pi-gauntlet 5.1.0 → 5.2.0

package/skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md

@@ -112,7 +112,14 @@ Reviewers certify fix concurrency with a `Parallel-safe:` line (see the reviewer
 
 **Precondition:** a clean committed HEAD containing the code under review. When the reviewed change is an unintegrated patch (a wave-mode per-patch spec review), each fix task branches from the wave's base HEAD and carries the prior patch verbatim in its task text — the consuming loop's existing re-dispatch protocol. When the tree is dirty (e.g. post-integration, before the wave commit), the fan-out is unavailable: fix sequentially in place.
 
-**Degradation:** missing, malformed, or ID-less `Parallel-safe:` line, or no `disjoint` group with ≥ 2 IDs → fully sequential fixes. Degradation is silent — it costs parallelism, never correctness.
+Grammar (identical across producers, modulo id prefix — `F` for code/spec reviewers, `G` for conformance-reviewer):
+
+```text
+<group> = <comma-separated id list> " disjoint"
+        | <id> " conflicts " <id> " (" <reason> ")"
+```
+
+**Structural probe:** when the report carries >= 2 actionable finding IDs (Critical/Moderate findings for code-reviewer; PARTIAL/MISSING/scope-creep findings for spec-reviewer; non-DELIVERED gaps for conformance-reviewer), validate the certificate before the fan-out decision: the review must contain **exactly one** line matching `^Parallel-safe: ` whose remainder parses as `<group>[; <group>]*` (grammar above). Zero matching lines, an unparseable remainder, or **any second** `Parallel-safe:` line (identical or not) = malformed -> re-ask the reviewer **once**, quoting the expected grammar, before any disposition or fan-out decision. Still malformed after the re-ask -> fully sequential fixes with an explicit one-line degradation notice in the orchestrator's visible output — never silent. A probe-passing line with no >= 2-ID `disjoint` group is **valid**: sequential fixes, no re-ask, no notice (the certificate says "serial", not a malformation). Fewer than 2 actionable IDs -> skip the probe (nothing to fan out). Reviewer errors (no report at all) are out of scope here — report-shape validation, not report-existence; existing dispatch-failure handling applies.
 
 **After the fix wave:** integrate patches serially per "Review and Integrate" above (mis-partition is self-healing: integrate the successes, re-run the conflicting finding sequentially on integrated HEAD); run the consuming loop's scoped test gate on the integrated tree; then one re-review of the integrated fix delta, per the consuming loop's own rules. The fan-out counts as one fix round against the consuming loop's budget — it grants no extra rounds.
 

package/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ subagent({ agent: "code-reviewer", task: "... filled template ..." })
 - Note Minor issues for later
 - Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)
 
-**Fix rounds.** Critical and Moderate findings trigger a fix round; when dispatched from an orchestrating skill, fixes go to `implementer` subagents (per the orchestrator's no-self-coding rule), fanned out per `dispatching-parallel-agents` "Fix fan-out" when the review's `Parallel-safe:` line certifies a `disjoint` group of ≥ 2 findings. After integration and the project's test command, re-dispatch the reviewer once on the integrated delta. If Critical or Moderate findings remain, run one more fix round and one more re-review; still failing → escalate to the user. Minor findings never trigger the fan-out.
+**Fix rounds.** Critical and Moderate findings trigger a fix round; when dispatched from an orchestrating skill, fixes go to `implementer` subagents (per the orchestrator's no-self-coding rule), fanned out per `dispatching-parallel-agents` "Fix fan-out" when the review's `Parallel-safe:` line certifies a `disjoint` group of ≥ 2 findings. Before fanning out, validate the review's `Parallel-safe:` line with the structural probe in `dispatching-parallel-agents` § Fix fan-out (exactly-one-line grammar check, one re-ask, then explicit sequential fallback). After integration and the project's test command, re-dispatch the reviewer once on the integrated delta. If Critical or Moderate findings remain, run one more fix round and one more re-review; still failing → escalate to the user. Minor findings never trigger the fan-out.
 
 ## Example
 

package/skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md

@@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ For the fan-out + worktree + patch-integration + conflict mechanics, see `dispat
 - Skipping the `Implementer Status` parse — treating every response as DONE
 - Starting on main without explicit user consent
 - Dispatching `code-reviewer` before every one of the wave's spec-review verdicts has landed (including fusing SR+CR into one parallel call)
-- Dispatching fixes sequentially on a clean HEAD despite a ≥ 2-ID `disjoint` group in the review's `Parallel-safe:` line
+- Dispatching fixes sequentially on a clean HEAD despite a certified (probe-passing, per dispatching-parallel-agents § Fix fan-out) ≥ 2-ID `disjoint` group in the review's `Parallel-safe:` line
 - Dispatching `code-reviewer` per task inside a wave (CR binds to the integrated wave diff)
 - Dispatching an implementer or code-reviewer without a `SCOPED_TEST_COMMANDS` value (commands or `none`)
 - About to run the full verification entrypoint during the implement phase — task and wave gates run scoped, plan-declared commands only; the full set belongs to verify

package/skills/writing-plans/SKILL.md

@@ -290,19 +290,16 @@ If a decision is genuinely open, put it in an explicit **Open Questions** sectio
 
 ## Self-Review (Before Handoff)
 
-After drafting the plan and before announcing it complete, run these checks yourself. This is a checklist you run yourself — not a subagent dispatch.
+After drafting the plan and before announcing it complete, run the deterministic checker, then the judgment checks yourself — not a subagent dispatch.
 
-- **Table closure (three legs).** Every `## Spec coverage` row's owner is a task-ID list, a spec-authorized `waived: <reason>`, or a mechanical-task row; every `### Task N` heading appears in >=1 row; every requirement row's anchor is contained in the anchor set of each listed owner task's `**Spec:**` line. Zero orphans, zero waived in-scope normative rows, zero row-vs-owner anchor mismatches. Each Documentation impact entry maps to a plan task (or explicit "none").
+- **Deterministic checker.** Run `plan_check({ planPath })` on the saved plan. Assess and fix every finding yourself (no human involvement), then re-run until it passes — a pass writes the execution stamp that implement-start verifies mechanically. If the same finding survives 3 fix rounds, convert it to an explicit Open Question and stop (the pre-existing Open-Questions halt, resolved by the human in-session — not a new gate). The checker covers table closure, quote integrity, anchor resolution, path existence, placeholder scan, wave file-disjointness, solo-line presence, and header-only entrypoint.
 - **Code-vs-anchor sanity.** For each non-waived requirement row, re-read the anchored spec lines and confirm the owner tasks' bodies do what they say - mechanism present, not just the quoted literal. Fix the task, don't annotate.
-- **Quote integrity (spec -> task).** For every non-waived requirement row, extract each backtick-quoted literal inside the row's anchored spec lines (strip the backticks; skip `<placeholder>` template spans) and `grep -F` it against the owning task's body — zero misses. Planner-authored backticks elsewhere in tasks are never scanned; the input set is spec-side literals only.
-- **Anchor resolution.** For every task-level anchor (a `**Spec:**` line carrying `§`; the plan header's path line is exempt), the quoted heading text matches an ATX heading in the spec file and `L<start>-L<end>` is in-bounds, non-empty, and lies within that heading's section — zero unresolved anchors. Verify with `grep -n '^#'` plus a scoped `sed -n`. Ignore `#`-lines inside fenced code blocks when locating headings and section boundaries - a fenced markdown example is not a heading.
-- **Paths exist.** Every `Modify:` path in `Files:` blocks passes `test -f` after stripping any trailing `:line[-line]` suffix; a `Modify:` glob must expand to >=1 match; `Create:` and `Test:` paths are exempt unless the `Test:` path is also listed under `Modify:`. Zero missing.
-- **Placeholder scan.** Grep the doc for `TODO`, `TBD`, `xxx`, `[fill in]`, `<example>`, `etc.`, "probably", "something like". Resolve or convert each into an explicit Open Question.
 - **Type / API consistency.** Function signatures and field names that appear in multiple tasks must match exactly. The plan is its own contract — internal contradictions surface as bugs during execution.
-- **Wave disjointness.** For every multi-task wave, confirm the tasks' `Files:` sets are pairwise disjoint **and** that no two tasks contend on a shared mutable runtime resource (DB/schema, port, fixture, external service, shared temp path). Either kind of overlap = mis-grouped wave; split or re-order before handoff.
-- **Solo-wave justification.** Every single-task wave carries a `Solo:` line naming its specific blocker. A solo wave without one is mis-grouped or under-justified — merge it or justify it before handoff.
 - **Scoped-test coverage.** Every code-touching wave declares at least one scoped test command; only doc-only waves may have none.
-- **Header-only entrypoint.** The full verification entrypoint appears only in the plan header's `**Verification:**` line. Grep the task body for the header's command string — expect zero hits.
+- **Runtime-resource disjointness.** For every multi-task wave, confirm no two tasks contend on a shared mutable runtime resource (DB/schema, port, fixture, external service, shared temp path) — `Files:` overlap is checked mechanically, resource contention is not. Contention = mis-grouped wave; split or re-order before handoff.
+- **Solo-reason validity.** Every single-task wave's `Solo:` line (presence is checked mechanically) must name its specific blocker — the blocking task/wave, the contended resource, or `lone remaining task`. Category-only justifications are under-justified; merge or justify before handoff.
+- **Waiver authorization.** Every `waived: <reason>` owner in `## Spec coverage` is authorized by the spec itself marking the item out of scope. A waiver on an in-scope normative requirement is a Self-Review failure — there is no human plan-review gate to catch it downstream.
+- **Documentation-impact mapping.** Each Documentation impact entry maps to a plan task (or explicit "none").
 
 Fix what this review finds before handoff.