create-ai-project 1.23.3 → 1.23.5

package/.claude/agents-en/quality-fixer.md

@@ -163,11 +163,7 @@ Final message: exactly one JSON object matching the schema below (begins with `{
 All responses share `status` plus a `taskFileMechanisms` object when `task_file` is provided:
 
 ```json
-"taskFileMechanisms": {
-  "provided": true,
-  "executed": ["mechanism names that were found and executed"],
-  "skipped": [{"mechanism": "mechanism name", "reason": "tool not found | config not found | not executable"}]
-}
+"taskFileMechanisms": {"provided": true, "executed": ["mechanism names that were found and executed"], "skipped": [{"mechanism": "mechanism name", "reason": "tool not found | config not found | not executable"}]}
 ```
 When `task_file` is not provided, set `"provided": false` and omit `executed`/`skipped`.
 
@@ -205,10 +201,10 @@ Minimal example (`blocked` — Variant B, missing prerequisites):
 During execution, report progress between tool calls using this format:
 
 ```markdown
-📋 Phase [Number]: [Phase Name]
+Phase [Number]: [Phase Name]
 
 Executed Command: [Command]
-Result: ❌ Errors [Count] / ⚠️ Warnings [Count] / ✅ Pass
+Result: Errors [Count] / Warnings [Count] / Pass
 
 Issues requiring fixes:
 1. [Issue Summary]
@@ -217,7 +213,7 @@ Issues requiring fixes:
    - Fix Method: [Specific Fix Approach]
 
 [After Fix Implementation]
-✅ Phase [Number] Complete! Proceeding to next phase.
+Phase [Number] Complete! Proceeding to next phase.
 ```
 
 This is intermediate output only. The final response must be the JSON result (Step 6).

package/.claude/agents-en/requirement-analyzer.md

@@ -116,23 +116,12 @@ Final message: exactly one JSON object matching the schema below (begins with `{
   "fileCount": 3,
   "adrRequired": true,
   "adrReason": "specific condition met, or null if not required",
-  "technicalConsiderations": {
-    "constraints": ["list"],
-    "risks": ["list"],
-    "dependencies": ["list"]
-  },
+  "technicalConsiderations": {"constraints": ["list"], "risks": ["list"], "dependencies": ["list"]},
   "scopeDependencies": [
-    {
-      "question": "specific question that affects scale",
-      "impact": { "if_yes": "large", "if_no": "medium" }
-    }
+    {"question": "specific question that affects scale", "impact": {"if_yes": "large", "if_no": "medium"}}
   ],
   "questions": [
-    {
-      "category": "boundary|existing_code|dependencies",
-      "question": "specific question",
-      "options": ["A", "B", "C"]
-    }
+    {"category": "boundary|existing_code|dependencies", "question": "specific question", "options": ["A", "B", "C"]}
   ]
 }
 ```

package/.claude/agents-en/rule-advisor.md

@@ -59,24 +59,11 @@ Return structured JSON:
 
 ```json
 {
-  "taskAnalysis": {
-    "taskType": "implementation|fix|refactoring|design|quality-improvement",
-    "essence": "Fundamental purpose", "estimatedFiles": 3, "scale": "small|medium|large",
-    "extractedTags": ["implementation", "testing", "security"]
-  },
+  "taskAnalysis": {"taskType": "implementation|fix|refactoring|design|quality-improvement", "essence": "Fundamental purpose", "estimatedFiles": 3, "scale": "small|medium|large", "extractedTags": ["implementation", "testing", "security"]},
   "selectedSkills": [
-    {
-      "skill": "coding-standards",
-      "sections": [{"title": "Section Name", "content": "## Section content..."}],
-      "reason": "Why needed", "priority": "high"
-    }
+    {"skill": "coding-standards", "sections": [{"title": "Section Name", "content": "## Section content..."}], "reason": "Why needed", "priority": "high"}
   ],
-  "metaCognitiveGuidance": {
-    "taskEssence": "Understanding fundamental purpose, not surface work",
-    "pastFailures": ["error-fixing impulse", "large changes at once", "insufficient testing"],
-    "potentialPitfalls": ["No root cause analysis", "No phased approach", "No tests"],
-    "firstStep": {"action": "First action", "rationale": "Why first"}
-  },
+  "metaCognitiveGuidance": {"taskEssence": "Understanding fundamental purpose, not surface work", "pastFailures": ["error-fixing impulse", "large changes at once", "insufficient testing"], "potentialPitfalls": ["No root cause analysis", "No phased approach", "No tests"], "firstStep": {"action": "First action", "rationale": "Why first"}},
   "metaCognitiveQuestions": ["Most important quality criterion?", "Past problems in similar tasks?", "Which part first?"],
   "warningPatterns": [
     {"pattern": "Large changes at once", "risk": "High complexity", "mitigation": "Split into phases"},

package/.claude/agents-en/scope-discoverer.md

@@ -164,17 +164,8 @@ Final message: exactly one JSON object matching the schema below (begins with `{
       "entryPoints": ["/path1", "/path2"],
       "relatedFiles": ["src/feature/*"],
       "dependencies": ["UNIT-002"],
-      "valueProfile": {
-        "targetPersona": "Who this feature serves (e.g., 'end user', 'admin', 'developer')",
-        "userGoal": "What the user is trying to accomplish with this feature",
-        "valueCategory": "High-level capability this belongs to (e.g., 'Authentication', 'Content Management', 'Reporting')"
-      },
-      "technicalProfile": {
-        "primaryModules": ["src/<feature>/module-a.ts", "src/<feature>/module-b.ts"],
-        "publicInterfaces": ["ServiceA.operation()", "ModuleB.handle()"],
-        "dataFlowSummary": "Input source → core processing path → output destination",
-        "infrastructureDeps": ["external dependency list"]
-      },
+      "valueProfile": {"targetPersona": "Who this feature serves (e.g., 'end user', 'admin', 'developer')", "userGoal": "What the user is trying to accomplish with this feature", "valueCategory": "High-level capability this belongs to (e.g., 'Authentication', 'Content Management', 'Reporting')"},
+      "technicalProfile": {"primaryModules": ["src/<feature>/module-a.ts", "src/<feature>/module-b.ts"], "publicInterfaces": ["ServiceA.operation()", "ModuleB.handle()"], "dataFlowSummary": "Input source → core processing path → output destination", "infrastructureDeps": ["external dependency list"]},
       "unitInventory": {
         "routes": [
           {"method": "POST", "path": "/api/auth/login", "handler": "AuthController.handleLogin", "file": "routes:15"}
@@ -189,28 +180,13 @@ Final message: exactly one JSON object matching the schema below (begins with `{
     }
   ],
   "relationships": [
-    {
-      "from": "UNIT-001",
-      "to": "UNIT-002",
-      "type": "depends_on|extends|shares_data"
-    }
+    {"from": "UNIT-001", "to": "UNIT-002", "type": "depends_on|extends|shares_data"}
   ],
   "uncertainAreas": [
-    {
-      "area": "Area name",
-      "reason": "Why uncertain",
-      "suggestedAction": "What to do"
-    }
+    {"area": "Area name", "reason": "Why uncertain", "suggestedAction": "What to do"}
   ],
   "prdUnits": [
-    {
-      "id": "PRD-001",
-      "name": "PRD unit name (user-value level)",
-      "description": "What this capability delivers to the user",
-      "sourceUnits": ["UNIT-001", "UNIT-003"],
-      "combinedRelatedFiles": ["src/feature-a/*", "src/feature-b/*"],
-      "combinedEntryPoints": ["/path1", "/path2", "/path3"]
-    }
+    {"id": "PRD-001", "name": "PRD unit name (user-value level)", "description": "What this capability delivers to the user", "sourceUnits": ["UNIT-001", "UNIT-003"], "combinedRelatedFiles": ["src/feature-a/*", "src/feature-b/*"], "combinedEntryPoints": ["/path1", "/path2", "/path3"]}
   ],
   "limitations": ["What could not be discovered and why"]
 }

package/.claude/agents-en/security-reviewer.md

@@ -100,22 +100,11 @@ Final message: exactly one JSON object matching the schema below (begins with `{
   "summary": "[1-2 sentence summary]",
   "filesReviewed": 5,
   "findings": [
-    {
-      "category": "confirmed_risk|suspected_risk|defense_gap|hardening|policy",
-      "confidence": "high|medium|low",
-      "location": "[file:line]",
-      "description": "[specific issue found]",
-      "rationale": "[category-specific, see Category-Specific Rationale]",
-      "suggestion": "[specific fix]"
-    }
+    {"category": "confirmed_risk|suspected_risk|defense_gap|hardening|policy", "confidence": "high|medium|low", "location": "[file:line]", "description": "[specific issue found]", "rationale": "[category-specific, see Category-Specific Rationale]", "suggestion": "[specific fix]"}
   ],
   "notes": "[summary of hardening/policy findings for completion report, present when status is approved_with_notes]",
   "requiredFixes": [
-    {
-      "location": "[file:line — parseable as file[:line] for Fix Mode allowed-list expansion]",
-      "issue": "[specific issue to fix — drawn from the corresponding finding]",
-      "fix": "[specific fix instruction]"
-    }
+    {"location": "[file:line — parseable as file[:line] for Fix Mode allowed-list expansion]", "issue": "[specific issue to fix — drawn from the corresponding finding]", "fix": "[specific fix instruction]"}
   ]
 }
 ```

package/.claude/agents-en/skill-creator.md

@@ -152,17 +152,14 @@ Return results as structured JSON:
 {
   "mode": "creation|modification",
   "skillName": "...",
-  "frontmatter": {
-    "name": "...",
-    "description": "..."
-  },
+  "frontmatter": {"name": "...", "description": "..."},
   "body": "full markdown content after frontmatter",
   "references": [
-    { "filename": "...", "content": "..." }
+    {"filename": "...", "content": "..."}
   ],
   "optimizationReport": {
     "issuesFound": [
-      { "pattern": "BP-XXX", "severity": "P1/P2/P3", "location": "...", "transform": "..." }
+      {"pattern": "BP-XXX", "severity": "P1/P2/P3", "location": "...", "transform": "..."}
     ],
     "researchFindings": [],
     "lineCount": 0,

package/.claude/agents-en/skill-reviewer.md

@@ -87,56 +87,20 @@ Return results as structured JSON:
   "grade": "A|B|C",
   "summary": "1-2 sentence overall assessment",
   "patternIssues": [
-    {
-      "pattern": "BP-XXX",
-      "severity": "P1|P2|P3",
-      "location": "section heading",
-      "original": "quoted text",
-      "suggestedFix": "replacement text"
-    }
+    {"pattern": "BP-XXX", "severity": "P1|P2|P3", "location": "section heading", "original": "quoted text", "suggestedFix": "replacement text"}
   ],
   "patternExceptions": [
-    {
-      "pattern": "BP-XXX",
-      "location": "section heading",
-      "original": "quoted text",
-      "conditions": {
-        "singleStepDestruction": "true|false + evidence",
-        "callerCannotRecover": "true|false + evidence",
-        "operationalNotPolicy": "true|false + evidence",
-        "positiveFormBlursScope": "true|false + evidence"
-      }
-    }
+    {"pattern": "BP-XXX", "location": "section heading", "original": "quoted text", "conditions": {"singleStepDestruction": "true|false + evidence", "callerCannotRecover": "true|false + evidence", "operationalNotPolicy": "true|false + evidence", "positiveFormBlursScope": "true|false + evidence"}}
   ],
   "principlesEvaluation": [
-    {
-      "principle": "1: Context efficiency",
-      "status": "pass|partial|fail",
-      "detail": "explanation if not pass"
-    }
+    {"principle": "1: Context efficiency", "status": "pass|partial|fail", "detail": "explanation if not pass"}
   ],
-  "progressiveDisclosure": {
-    "tier1": "pass|fail (description quality)",
-    "tier2": "pass|fail (body structure)",
-    "tier3": "pass|fail (reference organization)",
-    "details": "specific issues if any"
-  },
+  "progressiveDisclosure": {"tier1": "pass|fail (description quality)", "tier2": "pass|fail (body structure)", "tier3": "pass|fail (reference organization)", "details": "specific issues if any"},
   "crossSkillIssues": [
-    {
-      "overlappingSkill": "skill-name",
-      "description": "what overlaps",
-      "recommendation": "reference or deduplicate"
-    }
+    {"overlappingSkill": "skill-name", "description": "what overlaps", "recommendation": "reference or deduplicate"}
   ],
-  "balanceAssessment": {
-    "overOptimization": "none|minor|major",
-    "lostExpertise": "none|minor|major",
-    "clarityTradeOff": "none|minor|major",
-    "descriptionQuality": "pass|needs fix"
-  },
-  "actionItems": [
-    "Prioritized list of fixes (P1 first, then P2, then principles)"
-  ]
+  "balanceAssessment": {"overOptimization": "none|minor|major", "lostExpertise": "none|minor|major", "clarityTradeOff": "none|minor|major", "descriptionQuality": "pass|needs fix"},
+  "actionItems": ["Prioritized list of fixes (P1 first, then P2, then principles)"]
 }
 ```
 

package/.claude/agents-en/solver.md

@@ -73,6 +73,10 @@ Generate at least 3 solutions from the following perspectives:
 | mitigation | Measures to reduce impact | Temporary measure while waiting for root fix |
 | fundamental | Comprehensive fix including recurrence prevention | When similar problems have occurred repeatedly |
 
+**Adjacent Case Coverage**:
+- When the confirmed failure point concerns a `bug-fix`, `regression`, `state-change`, or `boundary-change` (the debugging flow carries no Change Category field, so judge these from the failure point itself), evaluate whether cases sharing the same path, contract, persisted state, or external boundary need the same fix
+- Include those adjacent cases in the solution scope when they share the same class of defect; record in residualRisks why any are excluded
+
 **Generated Solution Verification**:
 - Check if project rules have applicable guidelines
 - For areas without guidelines, research current best practices via WebSearch to verify solutions align with standard approaches
@@ -116,24 +120,10 @@ Final message: exactly one JSON object matching the schema below (begins with `{
   },
   "solutions": [
     {
-      "id": "S1",
-      "name": "Solution name",
-      "type": "direct|workaround|mitigation|fundamental",
-      "description": "Detailed solution description",
-      "implementation": {
-        "approach": "Implementation approach description",
-        "affectedFiles": ["Files requiring changes"],
-        "dependencies": ["Affected dependencies"]
-      },
-      "tradeoffs": {
-        "cost": {"level": "low|medium|high", "details": "Details"},
-        "risk": {"level": "low|medium|high", "details": "Details"},
-        "scope": {"level": "low|medium|high", "details": "Details"},
-        "maintainability": {"level": "low|medium|high", "details": "Details"},
-        "certainty": {"level": "low|medium|high", "details": "Details"}
-      },
-      "pros": ["Advantages"],
-      "cons": ["Disadvantages"]
+      "id": "S1", "name": "Solution name", "type": "direct|workaround|mitigation|fundamental", "description": "Detailed solution description",
+      "implementation": {"approach": "Implementation approach description", "affectedFiles": ["Files requiring changes"], "dependencies": ["Affected dependencies"]},
+      "tradeoffs": {"cost": {"level": "low|medium|high", "details": "Details"}, "risk": {"level": "low|medium|high", "details": "Details"}, "scope": {"level": "low|medium|high", "details": "Details"}, "maintainability": {"level": "low|medium|high", "details": "Details"}, "certainty": {"level": "low|medium|high", "details": "Details"}},
+      "pros": ["Advantages"], "cons": ["Disadvantages"]
     }
   ],
   "recommendation": {
@@ -144,12 +134,7 @@ Final message: exactly one JSON object matching the schema below (begins with `{
   },
   "implementationPlan": {
     "steps": [
-      {
-        "order": 1,
-        "action": "Specific action",
-        "verification": "How to verify this step",
-        "rollback": "Rollback procedure if problems occur"
-      }
+      {"order": 1, "action": "Specific action", "verification": "How to verify this step", "rollback": "Rollback procedure if problems occur"}
     ],
     "criticalPoints": ["Points requiring special attention"]
   },

package/.claude/agents-en/task-decomposer.md

@@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ Decompose tasks based on implementation strategy patterns determined in implemen
 2. **Plan Analysis and Overall Design**
    - Confirm phase structure
    - Extract task list
+     - Skip any task already checked off (`[x]`) and annotated as committed (e.g. a Phase 0 resolved by the prepare-implementation recipe) — its work is already in the codebase. Generate task files only for outstanding (`[ ]`) tasks so completed work is not regenerated or re-executed
    - Identify dependencies
    - **Overall Optimization Considerations**
      - Identify common processing (prevent redundant implementation)
@@ -101,6 +102,7 @@ Decompose tasks based on implementation strategy patterns determined in implemen
    - Task overview
    - Target files
    - **Investigation Targets** (what the executor must read and understand before implementing)
+   - **Change Category** (when the task is a bug fix / regression / state-change / boundary-change — see Change Category Classification below)
    - Concrete implementation steps
    - **Quality Assurance Mechanisms** (derived from work plan header — see Quality Assurance Mechanism Propagation below)
    - **Operation Verification Methods** (derived from Verification Strategy in work plan)
@@ -221,6 +223,21 @@ When the work plan header includes a Quality Assurance Mechanisms table, propaga
 3. **Include all if coverage is unspecified**: If a mechanism has no specific file coverage (applies project-wide), include it in every task
 4. **Omit when no match**: If no mechanisms match a task's target files, omit the "Quality Assurance Mechanisms" section from that task
 
+## Change Category Classification
+
+When a task corrects observed behavior or alters how state or a boundary behaves, classify it so the executor and downstream reviewers run a scoped adjacent-case sweep from the field value, rather than re-inferring the task's intent:
+
+1. **Classify from the work plan and Design Doc**. A task can match more than one category (e.g., a regression fix that changes a persisted-state boundary); record every value that applies:
+   - `bug-fix`: corrects observed incorrect behavior
+   - `regression`: restores behavior a prior change broke
+   - `state-change`: alters how state is written, transitioned, or persisted
+   - `boundary-change`: changes a published or consumed contract at an external, cross-package, or persisted boundary
+2. **Populate the task's `Change Category` field** with all matched values, comma-separated (see task template).
+3. **Extend Investigation Targets with the adjacent cases**. For every matched category, add the files sharing the same path, contract, persisted state, or external boundary as the change — including the owner module on both sides of an affected boundary — so the executor can sweep them for the same class of defect. Union the targets across all matched categories.
+4. **Apply only on a match**. Purely additive, config, or scaffolding tasks default to no `Change Category` field and skip this propagation.
+
+This is distinct from per-AC boundary-path proof (which proves a boundary path *within* an AC): Change Category drives a sweep of cases that sit *outside* the task's ACs but share its path, contract, state, or boundary.
+
 ## Task File Template
 
 See task template in documentation-criteria skill for details.
@@ -287,7 +304,7 @@ Task 3: [Content]
 ### Decomposition Completion Report
 
 ```markdown
-📋 Task Decomposition Complete
+Task Decomposition Complete
 
 Plan Document: [Filename]
 Overall Design Document: _overview-[plan-name].md
@@ -358,6 +375,7 @@ Please execute decomposed tasks according to the order.
 - [ ] Implementation efficiency and rework prevention (pre-identification of common processing, clarification of impact scope)
 - [ ] Investigation Targets specified for every task (specific file paths, not vague categories)
 - [ ] Proof Obligations recorded for each claim-implementing task (primary failure mode + boundary to exercise)
+- [ ] Change Category set for bug-fix / regression / state-change / boundary-change tasks, with adjacent path/boundary owners added to Investigation Targets
 - [ ] Quality Assurance Mechanisms from work plan header propagated to relevant tasks
 
 ## Task Design Principles

package/.claude/agents-en/task-executor-frontend.md

@@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ Internal detail optimization (variable names, logic order); specs not in Design
 
 ## Responsibilities, Authority, and Boundaries
 
-**In scope**: Read task files from `docs/plans/tasks/`, review dependency deliverables listed in task "Metadata", create React function components and React Testing Library tests, co-locate tests with components, apply Red→Green→Refactor TDD, update progress checkboxes (task file always; work plan and overall design only when those files exist — at small scale only the task file exists), produce research deliverables specified in `Provides`. State transitions: `[ ]` → `[🔄]` → `[x]`.
+**In scope**: Read task files from `docs/plans/tasks/`, review dependency deliverables listed in task "Metadata", create React function components and React Testing Library tests, co-locate tests with components, apply Red→Green→Refactor TDD, update progress checkboxes (task file always; work plan and overall design only when those files exist — at small scale only the task file exists), produce research deliverables specified in `Provides`. State transitions: `[ ]` → `[x]`.
 
 **Out of scope (always)**: Overall quality checks (delegated to quality assurance), commit creation (after quality checks), forcing implementation when Design Doc cannot be satisfied (always escalate), class components (deprecated in modern React).
 
@@ -183,6 +183,17 @@ This gate runs only when the task file's "Investigation Targets" section lists a
 2. **Investigate existing implementations**: Search for similar components/hooks in same domain/responsibility
 3. **Execute determination**: Determine continue/escalation per "Mandatory Judgment Criteria" above
 
+#### Adjacent Case Sweep (Required when the task file has a `Change Category` field set to one or more of `bug-fix`, `regression`, `state-change`, `boundary-change`)
+
+Runs after Pre-implementation Verification, before the Binding Decision Check. This step fires on the field value the task decomposition wrote — read the field value and treat it as authoritative for whether the sweep applies.
+
+1. From the Investigation Targets (the decomposition already extended them with the adjacent files), identify the cases sharing the same path, contract, persisted state, or external boundary as the change — fallback rendering, stale state, retries, and external calls related to the change.
+2. Check each for the same class of defect this task corrects.
+3. Disposition each residual by scope:
+   - **Within Target Files scope** → fold the residual into this task's failing tests and implementation.
+   - **A confirmed out-of-scope sibling that needs the same fix** → raise the `out_of_scope_file` escalation (the standard path for a file outside Target Files), letting the user expand Target Files or split off a follow-up task. This routes a confirmed adjacent defect to an explicit decision.
+   - **A related residual not confirmed to need the same fix** → record it in the task file's Investigation Notes so code-reviewer's adjacent-case check verifies it against the implementation.
+
 #### Binding Decision Check (Required when the task file has a Binding Decisions section)
 
 This check runs after Pre-implementation Verification and before the TDD cycle. It applies only when the task file contains a Binding Decisions section with one or more rows.
@@ -278,20 +289,8 @@ Report in the following JSON format upon task completion (**without executing qu
   "testsAdded": ["src/components/Button/Button.test.tsx"],
   "requiresTestReview": false,
   "newTestsPassed": true,
-  "progressUpdated": {
-    "taskFile": "5/8 items completed",
-    "workPlan": "Relevant sections updated",
-    "designDoc": "Progress section updated or N/A"
-  },
-  "runnableCheck": {
-    "level": "L1: Unit test (React Testing Library) / L2: Integration test / L3: E2E test",
-    "executed": true,
-    "command": "test -- Button.test.tsx",
-    "result": "passed / failed / skipped",
-    "substance": "substantive | non_substantive | null (non-test verification)",
-    "substanceIssue": "null when substantive or non-test; cause and location when non_substantive",
-    "reason": "Test execution reason/verification content"
-  },
+  "progressUpdated": {"taskFile": "5/8 items completed", "workPlan": "Relevant sections updated", "designDoc": "Progress section updated or N/A"},
+  "runnableCheck": {"level": "L1: Unit test (React Testing Library) / L2: Integration test / L3: E2E test", "executed": true, "command": "test -- Button.test.tsx", "result": "passed / failed / skipped", "substance": "substantive | non_substantive | null (non-test verification)", "substanceIssue": "null when substantive or non-test; cause and location when non_substantive", "reason": "Test execution reason/verification content"},
   "readyForQualityCheck": true,
   "nextActions": "Overall quality verification by quality assurance process"
 }
@@ -334,11 +333,7 @@ Minimal example (out_of_scope_file):
   "reason": "Out of scope file",
   "taskName": "[task name]",
   "escalation_type": "out_of_scope_file",
-  "details": {
-    "file_path": "[path attempted]",
-    "allowed_list": ["[union of Target Files, task file, work plan, Provides]"],
-    "modification_reason": "[why modification was attempted]"
-  },
+  "details": {"file_path": "[path attempted]", "allowed_list": ["[union of Target Files, task file, work plan, Provides]"], "modification_reason": "[why modification was attempted]"},
   "user_decision_required": true,
   "suggested_options": ["Add to Target files and retry", "Split into separate task", "Reconsider approach"]
 }

package/.claude/agents-en/task-executor.md

@@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ Internal detail optimization (variable names, processing order); specs not in De
 
 ## Responsibilities, Authority, and Boundaries
 
-**In scope**: Read task files from `docs/plans/tasks/`, review dependency deliverables listed in task "Metadata", create implementation and tests, apply Red→Green→Refactor TDD, update progress checkboxes (task file always; work plan and overall design only when those files exist — at small scale only the task file exists), produce research deliverables specified in `Provides`. State transitions: `[ ]` → `[🔄]` → `[x]`.
+**In scope**: Read task files from `docs/plans/tasks/`, review dependency deliverables listed in task "Metadata", create implementation and tests, apply Red→Green→Refactor TDD, update progress checkboxes (task file always; work plan and overall design only when those files exist — at small scale only the task file exists), produce research deliverables specified in `Provides`. State transitions: `[ ]` → `[x]`.
 
 **Out of scope (always)**: Overall quality checks (delegated to quality assurance), commit creation (after quality checks), forcing implementation when Design Doc cannot be satisfied (always escalate).
 
@@ -183,6 +183,17 @@ This gate runs only when the task file's "Investigation Targets" section lists a
 2. **Investigate existing implementations**: Search for similar functions in same domain/responsibility
 3. **Execute determination**: Determine continue/escalation per "Mandatory Judgment Criteria" above
 
+#### Adjacent Case Sweep (Required when the task file has a `Change Category` field set to one or more of `bug-fix`, `regression`, `state-change`, `boundary-change`)
+
+Runs after Pre-implementation Verification, before the Binding Decision Check. This step fires on the field value the task decomposition wrote — read the field value and treat it as authoritative for whether the sweep applies.
+
+1. From the Investigation Targets (the decomposition already extended them with the adjacent files), identify the cases sharing the same path, contract, persisted state, or external boundary as the change — fallback behavior, stale state, retries, and external calls related to the change.
+2. Check each for the same class of defect this task corrects.
+3. Disposition each residual by scope:
+   - **Within Target Files scope** → fold the residual into this task's failing tests and implementation.
+   - **A confirmed out-of-scope sibling that needs the same fix** → raise the `out_of_scope_file` escalation (the standard path for a file outside Target Files), letting the user expand Target Files or split off a follow-up task. This routes a confirmed adjacent defect to an explicit decision.
+   - **A related residual not confirmed to need the same fix** → record it in the task file's Investigation Notes so code-reviewer's adjacent-case check verifies it against the implementation.
+
 #### Binding Decision Check (Required when the task file has a Binding Decisions section)
 
 This check runs after Pre-implementation Verification and before the TDD cycle. It applies only when the task file contains a Binding Decisions section with one or more rows.
@@ -281,20 +292,8 @@ Report in the following JSON format upon task completion (**without executing qu
   "testsAdded": ["created/test/file/path"],
   "requiresTestReview": true,
   "newTestsPassed": true,
-  "progressUpdated": {
-    "taskFile": "5/8 items completed",
-    "workPlan": "Relevant sections updated",
-    "designDoc": "Progress section updated or N/A"
-  },
-  "runnableCheck": {
-    "level": "L1: Unit test / L2: Integration test / L3: E2E test",
-    "executed": true,
-    "command": "Executed test command",
-    "result": "passed / failed / skipped",
-    "substance": "substantive | non_substantive | null (non-test verification)",
-    "substanceIssue": "null when substantive or non-test; cause and location when non_substantive",
-    "reason": "Test execution reason/verification content"
-  },
+  "progressUpdated": {"taskFile": "5/8 items completed", "workPlan": "Relevant sections updated", "designDoc": "Progress section updated or N/A"},
+  "runnableCheck": {"level": "L1: Unit test / L2: Integration test / L3: E2E test", "executed": true, "command": "Executed test command", "result": "passed / failed / skipped", "substance": "substantive | non_substantive | null (non-test verification)", "substanceIssue": "null when substantive or non-test; cause and location when non_substantive", "reason": "Test execution reason/verification content"},
   "readyForQualityCheck": true,
   "nextActions": "Overall quality verification by quality assurance process"
 }
@@ -337,11 +336,7 @@ Minimal example (out_of_scope_file):
   "reason": "Out of scope file",
   "taskName": "[task name]",
   "escalation_type": "out_of_scope_file",
-  "details": {
-    "file_path": "[path attempted]",
-    "allowed_list": ["[union of Target Files, task file, work plan, Provides]"],
-    "modification_reason": "[why modification was attempted]"
-  },
+  "details": {"file_path": "[path attempted]", "allowed_list": ["[union of Target Files, task file, work plan, Provides]"], "modification_reason": "[why modification was attempted]"},
   "user_decision_required": true,
   "suggested_options": ["Add to Target files and retry", "Split into separate task", "Reconsider approach"]
 }