raga-cli 0.0.0-stage → 0.8.0

package/bundled-skills/skills/peak/references/architect/references/design-red-flags.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+# Design red flags
+
+Screen every candidate before synthesis. A red flag is a reason to revise or reject the shape.
+
+## Shallow module
+
+A shallow module exposes a large interface while hiding little complexity. Judge depth by the capability and policy hidden behind the public surface relative to the size of that surface. Prefer a simple interface backed by substantial behavior.
+
+Do not confuse a deep module with a deep call chain. A deep call chain scatters understanding across layers. A deep module concentrates capability behind one interface.
+
+Look for these signs:
+
+- Callers coordinate several methods to complete one operation.
+- Public options expose internal stages or implementation choices.
+- Learning the interface does not save the caller from learning the implementation.
+
+## Information leakage
+
+Information leakage makes multiple modules depend on the same internal decision. A representation, policy, or protocol detail appears in more than one place, so changing it requires coordinated edits.
+
+Public re-exports of transport or wire types are leakage. Parse external data into domain types behind the interface. Keep storage schemas, framework objects, and protocol details private.
+
+## Temporal decomposition
+
+Temporal decomposition organizes modules by execution order instead of the knowledge they own. Separate load, validate, transform, and save stages often repeat one representation and its invariants across several boundaries.
+
+Group code around domain knowledge and ownership. Methods that run at different times can still belong to one module when they protect the same decisions.
+
+## Pass-through method
+
+A pass-through method forwards the same arguments to another method with the same shape. It adds a layer without hiding complexity.
+
+Remove it or move responsibility to the module that can complete the operation. Keep a forwarding boundary only when it adds policy, adaptation, or a distinct abstraction.
+
+## Split ownership
+
+More than one module writes the same state or keeps its own copy of it. An agent that edits one writer can't see the others, so their rules diverge.
+
+Give each piece of state one owner. Other modules read it or ask the owner to change it.
+
+## Two ways to do one task
+
+The design supports more than one way to do the same task. An agent copies whichever way it finds first, so every way keeps gaining callers.
+
+Keep one way. Move callers off the others and delete them in the same change.
+
+## Importable internals
+
+A caller can import a module's internals. An agent takes the shortest path that compiles, so it imports them directly and they become part of the interface.
+
+Make internals unreachable from outside the module, so an import from outside fails the build.
+
+## Hand-synced list
+
+Two or more places list the same items, and adding an item means editing every list. An agent that sees one list updates only that one.
+
+Keep one list and derive the others from it. If a list can't be derived, make the build fail when the lists disagree.

package/bundled-skills/skills/peak/references/architect/references/rationale-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+# Rationale template
+
+The prose that ships alongside the type sketch. One page. Sentence-case headings, no boilerplate. Replace the italic notes with actual content.
+
+## Problem
+
+*One paragraph. What we're trying to do, and what about the existing system or constraints makes the shape non-obvious. If [Phase A](../SKILL.md#phase-a-ground-the-problem) surfaced constraints the design must honor (existing types to interop with, callers we can't break, invariants that crossed our boundary), name them here so the reader sees the same constraints you saw.*
+
+## Usage (caller's view)
+
+*Write this first, before the type sketch. Show the README or quickstart the consumer reads, plus two or three realistic call sites in their own code. What they import, what they call, what comes back. The type sketch in [Shape](#shape) is derived from this. The two must agree. When they diverge, reconcile the sketch to the usage, not the reverse. The caller's experience is the spec. The types serve it.*
+
+## Shape
+
+*The recommended architecture. Data structures first. Then how data flows through the signatures. Name the load-bearing decisions. State which invariants are encoded in types, where validation lives, and what the system deliberately does not do. Judge interface depth explicitly. State what complexity the public surface hides, what remains exposed to callers, and why the interface is no larger than needed. Cite the principle behind each decision (e.g., `per boundary-discipline`). Don't restate it.*
+
+## Synthesis decision
+
+*Filled in by [arena](../../arena/SKILL.md). Records which candidate became the base and why, what was adapted from each of the others, and what was rejected and why.*
+
+## Tradeoffs accepted
+
+*One bullet per tradeoff the chosen shape makes. Form: "we accept X in exchange for Y." Name anything a future reader might mistake for an oversight, including things that look like premature optimization or premature simplification.*
+
+## Alternatives considered
+
+*Required. Name at least one concrete alternative shape, with one line on why it lost. Judge each alternative on interface depth, not implementation simplicity alone. Name the complexity it exposes to callers and the complexity it hides. Two or three alternatives belong here when the design space had real contenders. One is fine when the constraints forced the answer, with the conclusion phrased as "this was the only viable shape because..." Avoid listing flavors of the same shape. This section covers design alternatives the chosen shape considered and rejected, not other runner candidates.*
+
+## Open questions and risks
+
+*Things you noticed during the sketch that the human needs to weigh in on, and risks worth flagging before implementation starts. Phrase as questions, not assertions, so the human's answer is the resolution rather than a comment.*
+
+## Next implementation step
+
+*The first thing to build against the sketch. One sentence. What you'd start writing immediately after synthesis (or after Phase D sign-off, if a checkpoint was opted into).*

package/bundled-skills/skills/peak/references/architect/references/runner-prompt.md

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+# Architect runner prompt
+
+The orchestrator passes this file through to every parallel candidate runner during Phase B and fills in the variable inputs around it: the task, the Phase A grounding artifacts, the isolated working directory, and the path to write outputs. The working directory is a git worktree when available, otherwise a per-runner subdirectory under the sketch dir. What matters is independence between candidates.
+
+You are producing one candidate design in architect's parallel exploration. Read the **architect** skill in full first. That's the workflow you're inside. Output a candidate design package: type sketch, function signatures, module map, and prose rationale shaped per [`rationale-template.md`](rationale-template.md).
+
+Apply the following discipline. The orchestrator compares candidates on these axes to pick a base.
+
+- Caller's usage first. Write the README-style usage and two or three real call sites before the types, then derive the type sketch from them. The usage is the spec. The two must agree, so reconcile the sketch to the usage, not the reverse.
+- Data structures first. Get the core types right and the code becomes obvious. Trace each dominant access pattern through the proposed structure. If the answer is "we'll add a map / index / cache later," the structure is wrong.
+- Interface depth. Compare the capability hidden behind the public surface relative to the size of that surface. Prefer a simple interface that pulls complexity into the callee, even when the implementation becomes less simple. Do not put transport or wire types on the public API. Parse into domain types behind the interface.
+- Shared state: if two actors might both write, ask "what happens?" If the answer isn't "nothing," default to per-actor state with a merge at the read boundary, per the **separate-before-serializing-shared-state** principle skill.
+- Make boundaries visible. `not implemented` errors for bodies, `// TODO` pseudocode for tricky logic, doc comments stating intent and invariants. A reader should trace data from input to output by reading types and signatures alone.
+- Encode invariants in types: hard-to-misuse types > runtime checks > prose comments, per the **encode-lessons-in-structure** principle skill.
+- Validate at boundaries, trust types inside, per the **boundary-discipline** principle skill. Business logic as pure functions. The shell stays thin.
+- Single source of truth per invariant. Derive instead of sync.
+- Idempotent state transitions where applicable, per the **make-operations-idempotent** principle skill. Ask what happens if the operation runs twice or crashes halfway.
+- Short call chains. If tracing the flow needs more than three files, flatten the hierarchy, per the **laziness-protocol** and **minimize-reader-load** principle skills.
+
+You are one of the parallel runners, each on a different model. Produce the best design your model can make. Don't hedge against the others. Differences between candidates are the signal used to pick a base and graft. Converging on a safe-looking middle defeats the exploration.

package/bundled-skills/skills/peak/references/arena/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+---
+name: arena
+description: "Spawn N parallel candidates at the same task, pick a base, graft the strongest parts of the losers into it. Use for /arena, 'arena this', 'throw it in the arena', or when one attempt at a non-trivial artifact would lock in the wrong shape."
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+Read [the native Python adapter](../raga-runtime/SKILL.md) before executing this workflow. Authoring targets candidate revisions. Children use run_child, not an external agent service.
+
+# Arena
+
+Open a todolist with one entry per phase (Frame, Fan out, Cross-judge, Pick, Graft, Verify) before launching anything.
+
+## Phase A: Frame
+
+Every candidate gets the same prompt, so the prompt is the contract.
+
+1. State the artifact each candidate is producing.
+2. Derive the rubric, 3-6 concrete gradeable criteria for what success looks like on *this* task. It is the picker's tool in Phase D. Candidates only see the task.
+3. Pick the runners. Use the `arena runners` line in `agents/model-roles.json`. If no role is configured, inherit the parent model and report that the seats are not model-diverse. An `auto` or `inherit-parent` entry in this line or the cross-judge line means the parent model, so omit `model` for it. If a configured model is rejected, report the unavailable selector and stop that seat. Compare actual configured provider/model families, not editor aliases. Report an unavailable configured selector instead of replacing it. An unconfigured role inherits the parent model. An unavailable model is a prerequisite failure. Spawn more runners when the arena covers multiple design directions. Use the same model N times when the work is generation-bound rather than judgment-sensitive. Pick each subagent's reasoning level and fast or standard speed for the job, per the Subagents section of the **peak** skill.
+4. Give each candidate its own output location (a supervisor-owned child workspace for code, or an independent returned artifact for a read-only design), per the **separate-before-serializing-shared-state** principle skill.
+
+## Phase B: Fan out
+
+Spawn all N subagents in one message with `asyncio.gather for independent child calls`, each with the task, the path to the shared grounding, its own output path, and instructions to produce the artifact and a short rationale naming the alternatives it considered and what it rejected.
+
+If a candidate produces no output, proceed with N-1 and note the dropout.
+
+## Phase C: Cross-judge
+
+After all Phase B candidates complete, choose one model from the `arena cross-judge pool` line in `agents/model-roles.json`. If the rule or that line is missing, choose from `None` and `None`. Prefer a different model family from the parent's. Spawn one readonly judge subagent on that model. It sees the rubric and the candidates by path label, scores each criterion, and recommends a base with rationale. It runs in parallel with your reading in Phase D. Don't spawn it while candidates are still writing.
+
+## Phase D: Pick a base
+
+Read every candidate end to end before picking. Score each against the rubric criterion by criterion, not on holistic feel, and compare with the cross-judge. Agreement on the base confirms the pick. Disagreement means one of you is biased or the rubric was ambiguous. Read both rationales before deciding.
+
+Pick the base a future maintainer can extend most easily without breaking invariants. When two feel tied, prefer the cleaner boundary or smaller API, per the Laziness Protocol.
+
+## Phase E: Graft
+
+Walk each losing candidate once more for what is worth porting into the base, usually one or two things per candidate, not most of it. Fold each graft in by hand, per the **redesign-from-first-principles** principle skill, so the result stays coherent under one mental model. Don't paste mechanically.
+
+If the candidates converge on one shape, that is strong agreement. Note it and ship the consensus shape. No graft is needed. If they wildly diverge, Phase A was under-specified. Reframe and re-run rather than averaging the divergence.
+
+## Phase F: Verify
+
+Verify the synthesized artifact like any other output, per the **prove-it-works** principle skill. If verification finds a problem the arena missed, either Phase A was wrong (re-frame and re-run) or a candidate caught it and you missed the graft (go back to Phase E). Don't paper over it.
+
+## Outputs
+
+One synthesized artifact, with a short synthesis note alongside naming the base and why, the cross-judge's verdict, each graft with its source candidate, what was rejected and why, any convergence or dropouts, and the verification result.

package/bundled-skills/skills/peak/references/automate-me/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
+---
+name: automate-me
+description: "Use for \"automate me\", \"create/update/refresh my -mode skill\", \"turn/capture my preferences or working style into a skill\", or wanting agents to follow how the user works. Drafts or revises a personal -mode skill via create-skill + unslop, optionally pulling fresh evidence from recent transcripts."
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+Read [the native Python adapter](../raga-runtime/SKILL.md) before executing this workflow. Authoring targets candidate revisions. Children use run_child, not an external agent service.
+
+# Automate me
+
+A guided flow for turning the user's working conventions into a skill agents will follow. The output is one `-mode` skill tailored to them (e.g. `jay-mode`, `priya-mode`).
+
+This skill orchestrates three others: an inline mining pass (see step 1), the bundled `create-skill` skill (authoring), and the **unslop** skill (prose discipline). It sequences them. It doesn't replace them.
+
+## Flow
+
+### 0. Check for an existing skill
+
+Look recursively for `skills/**/*-mode/SKILL.md` and `skills/*-mode/SKILL.md` matching the user's handle. Mode skills can live in a personal category directory (`skills/<handle>/`), not only at the top level. If one exists, confirm intent with `ask the user in the final response` (unless they already said "update my skill" or similar):
+
+- Update the existing skill (default for repeat runs)
+- Start fresh (rare, ask why before doing it)
+
+Update mode changes the rest of the flow:
+- Step 1 mines only history since the skill was last edited (`git log -1 --format=%cI <path>`).
+- Step 2 asks what's changed or missing, not what to capture from zero.
+- Step 4 edits only the supervisor-created candidate. Preserve sections the user hasn't contradicted. Revise ones with new evidence. Add new sections only for genuinely new rules.
+
+### 1. Mine their history
+
+Locate the active workspace's transcripts before fanning out. Use await context.history() for this session. For previous work, use await memory.search(query), then await memory.get(id). Only mine earlier transcripts explicitly supplied by the supervisor.
+
+Survey recent agent conversations within that scope for recurring patterns. Run multiple parallel subagents across slices of history (e.g. last 2-4 weeks, split into 3 slices so each has enough material). Pick each subagent's reasoning level and fast or standard speed for the job, per the Subagents section of the **peak** skill. Each slice mining subagent reads transcripts from the workspace-scoped path the parent provides, looks for the signals below, and returns a short structured list of patterns it saw with evidence pointers. Default signals worth hunting:
+
+- Response preferences (length, tone, format, "dumb it down" corrections)
+- Delegation habits (subagents, models, specialized workflows, parallelism)
+- Verification posture (what "done" means, unit tests vs live repro, reviewers)
+- Code and prose discipline (style, principles cited, lint/format tools)
+- Process conventions (worktrees, commits, PRs, review/merge tooling)
+- Meta preferences (fixing skills mid-task, proposing new ones)
+
+Cross-check across slices before elevating a signal. Patterns seen in 2+ slices are high-confidence. Lone signals are weak and usually get dropped.
+
+### 2. Ask the user directly
+
+Mining misses intent that hasn't come up yet. Ask a plain-language question in the final response. There is no structured question tool.
+
+Ask one or two questions in ordinary language. The user can answer with their own words and select more than one category.
+
+Don't dump 20 questions.
+
+### 3. Cluster findings
+
+Group the combined signals into sections. Common ones (use only what applies):
+
+- **Response style**: length, tone, format.
+- **Autonomy**: how much to do without asking, MCP tool use.
+- **Understand first**: which skills to reach for when scoping or investigating a change.
+- **Subagents**: default, parallelism, model-to-task, specialized workflows.
+- **Prose / code discipline**: principles, lint tools, style guides.
+- **Review and verify**: repro posture, verification skills, live-testing tools.
+- **Process**: git worktrees, commits, PRs, review/merge tooling.
+- **Skills**: skill-authoring habits, fix-the-skill-first, proposing new skills.
+
+The **peak** skill shows the shape. Read it for granularity. Don't copy its content. The user's rules are not the same as peak's.
+
+### 4. Draft the skill
+
+Use the bundled `create-skill` skill skill to author the skill. Placement:
+
+- Path: preserve an existing mode skill's category. For a new mode, use `skills/<handle>/<handle>-mode/SKILL.md` when the repo has an established personal category for that handle. Otherwise default to `skills/<handle>-mode/SKILL.md` in the project (or `skills/<handle>-mode/` if the user prefers a personal skill).
+- Handle: the user's first name or chosen identifier.
+- Frontmatter `description`: trigger on their name + `/<handle>-mode` + "work in their style", not on generic keywords like "write code" or "review PR".
+- Frontmatter formatting: follow `create-skill`'s YAML rules. Keep `description` as one YAML scalar. Quote it or use `description: >-` with indented continuation lines when punctuation or wrapping requires it.
+- Frontmatter `disable-model-invocation: true` by default. Opt out only if the user explicitly wants their mode to apply on every turn.
+
+### 5. Iterate on prose
+
+Apply the **unslop** skill and `create-skill`'s writing guidelines to every line.
+
+Show the draft to the user and take feedback. Expect multiple iterations. Cut ruthlessly. A mode skill is not a manual.
+
+### 6. Land it
+
+Write the skill through instance.candidate_write and commit through instance.candidate_commit. Return the candidate and evidence for explicit operator promotion. Do not open an application PR for an instance-only proposal.
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- **Don't overfit to one conversation.** A preference stated once and contradicted another time is noise. Require multiple instances before codifying it.
+- **Don't be clever.** Restating other skills' contents, inventing metaphors, or writing "poetic" prose for an agent reader is cost without benefit. Keep it operational.
+- **Reference, don't inline.** Other skills the user relies on should appear as path references, not pasted excerpts. Same for any principle docs they maintain elsewhere.
+- **Keep sections minimal.** Only add a section if the user has a specific, non-default rule there. "Communicate clearly" is not a section. "Short paragraphs. Tables when comparing options. Bullets only when items are genuinely parallel." is.
+- **Name conventions generic.** Use "the user" or "the human" in imperatives, not the author's first name.
+- **Don't force symmetry.** If a user has no process rules worth writing down, skip the Process section entirely.
+
+## Evaluation
+
+A `-mode` skill is subjective output. A `create-skill`-style test/iterate benchmark loop isn't useful here. Vibe-check with the user: does it read like them? Did it miss anything? Then ship.
+
+Run a description-optimization loop only if the skill's trigger accuracy turns out to be a problem in practice.
+
+## When not to use
+
+- User wants a task-specific skill (not working conventions): `create-skill` alone, no mining required.
+- User wants to capture one narrow workflow (e.g. "how I write commit messages"). That's a regular skill, not a mode skill.
+

package/bundled-skills/skills/peak/references/benchmark-checklist/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+---
+name: benchmark-checklist
+description: "Vet a perf measurement (limiter, tuning, limits, errors, repeatability, relevance, and whether the work happened) before you report or act on it. Use when you run a benchmark or report a speedup or regression you measured."
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+Read [the native Python adapter](../raga-runtime/SKILL.md) before executing this workflow. Authoring targets candidate revisions. Children use run_child, not an external agent service.
+
+# Benchmark checklist
+
+Use this when you produce a performance number: a PR's before and after, a regression claim, a hillclimb harness, or a library or config choice. Answer each question with evidence from a run, not a guess about the code.
+
+For a quick ballpark the user asked for, one run is enough. Still check questions 4 and 7, and say that it is one run. Skip the rest unless that run looks wrong. A choice between options is never a ballpark.
+
+## Before you run anything
+
+- Write down the claim you expect to make, in the words you would ship ("export is 30% faster at p50 on the 60k-row dataset"). The questions test that sentence.
+- Read the measurement script. Note what it times, counts, and ignores.
+- Check the load average with `uptime` and the core count with `nproc`. If the machine is busy, find out what is running. If you cannot stop it, interleave the sides so both see the same noise, and say so in the report.
+
+## The questions
+
+1. **Why not double?** Name the limiter. Profile in a run you do not report, because profilers and tracers slow the work down. Use CPU per process (`top`, `pidstat`), a runtime profiler (`node --cpu-prof`, `py-spy`, `perf`), I/O wait, and syscall counts (`strace -c` on Linux), then map the hot spot to source. Watch the load generator too: if it saturates first, you measured the load generator. If a change did not move the number, the limiter explains why, so find it before you call the change useless.
+2. **Was it tuned?** Run every side the way production runs it: release builds, production flags and env, batching and transaction settings, connection pools, caches as warm or cold as production sees them, and the same versions and data. If one side runs on defaults, you compared configurations, not implementations. A limiter that is a setting (a commit per row, a debug build, a missing index) means that side is untuned. Tune it and measure again before you pick a winner. If you cannot tune it, do not pick a winner from that run. When the user is choosing what to adopt, narrowing the claim to the code as it ships today does not fix this, because they adopt the option, not today's settings.
+3. **Did it break limits?** Do the arithmetic. Compare bytes per second with disk and network bandwidth, operations per second times cost per operation with your cores, and the time saved with the time the changed piece took. Removing a piece that takes 10% of the run can make the run at most about 11% faster. A result past a limit measured something other than the work, such as a cache, a no-op, or a bug.
+4. **Did it error?** Count failures and non-success responses, and check that outputs are correct, not just present. Rejections are often fast, and timeouts and retries are slow. If the script does not count errors, add the count.
+5. **Does it reproduce?** Run each side at least 5 times, alternating (A, B, A, B, and so on) so warmup, lazy initialization, caches, and drift favor neither. Report the median and range. A gap smaller than the run-to-run variation is no measurable difference. When the call is close, use a rank-sum test or the harness's own statistics.
+6. **Does it matter?** Next to any micro result, measure the end-to-end path a user waits on, with realistic data sizes and concurrency, and report the micro result as a share of the whole. A helper that takes 1% of a request can make the request at most 1% faster, however fast the helper gets.
+7. **Did it even happen?** Confirm the work ran inside the timed region: the request reached the server, the rows were written, the bytes were read, and the code used the result. Lazy code (generators nobody iterates, promises nobody awaits, results the JIT can discard) and timeouts produce numbers for work that never happened.
+
+## Report
+
+- Lead with the verdict: faster, slower, no measurable difference, or inconclusive.
+- Give the number with its unit, the run count, the range, and the limiter. For example, "p50 41 ms → 33 ms, median of 7 runs per side, range 32 to 35 ms after, bound by JSON parsing on one core."
+- Call the verdict inconclusive when you claim a difference but cannot name the limiter, when a side ran untuned, or when you could not check questions 4 and 7. Name the gap.
+- Keep a PR body to one primary number, per the **Opening a PR** playbook. Put the runs, range, and limiter evidence in a linked artifact or notes file.
+
+## Other perf material
+
+- Vet the **Perf issue** playbook's baseline before the playbook plans from it, and every number after that.
+- Vet the **Hillclimb** playbook's harness before it is frozen. The frozen harness then prints error and work counts, so each keep-or-revert checks questions 4 and 7 for free.

package/bundled-skills/skills/peak/references/blast-radius/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+---
+name: blast-radius
+description: "Find what a change could break somewhere else before it ships, beyond the diff, and prove the one fact it's safe because of by running real code instead of writing it up. Use for 'blast radius of X', 'what could this break', or reviewing a small diff you don't trust."
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+Read [the native Python adapter](../raga-runtime/SKILL.md) before executing this workflow. Authoring targets candidate revisions. Children use run_child, not an external agent service.
+
+# Blast radius
+
+Find what a change breaks somewhere else, before it ships. Use for "blast radius of X", "what could this break", or reviewing a small diff you don't trust yet.
+
+Companion to `how` and `why`. `how` tells you what the code does. `why` tells you why it's shaped that way. Blast radius tells you what it breaks somewhere else.
+
+Listing the callers is not the job. The agent can grep those in a second. The job is the breakage grep won't show you.
+
+## Don't trust your own writeup
+
+A blast-radius writeup that sounds right is worthless. It reads as convincing whether or not it's true. So don't hand back the writeup. Find the one or two facts the whole thing depends on and prove them by running code.
+
+### How sure are you
+
+For each fact the change's safety depends on, get it as far down this list as is cheap, and say where it stopped.
+
+1. You said so. Worthless on its own.
+2. You pointed at the line. A real `file:line`, or the library's own source.
+3. You showed the bad case can't happen. You walked the failure step by step and it doesn't reach.
+4. You ran it. A script or test that calls the real code and fails loud if you're wrong.
+5. You reproduced it in the running app.
+
+Step 4 is usually one small script that imports the same library the app ships and calls the exact function you're worried about.
+
+## Steps
+
+1. Read the change. The diff, the symbols it adds, changes, and deletes, and what it now does differently, including the part the diff doesn't spell out. Use `why` step 2 to pull the PR and commits.
+2. Find the one fact it's safe because of. Most changes that look risky are safe because of a single fact, like "this call only drops already-dead cache entries and does nothing else". Find that fact. If it holds, most risky cases are cleared at once. Spend your time here, not on a long list of maybes.
+3. Look where grep stops. Read the source of the library you call, and check its pinned version and any local patch. Work out when things run: microtasks, unmount and teardown, Solid versus React. Follow what a symbol search misses: the JSON an API returns, a DB column, a wire format, another language reading the same bytes, a feature flag, code three hops downstream.
+4. Be honest about each risk. Give it a real chance of happening and a real cost if it does. Keep the risks you confirmed. List the ones you checked and cleared separately. Same rules as `why`. Cite a real `file:line`, a search that finds nothing is still an answer, and never make up a caller or an API.
+5. Prove the one fact. Write a script or test that runs the real code, run it, and paste what happened.
+6. For a big or wide change, run it as an `arena`. Ask more than one model the same question and merge the answers. Different models catch different real bugs.
+
+## What to hand back
+
+- **What it does.** What changed, including the part that isn't obvious.
+- **The one fact it's safe because of.** State it, say which step you got it to, and show the proof. If you couldn't prove it, write unproven.
+- **Risks.** Each names how it breaks, the `file:line`, how likely and how bad, and how to check. Paste the proof for the ones that matter.
+- **Cleared.** What you checked and why it's fine.
+- **Before you merge.** The cheapest test or repro that catches the real bug, including the script you wrote.
+
+Write it through `unslop`, cite real code, and strip anything private before it goes anywhere public.
+
+**Reply:** the writeup above, with the one safety fact either proven or marked unproven.

package/bundled-skills/skills/peak/references/bro/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+---
+name: bro
+description: Restate the last message in plain human language, with no jargon.
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+Read [the native Python adapter](../raga-runtime/SKILL.md) before executing this workflow. Authoring targets candidate revisions. Children use run_child, not an external agent service.
+
+Restate your last message. Stop using jargon and speak coherently. State it more simply and concisely, like one human talking to another.

package/bundled-skills/skills/peak/references/control-cli/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
+---
+name: control-cli
+description: Build or adapt a local harness to drive, inspect, and profile an interactive CLI or TUI without external services. Use for CLI UX checks, startup regressions, memory leaks, hangs, prompt flows, or terminal demos.
+---
+
+Read [the native Python adapter](../raga-runtime/SKILL.md) before executing this workflow. Authoring targets candidate revisions. Children use run_child, not an external agent service.
+
+# Control CLI
+
+Use a repeatable local harness to exercise an interactive CLI instead of poking at it manually. First reuse the repo's own test/demo harness if it exists; otherwise assemble a temporary harness from standard local tools.
+
+## What It Is Used For
+
+- Reproducing CLI/TUI bugs with deterministic input.
+- Verifying keyboard flows, prompts, interrupts, resize behavior, and terminal layout.
+- Capturing before/after transcripts for bug fixes.
+- Profiling startup time, slow operations, hangs, or memory growth.
+- Recording a short terminal demo when output is easier to show than explain.
+
+## Harness Loop
+
+1. Identify the command under test and the smallest reproducible workspace.
+2. Discover existing local harnesses: package scripts, e2e tests, demo recorders, expect scripts, or PTY helpers.
+3. If no harness exists, launch the CLI in an isolated terminal session with deterministic env vars.
+4. Capture the current screen before interacting.
+5. Send one action at a time: text, Enter, arrows, Escape, Ctrl-C, resize.
+6. Wait for a concrete screen pattern or prompt before the next action.
+7. Save the transcript and any profile artifacts.
+8. Kill the session cleanly.
+
+## Harness Options
+
+- Repo-native harness: prefer checked-in scripts because they know the app's startup, env, and prompts.
+- `tmux`: managed sessions, `capture-pane`, `send-keys`, attach/detach.
+- PTY probe: use a short Python, Node, or Expect script when tmux is unavailable.
+- Runtime inspector: use Node or Bun inspector for CPU profiles, heap snapshots, and live evaluation.
+- Terminal recorder: use repo-local demo tools or asciinema-compatible tools when the user asks for a demo.
+
+## Minimal tmux Harness
+
+```bash
+SESSION="cli-harness-$(date +%s)"
+tmux new-session -d -s "$SESSION" -- <command-under-test>
+tmux capture-pane -pt "$SESSION"
+tmux send-keys -t "$SESSION" "help" Enter
+tmux capture-pane -pt "$SESSION"
+tmux kill-session -t "$SESSION"
+```
+
+For Node CLIs:
+
+```bash
+NODE_OPTIONS="--inspect=127.0.0.1:0" tmux new-session -d -s "$SESSION" -- <node-cli-command>
+```
+
+Read the terminal output to find the inspector URL, then use Chrome DevTools-compatible tooling if profiling is needed.
+
+## Minimal PTY Harness
+
+Use a PTY script when you need deterministic waits in a repo that does not have tmux or a demo harness. Keep it temporary unless the user asks to add a reusable test.
+
+```python
+import os
+import pty
+import select
+import subprocess
+import time
+
+master_fd, slave_fd = pty.openpty()
+proc = subprocess.Popen(
+    ["<command>", "<arg>"],
+    stdin=slave_fd,
+    stdout=slave_fd,
+    stderr=slave_fd,
+    close_fds=True,
+)
+os.close(slave_fd)
+
+deadline = time.time() + 30
+buffer = b""
+while time.time() < deadline:
+    ready, _, _ = select.select([master_fd], [], [], 0.25)
+    if not ready:
+        continue
+    chunk = os.read(master_fd, 4096)
+    buffer += chunk
+    if b"<ready text>" in buffer:
+        os.write(master_fd, b"help\n")
+        break
+
+print(buffer.decode(errors="replace"))
+proc.terminate()
+os.close(master_fd)
+```
+
+If the CLI needs richer terminal control, use `pty.fork()` or an existing PTY library.
+
+## Profiling Recipes
+
+- Startup regression: capture baseline and treatment startup timings under the same machine, env, and command.
+- Slow operation: start a CPU profile, perform the operation, stop the profile, and compare top self-time functions.
+- Memory leak: force GC if available, take a heap snapshot, perform the operation repeatedly, force GC again, and take another snapshot.
+- Hang: capture the screen, active handles/resources, and a stack/CPU sample before interrupting.
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- Prefer deterministic waits over sleeps. If you must sleep, explain why.
+- Do not send credentials or destructive commands into a controlled session.
+- Keep the harness in `/tmp` unless the repo already has a testing/demo harness.
+- Do not hard-code paths from another repository. Adapt commands to the current repo's scripts and runtime.
+- Clean up tmux sessions, temp dirs, inspector processes, and demo artifacts unless the user asks to keep them.

package/bundled-skills/skills/peak/references/control-ui/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
+---
+name: control-ui
+description: Build or adapt a local browser/CDP harness to drive and inspect a web, IDE, or Electron UI. Use for local UI verification, screenshots, accessibility snapshots, perf profiles, visual diffs, or reproducing UI bugs.
+---
+
+Read [the native Python adapter](../raga-runtime/SKILL.md) before executing this workflow. Authoring targets candidate revisions. Children use run_child, not an external agent service.
+
+# Control UI
+
+Use local browser automation to verify UI behavior with evidence. First reuse the repo's own Playwright, browser, or Electron harness if it exists; otherwise assemble a temporary local harness around the app's dev server or Chromium debug port.
+
+## What It Is Used For
+
+- Reproducing UI bugs that depend on real browser focus, keyboard input, scrolling, resizing, or rendering.
+- Verifying visual or accessibility changes with screenshots and snapshots.
+- Checking local web, IDE, or Electron behavior before shipping.
+- Capturing console logs, network logs, CPU profiles, traces, or heap snapshots.
+- Creating before/after evidence for `verify-this`.
+
+## Setup Pattern
+
+1. Start the app locally using the repo's documented dev command.
+2. Discover existing local harnesses: Playwright tests, Cypress specs, Storybook, browser scripts, Electron launch scripts, or snapshot tools.
+3. For a web app, connect to the local URL with the existing browser tooling.
+4. For Electron/Chromium, enable a remote debugging port when supported.
+5. Select the correct page by stable app markers, not by tab order alone.
+6. Prefer accessibility roles, labels, and stable `data-*` selectors over coordinates.
+
+## Generic Web Harness
+
+Use the repo's installed browser tooling when possible. If the repo already has Playwright, a minimal one-off probe looks like:
+
+```javascript
+import { chromium } from "playwright";
+
+const browser = await chromium.launch();
+const page = await browser.newPage({ viewport: { width: 1280, height: 800 } });
+await page.goto("http://127.0.0.1:<port>");
+await page.getByRole("button", { name: /submit/i }).click();
+await page.screenshot({ path: "/tmp/ui-harness-after.png", fullPage: true });
+await browser.close();
+```
+
+Do not add Playwright as a project dependency just for this probe unless the user asks. Prefer existing dev dependencies or external browser tools already available in the environment.
+
+## Generic CDP Harness
+
+For Electron or a Chromium app launched with `--remote-debugging-port=<port>`, connect over CDP:
+
+```javascript
+import { chromium } from "playwright";
+
+const browser = await chromium.connectOverCDP("http://127.0.0.1:<debug-port>");
+const pages = browser.contexts().flatMap((context) => context.pages());
+let page;
+for (const candidate of pages) {
+  if (await candidate.locator("<app-root-selector>").count()) {
+    page = candidate;
+    break;
+  }
+}
+
+if (!page) {
+  console.log(await Promise.all(pages.map(async (p) => ({
+    title: await p.title(),
+    url: p.url(),
+  }))));
+  throw new Error("No matching app page found");
+}
+
+await page.screenshot({ path: "/tmp/ui-harness-cdp.png", fullPage: true });
+await browser.close();
+```
+
+Replace `<app-root-selector>` with a stable marker from the current repo, such as a root app node, landmark, or product-specific `data-*` attribute.
+
+## Interaction Loop
+
+1. Capture a page snapshot or screenshot before acting.
+2. Choose a target from the latest page structure.
+3. Perform exactly one structural action: click, type, keypress, drag, scroll, navigate, or resize.
+4. Capture a fresh snapshot/screenshot.
+5. Verify the expected state change.
+6. Save artifacts for before/after comparisons when the user asked for proof.
+
+## CDP Capabilities
+
+Use raw CDP only when higher-level browser APIs are insufficient:
+
+- Performance: CPU profiles, traces, paint flashing, FPS meter, layout shift inspection.
+- Memory: heap snapshots and forced GC for leak investigations.
+- Network: request blocking, throttling, cache disablement, request/response logs.
+- Rendering: viewport changes, color scheme emulation, reduced motion, accessibility checks.
+- Debugging: console streaming, exception capture, DOM snapshots.
+
+## Page Selection
+
+When multiple app windows/tabs share a debug port:
+
+- Prefer a positive marker for the surface under test, such as an app root selector.
+- Use a negative marker to avoid the wrong surface when necessary.
+- If no page matches, list available page titles and URLs instead of guessing.
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- Do not rely on stale element references after navigation or structural changes.
+- Avoid coordinate clicks unless a fresh screenshot was captured immediately before the click.
+- Keep test data local and disposable.
+- Do not store screenshots or heap snapshots from privacy-sensitive workspaces unless the user explicitly agrees.
+- Do not hard-code selectors, ports, or script paths from another repository. Discover the current repo's local app markers.
+- Clean up dev servers, debug sessions, and temp profiles when done.