devrites 5.10.2 → 5.12.0

package/pack/generated/devin/skills/rite-spec/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,156 @@
+---
+name: rite-spec
+description: Specify new, vague, or high-risk behavior before code. Use for features, auth, migrations, or public API changes; not for planning an approved spec.
+argument-hint: "<feature or idea>"
+---
+
+<!-- loads: {"always":["devrites-lib/reference/standards/core.md","devrites-lib/reference/standards/elicitation.md","devrites-lib/reference/standards/agents.md","rite-spec/reference/investigation.md","rite-spec/reference/question-protocol.md","rite-spec/reference/spec-template.md","rite-spec/reference/spec-checklists.md","rite-spec/reference/state-workspace.md","rite-spec/reference/acceptance-criteria.md","rite-spec/reference/interview-patterns.md","rite-spec/reference/ai-spec-template.md","rite-spec/reference/anti-patterns.md"],"triggers":{"afk":["devrites-lib/reference/standards/afk-hitl.md"],"applicability":["devrites-lib/reference/standards/repository-topology.md","devrites-lib/reference/standards/data-integrity.md","devrites-lib/reference/standards/integration-reliability.md"],"documentation":["devrites-lib/reference/standards/documentation.md"],"edge-cases":["devrites-lib/reference/standards/edge-case-trace.md"],"frontend":["rite-build/reference/frontend-trigger.md"],"grammar":["devrites-lib/reference/standards/spec-grammar.md"],"principles":["devrites-lib/reference/standards/principles.md"],"references":["rite-spec/reference/references-intake.md"]},"workspace":["brief.md","spec.md","state.md","decisions.md","assumptions.md","questions.md"],"workspaceByRole":{"evidence-scout":["brief.md","spec.md","state.md","questions.md"]}} -->
+> Read-set manifest: `devrites-engine context <slug> --phase spec` bundles every file named below into one deduplicated read. Trigger names map to the conditional rules in the sections that follow.
+
+
+# /rite-spec: investigate and write the spec
+
+Investigate and resolve material gaps into a placed, covered `spec.md`.
+`/rite-clarify` audits topology next. Write no plan, task, or code here.
+
+> Use `/rite-quick` for a typo, copy/config edit, or one-function fix. It returns
+> here for auth, data, migration, public API, or multi-slice work.
+
+## Rules consulted (read on demand from `.devin/skills/devrites-lib/reference/standards/`)
+Pull [`documentation.md`](../devrites-lib/reference/standards/documentation.md) for significant decisions and [`principles.md`](../devrites-lib/reference/standards/principles.md) for
+declared invariants; an unavoidable principle violation is blocking.
+For behavioral/high-risk acceptance, use [`spec-grammar.md`](../devrites-lib/reference/standards/spec-grammar.md) plus workspace schema;
+simple criteria stay flat `AC-###`. Apply
+[`acceptance-criteria.md`](reference/acceptance-criteria.md) so each is binary and observable.
+Use [`edge-case-trace.md`](../devrites-lib/reference/standards/edge-case-trace.md)
+to populate only relevant edge/prohibition rows (trigger `edge-cases`). The spec's applicability map routes
+topology, data, integration, security, and delivery concerns to their focused standard;
+load a routed standard to discover required behavior, not to prescribe implementation.
+
+## Operating rules (DevRites core)
+- No silent assumptions or guessing; prefer conventions; ask on scope,
+  placement, data, UX, security, migration, or acceptance changes.
+- **Root authority:** controlling chat asks humans, decides, and writes workspace;
+  evidence work follows [`agents.md`](../devrites-lib/reference/standards/agents.md).
+- **Author one section at a time:** problem → goal → requirements → acceptance →
+  edges. For contested requirements/boundaries/assumptions, apply
+  [`elicitation.md`](../devrites-lib/reference/standards/elicitation.md) before continuing.
+
+## Workflow
+0. Read core; if `.devrites/ACTIVE` exists, require its `state.md`.
+0a. **Adoption check.** For a never-adopted existing codebase, route first to
+   `/rite-adopt` with `$ARGUMENTS`; it derives baseline spec/principles. HITL
+   offers ranked adopt-first and spec-only choices; permitted AFK adopts.
+   Silently skip greenfield/onboarded projects, and never block solely on absence:
+   ```bash
+   if [ ! -d .devrites/archive ] \
+      && [ -z "$(ls .devrites/work 2>/dev/null)" ] \
+      && [ -n "$(git ls-files 2>/dev/null | grep -vE '^\.(devrites|claude)/' | head -1)" ]; then
+     echo "brownfield, not yet adopted → recommend /rite-adopt first (carry this idea as its next objective)"
+   else echo "greenfield or already onboarded → continue spec"; fi
+   ```
+1. **Understand the request** (`$ARGUMENTS`). State outcome and underlying
+   problem in one sentence. **Completion:** it includes both.
+1a. **Dedupe.** Search local issues/PRDs, work, and archive. On a close match ask
+   extend/adopt/new, then record the choice; otherwise continue silently.
+   A recorded [feature-sequence continuation](../rite-plan/reference/slicing.md#continuation-workspaces)
+   is a **new** workspace (`<parent>-2`): carry the parent slug and position into
+   `brief.md`, read the parent artifacts as design input, and do not route to
+   `/rite-plan revise` on the parent. When the ask is open and archived work records
+   an unfinished sequence, propose that next continuation (slug + objective) as the
+   recommended option instead of a fresh slug.
+2. **Investigate:** follow [investigation](reference/investigation.md) through its
+   complete findings and done-when gate. Resolve the project's **test /
+   build/typecheck/lint** commands with `devrites-engine detect commands`
+   (Makefile → package.json → language manifests; read-only) and record the
+   resolved text — an `unresolved` slot means the plan must name the concrete
+   command later, never an invented one. Discover frontend/backend systems, and declared project guidance
+   (`PRODUCT.md`, `DESIGN.md`, `CLAUDE.md`, `AGENTS.md`, and `.devrites/principles.md` when
+   present).
+   **Consult the capability ledger**, which records current system behavior
+   ([`ledger.md`](../rite-polish/reference/ledger.md)); Polish folds accepted deltas
+   before Review. List `.devrites/specs/*/spec.md` with the
+   host filesystem and read only capabilities this feature touches. Search accepted ADRs and
+   relevant `.devrites/**/decisions.md` files directly before asking the human to revisit a
+   settled architecture, API, or auth choice. Compare exact requirement headers and meanings
+   with the current ledger to choose ADDED/MODIFIED/REMOVED; never classify from memory. Use
+   [`spec-grammar.md`](../devrites-lib/reference/standards/spec-grammar.md)'s singular `Capability impact:` declaration to name the affected
+   capabilities and change, or give its specific `none` justification.
+   Inventory affected observable behavior from current test/contract/runtime/source
+   evidence; map each outcome to preserving REQ/AC. Greenfield `none` needs the
+   template's specific justification.
+   Identify proof constraints now: human-only credentials, unavailable environments, approval
+   windows, or acceptance not observable through existing test/runtime/browser surfaces.
+   An unfamiliar framework/version routes to `devrites-source-driven`; missing or
+   contradictory documentation is evidence to reconcile, never a license to guess.
+   Split independent placement, blast-radius, and external-fact questions into at most three
+   bounded `devrites-evidence-scout` tasks on one frozen candidate. Wait for and reconcile every
+   cited dossier before step 4. The scout supplies facts only; it never asks the human or writes
+   the spec.
+3. **Gather design references when provided:** [references-intake](reference/references-intake.md).
+   The human may attach screenshots, mockups, a Figma link, a video, links, or nothing.
+   Skip this step when none are provided. Otherwise, **view or fetch**
+   them, **save local files** into `.devrites/work/<slug>/references/`, and index them in
+   `references.md` as target, constraint, or inspiration. Later phases honor that role
+   rather than treating every reference as a fidelity target.
+   **Completion:** every supplied reference is saved and classified, or absence is explicit.
+3a. **Shape UX/UI before code when the feature is frontend**
+   ([frontend-trigger](../rite-build/reference/frontend-trigger.md)). Apply
+   `devrites-ux-shape` within the spec phase. It turns the
+   references and spec into a feature-level **`design-brief.md`** (design direction, key
+   states, interaction model, optional Figma/image visual-direction probe) that `/rite-build`
+   targets for the build. In HITL it pauses for the human to
+   confirm the direction; in AFK it asserts the best guess and logs it. Pure
+   backend/data/CLI features skip this.
+4. **Resolve human-owned gaps.** Recommend an option and let the human decide. Apply
+   [question-protocol](reference/question-protocol.md), the shared
+   [[`afk-hitl.md`](../devrites-lib/reference/standards/afk-hitl.md) option-set and decision-ownership rules](../devrites-lib/reference/standards/afk-hitl.md#decision-ownership-search-before-asking),
+   and [`interview-patterns.md`](reference/interview-patterns.md) for a vague ask. Every
+   material dimension is resolved by a human pick or explicitly deferred as non-blocking;
+   only genuinely reversible, low-impact details go to `assumptions.md`. A paper-only
+   uncertainty may take one scoped `/rite-prototype` detour. A declared-principle conflict
+   remains blocking until the human approves a recorded, scoped exception.
+4a. **Build-interruption forecast.** Search first, then list and close foreseeable human needs:
+   product/acceptance ambiguity, irreversible/external approval, or human-only access. Record
+   owned prerequisites. Keep a build checkpoint only for unavailable pre-code evidence or a
+   mandatory action-time approval. **Completion:** no foreseeable human choice is deferred.
+5. **Create or update the workspace** + set `.devrites/ACTIVE` from
+   [state-workspace](reference/state-workspace.md). If the slug already exists,
+   update the existing workspace rather than overwrite it; preserve history and
+   unrelated settled content. Write every required artifact and conditional
+   annex exactly from [spec-template](reference/spec-template.md)
+   ([ai-spec-template](reference/ai-spec-template.md)), including its
+   capability impact, existing-behavior preservation, grammar/delta,
+   stakeholder/constraint/invariant, failure/recovery, applicability, coverage-seed,
+   qualified backstop, edge/prohibition, UI, and AI rules. Native
+   hierarchical instructions remain stable; do not rewrite `AGENTS.md` or
+   `CLAUDE.md` for the active workspace.
+5a. **Check the spec prose** with [spec-checklists](reference/spec-checklists.md).
+   Emit every applicable domain checklist and fix each CRITICAL by correcting the spec,
+   never by softening the question.
+6. **Run the complete readiness gate** at the bottom of
+   [spec-template](reference/spec-template.md), then apply the
+   **Native grammar re-read checklist** in [`spec-grammar.md`](../devrites-lib/reference/standards/spec-grammar.md) to the complete
+   saved `spec.md`. Re-open the file after corrections and verify every
+   applicable item; there is no parser or replacement script. Natively compare
+   deltas with the current ledger using exact header semantics and the ledger's
+   complete-block preservation rule.
+   `tasks.md` deliberately does not exist yet; cross-artifact traceability starts in
+   `/rite-define`. Any grammar or delta failure blocks. The interruption forecast must be resolved, owned, or a justified
+   action-time gate. Then write `Spec gate: passed <iso>`.
+6a. **Existing-spec delta.** For a pre-existing slug/workspace, compare old/new
+   spec and questions, then show `Acceptance delta` (added/removed/reworded IDs)
+   and `Open-question delta` (opened/resolved/reworded IDs), using `none` for
+   empty categories. Show before proceeding; new workspaces skip.
+6b. **Review-before-code digest.** Before planning, render the compact human review:
+   `Intent` (one sentence), `Done means` (top acceptance/scenario IDs), `Scope/risk` (what is in/out
+   plus the hard gates), and `Build exactly this?` (yes → next phase; no → revise now). The digest
+   is a view over `spec.md`, not a new artifact. **Stop** after the digest.
+
+> **Mid-flight discipline.** Do not skip investigation, gap resolution, or placement
+> decisions. See [`anti-patterns`](reference/anti-patterns.md).
+
+## Output
+
+When the ask overlaps the ACTIVE feature (same intent, >50% scope), route to
+`/rite-plan revise` (its gate decides) rather than minting a parallel workspace.

package/pack/generated/devin/skills/rite-spec/reference/acceptance-criteria.md

@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+# Acceptance criteria
+
+Acceptance criteria are the contract the seal checks. Write them so each is
+**independently verifiable by evidence**, not opinion.
+
+## A good criterion
+- Is observable: a test passes, a command outputs X, a screenshot shows Y.
+- Is binary: met or not: no "mostly".
+- Names the evidence: "`npm test path/x.test.ts` passes" or "POST /export returns 200
+  with a CSV body" or "empty state renders 'No exports yet' at 375px".
+- Belongs to a slice: every criterion maps to at least one slice (mapped in `/rite-define`).
+
+## Forms
+| Type | Template |
+|---|---|
+| Functional | "Given <state>, when <action>, then <observable result>." |
+| API | "<METHOD> <route> with <input> returns <status> and <shape>." |
+| UI | "<screen> shows <element/state> at <viewport>; <interaction> does <result>." |
+| UI vs reference | "<screen> matches design reference <Rn> at <viewport>." |
+| Non-functional | "<operation> completes under <budget> / handles <volume>." |
+| Negative | "<invalid input> is rejected with <message>, no <side effect>." |
+
+## Anti-patterns
+- "Works well" / "is fast" / "looks good": unverifiable. Attach a number or an
+  observation.
+- Criteria with no slice: orphaned scope.
+- Criteria only provable by reading the code: require runtime/test evidence instead.
+
+## At seal time
+Each criterion gets a checkbox + the evidence that proves it. Unproven critical
+criteria force **NO-GO**.

package/pack/generated/devin/skills/rite-spec/reference/ai-spec-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+# `ai-spec.md` template
+
+Create this annex only when the feature touches model calls, RAG, agents, evals,
+or LLM output.
+
+```markdown
+# AI-SPEC: <Feature>
+
+## AI surface
+| Surface | Purpose | Owner |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| <model call/RAG/agent/eval> | <why it exists> | <module/team> |
+
+## Model/runtime choice
+- Framework/model/provider: <choice or project default>
+- Settings that matter: <temperature, tools, retrieval scope, limits>
+- Fallback/degradation: <what users see when AI is unavailable>
+
+## Domain evals
+| Eval ID | Scenario / slice | Dataset provenance | Expected signal + threshold | Gate |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
+| EVAL-001 | <representative/adversarial/empty-context case> | <held-out source/version> | <pass condition and baseline delta> | build/seal |
+
+For RAG, cover retrieval relevance/context recall, context precision, answer
+faithfulness, citation support, tenant/ACL isolation, poisoned or conflicting documents,
+and insufficient-context fallback as applicable. A single polished example is not an eval.
+
+## Guardrails
+- Inputs: <validation, prompt-injection boundaries, tenant/data limits>
+- Retrieval: <source provenance, indexing validation, tenant/ACL filter, freshness/deletion>
+- Outputs: <schema checks, refusals, human review, citations only to supporting retrieved sources>
+- Privacy/security: <data sent to model, retention, secrets policy>
+- Unknown/insufficient context: <abstain, clarify, or bounded fallback; never fabricate>
+
+## Monitoring
+- Runtime metrics/logs: <latency, cost, retrieval/quality, refusal/error/fallback rates>
+- Alerts or manual review: <trigger>
+- Rollback/kill switch: <prompt/model/index version and reversible mechanism>
+- Drift evaluation: <reference set, schedule/trigger, regression threshold, owner>
+```

package/pack/generated/devin/skills/rite-spec/reference/anti-patterns.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+# rite-spec: anti-patterns
+
+Load this when standing a non-trivial decision in `/rite-spec`, or when the
+agent feels reluctance toward investigation depth, gap-closing, or
+placement decisions.
+
+Pack-wide rationalizations + red flags: see [standards/anti-patterns.md](../../devrites-lib/reference/standards/anti-patterns.md).
+
+## Phase-specific rationalizations
+
+| Excuse | Rebuttal |
+|---|---|
+| "User said *just make it work*: no spec needed." | Vague asks are exactly where `/rite-spec` earns its keep; load `devrites-interview` and ask one question at a time. |
+| "I already understand the request." | Then writing the placement + acceptance criteria takes minutes and saves drift later. Investigation isn't for *you*, it's for `/rite-define`. |
+| "Too small for a spec." | If it's big enough for `/rite-build`, it's big enough for one paragraph of WHAT/WHY + measurable acceptance. |
+| "No design refs were attached, so skip references." | Skip the *gathering*, not the *acknowledgement*. Note "no references provided" in the spec: silence is ambiguous. |
+| "I can resolve gaps as I build." | Drift discovered at slice 3 costs more than 5 questions answered now. |
+| "I'm confident of the answer, so I'll just decide this myself." | Confidence changes the *cost* of the question, not its *owner*. A material decision (scope · placement · data model · UX · security · migration · acceptance) is put to the human as a ranked option set: near-certainty just makes it a one-pick confirm, never a silent decision. |
+| "Presenting options for every gap is over-asking." | Over-asking is many questions at once or asking what the codebase answers. One ranked option set per *material* gap, recommended-first, is the opposite: it hands the human the decision cheaply. Reversible low-impact details you still auto-decide and log. |
+
+## Red Flags
+
+- About to start writing `spec.md` without a Placement & integration section.
+- Spec has no measurable acceptance criteria: "works as expected" is not measurable.
+- A `[NEEDS CLARIFICATION]` marker remains on a blocking item.
+- Design references were attached but never opened, saved, or indexed in `references.md`.
+- The investigation didn't read the module/component that currently owns this area.

package/pack/generated/devin/skills/rite-spec/reference/interview-patterns.md

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+# Interview patterns
+
+Question ladders by domain. Pull the rung that matches the biggest current unknown.
+Each question still follows the protocol: one at a time, best guess attached.
+
+## Vague ask? Map the decision tree first
+For a fuzzy one-liner (`"design a contact page"`, `"add reporting"`), sketch the branches
+the answer splits into, then resolve each **depth-first**: one branch to a decision before
+opening the next:
+
+```text
+contact page
+├─ purpose?   ── sales lead | support request | general
+├─ fields?    ── name/email/message | + company/phone | file upload
+├─ on submit? ── email | ticket/CRM | DB row | embedded third-party form
+└─ success?   ── inline confirm | redirect | autoresponder
+```
+
+Once per interview you may **challenge the premise** instead of refining it
+(*"is a form even the right answer, or a mailto / booking link?"*): a good reframe
+collapses whole branches. Then use the domain ladders below for each open branch.
+
+## Objective / problem
+- "What does success look like in one sentence?"
+- "Who hits this, how often, and what do they do today instead?"
+- "If we shipped only one thing here, what must it be?"
+
+## Scope boundaries
+- "What is explicitly **out** of scope for this first version?"
+- "Is this a new capability or a change to an existing flow?"
+- "What's the smallest version that's still useful?" (→ slice 1)
+
+## Data model
+- "What are the core entities and how do they relate?"
+- "What's the source of truth, and can these fields change after creation?"
+- "Any uniqueness, ordering, or soft-delete needs?"
+
+## UX / flow
+- "Walk me through the happy path screen by screen."
+- "What are the empty / loading / error / permission-denied states?"
+- "Brand surface (marketing) or product surface (app UI)?" (drives craft)
+
+## Integration / external
+- "Which external systems or APIs are involved, and who owns them?"
+- "Sync or async? What happens when the dependency is down?"
+
+## Non-functional
+- "Any latency, scale, or volume targets I should design to?"
+- "Auth/permission rules? Anything sensitive (PII, secrets, payments)?"
+
+## Acceptance
+- "How will we *prove* this works: what's the test or observation?"
+- "What would make you reject the PR?"
+
+## Anti-references (taste)
+- "Show me one thing that does this well, and one that does it badly."

package/pack/generated/devin/skills/rite-spec/reference/investigation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+# Investigation before specification
+
+Understand the requirement, decide where it belongs, define the outcome, and identify
+every issue and gap. Resolve material gaps with the user before the spec is ready. A
+gap first found during `/rite-build` is a drift event.
+
+Use a code-intelligence index if available (see
+`../../devrites-lib/reference/standards/tooling.md`) for structural questions such as
+where code lives, what calls it, and what it could break. With none present, use
+Read/Grep/Glob. When a gap depends on an external fact, such as a standard, UX pattern,
+or comparable product, **search the web if available** (brave MCP preferred;
+`../../devrites-lib/reference/standards/tooling.md`). Cite the finding in the option
+presented to the human.
+
+## Check the archive first
+Before external research, check whether the project already shipped related work. Search
+the archive for the feature's key nouns. A hit may indicate an extension, conflict, or
+replacement and provides prior decisions:
+Use native file search over `.devrites/archive/*/{spec,decisions}.md`.
+- **Overlap found** → read the overlapping `spec.md` + its `decisions.md`, then put it to
+  the human as a ranked option (*extend the shipped feature* · *this supersedes it* ·
+  *genuinely distinct*) same option-set contract as a gap.
+- **No archive / no hit** → skip silently; never block a spec on absent history (the
+  brownfield / principles no-op discipline).
+
+## Produce these findings (write into spec.md)
+1. **The request and problem:** restate the goal and the problem behind it (people ask
+   for "a dashboard" when they want an answer to a question). Who hits it, how often,
+   what they do today instead.
+2. **Current behavior:** how it works today, or what's absent. Read the actual code and
+   flows; don't assume.
+3. **Placement**
+   - Which module / layer / file / component should own this; the right seam.
+   - Existing patterns/components/utilities to **extend or reuse** instead of duplicating.
+   - **Integration points**: callers and dependents, the data it reads/writes, the
+     APIs/events/contracts it touches (interface analysis: how it interacts with the
+     rest of the system).
+4. **Outcome:** the result and how to observe it (feeds
+   success + acceptance criteria).
+5. **Issues:** conflicts with existing code/UX/data/permissions, constraints, and
+   anything that makes the obvious approach wrong. Each issue gets a disposition.
+6. **Gaps:** unknowns, ambiguities, undecided behavior, missing inputs. **Every gap
+   becomes a question** (next section).
+7. **Blast radius:** what this change could break (use the code graph's impact/callers).
+   Informs risks, test strategy, and rollback.
+8. **Human prerequisites:** credentials, accounts, approval windows, or irreversible
+   action-time decisions the acceptance path requires. Separate these from agent-owned
+   implementation and diagnostic work.
+
+Design/reference materials the human supplies: see [references-intake](references-intake.md).
+
+## Gap analysis (present → desired)
+State the present and desired states. Their delta defines the work; unknowns in that
+delta are gaps. Resolve them before `/rite-define`. Mark each gap inline with
+`[NEEDS CLARIFICATION: question]`.
+
+## Present gaps and issues as options
+For each material gap or issue that changes scope, placement, data model, UX, security,
+migration risk, or acceptance, **ask the human** one gap at a time with a ranked
+option set with the recommended option **first and marked `(Recommended)`** plus an escape
+hatch (via `AskUserQuestion` in HITL):
+```
+<gap/issue stated in one line>. Why it matters: <...>
+1. <recommended option> (Recommended) — <implication / where it places the work; cite any web/docs finding>
+2. <alternative> — <implication>
+3. <alternative> — <implication>
+4. Something else — I'll describe it
+```
+Investigate and recommend, but do not settle a material decision. High confidence may
+make the answer a one-pick confirmation; it does not change the decision owner.
+Only a **genuinely reversible, low-impact** gap is decided and recorded in `assumptions.md`
+without asking. Full render contract + AFK behaviour: [`afk-hitl.md`](../../devrites-lib/reference/standards/afk-hitl.md).
+
+## Done when
+- The shipped archive was checked for prior art; any overlap was surfaced to the human.
+- The problem, current behavior, placement, and outcome are written down.
+- Every issue has a disposition; every material gap is resolved **by a human pick** from its
+  option set (or explicitly deferred as non-blocking), not settled silently on your confidence.
+- Every foreseeable build-time human prerequisite is resolved, assigned, or justified as an
+  action-time gate; objective repair/retry work is not disguised as a question.
+- No blocking `[NEEDS CLARIFICATION]` remains. The spec covers the gaps found during
+  authoring and records correct placement. This is the `/rite-spec` readiness gate
+  before `/rite-clarify` performs the systematic topology scan.

package/pack/generated/devin/skills/rite-spec/reference/question-protocol.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+# Spec question protocol
+
+For vague or unknown intent, invoke `devrites-interview` for ordered one-question turns,
+recommendations, option sets, pass limits, reframing, and closure.
+This file owns only Spec-specific coverage and recording. Render through
+[`Option set`](../../devrites-lib/reference/standards/afk-hitl.md#option-set-how-every-gap-is-presented).
+
+## Coverage gate: am I done asking?
+Each dimension MUST be **resolved** or **explicitly deferred** (logged, non-blocking),
+never skipped:
+- [ ] **Objective:** one-sentence success + the real problem behind it.
+- [ ] **Scope**: what's in vs explicitly out for v1.
+- [ ] **Data model**: core entities + relationships (or "none").
+- [ ] **UX / flow**: happy path + empty/loading/error/permission states (or "no UI").
+- [ ] **Integration**: external systems/APIs/contracts (or "none").
+- [ ] **Non-functional**: auth, sensitive data, latency/scale (or "n/a").
+- [ ] **Acceptance**: how each requirement is *proven* (test/observation).
+- [ ] **Human prerequisites**: credentials, approval windows, irreversible action-time gates
+  (or "none").
+
+An agent recommendation is not a user answer. A human-owned material product, scope, UX,
+compatibility, or acceptance choice closes only by the user's option selection, free-form
+answer, or explicit deferral. Packets MAY be bounded; readiness MUST NOT. Rescan and continue
+while blockers remain. If the user stops, keep them blocking and MUST NOT pass `/rite-spec`
+readiness.
+
+## Spec question boundary
+- Search code, decisions, authoritative docs before asking discoverable facts.
+- Decide and log agent-owned reversible implementation/test details.
+- Record tooling failures as prerequisites or blockers; never ask the human to authorize repair.
+- Ask only material choices, not everything at once.
+
+## Record
+Confirmed answers → `decisions.md` (with rationale). Agent-owned reversible, low-impact
+technical assumptions →
+`assumptions.md`. Open non-blocking items → `questions.md`.

package/pack/generated/devin/skills/rite-spec/reference/references-intake.md

@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+# Reference intake: design/style materials from the human
+
+During spec, the human may supply screenshots, Figma, video, sites, or docs showing how the
+feature should look or behave. When present, inspect them, save local copies, and classify
+each as a fidelity **target**, hard **constraint**, or **inspiration** so a mood reference
+cannot become a pixel-match contract. No references is valid; skip this intake.
+
+## Gather + understand each reference
+- **Images / screenshots / mockups:** open and **view** them (the Read tool renders
+  images). Describe what they show: layout, components, spacing, states, the target look.
+- **Figma link:** if a Figma integration is available, pull its design context (frames,
+  tokens, components); otherwise record the link and ask the human for an export/screenshot
+  so there's something concrete to match offline.
+- **Links / reference sites / docs:** fetch and read for the relevant intent (tone,
+  layout, interaction, quality bar). Capture *why* it's a reference, not just the URL.
+- **Video:** note what it demonstrates (the expected interaction/flow). Save it; later
+  phases can step through it as tooling allows.
+
+## Save local assets into the workspace
+Copy any local file (screenshot, mockup, video, export) into
+`.devrites/work/<slug>/references/` so it's durable and connectable later:
+```
+mkdir -p .devrites/work/<slug>/references
+cp "<the file the human gave>" .devrites/work/<slug>/references/<clear-name>.<ext>
+```
+Use clear names (`login-mockup.png`, `checkout-flow.mp4`). Don't move the user's
+original; copy it. For remote-only refs (a live Figma/URL), record the link in the index.
+Index source/owner/license and **reference-only** or **may ship** usage; external screenshots
+never grant rights to copy brand, copy, or assets.
+
+## Index in `references.md`
+```markdown
+# References: <slug>
+| Ref | Role | Usage / provenance | Type | Location | Shows / why it's a reference | Informs |
+|-----|------|--------------------|------|----------|------------------------------|---------|
+| R1 | target | project; may ship | screenshot | references/login-mockup.png | approved composition + spacing | spec UI, slice 2, proof |
+| R2 | constraint | project; may ship | figma | https://figma.com/… | required tokens + components | all UI |
+| R3 | target | user; reference-only | video | references/checkout-flow.mp4 | approved step order + transitions | build, proof |
+| R4 | inspiration | external; reference-only | link | https://example.com | tone + density, not identity/layout | shape |
+```
+
+Roles are normative: **target** means compare fidelity, **constraint** means satisfy the
+named rule, and **inspiration** means extract the cited principle without copying identity,
+composition, copy, or distinctive assets. Usage is normative too: only **may ship** assets
+enter product code.
+
+## Feed them into the spec + the design brief
+- Use references to sharpen `spec.md` (UI impact, success/acceptance: e.g. "matches R1").
+- When the feature touches UI, these references are the primary input to **`devrites-ux-shape`**
+  (spec step 3a): they anchor the design direction and can seed the visual-direction probe
+  (a Figma link → pulled design context; reference sites → screenshots). The resulting
+  `design-brief.md` cites them by R-id **and role**.
+- A reference can *resolve a gap* ("which layout?"): record that in the gaps table.
+- If a reference **conflicts** with the existing design system, that's an issue to raise
+  with the human (match the system, or adopt the reference: their call).
+
+## Later phases use them (wire-through)
+`devrites-frontend-craft` builds to the approved brief and its **target** references,
+honors **constraints**, and uses **inspiration** only for the named principle. `/rite-prove`
+records rendered comparisons in `browser-evidence.md`; `/rite-polish` and `/rite-seal`
+reuse that same contract. Save and classify once here so every downstream phase makes the
+same fidelity decision.

package/pack/generated/devin/skills/rite-spec/reference/spec-checklists.md

@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
+# Spec-quality checklists
+
+Before `/rite-define`, test requirement prose for completeness, clarity, and
+measurability—not implementation. “Banner is prominent” lacks a threshold; ask
+whether export defines empty data, never whether `exportCsv()` handles `[]`.
+Function/file/library checks belong to `/rite-vet` and `/rite-prove`.
+
+## Output: one file per requirement domain
+
+Emit `.devrites/work/<slug>/checklists/<domain>.md` per covered domain; skip
+`none`. Each domain maps gaps to a `devrites-interview` dimension:
+
+| Domain file | Tests the prose of |
+| --- | --- |
+| `functional.md` | Functional requirements + scenarios: is each capability stated, bounded, testable? |
+| `data-model.md` | Key entities / data model: shapes, fields, lifecycle, relationships (skip if "none"). |
+| `interaction.md` | API / UI impact + UX states: every screen state and contract named (skip if no UI/API). |
+| `non-functional.md` | Invariants; security/privacy/accessibility, latency/scale, compatibility, operations, and human-only proof prerequisites. |
+| `edge-cases.md` | Empty/boundary/invalid/concurrent/failure/recovery paths plus the spec's applicability map. |
+
+## Each item: a question, a verdict, the line it interrogates
+
+```markdown
+# Spec checklist: <domain> — <slug>
+Scored: <iso>   Verdict: pass | gaps (<n CRITICAL / n minor>)
+
+| # | Question (tests the requirement prose) | Verdict | Spec line | Severity |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| 1 | Is every quantitative qualifier ("prominent", "fast", "large") given a number or reference? | fail | "banner is prominent" | **CRITICAL** |
+| 2 | Does each requirement name an observable outcome a test could check? | pass | REQ-001..004 | — |
+| 3 | Are all enumerations closed — no "etc." / "and so on" / open "…"? | pass | — | — |
+```
+
+Verdict: `pass | fail | n/a`. A fail is **CRITICAL** when ambiguity changes build
+or acceptance: unquantified success, open enumeration, ambiguous data shape,
+undefined stated-flow edge, or contradictory requirements. Other vague prose is
+**minor**: record it; do not block.
+
+## Question bank
+
+Each question checks one requirement-prose failure mode:
+
+- **Measurability:** every "good / fast / prominent / simple / secure" carries a number, a budget,
+  or a named reference. No adjective stands in for a threshold.
+- **Completeness:** every enumeration is closed (no "etc."); every requirement with a precondition
+  states the failure branch; every entity names its required fields + lifecycle; every stated flow
+  names its empty / error / boundary behaviour.
+- **Clarity:** one entity, one name (no `user`/`customer`/`account` drift); no requirement two
+  readers would implement differently; no "should" where "MUST" is meant.
+- **Assumptions:** no material behavior, scope, data, security, or proof fact survives as a
+  hidden assumption; verify it or record an owned/deadlined assumption or blocking question.
+- **Testability:** each acceptance criterion is binary and names (or clearly implies) its evidence.
+  A criterion only provable by reading code is a fail.
+- **Consistency:** no requirement contradicts another, the data model, or a non-goal.
+- **Stakeholders:** affected actors/operators are named; conflicting outcomes have an
+  explicit priority or decision owner rather than two simultaneously impossible promises.
+- **Applicability:** topology, data, integration, security, UI/i18n/time zone, and
+  compatibility/delivery rows are `applies` with IDs or specifically justified `not applicable`.
+- **Failure/recovery:** each partial, timeout, invalid, interrupted, or unavailable state
+  implied by an applicable row has a user outcome, system state, and safe retry/recovery rule.
+- **Data:** schema/backfill/concurrency/tenant/retention implications state invariants and
+  prohibited loss/leakage; implementation detail stays for Define.
+- **Integration:** timeout, invalid/partial response, auth/rate-limit/outage, duplicate,
+  ordering, and version-change behavior is specified when the boundary can produce it.
+- **Preservation:** each material brownfield outcome appears in `Existing behavior
+  to preserve` with preserving REQ/AC and current evidence. Missing/vague “no
+  regressions” or unjustified `none` is CRITICAL.
+  **Failing case:** brownfield login still works but the table has no evidence column
+  → CRITICAL until a test path, command, or observed contract is named.
+- **Backstops:** each row names an independent held-out, property/metamorphic, or
+  direct behavioral check and the failure it discriminates; confidence/presence/self-review fail.
+- **Non-functional:** each NFR names affected REQ/AC IDs or a bounded `global` scope;
+  human-only proof prerequisites name their owner.
+
+## Readiness gate
+
+The spec **Readiness gate** at the bottom of
+[`spec-template.md`](spec-template.md) requires every
+emitted `checklists/<domain>.md` to reach `Verdict: pass` (zero CRITICAL fails) before the gate
+passes. Minor fails are logged, not blocking. A single open CRITICAL keeps the spec `Status: Draft`.
+`/rite-define` reads the checklists at step 0 and **hard-blocks while any CRITICAL is
+unchecked**. A spec without checklists is not yet checked, so define stops and routes
+back here.
+
+## Discipline
+
+- Score honestly. Do not soften a checklist question to pass a weak spec.
+- Don't pad. Five real questions that find one CRITICAL beat thirty rubber-stamped rows.
+- If a question needs a function name, it belongs in `/rite-vet`'s `test-plan.md`.