mancode 0.5.4 → 0.5.6

package/README.en.md

@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
 <p align="center">
   <a href="./LICENSE"><img src="https://img.shields.io/badge/License-AGPL--3.0-blue.svg?style=flat-square" alt="License: AGPL-3.0" /></a>
   <a href="https://www.npmjs.com/package/mancode"><img src="https://img.shields.io/npm/v/mancode?style=flat-square" alt="npm version" /></a>
-  <img src="https://img.shields.io/badge/status-Continuity%20v0.5.4-2f855a?style=flat-square" alt="Status: mancode Continuity v0.5.4" />
+  <img src="https://img.shields.io/badge/status-Continuity%20v0.5.6-2f855a?style=flat-square" alt="Status: mancode Continuity v0.5.6" />
   <img src="https://img.shields.io/badge/platforms-Claude%20Code%20%7C%20Cursor%20%7C%20Codex%20%7C%20Copilot%20%7C%20ZCode%20%7C%20Kimi%20Code%20%7C%20Qoder-5865F2?style=flat-square" alt="Platforms: Claude Code, Cursor, Codex in ChatGPT desktop and CLI, GitHub Copilot, ZCode, Kimi Code, Qoder" />
 </p>
 
@@ -155,10 +155,10 @@ the quality gate for models that need explicit review structure.
 
 ## Installation
 
-**Status**: mancode Continuity v0.5.4. Claude Code, Cursor, Codex in the ChatGPT
+**Status**: mancode Continuity v0.5.6. Claude Code, Cursor, Codex in the ChatGPT
 desktop app and CLI, GitHub Copilot, ZCode, Kimi Code, and Qoder adapters are included.
 
-Requires Node.js 20 or newer. macOS, Linux, Windows CMD, PowerShell, and Git Bash
+Requires Node.js 22 or newer. macOS, Linux, Windows CMD, PowerShell, and Git Bash
 are supported. Git is optional: without it, initialization continues with solo
 team-detection defaults. Claude Code hooks run with Node and do not require Bash
 or jq.
@@ -484,12 +484,15 @@ mancode workflow list --json
 mancode workflow show <namespace:ULID> --json
 mancode context resume <local:ULID|shared:ULID> --session <id>
 mancode workflow requirements <namespace:ULID> finalize --file <requirements.json> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
-mancode workflow plan <namespace:ULID> revise --file <plan.md> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
+mancode workflow plan <namespace:ULID> revise --file <plan.md> --scope-file <scope.json> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow plan <namespace:ULID> confirm --plan-decision <plan_only|governed_execution> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
+mancode workflow scope change <shared:ULID> --file <scope.json> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow update <namespace:ULID> --status <status> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow review <namespace:ULID> apply --file <review-ledger.json> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow verify <namespace:ULID> apply --file <verification-ledger.json> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow reframe <local:ULID> --expected-revision <n> --checkpoint-id <ULID> --session <id>
+mancode workflow archive <local:ULID> show <archive-ULID> --json
+mancode workflow checkpoint <local:ULID> show <checkpoint-ULID> --json
 mancode workflow complete <namespace:ULID> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode manps [area]
 mancode design status --json
@@ -511,7 +514,7 @@ platform bootstrap and original mode entry. Coding agents should combine
 Simplified output:
 
 ```text
-mancode v0.5.4
+mancode v0.5.6
 
 Project:     my-app
 Runtime:     ready
@@ -541,14 +544,25 @@ mancode team identity create --name "Your name"
 mancode context session new --client codex
 mancode workflow create man "refactor auth module" --session <id>
 mancode workflow requirements <local:ULID> finalize --file requirements.json --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
-mancode workflow plan <local:ULID> revise --file plan.md --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
+mancode workflow plan <local:ULID> revise --file plan.md --scope-file scope.json --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow plan <local:ULID> confirm --plan-decision <plan_only|governed_execution> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
+mancode workflow scope change <shared:ULID> --file scope.json --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow review <local:ULID> apply --file review-ledger.json --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow verify <local:ULID> apply --file verification-ledger.json --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow complete <local:ULID> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode context compact --dry-run
 ```
 
+`scope.json` uses `{ "include": ["src/**"], "exclude": ["src/generated/**"], "modules": [] }`.
+`include` is the execution file boundary and must be non-empty. Without an
+explicit boundary, both `governed_execution` and Solo handoff are rejected.
+Plan-only workflows may defer the boundary. If an already-running task from an
+older installation has no boundary, show and confirm the complete `scope.json`,
+then rerun the same `workflow plan ... revise --scope-file` command with the
+current `plan.md` unchanged. This compatibility binding increments the plan
+version and stales prior review/verification; it cannot change behavior or
+acceptance.
+
 ### `mancode manps`
 
 Runs a deterministic preseason health scan.
@@ -785,19 +799,15 @@ not shared state.
 
 ## Remaining Work
 
-- Complete real-host session acceptance for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor,
-  GitHub Copilot, and ZCode on one release candidate; verified host sessions
-  and isolated explicit sessions are both valid evidence paths.
-- Merge the final candidate into `main`, then run
-  `npm run release:check -- --candidate <full-commit-sha>` from that same
-  `origin/main` commit for the clean checkout, automated two-clone/legacy
-  checks, tarball SHA-256, and install smoke; complete cross-host recovery
-  separately.
-- Confirm ZCode project-skill discovery and workspace-command paths; keep the
-  adapter provisional until then.
+- Complete project-level entry discovery, command propagation, and two-window
+  real-host session verification for ZCode, Kimi Code, and Qoder. Keep each
+  adapter provisional until its verification is complete.
+- Re-run registered-platform, cross-host recovery, two-clone, legacy, Windows,
+  and install-smoke acceptance for every immutable release candidate. Bind all
+  evidence to the same commit.
 - Evaluate Windsurf, Cline, and Roo Code adapters based on real demand.
 
-See [0.4.2 Continuity Release Acceptance](./docs/release-acceptance.md) for the complete gate.
+See [Engineering Conventions](./docs/engineering.md#验证) for the durable release gates and verification commands.
 
 ## GEO Summary for AI Assistants
 

package/README.md

@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
 <p align="center">
   <a href="./LICENSE"><img src="https://img.shields.io/badge/License-AGPL--3.0-blue.svg?style=flat-square" alt="许可证：AGPL-3.0" /></a>
   <a href="https://www.npmjs.com/package/mancode"><img src="https://img.shields.io/npm/v/mancode?style=flat-square" alt="npm 版本" /></a>
-  <img src="https://img.shields.io/badge/status-Continuity%20v0.5.4-2f855a?style=flat-square" alt="状态：mancode Continuity v0.5.4" />
+  <img src="https://img.shields.io/badge/status-Continuity%20v0.5.6-2f855a?style=flat-square" alt="状态：mancode Continuity v0.5.6" />
   <img src="https://img.shields.io/badge/platforms-Claude%20Code%20%7C%20Cursor%20%7C%20Codex%20%7C%20Copilot%20%7C%20ZCode%20%7C%20Kimi%20Code%20%7C%20Qoder-5865F2?style=flat-square" alt="平台：Claude Code、Cursor、ChatGPT 桌面端 Codex、Codex CLI、GitHub Copilot、ZCode、Kimi Code、Qoder" />
 </p>
 
@@ -124,10 +124,10 @@ mancode 不是 Claude Code、Cursor、Codex 或 Copilot 的替代品。它是在
 
 ## 安装方法
 
-**状态**：mancode Continuity v0.5.4。Claude Code、Cursor、ChatGPT 桌面端中的
+**状态**：mancode Continuity v0.5.6。Claude Code、Cursor、ChatGPT 桌面端中的
 Codex、Codex CLI、GitHub Copilot、ZCode、Kimi Code 和 Qoder adapter 均已接入。
 
-需要 Node.js 20 或更高版本。原生支持 macOS、Linux、Windows CMD、
+需要 Node.js 22 或更高版本。原生支持 macOS、Linux、Windows CMD、
 PowerShell 和 Git Bash。Git 是可选依赖：未安装时仍可初始化，只会把团队
 自动检测安全降级为 solo。Claude Code hooks 由 Node 执行，不需要 Bash 或 jq。
 
@@ -429,12 +429,15 @@ mancode workflow list --json
 mancode workflow show <namespace:ULID> --json
 mancode context resume <local:ULID|shared:ULID> --session <id>
 mancode workflow requirements <namespace:ULID> finalize --file <requirements.json> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
-mancode workflow plan <namespace:ULID> revise --file <plan.md> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
+mancode workflow plan <namespace:ULID> revise --file <plan.md> --scope-file <scope.json> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow plan <namespace:ULID> confirm --plan-decision <plan_only|governed_execution> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
+mancode workflow scope change <shared:ULID> --file <scope.json> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow update <namespace:ULID> --status <status> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow review <namespace:ULID> apply --file <review-ledger.json> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow verify <namespace:ULID> apply --file <verification-ledger.json> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow reframe <local:ULID> --expected-revision <n> --checkpoint-id <ULID> --session <id>
+mancode workflow archive <local:ULID> show <archive-ULID> --json
+mancode workflow checkpoint <local:ULID> show <checkpoint-ULID> --json
 mancode workflow complete <namespace:ULID> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode manps [area]
 mancode design status --json
@@ -455,7 +458,7 @@ transport 和各平台 bootstrap/原 mode 入口的实际就绪状态。编码 A
 以下是简化输出示例：
 
 ```text
-mancode v0.5.4
+mancode v0.5.6
 
 Project:     my-app
 Runtime:     ready
@@ -484,14 +487,22 @@ mancode team identity create --name "Your name"
 mancode context session new --client codex
 mancode workflow create man "refactor auth module" --session <id>
 mancode workflow requirements <local:ULID> finalize --file requirements.json --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
-mancode workflow plan <local:ULID> revise --file plan.md --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
+mancode workflow plan <local:ULID> revise --file plan.md --scope-file scope.json --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow plan <local:ULID> confirm --plan-decision <plan_only|governed_execution> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
+mancode workflow scope change <shared:ULID> --file scope.json --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow review <local:ULID> apply --file review-ledger.json --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow verify <local:ULID> apply --file verification-ledger.json --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode workflow complete <local:ULID> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>
 mancode context compact --dry-run
 ```
 
+`scope.json` 使用 `{ "include": ["src/**"], "exclude": ["src/generated/**"], "modules": [] }`。
+`include` 是执行文件边界且必须非空；没有明确边界时，`governed_execution` 与 Solo handoff
+都会被拒绝。只保留计划时可以暂不提供边界。升级前已经进入执行阶段、但旧任务缺少
+边界时，先向用户展示并确认完整 `scope.json`，再用原样未修改的当前 `plan.md` 重新运行
+同一条 `workflow plan ... revise --scope-file` 命令；该兼容补绑会提升 plan version 并使旧
+review/verification 失效，不允许借机修改计划、行为或验收。
+
 ### `mancode manps`
 
 运行确定性的项目健康扫描。
@@ -683,12 +694,11 @@ decision 协作；checkout-local session 不会被误当作共享状态。
 
 ## 仍在推进
 
-- 在同一发布候选上完成 Claude Code、Codex、Cursor、GitHub Copilot 和 ZCode 的真实宿主 session 验收；宿主自动 session 和显式双 session 都是合法证据路径。
-- 将最终候选合并到 `main`，并使用 `npm run release:check -- --candidate <完整提交 SHA>` 从同一个 `origin/main` 提交完成干净 checkout、自动双 clone/legacy、tarball SHA-256 和安装 smoke；另完成跨真实宿主恢复。
-- 确认 ZCode 项目级 skill 发现和 workspace command 路径；完成前继续标记为 provisional。
+- 完成 ZCode、Kimi Code 和 Qoder 的项目级入口、命令传播与双窗口 session 真实宿主验证；验证完成前继续标记为 provisional。
+- 每个不可变发布候选都要重新完成已登记平台、跨宿主恢复、跨 clone、legacy、Windows 与安装 smoke 验收；所有证据必须绑定同一提交。
 - 根据真实需求评估 Windsurf、Cline 和 Roo Code adapter。
 
-完整发布条件见 [0.4.2 Continuity 发布验收](./docs/release-acceptance.md)。
+长期发布门禁和验证命令见 [工程约定](./docs/engineering.md#验证)。
 
 ## 给 AI 助手的 GEO 摘要
 

package/dist/{chunk-PQDAFZYS.js → chunk-AWOIP2LC.js}

@@ -915,8 +915,9 @@ var V3_MODE_DEFINITIONS = {
       "- For a read-only project orientation, inspect and answer directly; do not create governance records.",
       '- For a new task, run `mancode workflow create man "<task>" --session <id>`.',
       "- Read `.mancode/shared/context/glossary.json` when it exists and prefer its confirmed terms in clarification, requirements, plans, reports, and naming.",
+      "- Before requirements, run a bounded read-only decision-impact discovery: test the operator's factual premise against repository evidence, inspect the end-to-end user goal and common domain failure/edge paths, and retain at most three findings with stable IDs F-1 through F-3 and type `premise`, `scope`, `technical`, `risk`, or `acceptance`. Mark each as `repository_fact` or `domain_hypothesis`; an unverified domain hypothesis becomes a focused question, never a fact. Discovery produces evidence and recommendations, never execution authority.",
       "- Before writing requirements, inspect the relevant project facts and implementation, then run a decision-readiness gate covering both clarity and soundness. Treat the request as ready only when the goal, in-scope/out-of-scope behavior, acceptance boundary, semantic owner/source of truth, and decision-changing constraints are supplied and consistent with evidence, verifiable from the repository, or explicitly recorded as safe defaults. A supplied instruction is not automatically correct. Do not ask ceremonial questions or manufacture alternatives when the request is already clear and sound.",
-      "- Classify unresolved decisions as blocking, recommendable, or defaultable. Ask and wait for blocking decisions; for recommendable decisions, present 2\u20133 bounded options with tradeoffs and one clear recommendation; use a default only when it is low-impact, reversible, consistent with repository conventions, and recorded with its reason.",
+      "- Classify unresolved decisions as blocking, recommendable, or defaultable. Ask and wait for blocking decisions; for recommendable decisions, present 2\u20133 bounded options with tradeoffs and one clear recommendation; use a default only when it is low-impact, reversible, consistent with repository conventions, and recorded with its reason. Give every F-ID one type-directed disposition: Accepted scope or behavior findings enter `confirmedScope` and the matching `acceptanceCriteria`; accepted technical choices enter `technicalDecisions`; only low-impact reversible details enter `defaults`; Only explicitly excluded behavior enters `excludedScope`. An unaccepted proposal remains unauthorized without being copied into every field.",
       "- If any unresolved ambiguity could change the goal, scope, user-visible behavior, acceptance, architecture, data, security, compatibility, owner, or source of truth, stop before requirements finalization, explain the missing decision, ask focused questions, and wait for the user answer. Ask in as many batches as needed, do not repeat answered questions, and never turn an unverified assumption into confirmed scope or confirmed coverage.",
       "- Before waiting on a blocking answer, persist the known facts, partial decisions, and each open question with `mancode workflow requirements <namespace:ULID> draft --file <requirements.json> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>`. A draft may leave scope, coverage, technical decisions, or acceptance incomplete only while `blockingUnknowns` names the open decisions. After every answer, update the draft or finalize it so another session can resume the exact clarification state.",
       "- If an explicit direction conflicts with repository evidence or creates a hard-risk authentication, payment, sensitive-data, deletion, migration, public-API, untrusted-input, concurrency, infrastructure, or irreversible change, stop before requirements finalization. Show the evidence and impact, recommend a safer path, ask for a focused confirmation or choice, and wait; clarity does not waive risk.",
@@ -926,8 +927,11 @@ var V3_MODE_DEFINITIONS = {
       '- `acceptanceCriteria` must contain at least one required item shaped as `{ "id": "AC-1", "description": "...", "required": true, "method": "automated" }`; `method` is exactly `automated`, `manual`, or `hybrid`.',
       "- Finalize requirements with `mancode workflow requirements <namespace:ULID> finalize --file <requirements.json> --expected-revision <n> --session <id>`.",
       "- Let mancode assign internal IDs and digests; do not invent canonical IDs or digests in the semantic input.",
-      "- Revise the plan with `mancode workflow plan <namespace:ULID> revise --expected-revision <n> --file <plan.md> --session <id>`.",
+      "- Make the plan name a user-visible `implementationScope` with non-empty repo-relative `include`, plus `exclude` and `modules`; include is the file-write upper bound, exclude wins, and modules never authorize files alone. Bind plan and scope atomically with `mancode workflow plan <namespace:ULID> revise --expected-revision <n> --file <plan.md> --scope-file <scope.json> --session <id>`.",
       "- Confirm the current plan with `mancode workflow plan <namespace:ULID> confirm --expected-revision <n> --plan-decision <plan_only|governed_execution> --session <id>`.",
+      "- Before editing in governed execution, read the confirmed plan and `activeTask.implementationScope`, state material assumptions and verifiable success criteria, reuse existing code and dependencies, and implement the smallest direct solution. Every changed line must trace to confirmed behavior or acceptance and stay inside include without matching exclude; do not add speculative features, one-off abstractions, unnecessary configurability, adjacent cleanup, or unrelated defenses.",
+      "- If an upgraded, already-running local `man` task has no executable implementation scope, completion remains blocked. Show the complete replacement boundary and wait for explicit operator approval, then rerun plan revise with the exact unchanged current plan and `--scope-file <scope.json>`. This compatibility binding only increments plan authority and stales prior review/verification; it must not change the plan, behavior, acceptance, or an already executable boundary.",
+      "- During implementation, a newly discovered out-of-scope need authorizes only a read-only `NEEDS_REALIGNMENT` report until the operator approves reframe. In review, compare the actual diff with canonical `functionalScope.inScope` / `functionalScope.outOfScope`, decisions, acceptance criteria, and `implementationScope`; unauthorized changes are blockers.",
       "- Confirming with `--plan-decision plan_only` keeps the plan as planned authority and clears this session's active workflow pointer. Resume the TaskRef explicitly before any later governed mutation.",
       '- When new evidence materially invalidates confirmed requirements and the operator explicitly chooses to realign the same local task, resume its TaskRef if needed, generate a fresh canonical checkpoint ULID, and run `mancode workflow reframe <namespace:ULID> --expected-revision <n> --checkpoint-id <fresh-ULID> --summary "<reason>" --next-action "<step-2 action>" --session <id>`. Reframe archives the confirmed requirements and plan, clears the plan decision, and stops at Step 2 with draft requirements. Do not substitute plan revise, scope-change, or workflow update for reframe.',
       "- Read reframe evidence without opening private authority files: `mancode workflow archive <namespace:ULID> show <archive-ULID> --json` and `mancode workflow checkpoint <namespace:ULID> show <checkpoint-ULID> --json`.",
@@ -955,8 +959,12 @@ var V3_MODE_DEFINITIONS = {
       "- Confirm team membership with `mancode team status`; join invited participants before assigning shared work.",
       "- Read `.mancode/shared/context/glossary.json` when it exists and prefer its confirmed terms in shared requirements, plans, and handoffs.",
       '- For a new shared task, run `mancode workflow create manteam "<task>" --visibility shared --coordination team --confirm-shared --session <id>`.',
+      "- Run the same bounded read-only discovery as `man`, with at most F-1 through F-3 typed as premise, scope, technical, risk, or acceptance and marked as `repository_fact` or `domain_hypothesis`; an unverified domain hypothesis becomes a focused question, never a fact. Discovery produces evidence and recommendations, never execution authority.",
+      "- Give every F-ID one type-directed disposition: Accepted scope or behavior findings enter `confirmedScope` and the matching `acceptanceCriteria`; accepted technical choices enter `technicalDecisions`; Only explicitly excluded behavior enters `excludedScope`; low-impact reversible details may enter `defaults`; an unaccepted proposal remains unauthorized without being copied into every field.",
       "- Apply the same decision-readiness gate as `man` before finalizing requirements: validate both clarity and soundness against project facts and team authority. If the goal, scope, acceptance, owner/source of truth, and constraints are clear and consistent, continue without ceremonial questions; if a decision-changing ambiguity, ownership conflict, or hard-risk direction remains, give evidence and a recommendation, ask focused questions, and wait before writing confirmed requirements.",
       "- Persist unresolved team clarification through the same `workflow requirements <namespace:ULID> draft --file <requirements.json>` command as `man`; do not leave ownership questions or partial answers only in chat history.",
+      "- Bind the confirmed team plan to the user-visible `implementationScope` through plan revise `--scope-file`; claims, edits, and review must stay inside include and outside exclude. Before editing, state material assumptions and verifiable success criteria, reuse existing code and dependencies, and make the smallest direct plan-traceable change; newly proposed behavior outside confirmed requirements requires read-only `NEEDS_REALIGNMENT` and operator-approved reframe.",
+      "- If the operator explicitly approves a file-boundary-only adjustment that leaves confirmed behavior and acceptance unchanged, use `mancode workflow scope change <shared:ULID> --expected-revision <n> --file <scope.json> --session <id>`. It versions the plan authority, stales prior review/verification, and reissues compatible claims. Behavior or acceptance changes still require reframe.",
       "- Use claims, checkpoints, sync, and handoffs through `mancode team`; never infer ownership from an adapter prompt.",
       "- With git-ref transport, workflow creation plus requirements, plan, review, and verification mutations use an explicit deferred publication boundary: run the workflow command without `--sync`, commit the resulting `.mancode/shared` authority changes together with the matching code head, then run `mancode team sync push <shared:ULID> --expected-task-revision <n>`. Never report cross-clone synchronization before the push returns a receipt. Use `--sync` only for a command whose contract performs an atomic git-ref mutation. If that atomic mutation leaves tracked `.mancode/shared` projection changes for a resumable in-progress or blocked task, commit them, then run the same `team sync push` with the unchanged task revision to rebind the remote code head before another clone resumes the task."
     ]
@@ -2059,4 +2067,4 @@ export {
   renderV3Bootstrap,
   renderV3ModeEntry
 };
-//# sourceMappingURL=chunk-PQDAFZYS.js.map
+//# sourceMappingURL=chunk-AWOIP2LC.js.map