claude-code-workflow 7.2.15 → 7.2.16

package/.codex/skills/team-arch-opt/schemas/tasks-schema.md

@@ -1,174 +0,0 @@
-# Team Architecture Optimization -- CSV Schema
-
-## Master CSV: tasks.csv
-
-### Column Definitions
-
-#### Input Columns (Set by Decomposer)
-
-| Column | Type | Required | Description | Example |
-|--------|------|----------|-------------|---------|
-| `id` | string | Yes | Unique task identifier (PREFIX-NNN) | `"ANALYZE-001"` |
-| `title` | string | Yes | Short task title | `"Analyze architecture"` |
-| `description` | string | Yes | Detailed task description (self-contained) with goal, inputs, outputs, success criteria | `"Analyze codebase architecture..."` |
-| `role` | enum | Yes | Worker role: `analyzer`, `designer`, `refactorer`, `validator`, `reviewer` | `"analyzer"` |
-| `issue_type` | string | No | Architecture issue category: CYCLE, COUPLING, COHESION, GOD_CLASS, DUPLICATION, LAYER_VIOLATION, DEAD_CODE, API_BLOAT | `"CYCLE"` |
-| `priority` | enum | No | P0 (Critical), P1 (High), P2 (Medium), P3 (Low) | `"P0"` |
-| `target_files` | string | No | Semicolon-separated file paths to focus on | `"src/auth/index.ts;src/user/index.ts"` |
-| `deps` | string | No | Semicolon-separated dependency task IDs | `"ANALYZE-001"` |
-| `context_from` | string | No | Semicolon-separated task IDs for context | `"ANALYZE-001"` |
-| `exec_mode` | enum | Yes | Execution mechanism: `csv-wave` or `interactive` | `"csv-wave"` |
-
-#### Computed Columns (Set by Wave Engine)
-
-| Column | Type | Description | Example |
-|--------|------|-------------|---------|
-| `wave` | integer | Wave number (1-based, from topological sort) | `2` |
-| `prev_context` | string | Aggregated findings from context_from tasks (per-wave CSV only) | `"[ANALYZE-001] Found 5 architecture issues..."` |
-
-#### Output Columns (Set by Agent)
-
-| Column | Type | Description | Example |
-|--------|------|-------------|---------|
-| `status` | enum | `pending` -> `completed` / `failed` / `skipped` | `"completed"` |
-| `findings` | string | Key discoveries (max 500 chars) | `"Found 3 circular deps, 2 God Classes..."` |
-| `verdict` | string | Validation/review verdict: PASS, WARN, FAIL, APPROVE, REVISE, REJECT | `"PASS"` |
-| `artifacts_produced` | string | Semicolon-separated paths of produced artifacts | `"artifacts/architecture-report.md"` |
-| `error` | string | Error message if failed | `""` |
-
----
-
-### exec_mode Values
-
-| Value | Mechanism | Description |
-|-------|-----------|-------------|
-| `csv-wave` | `spawn_agents_on_csv` | One-shot batch execution within wave |
-| `interactive` | `spawn_agent`/`wait`/`send_input`/`close_agent` | Multi-round individual execution |
-
-Interactive tasks appear in master CSV for dependency tracking but are NOT included in wave-{N}.csv files.
-
----
-
-### Role Prefix Mapping
-
-| Role | Prefix | Stage | Responsibility |
-|------|--------|-------|----------------|
-| analyzer | ANALYZE | 1 | Architecture analysis, baseline metrics, issue identification |
-| designer | DESIGN | 2 | Refactoring plan design, strategy selection, prioritization |
-| refactorer | REFACTOR / FIX | 3 | Code implementation, refactoring application, targeted fixes |
-| validator | VALIDATE | 4 | Build checks, test suite, metric validation, API compatibility |
-| reviewer | REVIEW | 4 | Code review for correctness, patterns, completeness, safety |
-
----
-
-### Example Data
-
-```csv
-id,title,description,role,issue_type,priority,target_files,deps,context_from,exec_mode,wave,status,findings,verdict,artifacts_produced,error
-"ANALYZE-001","Analyze architecture","PURPOSE: Analyze codebase architecture to identify structural issues\nTASK:\n- Build import graph, detect circular deps\n- Identify God Classes (>500 LOC, >10 methods)\n- Calculate coupling/cohesion metrics\n- Detect dead code and dead exports\nINPUT: Codebase under target scope\nOUTPUT: artifacts/architecture-baseline.json + artifacts/architecture-report.md\nSUCCESS: Ranked issue list with severity, baseline metrics collected\nSESSION: .workflow/.csv-wave/tao-example-20260308","analyzer","","","","","","csv-wave","1","pending","","","",""
-"DESIGN-001","Design refactoring plan","PURPOSE: Design prioritized refactoring plan from architecture report\nTASK:\n- For each issue, select refactoring strategy\n- Prioritize by impact/effort ratio (P0-P3)\n- Define measurable success criteria per refactoring\n- Assign unique REFACTOR-IDs with non-overlapping file targets\nINPUT: artifacts/architecture-report.md + artifacts/architecture-baseline.json\nOUTPUT: artifacts/refactoring-plan.md\nSUCCESS: Prioritized plan with self-contained REFACTOR blocks\nSESSION: .workflow/.csv-wave/tao-example-20260308","designer","","","","ANALYZE-001","ANALYZE-001","csv-wave","2","pending","","","",""
-"REFACTOR-001","Implement refactorings","PURPOSE: Implement architecture refactoring changes per plan\nTASK:\n- Apply refactorings in priority order (P0 first)\n- Update all import references when moving/renaming\n- Update all test files referencing moved symbols\n- Preserve existing behavior\nINPUT: artifacts/refactoring-plan.md\nOUTPUT: Modified source files\nSUCCESS: All planned structural changes applied, no dangling imports\nSESSION: .workflow/.csv-wave/tao-example-20260308","refactorer","","","","DESIGN-001","DESIGN-001","csv-wave","3","pending","","","",""
-"VALIDATE-001","Validate refactoring","PURPOSE: Validate refactoring improves architecture without breaking functionality\nTASK:\n- Build check: zero new compilation errors\n- Test suite: all previously passing tests still pass\n- Metrics: coupling improved or neutral, no new cycles\n- API: public signatures preserved\nINPUT: artifacts/architecture-baseline.json + artifacts/refactoring-plan.md\nOUTPUT: artifacts/validation-results.json\nSUCCESS: All dimensions PASS\nSESSION: .workflow/.csv-wave/tao-example-20260308","validator","","","","REFACTOR-001","REFACTOR-001","csv-wave","4","pending","","","",""
-"REVIEW-001","Review refactoring code","PURPOSE: Review refactoring changes for correctness and quality\nTASK:\n- Correctness: no behavior changes, all references updated\n- Pattern consistency: follows existing conventions\n- Completeness: imports, tests, configs all updated\n- Migration safety: no dangling refs, backward compatible\n- Best practices: SOLID principles, appropriate abstraction\nINPUT: artifacts/refactoring-plan.md + changed files\nOUTPUT: artifacts/review-report.md\nSUCCESS: APPROVE verdict (no Critical/High findings)\nSESSION: .workflow/.csv-wave/tao-example-20260308","reviewer","","","","REFACTOR-001","REFACTOR-001","csv-wave","4","pending","","","",""
-```
-
----
-
-### Column Lifecycle
-
-```
-Decomposer (Phase 1)     Wave Engine (Phase 2)    Agent (Execution)
----------------------    --------------------     -----------------
-id          ---------->  id          ---------->  id
-title       ---------->  title       ---------->  (reads)
-description ---------->  description ---------->  (reads)
-role        ---------->  role        ---------->  (reads)
-issue_type  ---------->  issue_type  ---------->  (reads)
-priority    ---------->  priority    ---------->  (reads)
-target_files---------->  target_files---------->  (reads)
-deps        ---------->  deps        ---------->  (reads)
-context_from---------->  context_from---------->  (reads)
-exec_mode   ---------->  exec_mode   ---------->  (reads)
-                         wave         ---------->  (reads)
-                         prev_context ---------->  (reads)
-                                                   status
-                                                   findings
-                                                   verdict
-                                                   artifacts_produced
-                                                   error
-```
-
----
-
-## Output Schema (JSON)
-
-Agent output via `report_agent_job_result` (csv-wave tasks):
-
-```json
-{
-  "id": "ANALYZE-001",
-  "status": "completed",
-  "findings": "Found 5 architecture issues: 2 circular deps (auth<->user, service<->repo), 1 God Class (UserManager 850 LOC), 1 dead code cluster (src/legacy/), 1 API bloat (utils/ exports 45 symbols, 12 unused).",
-  "verdict": "",
-  "artifacts_produced": "artifacts/architecture-baseline.json;artifacts/architecture-report.md",
-  "error": ""
-}
-```
-
-Interactive tasks output via structured text or JSON written to `interactive/{id}-result.json`.
-
----
-
-## Discovery Types
-
-| Type | Dedup Key | Data Schema | Description |
-|------|-----------|-------------|-------------|
-| `cycle_found` | `data.modules` (sorted) | `{modules, depth, description}` | Circular dependency detected |
-| `god_class_found` | `data.file` | `{file, loc, methods, description}` | God Class/Module identified |
-| `coupling_issue` | `data.module` | `{module, fan_in, fan_out, description}` | High coupling detected |
-| `dead_code_found` | `data.file+data.type` | `{file, type, description}` | Dead code or dead export |
-| `layer_violation` | `data.from+data.to` | `{from, to, description}` | Layering violation detected |
-| `file_modified` | `data.file` | `{file, change, lines_added}` | File change recorded |
-| `pattern_found` | `data.pattern_name+data.location` | `{pattern_name, location, description}` | Code pattern identified |
-| `metric_measured` | `data.metric+data.module` | `{metric, value, unit, module}` | Architecture metric measured |
-| `artifact_produced` | `data.path` | `{name, path, producer, type}` | Deliverable created |
-
-### Discovery NDJSON Format
-
-```jsonl
-{"ts":"2026-03-08T10:00:00Z","worker":"ANALYZE-001","type":"cycle_found","data":{"modules":["auth","user"],"depth":2,"description":"Circular dependency: auth imports user, user imports auth"}}
-{"ts":"2026-03-08T10:01:00Z","worker":"ANALYZE-001","type":"god_class_found","data":{"file":"src/services/UserManager.ts","loc":850,"methods":15,"description":"UserManager handles auth, profile, permissions, notifications"}}
-{"ts":"2026-03-08T10:05:00Z","worker":"ANALYZE-001","type":"metric_measured","data":{"metric":"coupling_score","value":0.72,"unit":"normalized","module":"src/auth/"}}
-{"ts":"2026-03-08T10:20:00Z","worker":"REFACTOR-001","type":"file_modified","data":{"file":"src/auth/index.ts","change":"Extracted IAuthService interface to break cycle","lines_added":25}}
-{"ts":"2026-03-08T10:25:00Z","worker":"REFACTOR-001","type":"artifact_produced","data":{"name":"refactoring-summary","path":"artifacts/refactoring-plan.md","producer":"designer","type":"markdown"}}
-```
-
-> Both csv-wave and interactive agents read/write the same discoveries.ndjson file.
-
----
-
-## Cross-Mechanism Context Flow
-
-| Source | Target | Mechanism |
-|--------|--------|-----------|
-| CSV task findings | Interactive task | Injected via spawn message or send_input |
-| Interactive task result | CSV task prev_context | Read from interactive/{id}-result.json |
-| Any agent discovery | Any agent | Shared via discoveries.ndjson |
-
----
-
-## Validation Rules
-
-| Rule | Check | Error |
-|------|-------|-------|
-| Unique IDs | No duplicate `id` values | "Duplicate task ID: {id}" |
-| Valid deps | All dep IDs exist in tasks | "Unknown dependency: {dep_id}" |
-| No self-deps | Task cannot depend on itself | "Self-dependency: {id}" |
-| No circular deps | Topological sort completes | "Circular dependency detected involving: {ids}" |
-| context_from valid | All context IDs exist and in earlier waves | "Invalid context_from: {id}" |
-| exec_mode valid | Value is `csv-wave` or `interactive` | "Invalid exec_mode: {value}" |
-| Description non-empty | Every task has description | "Empty description for task: {id}" |
-| Status enum | status in {pending, completed, failed, skipped} | "Invalid status: {status}" |
-| Role valid | role in {analyzer, designer, refactorer, validator, reviewer} | "Invalid role: {role}" |
-| Verdict enum | verdict in {PASS, WARN, FAIL, APPROVE, REVISE, REJECT, ""} | "Invalid verdict: {verdict}" |
-| Cross-mechanism deps | Interactive to CSV deps resolve correctly | "Cross-mechanism dependency unresolvable: {id}" |

package/.codex/skills/team-brainstorm/agents/gc-controller.md

@@ -1,122 +0,0 @@
-# GC Controller Agent
-
-Evaluate Generator-Critic loop severity and decide whether to trigger revision or converge to synthesis.
-
-## Identity
-
-- **Type**: `interactive`
-- **Responsibility**: GC loop decision making
-
-## Boundaries
-
-### MUST
-
-- Load role definition via MANDATORY FIRST STEPS pattern
-- Read the latest critique file to assess severity
-- Make a binary decision: REVISION or CONVERGE
-- Respect max GC round limits
-- Produce structured output following template
-
-### MUST NOT
-
-- Generate ideas or perform critique (delegate to csv-wave agents)
-- Exceed 1 decision per invocation
-- Ignore the max round constraint
-
----
-
-## Toolbox
-
-### Available Tools
-
-| Tool | Type | Purpose |
-|------|------|---------|
-| `Read` | builtin | Load critique artifacts and session state |
-| `Glob` | builtin | Find critique files in session directory |
-
----
-
-## Execution
-
-### Phase 1: Context Loading
-
-**Objective**: Load critique results and GC round state
-
-**Input**:
-
-| Source | Required | Description |
-|--------|----------|-------------|
-| Session folder | Yes | Path to session directory |
-| GC Round | Yes | Current GC round number |
-| Max GC Rounds | Yes | Maximum allowed rounds (default: 2) |
-
-**Steps**:
-
-1. Read the session's discoveries.ndjson for critique entries
-2. Parse prev_context for the challenger's findings
-3. Extract severity counts from the challenger's severity_summary
-4. Load current gc_round from spawn message
-
-**Output**: Severity counts and round state loaded
-
----
-
-### Phase 2: Decision Making
-
-**Objective**: Determine whether to trigger revision or converge
-
-**Input**:
-
-| Source | Required | Description |
-|--------|----------|-------------|
-| Severity counts | Yes | CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW counts |
-| GC round | Yes | Current round number |
-| Max rounds | Yes | Maximum allowed rounds |
-
-**Steps**:
-
-1. Check severity threshold:
-
-| Condition | Decision |
-|-----------|----------|
-| gc_round >= max_rounds | CONVERGE (force, regardless of severity) |
-| CRITICAL count > 0 | REVISION (if rounds remain) |
-| HIGH count > 0 | REVISION (if rounds remain) |
-| All MEDIUM or lower | CONVERGE |
-
-2. Log the decision rationale
-
-**Output**: Decision string "REVISION" or "CONVERGE"
-
----
-
-## Structured Output Template
-
-```
-## Summary
-- GC Round: <current>/<max>
-- Decision: REVISION | CONVERGE
-
-## Severity Assessment
-- CRITICAL: <count>
-- HIGH: <count>
-- MEDIUM: <count>
-- LOW: <count>
-
-## Rationale
-- <1-2 sentence explanation of decision>
-
-## Next Action
-- REVISION: Ideator should address HIGH/CRITICAL challenges in next round
-- CONVERGE: Proceed to synthesis phase, skip remaining revision tasks
-```
-
----
-
-## Error Handling
-
-| Scenario | Resolution |
-|----------|------------|
-| No critique data found | Default to CONVERGE (no evidence for revision) |
-| Severity parsing fails | Default to CONVERGE with warning |
-| Timeout approaching | Output current decision immediately |

package/.codex/skills/team-brainstorm/agents/topic-clarifier.md

@@ -1,126 +0,0 @@
-# Topic Clarifier Agent
-
-Assess brainstorming topic complexity, recommend pipeline mode, and suggest divergence angles.
-
-## Identity
-
-- **Type**: `interactive`
-- **Responsibility**: Topic analysis and pipeline selection
-
-## Boundaries
-
-### MUST
-
-- Load role definition via MANDATORY FIRST STEPS pattern
-- Perform text-level analysis only (no source code reading)
-- Produce structured output with pipeline recommendation
-- Suggest meaningful divergence angles for ideation
-
-### MUST NOT
-
-- Read source code or explore codebase
-- Generate ideas (that is the ideator's job)
-- Make final pipeline decisions (orchestrator confirms with user)
-
----
-
-## Toolbox
-
-### Available Tools
-
-| Tool | Type | Purpose |
-|------|------|---------|
-| `Read` | builtin | Load project context if available |
-
----
-
-## Execution
-
-### Phase 1: Signal Detection
-
-**Objective**: Analyze topic keywords for complexity signals
-
-**Input**:
-
-| Source | Required | Description |
-|--------|----------|-------------|
-| Topic text | Yes | The brainstorming topic from user |
-
-**Steps**:
-
-1. Scan topic for complexity signals:
-
-| Signal | Weight | Keywords |
-|--------|--------|----------|
-| Strategic/systemic | +3 | strategy, architecture, system, framework, paradigm |
-| Multi-dimensional | +2 | multiple, compare, tradeoff, versus, alternative |
-| Innovation-focused | +2 | innovative, creative, novel, breakthrough |
-| Simple/basic | -2 | simple, quick, straightforward, basic |
-
-2. Calculate complexity score
-
-**Output**: Complexity score and matched signals
-
----
-
-### Phase 2: Pipeline Recommendation
-
-**Objective**: Map complexity to pipeline mode and suggest angles
-
-**Steps**:
-
-1. Map score to pipeline:
-
-| Score | Complexity | Pipeline |
-|-------|------------|----------|
-| >= 4 | High | full (3x parallel ideation + GC + evaluation) |
-| 2-3 | Medium | deep (serial with GC loop + evaluation) |
-| 0-1 | Low | quick (generate → challenge → synthesize) |
-
-2. Identify divergence angles from topic context:
-   - **Technical**: Implementation approaches, architecture patterns
-   - **Product**: User experience, market fit, value proposition
-   - **Innovation**: Novel approaches, emerging tech, disruption potential
-   - **Risk**: Failure modes, mitigation strategies, worst cases
-   - **Business**: Cost, ROI, competitive advantage
-   - **Organizational**: Team structure, process, culture
-
-3. Select 3-4 most relevant angles based on topic keywords
-
-**Output**: Pipeline mode, angles, complexity rationale
-
----
-
-## Structured Output Template
-
-```
-## Summary
-- Topic: <topic>
-- Complexity Score: <score> (<level>)
-- Recommended Pipeline: <quick|deep|full>
-
-## Signal Detection
-- Matched signals: <list of matched signals with weights>
-
-## Suggested Angles
-1. <Angle 1>: <why relevant>
-2. <Angle 2>: <why relevant>
-3. <Angle 3>: <why relevant>
-
-## Pipeline Details
-- <pipeline>: <brief description of what this pipeline does>
-- Expected tasks: <count>
-- Parallel ideation: <yes/no>
-- GC rounds: <0/1/2>
-- Evaluation: <yes/no>
-```
-
----
-
-## Error Handling
-
-| Scenario | Resolution |
-|----------|------------|
-| Topic too vague | Suggest clarifying questions in output |
-| No signal matches | Default to "deep" pipeline with general angles |
-| Timeout approaching | Output current analysis with "PARTIAL" status |

package/.codex/skills/team-brainstorm/instructions/agent-instruction.md

@@ -1,105 +0,0 @@
-## TASK ASSIGNMENT
-
-### MANDATORY FIRST STEPS
-1. Read shared discoveries: .workflow/.csv-wave/{session-id}/discoveries.ndjson (if exists, skip if not)
-2. Read project context: .workflow/project-tech.json (if exists)
-
----
-
-## Your Task
-
-**Task ID**: {id}
-**Title**: {title}
-**Role**: {role}
-**Description**: {description}
-**Angle(s)**: {angle}
-**GC Round**: {gc_round}
-
-### Previous Tasks' Findings (Context)
-{prev_context}
-
----
-
-## Execution Protocol
-
-1. **Read discoveries**: Load shared discoveries from the session's discoveries.ndjson for cross-task context
-2. **Use context**: Apply previous tasks' findings from prev_context above
-3. **Execute by role**:
-
-### Role: ideator (IDEA-* tasks)
-- **Initial Generation** (gc_round = 0):
-  - For each angle listed in the Angle(s) field, generate 3+ ideas
-  - Each idea must include: title, description (2-3 sentences), key assumption, potential impact, implementation hint
-  - Self-review: ensure >= 6 ideas total, no duplicates, all angles covered
-- **GC Revision** (gc_round > 0):
-  - Read critique findings from prev_context
-  - Focus on HIGH/CRITICAL severity challenges
-  - Retain unchallenged ideas intact
-  - Revise challenged ideas with revision rationale
-  - Replace unsalvageable ideas with new alternatives
-
-### Role: challenger (CHALLENGE-* tasks)
-- Read all idea findings from prev_context
-- Challenge each idea across 4 dimensions:
-  - **Assumption Validity**: Does the core assumption hold? Counter-examples?
-  - **Feasibility**: Technical/resource/time feasibility?
-  - **Risk Assessment**: Worst case scenario? Hidden risks?
-  - **Competitive Analysis**: Better alternatives already exist?
-- Assign severity per idea: CRITICAL / HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW
-- Determine GC signal:
-  - Any CRITICAL or HIGH severity → `REVISION_NEEDED`
-  - All MEDIUM or lower → `CONVERGED`
-
-### Role: synthesizer (SYNTH-* tasks)
-- Read all idea and critique findings from prev_context
-- Execute synthesis steps:
-  1. **Theme Extraction**: Identify common themes, rate strength (1-10), list supporting ideas
-  2. **Conflict Resolution**: Identify contradictions, determine resolution approach
-  3. **Complementary Grouping**: Group complementary ideas together
-  4. **Gap Identification**: Discover uncovered perspectives
-  5. **Integrated Proposals**: Generate 1-3 consolidated proposals with feasibility score (1-10) and innovation score (1-10)
-
-### Role: evaluator (EVAL-* tasks)
-- Read synthesis findings from prev_context
-- Score each proposal across 4 weighted dimensions:
-  - Feasibility (30%): Technical feasibility, resource needs, timeline
-  - Innovation (25%): Novelty, differentiation, breakthrough potential
-  - Impact (25%): Scope of impact, value creation, problem resolution
-  - Cost Efficiency (20%): Implementation cost, risk cost, opportunity cost
-- Weighted score = (Feasibility * 0.30) + (Innovation * 0.25) + (Impact * 0.25) + (Cost * 0.20)
-- Provide recommendation per proposal: Strong Recommend / Recommend / Consider / Pass
-- Generate final ranking
-
-4. **Share discoveries**: Append exploration findings to shared board:
-   ```bash
-   echo '{"ts":"<ISO8601>","worker":"{id}","type":"<type>","data":{...}}' >> .workflow/.csv-wave/{session-id}/discoveries.ndjson
-   ```
-
-   Discovery types to share:
-   - `idea`: {title, angle, description, assumption, impact} — generated idea
-   - `critique`: {idea_title, dimension, severity, challenge, rationale} — critique finding
-   - `theme`: {name, strength, supporting_ideas[]} — extracted theme
-   - `proposal`: {title, source_ideas[], feasibility, innovation, description} — integrated proposal
-   - `evaluation`: {proposal_title, weighted_score, rank, recommendation} — scored proposal
-
-5. **Report result**: Return JSON via report_agent_job_result
-
----
-
-## Output (report_agent_job_result)
-
-Return JSON:
-{
-  "id": "{id}",
-  "status": "completed" | "failed",
-  "findings": "Key discoveries and implementation notes (max 500 chars)",
-  "gc_signal": "REVISION_NEEDED | CONVERGED | (empty for non-challenger roles)",
-  "severity_summary": "CRITICAL:N HIGH:N MEDIUM:N LOW:N (challenger only, empty for others)",
-  "error": ""
-}
-
-**Role-specific findings guidance**:
-- **ideator**: List idea count, angles covered, key themes. Example: "Generated 8 ideas across Technical, Product, Innovation. Top ideas: API Gateway, Event Sourcing, DevEx Platform."
-- **challenger**: Summarize severity counts and GC signal. Example: "Challenged 8 ideas. 2 HIGH (require revision), 3 MEDIUM, 3 LOW. GC signal: REVISION_NEEDED."
-- **synthesizer**: List proposal count and key themes. Example: "Synthesized 3 proposals from 5 themes. Top: Infrastructure Modernization (feasibility:8, innovation:7)."
-- **evaluator**: List ranking and top recommendation. Example: "Ranked 3 proposals. #1: Infrastructure Modernization (7.85) - Strong Recommend."