project-tiny-context-harness 0.8.16 → 0.11.0

package/assets/skills/design-resource-authoring/references/open-design-provider.md

@@ -21,6 +21,8 @@ Discover rather than remember:
 - specialist paths such as collaborative design platforms, image, video or 3D/WebGL;
 - supported project creation, run, cancellation, file and artifact operations.
 
+When live behavior or CLI/MCP semantics materially control the commission, retain the exact provider version and, when available, the released tag/commit plus authoritative documentation locator used for capability interpretation. A mutable default branch, remembered UI behavior or unpinned local checkout is not durable protocol evidence.
+
 Current structured tool names may include `list_agents`, `list_skills`, `list_plugins`, `create_project`, `get_project`, `get_active_context`, `start_run`, `get_run`, `cancel_run`, `list_files`, `get_file` and `get_artifact`. Feature-detect them; tool names and provider versions may evolve.
 
 Functional skills and rendering templates are different registries. Finding `frontend-design` does not prove that a `mobile-app` or `wireframe-mobile-flow` template is installed, and a remembered template ID is not live capability evidence.
@@ -56,6 +58,12 @@ Prefer, in order:
 
 Never vendor a fallback template catalogue or guess a template ID from prior runs. Do not implement a transport helper unless the live host truly lacks a safe structured path; any helper may normalize metadata and transport only.
 
+### Resource-type capability matching
+
+Match the requested artifact archetype to demonstrated live capability rather than a Skill name. Distinguish at least landing/brand pages, dashboards/data workbenches, dense tables/filters/forms, mobile multi-screen flows, component workbenches, complex interaction, formal Web/App handoff and icon/illustration/media work. For every considered capability, establish the target resource type, platform, surface count, state/interaction support, real-render support, bounded revision support, canonical-source retrieval and formal-handoff coverage.
+
+A single-frame HTML phone mockup cannot claim a native mobile-App or multi-screen formal handoff. A visually strong capability without retrievable canonical Source may support exploration but not a formal implementation handoff. Give unsupported candidates `unavailable` or `not-needed`; do not wrap a partial output in a stronger profile. This matching is task-local provider adaptation, not a registry or durable ranking.
+
 ## Conditional Design Authority gate and binding
 
 Before any style-bearing commission, read project `DESIGN.md` and its declared authored exact-value token source/generation direction. Style-bearing means the resource materially expresses visual fidelity, brand, typography/color/density, component visual treatment or a production-style prototype. Low-fidelity structure, IA/flow topology and semantics-only behavior/state studies are non-fidelity and do not require the gate.
@@ -73,11 +81,26 @@ For configured style-bearing work:
 
 Never silently use the provider's default or a different system. A provider-side mismatch is a synchronization/rebinding issue; it does not erase the canonical project `DESIGN.md`.
 
+## Pre-run style-application closure
+
+Before submitting a commission or calling `start_run` for any style-bearing generation or material revision, require the task-local closure defined by [resource-selection.md](resource-selection.md). Every applicable current-slice dimension must be `existing-covered`, `projected` or `not-applicable`. A `decision-required`, undispositioned dimension or Source conflict blocks the run before Provider execution; preserve the concrete diagnostic instead of launching a speculative candidate.
+
+Validate each disposition at the adapter boundary:
+
+- `existing-covered` meaning must arrive through the current commission's existing `inputs.exact_targets`, `inputs.constraints` or corresponding input binding and must match the exact target, slice and declared conditions;
+- only `projected` meaning enters the existing `style_application` object;
+- `not-applicable` stays a reasoned task-local judgment and creates no empty field; and
+- `decision-required` stays unresolved and never becomes Provider-authored application meaning.
+
+A verified `designSystemId`, exact-value Token lineage or generic instruction to follow the system proves system binding only. It cannot prove that the current slice's hierarchy, density, container, visible-versus-hit geometry, preservation or prohibited-pattern meaning reached the Provider. The Provider must not complete missing application meaning from a feature list, route tree, generic system, component inventory, screenshot, inspiration, background or task-level UI/UX analysis.
+
+Repeat the closure immediately before each material-revision run, using the existing material-revision definition. After the resulting candidate is acquired, rerun the applicable Design suitability subchecks as the independent post-generation review. A packaging, rename or byte-only export proved equivalent to the same canonical source creates neither a new Provider run nor a new design decision. This is a fail-closed adapter precondition inside the existing commission action, not a schema, state, Authority, Gate, readiness result or Provider lifecycle.
+
 ## Structured commission sequence
 
 1. Record provider version, selected agent/model, reasoning effort and service tier when exposed, functional capability, rendering template, adopted design system and relevant plugin/export readiness as reported live. For an applicable generation, retain the eligibility/ranking basis and the request-versus-effective comparison required by the highest-performance policy.
 2. Reuse an existing task-local project only when its scope, prior inputs and required design-system binding match; otherwise create a bounded project. For style-bearing work, pass `designSystem` and verify `get_project.designSystemId` before the run.
-3. Start a run with the product-specific commission envelope, provider-native capability identifier and—when the intent is a formal Web/App implementation handoff—the complete prederived authoring obligation universe. That universe is based on requested scope, product semantics, adopted design system and target environments; it must not be inferred only from provider output.
+3. Only after the pre-run style-application closure allows execution, start a run with the product-specific commission envelope, including exactly its Source-bound `projected` `style_application` fields, archetype-specific `quality_commission`, provider-native capability identifier and—when the intent is a formal Web/App implementation handoff—the complete prederived authoring obligation universe plus current implementation-substrate observations and allowed realization boundaries from [implementation-feasibility.md](implementation-feasibility.md). Fully current input-bound `existing-covered` meaning permits the style object to be omitted; `not-applicable` and `decision-required` never become empty or invented fields. The quality commission states real-copy/data needs, primary challenges, desired/avoided character, reference roles and design-side shared-family reuse without claiming production reuse. That universe is based on requested scope, product semantics, adopted design system, real technical Source and target environments; it must not be inferred only from provider output. Both application and quality fields are commission content, not a separate persistent Projection, Authority, state, routing record or Provider score.
 4. Poll with a bounded cadence. During a long run, report meaningful progress at least once per minute without flooding the user.
 5. Preserve run IDs and the latest provider diagnostic. Support cancellation when the user requests it and the provider exposes it.
 6. Resolve the actual entry explicitly, retrieve the artifact/source, inspect it according to intent and preserve its immutable identity before later iterations or handoff.
@@ -96,10 +119,23 @@ Examples: missing, partial, corrupt, retrievable, rendered or snapshot-preserved
 
 ### Design suitability
 
-Examples: unreviewed, scope-sane, handoff-checked, human-selected or rejected.
+Design suitability is one freshly derived umbrella review, not another state machine and never human selection. Review the applicable subchecks at intent-proportional depth:
+
+- **scope and Source suitability:** the candidate stays within the hard ceiling and follows current controlling Product/Surface/Screen/Design Source; an outside effect is reported, not generated;
+- **mechanical checks:** promised files/entries are readable, structurally usable and free of obvious corruption, broken references or intent-material runtime defects;
+- **Design-System application checks:** the verified adopted identity, exact-value/token lineage and applicable component-family rules are used rather than merely named;
+- **visual-language checks:** composition, hierarchy, typography, visual rhythm, density, container treatment, color, spacing, content realism, component treatment and other material relationships cohere with the selected Source-bound direction;
+- **distinctiveness and component-authoring checks:** the result answers the product-specific challenges without unsupported template mannerisms, and repeated controls use a coherent design-side component family rather than unrelated per-instance styling;
+- **state/condition coverage checks:** credit only demonstrated states, variations, interactions, viewports, input/accessibility conditions and assets; and
+- **preservation checks:** explicitly preserved Source meaning, exact visual facts and unaffected bindings remain unchanged.
+- **implementation-feasibility checks for formal Web/App handoff:** each material component-family × target × condition profile has at least one real-substrate realization or a Source-backed blocker, without copying exact design values into the technical feasibility document.
+
+Report applicable checked and unchecked conditions. A grounded conflict blocks; an ungrounded aesthetic preference is a candidate-comparison observation, not a fabricated Source rule. Examples of derived suitability outcomes may include `unreviewed`, `scope-source-conflict`, `revision-required` or `suitable-for-user-review`; none means selected, formally complete or handoff-ready.
 
 Never collapse these into one “success.” A provider success does not prove a good design; a complete artifact can exist even when a provider run later fails.
 
+After every material revision, rerun every applicable suitability subcheck against current Source and bytes. A material revision changes the selected visual direction or design system, cross-surface information architecture, primary interaction model, declared state/condition coverage, preservation obligation or enough canonical source/Fact meaning to invalidate the reviewed candidate. A byte-only packaging/export change proven equivalent to the same canonical source does not create a new design decision; a visible or semantic difference does. Always inspect the actual rendered candidate when the resource is renderable. If the first candidate has no material Source, feasibility, mechanical or suitability defect, it may proceed directly to user selection; never manufacture a revision quota. When repair is needed, request the smallest defect-localizing revision that preserves unaffected meaning, then reacquire and review the complete current candidate.
+
 Use these qualifiers when needed:
 
 - `artifact-ready/run-unreconciled`: a complete retrievable artifact exists, but the provider run remains nonterminal or inconsistent;
@@ -122,6 +158,8 @@ Open Design has demonstrated that a complex Web page can emit a machine-readable
 9. exercise every property-required verification method against the canonical entry under each claimed condition. A Fact may require multiple independent methods—for example token plus pixel—and each obligation binds method-compatible evidence, comparator parameters, exact/tolerance mode, any narrow authoritative mask, Oracle identity/version/digest and frozen render environment. Compare repeated facts across code, specifications, tokens and asset manifests. Refine any mismatch; if it cannot be resolved, keep the exact Fact Cell `decision_required`/`unavailable` with a blocker;
 10. mark protected observations before downstream use. Sensitive raw UI values must not be persisted in Contract/runtime evidence: the canonical source remains the value owner while later evidence carries an attributable digest-only or redacted representation and policy reference.
 
+Alongside, author one separate `design-resource-implementation-feasibility-v1` input per target from real repository technical Source. It must use current no-follow repository directories for component/route owner roots, cover the complete transitive subject closure of every material component-family × condition profile with feasible multi-step/multi-primitive realizations or explicit blockers, and retain candidate costs/risks and customization surfaces without carrying any exact visual values in observation reasons, costs, risks or blocker prose. A decision-required/unavailable substrate observation reaches an affected cell through an exact Source-backed blocker. Leave the required realization unselected unless an exact current marked technical Source Item decision requires one; planned owners and blockers use their corresponding strict decision projections too. Provider output cannot invent any of those decisions. Never put this document or its technical Source records into the canonical resource closure.
+
 The authoring Skill then projects the exact manifest identities into the residual handoff and shared preflight enforces `Expected Fact Universe = Canonical Resource Facts = Handoff Indexed Facts`. This is authoring source QA, never production acceptance. If the live Open Design capability cannot generate, expose or retrieve this profile, report the missing capability and keep the formal handoff blocked; provider success does not authorize a coarser replacement.
 
 A PNG may be a useful derived visual baseline, but it cannot be the sole source for implementation-level state, interaction, adaptation, accessibility or motion facts. Non-Web resources use the `reference` profile; do not manufacture HTML merely to satisfy this profile.
@@ -140,15 +178,15 @@ A preview URL is mutable navigation, not immutable identity. It may be reported
 
 ## Review proportional to intent
 
-- **Exploration:** open/render the requested entry, confirm artifact count/scope and obvious corruption, then show it. Do not launch a packaging or validator sequence.
-- **Handoff:** additionally perform the method-proportional source QA above, including relevant structure, states/transitions, viewport behavior, accessibility semantics, assets, obvious console/runtime errors and requested interaction hooks. State exactly what was and was not checked.
-- **Selected-source preparation:** require explicit human selection basis, preserve identity/snapshot, and prepare downstream metadata. It still does not verify production behavior.
+- **Exploration:** open/render the requested entry, confirm artifact count/scope and obvious corruption, perform only the decision-material suitability subchecks, then show it. Do not launch a packaging or validator sequence.
+- **Handoff:** additionally perform the method-proportional source QA above, including relevant structure, states/transitions, viewport behavior, accessibility semantics, assets, obvious console/runtime errors, requested interaction hooks, Design-System application, visual language, preservation and real-substrate implementation feasibility. State exactly what was and was not checked.
+- **Selected-source preparation:** require an independent explicit human selection basis, preserve identity/snapshot and prepare downstream metadata. Suitability informs that decision but never makes it, and still does not verify production behavior.
 
-Provider self-checks, outer artifact sanity review and downstream project verification are separate evidence layers. Never claim native rendering, accessibility, responsive coverage, product correctness or acceptance unless the appropriate downstream project checks actually prove them.
+Provider self-checks, outer artifact sanity review, user selection, formal source closure and downstream project verification are separate evidence layers. A visual-language or mechanical pass cannot independently establish Artifact readiness, selection, formal completeness, handoff readiness, native rendering, accessibility, responsive coverage, product correctness or acceptance.
 
 ## Specialist paths
 
-Figma, Penpot, OpenPencil, image, video, 3D/WebGL and other providers are optional upstream producers. Use one only when its collaboration/editability or native inspection value is material and its connector/auth/read/export path is operational. A listed plugin, URL, thumbnail or metadata response is not proof of usable native input. If a requested provider is unavailable, report the missing capability precisely, offer another artifact only when it preserves the requested design decision, and never relabel an export as native editable design. Every selected provider still emits repository-readable immutable resources through the same provider-neutral handoff.
+Figma, Penpot, OpenPencil, image, video, 3D/WebGL and other providers are optional upstream producers. A Direct Agent authoring the resource is also a legal other Provider when current evidence shows that it satisfies the same bounded archetype, render, revision, canonical-source and formal-handoff capabilities; it receives no exemption from Source, Design suitability or handoff closure. Use any provider only when its collaboration/editability or native inspection value is material and its connector/auth/read/export path is operational. A listed plugin, URL, thumbnail or metadata response is not proof of usable native input. If a requested provider is unavailable, report the missing capability precisely, offer another artifact only when it preserves the requested design decision, and never relabel an export as native editable design. Every selected provider still emits repository-readable immutable resources through the same provider-neutral handoff.
 
 ## Failure and recovery
 

package/assets/skills/design-resource-authoring/references/recovery-and-writeback.md

@@ -6,6 +6,10 @@ Load this reference only for a material generation/revision loop which needs com
 
 A simple scoped preview creates zero recovery files and persisted recovery bytes, adds no user pause or Provider generation beyond the one requested commission, runs no formal handoff/preflight, performs no Proposal writeback and opens no helper write transaction. Its ordinary requested preview is the commission itself; recovery adds and reports zero tool actions. Keep its temporary reasoning in the current turn.
 
+Ordinary conversational review and selection remains legal outside this deterministic path. It creates no approval record or persistent selection state and must be reconfirmed if lost before authorized materialization. Deterministic cross-interruption selection uses only the existing raw-digest-bound marked Source, `ty-dra-authority-v1`, selected-resource binding and conditional checkpoint below; do not invent `review_set_id`, approval status or another checkpoint kind.
+
+Without the complete bindings below, an ordinary loop may report only conservative impact analysis from readable Source, identify unverified scope and regenerate conservatively within the hard ceiling or return `decision-required`. It cannot claim that only identified resources are affected. When this recoverable path has a complete current catalog, change and preservation claims remain bounded to its exact Requirements-to-Resource, Resource-to-Requirements, explicitly unchanged, blast-radius and inactive-leakage universes.
+
 Use a recovery checkpoint only when interruption would otherwise lose material accepted/rejected/unresolved semantics, immutable Provider identity or a pending CAS writeback. It is versioned, ignored, task-local, non-authoritative and deletable. It is not Source, Context, a Contract, Authority, Evidence, Receipt, Gate, Provider registry, scheduler, acceptance state or completion conclusion. There is no global session registry, event log, heartbeat, polling loop or state-machine service.
 
 For deterministic classification, apply four fail-closed invariants before details: validate every semantic key independently; retain every valid accepted/rejected/unresolved decision and its authority row even when a later patch, audit or owner fails; reject deterministic checkpoint input whose claimed Source authority is invalid; and report a requested or pending unsafe reconciliation/writeback as blocked rather than as no action. Provider/resource selection never fills a missing authority row, and one key's authority never covers another key.
@@ -80,6 +84,8 @@ Never use a prior Agent summary or generated resource as the next Base. Missing
 
 Prepare one disclosure-reviewed JSON input using schema `design-resource-recovery-input-v4`, including session identity, Base, `authority_sources`, delegations/Deltas, exact accepted/rejected/unresolved sets, current Design Authority identity, immutable Provider project/run/resource references, `selected_resource_bindings`, one frozen `audit_expectations` catalog and optional writeback. The catalog owns the exact changed, unchanged, resource-decision, blast-radius and inactive-leakage row expectations, including Delta/resource/condition/basis/binding identities. Every resource-decision binding freezes one and only one `final_disposition`: `proposal-written` with its exact operation ID, `resource-owned-exact-visual` with its selected resource/conditions/structured owner, `not-adopted` for rejected or superseded meaning, or `unresolved` for unresolved meaning. Audit observes and verifies this owner; it never selects it. Changing an owner requires checkpoint `update` with digest CAS. The catalog is the only checkpoint audit-universe/owner owner; current audit rows must be set-equal to it rather than merely non-empty. Selected resource bindings declare one unique resource key, generic `repository-snapshot` or `external-immutable` identity, locator, raw-byte digest and exact condition identities. Arbitrary condition strings and duplicate identities fail closed.
 
+The existing selected-resource, condition, Design-Authority and authority-Source fields jointly bind deterministic selection to the canonical selected-source digest, target, declared conditions and controlling Source/Design-Authority identity; no new selection field or status is added. Preview URLs, names and exports are derived outputs. A proved equivalent export does not change the selection binding, while a visible or semantic difference requires a new user review/selection and, when retained here, the existing digest-CAS checkpoint update.
+
 Create/retain a checkpoint for a real interruption or pending CAS writeback; use `none` when neither exists, and `reject` when a requested new checkpoint, input, destination or existing checkpoint cannot be admitted. Never turn an invalid authority request into `none` merely because no file was written. Then explicitly create it when required:
 
 ```text
@@ -178,7 +184,7 @@ When no binding is `proposal-written`, omit writeback and do not invent an empty
 ty-context design-resource recovery reconcile <session> --audit <audit.json>
 ```
 
-Recovery uses only generic repository snapshot/source-record identity. It does not accept a `formal-handoff-target` label or duplicate the formal handoff parser; formal Web/App handoff readiness remains owned by `ty-context design-resource preflight`.
+Recovery uses only generic repository snapshot/source-record identity. It does not accept a `formal-handoff-target` label, an implementation-feasibility-readiness label, duplicate either formal parser, or persist a selected production strategy. Formal Web/App input closure remains owned by `ty-context design-resource preflight`, while production ownership remains downstream.
 
 A valid resource-owned-only case may be `allow` plus `reconciliation-balanced` with `write_action: none`, but the helper-level `handoff_ready` projection remains false. Any later readiness claim waits for the Skill-owned composition of current Provider/resource revalidation, durable final ownership and applicable formal preflight; never infer readiness merely from a balanced read-only reconcile.
 

package/assets/skills/design-resource-authoring/references/resource-selection.md

@@ -15,6 +15,21 @@ Extract the smallest explicit output or development boundary before interpreting
 
 Rich background improves a bounded artifact. It never authorizes more artifacts. Necessary surrounding context may show where a partial feature lives, but it does not place the rest of that page or product in scope. If the user supplies a complete app plan but asks to preview one button, generate at most the one-control resource. If the user asks for design resources for one development slice, cover that slice through its material controls and conditions, not the whole background product.
 
+When an in-scope decision exposes an outside-ceiling effect, assess and explain that effect without generating or revising the outside subjects. Return the existing `decision-required` disposition with `reason: scope-expansion-required`. The user may choose an in-scope alternative or explicitly expand scope; only then recompute the ceiling and coverage. The reason is not a new status, approval or workflow state.
+
+For page, flow or complex-control generation, recover the available authoritative constraints before deriving a commission:
+
+- target user/role and usage context reference;
+- client/host/platform, input method and relevant size classes;
+- owning Surface/Screen duty and main-versus-drilldown boundary;
+- primary task outcome, primary work object and shortest task loop;
+- material operation–affected-object–feedback relationships; and
+- critical context, state, recovery and accessibility constraints.
+
+These product and surface facts remain owned by controlling Product/Surface/Screen Source. The commission references them without becoming their owner. Separately consume `DESIGN.md` and selected exact-target/constraint Source for visual-system and selected-design conditions. Non-authoritative task-level UI/UX analysis may inform candidate comparison but cannot supply missing product or surface meaning. A feature list, screenshot, route tree, component inventory or analysis output cannot fill a missing product or surface fact; if the missing meaning materially changes the resource, return `decision-required` or request the owning Source update before Provider execution.
+
+If the desired candidate changes durable product goals/rules/capability, page duty, primary work object/task loop, information/action/feedback placement, interaction topology, Design Authority, tokens or component-family grammar, stop and route the change to the actual Product/Surface/Screen/Design owner. Reread the updated owner before resuming selection or generation. A candidate execution defect stays within DRA and does not by itself justify a durable owner change.
+
 ## 2. Choose the intent
 
 | Intent | User decision being supported | Default stopping point |
@@ -44,6 +59,35 @@ Preserve each supplied item's actual role:
 
 An optional pre-existing planning document is one possible input. Raw notes or an initial proposal are equally valid. Never require a special intermediary format merely to make another input usable.
 
+### Pre-generation style-application closure
+
+Before every style-bearing Provider generation or material revision—including a simple high-fidelity preview—evaluate every current-slice style-application dimension which can materially change the output. Reuse the Provider reference's existing material-revision definition; do not create another revision classification. This closure does not apply to non-fidelity work, pure IA/flow topology, low-fidelity structure, a semantics-only state study, a read which starts no new generation, or packaging, renaming or byte-only export proved equivalent to the same canonical source.
+
+At minimum evaluate `primary_content_priority`, `density`, `container_treatment`, `visible_vs_hit_geometry`, `preserve` and `prohibited_patterns`, plus any other obvious slice-specific style-application dimension which materially affects Provider output. These are task-local judgments, not a fixed visual-property matrix or a copy of the formal handoff Fact Universe. Every applicable dimension has exactly one of these dispositions:
+
+| Disposition | Legal condition | Commission representation | Provider effect |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- |
+| `existing-covered` | Current controlling Source or a selected `exact-target`/`constraint` completely governs the exact target, slice and declared conditions and reaches the Provider through an existing input binding | Keep that Source in its existing input binding; do not duplicate it in `style_application` | Contributes to a closed commission |
+| `projected` | Current controlling Source and Design Authority already determine the slice-specific application, but selected input does not directly and completely express it | Put only the necessary current-slice field in the existing `style_application` envelope | Contributes to a closed commission |
+| `not-applicable` | The dimension has no material effect on this resource and the task-local reason is explicit | Keep the reason task-local; emit no empty or placeholder field | Contributes to a closed commission |
+| `decision-required` | Source is missing, stale, conflicting or ambiguous; a user choice is needed; delegation is insufficient; or resolution requires a durable owner change | Give the concrete natural-language reason through the existing disposition; emit no invented application meaning | Blocks the Provider run |
+
+Use `existing-covered` only when all of the following hold:
+
+1. current controlling Source or a selected `exact-target`/`constraint` explicitly specifies the dimension;
+2. the specification applies to the exact target, slice and declared conditions;
+3. the Source remains current after any owner update;
+4. the Provider commission actually carries it through existing `inputs.exact_targets`, `inputs.constraints` or the corresponding current input binding; and
+5. the conclusion requires no Agent inference from a generic style, name or visual impression.
+
+Design System identity, generic Tokens, “follow the design system”, inspiration, background, an unselected candidate, Provider output, a default-only static screenshot and current-implementation evidence do not by themselves establish `existing-covered`. Current implementation may support `preserve` only when controlling Source explicitly makes the observed behavior or visual fact a preservation constraint. A Provider must not infer missing application meaning from any of these inputs, a feature list, route tree, component inventory or task-level UI/UX analysis.
+
+For `projected`, derive only meaning already authorized by current Source and Design Authority. Do not invent product, business, interaction or design-system semantics, paste complete Tokens, copy a Provider prompt or create a persistent Projection. The actual commission envelope contains exactly the `projected` fields: omit `existing-covered` fields, keep `not-applicable` reasons task-local and never encode `decision-required` as a placeholder.
+
+The Provider run is allowed if and only if every applicable dimension is `existing-covered`, `projected` or `not-applicable`. Any `decision-required`, undispositioned dimension or Source conflict blocks commission submission and Provider execution. When resolution changes durable Product/Surface/Screen/Design meaning, use the existing owner-first route above, reread current Source and repeat this closure before resuming DRA. Post-generation Design suitability cannot retroactively repair a commission which skipped this closure.
+
+This judgment occurs inside the existing Source read and commission-envelope action. For a simple high-fidelity preview it adds no Provider generation, tool action, file, checkpoint, persistent state, fixed user pause, required extra conversation turn, formal handoff, manifest, bundle, preflight or complete Fact Universe. When all dimensions close, the same turn may still generate, perform minimal sanity/suitability review, show the candidate and receive a user choice. “Closure required” never means “emit a closure record.”
+
 ## 4. Derive development-corresponding coverage
 
 For an implementation handoff, use this task-local equation:
@@ -56,6 +100,8 @@ resources to commission
 
 A decision is material when changing it would materially change what the user sees, understands, can do or receives as feedback. Pure code structure and non-user-visible implementation choices are not design gaps.
 
+For each selected existing mapping, also name the applicable target/conditions and the meaning that must be preserved. Preservation includes current product/surface meaning, exact resource-owned visual facts, state/condition coverage and component-family or Design-System lineage which the requested change does not authorize altering. Do not treat an unchanged-looking default frame as proof that its hidden states, responsive variants or inherited dependencies are preserved.
+
 Account for the applicable meaning at each level; do not require filler for non-applicable dimensions:
 
 | Coverage level | Material UI/UX meaning |
@@ -73,8 +119,12 @@ For every material in-scope item, record one task-local disposition: `existing-c
 
 Existing coverage is sufficient only for the conditions it explicitly specifies or demonstrates. Seeing a control in one default page frame does not cover its variants, dynamic states, feedback, motion, responsive behavior or accessibility. Conversely, a selected component source may cover many control instances, so do not commission duplicate designs merely because several stable control keys map to it.
 
+Impact assurance has two strengths. A material/recoverable loop may use the complete current `audit_expectations`, bidirectional resource bindings, explicitly unchanged universe, blast-radius universe and inactive-Delta leakage catalog owned by [recovery-and-writeback.md](recovery-and-writeback.md). An ordinary loop without those complete bindings performs only conservative impact analysis from readable Source: mark the unverified remainder, conservatively regenerate within the ceiling or return `decision-required`. Never claim that only identified resources are affected, and never expand outside the ceiling for safety.
+
 Design resources express user-visible interaction semantics and the presentation of product rules. Business, data, permission and algorithmic rules remain owned by product/technical Source; reference those rules and show their visible consequences without inventing them or making a visual artifact their sole owner.
 
+For a Web/App implementation handoff, visual coverage alone is insufficient. Read [implementation-feasibility.md](implementation-feasibility.md) and inspect the current platform, framework/runtime, UI system, token/theming adapter, component owners and route owners. Every material component-family × target × condition profile needs a Source-backed candidate realization or blocker before formal publication. This does not make implementation structure a design decision or put exact design values into technical Source.
+
 ### Formal selected Web/App handoff
 
 When—and only when—the direction is final-selected for a formal Web/App implementation handoff, load [formal-selected-web-app-handoff.md](formal-selected-web-app-handoff.md). That reference owns the complete atomic Expected Fact Universe, canonical acquisition, Inspector/Census, Fact × method proof and publication rules. Exploration never loads or approximates them.
@@ -138,15 +188,40 @@ coverage:
   material_needs: []
   observable_fact_families: []
   existing_mappings: []
+  preserve: []
   required_content_visual: []
   required_components_states: []
   required_interactions_motion: []
   required_adaptation_accessibility: []
 inputs:
+  product_surface_constraints: []
+  technical_sources: []
   exact_targets: []
   constraints: []
   inspiration: []
   background: []
+style_application:
+  primary_content_priority: results-table-is-primary-work-object
+  density: compact-working-density-for-results-table
+  container_treatment: one-flat-table-surface-without-card-wrapper
+  preserve: [selected-header-hierarchy]
+  prohibited_patterns: [nested-cards-around-the-primary-results-table]
+quality_commission:
+  artifact_archetype: dashboard-data-workbench
+  primary_design_challenges: [task-hierarchy, component-reuse, dense-data-legibility]
+  visual_character:
+    desired: [calm, precise, product-specific]
+    avoid: [generic-ai-gradient, excessive-cards, arbitrary-glow]
+  content:
+    real_copy_required: true
+    realistic_data_required: true
+    placeholder_final_content_forbidden: true
+  reference_roles:
+    - { ref: selected-density-reference, role: information-density }
+  component_authoring:
+    shared_families_required: true
+    repeated_instance_specific_styling_forbidden_by_design: true
+  substrate_input_refs: [dashboard-web-feasibility]
 selected_capability:
   kind: runtime-discovered-kind
   id: runtime-discovered-id
@@ -154,17 +229,19 @@ expected_entry: known-or-provider-native
 review_promise: minimal-sanity | handoff-checks | selected-source-snapshot
 ```
 
-This is an explanatory shape, not a required file or schema. Never paste or paraphrase the Open Design capability's own seed/template prompt into it.
+This is an explanatory shape, not a required file or schema; its concrete dashboard values illustrate Source-derived content and are not defaults. Include `style_application` only when material to a style-bearing commission and bind its actual values to current Design Authority, selected Source and the explicit slice. It is not a persisted Application Projection, Authority, state or acceptance record. For style-bearing generation, add an archetype-specific `quality_commission`: name the main design challenges, desired/avoided visual character, real-content obligations, the distinct role of each selected reference, design-side shared-family expectations and applicable feasibility Source. Omit irrelevant keys instead of emitting placeholders.
+
+`repeated_instance_specific_styling_forbidden_by_design` means repeated controls in the selected resource share one component-family grammar rather than being drawn as unrelated instances. It does not assert that later production code already reuses one component. `quality_commission` is Provider input, not a persisted quality score, Authority, Gate, routing record or acceptance result. A simple high-fidelity preview does not gain another tool action or persisted side effect from these fields. Never paste or paraphrase the Open Design capability's own seed/template prompt into it.
 
 ## 9. Iterate and stop
 
-- Keep each revision inside the original scope ceiling unless the user explicitly expands it.
+- Keep each revision inside the original scope ceiling unless the user explicitly expands it; otherwise use `decision-required` with reason `scope-expansion-required`.
 - Reuse the current Open Design project when that preserves context and provenance; preserve the prior artifact hash before overwriting a selected candidate.
 - Do not create low-fi, high-fi, component boards or native-platform copies merely because a process diagram lists them.
 - For exploration, stop as soon as the requested decision is supported.
 - For a final-selected formal Web/App implementation handoff, apply the dedicated formal reference's exact stop conditions. Honest `decision_required`, `unavailable` or capability gaps remain blocking; they cannot be called ready or authorize fidelity work.
 
-During simple iteration, keep accepted, rejected and unresolved implications in a task-local delta buffer. Do not require or emit an interim delta after every iteration and never continuously synchronize the initial proposal. If the loop requires durable semantic replay, a selected-Proposal file writeback or cross-interruption recovery, load [recovery-and-writeback.md](recovery-and-writeback.md) and use its independent origin/decision-authority/evidence/status model plus package helper; prompt prose alone cannot establish CAS or deterministic recovery. After explicit human selection or explicitly delegated selection, consolidate the buffer once and reconcile only accepted decisions into the initial proposal. If it exists only in conversation and safe materialization was not explicitly authorized, return one complete revised proposal and report cross-session deterministic recovery unavailable. Never create another intermediary planning document or mutate Context, `DESIGN.md`, code, tests or Contract.
+During simple iteration, keep accepted, rejected and unresolved implications in a task-local delta buffer. Do not require or emit an interim delta after every iteration and never continuously synchronize the initial proposal. If the loop requires durable semantic replay, a selected-Proposal file writeback or cross-interruption recovery, load [recovery-and-writeback.md](recovery-and-writeback.md) and use its independent origin/decision-authority/evidence/status model plus package helper; prompt prose alone cannot establish CAS or deterministic recovery. Ordinary conversational selection creates no approval record or deterministic cross-session promise; if it is lost before authorized materialization, reconfirm it. For a non-formal small request, explicit human selection or explicitly delegated selection may be consolidated and reconciled once in the same turn. For a selected formal Web/App handoff, defer reconciliation until the formal owner completes canonical closure and no newly visible decision returns to review. Reconcile only accepted decisions. If the Proposal exists only in conversation and safe materialization was not explicitly authorized, return one complete revised proposal and report cross-session deterministic recovery unavailable. Never create another intermediary planning document or mutate Context, `DESIGN.md`, code, tests or Contract.
 
 ## Worked scope examples
 
@@ -176,3 +253,38 @@ During simple iteration, keep accepted, rejected and unresolved implications in
 - **Three-screen interaction flow:** select a low-fi flow and an interactive high-fi prototype only if topology and interaction/visual behavior are independently unresolved.
 - **Local style fix with exact target:** select no new design resource and route to implementation.
 - **Initial proposal before execution:** iterate only requested candidates, keep one task-local delta buffer, then after selection reconcile accepted decisions once. Pass the revised proposal plus selected immutable resources directly to the default Goal or `long-task-workflow`.
+
+### Style-application worked examples
+
+#### Example A — must block
+
+A one-page high-fidelity preview has configured Design Authority but only generic Tokens. No selected `exact-target` or `constraint` specifies the page's primary-content priority, density or container treatment, and the commission has no corresponding projected fields. Generic system binding cannot fill those application decisions. Result: use the existing `decision-required` with concrete missing-Source reasons; the Provider run must not start.
+
+#### Example B — complete existing coverage may omit projection
+
+A local style-bearing revision has a current selected `exact-target` which explicitly specifies every applicable style-application dimension for the exact target and conditions, and that Source is carried through the Provider's existing exact-target input binding. Every dimension is `existing-covered`. Result: omit `style_application` rather than copying the Source, and allow the Provider run.
+
+#### Example C — mixed closure projects only the gaps
+
+The task-local dispositions are:
+
+```text
+primary_content_priority: existing-covered
+density: projected
+container_treatment: projected
+visible_vs_hit_geometry: not-applicable
+preserve: existing-covered
+prohibited_patterns: projected
+```
+
+Assume current Screen Source says the results table is the page's primary work object, current Design Authority calls for compact working density, and an adopted constraint forbids nested cards. The illustrative actual envelope contains only those three Source-derived fields:
+
+```yaml
+style_application:
+  density: compact-working-density-for-results-table
+  container_treatment: one-flat-table-surface-without-card-wrapper
+  prohibited_patterns:
+    - nested-cards-around-the-primary-results-table
+```
+
+All applicable dimensions are closed, so the Provider run is allowed. If any one of them instead becomes unresolved, stale or conflicting, its disposition becomes `decision-required` and the run is blocked.

package/assets/skills/design-system-authoring/SKILL.md

@@ -1,21 +1,23 @@
 ---
 name: design-system-authoring
-description: Use only when the user explicitly asks to initialize, generate, choose, adopt, replace or repair a project design system or design style with Open Design; asks for “初始化设计系统”, “生成设计系统”, “确定设计风格”, “采纳 Open Design 设计系统”, or explicitly invokes design-system-authoring in a Minimal Context Harness project. This cold-start capability never runs merely because DESIGN.md is missing, a project is new, another Skill needs visual style, or ordinary UI work begins.
+description: Use only when the user explicitly asks to bootstrap, revise, reconcile, choose, adopt, replace or repair a project design system or design style with Open Design; asks for “初始化设计系统”, “生成设计系统”, “确定设计风格”, “采纳 Open Design 设计系统”, explicitly promotes a DRA Authority delta candidate, or invokes design-system-authoring in a Minimal Context Harness project. This capability never runs merely because DESIGN.md is missing, a project is new, DRA found a candidate delta, another Skill needs visual style, or ordinary UI work begins.
 ---
 
 # Design System Authoring
 
-Generate or select an Open Design design system, obtain an explicit selection, and adopt that selection into the project's existing durable Design Authority. The user invokes this Skill at project cold start or later repair time; installation only makes it available.
+Bootstrap, revise or reconcile an Open Design design-system candidate, obtain an explicit selection, then require a separate explicit adoption confirmation before changing the project's durable Design Authority. Installation only makes the Skill available.
 
 ## Hard boundaries
 
 - Run only from an explicit user request. Never auto-run from `init`, `sync`, the default Workflow, `design-resource-authoring`, a missing/starter `DESIGN.md`, or a new-project inference.
+- A DRA `authority_delta_candidate` is non-authoritative input, not permission to invoke this Skill or adopt anything. The user must explicitly start `reconcile` mode.
 - A combined explicit user request to initialize the system and then generate resources authorizes that sequence; a resource gate alone does not.
 - Open Design owns generation, revision, previews and its catalogue. Use its live structured capabilities; do not copy its prompts, emulate its generator, vendor a catalogue or invent provider IDs.
-- Keep candidate generation, human/delegated selection and authority adoption distinct. A successful job or attractive preview is not selected and is not project authority.
-- Project `DESIGN.md` and its one declared authored exact-value token source or generation direction are canonical. An Open Design design-system record and project binding are provider synchronization, not a second authority.
+- Keep candidate generation, human/delegated selection, and the later explicit adoption confirmation distinct. A successful job, attractive preview, selected task resource or selected system candidate is not project authority.
+- Root `DESIGN.md` is the unique Authority entry and revision owner. In this bundle version its supported front matter remains the editable exact Token authority; `design_system/tokens.json` is deterministic generated output, and a sparse `design_system/authority.manifest.json` owns closure membership/digest only. Bundle adoption must insert the exact `<!-- ty-context-design-authority-format: bundle-v1 -->` line at the fixed first non-empty Markdown body position and create the manifest in the same adoption. None is a second independently editable Authority.
+- Create subordinate component/pattern/motion/platform owners only for real reusable durable rules. Never scaffold a mandatory full taxonomy.
 - Put durable surface, information-architecture and interaction facts in their owning `project_context/**`; put visual-system semantics, rationale, token direction and reference interpretation in `DESIGN.md`. Do not duplicate facts across owners.
-- Do not create a design registry, receipt, workflow state, Contract, acceptance gate or provider runtime inside Tiny Context.
+- Do not create a design registry, receipt, workflow state, Contract, acceptance gate or provider runtime inside Tiny Context. The package's local `@google/design.md` adapter and Authority codecs are deterministic lint/export/validation tools, not Open Design generation.
 - Do not persistently install/configure MCP, plugins, authentication or disclosure paths without separate authorization. Task-local use of an already available Open Design MCP/daemon is allowed.
 - Do not implement production UI or claim downstream fidelity, accessibility, product correctness or acceptance.
 
@@ -26,19 +28,21 @@ Generate or select an Open Design design system, obtain an explicit selection, a
 
 ## Core workflow
 
-1. **Confirm explicit intent and scope.** Identify whether the user wants a new system, selection from existing systems, repair, or replacement; capture the product/brand purpose, supported surface/platform, accessibility needs, required modes and supplied references. Ask only when an unresolved aesthetic or brand choice materially changes the candidates and the user has not delegated selection.
-2. **Inspect current authority.** Read core Context, relevant surface/interaction Context, `DESIGN.md`, its declared token source/generation direction and any recorded Open Design provenance. Classify the project as `unconfigured`, `configured`, or `configured-but-inconsistent`; this is a task-local finding, not new state.
-3. **Discover live Open Design capabilities.** Prefer structured MCP. List/read `od://design-systems/<id>/DESIGN.md`, inspect tool schemas, and feature-detect design-system creation/revision/acceptance plus project binding. Record the live provider/MCP version and any fallback used.
-4. **Reuse or generate candidates.** Reuse an existing provider system only when its identity and meaning fit. If a live MCP creation capability exists, use it. Otherwise use the official daemon generation-job API described in the provider reference. Keep every output a candidate until selection.
-5. **Review and iterate.** Inspect `DESIGN.md`, generated token files, preview/showcase and relevant workspace files. Use provider revision jobs for scoped feedback, poll boundedly, preserve diagnostics and keep pending revisions non-authoritative.
-6. **Obtain selection.** Require an explicit user/team selection, or an explicit instruction delegating selection with known criteria. Record the selection basis, provider design-system ID, selected revision when applicable and immutable content digest/snapshot. Reject or leave other candidates unselected.
-7. **Adopt once.** Reconcile the selected system through the authority-adoption procedure. Update root `DESIGN.md`, establish exactly one authored token source/generation direction, update only owning Context facts, and record provider provenance without making it authoritative.
-8. **Synchronize Open Design.** Accept the selected pending revision when applicable. Confirm MCP can read the adopted provider system. For later style-bearing resource work, create or verify an Open Design project with `create_project.designSystem` equal to the adopted provider ID.
-9. **Validate and report.** Run project-owned Context/design lint and source/package checks appropriate to the repository. Separately report provider execution, artifact readiness, selection, authority adoption, provider synchronization, verification and unresolved issues.
+1. **Confirm explicit mode and scope.** Use `bootstrap` for an unconfigured project, `revise` for an explicit current-system change, or `reconcile` for a user-promoted DRA Authority delta candidate. Capture product/brand purpose, supported surfaces/platforms, accessibility, modes, immutable constraints and supplied references. Ask only when an unresolved aesthetic or brand choice materially changes candidates and selection was not delegated.
+2. **Inspect the complete current authority.** Read core and relevant surface Context, root `DESIGN.md`, optional sparse manifest/subordinate owners, generated Tokens and provider provenance. Run read-only closure inspection. Classify `unconfigured`, `configured` or `configured-but-inconsistent` as a task-local finding, not state.
+3. **Validate reconcile input.** In `reconcile`, require the strict non-authoritative Authority Delta Assessment, validate that its `based_on` closure is still current, then use only its proposed changes, supporting resources, representative scenarios and immutable constraints. A stale packet returns to DRA reassessment.
+4. **Discover live Open Design capabilities.** Prefer structured MCP. List/read `od://design-systems/<id>/DESIGN.md`, inspect tool schemas, and feature-detect creation/revision/acceptance plus project binding. Record live provider/MCP version and fallback.
+5. **Reuse or generate candidates.** Reuse an existing provider system only when identity and meaning fit. Otherwise use a live structured creation/revision capability or the official daemon fallback. In `revise`/`reconcile`, generate bounded deltas against the current closure rather than an unrelated replacement. Keep every output a candidate.
+6. **Review representative scenarios and iterate.** Inspect candidate `DESIGN.md`, exact Token delta, sparse owner delta, preview/showcase and representative scenes. Preserve immutable constraints, migration impact, provider diagnostics and provenance. Pending revisions remain non-authoritative.
+7. **Obtain system-candidate selection.** Require explicit user/team selection, or explicit delegated selection with known criteria. Record basis, provider ID/revision and immutable digest/snapshot. Reject or leave other candidates unselected.
+8. **Stop for separate adoption confirmation.** Present the exact project-owner diff, migration impact, new/removed subordinate owners, generated Token change and affected DRA resources. Ask the user to explicitly confirm adoption of this selected system candidate. Candidate selection or an earlier page-resource approval does not satisfy this confirmation.
+9. **Adopt once after confirmation.** Follow the authority-adoption reference: update root `DESIGN.md`, insert/preserve the canonical body-leading `bundle-v1` marker, update only necessary sparse subordinate owners, deterministic generated Tokens, closure-only manifest/digest, owning Context and provider provenance. Create or remove marker and manifest only as one explicit Authority-format change. Do not copy revision or Token values into the manifest.
+10. **Rebind and synchronize.** Calculate the new complete closure identity. Rebind affected DRA resources/handoffs to it and rerun affected preflight/representative verification. Accept the selected provider revision when applicable, confirm it is readable, and verify downstream provider project binding.
+11. **Validate and report.** Run project-owned closure, Token, Context/design lint, source/package and affected DRA checks. Separately report mode, provider execution, artifact readiness, selection, explicit adoption confirmation, changed owners, old/new closure identities, rebinding, provider synchronization, verification and unresolved issues.
 
 ## Readiness classification
 
-Treat Design Authority as unconfigured when `DESIGN.md` is absent, explicitly says `Design authority status: unconfigured`, remains an unedited starter, contains only style adjectives/inspiration, or lacks one authored exact-value token source/generation direction. A configured visual system still does not make every surface implementation-ready; selected exact/constraint targets and declared coverage remain separate.
+Treat Design Authority as unconfigured when `DESIGN.md` is absent, explicitly says `Design authority status: unconfigured`, remains an unedited starter, contains only style adjectives/inspiration, or lacks supported authored exact Token values. A configured visual system still does not make every surface implementation-ready; selected exact/constraint targets and declared coverage remain separate.
 
 If authority is already configured and the user did not ask to replace or repair it, prefer reuse and explain the current system. Never generate a competing system as filler.
 
@@ -47,10 +51,12 @@ If authority is already configured and the user did not ask to replace or repair
 Report:
 
 - requested operation and design-system scope;
+- `bootstrap`, `revise` or `reconcile` mode and the exact base closure identity;
 - Open Design transport/version and capabilities actually used;
 - candidate IDs and review performed;
-- explicit or delegated selection basis;
-- adopted `DESIGN.md`, token source and Context owners changed;
+- explicit or delegated selection basis and separate adoption confirmation;
+- adopted `DESIGN.md`, sparse subordinate owners, generated Tokens, manifest and Context owners changed;
+- new closure identity and affected DRA rebinding/revalidation;
 - provider ID, revision/digest and project-binding verification;
 - validations run, limitations and decisions still required.
 

package/assets/skills/design-system-authoring/references/authority-adoption.md

@@ -5,8 +5,10 @@ Adopt one explicitly selected Open Design result through existing Minimal Contex
 ## Preconditions
 
 - Selection is explicit, or the user explicitly delegated selection and the stated criteria support one defensible choice.
+- After seeing the selected candidate's exact project diff and migration impact, the user separately and explicitly confirmed Authority adoption. Page/resource approval and system-candidate selection are insufficient.
+- The current complete project Authority closure identity is readable and still matches the candidate base. A stale `reconcile` packet returns to DRA assessment.
 - The exact provider design-system ID and selected revision/body are readable.
-- `DESIGN.md`, generated token artifacts and relevant preview/workspace files have been inspected.
+- `DESIGN.md`, optional sparse manifest/subordinate owners, generated token artifacts and relevant preview/workspace files have been inspected.
 - The selected content has a stable digest or user-approved snapshot.
 - Conflicts with product/surface Context are resolved or remain an explicit decision; provider output never silently overrides product meaning.
 
@@ -15,34 +17,42 @@ Adopt one explicitly selected Open Design result through existing Minimal Contex
 Use these owners:
 
 - `project_context/**`: durable surface responsibility, information hierarchy, navigation, stable interaction/state, product accessibility requirements and repeatable verification entrypoints;
-- root `DESIGN.md`: visual principles, typography, color, spacing, radius, elevation, motion rationale, component visual semantics, token-source declaration and interpretation of design references;
-- one project-native authored token source or one explicit generation direction: exact values consumed by implementation;
+- root `DESIGN.md`: unique Authority entry/revision owner, visual principles, supported front-matter exact Token authority and the canonical body-leading `<!-- ty-context-design-authority-format: bundle-v1 -->` bundle declaration;
+- sparse `design_system/**` subordinate owners: only real reusable component/pattern/motion/platform rules, indexed from the entry;
+- `design_system/tokens.json`: deterministic generated DTCG output from `DESIGN.md`, never independently authored;
+- `design_system/authority.manifest.json`: complete closure membership and digest only, never revision, direction or Token values;
 - selected authored targets: concrete composition/condition coverage, kept as ordinary versioned project Source.
 
 Do not copy the same fact into several owners. Open Design metadata is provenance only.
 
 ## Adoption procedure
 
-1. Read the project's `DESIGN.md` format and lint expectations. Preserve valid project-specific content unless the user explicitly authorized replacement.
+1. Inspect the complete current closure and preserve its identity as the adoption CAS base. Read the project's `DESIGN.md` format and lint expectations. Preserve valid project-specific content unless the user explicitly authorized replacement.
 2. Reconcile selected provider semantics against controlling Context. Provider-invented business, permission, data or algorithmic rules are excluded unless independently authorized by product Source.
-3. Write the selected visual system into `DESIGN.md` and declare exactly one authored exact-value token source or generation direction. Avoid style-only adjectives without implementation meaning.
+3. Write selected system semantics and exact Token values into root `DESIGN.md`. When adopting or retaining bundle format, place the exact `<!-- ty-context-design-authority-format: bundle-v1 -->` declaration on the first non-empty Markdown body line after supported YAML front matter. Add or revise a subordinate owner only for an actual reusable durable rule; do not scaffold an empty taxonomy. Avoid style-only adjectives without implementation meaning.
 4. Record provider provenance in a normal `DESIGN.md` section unless the format explicitly permits metadata fields. Include provider name/version, design-system ID, selected revision when applicable, selection basis, immutable source/snapshot locator and SHA-256 digest, plus the editable upstream owner/locator/update/export route. State that project files are canonical.
 5. Update only relevant Context when durable surface/interaction/verification facts changed. Use stable surface/control/target keys to make every adopted decision-relevant target Context-reachable without duplicating the visual prose.
-6. Put concrete selected targets/tokens in project-native versioned paths selected by the user or existing project convention. Never silently choose a repository directory merely because Open Design has a mutable workspace. Never overwrite an adopted baseline in place; update upstream, create or approve a new immutable version/digest and update the owning reference.
-7. Accept the selected provider revision if one exists, then re-read the MCP design-system resource and compare its identity/body or digest with the adopted selection.
-8. Verify downstream project binding by creating or reading a provider project with the selected ID. Provider mismatch is a synchronization problem, not evidence that project Design Authority is absent.
+6. Deterministically project DTCG `design_system/tokens.json` from the adopted `DESIGN.md`; never hand-edit generated Token values. The read-only `ty-context design-authority tokens --from-entry` command may project while the old bundle digest is intentionally stale. Create/update the sparse manifest together with the canonical marker, without revision or Token semantics, calculate the canonical complete-closure digest and make a second current-base check immediately before writeback. A deliberate bundle-to-one-file adoption removes both marker and manifest in the same explicit Authority Revision; never leave either half orphaned.
+7. Put concrete selected targets in project-native versioned paths selected by the user or existing convention. Never silently choose a repository directory merely because Open Design has a mutable workspace. Never overwrite an adopted selected-resource baseline in place; create a new immutable version/digest and update its owner.
+8. Inspect the new closure and require its claimed digest, generated Tokens, links, file identities and extra-file policy to validate. Rebind affected DRA handoffs/resources to the new identity and rerun their affected preflight/representative verification.
+9. Accept the selected provider revision if one exists, then re-read the MCP resource and compare identity/body or digest with the adopted selection.
+10. Verify downstream project binding by creating or reading a provider project with the selected ID. Provider mismatch is synchronization drift, not evidence that project Authority is absent.
 
 ## Validation
 
 Run the repository-owned Design Authority lint, Context validation and token generation/check paths. At minimum confirm:
 
 - `DESIGN.md` is no longer an unconfigured starter;
-- exactly one authored token source/generation direction is declared and resolvable;
+- root `DESIGN.md` is the sole revision and editable exact-Token owner;
+- the exact bundle marker is the first non-empty Markdown body line and exists if and only if the sparse manifest exists;
+- generated `tokens.json` exactly matches deterministic projection;
+- the sparse manifest contains only complete closure membership/digest and the claimed closure validates;
 - provenance points to the selected provider ID/revision/digest;
 - each adopted target has a readable immutable locator and a verified editable upstream/update route or an explicit manual/external-update boundary;
 - no competing design-system authority or duplicate token owner was introduced;
 - MCP can read the provider design system;
 - a downstream Open Design project reports the matching `designSystemId`;
 - candidate resources remain candidates unless independently selected.
+- affected DRA handoffs bind the new closure identity and their current validation was rerun.
 
 Report changed owners and validation results. Do not claim production visual acceptance from these checks.

package/assets/skills/design-system-authoring/references/open-design-design-system-provider.md

@@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ Use Open Design's live structured surface. Do not assume the installed version m
 
 Never call a copied prompt or local imitation a provider result. Persistent MCP registration, plugin/auth changes and new disclosure paths require separate authorization.
 
+The package-local `@google/design.md` adapter performs deterministic lint, parse/validate, export and diff only. It is not Open Design, does not generate candidates and owns no provider authentication, polling, selection or adoption.
+
 ## Current verified MCP contract
 
 Open Design 0.15.1 exposed MCP server 0.2.0 using protocol `2025-06-18`. A live read-only smoke observed 152 concrete design-system resources through `resources/list`; `resources/read` returned their Markdown bodies. The URI families are:
@@ -97,6 +99,8 @@ For a new Open Design resource project, call MCP `create_project` with the adopt
 
 For an existing project, inspect `get_project` first. When it is missing or mismatched, prefer a new bounded project with the correct binding if MCP offers no safe update. Use a live structured provider update only after feature-detecting it and preserving project identity. Never proceed with a style-bearing run while silently bound to another system.
 
+In DSA `reconcile` mode, send only the current Authority material needed for the proposed Token/component/pattern/motion/platform delta, the user-promoted non-authoritative assessment, immutable constraints, affected platforms, supporting resources and representative scenarios. Provider output remains a system candidate. It cannot emit an effective `selected`, `adopted` or `authority_updated` decision.
+
 ## Failure semantics
 
 Keep these states separate: