create-yss-spec 1.0.0

package/template/.claude/skills/beautiful-article/theme-profiles/sottsass.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+# Theme Profile · sottsass（孟菲斯 / 80s 撞色）
+
+> 这是给 **AI 写作时读** 的 authoring profile，不是 CSS。CSS token 由组件库
+> 运行时主题持有（`data-theme="sottsass"`）。本文件是"如何选择和使用这个主题"。
+> 详尽版本见组件库 canonical md：`src/theme/themes/sottsass/sottsass.md`（写代码 /
+> 公式 / 媒体 / Raw 前请读它）。
+
+- **runtime theme id**：`sottsass`（`<ThemeProvider theme="sottsass">`）
+- **气质**：后现代 / 孟菲斯（米兰 1981）。暖奶油纸、黑墨，故意撞色的孟菲斯粉彩
+  （艳粉 / 青绿 / 阳光黄 / 钴蓝）。识别度来自 80s 游戏感：无模糊硬投影、轻微旋转、
+  圆角彩色药丸、波浪下划线、几何彩屑。响亮欢快但仍可读。
+
+## 适合 / 不适合的文章类型
+
+- **适合**：好玩的科普 / 解释、设计 / 文化 / 潮流写作、发布与活动稿、轻松上手；
+  "个性大于精致"、敢撞色不端着的内容。
+- **不适合**：学术（`knuth`）、黑白大刊（`bodoni`）、冷调规格（`vignelli`）、
+  暗底工程（`shannon` / `fuller`）、严肃克制内容、安静治愈（`andy` 更柔）、幻灯片。
+
+## 排版气质
+
+- 标题 / 标签用 Space Grotesk（顽皮几何），正文用 Hanken Grotesk（干净 grotesque）。
+- 正文 ~17px，行距 1.65；display 字重 700；强调不用斜体（协议级禁用），用色块 / 高亮。
+- **撞色是表达、钴蓝是结构**：链接 / 序号固定钴蓝（可读）；粉 / 青 / 黄只作大胆填充，绝不作小字。
+
+## Raw 风格
+
+像一页孟菲斯海报式的图解。
+
+- 约束的是**气质**（撞色块、无模糊硬投影、混合圆角、轻旋转、彩屑 / 波纹），不是**媒介**。
+- 典型：硬投影卡片、撞色几何图、彩屑 / 波纹装饰、旋转标签、明快的比例 / 步骤图。
+- 构图：黑描边 + 偏移硬投影 + 撞色 + 混合圆角；可轻微旋转。
+- 动效：带回弹的弹入 / 位移；避免无限霓虹循环。
+
+## 媒体（图片 / 视频 / 音频）风格
+
+- 适合：几何彩屑插画、撞色海报、波纹 / 水磨石纹理、硬投影拼贴、明快人物 / 静物。
+- 构图大胆撞色、可旋转 / 不对称、黑描边 + 硬投影；caption 简洁俏皮；必配 alt。
+- 色彩粉 / 青 / 黄 / 蓝撞色 + 黑白；不用柔光渐变与霓虹。
+
+## 代码 / 公式风格
+
+- `CodeBlock` 像潮流杂志的代码卡片：暖浅 surface + 黑边 + 适度圆角，可有硬投影；不用暗终端。
+- Prism token：标签 / 函数走钴蓝，关键字走红玫 risk，字符串走青 success；撞色在边框 / 高亮，不在语法色彩虹。
+- `Formula` 可有圆角 surface 与一抹色，克制对齐。
+
+## 禁止项
+
+- 把粉 / 青 / 黄当正文 / 小字 / 链接色（可读结构固定钴蓝）。
+- 柔光模糊阴影（本主题用无模糊硬投影）、廉价渐变、霓虹。
+- "撞色 + 硬投影"用力过猛到读不下去（仍要保证正文从容可读）。用斜体强调（协议级禁用）。
+
+## 不同信息密度下的表现建议（建议，非限制）
+
+- `100% 好玩 explainer`：撞色长文 + 旋转章节块 + 硬投影 callout + 彩屑点缀，正文为主体。
+- `60-80% 内容`：保留关键硬投影卡 + 撞色图解，波浪下划线点睛。
+- `40% briefing`：Raw 偏撞色比例 / 步骤图，文字更短，仍是孟菲斯形态。

package/template/.claude/skills/beautiful-article/theme-profiles/tufte.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+# Theme Profile · tufte（Data-Ink）
+
+> 这是给 **AI 写作时读** 的 authoring profile，不是 CSS。CSS token 由组件库
+> 运行时主题持有（`data-theme="tufte"`）。本文件是"如何选择和使用这个主题"。
+> 详尽版本见组件库 canonical md：`src/theme/themes/tufte/tufte.md`（写代码 /
+> 公式 / 媒体 / Raw 前请读它）。
+
+- **runtime theme id**：`tufte`（`<ThemeProvider theme="tufte">`）
+- **气质**：Edward Tufte 数据墨水比。页面上每一滴墨水都承载信息。去除卡片、
+  填色、阴影、圆角、装饰色。留下文字、发丝级参考线、充裕页边、由排版承载的含义。
+
+## 适合 / 不适合的文章类型
+
+- **适合**：`longform`、`full-report`、`explainer`、`review`（技术 / 数据型）、
+  `tutorial`。以论点与证据为主角的长文阅读。
+- **不适合**：需要 10 米外观看的幻灯片（正文字号刻意偏小）；移动端优先且需要大量
+  边注的场景。
+
+## 排版气质
+
+- 正文与标题用老式（old-style）衬线（et-book → Palatino / Georgia / 宋体），字重 400。
+- 标签 / 注释 / 表头用人文 sans，小字号。
+- 正文刻意偏小（~16px），行距 1.6；标题层级克制（h1≈2.5rem，h2≈1.7rem）。
+- 强调靠字重 / 颜色 / 间距，不靠斜体（协议级禁用斜体），不靠厚黑体。
+
+## Raw 风格
+
+像作者为当前段落手画的一张小图，不是营销组件。
+
+- 约束的是**气质**（克制、线条化、数据密集、低装饰），不是**媒介** —— 可用任意
+  HTML / CSS / React，按需才用 SVG / canvas。
+- 典型：细线折线 / 散点 / slopegraph、小坐标轴、可拖动阈值线、局部高亮、文本旁注、
+  微型 sparkline、轻量可调参数控件、紧凑对照排版。
+- 构图：少填充、多线条；信息密度可以高，但每条线 / 每个元素都要有含义。
+- 动效：默认无；必须交互时只用即时响应或极轻过渡，不用弹跳 / 漂浮 / 循环装饰。
+- 颜色 / 字体 / 间距必须取自 `--ra-*`，不自造 palette。
+
+## 媒体（图片 / 视频 / 音频）风格
+
+- 适合：真实数据图、论文 / 报告截图、表格截屏、产品界面局部、低饱和摄影、黑白或
+  暖纸感线稿、地图 / 时间轴 / 细线示意图。
+- 构图留白充足、主体清楚、边缘干净；必须配清晰 caption / source / alt。
+- 截图优先裁掉浏览器 chrome。
+
+## 代码 / 公式风格
+
+- `CodeBlock` 像正文里的精密标本：纸面轻 surface + 发丝线，不用深色编辑器壳 / 发光边框 /
+  彩色标题栏。行号可见但退后。
+- Prism token 色从主题派生：结构 / 标签用青灰 accent，关键字 / 警示用暖红 risk，
+  字符串用低饱和绿。
+- `Formula` 像正文里的数学标注，块级公式只用发丝线与留白承载。
+
+## 禁止项
+
+- 卡片、面板、填色块、投影、圆角；比 `#D8D2C2` 更深的网格线。
+- emoji / 图标当装饰；色彩用于"承载含义"以外的任何用途。
+- 库存感 hero 图、3D 插画、渐变背景、装饰光斑、强饱和科技蓝紫、卡通人物。
+- 在 Raw 里写出与 Data-Ink 相反的装饰性组件（仪表盘大屏、粒子背景、玻璃拟态）。
+
+## 不同信息密度下的表现建议（建议，非限制）
+
+- `100% longform / full-report`：克制长文为主，Raw 点亮关键概念，数据证据优先。
+- `60-80% explainer / review`：保留核心证据 + 图解，正文仍是主体。
+- `40% visual-essay`：仍成立，但 Raw 应偏图解 / 证据、低装饰，文字更短。

package/template/.claude/skills/beautiful-article/theme-profiles/vignelli.md

@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+# Theme Profile · vignelli（瑞士国际主义文档）
+
+> 这是给 **AI 写作时读** 的 authoring profile，不是 CSS。CSS token 由组件库
+> 运行时主题持有（`data-theme="vignelli"`）。本文件是"如何选择和使用这个主题"。
+> 详尽版本见组件库 canonical md：`src/theme/themes/vignelli/vignelli.md`（写代码 /
+> 公式 / 媒体 / Raw 前请读它）。
+
+- **runtime theme id**：`vignelli`（`<ThemeProvider theme="vignelli">`）
+- **气质**：瑞士国际主义排版。ReActicle **唯一的 sans 正文 + 冷中性**主题。冷中性纸、
+  一个 grotesque 字族在不同字号上建立层级、发丝网格线、一抹瑞士红、等宽体承载元数据。
+  完整继承结构纪律（以线代框、去垃圾表格、色彩承载含义）。
+
+## 适合 / 不适合的文章类型
+
+- **适合**：`docs` / 产品文档、`spec` / 技术规格、`changelog` / release notes、
+  `reference` / SDK·API 参考、AI 工具 / 平台文档、`explainer`、`tutorial`。
+  需要强结构、可扫读的中性内容。
+- **不适合**：温暖叙事（`press`）；正式学术论文（`knuth`）；暗底工程现场（`shannon`）；幻灯片。
+
+## 排版气质
+
+- 正文与标题用单一 grotesque 字族（Söhne → Aktiv Grotesk → Helvetica Neue → Arial），
+  **靠字号与留白、而非堆字重**建立层级。
+- 标签 / 表头用同一字族小字号；元数据 / 代码用等宽体作 metadata "chip"（以线与字重呈现，
+  绝不做成彩色胶囊或卡片）。
+- 正文 ~17px，行距 1.6；大标题带负字距保持紧致。强调不用斜体（协议级禁用）。
+
+## Raw 风格
+
+像一页严格按网格设计的系统文档插图。
+
+- 约束的是**气质**（冷中性、强网格、系统化、可扫读），不是**媒介**。
+- 典型：网格示意、流程 / 状态图、规格对照表、键盘 / 快捷键图、可切换参数说明、
+  带 mono 标注的 SVG。
+- 构图：强网格对齐、清晰层级、瑞士红作识别线索；填色克制、服务理解。颜色只用 `--ra-*`。
+- 动效：允许短促干脆的一次性过渡（~120ms）；避免无限循环装饰。
+
+## 媒体（图片 / 视频 / 音频）风格
+
+- 适合：界面截图（裁净 chrome）、信息图 / 流程图 / 网格示意、图标系统说明、线框 / 规格图、
+  低饱和中性摄影。
+- 构图强网格对齐、留白克制、主体清楚；caption 简洁说明来源；必须配 alt。
+- 色彩贴近冷中性体系，强调只用瑞士红承载信息。
+
+## 代码 / 公式风格
+
+- `CodeBlock` 像排版严谨的技术规格：冷纸浅 surface + 发丝线，不用暗色编辑器窗口。行号克制。
+- Prism token 从主题派生：标签 / 函数用瑞士红 accent（克制），关键字 / 风险用 risk 深红，
+  字符串用绿，其余走墨色 / muted。
+- `Formula` 像规格里的公式：克制、对齐、发丝线与留白承载。
+
+## 禁止项
+
+- 卡片、面板、填色块、投影、圆角、**彩色左边框强调卡**（被点名的 slop）。
+- 把瑞士红当装饰；第二个红色用于"警示"以外；用堆字重代替字号层级。
+- 紫粉渐变 SaaS hero、霓虹、Tailwind 默认味、emoji / 图标当装饰、3D 渲染图标。
+- Raw / 媒体变成营销落地页或仪表盘大屏。
+
+## 不同信息密度下的表现建议（建议，非限制）
+
+- `100% docs / reference`：系统化长文 + 规格表 + 网格图，正文为主体。
+- `60-80% spec / changelog`：保留关键规格 + 流程图，mono 元数据带扫读友好。
+- `40% briefing`：Raw 偏网格图解，文字更短，仍是文档形态。

package/template/.claude/skills/code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
+---
+name: code-review
+description: Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes — Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/PRD asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to "review since X".
+---
+
+Two-axis review of the diff between `HEAD` and a fixed point the user supplies:
+
+- **Standards** — does the code conform to this repo's documented coding standards?
+- **Spec** — does the code faithfully implement the originating issue / PRD / spec?
+
+Both axes run as **parallel sub-agents** so they don't pollute each other's context, then this skill aggregates their findings.
+
+The issue tracker should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` is missing.
+
+## Process
+
+### 1. Pin the fixed point
+
+Whatever the user said is the fixed point — a commit SHA, branch name, tag, `main`, `HEAD~5`, etc. If they didn't specify one, ask for it.
+
+Capture the diff command once: `git diff <fixed-point>...HEAD` (three-dot, so the comparison is against the merge-base). Also note the list of commits via `git log <fixed-point>..HEAD --oneline`.
+
+Before going further, confirm the fixed point resolves (`git rev-parse <fixed-point>`) and the diff is non-empty. A bad ref or empty diff should fail here — not inside two parallel sub-agents.
+
+### 2. Identify the spec source
+
+Look for the originating spec, in this order:
+
+1. Issue references in the commit messages (`#123`, `Closes #45`, GitLab `!67`, etc.) — fetch via the workflow in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`.
+2. A path the user passed as an argument.
+3. A PRD/spec file under `docs/`, `specs/`, or `.scratch/` matching the branch name or feature.
+4. If nothing is found, ask the user where the spec is. If they say there isn't one, the **Spec** sub-agent will skip and report "no spec available".
+
+### 3. Identify the standards sources
+
+Anything in the repo that documents how code should be written, such as `CODING_STANDARDS.md` or `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
+
+On top of whatever the repo documents, the Standards axis always carries the **smell baseline** below — a fixed set of Fowler code smells (_Refactoring_, ch.3) that applies even when a repo documents nothing. Two rules bind it:
+
+- **The repo overrides.** A documented repo standard always wins; where it endorses something the baseline would flag, suppress the smell.
+- **Always a judgement call.** Each smell is a labelled heuristic ("possible Feature Envy"), never a hard violation — and, like any standard here, skip anything tooling already enforces.
+
+Each smell reads *what it is* → *how to fix*; match it against the diff:
+
+- **Mysterious Name** — a function, variable, or type whose name doesn't reveal what it does or holds. → rename it; if no honest name comes, the design's murky.
+- **Duplicated Code** — the same logic shape appears in more than one hunk or file in the change. → extract the shared shape, call it from both.
+- **Feature Envy** — a method that reaches into another object's data more than its own. → move the method onto the data it envies.
+- **Data Clumps** — the same few fields or params keep travelling together (a type wanting to be born). → bundle them into one type, pass that.
+- **Primitive Obsession** — a primitive or string standing in for a domain concept that deserves its own type. → give the concept its own small type.
+- **Repeated Switches** — the same `switch`/`if`-cascade on the same type recurs across the change. → replace with polymorphism, or one map both sites share.
+- **Shotgun Surgery** — one logical change forces scattered edits across many files in the diff. → gather what changes together into one module.
+- **Divergent Change** — one file or module is edited for several unrelated reasons. → split so each module changes for one reason.
+- **Speculative Generality** — abstraction, parameters, or hooks added for needs the spec doesn't have. → delete it; inline back until a real need shows.
+- **Message Chains** — long `a.b().c().d()` navigation the caller shouldn't depend on. → hide the walk behind one method on the first object.
+- **Middle Man** — a class or function that mostly just delegates onward. → cut it, call the real target direct.
+- **Refused Bequest** — a subclass or implementer that ignores or overrides most of what it inherits. → drop the inheritance, use composition.
+
+### 4. Spawn both sub-agents in parallel
+
+Send a single message with two `Agent` tool calls. Use the `general-purpose` subagent for both.
+
+**Standards sub-agent prompt** — include:
+
+- The full diff command and commit list.
+- The list of standards-source files you found in step 3, **plus the smell baseline from step 3** pasted in full — the sub-agent has no other access to it.
+- The brief: "Report — per file/hunk where relevant — (a) every place the diff violates a documented standard: cite the standard (file + the rule); and (b) any baseline smell you spot: name it and quote the hunk. Distinguish hard violations from judgement calls — documented-standard breaches can be hard, but baseline smells are always judgement calls, and a documented repo standard overrides the baseline. Skip anything tooling enforces. Under 400 words."
+
+**Spec sub-agent prompt** — include:
+
+- The diff command and commit list.
+- The path or fetched contents of the spec.
+- The brief: "Report: (a) requirements the spec asked for that are missing or partial; (b) behaviour in the diff that wasn't asked for (scope creep); (c) requirements that look implemented but where the implementation looks wrong. Quote the spec line for each finding. Under 400 words."
+
+If the spec is missing, skip the Spec sub-agent and note this in the final report.
+
+### 5. Aggregate
+
+Present the two reports under `## Standards` and `## Spec` headings, verbatim or lightly cleaned. Do **not** merge or rerank findings — the two axes are deliberately separate (see _Why two axes_).
+
+End with a one-line summary: total findings per axis, and the worst issue _within each axis_ (if any). Don't pick a single winner across axes — that's the reranking the separation exists to prevent.
+
+## Why two axes
+
+A change can pass one axis and fail the other:
+
+- Code that follows every standard but implements the wrong thing → **Standards pass, Spec fail.**
+- Code that does exactly what the issue asked but breaks the project's conventions → **Spec pass, Standards fail.**
+
+Reporting them separately stops one axis from masking the other.

package/template/.claude/skills/codebase-design/DEEPENING.md

@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+# Deepening
+
+How to deepen a cluster of shallow modules safely, given its dependencies. Assumes the vocabulary in [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) — **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**.
+
+## Dependency categories
+
+When assessing a candidate for deepening, classify its dependencies. The category determines how the deepened module is tested across its seam.
+
+### 1. In-process
+
+Pure computation, in-memory state, no I/O. Always deepenable — merge the modules and test through the new interface directly. No adapter needed.
+
+### 2. Local-substitutable
+
+Dependencies that have local test stand-ins (PGLite for Postgres, in-memory filesystem). Deepenable if the stand-in exists. The deepened module is tested with the stand-in running in the test suite. The seam is internal; no port at the module's external interface.
+
+### 3. Remote but owned (Ports & Adapters)
+
+Your own services across a network boundary (microservices, internal APIs). Define a **port** (interface) at the seam. The deep module owns the logic; the transport is injected as an **adapter**. Tests use an in-memory adapter. Production uses an HTTP/gRPC/queue adapter.
+
+Recommendation shape: *"Define a port at the seam, implement an HTTP adapter for production and an in-memory adapter for testing, so the logic sits in one deep module even though it's deployed across a network."*
+
+### 4. True external (Mock)
+
+Third-party services (Stripe, Twilio, etc.) you don't control. The deepened module takes the external dependency as an injected port; tests provide a mock adapter.
+
+## Seam discipline
+
+- **One adapter means a hypothetical seam. Two adapters means a real one.** Don't introduce a port unless at least two adapters are justified (typically production + test). A single-adapter seam is just indirection.
+- **Internal seams vs external seams.** A deep module can have internal seams (private to its implementation, used by its own tests) as well as the external seam at its interface. Don't expose internal seams through the interface just because tests use them.
+
+## Testing strategy: replace, don't layer
+
+- Old unit tests on shallow modules become waste once tests at the deepened module's interface exist — delete them.
+- Write new tests at the deepened module's interface. The **interface is the test surface**.
+- Tests assert on observable outcomes through the interface, not internal state.
+- Tests should survive internal refactors — they describe behaviour, not implementation. If a test has to change when the implementation changes, it's testing past the interface.

package/template/.claude/skills/codebase-design/DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+# Design It Twice
+
+When the user wants to explore alternative interfaces for a chosen deepening candidate, use this parallel sub-agent pattern. Based on "Design It Twice" (Ousterhout) — your first idea is unlikely to be the best.
+
+Uses the vocabulary in [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) — **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**.
+
+## Process
+
+### 1. Frame the problem space
+
+Before spawning sub-agents, write a user-facing explanation of the problem space for the chosen candidate:
+
+- The constraints any new interface would need to satisfy
+- The dependencies it would rely on, and which category they fall into (see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md))
+- A rough illustrative code sketch to ground the constraints — not a proposal, just a way to make the constraints concrete
+
+Show this to the user, then immediately proceed to Step 2. The user reads and thinks while the sub-agents work in parallel.
+
+### 2. Spawn sub-agents
+
+Spawn 3+ sub-agents in parallel using the Agent tool. Each must produce a **radically different** interface for the deepened module.
+
+Prompt each sub-agent with a separate technical brief (file paths, coupling details, dependency category from [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md), what sits behind the seam). The brief is independent of the user-facing problem-space explanation in Step 1. Give each agent a different design constraint:
+
+- Agent 1: "Minimize the interface — aim for 1–3 entry points max. Maximise leverage per entry point."
+- Agent 2: "Maximise flexibility — support many use cases and extension."
+- Agent 3: "Optimise for the most common caller — make the default case trivial."
+- Agent 4 (if applicable): "Design around ports & adapters for cross-seam dependencies."
+
+Include both [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) vocabulary and CONTEXT.md vocabulary in the brief so each sub-agent names things consistently with the architecture language and the project's domain language.
+
+Each sub-agent outputs:
+
+1. Interface (types, methods, params — plus invariants, ordering, error modes)
+2. Usage example showing how callers use it
+3. What the implementation hides behind the seam
+4. Dependency strategy and adapters (see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md))
+5. Trade-offs — where leverage is high, where it's thin
+
+### 3. Present and compare
+
+Present designs sequentially so the user can absorb each one, then compare them in prose. Contrast by **depth** (leverage at the interface), **locality** (where change concentrates), and **seam placement**.
+
+After comparing, give your own recommendation: which design you think is strongest and why. If elements from different designs would combine well, propose a hybrid. Be opinionated — the user wants a strong read, not a menu.

package/template/.claude/skills/codebase-design/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
+---
+name: codebase-design
+description: Shared vocabulary for designing deep modules. Use when the user wants to design or improve a module's interface, find deepening opportunities, decide where a seam goes, make code more testable or AI-navigable, or when another skill needs the deep-module vocabulary.
+---
+
+# Codebase Design
+
+Design **deep modules**: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface, placed at a clean seam, testable through that interface. Use this language and these principles wherever code is being designed or restructured. The aim is leverage for callers, locality for maintainers, and testability for everyone.
+
+## Glossary
+
+Use these terms exactly — don't substitute "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." Consistent language is the whole point.
+
+**Module** — anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic: a function, class, package, or tier-spanning slice. _Avoid_: unit, component, service.
+
+**Interface** — everything a caller must know to use the module correctly: the type signature, but also invariants, ordering constraints, error modes, required configuration, and performance characteristics. _Avoid_: API, signature (too narrow — they refer only to the type-level surface).
+
+**Implementation** — what's inside a module, its body of code. Distinct from **Adapter**: a thing can be a small adapter with a large implementation (a Postgres repo) or a large adapter with a small implementation (an in-memory fake). Reach for "adapter" when the seam is the topic; "implementation" otherwise.
+
+**Depth** — leverage at the interface: the amount of behaviour a caller (or test) can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. A module is **deep** when a large amount of behaviour sits behind a small interface, **shallow** when the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation.
+
+**Seam** _(Michael Feathers)_ — a place where you can alter behaviour without editing in that place; the *location* at which a module's interface lives. Where to put the seam is its own design decision, distinct from what goes behind it. _Avoid_: boundary (overloaded with DDD's bounded context).
+
+**Adapter** — a concrete thing that satisfies an interface at a seam. Describes *role* (what slot it fills), not substance (what's inside).
+
+**Leverage** — what callers get from depth: more capability per unit of interface they learn. One implementation pays back across N call sites and M tests.
+
+**Locality** — what maintainers get from depth: change, bugs, knowledge, and verification concentrate in one place rather than spreading across callers. Fix once, fixed everywhere.
+
+## Deep vs shallow
+
+**Deep module** = small interface + lots of implementation:
+
+```
+┌─────────────────────┐
+│   Small Interface   │  ← Few methods, simple params
+├─────────────────────┤
+│                     │
+│  Deep Implementation│  ← Complex logic hidden
+│                     │
+└─────────────────────┘
+```
+
+**Shallow module** = large interface + little implementation (avoid):
+
+```
+┌─────────────────────────────────┐
+│       Large Interface           │  ← Many methods, complex params
+├─────────────────────────────────┤
+│  Thin Implementation            │  ← Just passes through
+└─────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+When designing an interface, ask:
+
+- Can I reduce the number of methods?
+- Can I simplify the parameters?
+- Can I hide more complexity inside?
+
+## Principles
+
+- **Depth is a property of the interface, not the implementation.** A deep module can be internally composed of small, mockable, swappable parts — they just aren't part of the interface. A module can have **internal seams** (private to its implementation, used by its own tests) as well as the **external seam** at its interface.
+- **The deletion test.** Imagine deleting the module. If complexity vanishes, it was a pass-through. If complexity reappears across N callers, it was earning its keep.
+- **The interface is the test surface.** Callers and tests cross the same seam. If you want to test *past* the interface, the module is probably the wrong shape.
+- **One adapter means a hypothetical seam. Two adapters means a real one.** Don't introduce a seam unless something actually varies across it.
+
+## Designing for testability
+
+Good interfaces make testing natural:
+
+1. **Accept dependencies, don't create them.**
+
+   ```typescript
+   // Testable
+   function processOrder(order, paymentGateway) {}
+
+   // Hard to test
+   function processOrder(order) {
+     const gateway = new StripeGateway();
+   }
+   ```
+
+2. **Return results, don't produce side effects.**
+
+   ```typescript
+   // Testable
+   function calculateDiscount(cart): Discount {}
+
+   // Hard to test
+   function applyDiscount(cart): void {
+     cart.total -= discount;
+   }
+   ```
+
+3. **Small surface area.** Fewer methods = fewer tests needed. Fewer params = simpler test setup.
+
+## Relationships
+
+- A **Module** has exactly one **Interface** (the surface it presents to callers and tests).
+- **Depth** is a property of a **Module**, measured against its **Interface**.
+- A **Seam** is where a **Module**'s **Interface** lives.
+- An **Adapter** sits at a **Seam** and satisfies the **Interface**.
+- **Depth** produces **Leverage** for callers and **Locality** for maintainers.
+
+## Rejected framings
+
+- **Depth as ratio of implementation-lines to interface-lines** (Ousterhout): rewards padding the implementation. We use depth-as-leverage instead.
+- **"Interface" as the TypeScript `interface` keyword or a class's public methods**: too narrow — interface here includes every fact a caller must know.
+- **"Boundary"**: overloaded with DDD's bounded context. Say **seam** or **interface**.
+
+## Going deeper
+
+- **Deepening a cluster given its dependencies** — see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md): dependency categories, seam discipline, and replace-don't-layer testing.
+- **Exploring alternative interfaces** — see [DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md](DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md): spin up parallel sub-agents to design the interface several radically different ways, then compare on depth, locality, and seam placement.

package/template/.claude/skills/competitive-intelligence/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+---
+name: competitive-intelligence
+description: Use when researching competitors, market positioning, pricing, feature gaps, customer sentiment, or category trends before Discovery, PRD, product strategy, or roadmap decisions.
+---
+
+# Competitive Intelligence
+
+Source requested for this project: `anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins`, `sales/skills/competitive-intelligence`.
+
+Use this skill when competitive or market facts are needed to shape product Discovery, PRD scope, positioning, differentiation, pricing assumptions, or roadmap tradeoffs.
+
+## Core Rules
+
+- Browse or verify current public sources before making factual claims about competitors, pricing, features, market position, funding, partnerships, product releases, or customer sentiment.
+- Separate facts, evidence, and inference. Do not present strategy guesses as verified competitor intent.
+- Prefer primary or near-primary sources: official product pages, docs, pricing pages, changelogs, release notes, filings, case studies, status pages, marketplace listings, reputable analyst reports, and dated customer reviews.
+- Record dates for time-sensitive claims. Pricing, packaging, roadmap, customer logos, and feature availability can change quickly.
+- Persistent project outputs should use Chinese body text by default. Keep competitor names, product names, URLs, API names, and quoted identifiers unchanged.
+- Do not bypass paywalls, scrape private systems, or use confidential information. Public evidence only unless the user explicitly provides internal material.
+
+## Workflow
+
+1. Define the intelligence question:
+   - Which product decision will this inform?
+   - Which competitors or substitute workflows are in scope?
+   - Which markets, user segments, regions, editions, or use cases matter?
+   - What must be decided after the research?
+2. Build an evidence plan:
+   - Official sources for product capabilities and pricing.
+   - Documentation and changelogs for depth and recency.
+   - Reviews, community posts, app marketplaces, and job posts for adoption and pain signals.
+   - Analyst, media, or public filings for market context when relevant.
+3. Capture evidence with source links and dates:
+   - Feature / capability evidence.
+   - Pricing / packaging evidence.
+   - UX / onboarding evidence.
+   - Integration / ecosystem evidence.
+   - Customer segment and positioning evidence.
+   - Complaints, workarounds, or unmet needs.
+4. Synthesize:
+   - Competitor positioning.
+   - Table-stakes capabilities.
+   - Differentiators and defensibility.
+   - Gaps and underserved jobs-to-be-done.
+   - Risks if we copy the competitor too closely.
+   - Product opportunities for PRD or roadmap.
+5. Hand off to lifecycle assets:
+   - Update Discovery findings in `docs/discovery/`.
+   - Create or update a competitor matrix in `docs/discovery/reports/`.
+   - Feed stable user, pain, MVP, non-goal, and success criteria into `grill-with-docs` and `to-prd`.
+   - Record uncertain claims as assumptions, not requirements.
+
+## Output Shape
+
+For a quick brief:
+
+```markdown
+## 竞品情报简报
+
+### 研究问题
+- <本次情报要支持的产品决策>
+
+### 范围
+- 竞品 / 替代方案：<list>
+- 用户 / 市场：<scope>
+- 时间范围：<date>
+
+### 关键结论
+- <fact or inference, clearly labeled>
+
+### 证据表
+| 结论 | 证据 | 来源 | 日期 | 置信度 |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+
+### 竞品矩阵
+| 维度 | 竞品 A | 竞品 B | 我们的机会 |
+|---|---|---|---|
+
+### PRD 输入
+- 用户 / 痛点：
+- MVP 建议：
+- 非目标范围：
+- 验收或验证建议：
+
+### 风险与待验证假设
+- <assumption>
+```
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- Do not treat competitive parity as a product requirement. Convert evidence into user value, MVP boundaries, and testable acceptance criteria.
+- Do not copy competitor UX, text, proprietary workflows, screenshots, or private materials into project artifacts.
+- If sources conflict, show both and mark confidence rather than forcing a false conclusion.
+- If current web access is unavailable, state the limitation and produce only a research plan or hypothesis list.