psyclaw 0.27.23 → 0.28.1

package/vendor/ars/deep-research/templates/prisma_report_template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,415 @@
+# PRISMA 2020 — Systematic Review Report Template
+
+## Purpose
+
+Template for writing a systematic review report following PRISMA 2020 (Page et al., 2021). All 27 PRISMA items are mapped to their corresponding sections. Use alongside `references/systematic_review_toolkit.md` for detailed guidance.
+
+**Reference**: Page et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
+
+---
+
+## Title [PRISMA Item 1]
+
+**[Full title identifying the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both]**
+
+Example: "The Effect of [Intervention] on [Outcome] in [Population]: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"
+
+---
+
+## Abstract [PRISMA Item 2]
+
+### Background
+[1-2 sentences on context and why the review was done]
+
+### Objectives
+[Research question(s), ideally structured as PICOS]
+
+### Data Sources
+[Databases searched and dates of last search]
+
+### Study Selection
+[Eligibility criteria in brief]
+
+### Data Extraction and Synthesis
+[Methods used for data extraction, risk of bias, and synthesis]
+
+### Results
+[Number of studies included, key findings, effect estimates with CIs, certainty of evidence]
+
+### Limitations
+[Key limitations of the evidence and/or the review process]
+
+### Conclusions
+[General interpretation and implications]
+
+### Registration
+[Protocol registration number and repository]
+
+**Keywords**: [3-5 keywords]
+
+---
+
+## 1. Introduction
+
+### 1.1 Rationale [PRISMA Item 3]
+
+[Describe the rationale for the review in the context of existing knowledge. Address:]
+- What is the problem or question?
+- What is already known (with references to existing reviews)?
+- Why is this review needed (e.g., no existing review, existing review outdated, conflicting evidence)?
+
+### 1.2 Objectives [PRISMA Item 4]
+
+[Provide an explicit statement of the question(s) using PICOS:]
+
+- **Population**: [target population]
+- **Intervention/Exposure**: [intervention or exposure of interest]
+- **Comparator**: [comparison group]
+- **Outcome(s)**: [primary and secondary outcomes]
+- **Study Design**: [eligible study designs]
+
+---
+
+## 2. Methods
+
+### 2.1 Eligibility Criteria [PRISMA Item 5]
+
+| Criterion | Include | Exclude |
+|-----------|---------|---------|
+| Study design | [e.g., RCTs, quasi-experimental] | [e.g., case reports, editorials] |
+| Population | [describe] | [describe] |
+| Intervention | [describe] | [describe] |
+| Comparator | [describe] | [describe] |
+| Outcome | [describe] | [describe] |
+| Time frame | [e.g., published 2014-2024] | [before cutoff] |
+| Language | [e.g., English] | [other] |
+| Setting | [describe] | [describe] |
+
+### 2.2 Information Sources [PRISMA Item 6]
+
+[List all databases and other sources searched, with dates of coverage and last search date:]
+
+| Source | Date Range | Last Searched |
+|--------|-----------|---------------|
+| [Database 1] | [start]-[end] | [date] |
+| [Database 2] | [start]-[end] | [date] |
+| [Other sources: reference lists, expert contact, grey literature] | — | [date] |
+
+### 2.3 Search Strategy [PRISMA Item 7]
+
+[Present the complete search strategy for at least one database. Include all search terms, Boolean operators, and any filters applied.]
+
+**[Database Name] Search Strategy**:
+```
+#1 [search block 1 - Population terms]
+#2 [search block 2 - Intervention terms]
+#3 [search block 3 - Outcome terms]
+#4 #1 AND #2 AND #3
+#5 #4 with filters: [date, language, document type]
+```
+
+[Search strategies for other databases are available in Appendix A.]
+
+### 2.4 Selection Process [PRISMA Item 8]
+
+[Describe the study selection process:]
+- Number of reviewers at each stage
+- How independence was maintained
+- How disagreements were resolved
+- Software used (e.g., Covidence, Rayyan)
+- Pilot testing of screening criteria
+
+### 2.5 Data Collection Process [PRISMA Item 9]
+
+[Describe methods for extracting data from reports:]
+- Data extraction form (developed, piloted)
+- Number of extractors and independence
+- Process for resolving discrepancies
+- How missing data were handled (e.g., contacted authors)
+
+### 2.6 Data Items [PRISMA Item 10]
+
+[List all variables for which data were sought:]
+
+| Category | Variables |
+|----------|----------|
+| Study-level | Authors, year, country, design, setting, funding |
+| Participants | N, age, gender, diagnosis/condition, attrition |
+| Intervention | Type, duration, frequency, fidelity |
+| Outcomes | Definition, measurement tool, time points |
+| Results | Effect sizes, CIs, p-values, raw data |
+
+### 2.7 Study Risk of Bias Assessment [PRISMA Item 11]
+
+[Describe the risk of bias assessment:]
+- Tool(s) used: [RoB 2 for RCTs / ROBINS-I for non-randomized / other]
+- Domains assessed
+- Number of assessors and independence
+- How results were used in the synthesis
+
+### 2.8 Effect Measures [PRISMA Item 12]
+
+[Specify the effect measure(s) for each outcome:]
+
+| Outcome | Type | Effect Measure | Justification |
+|---------|------|---------------|---------------|
+| [Outcome 1] | Continuous | SMD (Hedges' g) | Different scales across studies |
+| [Outcome 2] | Binary | RR | Incidence data |
+
+### 2.9 Synthesis Methods [PRISMA Items 13a-13f]
+
+**13a. Eligibility for synthesis**: [Criteria for grouping studies into each synthesis]
+
+**13b. Data preparation**: [Methods to prepare data, e.g., converting SE to SD, handling multi-arm studies]
+
+**13c. Tabulation/visualization**: [Methods for displaying individual study and synthesis results, e.g., forest plots, summary tables]
+
+**13d. Synthesis approach**: [Statistical model and software]
+- Model: [Fixed-effect / Random-effects (DerSimonian-Laird / REML)]
+- Software: [R metafor / RevMan / Stata]
+- OR if narrative: [SWiM approach, vote counting, effect direction plot]
+
+**13e. Heterogeneity exploration**: [Methods used]
+- Subgroup analyses: [pre-specified subgroups and rationale]
+- Meta-regression: [covariates tested, if applicable]
+
+**13f. Sensitivity analyses**: [Planned sensitivity analyses]
+1. Leave-one-out analysis
+2. Excluding high risk of bias studies
+3. Fixed-effect vs. random-effects comparison
+4. [Other analyses]
+
+### 2.10 Reporting Bias Assessment [PRISMA Item 14]
+
+[Methods to assess publication bias:]
+- Funnel plot (visual inspection)
+- Statistical test: [Egger's / Peter's / trim-and-fill]
+- Comparison of protocol to published reports
+
+### 2.11 Certainty Assessment [PRISMA Item 15]
+
+[Framework used to assess certainty of evidence:]
+- GRADE approach
+- Factors assessed: risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, publication bias
+- Rating up factors (for observational studies): large effect, dose-response, plausible confounding
+
+---
+
+## 3. Results
+
+### 3.1 Study Selection [PRISMA Item 16a, 16b]
+
+#### PRISMA Flow Diagram
+
+```
+ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+ │                 IDENTIFICATION                      │
+ ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+ │ Records identified from databases (n = )            │
+ │   Database 1 (n = )                                 │
+ │   Database 2 (n = )                                 │
+ │   Database 3 (n = )                                 │
+ │ Records identified from other sources (n = )        │
+ │   Reference lists (n = )                            │
+ │   Expert recommendations (n = )                     │
+ └──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
+                        │
+ ┌──────────────────────▼──────────────────────────────┐
+ │ Records removed before screening:                   │
+ │   Duplicate records (n = )                          │
+ │   Records marked ineligible by automation (n = )    │
+ │   Records removed for other reasons (n = )          │
+ └──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
+                        │
+ ┌──────────────────────▼──────────────────────────────┐
+ │                  SCREENING                          │
+ ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+ │ Records screened (n = )                             │
+ │ Records excluded (n = )                             │
+ └──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
+                        │
+ ┌──────────────────────▼──────────────────────────────┐
+ │ Reports sought for retrieval (n = )                 │
+ │ Reports not retrieved (n = )                        │
+ └──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
+                        │
+ ┌──────────────────────▼──────────────────────────────┐
+ │ Reports assessed for eligibility (n = )             │
+ │ Reports excluded, with reasons (n = )               │
+ │   Reason 1 (n = )                                   │
+ │   Reason 2 (n = )                                   │
+ │   Reason 3 (n = )                                   │
+ └──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
+                        │
+ ┌──────────────────────▼──────────────────────────────┐
+ │                  INCLUDED                           │
+ ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+ │ Studies included in review (n = )                   │
+ │ Reports of included studies (n = )                  │
+ │ Studies in quantitative synthesis (n = )             │
+ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+[PRISMA Item 16b: Cite studies that appeared to meet inclusion criteria but were excluded, with reasons.]
+
+### 3.2 Study Characteristics [PRISMA Item 17]
+
+**Table: Characteristics of Included Studies**
+
+| Study | Country | Design | Population (N) | Intervention | Comparator | Outcome(s) | Follow-up | Funding |
+|-------|---------|--------|----------------|-------------|-----------|------------|-----------|---------|
+| Author1 (Year) | [country] | [design] | [N] | [intervention] | [comparator] | [outcomes] | [duration] | [source] |
+| Author2 (Year) | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
+
+### 3.3 Risk of Bias in Studies [PRISMA Item 18]
+
+**Table: Risk of Bias Summary (Traffic-Light)**
+
+| Study | D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 | D5 | Overall |
+|-------|----|----|----|----|----|---------|
+| Author1 (Year) | [L/S/H] | [L/S/H] | [L/S/H] | [L/S/H] | [L/S/H] | [L/S/H] |
+| Author2 (Year) | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
+
+L = Low risk, S = Some concerns, H = High risk
+
+[Narrative summary of risk of bias findings across studies]
+
+### 3.4 Results of Individual Studies [PRISMA Item 19]
+
+**Table: Individual Study Results**
+
+| Study | Outcome | Effect Estimate | 95% CI | p-value | Weight |
+|-------|---------|----------------|--------|---------|--------|
+| Author1 (Year) | [outcome] | [estimate] | [lower, upper] | [p] | [%] |
+| Author2 (Year) | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
+
+### 3.5 Results of Syntheses [PRISMA Items 20a-20d]
+
+#### Primary Outcome: [Name]
+
+**20a. Study characteristics**: [Brief summary of contributing studies' characteristics and risk of bias]
+
+**20b. Pooled result**:
+- Pooled effect: [estimate] (95% CI: [lower, upper])
+- Statistical significance: Z = [value], p = [value]
+- Heterogeneity: I² = [value]% (95% CI: [lower, upper]), Q = [value] (df = [n], p = [value]), tau² = [value]
+- Prediction interval: [lower, upper]
+
+**Forest Plot**: [Insert or reference forest plot]
+
+**20c. Heterogeneity investigation**:
+- Subgroup analyses: [results]
+- Meta-regression: [results, if conducted]
+
+**20d. Sensitivity analyses**:
+1. Leave-one-out: [results — did any single study substantially change the estimate?]
+2. Excluding high-risk studies: [revised estimate]
+3. Fixed vs. random effects: [comparison]
+
+#### Secondary Outcome(s): [Name]
+
+[Repeat structure above for each secondary outcome]
+
+### 3.6 Reporting Biases [PRISMA Item 21]
+
+[Report assessments of publication bias:]
+- Funnel plot: [description of symmetry/asymmetry]
+- Statistical test: [result]
+- Trim-and-fill: [adjusted estimate, if applicable]
+- Other assessments: [protocol-outcome comparison]
+
+### 3.7 Certainty of Evidence [PRISMA Item 22]
+
+**GRADE Summary of Findings Table**
+
+| Outcome | Studies (n) | Participants (N) | Effect (95% CI) | Certainty | Rationale |
+|---------|------------|-------------------|-----------------|-----------|-----------|
+| [Outcome 1] | [n] | [N] | [estimate (CI)] | [High/Moderate/Low/Very Low] | [Reasons for up/downgrading] |
+| [Outcome 2] | [n] | [N] | [estimate (CI)] | [level] | [reasons] |
+
+---
+
+## 4. Discussion [PRISMA Item 23]
+
+### 4.1 Summary of Evidence
+
+[Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence. Address:]
+- Main findings for each outcome
+- How findings compare to previous reviews
+- Consistency of findings across studies
+
+### 4.2 Limitations
+
+**Limitations of the evidence**:
+- [e.g., risk of bias across studies, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision]
+
+**Limitations of the review process**:
+- [e.g., language restrictions, database coverage, inability to contact authors]
+
+### 4.3 Implications
+
+**For practice**:
+- [What practitioners should do based on these findings]
+
+**For research**:
+- [Gaps identified, recommended future study designs]
+
+**For policy**:
+- [Policy implications, if applicable]
+
+---
+
+## 5. Other Information
+
+### 5.1 Registration and Protocol [PRISMA Item 24]
+
+[Provide registration information and link to protocol:]
+- Registry: [e.g., PROSPERO]
+- Registration number: [number]
+- Protocol URL: [link]
+- Deviations from protocol: [describe any deviations and rationale]
+
+### 5.2 Support [PRISMA Item 25]
+
+[Describe sources of support:]
+- Financial: [funding sources and grant numbers]
+- Non-financial: [e.g., institutional support, access to databases]
+- Role of funder: [describe any role of funders in the review]
+
+### 5.3 Competing Interests [PRISMA Item 26]
+
+[Declare competing interests of all authors]
+
+### 5.4 Availability of Data and Materials [PRISMA Item 27]
+
+[Report availability of:]
+- [ ] Data extraction forms
+- [ ] Extracted data from included studies
+- [ ] Analysis code
+- [ ] List of excluded studies with reasons
+- [ ] PRISMA checklist (completed)
+
+---
+
+## Appendices
+
+### Appendix A: Full Search Strategies
+
+[Complete search strategies for all databases]
+
+### Appendix B: Excluded Studies with Reasons
+
+| Study | Reason for Exclusion |
+|-------|---------------------|
+| [citation] | [reason] |
+
+### Appendix C: PRISMA 2020 Checklist
+
+[Completed PRISMA 2020 checklist with page/section numbers for each item]
+
+| Item # | Checklist Item | Reported on Page/Section |
+|--------|---------------|-------------------------|
+| 1 | Title | [page] |
+| 2 | Abstract | [page] |
+| ... | ... | ... |
+| 27 | Availability | [page] |

package/vendor/ars/deep-research/templates/research_brief_template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
+# Research Brief Template
+
+## Purpose
+Standard output format for `quick` mode research. Concise, actionable, evidence-based.
+
+## Template
+
+```markdown
+# Research Brief
+
+**Title**: [Descriptive title in sentence case]
+**Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
+**Mode**: Quick Research Brief
+**AI Disclosure**: This brief was produced with AI-assisted research tools. All findings are verified against cited sources.
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+[100-150 words. State the question, key findings, and main implication.]
+
+---
+
+## Background & Research Question
+
+### Context
+[2-3 paragraphs providing necessary background for the reader.]
+
+### Research Question
+> [The refined research question, as a single clear sentence.]
+
+### Scope
+- **In scope**: [what this brief covers]
+- **Out of scope**: [what this brief does not cover]
+
+---
+
+## Key Findings
+
+### Finding 1: [Title]
+[2-3 sentences with citation(s)]
+
+**Evidence strength**: [Strong / Moderate / Emerging]
+**Source(s)**: [Brief citation]
+
+### Finding 2: [Title]
+[2-3 sentences with citation(s)]
+
+**Evidence strength**: [Strong / Moderate / Emerging]
+**Source(s)**: [Brief citation]
+
+### Finding 3: [Title]
+[2-3 sentences with citation(s)]
+
+**Evidence strength**: [Strong / Moderate / Emerging]
+**Source(s)**: [Brief citation]
+
+[Add more findings as needed, typically 3-5]
+
+---
+
+## Analysis & Implications
+
+### What This Means
+[2-3 paragraphs interpreting the findings. Connect evidence to practical implications.]
+
+### Recommendations
+1. [Actionable recommendation with evidence basis]
+2. [Actionable recommendation with evidence basis]
+3. [Actionable recommendation with evidence basis]
+
+---
+
+## Limitations
+- [Limitation 1: e.g., search scope, time constraints]
+- [Limitation 2: e.g., evidence gaps]
+- [Limitation 3: e.g., AI-assisted analysis limitations]
+
+---
+
+## References
+[APA 7.0 format, 5-10 references typical for quick mode]
+
+1. [Reference 1]
+2. [Reference 2]
+...
+```
+
+## Usage Notes
+- Target length: 500-1,500 words
+- Minimum 5 cited sources
+- Every finding must have at least one citation
+- Evidence strength ratings should align with source quality hierarchy
+- Keep language accessible — this is a brief, not a journal article

package/vendor/ars/package.json

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+{
+  "name": "academic-research-skills",
+  "private": true,
+  "description": "Academic research workflow skills with Claude Code and Pi adapters",
+  "keywords": [
+    "pi-package",
+    "academic-research"
+  ],
+  "license": "CC-BY-NC-4.0",
+  "pi": {
+    "extensions": [
+      "./pi/wrapper.js"
+    ],
+    "skills": [
+      "./deep-research",
+      "./academic-paper",
+      "./academic-paper-reviewer",
+      "./academic-pipeline"
+    ],
+    "prompts": [
+      "./commands"
+    ]
+  }
+}

package/vendor/ars/pi/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,161 @@
+# Pi wrapper
+
+Thin, community-maintained compatibility wrapper for running the original Claude Code Academic Research Skills (ARS) in [Pi](https://pi.dev/).
+
+The wrapper does not copy or modify ARS skill, agent, reference, schema, script, or command content. Pi loads the four original `SKILL.md` trees and exposes the original `commands/ars-*.md` files as prompt templates. A small input adapter reads the selected original command at invocation time and preserves trailing user arguments.
+
+## Load-bearing runtime differences from Claude Code
+
+These differences affect how ARS evidence should be interpreted:
+
+1. **The wrapper does not provide agent isolation or orchestration.** If the Pi setup has no matching subagent, workflow, or parallel-agent capability, ARS specialist roles run sequentially in the current context. That is degraded execution and must be disclosed; it is not independent multi-agent review.
+2. **Claude hooks do not run in Pi.** In particular, ARS write-scope enforcement remains prompt-level unless the user's Pi environment supplies a separate enforcement mechanism. Do not represent the Claude `PreToolUse` hook boundary as active.
+
+Run `/ars-pi-doctor` to inspect the current environment. The curated [degraded-mode end-to-end evidence](../examples/pi/README.md) shows both boundaries in a completed run.
+
+## Requirements
+
+- Pi with package support (`pi install` / `pi -e`)
+- The complete repository package, loaded from GitHub or from a local checkout; `pi/` is only a wrapper around its parent files and cannot be copied by itself
+- Optional capabilities depend on the user's Pi setup:
+  - a subagent, workflow, or parallel-agent skill/tool for true multi-agent execution
+  - a web-search or page-retrieval skill/tool for literature search and verification
+  - Python, Pandoc, and tectonic for the optional ARS features that already require them
+
+There are no required Pi orchestration or web-search dependencies. When a capability is unavailable, the wrapper tells Pi to use an installed equivalent or disclose degraded execution instead of pretending the operation ran.
+
+## Try without installing
+
+Load the package temporarily from GitHub for the current Pi run:
+
+```bash
+pi -e git:github.com/Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
+```
+
+To try a local checkout instead, clone the repository first:
+
+```bash
+git clone https://github.com/Imbad0202/academic-research-skills.git
+cd academic-research-skills
+pi -e ./pi
+```
+
+Then inspect optional capabilities and try a mode:
+
+```text
+/ars-pi-doctor
+/ars-plan
+/ars-lit-review AI-assisted systematic reviews
+/ars-reviewer
+/ars-full
+```
+
+The original skills are also directly available:
+
+```text
+/skill:deep-research
+/skill:academic-paper
+/skill:academic-paper-reviewer
+/skill:academic-pipeline
+```
+
+For automatic ARS skill selection from subsequent natural-language prompts, explicitly enable ARS mode first:
+
+```text
+/ars-pi-start
+```
+
+## Install from GitHub
+
+Pi can install the canonical repository directly because the root `package.json` points to this wrapper and the original ARS resources:
+
+```bash
+pi install git:github.com/Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
+```
+
+Pin a branch, tag, or commit that contains the Pi wrapper when needed:
+
+```bash
+pi install git:github.com/Imbad0202/academic-research-skills@REF
+```
+
+Update installed Git packages with `pi update --extensions`. Remove this package with:
+
+```bash
+pi remove git:github.com/Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
+```
+
+## Install from this checkout
+
+Keep the checkout at a stable path, then run from the repository root:
+
+```bash
+pi install .
+```
+
+The nested manifest also supports local installation from the wrapper directory:
+
+```bash
+pi install ./pi
+```
+
+Pi stores a local path rather than copying the repository. Update ARS with normal Git operations; the wrapper continues to load the original files.
+
+If an optional sandbox restricts reads to the current working directory, allow read access to the repository checkout or run Pi from the repository root. Supporting files are intentionally not copied into the wrapper.
+
+Remove using the same source form used during installation:
+
+```bash
+pi remove .
+# or: pi remove ./pi
+```
+
+## Capability doctor
+
+`/ars-pi-doctor` runs without an LLM call. It reports discovered orchestration and web-retrieval capabilities plus Python, PyYAML, Pandoc, tectonic, sandbox, and Claude-hook status. Missing optional dependencies remain the user's choice; the wrapper does not install them.
+
+## System-prompt scope
+
+For prompts submitted while Pi is idle, installing the package does not add ARS text to ordinary Pi prompts. While ARS mode is inactive, the wrapper removes only this package's four ARS skill entries from the newly started run's system prompt, preventing automatic model invocation without modifying the original `SKILL.md` files.
+
+When Pi is idle, an `/ars-*` command or one of the four direct `/skill:*` entries above activates ARS mode before the new agent run starts, so that request receives both the original skill and the compatibility note. `/ars-pi-start` explicitly enables ARS mode and automatic skill selection for subsequent natural-language prompts. The state survives resuming the same session, follows the selected branch during `/tree` navigation, and resets in a new session. `/ars-pi-doctor` does not activate it.
+
+Pi 0.83.0 does not rebuild the system prompt when a prompt is queued into an agent run that is already streaming. A mid-stream `/ars-*` or direct `/skill:*` prompt can therefore execute under that run's existing system prompt without the wrapper-injected compatibility note; similarly, `/ars-pi-stop` changes the persisted mode immediately but cannot remove ARS text from the in-flight run. The RPC `steer` and `follow_up` methods also bypass Pi's `input` event, so a direct ARS `/skill:*` sent through either method does not activate the wrapper. To receive the scoped system-prompt guarantee, wait for Pi to become idle and submit the request through the normal interactive or RPC `prompt` path.
+
+To hide the ARS skills again and continue unrelated work without the compatibility note, run:
+
+```text
+/ars-pi-stop
+```
+
+## Wrapper regression test
+
+```bash
+node --test pi/wrapper.test.mjs
+```
+
+The test covers idle-prompt skill hiding through canonical and symlink-spelled load paths, XML-escaped locations, preservation of missing and adjacent unrelated skills across alternate block formatting, same-request `/ars-*` and direct `/skill:*` activation while idle, manual start/stop toggling, `/tree` state restoration, argument-safe script-path rewriting, and single-pass argument-placeholder substitution.
+
+## What the wrapper translates
+
+The wrapper reads `/ars-*` invocations from the original Claude command files, strips their frontmatter, appends trailing arguments when the command has no argument placeholder, converts executable `python scripts/...` paths to checkout-absolute paths, and expands the original target `SKILL.md` through Pi's native `/skill:*` mechanism. While ARS is active in the session, it also adds a short compatibility note to Pi's system prompt:
+
+- repository-root ARS paths resolve against this checkout
+- Claude tool names mean “use the equivalent available Pi capability”
+- multi-agent work searches available tools and configured Pi skill locations for an installed orchestration capability, otherwise it uses sequential execution with a disclosure
+- `WebSearch`, `WebFetch`, and `/websearch` search available tools and configured Pi skill locations for an installed web capability; no capability means no verification claim
+- Claude-specific command model hints are ignored, so the active Pi model is inherited
+
+The `pi/package.json` manifest performs the remaining mapping directly:
+
+| Claude distribution resource | Pi resource |
+| --- | --- |
+| four original skill directories | four Pi skills |
+| `commands/ars-*.md` | `/ars-*` Pi prompt templates with argument-preserving native skill expansion and absolute utility-script paths |
+| Claude tool/runtime assumptions | short capability-based compatibility note |
+
+## Scope
+
+This is intentionally a basic wrapper, not a reimplementation of Claude Code or ARS orchestration. The original ARS content remains authoritative and unmodified.
+
+The project license remains CC BY-NC 4.0. Attribution and noncommercial restrictions apply.