs = conclusions.recommendations.sort(byPriority)
-
-for (const [index, rec] of sortedRecs.entries()) {
-  // 1. Present recommendation details
-  // Display: action, rationale, priority, steps[] (numbered sub-steps with target + verification)
-
-  // 2. Gather user review
-  const review = AskUserQuestion({
-    questions: [{
-      question: `Recommendation #${index + 1}: "${rec.action}" (${rec.priority} priority, ${rec.steps.length} steps). Your decision:`,
-      header: `Rec #${index + 1}`,
-      multiSelect: false,
-      options: [
-        { label: "Accept", description: "Accept this recommendation as-is" },
-        { label: "Modify", description: "Adjust scope, steps, or priority" },
-        { label: "Reject", description: "Remove this recommendation" },
-        { label: "Accept All Remaining", description: "Skip review for remaining recommendations" }
-      ]
-    }]
-  })
-
-  // 3. Process review decision
-  // Accept → rec.review_status = "accepted"
-  // Modify → gather modification via free text → update rec → rec.review_status = "modified"
-  // Reject → gather reason → rec.review_status = "rejected"
-  // Accept All Remaining → mark all remaining as "accepted", break loop
-
-  // 4. Record review decision to discussion.md Decision Log
-  // 5. Update conclusions.json
-}
-
-// Display review summary:
-// Accepted: N | Modified: N | Rejected: N
-// Only accepted/modified recommendations proceed to next step
-```
-
-**Review Summary Format** (append to discussion.md):
-```markdown
-### Recommendation Review Summary
-| # | Action | Priority | Steps | Review Status | Notes |
-|---|--------|----------|-------|---------------|-------|
-| 1 | [action] | high | 3 | ✅ Accepted | |
-| 2 | [action] | medium | 2 | ✏️ Modified | [modification notes] |
-| 3 | [action] | low | 1 | ❌ Rejected | [reason] |
-```
-
-##### Step 4.4: Post-Completion Options
-
-**Complexity Assessment** — determine available options:
-
-```javascript
-// Assess recommendation complexity to decide available options
-const recs = conclusions.recommendations || []
-const complexity = assessComplexity(recs)
-
-function assessComplexity(recs) {
-  if (recs.length === 0) return 'none'
-  if (recs.length <= 2 && recs.every(r => r.priority === 'low')) return 'simple'
-  if (recs.length >= 3 || recs.some(r => r.priority === 'high')) return 'complex'
-  return 'moderate'  // 1-2 medium-priority recommendations
-}
-
-// Complexity → available options mapping:
-//   none:    Done | Create Issue | Export Report
-//   simple:  Done | Create Issue | Export Report
-//   moderate: Generate Plan | Create Issue | Export Report | Done
-//   complex:  Generate Plan | Create Issue | Export Report | Done
-```
-
-```javascript
-if (!autoYes) {
-  const options = buildOptionsForComplexity(complexity)
-  AskUserQuestion({
-    questions: [{
-      question: `Analysis complete (${recs.length} recommendations, complexity: ${complexity}). Next step:`,
-      header: "Next Step",
-      multiSelect: false,
-      options: options
-    }]
-  })
-} else {
-  // Auto mode: generate plan only for moderate/complex, skip for simple/none
-  if (complexity === 'complex' || complexity === 'moderate') {
-    // → Phase 5 (plan generation only, NO code modifications)
-  } else {
-    // → Done (conclusions.json is sufficient output)
-  }
-}
-```
-
-**Options by Complexity**:
-
-| Complexity | Available Options | Rationale |
-|------------|-------------------|-----------|
-| `none` | Done, Create Issue, Export Report | No actionable recommendations |
-| `simple` | Done, Create Issue, Export Report | 1-2 low-priority items don't warrant formal task JSON |
-| `moderate` | Generate Plan, Create Issue, Export Report, Done | Task structure helpful for downstream execution |
-| `complex` | Generate Plan, Create Issue, Export Report, Done | Full plan generation justified |
-
-| Selection | Action |
-|-----------|--------|
-| Generate Plan | Jump to Phase 5 (plan generation only, NO code modifications) |
-| Create Issue | `Skill(skill="issue:new", args="...")` (only reviewed recs) |
-| Export Report | Copy discussion.md + conclusions.json to user-specified location |
-| Done | Display artifact paths, end |
-
-**Success Criteria**:
-- conclusions.json created with complete synthesis
-- discussion.md finalized with conclusions and decision trail
-- **Intent Coverage Matrix** verified — all original intents accounted for (no ❌ Missed without explicit user deferral)
-- User offered meaningful next step options
-- **Complete decision trail** documented and traceable from initial scoping to final conclusions
-
-### Phase 5: Plan Generation (Optional — NO code modifications)
-
-**Objective**: Generate structured plan checklist from analysis recommendations. **This phase produces plans only — it does NOT modify any source code.**
-
-**Trigger**: User selects "Generate Plan" in Phase 4. In auto mode, triggered only for `moderate`/`complex` recommendations.
-
-```javascript
-const recs = conclusions.recommendations || []
-
-// Build plan checklist from all accepted/modified recommendations
-const planChecklist = recs
-  .filter(r => r.review_status !== 'rejected')
-  .map((rec, index) => {
-    const files = rec.evidence_refs
-      ?.filter(ref => ref.includes(':'))
-      .map(ref => ref.split(':')[0]) || []
-
-    return `### ${index + 1}. ${rec.action}
-- **Priority**: ${rec.priority}
-- **Rationale**: ${rec.rationale}
-- **Target files**: ${files.join(', ') || 'TBD'}
-- **Evidence**: ${rec.evidence_refs?.join(', ') || 'N/A'}
-- [ ] Ready for execution`
-  }).join('\n\n')
-
-// Append plan checklist to discussion.md
-appendToDiscussion(`
-## Plan Checklist
-
-> **This is a plan only — no code was modified.**
-> To execute, use: \`$csv-wave-pipeline "<requirement summary>"\`
-
-- **Recommendations**: ${recs.length}
-- **Generated**: ${getUtc8ISOString()}
-
-${planChecklist}
-
----
-
-### Next Step: Execute
-
-Run \`$csv-wave-pipeline\` to execute these recommendations as wave-based batch tasks:
-
-\`\`\`bash
-$csv-wave-pipeline "${topic}"
-\`\`\`
-`)
-```
-
-**Characteristics**:
-- Plan checklist appended directly to `discussion.md`
-- **No code modifications** — plan output only
-- Reminds user to use `$csv-wave-pipeline` for execution
-
-**Success Criteria**:
-- Plan checklist in discussion.md with all accepted recommendations
-- User reminded about `$csv-wave-pipeline` for execution
-- **No source code modified** — strictly plan output
-
-## Output Structure
-
-```
-{projectRoot}/.workflow/.analysis/ANL-{slug}-{date}/
-├── discussion.md              # Evolution of understanding & discussions
-├── exploration-codebase.json  # Phase 2: Codebase context
-├── explorations/              # Phase 2: Multi-perspective explorations (if selected)
-│   ├── technical.json
-│   ├── architectural.json
-│   └── ...
-├── explorations.json          # Phase 2: Single perspective aggregated findings
-├── perspectives.json          # Phase 2: Multi-perspective findings with synthesis
-└── conclusions.json           # Phase 4: Final synthesis with recommendations
-```
-
-> **Phase 5** appends a plan checklist to `discussion.md`. No additional files are generated.
-
-| File | Phase | Description |
-|------|-------|-------------|
-| `discussion.md` | 1-5 | Session metadata → discussion timeline → conclusions. Plan checklist appended here (simple path). |
-| `exploration-codebase.json` | 2 | Codebase context: relevant files, patterns, constraints |
-| `explorations/*.json` | 2 | Per-perspective exploration results (multi only) |
-| `explorations.json` | 2 | Single perspective aggregated findings |
-| `perspectives.json` | 2 | Multi-perspective findings with cross-perspective synthesis |
-| `conclusions.json` | 4 | Final synthesis: conclusions, recommendations, open questions |
-
-## Analysis Dimensions Reference
-
-Dimensions guide the scope and focus of analysis:
-
-| Dimension | Keywords | Description |
-|-----------|----------|-------------|
-| architecture | 架构, architecture, design, structure, 设计, pattern | System design, component interactions, design patterns |
-| implementation | 实现, implement, code, coding, 代码, logic | Code patterns, implementation details, algorithms |
-| performance | 性能, performance, optimize, bottleneck, 优化, speed | Bottlenecks, optimization opportunities, resource usage |
-| security | 安全, security, auth, permission, 权限, vulnerability | Vulnerabilities, authentication, access control |
-| concept | 概念, concept, theory, principle, 原理, understand | Foundational ideas, principles, theory |
-| comparison | 比较, compare, vs, difference, 区别, versus | Comparing solutions, evaluating alternatives |
-| decision | 决策, decision, choice, tradeoff, 选择, trade-off | Trade-offs, impact analysis, decision rationale |
-
-## Analysis Perspectives
-
-Optional multi-perspective analysis (single perspective is default, max 4):
-
-| Perspective | Focus | Best For |
-|------------|-------|----------|
-| **Technical** | Implementation patterns, code structure, technical feasibility | Understanding how and technical details |
-| **Architectural** | System design, scalability, component interactions | Understanding structure and organization |
-| **Security** | Security patterns, vulnerabilities, access control | Identifying security risks |
-| **Performance** | Bottlenecks, optimization, resource utilization | Finding performance issues |
-
-**Selection**: User can multi-select up to 4 perspectives in Phase 1, or default to single comprehensive view.
-
-### Analysis Depth Levels
-
-| Depth | Scope | Description |
-|-------|-------|-------------|
-| Quick | Surface level understanding | Fast overview, minimal exploration |
-| Standard | Moderate depth with good coverage | Balanced analysis (default) |
-| Deep | Comprehensive detailed analysis | Thorough multi-round investigation |
-
-## Dimension-Direction Mapping
-
-When user selects focus areas, generate directions dynamically from detected dimensions:
-
-| Dimension | Possible Directions |
-|-----------|-------------------|
-| architecture | System Design, Component Interactions, Technology Choices, Integration Points, Design Patterns, Scalability Strategy |
-| implementation | Code Structure, Implementation Details, Code Patterns, Error Handling, Testing Approach, Algorithm Analysis |
-| performance | Performance Bottlenecks, Optimization Opportunities, Resource Utilization, Caching Strategy, Concurrency Issues |
-| security | Security Vulnerabilities, Authentication/Authorization, Access Control, Data Protection, Input Validation |
-| concept | Conceptual Foundation, Core Mechanisms, Fundamental Patterns, Theory & Principles, Trade-offs & Reasoning |
-| comparison | Solution Comparison, Pros & Cons Analysis, Technology Evaluation, Approach Differences |
-| decision | Decision Criteria, Trade-off Analysis, Risk Assessment, Impact Analysis, Implementation Implications |
-
-**Implementation**: Present 2-3 top dimension-related directions, allow user to multi-select and add custom directions.
-
-## Consolidation Rules
-
-When updating "Current Understanding" in discussion.md:
-
-| Rule | Description |
-|------|-------------|
-| Promote confirmed insights | Move validated findings to "What We Established" |
-| Track corrections | Keep important wrong→right transformations |
-| Focus on current state | What do we know NOW, not the journey |
-| Avoid timeline repetition | Don't copy discussion details into consolidated section |
-| Preserve key learnings | Keep insights valuable for future reference |
-
-**Example**:
-
-Bad (cluttered):
-```markdown
-## Current Understanding
-In round 1 we discussed X, then in round 2 user said Y...
-```
-
-Good (consolidated):
-```markdown
-## Current Understanding
-
-### What We Established
-- The authentication flow uses JWT with refresh tokens
-- Rate limiting is implemented at API gateway level
-
-### What Was Clarified
-- ~~Assumed Redis for sessions~~ → Actually uses database-backed sessions
-
-### Key Insights
-- Current architecture supports horizontal scaling
-```
-
-## Templates
-
-### discussion.md Structure
-
-The discussion.md file evolves through the analysis:
-
-- **Header**: Session ID, topic, start time, identified dimensions
-- **Analysis Context**: Focus areas, perspectives, depth level
-- **Initial Questions**: Key questions to guide the analysis
-- **Initial Decisions**: Why these dimensions and focus areas were selected
-- **Discussion Timeline**: Round-by-round findings with narrative synthesis
-  - Round 1: Initial Understanding + Exploration Results + **Initial Decision Log** + **Narrative Synthesis**
-  - Round 2-N: Current Understanding Summary + User feedback + direction adjustments + new insights + **Decision Log** + **Key Findings** + **Narrative Synthesis**
-- **Decision Trail**: Consolidated critical decisions across all rounds
-- **Synthesis & Conclusions**: Summary, key conclusions, recommendations
-- **Current Understanding (Final)**: Consolidated insights
-- **Session Statistics**: Rounds completed, findings count, artifacts generated, decision count
-
-### Round Documentation Pattern
-
-Each discussion round follows a consistent structure:
-
-```markdown
-### Round N - [Deepen|Adjust|Suggest|Q&A] (timestamp)
-
-#### User Input
-What the user indicated they wanted to focus on
-
-#### Decision Log
-> **Decision**: [Description of direction/scope/approach decision made this round]
-> - **Context**: [What triggered this decision]
-> - **Options considered**: [Alternatives evaluated]
-> - **Chosen**: [Selected approach] — **Reason**: [Rationale]
-> - **Rejected**: [Why other options were discarded]
-> - **Impact**: [Effect on analysis direction/conclusions]
-
-#### Key Findings
-> **Finding**: [Content]
-> - **Confidence**: [High/Medium/Low] — **Why**: [Evidence basis]
-> - **Hypothesis Impact**: [Confirms/Refutes/Modifies] hypothesis "[name]"
-> - **Scope**: [What areas this affects]
-
-#### Analysis Results
-Detailed findings from this round's analysis
-- Finding 1 (evidence: file:line)
-- Finding 2 (evidence: file:line)
-
-#### Corrected Assumptions
-- ~~Previous assumption~~ → Corrected understanding
-  - Reason: Why the assumption was wrong
-
-#### Open Items
-Remaining questions or areas for investigation
-
-#### Narrative Synthesis
-**起点**: 基于上一轮的 [conclusions/questions]，本轮从 [starting point] 切入。
-**关键进展**: [New findings] [confirmed/refuted/modified] 了之前关于 [hypothesis] 的理解。
-**决策影响**: 用户选择 [feedback type]，导致分析方向 [adjusted/deepened/maintained]。
-**当前理解**: 经过本轮，核心认知更新为 [updated understanding]。
-**遗留问题**: [remaining questions driving next round]
-```
-
-## Error Handling
-
-| Situation | Action | Recovery |
-|-----------|--------|----------|
-| No codebase detected | Normal flow, pure topic analysis | Proceed without exploration-codebase.json |
-| Codebase search fails | Continue with available context | Note limitation in discussion.md |
-| No relevant findings | Broaden search keywords | Ask user for clarification |
-| User timeout in discussion | Save state, show resume command | Use `--continue` to resume |
-| Max rounds reached (5) | Force synthesis phase | Highlight remaining questions in conclusions |
-| Session folder conflict | Append timestamp suffix | Create unique folder and continue |
-| Plan generation: no recommendations | No plan to generate | Inform user, suggest lite-plan |
-
-## Best Practices
-
-### Core Principles
-
-1. **No code modifications**: This skill is strictly read-only and plan-only. Phase 5 generates plan checklists in `discussion.md` but does NOT modify source code. Use `$csv-wave-pipeline` for execution.
-
-### Before Starting Analysis
-
-1. **Clear Topic Definition**: Detailed topics lead to better dimension identification
-2. **User Context**: Understanding focus preferences helps scope the analysis
-3. **Perspective Selection**: Choose 2-4 perspectives for complex topics, single for focused queries
-4. **Scope Understanding**: Being clear about depth expectations sets correct analysis intensity
-
-### During Analysis
-
-1. **Review Findings**: Check exploration results before proceeding to discussion
-2. **Document Assumptions**: Track what you think is true for correction later
-3. **Use Continue Mode**: Resume sessions to build on previous findings rather than starting over
-4. **Embrace Corrections**: Track wrong→right transformations as valuable learnings
-5. **Iterate Thoughtfully**: Each discussion round should meaningfully refine understanding
-6. **Record Decisions Immediately**: Never defer recording — capture decisions as they happen using the Decision Record format. A decision not recorded in-the-moment is a decision lost
-
-### Documentation Practices
-
-1. **Evidence-Based**: Every conclusion should reference specific code or patterns
-2. **Confidence Levels**: Indicate confidence (high/medium/low) for conclusions
-3. **Timeline Clarity**: Use clear timestamps for traceability
-4. **Evolution Tracking**: Document how understanding changed across rounds
-5. **Action Items**: Generate specific, actionable recommendations
-6. **Multi-Perspective Synthesis**: When using multiple perspectives, document convergent/conflicting themes
-7. **Link Decisions to Outcomes**: When writing conclusions, explicitly reference which decisions led to which outcomes — this creates an auditable trail from initial scoping to final recommendations
-
-## When to Use
-
-**Use analyze-with-file when:**
-- Exploring complex topics collaboratively with documented trail
-- Need multi-round iterative refinement of understanding
-- Decision-making requires exploring multiple perspectives
-- Building shared understanding before implementation
-- Want to document how understanding evolved
-
-**Use Plan Generation (Phase 5) when:**
-- Analysis conclusions contain clear, actionable recommendations
-- Simple: 1-2 items → inline plan checklist in discussion.md
-- Complex: 3+ recommendations → detailed plan checklist
-- **Then execute via**: `$csv-wave-pipeline` for wave-based batch execution
-
-**Consider alternatives when:**
-- Specific bug diagnosis needed → use `debug-with-file`
-- Generating new ideas/solutions → use `brainstorm-with-file`
-- Complex planning with parallel perspectives → use `collaborative-plan-with-file`
-- Ready to implement → use `lite-plan`
-- Requirement decomposition needed → use `req-plan-with-file`
-
----
-
-**Now execute the analyze-with-file workflow for topic**: $TOPIC
+---
+name: analyze-with-file
+description: Interactive collaborative analysis with documented discussions, inline exploration, and evolving understanding. Serial execution with no agent delegation.
+argument-hint: "TOPIC=\"<question or topic>\" [--depth=quick|standard|deep] [--continue]"
+---
+
+# Codex Analyze-With-File Prompt
+
+## Overview
+
+Interactive collaborative analysis workflow with **documented discussion process**. Records understanding evolution, facilitates multi-round Q&A, and uses inline search tools for deep exploration.
+
+**Core workflow**: Topic → Explore → Discuss → Document → Refine → Conclude → Plan Checklist
+
+**Key features**:
+- **Documented discussion timeline**: Captures understanding evolution across all phases
+- **Decision recording at every critical point**: Mandatory recording of key findings, direction changes, and trade-offs
+- **Multi-perspective analysis**: Supports up to 4 analysis perspectives (serial, inline)
+- **Interactive discussion**: Multi-round Q&A with user feedback and direction adjustments
+- **Plan output**: Generate structured plan checklist for downstream execution (e.g., `$csv-wave-pipeline`)
+
+### Decision Recording Protocol
+
+**CRITICAL**: During analysis, the following situations **MUST** trigger immediate recording to discussion.md:
+
+| Trigger | What to Record | Target Section |
+|---------|---------------|----------------|
+| **Direction choice** | What was chosen, why, what alternatives were discarded | `#### Decision Log` |
+| **Key finding** | Finding content, impact scope, confidence level, hypothesis impact | `#### Key Findings` |
+| **Assumption change** | Old assumption → new understanding, reason, impact | `#### Corrected Assumptions` |
+| **User feedback** | User's original input, rationale for adoption/adjustment | `#### User Input` |
+| **Disagreement & trade-off** | Conflicting viewpoints, trade-off basis, final choice | `#### Decision Log` |
+| **Scope adjustment** | Before/after scope, trigger reason | `#### Decision Log` |
+
+**Decision Record Format**:
+```markdown
+> **Decision**: [Description of the decision]
+> - **Context**: [What triggered this decision]
+> - **Options considered**: [Alternatives evaluated]
+> - **Chosen**: [Selected approach] — **Reason**: [Rationale]
+> - **Rejected**: [Why other options were discarded]
+> - **Impact**: [Effect on analysis direction/conclusions]
+```
+
+**Key Finding Record Format**:
+```markdown
+> **Finding**: [Content]
+> - **Confidence**: [High/Medium/Low] — **Why**: [Evidence basis]
+> - **Hypothesis Impact**: [Confirms/Refutes/Modifies] hypothesis "[name]"
+> - **Scope**: [What areas this affects]
+```
+
+**Recording Principles**:
+- **Immediacy**: Record decisions as they happen, not at the end of a phase
+- **Completeness**: Capture context, options, chosen approach, reason, and rejected alternatives
+- **Traceability**: Later phases must be able to trace back why a decision was made
+- **Depth**: Capture reasoning and hypothesis impact, not just outcomes
+
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-confirm exploration decisions, use recommended analysis angles, skip interactive scoping.
+
+## Quick Start
+
+```bash
+# Basic usage
+/codex:analyze-with-file TOPIC="How to optimize this project's authentication architecture"
+
+# With depth selection
+/codex:analyze-with-file TOPIC="Performance bottleneck analysis" --depth=deep
+
+# Continue existing session
+/codex:analyze-with-file TOPIC="authentication architecture" --continue
+
+# Auto mode (skip confirmations)
+/codex:analyze-with-file -y TOPIC="Caching strategy analysis"
+```
+
+## Target Topic
+
+**$TOPIC**
+
+## Analysis Flow
+
+```
+Step 0: Session Setup
+   ├─ Parse topic, flags (--depth, --continue, -y)
+   ├─ Generate session ID: ANL-{slug}-{date}
+   └─ Create session folder (or detect existing → continue mode)
+
+Step 1: Topic Understanding
+   ├─ Parse topic, identify analysis dimensions
+   ├─ Initial scoping with user (focus areas, perspectives, depth)
+   └─ Initialize discussion.md
+
+Step 2: Exploration (Inline, No Agents)
+   ├─ Detect codebase → search relevant modules, patterns
+   │   ├─ Run `ccw spec load --category exploration` (if spec system available)
+   │   ├─ Run `ccw spec load --category debug` (known issues and root-cause notes)
+   │   └─ Use Grep, Glob, Read, mcp__ace-tool__search_context
+   ├─ Multi-perspective analysis (if selected, serial)
+   │   ├─ Single: Comprehensive analysis
+   │   └─ Multi (≤4): Serial per-perspective analysis with synthesis
+   ├─ Aggregate findings → explorations.json / perspectives.json
+   ├─ Update discussion.md with Round 1
+   │   ├─ Replace ## Current Understanding with initial findings
+   │   └─ Update ## Table of Contents
+   └─ Initial Intent Coverage Check (early drift detection)
+
+Step 3: Interactive Discussion (Multi-Round, max 5)
+   ├─ Current Understanding Summary (round ≥ 2, before findings)
+   ├─ Present exploration findings
+   ├─ Gather user feedback
+   ├─ Process response:
+   │   ├─ Deepen → context-driven + heuristic options → deeper inline analysis
+   │   ├─ Agree & Suggest → user-directed exploration
+   │   ├─ Adjust → new inline analysis with adjusted focus
+   │   ├─ Questions → direct answers with evidence
+   │   └─ Complete → exit loop for synthesis
+   ├─ Update discussion.md:
+   │   ├─ Append round details + Narrative Synthesis
+   │   ├─ Replace ## Current Understanding with latest state
+   │   └─ Update ## Table of Contents
+   ├─ Intent Drift Check (round ≥ 2, building on Phase 2 initial check)
+   └─ Repeat until user selects complete or max rounds
+
+Step 4: Synthesis & Conclusion
+   ├─ Intent Coverage Verification (mandatory gate)
+   ├─ Consolidate all insights → conclusions.json (with steps[] per recommendation)
+   ├─ Update discussion.md with final synthesis
+   ├─ Interactive Recommendation Review (per-recommendation confirm/modify/reject)
+   └─ Offer options: generate plan / create issue / export / done
+
+Step 5: Plan Generation (Optional - produces plan only, NO code modifications)
+   ├─ Generate inline plan checklist → appended to discussion.md
+   └─ Remind user to execute via $csv-wave-pipeline
+```
+
+## Configuration
+
+| Flag | Default | Description |
+|------|---------|-------------|
+| `-y, --yes` | false | Auto-confirm all decisions |
+| `--continue` | false | Continue existing session |
+| `--depth` | standard | Analysis depth: quick / standard / deep |
+
+**Session ID format**: `ANL-{slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}`
+- slug: lowercase, alphanumeric + CJK characters, max 40 chars
+- date: YYYY-MM-DD (UTC+8)
+- Auto-detect continue: session folder + discussion.md exists → continue mode
+
+## Implementation Details
+
+### Session Initialization
+
+##### Step 0: Initialize Session
+
+```javascript
+const getUtc8ISOString = () => new Date(Date.now() + 8 * 60 * 60 * 1000).toISOString()
+
+// Parse flags
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+const continueMode = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--continue')
+const depthMatch = $ARGUMENTS.match(/--depth[=\s](quick|standard|deep)/)
+const analysisDepth = depthMatch ? depthMatch[1] : 'standard'
+
+// Extract topic
+const topic = $ARGUMENTS.replace(/--yes|-y|--continue|--depth[=\s]\w+|TOPIC=/g, '').replace(/^["']|["']$/g, '').trim()
+
+// Determine project root
+const projectRoot = Bash('git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd').trim()
+
+const slug = topic.toLowerCase().replace(/[^a-z0-9\u4e00-\u9fa5]+/g, '-').substring(0, 40)
+const dateStr = getUtc8ISOString().substring(0, 10)
+const sessionId = `ANL-${slug}-${dateStr}`
+const sessionFolder = `${projectRoot}/.workflow/.analysis/${sessionId}`
+
+// Auto-detect continue: session folder + discussion.md exists → continue mode
+// If continue → load discussion.md + explorations, resume from last round
+Bash(`mkdir -p ${sessionFolder}`)
+```
+
+### Phase 1: Topic Understanding
+
+**Objective**: Parse the topic, identify relevant analysis dimensions, scope the analysis with user input, and initialize the discussion document.
+
+##### Step 1.1: Parse Topic & Identify Dimensions
+
+Match topic keywords against analysis dimensions:
+
+```javascript
+const ANALYSIS_DIMENSIONS = {
+  architecture:    ['架构', 'architecture', 'design', 'structure', '设计', 'pattern'],
+  implementation:  ['实现', 'implement', 'code', 'coding', '代码', 'logic'],
+  performance:     ['性能', 'performance', 'optimize', 'bottleneck', '优化', 'speed'],
+  security:        ['安全', 'security', 'auth', 'permission', '权限', 'vulnerability'],
+  concept:         ['概念', 'concept', 'theory', 'principle', '原理', 'understand'],
+  comparison:      ['比较', 'compare', 'vs', 'difference', '区别', 'versus'],
+  decision:        ['决策', 'decision', 'choice', 'tradeoff', '选择', 'trade-off']
+}
+
+// Match topic text against keyword lists
+// If multiple dimensions match, include all
+// If none match, default to "architecture" and "implementation"
+const dimensions = identifyDimensions(topic, ANALYSIS_DIMENSIONS)
+```
+
+##### Step 1.2: Initial Scoping (New Session Only)
+
+For new sessions, gather user preferences (skipped in auto mode or continue mode):
+
+```javascript
+if (!autoYes && !continueMode) {
+  // 1. Focus areas (multi-select)
+  // Generate directions dynamically from detected dimensions (see Dimension-Direction Mapping)
+  const focusAreas = request_user_input({
+    questions: [{
+      header: "聚焦领域",
+      id: "focus",
+      question: "Select analysis focus areas:",
+      options: generateFocusOptions(dimensions) // Dynamic based on dimensions
+    }]
+  })
+
+  // 2. Analysis perspectives (multi-select, max 4)
+  const perspectives = request_user_input({
+    questions: [{
+      header: "分析视角",
+      id: "perspectives",
+      question: "Select analysis perspectives (single = focused, multi = broader coverage):",
+      options: [
+        { label: "Technical", description: "Implementation patterns, code structure, technical feasibility" },
+        { label: "Architectural", description: "System design, scalability, component interactions" },
+        { label: "Security", description: "Vulnerabilities, authentication, access control" }
+      ]
+    }]
+  })
+
+  // 3. Analysis depth (single-select, unless --depth already set)
+  // Quick: surface level | Standard: moderate depth | Deep: comprehensive
+}
+```
+
+##### Step 1.3: Initialize discussion.md
+
+```javascript
+const discussionMd = `# Analysis Discussion
+
+**Session ID**: ${sessionId}
+**Topic**: ${topic}
+**Started**: ${getUtc8ISOString()}
+**Dimensions**: ${dimensions.join(', ')}
+**Depth**: ${analysisDepth}
+
+## Table of Contents
+<!-- TOC: Auto-updated after each round/phase. Links to major sections. -->
+- [Analysis Context](#analysis-context)
+- [Current Understanding](#current-understanding)
+- [Discussion Timeline](#discussion-timeline)
+- [Decision Trail](#decision-trail)
+
+## Current Understanding
+<!-- REPLACEABLE BLOCK: Overwrite (not append) after each round with latest consolidated understanding.
+     Follow Consolidation Rules: promote confirmed insights, track corrections, focus on current state. -->
+
+> To be populated after exploration.
+
+## Analysis Context
+- Focus areas: ${focusAreas.join(', ')}
+- Perspectives: ${selectedPerspectives.map(p => p.name).join(', ')}
+- Depth: ${analysisDepth}
+
+## Initial Questions
+${generateInitialQuestions(topic, dimensions).map(q => `- ${q}`).join('\n')}
+
+## Initial Decisions
+> Record why these dimensions and focus areas were selected.
+
+---
+
+## Discussion Timeline
+
+> Rounds will be appended below as analysis progresses.
+> Each round MUST include a Decision Log section for any decisions made.
+
+---
+
+## Decision Trail
+
+> Consolidated critical decisions across all rounds (populated in Phase 4).
+`
+Write(`${sessionFolder}/discussion.md`, discussionMd)
+```
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- Session folder created with discussion.md initialized
+- Analysis dimensions identified
+- User preferences captured (focus, perspectives, depth)
+- **Initial decisions recorded**: Dimension selection rationale, excluded dimensions with reasons, user preference intent
+
+### Phase 2: Exploration
+
+**Objective**: Gather codebase context and execute analysis to build understanding. All exploration done inline — no agent delegation.
+
+##### Step 2.1: Detect Codebase & Explore
+
+Search the codebase directly using available tools:
+
+```javascript
+const hasCodebase = Bash(`
+  test -f package.json && echo "nodejs" ||
+  test -f go.mod && echo "golang" ||
+  test -f Cargo.toml && echo "rust" ||
+  test -f pyproject.toml && echo "python" ||
+  test -f pom.xml && echo "java" ||
+  test -d src && echo "generic" ||
+  echo "none"
+`).trim()
+
+if (hasCodebase !== 'none') {
+  // 1. Read project metadata (if exists)
+  //    - Run `ccw spec load --category exploration` (load project specs)
+  //    - Run `ccw spec load --category debug` (known issues and root-cause notes)
+  //    - .workflow/specs/*.md (project conventions)
+
+  // 2. Search codebase for relevant content
+  //    Use: Grep, Glob, Read, or mcp__ace-tool__search_context
+  //    Search based on topic keywords and identified dimensions
+  //    Focus on:
+  //      - Modules/components related to the topic
+  //      - Existing patterns and code structure
+  //      - Integration points and constraints
+  //      - Relevant configuration and dependencies
+
+  // 3. Write findings
+  Write(`${sessionFolder}/exploration-codebase.json`, JSON.stringify({
+    project_type: hasCodebase,
+    relevant_files: [...],    // [{path, relevance, summary}]
+    patterns: [...],          // [{pattern, files, description}]
+    constraints: [...],       // Architectural constraints found
+    integration_points: [...], // [{location, description}]
+    key_findings: [...],      // Main insights from code search
+    _metadata: { timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(), exploration_scope: '...' }
+  }, null, 2))
+}
+```
+
+##### Step 2.2: Multi-Perspective Analysis (if selected)
+
+Analyze the topic from each selected perspective. All analysis done inline by the AI.
+
+**Single perspective** (default):
+
+```javascript
+// Analyze comprehensively across all identified dimensions
+// Use exploration-codebase.json as context
+// Focus on: patterns, anti-patterns, potential issues, opportunities
+
+const findings = {
+  session_id: sessionId,
+  timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(),
+  topic: topic,
+  dimensions: dimensions,
+  sources: [...],            // [{type, file, summary}]
+  key_findings: [...],       // Main insights
+  discussion_points: [...],  // Questions for user engagement
+  open_questions: [...]      // Unresolved questions
+}
+Write(`${sessionFolder}/explorations.json`, JSON.stringify(findings, null, 2))
+```
+
+**Multi-perspective** (2-4 perspectives, serial):
+
+```javascript
+// Analyze each perspective sequentially
+// For each perspective:
+//   1. Focus search/analysis on that perspective's concern area
+//   2. Generate perspective-specific insights
+//   3. Write individual findings
+
+selectedPerspectives.forEach(perspective => {
+  // Analyze from this perspective's angle
+  // Use exploration-codebase.json + dimension focus
+  // Write to explorations/{perspective.name}.json
+  Write(`${sessionFolder}/explorations/${perspective.name}.json`, JSON.stringify({
+    perspective: perspective.name,
+    relevant_files: [...],
+    patterns: [...],
+    key_findings: [...],
+    perspective_insights: [...],
+    open_questions: [...],
+    _metadata: { timestamp: getUtc8ISOString() }
+  }, null, 2))
+})
+```
+
+##### Step 2.3: Aggregate Findings
+
+```javascript
+// Single perspective → explorations.json already written
+// Multi-perspective → synthesize into perspectives.json
+
+if (selectedPerspectives.length > 1) {
+  const synthesis = {
+    session_id: sessionId,
+    timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(),
+    topic: topic,
+    dimensions: dimensions,
+
+    // Individual perspective findings
+    perspectives: selectedPerspectives.map(p => ({
+      name: p.name,
+      findings: readJson(`${sessionFolder}/explorations/${p.name}.json`).key_findings,
+      insights: readJson(`${sessionFolder}/explorations/${p.name}.json`).perspective_insights,
+      questions: readJson(`${sessionFolder}/explorations/${p.name}.json`).open_questions
+    })),
+
+    // Cross-perspective synthesis
+    synthesis: {
+      convergent_themes: [...],   // What all perspectives agree on
+      conflicting_views: [...],   // Where perspectives differ
+      unique_contributions: [...]  // Insights unique to specific perspectives
+    },
+
+    aggregated_findings: [...],   // Main insights across all perspectives
+    discussion_points: [...],     // Questions for user engagement
+    open_questions: [...]         // Unresolved questions
+  }
+  Write(`${sessionFolder}/perspectives.json`, JSON.stringify(synthesis, null, 2))
+}
+```
+
+##### Step 2.4: Update discussion.md
+
+Append Round 1 with exploration results:
+
+**Single perspective round 1**:
+- Sources analyzed (files, patterns)
+- Key findings with evidence
+- Discussion points for user
+- Open questions
+
+**Multi-perspective round 1**:
+- Per-perspective summary (brief)
+- Synthesis section:
+  - Convergent themes (what all perspectives agree on)
+  - Conflicting views (where perspectives differ)
+  - Unique contributions (insights from specific perspectives)
+- Discussion points
+- Open questions
+
+##### Step 2.5: Initial Intent Coverage Check
+
+Perform the FIRST intent coverage check before entering Phase 3:
+
+```javascript
+// Re-read original user intent / analysis context from discussion.md header
+// Check each intent item against Round 1 findings
+// Append to discussion.md:
+
+appendToDiscussion(`
+#### Initial Intent Coverage Check (Post-Exploration)
+${originalIntents.map((intent, i) => {
+  const status = assessCoverage(intent, explorationFindings)
+  return `- ${status.icon} Intent ${i+1}: ${intent} — ${status.detail}`
+}).join('\n')}
+
+> 接下来的讨论将重点关注未覆盖 (❌) 和进行中 (🔄) 的意图。
+`)
+
+// Present to user at beginning of Phase 3 for early course correction
+```
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- exploration-codebase.json created with codebase context (if codebase exists)
+- explorations.json (single) or perspectives.json (multi) created with findings
+- discussion.md updated with Round 1 results
+- **Initial Intent Coverage Check** completed — early drift detection before interactive rounds
+- Ready for interactive discussion
+- **Key findings recorded** with evidence references and confidence levels
+- **Exploration decisions recorded** (why certain perspectives/search strategies were chosen)
+
+### Phase 3: Interactive Discussion
+
+**Objective**: Iteratively refine understanding through multi-round user-guided discussion cycles.
+
+**Max Rounds**: 5 discussion rounds (can exit earlier if user indicates analysis is complete)
+
+##### Step 3.1: Current Understanding Summary & Present Findings
+
+**Current Understanding Summary** (Round >= 2, BEFORE presenting new findings):
+- Generate 1-2 sentence recap of established consensus and last round's direction
+- Example: "到目前为止，我们已确认 [established facts]。上一轮 [key action/direction]。现在，这是新一轮的发现："
+- Purpose: Reset context, prevent cognitive overload, make incremental progress visible
+
+Display current understanding and gather user direction:
+
+```javascript
+// Round >= 2: Display Current Understanding Summary first
+if (round >= 2) {
+  // Generate 1-2 sentence recap from previous round's narrative synthesis
+  // Display before presenting new findings
+}
+
+// Display current findings summary from explorations.json or perspectives.json
+// Show key points, discussion points, open questions
+
+if (!autoYes) {
+  const feedback = request_user_input({
+    questions: [{
+      header: "分析方向",
+      id: "direction",
+      question: `Analysis round ${round}: Feedback on current findings?`,
+      options: [
+        { label: "Deepen(Recommended)", description: "Analysis direction is correct, investigate deeper" },
+        { label: "Adjust Direction", description: "Different understanding or focus needed" },
+        { label: "Analysis Complete", description: "Sufficient information obtained, proceed to synthesis" }
+      ]
+    }]
+  })
+}
+```
+
+##### Step 3.2: Process User Response
+
+**Recording Checkpoint**: Regardless of which option the user selects, the following MUST be recorded to discussion.md:
+- User's original choice and expression
+- Impact of this choice on analysis direction
+- If direction changed, record a full Decision Record
+
+**Deepen** — continue analysis in current direction:
+```javascript
+// Generate deepen direction options dynamically:
+// - 2-3 context-driven options from: unresolved questions, low-confidence findings, unexplored dimensions
+// - 1-2 heuristic options that break current frame:
+//   e.g., "compare with best practices in [related domain]",
+//   "analyze under extreme load scenarios",
+//   "review from security audit perspective",
+//   "explore simpler architectural alternatives"
+// request_user_input with generated options (single-select)
+// Execute selected direction via inline search tools
+// Merge new findings into explorations.json
+// Record: Which assumptions were confirmed, specific angles for deeper exploration
+```
+
+**Agree & Suggest** — user provides specific next step:
+```javascript
+// Ask user for their specific direction (free text input)
+const userSuggestion = request_user_input({
+  questions: [{
+    header: "你的方向",
+    id: "your_direction",
+    question: "请描述您希望下一步深入的方向:",
+    options: [
+      { label: "Code Details", description: "Deeper into implementation specifics" },
+      { label: "Architecture", description: "Broader structural analysis" }
+    ]
+  }]
+})
+// Execute user's specific direction via inline search tools
+// Record: User-driven exploration rationale and findings
+```
+
+**Adjust Direction** — new focus area:
+```javascript
+// Ask user for adjusted focus
+const adjustedFocus = request_user_input({
+  questions: [{
+    header: "新焦点",
+    id: "new_focus",
+    question: "What should the new analysis focus be?",
+    options: [
+      { label: "Code Details", description: "Deeper into implementation specifics" },
+      { label: "Architecture", description: "Broader structural analysis" },
+      { label: "Best Practices", description: "Industry standards and recommendations" }
+    ]
+  }]
+})
+
+// Analyze from adjusted perspective using inline search
+// Compare new insights with prior analysis
+// Identify what was missed and why
+// Update explorations.json with adjusted findings
+// Record Decision: Trigger reason for direction adjustment, old vs new direction, expected impact
+```
+
+**Specific Questions** — answer directly:
+```javascript
+// Capture user questions via request_user_input
+// Answer each question based on codebase search and analysis
+// Provide evidence and file references
+// Rate confidence for each answer (high/medium/low)
+// Document Q&A in discussion.md
+// Record: Knowledge gaps revealed by the question, new understanding from the answer
+```
+
+**Analysis Complete** — exit loop, proceed to Phase 4.
+```javascript
+// Record: Why concluding at this round (sufficient information / scope fully focused / user satisfied)
+```
+
+##### Step 3.3: Document Each Round
+
+Update discussion.md with results from each discussion round:
+
+**Append** to Discussion Timeline:
+
+| Section | Content |
+|---------|---------|
+| User Direction | Action taken (deepen/adjust/suggest/questions) and focus area |
+| Decision Log | Decisions made this round using Decision Record format (with rejected alternatives) |
+| Key Findings | Findings using Key Finding Record format (with confidence + hypothesis impact) |
+| Analysis Results | Detailed insights, evidence with file references |
+| Corrected Assumptions | Important wrong→right transformations with explanation |
+| Open Items | Remaining questions or areas for future investigation |
+| **Narrative Synthesis** | Round-end summary connecting this round to overall understanding evolution |
+
+**Replace** (not append) these sections:
+
+| Section | Update Rule |
+|---------|-------------|
+| `## Current Understanding` | Overwrite with latest consolidated understanding. Follow Consolidation Rules: promote confirmed insights, track corrections, focus on current state — NOT cumulative history |
+| `## Table of Contents` | Update links to include new Round N sections and any new headings |
+
+**Round Narrative Synthesis** (append after each round update):
+```markdown
+### Round N: Narrative Synthesis
+**起点**: 基于上一轮的 [conclusions/questions]，本轮从 [starting point] 切入。
+**关键进展**: [New findings] [confirmed/refuted/modified] 了之前关于 [hypothesis] 的理解。
+**决策影响**: 用户选择 [feedback type]，导致分析方向 [adjusted/deepened/maintained]。
+**当前理解**: 经过本轮，核心认知更新为 [updated understanding]。
+**遗留问题**: [remaining questions driving next round]
+```
+
+**Documentation Standards**:
+- Clear timestamps for each round
+- Evidence-based findings with file references and confidence levels
+- Explicit tracking of assumption corrections
+- Organized by analysis dimension
+- Narrative synthesis linking rounds into coherent understanding evolution
+
+##### Step 3.4: Intent Drift Check (every round ≥ 2, building on Phase 2 initial check)
+
+Re-read "User Intent" / "Analysis Context" from discussion.md header. Compare against the Initial Intent Coverage Check from Phase 2. For each original intent item, check updated coverage status:
+
+```markdown
+#### Intent Coverage Check
+- ✅ Intent 1: [addressed in Round N]
+- 🔄 Intent 2: [in-progress, current focus]
+- ⚠️ Intent 3: [implicitly absorbed by X — needs explicit confirmation]
+- ❌ Intent 4: [not yet discussed]
+```
+
+- If any item is "implicitly absorbed" (⚠️), note it explicitly in discussion.md — absorbed ≠ addressed
+- If ❌ or ⚠️ items exist → **proactively surface** to user at start of next round: "以下原始意图尚未充分覆盖：[list]。是否需要调整优先级？"
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- User feedback processed for each round
+- discussion.md updated with all discussion rounds
+- Assumptions documented and corrected
+- Exit condition reached (user selects complete or max rounds)
+- **All decision points recorded** with Decision Record format
+- **Direction changes documented** with before/after comparison and rationale
+
+### Phase 4: Synthesis & Conclusion
+
+**Objective**: Consolidate insights from all discussion rounds, generate conclusions and recommendations.
+
+##### Step 4.0: Intent Coverage Verification (MANDATORY before synthesis)
+
+Re-read all original user intent / analysis context items from discussion.md header. For EACH item, determine coverage status:
+
+- **✅ Addressed**: Explicitly discussed and concluded with clear design/recommendation
+- **🔀 Transformed**: Original intent evolved into a different solution — document the transformation chain
+- **⚠️ Absorbed**: Implicitly covered by a broader solution — flag for explicit confirmation
+- **❌ Missed**: Not discussed — MUST be either addressed now or explicitly listed as out-of-scope with reason
+
+Write "Intent Coverage Matrix" to discussion.md:
+
+```markdown
+### Intent Coverage Matrix
+| # | Original Intent | Status | Where Addressed | Notes |
+|---|----------------|--------|-----------------|-------|
+| 1 | [intent text] | ✅ Addressed | Round N, Conclusion #M | |
+| 2 | [intent text] | 🔀 Transformed | Round N → Round M | Original: X → Final: Y |
+| 3 | [intent text] | ❌ Missed | — | Reason for omission |
+```
+
+**Gate**: If any item is ❌ Missed, MUST either:
+- (a) Add a dedicated discussion round to address it before continuing, OR
+- (b) Explicitly confirm with user that it is intentionally deferred
+
+##### Step 4.1: Consolidate Insights
+
+```javascript
+const conclusions = {
+  session_id: sessionId,
+  topic: topic,
+  completed: getUtc8ISOString(),
+  total_rounds: roundCount,
+  summary: '...',                    // Executive summary
+  key_conclusions: [                 // Main conclusions
+    { point: '...', evidence: '...', confidence: 'high|medium|low' }
+  ],
+  recommendations: [                 // Actionable recommendations
+    {
+      action: '...',                    // What to do (imperative verb + target)
+      rationale: '...',                 // Why this matters
+      priority: 'high|medium|low',
+      evidence_refs: ['file:line', ...], // Supporting evidence locations
+      steps: [                          // Granular sub-steps for execution
+        { description: '...', target: 'file/module', verification: 'how to verify done' }
+      ],
+      review_status: 'accepted|modified|rejected|pending' // Set during Phase 4 review
+    }
+  ],
+  open_questions: [...],             // Unresolved questions
+  follow_up_suggestions: [           // Next steps
+    { type: 'issue|task|research', summary: '...' }
+  ],
+  decision_trail: [                  // Consolidated decisions from all phases
+    { round: 1, decision: '...', context: '...', options_considered: [...], chosen: '...', rejected_reasons: '...', reason: '...', impact: '...' }
+  ],
+  narrative_trail: [                 // From Step 3.3 Narrative Synthesis
+    { round: 1, starting_point: '...', key_progress: '...', hypothesis_impact: '...', updated_understanding: '...', remaining_questions: '...' }
+  ],
+  intent_coverage: [                 // From Step 4.0
+    { intent: '...', status: 'addressed|transformed|absorbed|missed', where_addressed: '...', notes: '...' }
+  ]
+}
+Write(`${sessionFolder}/conclusions.json`, JSON.stringify(conclusions, null, 2))
+```
+
+##### Step 4.2: Final discussion.md Update
+
+Append conclusions section and finalize:
+
+**Synthesis & Conclusions Section**:
+- **Executive Summary**: Overview of analysis findings
+- **Key Conclusions**: Ranked by confidence level with supporting evidence
+- **Recommendations**: Prioritized action items with rationale
+- **Remaining Open Questions**: Unresolved items for future work
+
+**Current Understanding (Final) Section**:
+
+| Subsection | Content |
+|------------|---------|
+| What We Established | Confirmed points and validated findings |
+| What Was Clarified | Important corrections (~~wrong→right~~) |
+| Key Insights | Valuable learnings for future reference |
+
+**Decision Trail Section**:
+
+| Subsection | Content |
+|------------|---------|
+| Critical Decisions | Pivotal decisions that shaped the analysis outcome |
+| Direction Changes | Timeline of scope/focus adjustments with rationale |
+| Trade-offs Made | Key trade-offs and why certain paths were chosen |
+
+**Session Statistics**: Total discussion rounds, key findings count, dimensions covered, artifacts generated, **decision count**.
+
+##### Step 4.3: Interactive Recommendation Review (skip in auto mode)
+
+Walk through each recommendation one-by-one for user confirmation before proceeding:
+
+```javascript
+// Order recommendations by priority: high → medium → low
+const sortedRecs = conclusions.recommendations.sort(byPriority)
+
+for (const [index, rec] of sortedRecs.entries()) {
+  // 1. Present recommendation details
+  // Display: action, rationale, priority, steps[] (numbered sub-steps with target + verification)
+
+  // 2. Gather user review
+  const review = request_user_input({
+    questions: [{
+      header: `建议#${index + 1}`,
+      id: `rec_${index + 1}`,
+      question: `Recommendation #${index + 1}: "${rec.action}" (${rec.priority} priority, ${rec.steps.length} steps). Your decision:`,
+      options: [
+        { label: "Accept(Recommended)", description: "Accept this recommendation as-is" },
+        { label: "Modify", description: "Adjust scope, steps, or priority" },
+        { label: "Reject", description: "Remove this recommendation" }
+      ]
+    }]
+  })
+
+  // 3. Process review decision
+  // Accept → rec.review_status = "accepted"
+  // Modify → gather modification via free text → update rec → rec.review_status = "modified"
+  // Reject → gather reason → rec.review_status = "rejected"
+  // Accept All Remaining → mark all remaining as "accepted", break loop
+
+  // 4. Record review decision to discussion.md Decision Log
+  // 5. Update conclusions.json
+}
+
+// Display review summary:
+// Accepted: N | Modified: N | Rejected: N
+// Only accepted/modified recommendations proceed to next step
+```
+
+**Review Summary Format** (append to discussion.md):
+```markdown
+### Recommendation Review Summary
+| # | Action | Priority | Steps | Review Status | Notes |
+|---|--------|----------|-------|---------------|-------|
+| 1 | [action] | high | 3 | ✅ Accepted | |
+| 2 | [action] | medium | 2 | ✏️ Modified | [modification notes] |
+| 3 | [action] | low | 1 | ❌ Rejected | [reason] |
+```
+
+##### Step 4.4: Post-Completion Options
+
+**Complexity Assessment** — determine available options:
+
+```javascript
+// Assess recommendation complexity to decide available options
+const recs = conclusions.recommendations || []
+const complexity = assessComplexity(recs)
+
+function assessComplexity(recs) {
+  if (recs.length === 0) return 'none'
+  if (recs.length <= 2 && recs.every(r => r.priority === 'low')) return 'simple'
+  if (recs.length >= 3 || recs.some(r => r.priority === 'high')) return 'complex'
+  return 'moderate'  // 1-2 medium-priority recommendations
+}
+
+// Complexity → available options mapping:
+//   none:    Done | Create Issue | Export Report
+//   simple:  Done | Create Issue | Export Report
+//   moderate: Generate Plan | Create Issue | Export Report | Done
+//   complex:  Generate Plan | Create Issue | Export Report | Done
+```
+
+```javascript
+if (!autoYes) {
+  const options = buildOptionsForComplexity(complexity)
+  request_user_input({
+    questions: [{
+      header: "下一步",
+      id: "next_step",
+      question: `Analysis complete (${recs.length} recommendations, complexity: ${complexity}). Next step:`,
+      options: options
+    }]
+  })
+} else {
+  // Auto mode: generate plan only for moderate/complex, skip for simple/none
+  if (complexity === 'complex' || complexity === 'moderate') {
+    // → Phase 5 (plan generation only, NO code modifications)
+  } else {
+    // → Done (conclusions.json is sufficient output)
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Options by Complexity**:
+
+| Complexity | Available Options | Rationale |
+|------------|-------------------|-----------|
+| `none` | Done, Create Issue, Export Report | No actionable recommendations |
+| `simple` | Done, Create Issue, Export Report | 1-2 low-priority items don't warrant formal task JSON |
+| `moderate` | Generate Plan, Create Issue, Export Report, Done | Task structure helpful for downstream execution |
+| `complex` | Generate Plan, Create Issue, Export Report, Done | Full plan generation justified |
+
+| Selection | Action |
+|-----------|--------|
+| Generate Plan | Jump to Phase 5 (plan generation only, NO code modifications) |
+| Create Issue | `Skill(skill="issue:new", args="...")` (only reviewed recs) |
+| Export Report | Copy discussion.md + conclusions.json to user-specified location |
+| Done | Display artifact paths, end |
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- conclusions.json created with complete synthesis
+- discussion.md finalized with conclusions and decision trail
+- **Intent Coverage Matrix** verified — all original intents accounted for (no ❌ Missed without explicit user deferral)
+- User offered meaningful next step options
+- **Complete decision trail** documented and traceable from initial scoping to final conclusions
+
+### Phase 5: Plan Generation (Optional — NO code modifications)
+
+**Objective**: Generate structured plan checklist from analysis recommendations. **This phase produces plans only — it does NOT modify any source code.**
+
+**Trigger**: User selects "Generate Plan" in Phase 4. In auto mode, triggered only for `moderate`/`complex` recommendations.
+
+```javascript
+const recs = conclusions.recommendations || []
+
+// Build plan checklist from all accepted/modified recommendations
+const planChecklist = recs
+  .filter(r => r.review_status !== 'rejected')
+  .map((rec, index) => {
+    const files = rec.evidence_refs
+      ?.filter(ref => ref.includes(':'))
+      .map(ref => ref.split(':')[0]) || []
+
+    return `### ${index + 1}. ${rec.action}
+- **Priority**: ${rec.priority}
+- **Rationale**: ${rec.rationale}
+- **Target files**: ${files.join(', ') || 'TBD'}
+- **Evidence**: ${rec.evidence_refs?.join(', ') || 'N/A'}
+- [ ] Ready for execution`
+  }).join('\n\n')
+
+// Append plan checklist to discussion.md
+appendToDiscussion(`
+## Plan Checklist
+
+> **This is a plan only — no code was modified.**
+> To execute, use: \`$csv-wave-pipeline "<requirement summary>"\`
+
+- **Recommendations**: ${recs.length}
+- **Generated**: ${getUtc8ISOString()}
+
+${planChecklist}
+
+---
+
+### Next Step: Execute
+
+Run \`$csv-wave-pipeline\` to execute these recommendations as wave-based batch tasks:
+
+\`\`\`bash
+$csv-wave-pipeline "${topic}"
+\`\`\`
+`)
+```
+
+**Characteristics**:
+- Plan checklist appended directly to `discussion.md`
+- **No code modifications** — plan output only
+- Reminds user to use `$csv-wave-pipeline` for execution
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- Plan checklist in discussion.md with all accepted recommendations
+- User reminded about `$csv-wave-pipeline` for execution
+- **No source code modified** — strictly plan output
+
+## Output Structure
+
+```
+{projectRoot}/.workflow/.analysis/ANL-{slug}-{date}/
+├── discussion.md              # Evolution of understanding & discussions
+├── exploration-codebase.json  # Phase 2: Codebase context
+├── explorations/              # Phase 2: Multi-perspective explorations (if selected)
+│   ├── technical.json
+│   ├── architectural.json
+│   └── ...
+├── explorations.json          # Phase 2: Single perspective aggregated findings
+├── perspectives.json          # Phase 2: Multi-perspective findings with synthesis
+└── conclusions.json           # Phase 4: Final synthesis with recommendations
+```
+
+> **Phase 5** appends a plan checklist to `discussion.md`. No additional files are generated.
+
+| File | Phase | Description |
+|------|-------|-------------|
+| `discussion.md` | 1-5 | Session metadata → discussion timeline → conclusions. Plan checklist appended here (simple path). |
+| `exploration-codebase.json` | 2 | Codebase context: relevant files, patterns, constraints |
+| `explorations/*.json` | 2 | Per-perspective exploration results (multi only) |
+| `explorations.json` | 2 | Single perspective aggregated findings |
+| `perspectives.json` | 2 | Multi-perspective findings with cross-perspective synthesis |
+| `conclusions.json` | 4 | Final synthesis: conclusions, recommendations, open questions |
+
+## Analysis Dimensions Reference
+
+Dimensions guide the scope and focus of analysis:
+
+| Dimension | Keywords | Description |
+|-----------|----------|-------------|
+| architecture | 架构, architecture, design, structure, 设计, pattern | System design, component interactions, design patterns |
+| implementation | 实现, implement, code, coding, 代码, logic | Code patterns, implementation details, algorithms |
+| performance | 性能, performance, optimize, bottleneck, 优化, speed | Bottlenecks, optimization opportunities, resource usage |
+| security | 安全, security, auth, permission, 权限, vulnerability | Vulnerabilities, authentication, access control |
+| concept | 概念, concept, theory, principle, 原理, understand | Foundational ideas, principles, theory |
+| comparison | 比较, compare, vs, difference, 区别, versus | Comparing solutions, evaluating alternatives |
+| decision | 决策, decision, choice, tradeoff, 选择, trade-off | Trade-offs, impact analysis, decision rationale |
+
+## Analysis Perspectives
+
+Optional multi-perspective analysis (single perspective is default, max 4):
+
+| Perspective | Focus | Best For |
+|------------|-------|----------|
+| **Technical** | Implementation patterns, code structure, technical feasibility | Understanding how and technical details |
+| **Architectural** | System design, scalability, component interactions | Understanding structure and organization |
+| **Security** | Security patterns, vulnerabilities, access control | Identifying security risks |
+| **Performance** | Bottlenecks, optimization, resource utilization | Finding performance issues |
+
+**Selection**: User can multi-select up to 4 perspectives in Phase 1, or default to single comprehensive view.
+
+### Analysis Depth Levels
+
+| Depth | Scope | Description |
+|-------|-------|-------------|
+| Quick | Surface level understanding | Fast overview, minimal exploration |
+| Standard | Moderate depth with good coverage | Balanced analysis (default) |
+| Deep | Comprehensive detailed analysis | Thorough multi-round investigation |
+
+## Dimension-Direction Mapping
+
+When user selects focus areas, generate directions dynamically from detected dimensions:
+
+| Dimension | Possible Directions |
+|-----------|-------------------|
+| architecture | System Design, Component Interactions, Technology Choices, Integration Points, Design Patterns, Scalability Strategy |
+| implementation | Code Structure, Implementation Details, Code Patterns, Error Handling, Testing Approach, Algorithm Analysis |
+| performance | Performance Bottlenecks, Optimization Opportunities, Resource Utilization, Caching Strategy, Concurrency Issues |
+| security | Security Vulnerabilities, Authentication/Authorization, Access Control, Data Protection, Input Validation |
+| concept | Conceptual Foundation, Core Mechanisms, Fundamental Patterns, Theory & Principles, Trade-offs & Reasoning |
+| comparison | Solution Comparison, Pros & Cons Analysis, Technology Evaluation, Approach Differences |
+| decision | Decision Criteria, Trade-off Analysis, Risk Assessment, Impact Analysis, Implementation Implications |
+
+**Implementation**: Present 2-3 top dimension-related directions, allow user to multi-select and add custom directions.
+
+## Consolidation Rules
+
+When updating "Current Understanding" in discussion.md:
+
+| Rule | Description |
+|------|-------------|
+| Promote confirmed insights | Move validated findings to "What We Established" |
+| Track corrections | Keep important wrong→right transformations |
+| Focus on current state | What do we know NOW, not the journey |
+| Avoid timeline repetition | Don't copy discussion details into consolidated section |
+| Preserve key learnings | Keep insights valuable for future reference |
+
+**Example**:
+
+Bad (cluttered):
+```markdown
+## Current Understanding
+In round 1 we discussed X, then in round 2 user said Y...
+```
+
+Good (consolidated):
+```markdown
+## Current Understanding
+
+### What We Established
+- The authentication flow uses JWT with refresh tokens
+- Rate limiting is implemented at API gateway level
+
+### What Was Clarified
+- ~~Assumed Redis for sessions~~ → Actually uses database-backed sessions
+
+### Key Insights
+- Current architecture supports horizontal scaling
+```
+
+## Templates
+
+### discussion.md Structure
+
+The discussion.md file evolves through the analysis:
+
+- **Header**: Session ID, topic, start time, identified dimensions
+- **Analysis Context**: Focus areas, perspectives, depth level
+- **Initial Questions**: Key questions to guide the analysis
+- **Initial Decisions**: Why these dimensions and focus areas were selected
+- **Discussion Timeline**: Round-by-round findings with narrative synthesis
+  - Round 1: Initial Understanding + Exploration Results + **Initial Decision Log** + **Narrative Synthesis**
+  - Round 2-N: Current Understanding Summary + User feedback + direction adjustments + new insights + **Decision Log** + **Key Findings** + **Narrative Synthesis**
+- **Decision Trail**: Consolidated critical decisions across all rounds
+- **Synthesis & Conclusions**: Summary, key conclusions, recommendations
+- **Current Understanding (Final)**: Consolidated insights
+- **Session Statistics**: Rounds completed, findings count, artifacts generated, decision count
+
+### Round Documentation Pattern
+
+Each discussion round follows a consistent structure:
+
+```markdown
+### Round N - [Deepen|Adjust|Suggest|Q&A] (timestamp)
+
+#### User Input
+What the user indicated they wanted to focus on
+
+#### Decision Log
+> **Decision**: [Description of direction/scope/approach decision made this round]
+> - **Context**: [What triggered this decision]
+> - **Options considered**: [Alternatives evaluated]
+> - **Chosen**: [Selected approach] — **Reason**: [Rationale]
+> - **Rejected**: [Why other options were discarded]
+> - **Impact**: [Effect on analysis direction/conclusions]
+
+#### Key Findings
+> **Finding**: [Content]
+> - **Confidence**: [High/Medium/Low] — **Why**: [Evidence basis]
+> - **Hypothesis Impact**: [Confirms/Refutes/Modifies] hypothesis "[name]"
+> - **Scope**: [What areas this affects]
+
+#### Analysis Results
+Detailed findings from this round's analysis
+- Finding 1 (evidence: file:line)
+- Finding 2 (evidence: file:line)
+
+#### Corrected Assumptions
+- ~~Previous assumption~~ → Corrected understanding
+  - Reason: Why the assumption was wrong
+
+#### Open Items
+Remaining questions or areas for investigation
+
+#### Narrative Synthesis
+**起点**: 基于上一轮的 [conclusions/questions]，本轮从 [starting point] 切入。
+**关键进展**: [New findings] [confirmed/refuted/modified] 了之前关于 [hypothesis] 的理解。
+**决策影响**: 用户选择 [feedback type]，导致分析方向 [adjusted/deepened/maintained]。
+**当前理解**: 经过本轮，核心认知更新为 [updated understanding]。
+**遗留问题**: [remaining questions driving next round]
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Situation | Action | Recovery |
+|-----------|--------|----------|
+| No codebase detected | Normal flow, pure topic analysis | Proceed without exploration-codebase.json |
+| Codebase search fails | Continue with available context | Note limitation in discussion.md |
+| No relevant findings | Broaden search keywords | Ask user for clarification |
+| User timeout in discussion | Save state, show resume command | Use `--continue` to resume |
+| Max rounds reached (5) | Force synthesis phase | Highlight remaining questions in conclusions |
+| Session folder conflict | Append timestamp suffix | Create unique folder and continue |
+| Plan generation: no recommendations | No plan to generate | Inform user, suggest lite-plan |
+
+## Best Practices
+
+### Core Principles
+
+1. **No code modifications**: This skill is strictly read-only and plan-only. Phase 5 generates plan checklists in `discussion.md` but does NOT modify source code. Use `$csv-wave-pipeline` for execution.
+
+### Before Starting Analysis
+
+1. **Clear Topic Definition**: Detailed topics lead to better dimension identification
+2. **User Context**: Understanding focus preferences helps scope the analysis
+3. **Perspective Selection**: Choose 2-4 perspectives for complex topics, single for focused queries
+4. **Scope Understanding**: Being clear about depth expectations sets correct analysis intensity
+
+### During Analysis
+
+1. **Review Findings**: Check exploration results before proceeding to discussion
+2. **Document Assumptions**: Track what you think is true for correction later
+3. **Use Continue Mode**: Resume sessions to build on previous findings rather than starting over
+4. **Embrace Corrections**: Track wrong→right transformations as valuable learnings
+5. **Iterate Thoughtfully**: Each discussion round should meaningfully refine understanding
+6. **Record Decisions Immediately**: Never defer recording — capture decisions as they happen using the Decision Record format. A decision not recorded in-the-moment is a decision lost
+
+### Documentation Practices
+
+1. **Evidence-Based**: Every conclusion should reference specific code or patterns
+2. **Confidence Levels**: Indicate confidence (high/medium/low) for conclusions
+3. **Timeline Clarity**: Use clear timestamps for traceability
+4. **Evolution Tracking**: Document how understanding changed across rounds
+5. **Action Items**: Generate specific, actionable recommendations
+6. **Multi-Perspective Synthesis**: When using multiple perspectives, document convergent/conflicting themes
+7. **Link Decisions to Outcomes**: When writing conclusions, explicitly reference which decisions led to which outcomes — this creates an auditable trail from initial scoping to final recommendations
+
+## When to Use
+
+**Use analyze-with-file when:**
+- Exploring complex topics collaboratively with documented trail
+- Need multi-round iterative refinement of understanding
+- Decision-making requires exploring multiple perspectives
+- Building shared understanding before implementation
+- Want to document how understanding evolved
+
+**Use Plan Generation (Phase 5) when:**
+- Analysis conclusions contain clear, actionable recommendations
+- Simple: 1-2 items → inline plan checklist in discussion.md
+- Complex: 3+ recommendations → detailed plan checklist
+- **Then execute via**: `$csv-wave-pipeline` for wave-based batch execution
+
+**Consider alternatives when:**
+- Specific bug diagnosis needed → use `debug-with-file`
+- Generating new ideas/solutions → use `brainstorm-with-file`
+- Complex planning with parallel perspectives → use `collaborative-plan-with-file`
+- Ready to implement → use `lite-plan`
+- Requirement decomposition needed → use `req-plan-with-file`
+
+---
+
+**Now execute the analyze-with-file workflow for topic**: $TOPIC