create-agdf 0.2.2 → 0.2.4

package/generated/.github/skills/agdf-release-or/SKILL.md

@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ It reports:
 Use `../agdf-runtime-contract.md` for Quality Contract output, Context Graph fields, gate terms, and non-duplication rules.
 
 OR-specific output must make gate status, delivered and intentionally not delivered content, missing approvals, missing evidence, risks, retained fallbacks, and the next permissible step visible.
+When `.agdf/control/` is present, persist or link the OR under `.agdf/control/artefacts/<key>/OR.md` and reference it from `AGDF_RUN.md` or `MASTER_BACKLOG.md` when it is steering-relevant.
 
 ## Rules
 1. OR is always allowed and mandatory for relevant runs.
@@ -77,15 +78,16 @@ If information is missing, state the gap instead of guessing.
 2. Determine report depth:
    - `OR-lite`: gate status, allowed/forbidden outputs, missing approval, next step
    - `OR-full`: also delivered artefacts, TP coverage, Brownfield fit, solution integrity, risks, fallbacks, QA/UAT status
-3. Record delivered vs intentionally not delivered content.
-4. Summarize TP coverage if a TP exists.
-5. Summarize Brownfield fit and solution integrity if reviewed.
-6. Summarize tests and verification.
-7. Summarize documentation and Context Graph impact if relevant.
-8. Name retained fallbacks and exit criteria.
-9. Set exactly one next permissible step.
-10. Set exactly one quality outlook.
-11. State whether `agdf-delivery-closeout` is the next operational handoff step when code changes exist and the delivery state allows it.
+3. Record the selected `Report mode` and durable OR target or link when `.agdf/control/` exists.
+4. Record delivered vs intentionally not delivered content.
+5. Summarize TP coverage if a TP exists.
+6. Summarize Brownfield fit and solution integrity if reviewed.
+7. Summarize tests and verification.
+8. Summarize documentation and Context Graph impact if relevant.
+9. Name retained fallbacks and exit criteria.
+10. Set exactly one next permissible step.
+11. Set exactly one quality outlook.
+12. State whether `agdf-delivery-closeout` is the next operational handoff step when code changes exist and the delivery state allows it.
 
 ## Output
 Use a compact structure:
@@ -93,6 +95,8 @@ Use a compact structure:
 ```text
 ## OR
 - gate:
+- report_mode:
+- artefact:
 - status:
 - delivered:
 - intentionally_not_delivered:

package/generated/.github/skills/agdf-runtime-contract.md

@@ -12,21 +12,54 @@ It is the operational reference for skill outputs, but it is not a second copy o
 
 Quick Task Mode must not become ritual gate overhead.
 Structured Delivery must not bypass missing approvals.
+New product semantics, functional change, user-visible behaviour, policy, persistence, architecture or release-critical work requires a durable UR in `.agdf/control/` or a linked authoritative repository SoT before later artefacts or implementation.
+UR, PRD, SD, TP and QA report approvals require durable artefacts or linked authoritative repository SoT entries before the next gate can open.
 
 ## Gate Rules
 
 - User gates: `UR -> PRD -> SD -> TP -> QA -> UAT`
-- Internal mandatory steps: `Brownfield Analysis -> CD+Tests -> CR -> OR`
+- Internal mandatory steps: `Brownfield Review -> Mode/Slice Decision -> Brownfield Analysis -> CD+Tests -> CR -> OR`
 - Exact approval formula: `Approval: <GateName>`
 - Legacy alias: `Freigabe: <GateName>` may be accepted when reviewing older German runs, but all new outputs must use `Approval: <GateName>`.
-- Implicit consent is not approval.
+- Implicit consent is not approval. Phrases such as "ok", "go ahead", "do it", "approved", "continue", "leg los" or "looks good" are work intent, not gate approval.
 - The earliest blocking gate wins.
+- For UR, PRD, SD, TP and QA, approval and durable artefact presence are separate requirements. A gate is not satisfied by approval text alone when its artefact is missing from `.agdf/control/` or not linked to the authoritative repository SoT.
+- Approval of one user gate permits work on the next allowed gate artefact or required internal step only. It does not permit implementation unless the approved gate is `TP` and required internal implementation prerequisites are satisfied.
+- Gates must never be skipped or inferred from urgency, tone, chat history, task wording or an instruction to "start". The next allowed action is always the next unsatisfied gate or internal mandatory step.
+- `Approval: UR` permits Brownfield Review after G-00 first, then a Mode/Slice Decision. It never permits implementation by itself.
+- PRD, SD and TP depth is chosen after Brownfield Review through the Mode/Slice Decision, not before existing-system impact is understood.
+- `Approval: PRD` permits Solution Design drafting, not implementation.
+- `Approval: SD` permits Task/Test Plan drafting, not implementation.
+- `Approval: TP` permits implementation-preparation Brownfield Analysis and then CD+Tests when Brownfield evidence supports it.
 - `CD+Tests` is implementation and test status only, not a delivery signal.
 - `agdf-code-review` standardizes the mandatory `CR` step, but does not replace QA.
 - `agdf-qa-gate` decides final `pass | revise | block`.
 - `agdf-release-or` reports the run, but does not replace QA or produce the operative commit/PR handoff.
 - `agdf-delivery-closeout` owns the operative Git handoff text when QA/OR/UAT state allows it.
 
+## Brownfield Review After G-00
+
+After an approved and durable UR, perform a lightweight `Brownfield Review` before PRD when Brownfield, UI, UX, admin, runtime, policy, persistence, architecture, ownership or source-of-truth impact is possible.
+
+This review is not a new user approval gate, not PRD, not SD, not TP and not implementation permission.
+It is the sizing and routing step that decides how much later gate discipline is actually needed.
+
+Its output is limited to:
+
+- workstream or follow-up-slice classification
+- `Mode/Slice Decision`: `quick_task | structured_slice | structured_delivery | block`
+- affected existing owners, source-of-truth artefacts, contracts, policies, runtime paths or tests
+- reuse-before-create risks and parallel-structure risks
+- open questions that PRD or SD must resolve
+- whether implementation-preparation Brownfield Analysis will also be needed after TP
+
+Mode/Slice Decision rules:
+
+- `quick_task`: use only when Brownfield Review shows a narrow local change, no new product semantics beyond the approved UR, no architecture/policy/persistence/contract expansion, and evidence is sufficient to proceed with a small implementation plus relevant checks.
+- `structured_slice`: use when some formal artefacts are needed, but they can stay intentionally small and scoped to the approved slice.
+- `structured_delivery`: use when the change has broad product, architecture, runtime, policy, persistence, release or cross-owner impact.
+- `block`: use when ownership, SoT, impact, evidence or product direction is not clear enough to choose a safe path.
+
 ## Quality Contract Output
 
 Structured Delivery skills use this shape when relevant:
@@ -63,9 +96,34 @@ When a repository needs durable AGDF state, use the plugin-local `control/` scaf
 - `SOT_REGISTRY.md` prevents parallel sources of truth.
 - `CONTEXT_GRAPH.md` stores durable Brownfield findings, decisions, risks, evidence and exit criteria.
 - `AGENT_QUALITY_CONTRACTS.json` stores reusable block, revise and warning conditions.
+- OR reports live under `.agdf/control/artefacts/<key>/OR.md` when a run closeout is steering-relevant or should be auditable beyond the chat.
 
 The scaffold is not a second documentation site. Link to authoritative artefacts instead of copying them.
 
+## Native Runtime
+
+AGDF must work natively through the plugin router, skills and live `.agdf/control/` artefacts.
+Agents should read the live control state and apply the gate model directly before reaching for helper commands.
+
+Machine-readable commands such as `doctor --json`, `gate-check --json` and `delivery-map --json` are validators and automation interfaces.
+They make the repository state checkable, but they do not replace the native skill workflow or the durable control artefacts.
+
+## Delivery Map
+
+`delivery-map --json` is the machine-readable delivery picture for the active control state.
+It derives, but does not replace, the live `.agdf/control/AGDF_RUN.md` and `MASTER_BACKLOG.md` state.
+
+It must expose:
+
+- approved or active artefacts and approvals
+- `UR -> PRD -> SD -> TP -> QA_REPORT` relationships
+- evidence refs, missing evidence and declared risks
+- Context Graph impact and gate effect
+- findings that explain why the delivery picture is `pass | warn | revise | block`
+
+Missing relationship evidence in the Artefact Chain is at least `revise` once the related gate artefact is approved or passed.
+Declared missing evidence, declared risk or Context Graph gate effect may escalate the delivery map to `warn`, `revise` or `block`.
+
 ## Skill Output
 
 Every skill output should be as short as possible and as concrete as needed.

package/generated/AGENTS.md

@@ -29,17 +29,26 @@ Use Quick Task Mode for questions, small reviews, local debugging and narrow fix
 
 Use Structured Delivery Mode for new capabilities, architecture, policy, persistence, release-critical work, formal artefacts or explicit approvals.
 
+Any new product semantics, functional change or user-visible behaviour change requires a durable UR first.
+Persist it in `.agdf/control/` or link it from there to the target repository's authoritative source of truth before PRD, SD, TP, Brownfield Analysis or implementation.
+Treat approval text and durable artefact presence as separate checks for UR, PRD, SD, TP and QA report decisions.
+Do not infer approval from "ok", "go ahead", "do it", "approved", "continue", "leg los" or similar wording.
+Those phrases may express intent to proceed, but they do not unlock a gate unless the exact gate formula is present.
+After `Approval: UR`, run lightweight Brownfield Review before PRD when Brownfield, ownership, runtime, policy, persistence, architecture, UI or UX impact is possible.
+Brownfield Review must produce a Mode/Slice Decision: `quick_task`, `structured_slice`, `structured_delivery` or `block`.
+Do not assume the full PRD/SD/TP chain before that decision; use only as much gate depth as the reviewed change size justifies.
+
 Quick Task Mode must still cite evidence and close with a concrete result.
 Structured Delivery Mode must respect gates, reviews and closeout discipline.
 
 ## Skill Routing
 | Skill | Use For | Boundary |
 |---|---|---|
-| `agdf-brownfield-analysis` | after gate-check permits implementation preparation, before non-trivial changes in existing systems | clarifies reuse, owners and risks; never bypasses gate-check |
+| `agdf-brownfield-analysis` | after gate-check permits Brownfield Review or implementation preparation, before non-trivial changes in existing systems | clarifies reuse, owners, risks and Mode/Slice Decision; never bypasses gate-check; Brownfield Review is not implementation permission |
 | `agdf-clean-implementation-review` | inspect workarounds, fallbacks, parallel structures or symptom fixes | not a TP or QA substitute |
 | `agdf-code-review` | mandatory CR step after code changes, focused on defects, regression and security findings | does not replace TP review, clean review or QA |
 | `agdf-delivery-closeout` | commit/PR-near handoff after QA/OR/UAT | never performs VCS actions automatically |
-| `agdf-gate-check` | new build/change intent, unclear approval, Structured Delivery, later-gate artefact requested | does not create later artefacts |
+| `agdf-gate-check` | new build/change intent, unclear approval, Structured Delivery, later-gate artefact requested | does not create later artefacts or skip Mode/Slice Decision after Brownfield Review |
 | `agdf-qa-gate` | final QA decision | only instance for `pass | revise | block` |
 | `agdf-release-or` | auditable closeout for every relevant run | not a QA substitute |
 | `agdf-task-plan-review` | after implementation and before QA, verify TP coverage | no final QA decision |
@@ -47,6 +56,7 @@ Structured Delivery Mode must respect gates, reviews and closeout discipline.
 Select exactly one primary skill first.
 Add more only when they cover a distinct concrete risk dimension.
 Do not choose `agdf-brownfield-analysis` as the first primary skill for a fresh "I want to build/change X" prompt unless `agdf-gate-check` or existing live AGDF control state already makes implementation preparation the next allowed action.
+Never jump directly from `Approval: UR`, implicit consent, or a generic "start" request to implementation. Route to Brownfield Review, then Mode/Slice Decision, then the smallest safe next gate or Quick Task execution.
 
 ## Runtime Contract
 For repeated output, gate, Quality Contract and Context Graph rules, use:
@@ -61,6 +71,9 @@ Use templates as starting points only.
 
 Do not let chat history become the source of truth for gate state, approvals, evidence, backlog status or durable Brownfield knowledge.
 
+AGDF is a native agent workflow first: read the live control state, apply the active skill and make the next allowed step explicit.
+Use `doctor`, `gate-check --json` or `delivery-map --json` as validators when a machine-readable proof is useful, not as a substitute for the router or skills.
+
 ## Closeout
 After relevant code, documentation, skill or governance changes:
 

package/generated/plugins/agdf/.codex-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "agdf",
-  "version": "0.2.2",
+  "version": "0.2.4",
   "description": "Codex-first workflow skills for gated, auditable AI-assisted software delivery.",
   "author": {
     "name": "AI-native Governance & Delivery Framework",

package/generated/plugins/agdf/control/README.md

@@ -9,7 +9,13 @@ Use this scaffold when a target repository should keep AGDF state outside chat h
 | File | Purpose |
 |---|---|
 | `templates/AGDF_RUN.md` | Template for current run state: mode, gate, approvals, evidence, risks, next allowed action |
-| `templates/MASTER_BACKLOG.md` | Template for the living backlog pointer: active initiatives and current UR/PRD/SD/TP artefacts |
+| `templates/MASTER_BACKLOG.md` | Template for the living backlog pointer: active initiatives and current UR/PRD/SD/TP/QA/OR artefacts |
+| `templates/artefacts/UR.md` | Template for the durable user requirement artefact of a work item |
+| `templates/artefacts/PRD.md` | Template for the durable product requirements artefact |
+| `templates/artefacts/SD.md` | Template for the durable solution design artefact |
+| `templates/artefacts/TP.md` | Template for the durable task and test plan artefact |
+| `templates/artefacts/QA_REPORT.md` | Template for the durable QA decision report |
+| `templates/artefacts/OR.md` | Template for the durable Orchestration Report closeout |
 | `templates/SOT_REGISTRY.md` | Template for the source-of-truth registry: one primary owner per domain |
 | `templates/CONTEXT_GRAPH.md` | Template for project memory: durable decisions, Brownfield findings, risks, evidence and exit criteria |
 | `templates/AGENT_QUALITY_CONTRACTS.json` | Template for machine-readable warning, revise and block contracts for review and QA |
@@ -21,6 +27,14 @@ Use this scaffold when a target repository should keep AGDF state outside chat h
   control/
     AGDF_RUN.md
     MASTER_BACKLOG.md
+    artefacts/
+      <work-item>/
+        UR.md
+        PRD.md
+        SD.md
+        TP.md
+        QA_REPORT.md
+        OR.md
     SOT_REGISTRY.md
     CONTEXT_GRAPH.md
     AGENT_QUALITY_CONTRACTS.json
@@ -49,6 +63,8 @@ npm create agdf@latest gate-check --json
 
 - `AGDF_RUN.md` is the current run dashboard.
 - `MASTER_BACKLOG.md` points to active delivery work; detailed artefacts live beside the work item.
+- UR, PRD, SD, TP and QA decisions require durable artefacts or links to the authoritative repository source of truth before the next gate can open.
+- OR records the run closeout and next permissible step; it does not approve later gates.
 - `SOT_REGISTRY.md` decides which document owns which domain.
 - `CONTEXT_GRAPH.md` records durable project knowledge only when it has evidence and an exit criterion.
 - `AGENT_QUALITY_CONTRACTS.json` names reusable block, revise and warning conditions.

package/generated/plugins/agdf/control/templates/AGDF_RUN.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
 - run_id:
 - started_at:
 - mode: `quick_task | structured_delivery`
-- current_gate: `none | UR | PRD | SD | TP | CD+Tests | CR | QA | UAT | OR`
+- current_gate: `none | UR | Brownfield Review | Mode/Slice Decision | PRD | SD | TP | Quick Task Execution | Brownfield Analysis | CD+Tests | CR | QA | UAT | OR`
 - decision: `pass | revise | block | in_progress`
 - owner:
 
@@ -44,10 +44,32 @@ Valid approval format for new runs: `Approval: <GateName>`.
 | PRD |  | `draft | approved | superseded | not_applicable` |  |
 | SD |  | `draft | approved | superseded | not_applicable` |  |
 | TP |  | `draft | approved | superseded | not_applicable` |  |
+| Brownfield Review |  | `missing | done | not_applicable` |  |
 | Review |  | `missing | done | not_applicable` |  |
 | QA |  | `missing | pass | revise | block | not_applicable` |  |
 | OR |  | `missing | done | not_applicable` |  |
 
+## Mode / Slice Decision
+
+Set this after Brownfield Review. Do not assume the full gate chain before the existing-system impact is understood.
+
+- decision: `undecided | quick_task | structured_slice | structured_delivery | block`
+- required_next_gate: `none | PRD | SD | TP | Brownfield Analysis`
+- scope_reason:
+- evidence:
+
+## Artefact Chain
+
+Keep the active work item traceable. A gate may open only when the previous gate has both exact approval and a durable or linked artefact.
+
+| From | Relationship | To | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| UR | `approved_by` | `Approval: UR` |  |
+| PRD | `derived_from` | UR |  |
+| SD | `derived_from` | PRD |  |
+| TP | `derived_from` | SD |  |
+| QA_REPORT | `tests` | TP |  |
+
 ## Evidence
 
 | Evidence | Source | Covers | Strength |

package/generated/plugins/agdf/control/templates/MASTER_BACKLOG.md

@@ -4,23 +4,28 @@ This file is the living control pointer for active AGDF delivery work. Detailed
 
 ## Rules
 
-1. Keep only steering-relevant work in `Active Backlog`.
-2. Every active item has exactly one current spec pointer.
-3. Historical artefacts remain linkable but do not override the current pointer.
-4. If an item is superseded, mark the replacement.
-5. If active work grows beyond roughly ten items, triage the backlog.
+1. New product semantics, functional change or user-visible behaviour change starts as a new UR draft in a stable local artefact path, for example `.agdf/control/artefacts/<key>/UR.md`, unless an authoritative repository SoT already exists and is linked here.
+2. `Approval: UR` adds or updates exactly one steering row with a link to the UR.
+3. PRD, SD, TP and QA report artefacts are created for the same work item after the previous gate is approved and persisted or linked.
+4. `Approval: PRD`, `Approval: SD`, `Approval: TP` and `Approval: QA` require the corresponding durable artefact or linked repository SoT before the next gate can open.
+5. Generic consent such as "ok", "go ahead", "do it", "continue", "leg los" or "approved" does not update a gate. Only `Approval: <GateName>` does.
+6. Keep only steering-relevant work in `Active Backlog`.
+7. Every active item has exactly one current spec pointer and a visible artefact chain.
+8. Historical artefacts remain linkable but do not override the current pointer.
+9. If an item is superseded, mark the replacement.
+10. If active work grows beyond roughly ten items, triage the backlog.
 
 ## Active Backlog
 
-| Prio | Key | Title | Status | Current Spec | Notes |
-|---:|---|---|---|---|---|
-| P1 |  |  | `in_progress | blocked` |  |  |
+| Prio | Key | Title | Status | UR | PRD | SD | TP | QA | OR | Current Spec | Notes |
+|---:|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| P1 |  |  | `in_progress | blocked` |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
 
 ## Planned / Parking Lot
 
-| Prio | Key | Title | Status | Current Spec | Notes |
-|---:|---|---|---|---|---|
-| P2 |  |  | `planned | review_needed` |  |  |
+| Prio | Key | Title | Status | UR | PRD | SD | TP | QA | OR | Current Spec | Notes |
+|---:|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| P2 |  |  | `planned | review_needed` |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
 
 ## Completed / Superseded Pointers
 

package/generated/plugins/agdf/control/templates/artefacts/OR.md

@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+# OR: <Title>
+
+Gate: OR
+Type: Orchestration Report
+Report mode: `OR-lite | OR-full`
+Status: `draft | done | superseded`
+
+## Run
+
+- run_id:
+- related_ur:
+- related_prd:
+- related_sd:
+- related_tp:
+- related_qa_report:
+- mode_slice_decision:
+- current_gate:
+- decision: `pass | revise | block | in_progress`
+
+## Gate State
+
+| Gate or step | Status | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|
+| UR |  |  |
+| Brownfield Review |  |  |
+| Mode/Slice Decision |  |  |
+| PRD |  |  |
+| SD |  |  |
+| TP |  |  |
+| Brownfield Analysis |  |  |
+| CD+Tests |  |  |
+| CR |  |  |
+| QA |  |  |
+| UAT |  |  |
+
+## Delivered
+
+| Item | Evidence |
+|---|---|
+|  |  |
+
+## Not Delivered / Intentionally Deferred
+
+| Item | Reason | Next owner or gate |
+|---|---|---|
+|  |  |  |
+
+## Evidence
+
+| Evidence | Source | Covers | Strength |
+|---|---|---|---|
+|  |  |  | `direct | indirect | weak` |
+
+## Missing Evidence
+
+| Missing evidence | Impact | Required next step |
+|---|---|---|
+|  | `warn | revise | block` |  |
+
+## Risks And Open Items
+
+| Risk or open item | Impact | Owner or mitigation |
+|---|---|---|
+|  | `warn | revise | block` |  |
+
+## Context Graph Impact
+
+- context_graph_impact: `none | link_only | update_existing_node | new_node_required | sot_drift`
+- context_graph_refs:
+- context_graph_required_action: `none | link | update | create | resolve_drift`
+- context_graph_gate_effect: `none | warning | revise | block`
+- context_graph_evidence:
+
+## Next Permissible Step
+
+- next_allowed_action:
+- required_approval:
+- forbidden_until_then:
+
+## Quality Outlook
+
+- quality_outlook:
+
+## Approval
+
+OR does not approve later gates. It records the next permissible step.

package/generated/plugins/agdf/control/templates/artefacts/PRD.md

@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+# PRD: <Title>
+
+Status: draft
+Gate: PRD
+Gate approval: open
+Based on: UR
+Date:
+Owner:
+
+## 1. Product Scope
+
+What exactly must be delivered?
+
+## 2. Acceptance Criteria
+
+Which observable outcomes must be true?
+
+## 3. Non-Goals
+
+What remains out of scope?
+
+## 4. Users And Roles
+
+Who is affected and who decides?
+
+## 5. Constraints
+
+Which business, operational, legal, security or compatibility constraints apply?
+
+## 6. Evidence Requirements
+
+Which evidence must later support QA?
+
+## 7. Risks And Open Questions
+
+Which questions must SD, TP or Brownfield Analysis clarify later?
+
+## 8. Next Step
+
+Review this PRD and approve only with:
+
+`Approval: PRD`

package/generated/plugins/agdf/control/templates/artefacts/QA_REPORT.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+# QA Report: <Title>
+
+Status: draft
+Gate: QA
+Gate approval: open
+Based on: TP, implementation evidence, task-plan review
+Date:
+Owner:
+
+## 1. QA Decision
+
+Decision: `pass | revise | block`
+
+## 2. TP Coverage
+
+Which TP tasks are fully done, partially done or not done?
+
+## 3. Evidence
+
+Which tests, logs, diffs, reviews or observations support the decision?
+
+## 4. Missing Evidence
+
+What remains unverified?
+
+## 5. Risks
+
+Which risks remain and what is their impact?
+
+## 6. Required Next Step
+
+What is the next permitted action?
+
+## 7. Gate Approval
+
+Approve this QA decision only with:
+
+`Approval: QA`

package/generated/plugins/agdf/control/templates/artefacts/SD.md

@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+# SD: <Title>
+
+Status: draft
+Gate: SD
+Gate approval: open
+Based on: PRD
+Date:
+Owner:
+
+## 1. Solution Overview
+
+How will the approved PRD be solved?
+
+## 2. Ownership And Source Of Truth
+
+Which existing modules, documents, services or owners remain authoritative?
+
+## 3. Architecture Decisions
+
+Which design decisions are binding for implementation?
+
+## 4. Integration Points
+
+Which APIs, data flows, UI surfaces, jobs, queues or external systems are affected?
+
+## 5. Constraints And Compatibility
+
+Which constraints must implementation preserve?
+
+## 6. Test And Evidence Strategy
+
+Which evidence must TP and QA later collect?
+
+## 7. Risks And Open Questions
+
+Which risks remain before task planning?
+
+## 8. Next Step
+
+Review this solution design and approve only with:
+
+`Approval: SD`

package/generated/plugins/agdf/control/templates/artefacts/TP.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+# TP: <Title>
+
+Status: draft
+Gate: TP
+Gate approval: open
+Based on: SD
+Date:
+Owner:
+
+## 1. Task List
+
+| task_id | Task | Acceptance mapping | Evidence required |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| T1 |  |  |  |
+
+## 2. Test Plan
+
+Which automated, manual or inspection checks must run?
+
+## 3. Brownfield Scope
+
+Which existing owners, modules or artefacts must be inspected before implementation?
+
+## 4. Out Of Scope
+
+Which implementation work is explicitly not part of this TP?
+
+## 5. Risks And Blockers
+
+Which risks must block, revise or warn later QA?
+
+## 6. Next Step
+
+Review this task and test plan and approve only with:
+
+`Approval: TP`

package/generated/plugins/agdf/control/templates/artefacts/UR.md

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+# UR: <Title>
+
+Status: draft
+Gate: UR
+Gate approval: open
+Date:
+Owner:
+
+## 1. Problem
+
+What user, business or operational problem should be solved?
+
+## 2. Goal
+
+What outcome should become possible?
+
+## 3. Scope
+
+What is included in this first slice?
+
+## 4. Non-Goals
+
+What is explicitly not part of this UR?
+
+## 5. Acceptance Signals
+
+How will we know the need is clear enough for PRD?
+
+## 6. Existing Source Of Truth
+
+Which existing repository artefacts, docs, code paths or decisions must be respected?
+
+## 7. Risks And Unknowns
+
+Which questions must Brownfield Review, PRD, SD or later implementation-preparation Brownfield Analysis clarify?
+
+## 8. Next Step
+
+Review this UR and approve only with:
+
+`Approval: UR`

package/generated/plugins/agdf/meta/agdf-agent-router.md

@@ -30,17 +30,26 @@ Use Quick Task Mode for questions, small reviews, local debugging and narrow fix
 
 Use Structured Delivery Mode for new capabilities, architecture, policy, persistence, release-critical work, formal artefacts or explicit approvals.
 
+Any new product semantics, functional change or user-visible behaviour change requires a durable UR first.
+Persist it in `.agdf/control/` or link it from there to the target repository's authoritative source of truth before PRD, SD, TP, Brownfield Analysis or implementation.
+Treat approval text and durable artefact presence as separate checks for UR, PRD, SD, TP and QA report decisions.
+Do not infer approval from "ok", "go ahead", "do it", "approved", "continue", "leg los" or similar wording.
+Those phrases may express intent to proceed, but they do not unlock a gate unless the exact gate formula is present.
+After `Approval: UR`, run lightweight Brownfield Review before PRD when Brownfield, ownership, runtime, policy, persistence, architecture, UI or UX impact is possible.
+Brownfield Review must produce a Mode/Slice Decision: `quick_task`, `structured_slice`, `structured_delivery` or `block`.
+Do not assume the full PRD/SD/TP chain before that decision; use only as much gate depth as the reviewed change size justifies.
+
 Quick Task Mode must still cite evidence and close with a concrete result.
 Structured Delivery Mode must respect gates, reviews and closeout discipline.
 
 ## Skill Routing
 | Skill | Use For | Boundary |
 |---|---|---|
-| `brownfield-analysis` | after gate-check permits implementation preparation, before non-trivial changes in existing systems | clarifies reuse, owners and risks; never bypasses gate-check |
+| `brownfield-analysis` | after gate-check permits Brownfield Review or implementation preparation, before non-trivial changes in existing systems | clarifies reuse, owners, risks and Mode/Slice Decision; never bypasses gate-check; Brownfield Review is not implementation permission |
 | `clean-implementation-review` | inspect workarounds, fallbacks, parallel structures or symptom fixes | not a TP or QA substitute |
 | `code-review` | mandatory CR step after code changes, focused on defects, regression and security findings | does not replace TP review, clean review or QA |
 | `delivery-closeout` | commit/PR-near handoff after QA/OR/UAT | never performs VCS actions automatically |
-| `gate-check` | new build/change intent, unclear approval, Structured Delivery, later-gate artefact requested | does not create later artefacts |
+| `gate-check` | new build/change intent, unclear approval, Structured Delivery, later-gate artefact requested | does not create later artefacts or skip Mode/Slice Decision after Brownfield Review |
 | `qa-gate` | final QA decision | only instance for `pass | revise | block` |
 | `release-or` | auditable closeout for every relevant run | not a QA substitute |
 | `task-plan-review` | after implementation and before QA, verify TP coverage | no final QA decision |
@@ -48,6 +57,7 @@ Structured Delivery Mode must respect gates, reviews and closeout discipline.
 Select exactly one primary skill first.
 Add more only when they cover a distinct concrete risk dimension.
 Do not choose `brownfield-analysis` as the first primary skill for a fresh "I want to build/change X" prompt unless `gate-check` or existing live AGDF control state already makes implementation preparation the next allowed action.
+Never jump directly from `Approval: UR`, implicit consent, or a generic "start" request to implementation. Route to Brownfield Review, then Mode/Slice Decision, then the smallest safe next gate or Quick Task execution.
 
 ## Runtime Contract
 For repeated output, gate, Quality Contract and Context Graph rules, use:
@@ -62,6 +72,9 @@ Use templates as starting points only.
 
 Do not let chat history become the source of truth for gate state, approvals, evidence, backlog status or durable Brownfield knowledge.
 
+AGDF is a native agent workflow first: read the live control state, apply the active skill and make the next allowed step explicit.
+Use `doctor`, `gate-check --json` or `delivery-map --json` as validators when a machine-readable proof is useful, not as a substitute for the router or skills.
+
 ## Closeout
 After relevant code, documentation, skill or governance changes: