fdeops 3.16.0 → 3.20.0

package/skills/fde/references/ai.md

@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ Write model selection rationale to `decisions.md`. Include: models tested, test
 
 ## Engagement eval pack (before AI ships)
 
-When any slice touches a model, embeddings, RAG, or an agent: create or update `.fde/evals.md` **before** ship. Full method: `references/eval-pack.md`. This is the engagement-local test set - not unit tests.
+When any slice touches a model, embeddings, RAG, or an agent: create or update `.fde/evals.md` **before** ship. Full skill: `references/eval-pack.md`. This is the engagement-local test set - not unit tests.
 
 **Minimum pack (do not grow until the minimum exists):**
 1. **Component + quality bar** - one sentence each; kill switch / fallback named.
@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ When any slice touches a model, embeddings, RAG, or an agent: create or update `
 4. **Pass/fail** - dated run; Verdict **SHIP** or **NO-SHIP**; critical fails must be 0.
 5. **HITL gate** - which decisions need human review before action (align with `trust-profile.md`). Empty when policy requires review → NO-SHIP.
 
-**When to write:** plan seeds the pack; poc/build grows goldens; ship requires Verdict SHIP and a receipt in `delivery.md` → `## Ship receipts`. Non-AI work skips this file entirely.
+**When to write:** plan seeds the pack; poc/ship grows goldens; ship requires Verdict SHIP and a receipt in `delivery.md` → `## Ship receipts`. Non-AI work skips this file entirely.
 
 ## RAG architecture (retrieval-augmented generation)
 

package/skills/fde/references/audit.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# audit - taking over mid-engagement
+# audit - Verify inherited claims
 
 **Enter when:** picking up someone else's work - previous consultant left, joining mid-project, half-done system.
 
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
 Before forming any opinion:
 
 1. **Inherit the paper.** Any previous `.fde/`, docs, README claims, ADRs, ticket history the FDE can export. Read it all - the previous FDE's decisions are evidence, not verdicts.
-2. **Run the discover scans** (see `discover.md` method part 1: churn, test gaps, "temporary" grep, AI components). On a takeover, add:
+2. **Run the discover scans** (see `discover.md` part 1: churn, test gaps, "temporary" grep, AI components). On a takeover, add:
 ```bash
 git log --format="%an" | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head   # who actually built this
 git log --since="60 days ago" --format="%ad %s" --date=short | head -20  # what was happening when they left

package/skills/fde/references/board-memo.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# board-memo - the story that gets the next phase funded
+# board-memo - Brief the board
 
 **Enter when:** the sponsor's boss needs a summary, a board update mentions the engagement, the FDE needs to justify continued investment, or a quarterly review is approaching.
 

package/skills/fde/references/business-case.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# business-case - the economics that get the sponsor to say yes
+# business-case - Build the business case
 
 **Enter when:** the sponsor needs justification for the next phase, the FDE needs to defend budget or timeline, a feature decision needs cost/benefit evidence, or poc produced a direction that needs funding.
 

package/skills/fde/references/close.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# close - handoff and pattern extraction
+# close - Transfer operations
 
 **Enter when:** the engagement is ending - the customer team must run this without the FDE.
 

package/skills/fde/references/connect.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# connect - wire a source MCP in plain language
+# connect - Connect a source
 
 **Enter when:** the FDE says "I want to connect a new MCP", "connect Granola / Slack / Notion", "how do I pull from …", or a pull request fails because no source tools exist.
 

package/skills/fde/references/dashboard.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# dashboard - the portfolio view
+# dashboard - View the portfolio
 
 **Enter when:** the FDE runs several customers and asks "where am I across everything?"
 
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ The visual artifact is rendered by code, not by you. `fde dashboard` reads every
 
 ## Method (you do this work)
 
-0. **First move: `fde status`** - instant heuristic triage (trust-first ordering) across every engagement. Use it as the index; then deep-read only the folders that are red/amber or that the FDE asks about, and apply the full card method below.
+0. **First move: `fde status`** - instant heuristic triage (trust-first ordering) across every engagement. Use it as the index; then deep-read only the folders that are red/amber or that the FDE asks about, and apply the full card below.
 1. **Find the engagements:** `~/fde-engagements/*/.fde/` (primary) · workspace `./.fde/` if present · paths the FDE names. Read each folder **separately** - never merge two customers.
 2. **Per engagement, read the card the way a human would:**
    - Name, phase, week

package/skills/fde/references/debrief.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# debrief - capture the meeting before it evaporates
+# debrief - Capture the meeting
 
 **Enter when:** the FDE just left a meeting/call and dumps raw notes, a transcript, or "they said…". Highest-frequency moment in FDE life. Capture within the hour.
 

package/skills/fde/references/demo-prep.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# demo-prep - the demo is the heartbeat of the engagement
+# demo-prep - Prepare the demo
 
 **Enter when:** a demo, show-and-tell, or exec walkthrough is coming. FDE engagements live demo-to-demo; a flat demo costs more than a slipped task.
 

package/skills/fde/references/discover.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# discover - find the real problem, map the terrain
+# discover - Frame the problem
 
 **Enter when:** the brief feels wrong, the real problem is unclear, shadow processes are suspected, or any phase found that the map is missing.
 
@@ -31,15 +31,28 @@ Q: <one question that changes where you dig>
 GUESS: <your answer, so they can correct it>
 ```
 
-Stop when you can write the decision sentence under **Frame the decision first**. If a name, quote, or metric is still missing, write `unknown - ask:` - never invent ops folklore to make the map look complete.
+Stop when you can write the four lines under **Frame the decision first**. If a name, quote, or metric is still missing, write `unknown - ask:` - never invent ops folklore to make the map look complete.
 
 ## Frame the decision first
 
-Before any scanning, write one sentence at the top of your working notes:
+Same SCQA spine as readout (`S → C → Q → A`), aimed at the floor, not a deck. Write it **before** any scan. Confirm with the FDE, then dig.
 
-> "What will the sponsor do differently because of this discovery?"
+| Line | What it is | Fail if |
+|------|------------|---------|
+| **Situation** | What they already treat as true - the workaround, the sheet, the owner who left | It could be copied from the RFP |
+| **Complication** | What broke, so they cannot stay here | No tension, or three problems joined by "and" |
+| **Question** | One decision the named signer must make | It smuggles the solution ("how do we add alerting") |
+| **Answer-space** | Shape of a satisfying answer: confirm brief / descope / rescope / pause | A novel, or "insights" |
 
-If you can't name the decision this informs (descope? rescope? pick use case A over B? touch module X first?), you're collecting trivia, not discovering. Every output of this phase is aimed at that decision.
+Tests on **Question** - rewrite until all five hold:
+
+1. **Decision-shaped** - answering it changes what someone does.
+2. **Single** - one thing, not three.
+3. **Scoped** - who, where, by when.
+4. **Answerable** - evidence could settle it in this engagement.
+5. **Neutral** - does not assume the fix.
+
+Cannot write the Question → keep interrogating. Do not `fde scan`. Every later output of this phase aims at that Question. Sub-questions go to the operating map or `assumptions.md`, not into the Question.
 
 ## Method - part 1: the codebase (you do this work)
 
@@ -92,7 +105,7 @@ The real spec is what people **do** when the system fails - not what the slide d
 - **The hesitation.** When someone says "well, there's also this other thing we do…" - stop them, ask them to finish. The main story is what they're comfortable explaining; the hesitation is the real problem.
 - **"Which part of the codebase do you least want to touch?"** The answer is unanimous and it's the load-bearing wall. Check it against your churn scan - when the human answer and the churn data agree, that's your first map landmark.
 - **Shadow AI.** Someone pasting data into ChatGPT to cope = a real unmet need + an uncontrolled data risk. Note both.
-- **Exception-led operating map.** For each real break (not the slide-deck process): what fails, who notices first, what they do today, and which artifact is trusted in that moment. Prefer exceptions over happy-path swimlanes - the workaround is the operating system. Write rows under `terrain.md` → `## Operating map (exception-led)`. If the section is missing on an older engagement, add it; never regenerate the rest of terrain. When AI is in play, also fill `## Intelligence placement` (deterministic vs LLM judgement vs human approve). **`fde doctor` requires at least one filled exception row before plan/build/ship/close** - empty map after discover is a hygiene fail, not optional polish.
+- **Exception-led operating map.** For each real break (not the slide-deck process): what fails, who notices first, what they do today, and which artifact is trusted in that moment. Prefer exceptions over happy-path swimlanes - the workaround is the operating system. Write rows under `terrain.md` → `## Operating map (exception-led)`. If the section is missing on an older engagement, add it; never regenerate the rest of terrain. When AI is in play, also fill `## Intelligence placement` (deterministic vs LLM judgement vs human approve). **`fde doctor` requires at least one filled exception row before plan/ship/outcome/close** - empty map after discover is a hygiene fail, not optional polish.
 
 ## Method - part 3: workshop facilitation
 
@@ -147,13 +160,18 @@ Score every candidate use case before anything gets prototyped:
 
 ## Artifact (this IS the memory - write it as you work)
 
-**`reality.md`** - the readout the FDE takes into the sponsor meeting:
+**`reality.md`** - the readout the FDE takes into the sponsor meeting. Keep the three schema lines the dashboard reads (`Working theory` / `Evidence` / `Differs from brief how`). Then the decision frame:
+
 ```markdown
 # Reality (actual problem)
-**Decision this informs:** <one line>
-**Confirmed:** <real problem> (evidence: <workaround/data/quote, source, day>)
-**Stated brief was wrong/right because:** <delta, with evidence>
-**Implication for build:** <thin-slice direction>
+**Working theory:** <the real problem, one sentence>
+**Evidence:** <workaround/data/quote, source, day>
+**Differs from brief how:** <delta, with evidence>
+**Situation:** <what the floor already treats as true>
+**Complication:** <what forces a decision now>
+**Question:** <one decision-shaped sentence>
+**Answer-space:** confirm brief / descope / rescope / pause - and what a yes looks like
+**Implication for build:** <first change they can see>
 **Validated with:** <who, when>
 ```
 
@@ -180,11 +198,11 @@ Every line carries its evidence. `(churn: 47/90d)` `(ops lead, Day 5)` `(stated,
 ## Checkpoint (before any build)
 
 Present to the FDE, five things, one paragraph each - no padding:
-1. The real problem, with the two strongest pieces of evidence.
+1. The Question, then the real problem, with the two strongest pieces of evidence.
 2. The top 3 risk areas of the codebase, one line of why each.
 3. What must not be touched without characterisation tests.
 4. The exception-led operating map: the two breaks that matter most, who owns the workaround, and where shadow systems live.
-5. The recommendation: confirm brief / descope / rescope - and the decision it puts in front of the sponsor.
+5. The Answer-space: confirm brief / descope / rescope - and the decision it puts in front of the sponsor.
 
 If discovery revealed the problem is 3× the brief: the FDE tells the customer **before** telling themselves it's manageable. Lead with evidence, offer three paths (descope / rescope / pause-and-plan), confirm any reset in writing - update `success.md` and `brief.md` before continuing.
 
@@ -198,13 +216,14 @@ Acme's brief blamed missing monitoring. Discovery goes to the workaround first.
 
 `git log` shows the reconciliation module at 47 commits/90d with no tests, all from one author who left in February. Marco (ops lead) turns out to keep a spreadsheet: every morning he re-runs the job manually and eyeballs the totals - a habit nobody mentioned because to him it is just the job. That spreadsheet is the system of record when the job fails, which is the actual finding.
 
-`reality.md`: **Confirmed:** the job has no owner, and the manual re-run masks failures for a day (evidence: Marco's sheet, Day 5; two silent failures since March, finance escalation Mar 14). **Stated brief was wrong because:** alerting existed last year and was disabled - adding it again without an owner reproduces the same outcome. `terrain.md` gets the hotspot row and an operating-map row: `job fails silently → Marco notices next morning → re-runs by hand → spreadsheet is truth → LOAD-BEARING (Marco, Day 5)`.
+`reality.md` keeps the schema, then the frame. **Working theory:** the job has no owner, and the manual re-run masks failures for a day. **Evidence:** Marco's sheet, Day 5; two silent failures since March, finance escalation Mar 14. **Differs from brief how:** alerting existed last year and was disabled - adding it again without an owner reproduces the same outcome. **Situation:** Marco re-runs the job every morning and the spreadsheet is truth when it fails. **Complication:** two silent failures since March already hit finance, and the author of the module left in February. **Question:** should Priya fund a named owner on the failure path, or fund alerting and accept the same miss in six months? **Answer-space:** fund ownership / fund alerting-as-theatre / pause until she names who acks. `terrain.md` gets the hotspot row and an operating-map row: `job fails silently → Marco notices next morning → re-runs by hand → spreadsheet is truth → LOAD-BEARING (Marco, Day 5)`.
 
-Checkpoint to the FDE names the sponsor decision this creates: fund ownership, or fund alerting and accept the same failure in six months.
+Checkpoint to the FDE leads with that Question, not a tour of the repo.
 
 ## Principles
 
 - The brief is a hypothesis until evidence confirms it.
+- No scan until the Question is one decision the signer must make.
 - The workaround is more honest than the requirements document.
 - Churn data + the human's "don't touch that" pointing at the same module = the map is true.
 - Never modify code before the terrain map exists.

package/skills/fde/references/earn-trust.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# earn-trust - earning commit access one move at a time
+# earn-trust - Earn access
 
 **Enter when:** new engagement where you don't have full access yet, trust is thin, the customer said "let's start small," or you need to navigate "we don't trust AI-generated code."
 

package/skills/fde/references/encode-pattern.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# encode-pattern - if you did it twice, encode it
+# encode-pattern - Encode the pattern
 
 **Enter when:** the engagement is closing and reusable patterns exist, a technique worked well and will apply to future clients, the FDE notices themselves doing the same thing on a second engagement, or close identified a pattern worth preserving.
 
@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ The difference between a 5-year FDE and a 15-year FDE is not talent - it's encod
 | **Repeatable?** | Applies to a class of situations, not just this one | Only worked because of a unique circumstance |
 | **Falsifiable?** | You can tell when the pattern is working or not | No way to measure whether applying it helped |
 
-**4. Classify by stage.** Patterns sort into the same stages as the methods:
+**4. Classify by stage.** Patterns sort into the same stages as the skills:
 
 | Stage | Pattern type | Example |
 |--------|-------------|---------|
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ The difference between a 5-year FDE and a 15-year FDE is not talent - it's encod
 | **Discover** | Investigative / analytical | "The cron-job discovery checklist for legacy systems" |
 | **Plan** | Structural / strategic | "The three-option presentation for nervous sponsors" |
 | **Ship** | Technical / safety | "The Strangler Fig on financial transaction code" |
-| **Prove** | Operational / process | "The regulated-environment change-approval timeline buffer" |
+| **Outcome** | Operational / process | "The regulated-environment change-approval timeline buffer" |
 | **Close** | Knowledge / handoff | "The 2am document format that actually gets used" |
 
 **5. Version and evolve.** Patterns are living documents:

package/skills/fde/references/eval-pack.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-# eval-pack - prove the system before it acts
+# eval-pack - Gate the model before it acts
 
-**Enter when:** the work touches AI/LLM/agents/RAG, or they need to POC a model, or ship/close is blocked because there is no evidence the non-deterministic path is safe. Activate alongside `ai.md`, `poc`, `thin-slices`, or `ship` - not instead of them.
+**Enter when:** the work touches AI/LLM/agents/RAG, or they need to POC a model, or ship/close is blocked because there is no evidence the non-deterministic path is safe. Activate alongside `ai.md`, `poc`, or `ship` - not instead of them.
 
 **Read first:** `trust-profile.md` (AI policy + HITL), `terrain.md` (operating map), `delivery.md`. Create or extend `evals.md`.
 

package/skills/fde/references/hold-scope.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# hold-scope - holding the line without losing the relationship
+# hold-scope - Hold scope
 
 **Enter when:** "also can you…" mid-build, a stakeholder adds requirements without adjusting timeline, the FDE feels scope creeping but can't name it, or `success.md` no longer matches what's being asked.
 

package/skills/fde/references/ingest.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# ingest - pull large artifacts into the fieldbook loop
+# ingest - Ingest sources
 
 **Enter when:** the FDE wants to catch the engagement up from external sources - "make sure Acme is up to date," "pull what's relevant," "grab today's Granola and Denise's last email." Raw transcripts and long emails that are too big to paste usefully.
 

package/skills/fde/references/land.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# land - first 48 hours
+# land - Interrogate the brief
 
 **Enter when:** new customer, first meeting, just got the brief, nothing started yet.
 

package/skills/fde/references/pick-three.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# pick-three - when 20 things are "urgent," pick the 3 that matter
+# pick-three - Prioritize three
 
 **Enter when:** a transformation engagement with a long list of initiatives, the customer's roadmap has more items than weeks, competing teams want different things, or the FDE needs to recommend what to do *first* across a complex programme.
 

package/skills/fde/references/plan.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# plan - sequence the work
+# plan - Sequence the work
 
 **Enter when:** scope is understood and the work needs breaking down - a slice, a phase, or the whole delivery.
 
@@ -22,13 +22,13 @@ An FDE plan is not a sprint backlog. The technical sequence is the easy part. Th
 
 ## Method (you do this work)
 
-**0. Lock scope first.** Read `success.md` and `assumptions.md`. If out-of-scope is undefined, define it now with the FDE - a plan on undefined scope accumulates silent commitments. If any CRITICAL assumption is still `OPEN`, stop and run test-assumptions / discover before sequencing work.
+**0. Lock scope first.** Read `success.md`, `assumptions.md`, and the **Question** on `reality.md`. If out-of-scope is undefined, define it now with the FDE - a plan on undefined scope accumulates silent commitments. If any CRITICAL assumption is still `OPEN`, stop and run test-assumptions / discover before sequencing work. If `reality.md` has no Question, stop and finish discover - you are sequencing trivia.
 
 **1. Work backwards from success.** What's the last thing that must be true before done? And before that? That's the dependency chain - not a wish list.
 
 **2. Front-load the fragile.** Check `terrain.md` hotspots. Risky modules go early - fail fast, not in week three.
 
-**3. Slice vertically.** Each task delivers something visible and testable end to end ("user submits form, sees it saved"), never a horizontal layer ("build the database layer").
+**3. One user action per change.** Each task delivers something visible and testable ("user submits form, sees it saved"), never a layer ("build the database layer"). See `ship`.
 
 **4. Size to 30-90 minutes, PR-sized.** Longer = two tasks. Each task implementable, testable, reviewable without a thousand-line diff.
 
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ An FDE plan is not a sprint backlog. The technical sequence is the easy part. Th
 
 **6. Stakeholder touchpoints every 2-3 tasks.** "Show progress to <name from stakeholders.md>." Not ceremony: a customer who sees small wins stays bought in; silence gets filled with doubt.
 
-**7. End with a kill list.** Every plan names what you will **not** do this phase. If everything is "later," you have no plan - you have a wish list. Cap **Now** at 3 slices (same discipline as pick-three).
+**7. End with a kill list.** Every plan names what you will **not** do this phase. If everything is "later," you have no plan - you have a wish list. Cap **Now** at 3 PRs (same discipline as pick-three).
 
 **Acceptance criteria gate:** no task moves to build without written happy-path AND unhappy-path criteria. Can't write them = the task isn't understood; the open question goes to the customer **before** the task starts. Vague criteria surface later as scope creep and rework.
 
@@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ Delivers: <what someone can see/test>
 Accepts: <happy path> / <unhappy path>
 Touches: <files/systems - blast radius declared upfront>
 Risk: <what could go wrong + fallback>
+Kill if: <the observation that voids this slice - copy from assumptions.md How we test, or the check that means stop>
 Verify: <specific check>
 Value promised: <business unit change this slice claims>
 
@@ -72,7 +73,7 @@ Value promised: <business unit change this slice claims>
 No kill list → not a finished plan. Reopen with the FDE until the deferrals are written.
 ## Checkpoint
 
-Walk the FDE through: sequence + why this order, where the fragile work sits, where the touchpoints land, the acceptance gate on task 1, and the kill list. One question: "Which stakeholder sees the first visible slice, and when?" Second: "Who accepted what we are not doing?"
+Walk the FDE through: sequence + why this order, where the fragile work sits, where the touchpoints land, the acceptance gate and **Kill if** on task 1, and the kill list. One question: "Which stakeholder sees the first visible slice, and when?" Second: "Who accepted what we are not doing?" Third: "What observation stops task 1 this week?"
 
 ## Method - estimation (when the sponsor asks "how long, how much?")
 
@@ -96,6 +97,7 @@ Every FDE gets asked this in week one. The honest answer is a range, not a numbe
 - Add 30% buffer for integration work (it always takes longer).
 - Add 50% buffer for AI/ML work (eval cycles are unpredictable).
 - Name assumptions explicitly: "assumes API docs are accurate", "assumes staging environment exists."
+- Each named assumption needs a **kill observation**: the result that voids the estimate. Copy it from `assumptions.md` → How we test. No kill observation = it is not an assumption, it is hope.
 - Revisit estimates every 2 weeks. An estimate that never updates is fiction.
 
 Write estimates to `decisions.md` under `## Sizing`. Include the assumptions - when they break, the estimate changes and the FDE has evidence for the conversation.
@@ -135,7 +137,7 @@ Never quietly update tasks. Name the reset: update `reality.md` and `success.md`
 
 Acme, after discover: the reconciliation job is unowned, Marco's spreadsheet is the real fallback.
 
-**Now** is three tasks, not eight. Task 1 is *failures reach a named human* - delivers a page to a rota, accepts "kill the job mid-run → the on-call is paged within 15 min", touches the job wrapper and the alert config, rollback is re-disable the route, verify by killing it in staging. Value promised: `risk-mitigation - a silent failure becomes a 15-minute one`.
+**Now** is three tasks, not eight. Task 1 is *failures reach a named human* - delivers a page to a rota, accepts "kill the job mid-run → the on-call is paged within 15 min", touches the job wrapper and the alert config, rollback is re-disable the route, **Kill if:** a real failure page is acked by nobody on the rota (the *finance would act* assumption, DISPROVED if Marco is the only name that answers), verify by killing it in staging. Value promised: `risk-mitigation - a silent failure becomes a 15-minute one`.
 
 The kill list in `decisions.md` is where the plan earns its keep: the rewrite of the reconciliation service that Tom keeps proposing goes there - *deferred, the failure mode is ownership not architecture (Priya accepted, Jun 12)* - along with the finance dashboard finance asked for directly. Both stay visible so the same argument is not re-litigated in week 4 without a receipt.
 
@@ -148,5 +150,6 @@ First visible slice goes to Marco, not Priya: he is the one whose morning change
 - Every 2-3 tasks, a stakeholder touchpoint. Trust decays without visibility.
 - No written acceptance criteria, no build.
 - No kill list, no finished plan.
-- Estimates are ranges, not promises. Name the assumptions.
+- No **Kill if** on a Now PR, that PR is hope.
+- Estimates are ranges, not promises. Name the assumptions and the observation that voids them.
 - Migrations: leaf nodes first, core last. Rollback before cutover.

package/skills/fde/references/poc.md

@@ -1,8 +1,10 @@
-# poc - kill or confirm a direction in a day
+# poc - Validate the solution
 
 **Enter when:** a direction needs validating before committing real build time - POC, spike, show something, de-risk, pick between use cases. The output is something a sponsor can reject in a room this week, not a polished product.
 
-**Read first:** `context.md`, `reality.md`. Load `terrain.md` only if the prototype touches the existing codebase.
+**Read first:** `context.md`, `reality.md`. Load `terrain.md` only if the prototype touches the existing codebase. If `terrain.md` **Data estate** has a Blocker source this prototype needs, stop - that is discover, not a day's demo.
+
+A green check on synthetic data is not a validated solution. The person who can say no has to see it on evidence they already believe.
 
 ## Method (you do this work)
 

package/skills/fde/references/readout.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# readout - the sponsor update that keeps the engagement alive
+# readout - Report the outcome
 
 **Enter when:** the weekly update is due, an exec asks "where are we," or the FDE says "I need to send Dana something." This artifact decides renewals; engineers underinvest in it.
 

package/skills/fde/references/red-team.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# red-team - adversarial stress-test of your plan, position, or deliverable
+# red-team - Challenge the plan
 
 **Enter when:** the FDE says "red-team this," "stress-test my thinking," "poke holes in this," "what am I missing," "challenge my plan" - or anytime they are about to walk into a high-stakes conversation (sponsor meeting, accumulation conversation, handoff, go-live) and want their blind spots exposed first.
 

package/skills/fde/references/rescue.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# rescue - production fire, trust fire, or wrong-brief mid-build
+# rescue - Resolve the incident
 
 **Enter when:** production is down, something's bleeding - OR a stakeholder went quiet, confidence is slipping, or three weeks into the build the brief turned out to be wrong. Trust fires get the same urgency as outages.
 
@@ -13,7 +13,8 @@ Open by narrowing time, like a human: "Walk me through the last couple hours - d
 git log --since="6 hours ago" --format="%ad %an %s" --date=relative
 ```
 
-**The sequence:**
+**The sequence:** no fix until the cause is named. A symptom patch is the second incident.
+
 1. **Stabilise first.** Roll back? Disable the broken path? Route around it? Buy time before diagnosing. The instinct to fix fast causes the second incident.
 2. **Name the unknowns.** "We don't know if the queue is corrupted / if this hits all users / if the cache is stale." Written down. Named unknowns are safer than assumed knowns.
 3. **Assume maximum blast radius.** The unrecognised integration in the stack trace is load-bearing until proven otherwise.

package/skills/fde/references/review.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# review - two stages, always in order
+# review - Review the change
 
 **Enter when:** a change needs review before merge - "is this safe," "does it match what we agreed."
 

package/skills/fde/references/rollback.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# rollback - test the escape route before you need it
+# rollback - Rehearse rollback
 
 **Enter when:** a deploy is planned for the next 48 hours, the FDE says "we can always revert," a previous rollback failed or took too long, or the engagement involves regulated/critical systems.
 

package/skills/fde/references/runbook.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# runbook - making yourself replaceable is the goal
+# runbook - Write the runbook
 
 **Enter when:** the engagement is entering its final phase, the customer team needs to operate without the FDE, a new FDE is taking over, or the sponsor asks "what happens when you leave?"
 

package/skills/fde/references/score-use-cases.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# score-use-cases - pick the right battle, not the interesting one
+# score-use-cases - Score use cases
 
 **Enter when:** multiple potential use cases compete for attention, the customer says "we want to do everything," a transformation engagement needs a starting point, or the FDE needs to recommend which problem to solve first.