skillpacks 0.1.0

package/global/claude/idea-scope-brief/archive/v0.1/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
+---
+name: concept-exploration
+description: Shape a rough product or project idea into an actionable concept brief before ICP, market research, specifications, UX, UI, or implementation planning
+type: planning
+version: v0.1
+argument-hint: "[optional rough idea, product thought, or app scope]"
+---
+
+# Concept Exploration
+
+Use this skill when the user has a half-formed idea and needs it cleaned up enough to enter the normal research and planning workflow. This skill is intentionally pre-ICP: it clarifies the concept, problem hypothesis, beneficiary hypothesis, value wedge, constraints, non-goals, and unknowns, but does not select an ICP, analyze competitors, define UX/UI, choose architecture, or write implementation specs.
+
+## Process
+
+1. **Resolve context**
+   - Read `.agents/project.json` if it exists.
+   - Read README, CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, existing `research/`, `specs/`, and task docs when present.
+   - Determine whether the current directory is already a bootstrapped project. Treat it as bootstrapped when it has meaningful `README.md` plus `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md`; treat it as unbootstrapped when those are missing, placeholder-only, or the user is describing an idea outside any project repo.
+   - If `$ARGUMENTS` contains a rough idea, use it as the starting draft.
+   - If `$ARGUMENTS` names an app that matches `research/{app}/`, use app-scoped output paths. Otherwise use top-level `research/`.
+   - Determine the concept identity and a normalized concept slug as soon as either is known from `$ARGUMENTS`, repo context, or the interview. Normalize by lowercasing, removing URL suffix noise, replacing non-alphanumeric runs with `-`, trimming leading/trailing `-`, and dropping only project-wide brand prefixes when the remaining word is the actual scoped concept (for example, `poketo.work` -> `work`; `Poketo Core` -> `poketo-core`).
+   - If existing research or the prompt suggests multiple related concepts may exist, prefer slugged output paths over generic filenames. Reserve generic `concept-brief.md` only for a single unambiguous project-level concept.
+   - If no rough idea is available from arguments or repo context, ask the user for the idea in plain language.
+
+2. **Keep the boundary clear**
+   - Do not run ICP, competitive analysis, journey mapping, UX variation, UI interview, roadmap, or implementation planning inside this skill.
+   - Do not validate the market with broad web research. Use light repo/context inspection only; downstream research skills own evidence gathering.
+   - Treat every user claim as a hypothesis unless supported by existing project files.
+
+3. **Surface a Concept Assumptions Manifest**
+   - Before deep questioning, present what you think the concept is.
+   - Tag assumptions as `[from prompt]`, `[from repo]`, `[from research]`, or `[inferred]`.
+   - Cover:
+     - concept summary
+     - problem hypothesis
+     - target beneficiary or user hypothesis
+     - product/category guess
+     - value wedge
+     - constraints
+     - non-goals
+     - riskiest unknowns
+   - Ask the user to confirm, correct, or flag assumptions before writing.
+
+4. **Interview until concept-ready**
+   - Ask 1 to 3 focused questions per turn.
+   - Resolve only concept-level ambiguity:
+     - what problem exists
+     - who might care
+     - what outcome changes for them
+     - what makes the idea different enough to investigate
+     - what must stay out of scope
+     - what constraints are real now
+   - When unsure, recommend a practical default and clearly mark it as an assumption.
+
+5. **Coverage checkpoint**
+   - Present the final concept summary, unknowns, and readiness for ICP.
+   - Restate the resolved concept identity, slug, and exact output paths before writing.
+   - If the conversation pivoted from the initial concept to a different central concept, write the pivoted concept to its own slugged brief and preserve the initial concept as a related or future concept in the brief and interview log. Do not merge both concepts into one generic project-level brief.
+   - Ask whether any core premise, constraint, or non-goal is wrong before writing.
+
+## Output
+
+Write:
+
+- For one unambiguous project-level concept only: `research/concept-brief.md` and `research/concept-brief-interview.md`.
+- When a concept identity is known, multiple concepts exist or may exist, or a pivot occurs: `research/concept-brief-{slug}.md` and `research/concept-brief-{slug}-interview.md`.
+- If `$ARGUMENTS` names an app that matches `research/{app}/`, use the same filenames under `research/{app}/`: `research/{app}/concept-brief-{slug}.md` and `research/{app}/concept-brief-{slug}-interview.md`, or unsuffixed app-scoped files only when that app has one unambiguous concept.
+
+The concept brief must include:
+
+- `## Summary`
+- `## Problem Hypothesis`
+- `## Beneficiary Hypothesis`
+- `## Product Category Guess`
+- `## Value Wedge`
+- `## Constraints`
+- `## Non-Goals`
+- `## Assumptions And Unknowns`
+- `## ICP Readiness`
+- `## Next Steps`
+
+The `## ICP Readiness` section must state whether the concept is ready for `/icp`, what inputs `/icp` should use, and which assumptions should be tested first.
+
+The `## Next Steps` section must recommend exactly one primary command:
+
+- If the concept appears to be a business app or user-facing product and the business discovery lane is not enabled: `/pack install business-discovery` — this installs the research skills (ICP, competitive analysis, value prop, positioning, lean canvas) needed before any repo bootstrapping or development.
+- If `business-discovery` or the compatibility `business-app` alias is enabled: `/icp`
+- If the concept already has ICP/market evidence but needs journey, onboarding, conversion, or retention planning: `/pack install customer-lifecycle`
+- If project type is unclear: `/pack recommend`
+
+Include 1-3 other options only when they are materially useful.
+
+### Alignment Page
+
+When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports, prototypes, or any document output), build a full-depth HTML alignment page at `alignment/concept-exploration-{topic}.html`. Use a normalized topic slug derived from the app, feature, research subject, report subject, or output filename.
+
+**Full content requirement.** The alignment page must contain the complete content of every proposed markdown deliverable -- every section, every finding, every detail, every list item. It is a thorough interactive review document, not a summary. Render the full deliverable content in clean, readable HTML with appropriate hierarchy, styling, and navigation. If the skill writes multiple scoped deliverables in one run, build one alignment page that contains all deliverables with anchor-linked navigation. Durable tracker artifacts, such as `research/assumption-tracker.md`, remain canonical markdown outputs but must also be fully rendered into the alignment page before approval.
+
+**Dark-mode styling.** Use a dark color scheme by default. Base CSS variables: `--bg: #0d1117; --surface: #161b22; --border: #30363d; --text: #c9d1d9; --text-muted: #8b949e; --accent: #58a6ff; --green: #3fb950; --red: #f85149; --orange: #d29922; --purple: #bc8cff;`. Apply `background: var(--bg); color: var(--text);` on body. Use `--surface` for cards, nav, and table headers. Use `--border` for all borders. Use `--purple` for question blocks and gate headings. Use `--accent` for links and section headings. Keep headings `color: #fff` or `var(--accent)` for hierarchy. Question block backgrounds should use `#1c2333`.
+
+**Alignment gates.** Treat gates as explicit review sections inside the HTML page. A gate blocks finalization until its required inline questions are answered and compiled into YAML. Include every gate that applies to the skill output, and include these gate types whenever relevant: evidence coverage, assumptions/confidence, scope/non-goals, candidate/verdict decisions, artifact destination, proposed file changes, coverage checkpoint, and post-approval route.
+
+**Report-only research gates.** For report-only or pre-approval research skills, the alignment page must explicitly contain evidence coverage, assumptions/confidence, recommended path, proposed file changes, and approval gates before any canonical research, spec, or task file is created or updated.
+
+**Concept-specific gates.** Render the Concept Assumptions Manifest as a first-class assumptions/confidence gate inside the alignment page before proposed deliverables. The concept identity, slug, scope/non-goals, ICP readiness, artifact destination, and proposed file changes must each be reviewable gates.
+
+
+**Required inline questions.** Each gate must contain at least one required inline question placed directly under the content it governs, inside a visually distinct question block. Each question must use radio-button inputs and include two standing options after the skill-generated choices: "Other / None of the above" backed by a multi-line text box for free-form input, and "Need clarification" backed by an optional notes box where the user can explain what is unclear. When any radio option other than "Other" or "Need clarification" is selected, show an optional "Additional notes" text box beneath it so the user can qualify their choice. Generate questions based on what genuinely needs user input -- do not add filler questions. Do not create a separate bottom "Decisions & Clarifications" section.
+
+**Gate YAML contract.** At the bottom of the page, include a "Compile Answers" button that aggregates answers from all inline gate questions throughout the page, including free-text notes. The button remains disabled until every required question has a selection, shows a count of remaining unanswered questions, and scrolls to the first unanswered question if clicked early. When every question is answered, generate a structured YAML block with one item per gate answer using this stable shape: `section`, `gate_type`, `status` (`answered`, `other`, or `needs-clarification`), `answer`, optional `notes`, and optional `target_artifact` or `target_path` when the gate controls file output. After successful compilation, automatically attempt to copy the YAML to the clipboard with the Clipboard API, display copy status, and display the YAML in a read-only textarea with an explicit "Copy YAML" button. The copy button must retry clipboard copy when supported and fall back to selecting the textarea contents when clipboard access is unavailable or blocked.
+
+**Pre-approval stop.** Before user approval, the next action is review of the HTML alignment page, not downstream routing. Ask the user to review the page and provide the compiled YAML answers. Do not include `Recommended next skill`, `Recommended next command`, or downstream routing language until after compiled YAML has been provided and the approved artifacts have been written or updated.
+
+**Diff highlighting on updates.** When the agent updates an existing alignment page after receiving compiled answers, highlight what changed since the previous version. The agent chooses inline annotation or side-by-side layout per situation.
+
+**Archiving.** Before replacing an existing alignment page, archive it to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/alignment/concept-exploration-{topic}.html`.
+
+**Browser open.** Attempt to open the resulting HTML page in the browser and report whether the open succeeded or was blocked. A blocked browser-open attempt does not make the skill fail when the files were written correctly.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Keep the skill short and pre-research.
+- Do not write specs, UX variants, UI specs, roadmap phases, or implementation tasks.
+- Do not recommend `/scaffold` unless the user explicitly asks to create a package/app shell before research; normal product flow scaffolds after research, prototype consolidation, spec, roadmap, and phase planning identify the first implementation target.
+- Do not update `tasks/todo.md`.
+- New files do not need archive snapshots. Before replacing an existing concept brief, including slugged briefs, archive it to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-relative-path>`.
+
+## Default Shipping Contract
+
+- **Default next-step routing:** when reporting completion, include either `Recommended next skill: <command>` or the two-line pair `**Next work:** <specific task or "none">` and `**Recommended next command:** <one command or route>` so the next operator has a concrete handoff.
+- If this skill creates or modifies tracked repository files, finish by committing and pushing all intended changes to the repository primary branch (`main` when present, otherwise `master`) before stopping, even if the user did not explicitly ask for commit/push.
+- Do not leave tracked changes or unpushed commits behind. If unrelated tracked work is already present, either include it in sensible commits too or stop and explain the blocker.
+- This contract does not override stricter safety rules about secrets, destructive history changes, release publication/tag confirmation, or production deploy confirmation.

package/global/claude/idea-scope-brief/archive/v0.10/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,146 @@
+---
+name: idea-scope-brief
+description: Shape a rough product or project idea into a scoped brief before ICP, market research, specifications, UX, UI, or implementation planning
+type: planning
+version: v0.10
+argument-hint: "[optional rough idea, product thought, or product-path scope]"
+---
+
+# Idea Scope Brief
+
+Use this skill when the user has a half-formed idea and needs it cleaned up enough to enter the normal research and planning workflow. This skill is intentionally pre-ICP: it clarifies the concept, problem hypothesis, beneficiary hypothesis, value wedge, constraints, non-goals, and unknowns, but does not select an ICP, analyze competitors, define UX/UI, choose architecture, or write implementation specs.
+
+## Process
+
+### 0. Product-Path Scope Resolution
+
+Resolve research scope by product path before using code or app structure as a hint:
+
+1. If `$ARGUMENTS` names a non-archived `research/{slug}/` directory or a product-path ID whose `scope_path` points there, use that path. Treat `{slug}` as the product/app name, not the ICP, audience, or segment label.
+2. If `$ARGUMENTS` names only `research/_archive/{slug}/` or a manifest entry with `status: archived` or legacy `status: abandoned`, stop and warn that the path is archived; do not write or update scoped outputs there.
+3. Read `research/.progress.yaml` when present. Normalize legacy `active_path` to `active_paths` on read and write back `active_paths` on manifest updates. Treat legacy `abandoned` as `archived`; exclude `archived`, `abandoned`, `deferred`, `revisit_candidate`, `promoted`, and any `scope_path` under `research/_archive/` from active target selection.
+4. If active product paths exist in the manifest, use those paths. If multiple active paths exist, ask which one to target unless this skill explicitly supports cross-path output.
+5. If no active manifest target exists, list non-archived product directories under `research/`, excluding `research/_archive/` and dot directories. Auto-select only when exactly one exists; ask when multiple exist.
+6. If no product directories exist, use flat `research/` single-product mode.
+7. Detect monorepo/app/package structure only as a secondary hint. Suggest creating a missing `research/{slug}/` product path when code clearly exposes an app, but do not require code or monorepo detection before using `research/{slug}/`.
+
+When product path `{slug}` is active, read and write research under `research/{slug}/`, specs under `specs/{slug}/`, and treat top-level `research/*.md` files as flat-mode documents or cross-path summaries.
+
+1. **Resolve context**
+   - Read `.agents/project.json` if it exists.
+   - Read README, CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, existing `research/`, `specs/`, and task docs when present.
+   - Determine whether the current directory is already a bootstrapped project. Treat it as bootstrapped when it has meaningful `README.md` plus `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md`; treat it as unbootstrapped when those are missing, placeholder-only, or the user is describing an idea outside any project repo.
+   - If `$ARGUMENTS` contains a rough idea, use it as the starting draft.
+   - If `$ARGUMENTS` names a non-archived `research/{slug}/` product path, use that path. If it names only `research/_archive/{slug}/`, stop and warn that the path is archived.
+   - Determine the concept identity and a normalized concept slug as soon as either is known from `$ARGUMENTS`, repo context, or the interview. Normalize by lowercasing, removing URL suffix noise, replacing non-alphanumeric runs with `-`, trimming leading/trailing `-`, and dropping only project-wide brand prefixes when the remaining word is the actual scoped concept (for example, `poketo.work` -> `work`; `Poketo Core` -> `poketo-core`).
+   - If existing research or the prompt suggests multiple related concepts may exist, prefer slugged output paths over generic filenames. Reserve generic `idea-brief.md` only for a single unambiguous project-level concept.
+   - If no rough idea is available from arguments or repo context, ask the user for the idea in plain language.
+   - Read `research/.progress.yaml` when present. Normalize `active_path` (singular legacy) to `active_paths` (plural list) when reading; treat legacy `abandoned` as `archived` and exclude archived/deferred/revisit/promoted paths plus `research/_archive/` scopes from active target selection. Treat `active_paths` as the current product/app/ICP focuses and `product_paths[]` as parked, archived, or promoted product-path state, not git branch state.
+   - When the prompt, repo context, interview, or pivot history surfaces multiple related concepts, apps, product lines, or future pivots, update or propose updates to `research/.progress.yaml` with product-path entries instead of merging them into one generic concept. Use fields: `id`, `label`, `scope_path`, `status`, `source_skill`, `reason`, `archive_reason`, `archived_at`, `promoted_at`, `evidence_refs`, `revisit_trigger`, `next_skill`, `pipeline_stage`, and `last_touched`. Set `pipeline_stage: idea-scope-brief` on entries created by this skill.
+   - Keep the central concept in `active_paths` when it is the current focus. Record related or future concepts as `status: deferred` or `status: revisit_candidate` with a concrete revisit trigger and a likely next skill such as `/icp <path/audience>`; if `business-discovery` is not enabled, recommend `/pack install business-discovery` before `/icp`.
+   - When 3+ product paths exist in the manifest, recommend `/product-line review` to the user for portfolio management; if `business-ops` is not enabled, recommend `/pack install business-ops` before `/product-line`.
+
+2. **Keep the boundary clear**
+   - Do not run ICP, competitive analysis, journey mapping, UX variation, UI interview, roadmap, or implementation planning inside this skill.
+   - Do not validate the market with broad web research. Use light repo/context inspection only; downstream research skills own evidence gathering.
+   - Treat every user claim as a hypothesis unless supported by existing project files.
+
+3. **Surface an Idea Assumptions Manifest**
+   - Before deep questioning, present what you think the concept is.
+   - Tag assumptions as `[from prompt]`, `[from repo]`, `[from research]`, or `[inferred]`.
+   - Cover:
+     - concept summary
+     - problem hypothesis
+     - target beneficiary or user hypothesis
+     - product/category guess
+     - value wedge
+     - constraints
+     - non-goals
+     - riskiest unknowns
+   - Ask the user to confirm, correct, or flag assumptions before writing.
+
+### Market Structure Handoff
+
+During the Idea Assumptions Manifest, if the concept appears marketplace/platform/B2B2C/multi-sided, add a compact `Market Structure Handoff` note:
+
+- Name the apparent sides and the expected value exchange between them.
+- Mark those sides and exchanges as hypotheses, not validated ICPs; do not decide which side is the customer, buyer, or primary ICP here.
+- Keep the source tag for each side as `[from prompt]`, `[from repo]`, or `[inferred]` unless the user provides a correction.
+- If the concept appears single-sided, omit the handoff or state that no marketplace/platform/B2B2C/multi-sided handoff is apparent.
+
+4. **Interview until idea-ready**
+   - Ask 1 to 3 focused questions per turn.
+   - Resolve only concept-level ambiguity:
+     - what problem exists
+     - who might care
+     - what outcome changes for them
+     - what makes the idea different enough to investigate
+     - what must stay out of scope
+     - what constraints are real now
+   - When unsure, recommend a practical default and clearly mark it as an assumption.
+
+5. **Coverage checkpoint**
+   - Present the final concept summary, unknowns, and readiness for ICP.
+   - Restate the resolved concept identity, slug, and exact output paths before writing.
+   - If the conversation pivoted from the initial concept to a different central concept, write the pivoted concept to its own slugged brief and preserve the initial concept as a related or future concept in the brief and interview log. Do not merge both concepts into one generic project-level brief.
+   - Ask whether any core premise, constraint, or non-goal is wrong before writing.
+
+6. **Build pre-approval alignment preview**
+   - Before writing any canonical `research/**/idea-brief.md`, `research/**/idea-brief-interview.md`, legacy flat `research/idea-brief-{slug}.md` variant, or `research/.progress.yaml`, build `alignment/idea-scope-brief-{topic}.html` as the review artifact.
+   - The HTML page must render the Idea/Concept Assumptions Manifest, artifact destinations, proposed file changes, coverage checkpoint, and approval gates, including any Market Structure Handoff.
+   - Attempt to open the page in the browser and point the user at the repo-relative path.
+   - Treat coverage-checkpoint confirmation as non-final; it only confirms the draft scope is ready to preview. Only final compiled YAML from the alignment page authorizes canonical writes.
+   - Before compiled YAML approval, the next action is review or revision of the HTML alignment page. Do not include `Recommended next skill`, `Recommended next command`, or downstream routing language until after final compiled YAML approval has been provided and the approved artifacts below have been written or updated.
+   - When feedback-only YAML is provided, revise the alignment page and ask again; do not write canonical artifacts until final compiled YAML approval is provided.
+
+## Output
+
+Before writing anything in this section, verify the alignment page has final compiled YAML approval. Do not write canonical idea briefs, interview logs, or `research/.progress.yaml` until `alignment/idea-scope-brief-{topic}.html` has been reviewed and the user has provided final compiled YAML approval. Coverage-checkpoint confirmation is not final approval and does not authorize these writes.
+
+Write:
+
+- For one unambiguous project-level concept only: `research/idea-brief.md` and `research/idea-brief-interview.md`.
+- When a product identity is known, multiple concepts exist or may exist, or a pivot occurs: prefer `research/{slug}/idea-brief.md` and `research/{slug}/idea-brief-interview.md`; preserve flat `research/idea-brief-{slug}.md` only as legacy compatibility when no product path is being introduced.
+- If `$ARGUMENTS` names a non-archived product path, use unsuffixed scoped files under `research/{slug}/`: `research/{slug}/idea-brief.md` and `research/{slug}/idea-brief-interview.md`.
+- `research/.progress.yaml` — create or update only when multiple concepts, product paths, product lines, product-path scopes, or pivots are present. Use `product_paths` terminology instead of branch terminology.
+
+The idea brief must include:
+
+- `## Summary`
+- `## Problem Hypothesis`
+- `## Beneficiary Hypothesis`
+- `## Product Category Guess`
+- `## Value Wedge`
+- `## Constraints`
+- `## Non-Goals`
+- `## Assumptions And Unknowns`
+- `## ICP Readiness`
+- `## Next Steps`
+
+The `## ICP Readiness` section must state whether the concept is ready for `/icp`, what inputs `/icp` should use, and which assumptions should be tested first. If a Market Structure Handoff exists, include the apparent sides and value exchange as explicit inputs for `/icp` to validate or refute.
+
+The `## Next Steps` section must recommend exactly one primary command:
+
+- If the concept appears to be a business app or user-facing product and the business discovery lane is not enabled: `/pack install business-discovery` — this installs the research skills (ICP, competitive analysis, value prop, positioning, lean canvas) needed before any repo bootstrapping or development.
+- If `business-discovery` or the compatibility `business-app` alias is enabled: `/icp`
+- If the concept already has ICP/market evidence but needs journey, onboarding, conversion, or retention planning: `/pack install customer-lifecycle`
+- If project type is unclear: `/pack recommend`
+
+Include 1-3 other options only when they are materially useful.
+
+### Alignment Page
+
+When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports, prototypes, or any document output), build a full-depth HTML alignment page following `ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md` in this skill's directory. Output: `alignment/idea-scope-brief-{topic}.html`.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Keep the skill short and pre-research.
+- Do not write specs, UX variants, UI specs, roadmap phases, or implementation tasks.
+- Do not recommend `/scaffold` unless the user explicitly asks to create a package/app shell before research; normal product flow scaffolds after research, prototype consolidation, spec, roadmap, and phase planning identify the first implementation target. `/scaffold` requires the monorepo pack (`/pack install monorepo`).
+- Do not update `tasks/todo.md`.
+- New files do not need archive snapshots. Before replacing an existing idea brief, including slugged briefs, archive it to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-relative-path>`.
+- Migration: if a project already has `research/concept-brief.md`, `research/concept-brief-interview.md`, or any `research/{slug}/concept-brief*.md` / `research/concept-brief-{slug}*.md` from a prior run, rename it to the `idea-brief` equivalent before re-running. Write only the `idea-brief` names and no longer recognizes the legacy `concept-brief` filenames.
+
+## Default Shipping Contract
+
+Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.

package/global/claude/idea-scope-brief/archive/v0.11/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,156 @@
+---
+name: idea-scope-brief
+description: Shape a rough product or project idea into a scoped brief before ICP, market research, specifications, UX, UI, or implementation planning
+type: planning
+version: v0.11
+argument-hint: "[optional rough idea, product thought, or product-path scope]"
+interview_depth: full
+---
+
+# Idea Scope Brief
+
+Use this skill when the user has a half-formed idea and needs it cleaned up enough to enter the normal research and planning workflow. This skill is intentionally pre-ICP: it clarifies the concept, problem hypothesis, beneficiary hypothesis, value wedge, constraints, non-goals, and unknowns, but does not select an ICP, analyze competitors, define UX/UI, choose architecture, or write implementation specs.
+
+## Process
+
+### 0. Product-Path Scope Resolution
+
+Resolve research scope by product path before using code or app structure as a hint:
+
+1. If `$ARGUMENTS` names a non-archived `research/{slug}/` directory or a product-path ID whose `scope_path` points there, use that path. Treat `{slug}` as the product/app name, not the ICP, audience, or segment label.
+2. If `$ARGUMENTS` names only `research/_archive/{slug}/` or a manifest entry with `status: archived` or legacy `status: abandoned`, stop and warn that the path is archived; do not write or update scoped outputs there.
+3. Read `research/.progress.yaml` when present. Normalize legacy `active_path` to `active_paths` on read and write back `active_paths` on manifest updates. Treat legacy `abandoned` as `archived`; exclude `archived`, `abandoned`, `deferred`, `revisit_candidate`, `promoted`, and any `scope_path` under `research/_archive/` from active target selection.
+4. If active product paths exist in the manifest, use those paths. If multiple active paths exist, ask which one to target unless this skill explicitly supports cross-path output.
+5. If no active manifest target exists, list non-archived product directories under `research/`, excluding `research/_archive/` and dot directories. Auto-select only when exactly one exists; ask when multiple exist.
+6. If no product directories exist, use flat `research/` single-product mode.
+7. Detect monorepo/app/package structure only as a secondary hint. Suggest creating a missing `research/{slug}/` product path when code clearly exposes an app, but do not require code or monorepo detection before using `research/{slug}/`.
+
+When product path `{slug}` is active, read and write research under `research/{slug}/`, specs under `specs/{slug}/`, and treat top-level `research/*.md` files as flat-mode documents or cross-path summaries.
+
+1. **Resolve context**
+   - Read `.agents/project.json` if it exists.
+   - Read README, CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, existing `research/`, `specs/`, and task docs when present.
+   - Determine whether the current directory is already a bootstrapped project. Treat it as bootstrapped when it has meaningful `README.md` plus `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md`; treat it as unbootstrapped when those are missing, placeholder-only, or the user is describing an idea outside any project repo.
+   - If `$ARGUMENTS` contains a rough idea, use it as the starting draft.
+   - If `$ARGUMENTS` names a non-archived `research/{slug}/` product path, use that path. If it names only `research/_archive/{slug}/`, stop and warn that the path is archived.
+   - Determine the concept identity and a normalized concept slug as soon as either is known from `$ARGUMENTS`, repo context, or the interview. Normalize by lowercasing, removing URL suffix noise, replacing non-alphanumeric runs with `-`, trimming leading/trailing `-`, and dropping only project-wide brand prefixes when the remaining word is the actual scoped concept (for example, `poketo.work` -> `work`; `Poketo Core` -> `poketo-core`).
+   - If existing research or the prompt suggests multiple related concepts may exist, prefer slugged output paths over generic filenames. Reserve generic `idea-brief.md` only for a single unambiguous project-level concept.
+   - If no rough idea is available from arguments or repo context, ask the user for the idea in plain language.
+   - Read `research/.progress.yaml` when present. Normalize `active_path` (singular legacy) to `active_paths` (plural list) when reading; treat legacy `abandoned` as `archived` and exclude archived/deferred/revisit/promoted paths plus `research/_archive/` scopes from active target selection. Treat `active_paths` as the current product/app/ICP focuses and `product_paths[]` as parked, archived, or promoted product-path state, not git branch state.
+   - When the prompt, repo context, interview, or pivot history surfaces multiple related concepts, apps, product lines, or future pivots, update or propose updates to `research/.progress.yaml` with product-path entries instead of merging them into one generic concept. Use fields: `id`, `label`, `scope_path`, `status`, `source_skill`, `reason`, `archive_reason`, `archived_at`, `promoted_at`, `evidence_refs`, `revisit_trigger`, `next_skill`, `pipeline_stage`, and `last_touched`. Set `pipeline_stage: idea-scope-brief` on entries created by this skill.
+   - Keep the central concept in `active_paths` when it is the current focus. Record related or future concepts as `status: deferred` or `status: revisit_candidate` with a concrete revisit trigger and a likely next skill such as `/icp <path/audience>`; if `business-discovery` is not enabled, recommend `/pack install business-discovery` before `/icp`.
+   - When 3+ product paths exist in the manifest, recommend `/product-line review` to the user for portfolio management; if `business-ops` is not enabled, recommend `/pack install business-ops` before `/product-line`.
+
+2. **Keep the boundary clear**
+   - Do not run ICP, competitive analysis, journey mapping, UX variation, UI interview, roadmap, or implementation planning inside this skill.
+   - Do not validate the market with broad web research. Use light repo/context inspection only; downstream research skills own evidence gathering.
+   - Treat every user claim as a hypothesis unless supported by existing project files.
+
+3. **Surface an Idea Assumptions Manifest**
+   - Before deep questioning, present what you think the concept is.
+   - Tag assumptions as `[from prompt]`, `[from repo]`, `[from research]`, or `[inferred]`.
+   - Cover:
+     - concept summary
+     - problem hypothesis
+     - target beneficiary or user hypothesis
+     - product/category guess
+     - value wedge
+     - constraints
+     - non-goals
+     - riskiest unknowns
+   - Ask the user to confirm, correct, or flag assumptions before writing.
+
+### Market Structure Handoff
+
+During the Idea Assumptions Manifest, if the concept appears marketplace/platform/B2B2C/multi-sided, add a compact `Market Structure Handoff` note:
+
+- Name the apparent sides and the expected value exchange between them.
+- Mark those sides and exchanges as hypotheses, not validated ICPs; do not decide which side is the customer, buyer, or primary ICP here.
+- Keep the source tag for each side as `[from prompt]`, `[from repo]`, or `[inferred]` unless the user provides a correction.
+- If the concept appears single-sided, omit the handoff or state that no marketplace/platform/B2B2C/multi-sided handoff is apparent.
+
+4. **Interview until idea-ready**
+   - Ask 1 to 3 focused questions per turn.
+   - Resolve only concept-level ambiguity:
+     - what problem exists
+     - who might care
+     - what outcome changes for them
+     - what makes the idea different enough to investigate
+     - what must stay out of scope
+     - what constraints are real now
+   - When unsure, recommend a practical default and clearly mark it as an assumption.
+
+5. **Coverage checkpoint**
+   - Present the final concept summary, unknowns, and readiness for ICP.
+   - Restate the resolved concept identity, slug, and exact output paths before writing.
+   - If the conversation pivoted from the initial concept to a different central concept, write the pivoted concept to its own slugged brief and preserve the initial concept as a related or future concept in the brief and interview log. Do not merge both concepts into one generic project-level brief.
+   - Ask whether any core premise, constraint, or non-goal is wrong before writing.
+
+6. **Build pre-approval alignment preview**
+   - Before writing any canonical `research/**/idea-brief.md`, `research/**/idea-brief-interview.md`, legacy flat `research/idea-brief-{slug}.md` variant, or `research/.progress.yaml`, build `alignment/idea-scope-brief-{topic}.html` as the review artifact.
+   - The HTML page must render the Idea/Concept Assumptions Manifest, artifact destinations, proposed file changes, coverage checkpoint, and approval gates, including any Market Structure Handoff.
+   - Attempt to open the page in the browser and point the user at the repo-relative path.
+   - Treat coverage-checkpoint confirmation as non-final; it only confirms the draft scope is ready to preview. Only final compiled YAML from the alignment page authorizes canonical writes.
+   - Before compiled YAML approval, the next action is review or revision of the HTML alignment page. Do not include `Recommended next skill`, `Recommended next command`, or downstream routing language until after final compiled YAML approval has been provided and the approved artifacts below have been written or updated.
+   - When feedback-only YAML is provided, revise the alignment page and ask again; do not write canonical artifacts until final compiled YAML approval is provided.
+
+### Review-Only Product Path Approval
+
+When the user approves a product-path fork or split at the alignment page level but explicitly withholds canonical-write approval (e.g., "review only, do not write canonical files"):
+
+1. **Do not write canonical files.** Keep `research/.progress.yaml`, `research/{slug}/idea-brief.md`, and `research/{slug}/idea-brief-interview.md` unchanged.
+2. **Render fully in the alignment page.** The proposed manifest entry, idea brief sections, and interview log for the review-only path must be rendered in full in the alignment page HTML — not summarized, linked, or embedded.
+3. **Mark the page as review-only-approved.** Set `approval_status: review-only-approved` in the alignment page status block. This is distinct from `confirmed` (canonical artifacts written) and `review` (awaiting any approval).
+4. **Downstream treatment.** Downstream skills must treat a review-only-approved path as provisional: it may be referenced as concept context, but it is not a canonical product path until manifest approval is later granted via a subsequent alignment cycle. See the provisional-path evidence rule in ICP and competitive-analysis contracts.
+
+## Output
+
+Before writing anything in this section, verify the alignment page has final compiled YAML approval. Do not write canonical idea briefs, interview logs, or `research/.progress.yaml` until `alignment/idea-scope-brief-{topic}.html` has been reviewed and the user has provided final compiled YAML approval. Coverage-checkpoint confirmation is not final approval and does not authorize these writes.
+
+Write:
+
+- For one unambiguous project-level concept only: `research/idea-brief.md` and `research/idea-brief-interview.md`.
+- When a product identity is known, multiple concepts exist or may exist, or a pivot occurs: prefer `research/{slug}/idea-brief.md` and `research/{slug}/idea-brief-interview.md`; preserve flat `research/idea-brief-{slug}.md` only as legacy compatibility when no product path is being introduced.
+- If `$ARGUMENTS` names a non-archived product path, use unsuffixed scoped files under `research/{slug}/`: `research/{slug}/idea-brief.md` and `research/{slug}/idea-brief-interview.md`.
+- `research/.progress.yaml` — create or update only when multiple concepts, product paths, product lines, product-path scopes, or pivots are present. Use `product_paths` terminology instead of branch terminology.
+
+The idea brief must include:
+
+- `## Summary`
+- `## Problem Hypothesis`
+- `## Beneficiary Hypothesis`
+- `## Product Category Guess`
+- `## Value Wedge`
+- `## Constraints`
+- `## Non-Goals`
+- `## Assumptions And Unknowns`
+- `## ICP Readiness`
+- `## Next Steps`
+
+The `## ICP Readiness` section must state whether the concept is ready for `/icp`, what inputs `/icp` should use, and which assumptions should be tested first. If a Market Structure Handoff exists, include the apparent sides and value exchange as explicit inputs for `/icp` to validate or refute.
+
+The `## Next Steps` section must recommend exactly one primary command:
+
+- If the concept appears to be a business app or user-facing product and the business discovery lane is not enabled: `/pack install business-discovery` — this installs the research skills (ICP, competitive analysis, value prop, positioning, lean canvas) needed before any repo bootstrapping or development.
+- If `business-discovery` or the compatibility `business-app` alias is enabled: `/icp`
+- If the concept already has ICP/market evidence but needs journey, onboarding, conversion, or retention planning: `/pack install customer-lifecycle`
+- If project type is unclear: `/pack recommend`
+
+Include 1-3 other options only when they are materially useful.
+
+### Alignment Page
+
+When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports, prototypes, or any document output), build a full-depth HTML alignment page following `ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md` in this skill's directory. Output: `alignment/idea-scope-brief-{topic}.html`.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Keep the skill short and pre-research.
+- Do not write specs, UX variants, UI specs, roadmap phases, or implementation tasks.
+- Do not recommend `/scaffold` unless the user explicitly asks to create a package/app shell before research; normal product flow scaffolds after research, prototype consolidation, spec, roadmap, and phase planning identify the first implementation target. `/scaffold` requires the monorepo pack (`/pack install monorepo`).
+- Do not update `tasks/todo.md`.
+- New files do not need archive snapshots. Before replacing an existing idea brief, including slugged briefs, archive it to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-relative-path>`.
+- Migration: if a project already has `research/concept-brief.md`, `research/concept-brief-interview.md`, or any `research/{slug}/concept-brief*.md` / `research/concept-brief-{slug}*.md` from a prior run, rename it to the `idea-brief` equivalent before re-running. Write only the `idea-brief` names and no longer recognizes the legacy `concept-brief` filenames.
+
+## Default Shipping Contract
+
+Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.

package/global/claude/idea-scope-brief/archive/v0.2/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,107 @@
+---
+name: concept-exploration
+description: Shape a rough product or project idea into an actionable concept brief before ICP, market research, specifications, UX, UI, or implementation planning
+type: planning
+version: v0.2
+argument-hint: "[optional rough idea, product thought, or app scope]"
+---
+
+# Concept Exploration
+
+Use this skill when the user has a half-formed idea and needs it cleaned up enough to enter the normal research and planning workflow. This skill is intentionally pre-ICP: it clarifies the concept, problem hypothesis, beneficiary hypothesis, value wedge, constraints, non-goals, and unknowns, but does not select an ICP, analyze competitors, define UX/UI, choose architecture, or write implementation specs.
+
+## Process
+
+1. **Resolve context**
+   - Read `.agents/project.json` if it exists.
+   - Read README, CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, existing `research/`, `specs/`, and task docs when present.
+   - Determine whether the current directory is already a bootstrapped project. Treat it as bootstrapped when it has meaningful `README.md` plus `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md`; treat it as unbootstrapped when those are missing, placeholder-only, or the user is describing an idea outside any project repo.
+   - If `$ARGUMENTS` contains a rough idea, use it as the starting draft.
+   - If `$ARGUMENTS` names an app that matches `research/{app}/`, use app-scoped output paths. Otherwise use top-level `research/`.
+   - Determine the concept identity and a normalized concept slug as soon as either is known from `$ARGUMENTS`, repo context, or the interview. Normalize by lowercasing, removing URL suffix noise, replacing non-alphanumeric runs with `-`, trimming leading/trailing `-`, and dropping only project-wide brand prefixes when the remaining word is the actual scoped concept (for example, `poketo.work` -> `work`; `Poketo Core` -> `poketo-core`).
+   - If existing research or the prompt suggests multiple related concepts may exist, prefer slugged output paths over generic filenames. Reserve generic `concept-brief.md` only for a single unambiguous project-level concept.
+   - If no rough idea is available from arguments or repo context, ask the user for the idea in plain language.
+
+2. **Keep the boundary clear**
+   - Do not run ICP, competitive analysis, journey mapping, UX variation, UI interview, roadmap, or implementation planning inside this skill.
+   - Do not validate the market with broad web research. Use light repo/context inspection only; downstream research skills own evidence gathering.
+   - Treat every user claim as a hypothesis unless supported by existing project files.
+
+3. **Surface a Concept Assumptions Manifest**
+   - Before deep questioning, present what you think the concept is.
+   - Tag assumptions as `[from prompt]`, `[from repo]`, `[from research]`, or `[inferred]`.
+   - Cover:
+     - concept summary
+     - problem hypothesis
+     - target beneficiary or user hypothesis
+     - product/category guess
+     - value wedge
+     - constraints
+     - non-goals
+     - riskiest unknowns
+   - Ask the user to confirm, correct, or flag assumptions before writing.
+
+4. **Interview until concept-ready**
+   - Ask 1 to 3 focused questions per turn.
+   - Resolve only concept-level ambiguity:
+     - what problem exists
+     - who might care
+     - what outcome changes for them
+     - what makes the idea different enough to investigate
+     - what must stay out of scope
+     - what constraints are real now
+   - When unsure, recommend a practical default and clearly mark it as an assumption.
+
+5. **Coverage checkpoint**
+   - Present the final concept summary, unknowns, and readiness for ICP.
+   - Restate the resolved concept identity, slug, and exact output paths before writing.
+   - If the conversation pivoted from the initial concept to a different central concept, write the pivoted concept to its own slugged brief and preserve the initial concept as a related or future concept in the brief and interview log. Do not merge both concepts into one generic project-level brief.
+   - Ask whether any core premise, constraint, or non-goal is wrong before writing.
+
+## Output
+
+Write:
+
+- For one unambiguous project-level concept only: `research/concept-brief.md` and `research/concept-brief-interview.md`.
+- When a concept identity is known, multiple concepts exist or may exist, or a pivot occurs: `research/concept-brief-{slug}.md` and `research/concept-brief-{slug}-interview.md`.
+- If `$ARGUMENTS` names an app that matches `research/{app}/`, use the same filenames under `research/{app}/`: `research/{app}/concept-brief-{slug}.md` and `research/{app}/concept-brief-{slug}-interview.md`, or unsuffixed app-scoped files only when that app has one unambiguous concept.
+
+The concept brief must include:
+
+- `## Summary`
+- `## Problem Hypothesis`
+- `## Beneficiary Hypothesis`
+- `## Product Category Guess`
+- `## Value Wedge`
+- `## Constraints`
+- `## Non-Goals`
+- `## Assumptions And Unknowns`
+- `## ICP Readiness`
+- `## Next Steps`
+
+The `## ICP Readiness` section must state whether the concept is ready for `/icp`, what inputs `/icp` should use, and which assumptions should be tested first.
+
+The `## Next Steps` section must recommend exactly one primary command:
+
+- If the concept appears to be a business app or user-facing product and the business discovery lane is not enabled: `/pack install business-discovery` — this installs the research skills (ICP, competitive analysis, value prop, positioning, lean canvas) needed before any repo bootstrapping or development.
+- If `business-discovery` or the compatibility `business-app` alias is enabled: `/icp`
+- If the concept already has ICP/market evidence but needs journey, onboarding, conversion, or retention planning: `/pack install customer-lifecycle`
+- If project type is unclear: `/pack recommend`
+
+Include 1-3 other options only when they are materially useful.
+
+### Alignment Page
+
+Follow the shared Alignment Page convention in CLAUDE.md. Output: `alignment/concept-exploration-{topic}.html`.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Keep the skill short and pre-research.
+- Do not write specs, UX variants, UI specs, roadmap phases, or implementation tasks.
+- Do not recommend `/scaffold` unless the user explicitly asks to create a package/app shell before research; normal product flow scaffolds after research, prototype consolidation, spec, roadmap, and phase planning identify the first implementation target. `/scaffold` requires the monorepo pack (`/pack install monorepo`).
+- Do not update `tasks/todo.md`.
+- New files do not need archive snapshots. Before replacing an existing concept brief, including slugged briefs, archive it to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-relative-path>`.
+
+## Default Shipping Contract
+
+Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.