facult 2.11.0 → 2.13.0

package/docs/reference.md

@@ -0,0 +1,112 @@
+# Command reference
+
+This page groups the main `fclt` commands by job. Use `fclt --help` and `fclt <command> --help` for exact flags.
+
+## Discovery
+
+```bash
+fclt status [--json]
+fclt doctor [--json] [--repair]
+fclt paths [--json]
+fclt scan [--from <path>] [--json] [--show-duplicates]
+fclt inventory [--json] [--tool <name>] [--show-secrets]
+fclt list [skills|mcp|agents|snippets|instructions|automations]
+fclt show <selector>
+fclt find <query>
+```
+
+Use these first. They let you inspect tool state without claiming ownership of any files.
+`doctor --json` is read-only and reports setup health, issues, and recommended
+actions. `paths --json` reports canonical, generated, runtime, and review paths
+for agents and integrations.
+
+## Graph
+
+```bash
+fclt graph show <selector>
+fclt graph deps <selector>
+fclt graph dependents <selector>
+```
+
+The graph explains how instructions, snippets, config refs, and rendered targets relate.
+
+## Canonical Store
+
+```bash
+fclt templates list
+fclt templates init operating-model [--global|--project|--root PATH]
+fclt templates init project-ai
+fclt templates init instruction <name>
+fclt templates init snippet <marker>
+fclt templates init skill <name>
+fclt templates init agent <name>
+fclt templates init mcp <name>
+fclt templates init automation <template-id> --scope global|project|wide
+fclt consolidate --auto keep-current --from <path>
+fclt index [--force]
+```
+
+Use these to create or normalize canonical capability in `~/.ai` or `<repo>/.ai`.
+
+## Managed mode
+
+```bash
+fclt manage <tool> [--dry-run] [--adopt-existing]
+fclt sync [tool] [--dry-run] [--adopt-live]
+fclt enable <selector> --for codex,claude
+fclt disable <selector> --for codex,claude
+fclt managed
+fclt unmanage <tool>
+```
+
+Managed mode writes rendered output into tool homes. Read [Managed mode](./managed-mode.md) before using it on an existing setup.
+
+## Writeback and evolution
+
+```bash
+fclt ai writeback add --kind <kind> --summary <text> --asset <selector>
+fclt ai writeback list
+fclt ai writeback show WB-00001
+fclt ai writeback group --by asset
+fclt ai writeback summarize --by kind
+
+fclt ai evolve propose
+fclt ai evolve list
+fclt ai evolve show EV-00001
+fclt ai evolve draft EV-00001
+fclt ai evolve review EV-00001
+fclt ai evolve accept EV-00001
+fclt ai evolve reject EV-00001 --reason <text>
+fclt ai evolve apply EV-00001
+fclt ai evolve promote EV-00003 --to global --project
+```
+
+Use these to turn repeated work friction into reviewed capability changes.
+
+## Sources, Audit, And Updates
+
+```bash
+fclt search <query>
+fclt install <source:item> [--as <name>] [--strict-source-trust]
+fclt update [--apply]
+fclt verify-source <name> [--json]
+fclt sources list
+fclt sources trust <source> [--note <text>]
+fclt sources review <source> [--note <text>]
+fclt sources block <source> [--note <text>]
+fclt sources clear <source>
+fclt audit [--non-interactive]
+fclt self-update
+```
+
+Use `--strict-source-trust` when installing or updating remote capability from catalogs.
+
+## Root Selection
+
+Most commands accept the same root controls:
+
+- `--global`: use `~/.ai`
+- `--project`: use the nearest repo-local `.ai`
+- `--root /path/to/.ai`: use an explicit canonical root
+- `--scope merged|global|project`: choose a discovery view
+- `--source builtin|global|project`: filter provenance in list/find/show/graph flows

package/docs/roadmap.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Roadmap
 
-This replaces the older operating-model target-state notes. That file mixed current documentation, past investigation output, and future design ideas. The current docs now describe shipped behavior; this file tracks remaining product direction.
+This roadmap tracks remaining product direction for `fclt`.
 
 ## Already Shipped
 
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ This replaces the older operating-model target-state notes. That file mixed curr
 - Project-scoped writeback/evolution artifacts mirrored under global `~/.ai`.
 - Built-in operating-model pack.
 - Independent built-in operating-model pack install with `templates init operating-model`.
+- Read-only setup discovery with `doctor --json` and `paths --json`.
 - Cleaner built-in canonical refs.
 - JSON-first `inventory`.
 - `sync --adopt-live` for explicit promotion of live tool edits.
@@ -18,32 +19,42 @@ This replaces the older operating-model target-state notes. That file mixed curr
 
 ## Current Priorities
 
-1. Make status more explanatory.
+1. Add agent-first setup APIs.
+   - Add `setup plan --json` and safe apply primitives for confirmation-gated setup.
+   - Add command/risk metadata so agents can distinguish read-only, dry-run, generated-state writes, mutating actions, and high-risk global changes.
+
+2. Make status more explanatory.
    - Show policy summaries.
    - Surface top recommended next action.
    - Connect sync ledger history to rendered targets.
 
-2. Add a structured sync plan.
+3. Add a structured sync plan.
    - Group writes, updates, removals, skips, conflicts, and repairs.
    - Expose the same plan as JSON.
    - Explain source refs and policy reasons.
 
-3. Improve project onboarding.
+4. Improve project onboarding.
    - Add a primary `fclt init project` flow.
    - Explain default-deny project sync during setup.
    - Offer safe adoption, detach, and restore choices.
 
-4. Make policy inspectable.
+5. Make policy inspectable.
    - Add `policy show`.
    - Add `policy explain`.
    - Hide TOML details behind user-facing commands where possible.
 
-5. Make templates, plugins, automations, and rendered targets first-class inventory objects.
+6. Make templates, plugins, automations, and rendered targets first-class inventory objects.
    - List and show them consistently.
    - Add graph visibility.
    - Include them in status and sync plans.
 
-6. Tighten selector consistency.
+7. Add a first-party Codex plugin and MCP surface.
+   - Expose safe read/write operations over existing `fclt` behavior.
+   - Keep the CLI and canonical `.ai` roots as the source of truth.
+   - Gate high-risk global changes behind explicit review.
+   - Bundle agent-facing skills for work units, writeback, evolution, capability search, and automation setup.
+
+8. Tighten selector consistency.
    - Use one selector grammar across `list`, `show`, `graph`, `enable`, `disable`, `trust`, `audit`, writeback, and evolution.
    - Return useful ambiguity errors with candidates.
 

package/docs/security-trust.md

@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
+# Security and Trust
+
+`fclt` can inspect and install capability that affects agent behavior. Treat that capability like code.
+
+## Source Trust
+
+Remote catalogs can be useful, but they should not become trusted by accident.
+
+```bash
+fclt sources list
+fclt verify-source skills.sh --json
+fclt sources trust skills.sh --note "reviewed"
+fclt install skills.sh:code-review --as code-review-skills-sh --strict-source-trust
+```
+
+Source trust has three practical states:
+
+- `trusted`: reviewed source, eligible for strict installs and updates
+- `review`: visible but not trusted for strict installs
+- `blocked`: not eligible for install/update
+
+## Item Trust
+
+Individual skills and MCP servers can also be trusted or untrusted:
+
+```bash
+fclt trust <skill-name>
+fclt trust mcp:<name>
+fclt untrust <skill-name>
+fclt untrust mcp:<name>
+fclt trust skills --all
+fclt untrust mcp --all
+```
+
+Use item trust when a source contains mixed-quality skills or MCP servers, or when local review happens item by item.
+
+## Audit
+
+Run an interactive audit:
+
+```bash
+fclt audit
+```
+
+Run static checks in automation:
+
+```bash
+fclt audit --non-interactive --severity high
+fclt audit --non-interactive mcp:github --severity medium --json
+```
+
+Suppress or fix reviewed findings:
+
+```bash
+fclt audit safe mcp:github --rule static:mcp-env-inline-secret --note "reviewed"
+fclt audit fix mcp:github
+```
+
+## Secrets
+
+Tracked canonical MCP config should not inline secrets. Put machine-specific values in ignored local overlays:
+
+```text
+~/.ai/mcp/servers.local.json
+<repo>/.ai/mcp/servers.local.json
+```
+
+`inventory --json` redacts MCP secrets by default. Use `--show-secrets` only for local debugging.
+
+## Commit Hygiene
+
+Commit canonical source that should travel:
+
+- instructions
+- snippets
+- skills
+- agents
+- MCP definitions without secrets
+- project sync policy
+
+Do not commit:
+
+- generated index or graph state
+- machine-local writeback queues
+- proposal metadata and draft patches
+- rendered tool outputs
+- local secret overlays
+
+Project-scoped writebacks and evolution proposals are mirrored for review under global `~/.ai/writebacks/projects/<slug-hash>/` and `~/.ai/evolution/projects/<slug-hash>/`, not under repo-local `<repo>/.ai`.

package/docs/writeback-evolution.md

@@ -1,7 +1,9 @@
-# Writeback And Evolution
+# Writeback and Evolution
 
 Writeback preserves useful signal from real work. Evolution turns repeated signal into reviewable changes.
 
+Use this when normal work exposes the same problem more than once: shallow tests, missing context, stale guidance, a slow tool path, or a missing skill. Ignore it for one-off preferences and vague complaints.
+
 Use this loop when a task exposes durable friction:
 
 1. record one targeted writeback
@@ -77,7 +79,7 @@ fclt ai evolve promote EV-00003 --to global --project
 
 ## Review Artifacts
 
-Runtime JSON queues, proposal metadata, draft patches, and journals stay in machine-local Facult state.
+Runtime JSON queues, proposal metadata, draft patches, and journals stay in machine-local `fclt` state.
 
 Human-readable Markdown mirrors live under global `~/.ai`:
 
@@ -95,3 +97,9 @@ Project-scoped artifacts include project metadata in frontmatter. They do not ge
 Global instructions, skills, plugins, and other high-risk shared surfaces require explicit review before apply. Project-scoped additive markdown changes can be lower risk, but still need evidence and a clear target.
 
 Executable product or tooling work belongs in the task system. Use evolution for the reusable instruction, skill, prompt, or operating-model change that should survive that work.
+
+## Next
+
+- Read [Composable Capability](./composable-capability.md) to choose the smallest target.
+- Read [Automations](./automations.md) to schedule recurring review loops.
+- Read [Security and trust](./security-trust.md) before applying global changes.

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "facult",
-  "version": "2.11.0",
+  "version": "2.13.0",
   "description": "Manage canonical AI capabilities, sync surfaces, and evolution state.",
   "type": "module",
   "license": "MIT",
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
     "bin/fclt.cjs",
     "bin/facult.cjs",
     "docs/**/*.md",
+    "docs/**/*.png",
     "src/**/*.ts",
     "!src/**/*.test.ts",
     "README.md",

package/src/builtin-assets.ts

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 // Generated by scripts/generate-builtin-assets.ts. Do not edit by hand.
 
 export const BUILTIN_OPERATING_MODEL_FILES = JSON.parse(
-  '{"AGENTS.global.md":"# Facult Operating Defaults\\n\\nThis machine has a default Facult operating-model layer available.\\n\\nWhen work produces durable friction, weak verification, stale guidance, or a missing skill/tool capability, preserve that signal with `fclt ai writeback ...` when the target and scope are clear. When repeated writebacks or clearly missing capability point at a concrete improvement, use `fclt ai evolve ...` or the `capability-evolution` skill to make a reviewable proposal.\\n\\nFor work-unit framing, read `@builtin/facult-operating-model/instructions/WORK_UNITS.md`.\\nFor writeback and evolution, read `@builtin/facult-operating-model/instructions/EVOLUTION.md`.\\nFor learning and writeback defaults, read `@builtin/facult-operating-model/instructions/LEARNING_AND_WRITEBACK.md`.\\nFor deciding whether capability belongs in global or project scope, read `@builtin/facult-operating-model/instructions/PROJECT_CAPABILITY.md`.\\nFor project operating-layer design, read `@builtin/facult-operating-model/instructions/INTEGRATION.md`.\\n\\nBuiltin specialist agents are available for:\\n- writeback curation\\n- evolution planning\\n- scope promotion\\n- integration auditing\\n\\nBuiltin skills are available for:\\n- capability evolution\\n- project operating-layer design\\n","agents/evolution-planner/agent.toml":"name = \\"evolution-planner\\"\\ndescription = \\"Turn repeated writeback into concrete capability proposals.\\"\\n\\ndeveloper_instructions = \\"\\"\\"\\nYou plan capability evolution.\\n\\nPrioritize:\\n- smallest useful change\\n- correct target asset type\\n- correct target scope\\n- evidence that justifies the change\\n- repeated writeback clusters or clearly missing capabilities, not isolated preferences\\n\\nProposal kinds you should consider first:\\n- update_asset\\n- create_asset\\n- extract_snippet\\n- add_skill\\n- promote_asset\\n\\nDefault to project scope when the pattern is repo-local.\\nPromote to global only when reuse is demonstrated and pollution risk is low.\\n\\nReturn concise proposals ordered by expected leverage, including:\\n- proposal kind\\n- target asset\\n- target scope\\n- why this is the smallest durable change\\n\\nDo not escalate to evolution when a single writeback is enough.\\nDo not use evolution as a substitute for executable task tracking when the main need is owner, priority, state, or implementation follow-through.\\n\\"\\"\\"\\n","agents/integration-auditor/agent.toml":"name = \\"integration-auditor\\"\\ndescription = \\"Find where local success can still fail system-wide.\\"\\n\\ndeveloper_instructions = \\"\\"\\"\\nYou audit integration risk.\\n\\nPrioritize:\\n- hidden dependencies\\n- rollout hazards\\n- operational constraints\\n- gaps between local verification and real system behavior\\n\\nReturn concise findings ordered by impact.\\n\\"\\"\\"\\n","agents/scope-promoter/agent.toml":"name = \\"scope-promoter\\"\\ndescription = \\"Decide whether learning belongs at project or global scope.\\"\\n\\ndeveloper_instructions = \\"\\"\\"\\nYou decide scope.\\n\\nPrioritize:\\n- project specificity\\n- cross-project reuse potential\\n- pollution risk from globalizing too early\\n\\nWhen recommending promotion, make the standard path explicit:\\n- keep the source capability in project scope until promotion is approved\\n- create a reviewable global proposal\\n- do not treat promotion as implicit apply\\n\\nReturn concise decisions with rationale.\\n\\"\\"\\"\\n","agents/writeback-curator/agent.toml":"name = \\"writeback-curator\\"\\ndescription = \\"Turn noisy outcomes into high-signal writeback.\\"\\n\\ndeveloper_instructions = \\"\\"\\"\\nYou curate durable writeback.\\n\\nPrioritize:\\n- repeated failures\\n- repeated wins\\n- stale guidance\\n- missing capability edges\\n- tool, skill, MCP, plugin, automation, or instruction friction that repeatedly slows work down\\n\\nFor each recommendation, prefer returning:\\n- suggested writeback kind\\n- best target asset or destination\\n- best scope (`project` or `global`)\\n- the evidence that justifies recording it\\n\\nDo not emit low-signal noise.\\nIf the learning is repo-specific, keep it project-scoped by default.\\nWhen the signal is already strong and the target is clear, prefer recommending direct writeback capture rather than abstract advice.\\nWhen the issue is executable tooling work, recommend task tracking for the fix and writeback only for the reusable operating-model learning.\\n\\"\\"\\"\\n","instructions/EVOLUTION.md":"---\\ndescription: Turn repeated signal into concrete capability changes.\\ntags: [facult, evolution, writeback]\\n---\\n\\n# Evolution\\n\\nUse writeback and evolution to improve the AI operating layer itself.\\n\\nEvolution is the synthesis and change side of the feedback loop. It turns accumulated writebacks, repeated tool friction, stale canonical assets, or clearly missing capability into small reviewable changes to instructions, skills, snippets, agents, or other markdown canonical assets.\\n\\n## When To Record Writeback\\n\\nRecord writeback when one of these is true:\\n\\n- the same failure repeats\\n- the same success pattern repeats\\n- guidance is stale or missing\\n- a prompt or loop has to be restated often\\n- a project-specific pattern looks reusable\\n\\nDo not record low-signal noise:\\n\\n- one-off annoyance with no reuse value\\n- generic \\"could be better\\" commentary\\n- duplicate observations with no new evidence\\n\\nThe intended default is that agents record strong writebacks themselves when the signal is clear enough, rather than only recommending that a user do it manually later.\\n\\nDo not wait for a weekly review to preserve high-signal evidence. Do wait for repeated evidence or a clearly missing capability before drafting a proposal.\\n\\n## Scope\\n\\nChoose `project` scope when the learning depends on:\\n\\n- repo architecture\\n- team workflow\\n- project tooling\\n- local testing or verification behavior\\n\\nChoose `global` scope when the learning is reusable across projects.\\n\\nPromote from project to global only after repeated reuse or strong evidence.\\n\\n## Writeback Kinds\\n\\nCommon kinds:\\n\\n- `weak_verification`\\n- `false_positive`\\n- `missing_context`\\n- `reusable_pattern`\\n- `capability_gap`\\n- `bad_default`\\n\\nEvery good writeback should try to include:\\n\\n- a concrete summary\\n- the best target asset if known\\n- the right scope\\n- domain or tags when useful\\n\\n## Operator Flow\\n\\nTypical workflow:\\n\\n```bash\\nfclt ai writeback add --kind weak_verification --summary \\"Checks were too shallow\\" --asset instruction:VERIFICATION\\nfclt ai writeback group --by asset\\nfclt ai writeback summarize --by domain\\nfclt ai evolve propose\\nfclt ai evolve draft EV-00001\\nfclt ai evolve accept EV-00001\\nfclt ai evolve apply EV-00001\\n```\\n\\nUse `fclt ai evolve draft <id> --append \\"...\\"` to revise a draft while preserving draft history.\\n\\nReview surfaces:\\n\\n- open `~/.ai/writebacks/` and `~/.ai/evolution/` in a Markdown editor for frontmatter-rich global and project-scoped review artifacts\\n- `fclt status --json` for queue/proposal paths, review artifact paths, counts, and active scope\\n- `fclt ai writeback list|show|group|summarize` for raw and clustered signal\\n- `fclt ai evolve list|show|review` for proposal state without applying changes\\n- `fclt templates init automation learning-review` for recurring capture/review\\n- `fclt templates init automation evolution-review` for recurring proposal review\\n- `fclt templates init automation tool-call-audit` for repeated tool-friction review\\n\\nEvolution proposal metadata, markdown drafts, patch artifacts, writeback queues,\\nand journals are runtime state. `fclt` stores JSON queues, proposal records,\\ndraft refs, patches, and journals in machine-local Facult state. It mirrors\\nhuman-readable review artifacts into global `~/.ai/writebacks/...` and\\n`~/.ai/evolution/...`, including project-scoped artifacts under\\n`projects/<slug-hash>/` with cwd/project metadata in frontmatter. Canonical\\nassets in `~/.ai` or `<repo>/.ai` should only change when a proposal is applied.\\n\\n## Default Agent Behavior\\n\\nUse the smallest action that fits the signal:\\n\\n1. record one strong writeback when there is a clear durable learning\\n2. use `writeback-curator` when the target, kind, or scope is ambiguous\\n3. use `capability-evolution` or `evolution-planner` when repeated signal should become a proposal\\n4. do not draft or apply proposals just because a writeback exists; require repeated evidence or a clearly missing capability\\n\\nAvoid creating writeback/evolution noise for one-off nits, vague preferences, or speculative ideas without evidence.\\n\\nWhen the friction is executable product/tooling work that needs ownership,\\npriority, state, or implementation follow-through, create or update a real task\\nsystem item instead of forcing it into capability evolution. Use evolution for\\nthe reusable operating-layer change.\\n\\n## Proposal Kinds\\n\\nCurrent supported proposal kinds:\\n\\n- `update_asset`\\n- `create_asset`\\n- `extract_snippet`\\n- `add_skill`\\n- `promote_asset`\\n\\nUse the smallest durable change that fits the evidence.\\n\\n## Review And Apply Rules\\n\\n- draft before apply\\n- accept before apply\\n- prefer the smallest safe change\\n- keep reviewable evidence tied to source writebacks\\n- do not globalize project behavior too early\\n- do not apply high-risk global instruction, skill, plugin, or shared-tool changes without explicit review/approval\\n\\nApply is for markdown canonical assets only. If the target is wrong, revise the proposal rather than forcing it through.\\n","instructions/INTEGRATION.md":"---\\ndescription: Detect where local success can still fail at integration boundaries.\\ntags: [facult, integration, verification]\\n---\\n\\n# Integration\\n\\nDistinguish local correctness from system correctness. Check hidden dependencies, rollout order, and operational constraints before calling work done.\\n","instructions/LEARNING_AND_WRITEBACK.md":"---\\ndescription: Preserve durable signal and record writeback when the operating layer should learn.\\ntags: [facult, learning, writeback]\\n---\\n\\n# Learning And Writeback\\n\\nUse this when work produces a durable decision, failure, success pattern, or missing guardrail that should outlive the current task.\\n\\nThis is the capture side of the feedback loop. The goal is to let normal agent work produce reusable signal without requiring a human to manually restate every friction point later.\\n\\n## Default Behavior\\n\\nThe normal path should be agent-driven.\\n\\nIf you can clearly answer:\\n\\n- what was learned\\n- why it matters\\n- where it should land\\n- whether it belongs in `project` or `global`\\n\\nthen record the writeback instead of only suggesting that someone should do it later.\\n\\nUse:\\n\\n```bash\\nfclt ai writeback add --kind <kind> --summary \\"<summary>\\" --asset <asset-selector>\\n```\\n\\nThe writeback queue is runtime state, not canonical source. `fclt` stores JSON\\nqueue state in machine-local Facult state so sandboxed agents can record durable\\nfriction without mutating canonical assets unless an evolution proposal is later\\nreviewed and applied.\\n\\nEvery writeback also refreshes a Markdown review artifact under the global\\n`~/.ai/writebacks/...` tree. Global signal lands in `~/.ai/writebacks/global/`;\\nproject-scoped signal lands in `~/.ai/writebacks/projects/<slug-hash>/` with\\nfrontmatter for scope, project root, cwd, target asset, status, tags, evidence,\\nand timestamps. Do not write writeback review artifacts into a repo-local `.ai`;\\nrepo-local state should contribute project metadata and evidence, not bundled\\nprivate review files.\\n\\nProject-scoped writebacks should usually be recorded from the repo that produced\\nthe evidence. Global writebacks should be reserved for shared doctrine, shared\\nskills, shared agents, tool behavior, or cross-project capability gaps.\\n\\n## Record Writeback When\\n\\n- the same failure or weak loop appears again\\n- a reusable success pattern shows up\\n- guidance is clearly stale or missing\\n- a repo-local behavior probably belongs in project capability\\n- a cross-project behavior probably belongs in global capability\\n- a skill, tool, MCP, plugin, automation, or instruction gap repeatedly slows work down\\n- an agent has to restate the same workaround, verification rule, or review rule\\n\\n## Do Not Record Writeback For\\n\\n- one-off annoyance with no durable value\\n- weak commentary with no target\\n- speculative ideas without evidence\\n- duplicate noise with no new signal\\n\\n## Follow Through\\n\\n- prefer one strong writeback over many weak ones\\n- mention the writeback id when summarizing what changed\\n- escalate to `capability-evolution` or `fclt ai evolve ...` only when the signal is repeated or clearly points at a durable capability change\\n- use `fclt ai writeback group --by asset` or `fclt ai writeback summarize --by domain` to review accumulated signal before proposing broad changes\\n- use scheduled `learning-review`, `evolution-review`, or `tool-call-audit` automations when the signal should be reviewed in the background\\n","instructions/PROJECT_CAPABILITY.md":"---\\ndescription: Decide what belongs in repo-local .ai versus the global store.\\ntags: [facult, project, scope]\\n---\\n\\n# Project Capability\\n\\nPrefer project scope when the guidance depends on repo architecture, team workflow, or colocated tooling. Promote to global only after repeated cross-project reuse.\\n\\n## Project First\\n\\nDefault to `<repo>/.ai` when the capability is about:\\n\\n- local architecture\\n- repo-specific testing or verification\\n- team conventions\\n- project tools and workflows\\n\\n## Promote Carefully\\n\\nPromote to `~/.ai` only when:\\n\\n- the same pattern succeeds in more than one repo\\n- the capability is not coupled to local architecture\\n- the global version will not create noise for unrelated projects\\n\\nUse:\\n\\n```bash\\nfclt ai evolve promote EV-00001 --to global --project\\n```\\n\\nThat creates a new global proposal for review. It does not auto-apply the promotion.\\n","instructions/WORK_UNITS.md":"---\\ndescription: \\"Define work units so agent tasks have a clear goal, evidence path, artifact, and writeback target.\\"\\ntags: [\\"work-units\\", \\"planning\\", \\"verification\\", \\"writeback\\"]\\n---\\n\\n# Work Units\\n\\nA work unit is the smallest coherent unit of agent work that can be understood, verified, and preserved.\\n\\nIt is not just the user\'s latest sentence. It is the operational shape around that sentence: what is being changed, why it matters, what evidence is needed, what artifact should remain, and how future agents should benefit from the result.\\n\\n## Minimum Contract\\n\\nA well-formed work unit names:\\n\\n- goal: the outcome the user needs\\n- acceptance criteria: what must be true when the work is done\\n- required context: source files, docs, systems, messages, or prior decisions needed for correctness\\n- constraints: permissions, privacy, compatibility, deadlines, ownership, or scope limits\\n- signals or evidence: checks that can confirm progress or falsify assumptions\\n- output artifact: code, docs, proposal, issue, note, draft, or report\\n- verification path: commands, review surfaces, manual checks, or source-of-truth reads\\n- writeback target: where durable learning belongs if the work teaches something reusable\\n\\nIf one of these is missing and the gap blocks correctness, surface the gap early and recover it before moving faster.\\n\\n## Why It Exists\\n\\nWork-unit framing prevents shallow completion. It helps agents avoid:\\n\\n- changing files before understanding the target\\n- treating a weak green signal as proof\\n- losing reusable learning in chat\\n- creating duplicate tasks or proposals\\n- turning one-off preferences into global rules\\n- pushing project-specific details into global capability\\n\\n## How To Use It\\n\\nFor simple tasks, keep the work unit implicit but still verify the result.\\n\\nFor ambiguous, high-impact, or multi-step tasks, make the work unit explicit before executing. A compact form is enough:\\n\\n```text\\nGoal:\\nAcceptance:\\nContext:\\nConstraints:\\nEvidence:\\nArtifact:\\nVerification:\\nWriteback:\\n```\\n\\nUse the smallest framing that makes the task correct. Do not turn every request into paperwork.\\n\\n## Writeback\\n\\nWhen the work reveals durable friction, missing capability, stale guidance, or a repeatable workflow, prefer one strong writeback over many weak ones.\\n\\nUse `fclt ai writeback add ...` when the target asset, scope, and evidence are clear. Use `fclt ai evolve ...` only when repeated signal supports a concrete proposal.\\n","skills/capability-evolution/SKILL.md":"---\\ndescription: Convert repeated writeback into concrete fclt capability proposals.\\ntags: [facult, evolution, writeback]\\n---\\n\\n# capability-evolution\\n\\n## When To Use\\nUse this skill when the same missing guidance, weak loop, or recurring win appears often enough that the AI system itself should probably change.\\n\\nDo not wait for a human operator by default if the signal is already clear and the environment permits local AI runtime state to be updated.\\n\\nUse writeback first when the signal is useful but not yet repeated. Use evolution when accumulated writebacks, repeated tool friction, or a clearly missing capability point at a specific target asset or new capability.\\n\\n## Scope Decision\\n\\nChoose `project` when the behavior depends on repo-local architecture or workflow.\\n\\nChoose `global` when the behavior is broadly reusable.\\n\\nIf unsure, start at project scope and promote later with evidence.\\n\\n## Working Flow\\n\\n1. record the strongest writeback\\n2. group or summarize repeated signal\\n3. choose the smallest valid proposal kind\\n4. draft the proposal\\n5. accept only after the target and scope are correct\\n6. apply only when the markdown target is the intended canonical asset\\n\\nUse:\\n\\n```bash\\nfclt ai writeback add ...\\nfclt ai writeback group --by asset\\nfclt ai writeback summarize --by domain\\nfclt ai evolve propose\\nfclt ai evolve draft EV-00001\\nfclt ai evolve draft EV-00001 --append \\"tighten the rule with a concrete verification step\\"\\nfclt ai evolve accept EV-00001\\nfclt ai evolve apply EV-00001\\n```\\n\\nFor background review loops, use:\\n\\n```bash\\nfclt templates init automation learning-review\\nfclt templates init automation evolution-review\\nfclt templates init automation tool-call-audit\\n```\\n\\nIf there is not yet enough repeated signal for evolution, record the writeback and stop there.\\n\\n## Proposal Kind Selection\\n\\n- `update_asset` for tightening existing guidance\\n- `create_asset` for missing instructions or docs\\n- `extract_snippet` for reusable partial guidance\\n- `add_skill` for reusable workflow instruction\\n- `promote_asset` for project-to-global promotion\\n\\nUse task tracking instead of evolution when the main work is an executable tool or product fix that needs an owner, priority, state, or delivery plan. Use evolution for the reusable instruction, skill, or operating-model change that should survive that fix.\\n\\n## Output Contract\\n- repeated signal\\n- proposed asset change\\n- target scope\\n- evidence\\n- smallest useful next step\\n","skills/project-operating-layer-design/SKILL.md":"---\\ndescription: Design or improve a repo-local .ai operating layer.\\ntags: [facult, project, design]\\n---\\n\\n# project-operating-layer-design\\n\\n## When To Use\\nUse this skill when a project needs its own `.ai/` structure, repo-specific instructions, or local bootstrap guidance.\\n\\n## Output Contract\\n- recommended `.ai/` layout\\n- what stays project-local\\n- what stays global\\n- what should remain generated runtime output only\\n"}'
+  '{"AGENTS.global.md":"# Facult Operating Defaults\\n\\nThis machine has a default Facult operating-model layer available.\\n\\nWhen work produces durable friction, weak verification, stale guidance, or a missing skill/tool capability, preserve that signal with `fclt ai writeback ...` when the target and scope are clear. When repeated writebacks or clearly missing capability point at a concrete improvement, use `fclt ai evolve ...` or the `capability-evolution` skill to make a reviewable proposal.\\n\\nFor work-unit framing, read `@builtin/facult-operating-model/instructions/WORK_UNITS.md`.\\nFor composing refs, snippets, instructions, skills, agents, MCP, and automations as evolvable units, read `@builtin/facult-operating-model/instructions/CAPABILITY_COMPOSITION.md`.\\nFor writeback and evolution, read `@builtin/facult-operating-model/instructions/EVOLUTION.md`.\\nFor learning and writeback defaults, read `@builtin/facult-operating-model/instructions/LEARNING_AND_WRITEBACK.md`.\\nFor deciding whether capability belongs in global or project scope, read `@builtin/facult-operating-model/instructions/PROJECT_CAPABILITY.md`.\\nFor project operating-layer design, read `@builtin/facult-operating-model/instructions/INTEGRATION.md`.\\n\\nBuiltin specialist agents are available for:\\n- writeback curation\\n- evolution planning\\n- scope promotion\\n- integration auditing\\n\\nBuiltin skills are available for:\\n- capability evolution\\n- project operating-layer design\\n","agents/evolution-planner/agent.toml":"name = \\"evolution-planner\\"\\ndescription = \\"Turn repeated writeback into concrete capability proposals.\\"\\n\\ndeveloper_instructions = \\"\\"\\"\\nYou plan capability evolution.\\n\\nPrioritize:\\n- smallest useful change\\n- correct target asset type\\n- correct target scope\\n- evidence that justifies the change\\n- repeated writeback clusters or clearly missing capabilities, not isolated preferences\\n\\nProposal kinds you should consider first:\\n- update_asset\\n- create_asset\\n- extract_snippet\\n- add_skill\\n- promote_asset\\n\\nDefault to project scope when the pattern is repo-local.\\nPromote to global only when reuse is demonstrated and pollution risk is low.\\n\\nReturn concise proposals ordered by expected leverage, including:\\n- proposal kind\\n- target asset\\n- target scope\\n- why this is the smallest durable change\\n\\nDo not escalate to evolution when a single writeback is enough.\\nDo not use evolution as a substitute for executable task tracking when the main need is owner, priority, state, or implementation follow-through.\\n\\"\\"\\"\\n","agents/integration-auditor/agent.toml":"name = \\"integration-auditor\\"\\ndescription = \\"Find where local success can still fail system-wide.\\"\\n\\ndeveloper_instructions = \\"\\"\\"\\nYou audit integration risk.\\n\\nPrioritize:\\n- hidden dependencies\\n- rollout hazards\\n- operational constraints\\n- gaps between local verification and real system behavior\\n\\nReturn concise findings ordered by impact.\\n\\"\\"\\"\\n","agents/scope-promoter/agent.toml":"name = \\"scope-promoter\\"\\ndescription = \\"Decide whether learning belongs at project or global scope.\\"\\n\\ndeveloper_instructions = \\"\\"\\"\\nYou decide scope.\\n\\nPrioritize:\\n- project specificity\\n- cross-project reuse potential\\n- pollution risk from globalizing too early\\n\\nWhen recommending promotion, make the standard path explicit:\\n- keep the source capability in project scope until promotion is approved\\n- create a reviewable global proposal\\n- do not treat promotion as implicit apply\\n\\nReturn concise decisions with rationale.\\n\\"\\"\\"\\n","agents/writeback-curator/agent.toml":"name = \\"writeback-curator\\"\\ndescription = \\"Turn noisy outcomes into high-signal writeback.\\"\\n\\ndeveloper_instructions = \\"\\"\\"\\nYou curate durable writeback.\\n\\nPrioritize:\\n- repeated failures\\n- repeated wins\\n- stale guidance\\n- missing capability edges\\n- tool, skill, MCP, plugin, automation, or instruction friction that repeatedly slows work down\\n\\nFor each recommendation, prefer returning:\\n- suggested writeback kind\\n- best target asset or destination\\n- best scope (`project` or `global`)\\n- the evidence that justifies recording it\\n\\nDo not emit low-signal noise.\\nIf the learning is repo-specific, keep it project-scoped by default.\\nWhen the signal is already strong and the target is clear, prefer recommending direct writeback capture rather than abstract advice.\\nWhen the issue is executable tooling work, recommend task tracking for the fix and writeback only for the reusable operating-model learning.\\n\\"\\"\\"\\n","instructions/CAPABILITY_COMPOSITION.md":"---\\ndescription: \\"Compose small capability units across global and project roots, then evolve the smallest affected unit.\\"\\ntags: [\\"facult\\", \\"composition\\", \\"refs\\", \\"snippets\\", \\"instructions\\"]\\n---\\n\\n# Capability Composition\\n\\nUse `fclt` capability as small units that can be composed, inspected, rendered, and evolved independently.\\n\\nThe main units are:\\n\\n- instructions: standalone markdown doctrine such as language preferences, verification rules, or review standards\\n- snippets: small markdown partials inserted into one or more rendered docs\\n- skills: task-specific workflows with `SKILL.md`\\n- agents: focused role manifests\\n- MCP definitions: tool interfaces and their safe auth shape\\n- automations: scheduled review or maintenance loops\\n- tool rules/config: tool-specific defaults and policy\\n\\n## Composition Rules\\n\\n- Keep reusable doctrine in `instructions/`.\\n- Keep repeated paragraphs or policy blocks in `snippets/`.\\n- Keep workflow execution in `skills/`.\\n- Keep persona or delegation behavior in `agents/`.\\n- Keep tool wiring in `mcp/` and `tools/<tool>/`.\\n- Compose broad agent docs from refs and snippets instead of copying text by hand.\\n- Prefer one narrow reusable unit over one large instruction file that mixes unrelated domains.\\n\\nExamples:\\n\\n- `@ai/instructions/BUN.md` for shared Bun preferences.\\n- `@ai/instructions/RUST.md` for shared Rust preferences.\\n- `@project/instructions/TESTING.md` for repo-specific test policy.\\n- `<!-- fclty:global/codex/baseline -->` for a shared rendered block.\\n\\n## Scope\\n\\nUse global scope for capability that should follow the user across projects.\\n\\nUse project scope for capability that belongs to a repo, team workflow, architecture, or local test harness.\\n\\nPromote project capability to global only when repeated evidence shows reuse across projects. Do not globalize a project quirk just because it worked once.\\n\\n## Writeback and Evolution\\n\\nTarget the smallest affected unit.\\n\\n- If a paragraph is reused in several rendered docs, target the snippet.\\n- If a domain rule is wrong, target the instruction.\\n- If a workflow is incomplete, target the skill.\\n- If a delegated role is unclear, target the agent.\\n- If a tool interface is missing or unsafe, target the MCP or tool config.\\n- If a scheduled review loop is noisy or missing context, target the automation.\\n\\nGood writeback targets are graph-backed selectors when possible:\\n\\n```bash\\nfclt ai writeback add --kind missing_context --summary \\"Bun guidance did not cover test runner selection.\\" --asset instruction:BUN\\nfclt ai writeback add --kind reusable_pattern --summary \\"Project test policy should become a shared verification snippet.\\" --asset @project/instructions/TESTING.md\\nfclt ai writeback add --kind bad_default --summary \\"The review automation escalated one-off preferences.\\" --asset automation:evolution-review\\n```\\n\\nUse `fclt ai evolve ...` only after repeated signal, a clearly missing capability, or a stale canonical asset points at a concrete change. Prefer the smallest valid proposal kind: `update_asset`, `create_asset`, `extract_snippet`, `add_skill`, or `promote_asset`.\\n\\n## Agent Defaults\\n\\nWhen an agent sees a repeated preference like \\"use Bun for JS projects\\" or \\"prefer Cargo nextest for Rust tests\\", it should not bury that in chat. It should identify whether the durable unit is:\\n\\n- a global instruction\\n- a project instruction\\n- a snippet reused by rendered docs\\n- a skill workflow\\n- a project-to-global promotion candidate\\n\\nThen it should record writeback against that unit, or draft a proposal when the evidence is already strong enough.\\n","instructions/EVOLUTION.md":"---\\ndescription: Turn repeated signal into concrete capability changes.\\ntags: [facult, evolution, writeback]\\n---\\n\\n# Evolution\\n\\nUse writeback and evolution to improve the AI operating layer itself.\\n\\nEvolution is the synthesis and change side of the feedback loop. It turns accumulated writebacks, repeated tool friction, stale canonical assets, or clearly missing capability into small reviewable changes to instructions, skills, snippets, agents, or other markdown canonical assets.\\n\\nUse capability composition when choosing the target. Instructions, snippets, skills, agents, MCP/tool config, and automations are separate units. Target the smallest unit that actually needs to change instead of rewriting a broad agent doc.\\n\\n## When To Record Writeback\\n\\nRecord writeback when one of these is true:\\n\\n- the same failure repeats\\n- the same success pattern repeats\\n- guidance is stale or missing\\n- a prompt or loop has to be restated often\\n- a project-specific pattern looks reusable\\n\\nDo not record low-signal noise:\\n\\n- one-off annoyance with no reuse value\\n- generic \\"could be better\\" commentary\\n- duplicate observations with no new evidence\\n\\nThe intended default is that agents record strong writebacks themselves when the signal is clear enough, rather than only recommending that a user do it manually later.\\n\\nDo not wait for a weekly review to preserve high-signal evidence. Do wait for repeated evidence or a clearly missing capability before drafting a proposal.\\n\\n## Scope\\n\\nChoose `project` scope when the learning depends on:\\n\\n- repo architecture\\n- team workflow\\n- project tooling\\n- local testing or verification behavior\\n\\nChoose `global` scope when the learning is reusable across projects.\\n\\nPromote from project to global only after repeated reuse or strong evidence.\\n\\n## Writeback Kinds\\n\\nCommon kinds:\\n\\n- `weak_verification`\\n- `false_positive`\\n- `missing_context`\\n- `reusable_pattern`\\n- `capability_gap`\\n- `bad_default`\\n\\nEvery good writeback should try to include:\\n\\n- a concrete summary\\n- the best target asset if known\\n- the right scope\\n- domain or tags when useful\\n\\nGood target examples:\\n\\n- `instruction:BUN` when shared Bun guidance is stale or missing\\n- `@project/instructions/TESTING.md` when repo test policy needs project-scoped evolution\\n- `snippet:global/lang/bun` when a repeated rendered block should be fixed or extracted\\n- `skill:capability-evolution` when a workflow skill is missing steps or examples\\n- `automation:evolution-review` when the scheduled review loop is noisy or incomplete\\n\\n## Operator Flow\\n\\nTypical workflow:\\n\\n```bash\\nfclt ai writeback add --kind weak_verification --summary \\"Checks were too shallow\\" --asset instruction:VERIFICATION\\nfclt ai writeback group --by asset\\nfclt ai writeback summarize --by domain\\nfclt ai evolve propose\\nfclt ai evolve draft EV-00001\\nfclt ai evolve accept EV-00001\\nfclt ai evolve apply EV-00001\\n```\\n\\nUse `fclt ai evolve draft <id> --append \\"...\\"` to revise a draft while preserving draft history.\\n\\nReview surfaces:\\n\\n- open `~/.ai/writebacks/` and `~/.ai/evolution/` in a Markdown editor for frontmatter-rich global and project-scoped review artifacts\\n- `fclt status --json` for queue/proposal paths, review artifact paths, counts, and active scope\\n- `fclt ai writeback list|show|group|summarize` for raw and clustered signal\\n- `fclt ai evolve list|show|review` for proposal state without applying changes\\n- `fclt templates init automation learning-review` for recurring capture/review\\n- `fclt templates init automation evolution-review` for recurring proposal review\\n- `fclt templates init automation tool-call-audit` for repeated tool-friction review\\n\\nEvolution proposal metadata, markdown drafts, patch artifacts, writeback queues,\\nand journals are runtime state. `fclt` stores JSON queues, proposal records,\\ndraft refs, patches, and journals in machine-local `fclt` state. It mirrors\\nhuman-readable review artifacts into global `~/.ai/writebacks/...` and\\n`~/.ai/evolution/...`, including project-scoped artifacts under\\n`projects/<slug-hash>/` with cwd/project metadata in frontmatter. Canonical\\nassets in `~/.ai` or `<repo>/.ai` should only change when a proposal is applied.\\n\\n## Default Agent Behavior\\n\\nUse the smallest action that fits the signal:\\n\\n1. record one strong writeback when there is a clear durable learning\\n2. use `writeback-curator` when the target, kind, or scope is ambiguous\\n3. use `capability-evolution` or `evolution-planner` when repeated signal should become a proposal\\n4. do not draft or apply proposals just because a writeback exists; require repeated evidence or a clearly missing capability\\n\\nAvoid creating writeback/evolution noise for one-off nits, vague preferences, or speculative ideas without evidence.\\n\\nWhen the friction is executable product/tooling work that needs ownership,\\npriority, state, or implementation follow-through, create or update a real task\\nsystem item instead of forcing it into capability evolution. Use evolution for\\nthe reusable operating-layer change.\\n\\n## Proposal Kinds\\n\\nCurrent supported proposal kinds:\\n\\n- `update_asset`\\n- `create_asset`\\n- `extract_snippet`\\n- `add_skill`\\n- `promote_asset`\\n\\nUse the smallest durable change that fits the evidence.\\n\\nExamples:\\n\\n- `update_asset`: fix a stale instruction, snippet, agent, or automation markdown asset.\\n- `create_asset`: add a missing instruction such as `BUN.md` or `RUST.md`.\\n- `extract_snippet`: move repeated guidance out of several docs into one snippet.\\n- `add_skill`: create a workflow when instructions are not enough.\\n- `promote_asset`: move a proven project instruction/snippet/skill toward global reuse.\\n\\n## Review And Apply Rules\\n\\n- draft before apply\\n- accept before apply\\n- prefer the smallest safe change\\n- keep reviewable evidence tied to source writebacks\\n- do not globalize project behavior too early\\n- do not apply high-risk global instruction, skill, plugin, or shared-tool changes without explicit review/approval\\n\\nApply is for markdown canonical assets only. If the target is wrong, revise the proposal rather than forcing it through.\\n","instructions/INTEGRATION.md":"---\\ndescription: Detect where local success can still fail at integration boundaries.\\ntags: [facult, integration, verification]\\n---\\n\\n# Integration\\n\\nDistinguish local correctness from system correctness. Check hidden dependencies, rollout order, and operational constraints before calling work done.\\n","instructions/LEARNING_AND_WRITEBACK.md":"---\\ndescription: Preserve durable signal and record writeback when the operating layer should learn.\\ntags: [facult, learning, writeback]\\n---\\n\\n# Learning And Writeback\\n\\nUse this when work produces a durable decision, failure, success pattern, or missing guardrail that should outlive the current task.\\n\\nThis is the capture side of the feedback loop. The goal is to let normal agent work produce reusable signal without requiring a human to manually restate every friction point later.\\n\\n## Default Behavior\\n\\nThe normal path should be agent-driven.\\n\\nIf you can clearly answer:\\n\\n- what was learned\\n- why it matters\\n- where it should land\\n- whether it belongs in `project` or `global`\\n\\nthen record the writeback instead of only suggesting that someone should do it later.\\n\\nUse:\\n\\n```bash\\nfclt ai writeback add --kind <kind> --summary \\"<summary>\\" --asset <asset-selector>\\n```\\n\\nThe writeback queue is runtime state, not canonical source. `fclt` stores JSON\\nqueue state in machine-local `fclt` state so sandboxed agents can record durable\\nfriction without mutating canonical assets unless an evolution proposal is later\\nreviewed and applied.\\n\\nEvery writeback also refreshes a Markdown review artifact under the global\\n`~/.ai/writebacks/...` tree. Global signal lands in `~/.ai/writebacks/global/`;\\nproject-scoped signal lands in `~/.ai/writebacks/projects/<slug-hash>/` with\\nfrontmatter for scope, project root, cwd, target asset, status, tags, evidence,\\nand timestamps. Do not write writeback review artifacts into a repo-local `.ai`;\\nrepo-local state should contribute project metadata and evidence, not bundled\\nprivate review files.\\n\\nProject-scoped writebacks should usually be recorded from the repo that produced\\nthe evidence. Global writebacks should be reserved for shared doctrine, shared\\nskills, shared agents, tool behavior, or cross-project capability gaps.\\n\\nTarget the smallest composable unit that explains the friction:\\n\\n- instruction: domain guidance, preferences, verification rules, or review doctrine\\n- snippet: repeated markdown block used by more than one rendered doc\\n- skill: workflow execution steps or examples\\n- agent: delegated role behavior\\n- MCP/tool config: tool interface, auth shape, or rendered integration\\n- automation: scheduled review loop, cadence, prompt, or memory\\n\\n## Record Writeback When\\n\\n- the same failure or weak loop appears again\\n- a reusable success pattern shows up\\n- guidance is clearly stale or missing\\n- a repo-local behavior probably belongs in project capability\\n- a cross-project behavior probably belongs in global capability\\n- a skill, tool, MCP, plugin, automation, or instruction gap repeatedly slows work down\\n- an agent has to restate the same workaround, verification rule, or review rule\\n- a repeated preference should become an atomic instruction such as `BUN.md`, `RUST.md`, or a project-specific testing policy\\n\\n## Do Not Record Writeback For\\n\\n- one-off annoyance with no durable value\\n- weak commentary with no target\\n- speculative ideas without evidence\\n- duplicate noise with no new signal\\n\\n## Follow Through\\n\\n- prefer one strong writeback over many weak ones\\n- mention the writeback id when summarizing what changed\\n- escalate to `capability-evolution` or `fclt ai evolve ...` only when the signal is repeated or clearly points at a durable capability change\\n- use `fclt ai writeback group --by asset` or `fclt ai writeback summarize --by domain` to review accumulated signal before proposing broad changes\\n- use scheduled `learning-review`, `evolution-review`, or `tool-call-audit` automations when the signal should be reviewed in the background\\n","instructions/PROJECT_CAPABILITY.md":"---\\ndescription: Decide what belongs in repo-local .ai versus the global store.\\ntags: [facult, project, scope]\\n---\\n\\n# Project Capability\\n\\nPrefer project scope when the guidance depends on repo architecture, team workflow, or colocated tooling. Promote to global only after repeated cross-project reuse.\\n\\n## Project First\\n\\nDefault to `<repo>/.ai` when the capability is about:\\n\\n- local architecture\\n- repo-specific testing or verification\\n- team conventions\\n- project tools and workflows\\n\\n## Promote Carefully\\n\\nPromote to `~/.ai` only when:\\n\\n- the same pattern succeeds in more than one repo\\n- the capability is not coupled to local architecture\\n- the global version will not create noise for unrelated projects\\n\\nUse:\\n\\n```bash\\nfclt ai evolve promote EV-00001 --to global --project\\n```\\n\\nThat creates a new global proposal for review. It does not auto-apply the promotion.\\n","instructions/WORK_UNITS.md":"---\\ndescription: \\"Define work units so agent tasks have a clear goal, evidence path, artifact, and writeback target.\\"\\ntags: [\\"work-units\\", \\"planning\\", \\"verification\\", \\"writeback\\"]\\n---\\n\\n# Work Units\\n\\nA work unit is the smallest coherent unit of agent work that can be understood, verified, and preserved.\\n\\nIt is not just the user\'s latest sentence. It is the operational shape around that sentence: what is being changed, why it matters, what evidence is needed, what artifact should remain, and how future agents should benefit from the result.\\n\\n## Minimum Contract\\n\\nA well-formed work unit names:\\n\\n- goal: the outcome the user needs\\n- acceptance criteria: what must be true when the work is done\\n- required context: source files, docs, systems, messages, or prior decisions needed for correctness\\n- constraints: permissions, privacy, compatibility, deadlines, ownership, or scope limits\\n- signals or evidence: checks that can confirm progress or falsify assumptions\\n- output artifact: code, docs, proposal, issue, note, draft, or report\\n- verification path: commands, review surfaces, manual checks, or source-of-truth reads\\n- writeback target: where durable learning belongs if the work teaches something reusable\\n\\nIf one of these is missing and the gap blocks correctness, surface the gap early and recover it before moving faster.\\n\\n## Why It Exists\\n\\nWork-unit framing prevents shallow completion. It helps agents avoid:\\n\\n- changing files before understanding the target\\n- treating a weak green signal as proof\\n- losing reusable learning in chat\\n- creating duplicate tasks or proposals\\n- turning one-off preferences into global rules\\n- pushing project-specific details into global capability\\n\\n## How To Use It\\n\\nFor simple tasks, keep the work unit implicit but still verify the result.\\n\\nFor ambiguous, high-impact, or multi-step tasks, make the work unit explicit before executing. A compact form is enough:\\n\\n```text\\nGoal:\\nAcceptance:\\nContext:\\nConstraints:\\nEvidence:\\nArtifact:\\nVerification:\\nWriteback:\\n```\\n\\nUse the smallest framing that makes the task correct. Do not turn every request into paperwork.\\n\\n## Writeback\\n\\nWhen the work reveals durable friction, missing capability, stale guidance, or a repeatable workflow, prefer one strong writeback over many weak ones.\\n\\nUse `fclt ai writeback add ...` when the target asset, scope, and evidence are clear. Use `fclt ai evolve ...` only when repeated signal supports a concrete proposal.\\n","skills/capability-evolution/SKILL.md":"---\\ndescription: Convert repeated writeback into concrete fclt capability proposals.\\ntags: [facult, evolution, writeback]\\n---\\n\\n# capability-evolution\\n\\n## When To Use\\nUse this skill when the same missing guidance, weak loop, or recurring win appears often enough that the AI system itself should probably change.\\n\\nDo not wait for a human operator by default if the signal is already clear and the environment permits local AI runtime state to be updated.\\n\\nUse writeback first when the signal is useful but not yet repeated. Use evolution when accumulated writebacks, repeated tool friction, or a clearly missing capability point at a specific target asset or new capability.\\n\\n## Scope Decision\\n\\nChoose `project` when the behavior depends on repo-local architecture or workflow.\\n\\nChoose `global` when the behavior is broadly reusable.\\n\\nIf unsure, start at project scope and promote later with evidence.\\n\\n## Working Flow\\n\\n1. record the strongest writeback\\n2. group or summarize repeated signal\\n3. choose the smallest valid proposal kind\\n4. draft the proposal\\n5. accept only after the target and scope are correct\\n6. apply only when the markdown target is the intended canonical asset\\n\\nUse:\\n\\n```bash\\nfclt ai writeback add ...\\nfclt ai writeback group --by asset\\nfclt ai writeback summarize --by domain\\nfclt ai evolve propose\\nfclt ai evolve draft EV-00001\\nfclt ai evolve draft EV-00001 --append \\"tighten the rule with a concrete verification step\\"\\nfclt ai evolve accept EV-00001\\nfclt ai evolve apply EV-00001\\n```\\n\\nFor background review loops, use:\\n\\n```bash\\nfclt templates init automation learning-review\\nfclt templates init automation evolution-review\\nfclt templates init automation tool-call-audit\\n```\\n\\nIf there is not yet enough repeated signal for evolution, record the writeback and stop there.\\n\\n## Proposal Kind Selection\\n\\n- `update_asset` for tightening existing guidance\\n- `create_asset` for missing instructions or docs\\n- `extract_snippet` for reusable partial guidance\\n- `add_skill` for reusable workflow instruction\\n- `promote_asset` for project-to-global promotion\\n\\nUse task tracking instead of evolution when the main work is an executable tool or product fix that needs an owner, priority, state, or delivery plan. Use evolution for the reusable instruction, skill, or operating-model change that should survive that fix.\\n\\n## Output Contract\\n- repeated signal\\n- proposed asset change\\n- target scope\\n- evidence\\n- smallest useful next step\\n","skills/project-operating-layer-design/SKILL.md":"---\\ndescription: Design or improve a repo-local .ai operating layer.\\ntags: [facult, project, design]\\n---\\n\\n# project-operating-layer-design\\n\\n## When To Use\\nUse this skill when a project needs its own `.ai/` structure, repo-specific instructions, or local bootstrap guidance.\\n\\n## Output Contract\\n- recommended `.ai/` layout\\n- what stays project-local\\n- what stays global\\n- what should remain generated runtime output only\\n"}'
 ) as Record<string, string>;