skillpacks 0.1.1 → 0.1.2

package/packs/research-admin/codex/research-roadmap/archive/v0.17/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,466 @@
+---
+name: research-roadmap
+description: Scan research and documentation health, then maintain a priority documentation queue
+type: planning
+version: v0.17
+invocation: orchestrator
+---
+
+## Pack Availability Guard
+
+Before telling the user to run a skill from another project-local pack, check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs`. If the target pack is not enabled, recommend `npx skillpacks install <pack>` instead of the target skill. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.
+
+# Research Roadmap - Documentation Queue Manager
+
+Invoke as `$research-roadmap`.
+
+Use this skill to make the project documentation contract complete before build work continues. It scans research, specs, and task docs, then updates `tasks/todo.md` with immediately actionable documentation work and uses `tasks/record-todo.md` or `tasks/recurring-todo.md` for non-blocking future documentation records.
+
+Do not run the queued research skills from this skill. The job here is to maintain the documentation queue so the user can complete research and planning artifacts in the right order.
+
+Queue direct skill commands only: the unchecked todo item must name the research or planning skill itself, such as `$customer-discovery`, `$journey-map`, or `$devtool-user-map`. Do not prepend `$exec`, `$exec --phase`, or any execution-loop wrapper to named research-skill routes; users invoke those research skills directly.
+
+## 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.
+
+### 0. Parse Mode Arguments
+
+Parse `$ARGUMENTS` for mode flags:
+
+- `--post-prototype`: Post-prototype research refresh mode
+- `--post-spec`: Post-spec research refresh mode
+- No flags: default documentation queue mode (existing behavior)
+
+If `--post-prototype` is present, skip to the Post-Prototype Process below.
+If `--post-spec` is present, skip to the Post-Spec Process below.
+Otherwise, continue with the standard process starting at step 1.
+
+### 1. Resolve Project Pack
+
+1. Read `.agents/project.json` if it exists.
+2. Use `project_type` and `enabled_packs` to decide which project-pack research skills apply.
+3. If `.agents/project.json` is missing, infer the project type from repository signals:
+   - game: game engine files, Steam/store assets, playable prototypes, or game-specific README/spec language
+   - devtool: SDK, CLI, API, library, infra, docs, examples, or package-first developer workflow
+   - business-app: SaaS, marketplace, productivity, workflow, enterprise, or user-facing app
+4. If the project type cannot be inferred, default to `business-app`.
+5. If an expected pack is not installed, add a priority todo for `npx skillpacks install <pack>` before pack-specific research todos.
+
+### 2. Resolve Documentation Roots
+
+Treat top-level `research/`, `specs/`, and `tasks/` as canonical.
+
+1. If a canonical root exists, use it directly.
+2. If a canonical root is missing, search shallowly near the repo root for likely aliases such as `docs/`, `planning/`, `notes/`, or `work/`.
+3. Prefer roots that contain multiple expected documentation files over isolated matches.
+4. If no credible task root exists, create/update top-level `tasks/todo.md`; create `tasks/record-todo.md` or `tasks/recurring-todo.md` only when advisory items exist.
+5. If a fallback root is used for research or specs, mention it in the generated todo item reasons.
+
+For writing the priority queue, prefer `tasks/todo.md`. Use a fallback task root only when the project already has a clear existing task contract and no top-level `tasks/` directory. Do not put condition-gated records or recurring obligations into `tasks/todo.md` unless they are immediately actionable execution work.
+
+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. Interpret `active_paths` as the current product/app/ICP focuses and `product_paths[]` as the product-path manifest. Valid statuses include `active`, `deferred`, `archived`, `promoted`, and `revisit_candidate`; these are research product-path states, not git branches.
+
+### 3. Discover Research-Producing Skills
+
+Build the research queue from enabled project packs. Include every enabled research-producing skill whose output is missing or stale, even if its prerequisites are not yet present. When prerequisites are missing, keep the item in the queue but note that it is blocked by earlier documentation items.
+
+Prefer dynamic discovery when skill files are available:
+
+1. Inspect enabled pack skill files under `.codex/skills/*/SKILL.md` or `packs/<pack>/codex/*/SKILL.md`.
+2. Include skills with `type: research`.
+3. Also include skills whose `## Output` section writes `research/*.md`, `research/{slug}/*.md`, `research/experiments/*.md`, or dated research files.
+
+If dynamic discovery is unavailable, use these fallback maps.
+
+Business-app research outputs:
+
+| Skill | Output |
+| --- | --- |
+| `$customer-discovery` | `research/icp.md` |
+| `$competitive-analysis` | `research/competitive-analysis.md` |
+| `$journey-map` | `research/journey-map.md` |
+| `$positioning` | `research/positioning.md` |
+| `$metrics` | `research/metrics.md` |
+| `$gtm` | `research/gtm.md` |
+| `$monetization` | `research/monetization.md` |
+| `$landing-copy` | `research/landing-copy.md` |
+| `$customer-feedback` | `research/customer-feedback.md` |
+| `$assumption-tracker` | `research/assumption-tracker.md` |
+| `$experiment` | `research/experiments/<experiment>.md` |
+| `$enterprise-icp` | `research/enterprise-icp.md` |
+| `$risk-register` | `research/risk-register.md` |
+| `$burn-rate` | `research/burn-rate.md` |
+| `$runway-model` | `research/runway-model.md` |
+| `$cohort-review` | `research/cohort-review-YYYY-MM-DD.md` |
+| `$retro` | `research/retro-YYYY-MM-DD.md` |
+| `$investor-update` | `research/investor-update-YYYY-MM.md` |
+| `$platform-strategy` | `research/platform-strategy.md` |
+| `$product-line review` | `research/.progress.yaml` |
+| `$mvp-gap` | `research/mvp-gap.md` |
+
+Game research outputs:
+
+| Skill | Output |
+| --- | --- |
+| `$game-audience` | `research/game-audience.md` |
+| `$game-fantasy` | `research/game-fantasy.md` |
+| `$game-genre-map` | `research/game-genre-map.md` |
+| `$game-comparables` | `research/game-comparables.md` |
+| `$game-core-loop` | `research/game-core-loop.md` |
+| `$game-prototype-test` | `research/game-prototype-test.md` |
+| `$game-playtest-metrics` | `research/game-playtest-metrics.md` |
+| `$game-store-page-test` | `research/game-store-page-test.md` |
+| `$game-launch` | `research/game-launch.md` |
+
+Devtool research outputs:
+
+| Skill | Output |
+| --- | --- |
+| `$devtool-user-map` | `research/devtool-user-map.md` |
+| `$devtool-integration-map` | `research/devtool-integration-map.md` |
+| `$devtool-dx-journey` | `research/devtool-dx-journey.md` |
+| `$devtool-adoption` | `research/devtool-adoption.md` |
+| `$devtool-positioning` | `research/devtool-positioning.md` |
+| `$devtool-monetization` | `research/devtool-monetization.md` |
+| `$devtool-docs-audit` | `research/devtool-docs-audit.md` |
+
+Also include documentation-producing non-research skills when their outputs are missing or stale:
+
+| Skill | Output |
+| --- | --- |
+| `$idea-scope-brief` | `research/idea-brief.md` or `research/{slug}/idea-brief.md` |
+| `$user-flow-map` | `specs/user-flow-*.md` or `specs/{slug}/user-flow-*.md` |
+| `$spec-interview` | `specs/*.md` |
+| `$ux-variations` | `specs/ux-variations-*.md` |
+| `$ui-interview` | `specs/ui-*.md` |
+| `$scale-audit` | `specs/scale-audit.md` |
+| `$roadmap` | `tasks/roadmap.md`, `tasks/todo.md` |
+| `$game-roadmap` | `tasks/roadmap.md`, `tasks/todo.md` |
+| `$reconcile-research fix all` | `research/reconciliation-report.md` |
+| `$reconcile-dev-docs fix all` | reconciled `tasks/`, `specs/`, and phase archives |
+| `$youtube-audit` | `research/youtube-audit-YYYY-MM-DD.md` |
+
+### 4. Scan Documentation State
+
+Record existence and last-modified timestamps for:
+
+- all discovered research outputs
+- `research/idea-brief.md` and product-path-scoped `research/{slug}/idea-brief.md` when present
+- `research/*-search-log.md` and `research/*-interview.md` only as supporting context, not primary completion artifacts
+- `specs/*.md` and product-path-scoped `specs/{slug}/*.md`
+- `specs/user-flow-*.md` and product-path-scoped `specs/{slug}/user-flow-*.md`
+- `specs/ux-variations-*.md` and product-path-scoped `specs/{slug}/ux-variations-*.md`
+- `specs/ui-*.md` and product-path-scoped `specs/{slug}/ui-*.md`
+- `prototypes/` prototype directories and consolidated prototype directories when present
+- `tasks/roadmap.md`
+- `tasks/todo.md`
+- `tasks/history.md`
+- `tasks/ideas.md`
+- `tasks/manual-todo.md`
+- `tasks/record-todo.md`
+- `tasks/recurring-todo.md`
+
+When `research/` contains product-path subdirectories, treat it as product-path mode. Build a separate documentation queue per product path and include product-path arguments in commands, such as `$customer-discovery web`.
+
+### 5. Classify Missing And Stale Items
+
+An item is missing when its expected output file does not exist.
+
+An item is stale when a newer upstream document should invalidate or refresh it. Include the exact timestamps in the todo reason. Use these default rules:
+
+| Newer input | Stale target |
+| --- | --- |
+| `research/idea-brief.md` or `research/{slug}/idea-brief.md` | matching `research/icp.md` or `research/{slug}/icp.md` |
+| `research/customer-feedback.md` | `research/icp.md`, `research/journey-map.md`, `research/monetization.md`, `research/landing-copy.md` |
+| `research/icp.md` | `research/competitive-analysis.md`, `research/positioning.md`, `research/gtm.md`, `research/monetization.md`, `research/landing-copy.md` |
+| `research/competitive-analysis.md` | `research/positioning.md`, `research/gtm.md`, `research/monetization.md`, `research/landing-copy.md` |
+| `research/positioning.md` | `specs/user-flow-*.md`, `research/gtm.md`, `research/landing-copy.md` |
+| `research/journey-map.md` | `specs/user-flow-*.md`, `research/metrics.md`, `research/gtm.md`, `research/monetization.md`, `research/landing-copy.md` |
+| `research/metrics.md` | `research/cohort-review-*.md`, `research/runway-model.md`, `research/investor-update-*.md` |
+| `research/gtm.md` | `research/monetization.md`, `research/runway-model.md`, `research/investor-update-*.md` |
+| `research/monetization.md` | `research/burn-rate.md`, `research/runway-model.md`, `research/investor-update-*.md` |
+| `research/experiments/*.md` with results | `research/assumption-tracker.md` |
+| `research/cohort-review-*.md` latest | `research/metrics.md`, `research/gtm.md`, `research/monetization.md`, `research/investor-update-*.md` |
+| `research/enterprise-icp.md` | `specs/scale-audit.md` |
+| `research/journey-map.md` | `specs/user-flow-*.md`, `specs/*.md`, `specs/ux-variations-*.md`, `specs/ui-*.md`, `research/metrics.md`, `research/gtm.md`, `research/monetization.md`, `research/landing-copy.md` |
+| `specs/user-flow-*.md` | `specs/ui-*.md`, `specs/ux-variations-*.md`, `prototypes/**`, `tasks/roadmap.md` |
+| any non-UX/UI `specs/*.md` | `specs/ux-variations-*.md`, `specs/ui-*.md`, `tasks/roadmap.md` |
+| `specs/ui-requirements-*.md` | `specs/ux-variations-*.md`, `prototypes/**`, `tasks/roadmap.md` |
+| `specs/ux-variations-*.md` | `prototypes/**`, `tasks/roadmap.md` |
+| `specs/ui-*.md` | `tasks/roadmap.md` |
+| `research/runway-model.md` | `tasks/roadmap.md` |
+
+Also flag potentially stale specs when source code has commits newer than the spec files. Add `$spec-drift fix all` as a priority documentation item when specs are probably behind implementation.
+
+Do not queue a missing `$idea-scope-brief` item for established projects that already have `research/icp.md`, `research/competitive-analysis.md`, `research/journey-map.md`, or `specs/`. Queue it only for idea-only projects where no idea brief or downstream research/spec artifact exists.
+
+### 6. Order The Priority Queue
+
+Order immediately actionable todo items so the user can complete documentation without guessing:
+
+1. Pack installation needed for the selected project type.
+2. Stale foundational research.
+3. Missing foundational research.
+4. Stale downstream research.
+5. Missing downstream research.
+6. Missing or stale flow/spec artifacts.
+7. Missing or stale user-flow, UI-requirements, UX/UI planning, and prototype artifacts for user-facing work, in that order.
+8. Missing or stale roadmap/task docs.
+9. Reconciliation items when conflicting docs are detected.
+
+Within research items, use this dependency order when relevant. When emitting queued commands for pack-based skills, apply the Pack Availability Guard — if the target skill's pack is not in `.agents/project.json` `enabled_packs`, queue `npx skillpacks install <pack>` before the skill:
+
+When `research/.progress.yaml` exists, show per-path pipeline progress alongside the priority queue. For each path in `active_paths`, show its `pipeline_stage` and queue the next missing research step. For `deferred` or `revisit_candidate` paths, add a concise record or queue note with the `revisit_trigger` and `next_skill` rather than scheduling full downstream research. When 3+ deferred paths accumulate with no recent activation, add `$product-line review` as a priority queue item to prompt portfolio review.
+
+```
+$idea-scope-brief
+  -> $customer-discovery
+  -> $competitive-analysis
+  -> $journey-map
+  -> $positioning
+    -> $user-flow-map
+      -> $ui-interview --requirements-only
+        -> $ux-variations --layout-mode
+          -> $prototype
+          -> $uat --variant-evaluation
+            -> $consolidate-variations
+              -> $research-roadmap --post-prototype
+                -> $spec-interview
+                  -> $roadmap
+    -> $metrics
+  -> $gtm
+  -> $monetization
+  -> $landing-copy
+3+ research docs -> $assumption-tracker -> $experiment -> $customer-feedback
+$enterprise-icp -> $scale-audit
+$metrics + launch data -> $cohort-review
+$monetization -> $burn-rate -> $runway-model
+quarterly/outcome data -> $retro
+stakeholder reporting -> $investor-update
+multi-product expansion -> $platform-strategy
+3+ deferred product paths -> $product-line review
+```
+
+For game and devtool projects, follow the default pack flow from `docs/skills-reference.md` when available. Add review or planning skills such as `$devtool-docs-audit` and `$game-roadmap` only when their documented output is missing from the documentation contract.
+
+Default devtool order:
+
+```
+$devtool-user-map
+  -> $devtool-integration-map
+    -> $devtool-dx-journey
+      -> $devtool-adoption
+        -> $devtool-positioning
+          -> $devtool-monetization
+            -> $devtool-docs-audit
+              -> $research-roadmap
+```
+
+### 6b. Classify Advisory Documentation Work
+
+Before writing any queue, choose the correct task surface:
+
+- `tasks/todo.md`: missing/stale documentation work that can be performed now with available repo context and normal skill inputs.
+- `tasks/record-todo.md`: one-time documentation records or measurements that are blocked on future conditions, production aggregate access, external reports, user-provided data, or launch data, and are not launch gates.
+- `tasks/recurring-todo.md`: cohort reviews, retros, investor updates, playtest/adoption checks, docs-health checks, or other documentation jobs that recur on a cadence.
+
+Record items must include task, source, condition, non-blocking reason, required data/access, measurement/query, target/acceptance note, revisit cadence/date, completion evidence, and promotion rule. Recurring items must include task, cadence, owner/agent, scope, trigger, last run, next due, command/skill, evidence/output path, and escalation conditions.
+
+### 7. Update `tasks/todo.md`
+
+Write a single top-level section named exactly:
+
+```md
+## Priority Documentation Todo
+```
+
+Rules:
+
+1. If `tasks/todo.md` does not exist, create it.
+2. If a previous `## Priority Documentation Todo` section exists, replace only that section.
+3. Put the section before existing implementation work. If the file starts with a title or status block, keep that orientation text at the top and insert the priority section immediately after it.
+4. Preserve all other todo content exactly unless it is inside the old priority section.
+5. Do not mark existing implementation tasks complete.
+6. Do not remove unrelated todo sections.
+7. Use unchecked boxes only for missing/stale documentation work that is immediately actionable.
+8. Use checked boxes only when an item is already current.
+
+Todo item format:
+
+```md
+- [ ] `$skill [optional-app-or-argument]` - create/update `path/to/output.md` because [missing/stale reason with evidence].
+```
+
+The command must be the direct named skill route, for example `$customer-discovery`, not `$exec $customer-discovery`, `$exec --phase`, or another execution-loop wrapper.
+
+If prerequisites are missing:
+
+```md
+- [ ] `$metrics` - create/update `research/metrics.md` after `$journey-map`; currently blocked because `research/journey-map.md` is missing.
+```
+
+Do not write unavailable-data or cadence-gated items here. Write those to `tasks/record-todo.md` or `tasks/recurring-todo.md` instead.
+
+### 7b. Update `tasks/record-todo.md`
+
+When non-blocking condition-gated documentation records exist, append or replace a `## Documentation Records` section in `tasks/record-todo.md`. Preserve all other sections exactly.
+
+Use this item format:
+
+```md
+- [ ] [record task]
+  - Source: [skill/spec/phase/criterion]
+  - Condition: [future condition or required access]
+  - Non-blocking reason: [why this does not block launch or current execution]
+  - Required data/access: [data, aggregate, portal, credential, or user-provided output]
+  - Measurement/query: [how to produce the record]
+  - Target/acceptance note: [threshold or expected note]
+  - Revisit: [date or cadence]
+  - Completion evidence: [research path, history entry, or report path]
+  - Promotion rule: [when to move into `tasks/todo.md`]
+```
+
+### 7c. Update `tasks/recurring-todo.md`
+
+When recurring documentation work exists, append or replace a `## Documentation Recurring Work` section in `tasks/recurring-todo.md`. Preserve all other sections exactly.
+
+Use this item format:
+
+```md
+- [ ] [recurring task]
+  - Cadence: [daily/weekly/monthly/quarterly/on release/etc.]
+  - Owner/agent: [$skill or responsible role]
+  - Scope: [project/app/area]
+  - Trigger: [time, release, data threshold, user request]
+  - Last run: [date or never]
+  - Next due: [date or rule]
+  - Command/skill: [$skill args]
+  - Evidence/output path: [research/report path]
+  - Escalation conditions: [when this becomes executable or blocking]
+```
+
+If all documentation is current:
+
+```md
+- [x] Documentation is current; no missing or stale research, spec, roadmap, or task artifacts found.
+```
+
+### 8. Output To User
+
+After editing, summarize:
+
+```
+## Research Roadmap Updated
+
+- Wrote/updated `tasks/todo.md` and any needed advisory task files
+- Priority documentation items: N
+- Stale items: N
+- Missing items: N
+- Blocked-by-prerequisite items: N
+- Record items: N
+- Recurring items: N
+
+Next: start at the first unchecked item in `tasks/todo.md`; review advisory task files separately. If there are no unchecked priority documentation items and no promotable advisory items, route to `$brainstorm` for candidate next-phase discovery unless the latest user request explicitly asks to pause, park, archive, or wait.
+```
+
+If fallback discovery was used, include a short note naming the inferred roots.
+
+## Next-Step Routing
+
+Before handing back, identify the next concrete documentation, planning, or discovery route from project state.
+
+Output exactly two lines beyond the normal report:
+
+- **Next work:** <specific documentation task, promotable advisory review, discovery task, or explicit parked state>
+- **Recommended next command:** <one command or route>
+
+Rules:
+
+- Recommend the first unchecked `## Priority Documentation Todo` item when one exists.
+- If a record or recurring item appears promotable to concrete execution work, recommend reviewing or promoting that item rather than discovery.
+- Do not emit `Recommended next command: none` unless the latest user request explicitly asks to pause, park, archive, or wait.
+- If documentation is current and no advisory item is promotable, route to new-phase discovery: `**Next work:** discover candidate next phase or explicitly park the project` and `**Recommended next command:** $brainstorm`.
+- Use `$feature-interview` instead of `$brainstorm` when the project already has a concrete unspecced idea selected but still needs planning-destination triage. Use `$spec-interview` only when full-spec creation is already confirmed.
+
+## Post-Prototype Process (`--post-prototype`)
+
+### Gate
+
+A consolidated prototype must exist at `prototypes/{topic}/consolidated/`. If missing, halt and recommend `$consolidate-variations` first.
+
+### Scan
+
+1. Read the consolidated prototype directory to understand what was built.
+2. Read all research docs: `research/idea-brief.md`, `research/icp.md`, `research/competitive-analysis.md`, `research/journey-map.md`, and any other `research/*.md` files. Read `specs/user-flow-*.md` when present as the approved flow-structure bridge between research and prototype.
+3. For each research document, compare against the consolidated prototype:
+   - **User flows**: Does the prototype's flow match the journey map's discovery -> onboarding -> aha -> conversion -> retention path?
+   - **Approved flow map**: Does the prototype preserve the `specs/user-flow-*.md` entry points, screen order, decisions, branches, required states, failure/recovery paths, and handoffs?
+   - **Onboarding**: Does the prototype's first-run experience match ICP expectations for technical sophistication and time-to-value?
+   - **Density and copy**: Does the prototype's information density and copy tone match ICP communication preferences?
+   - **Interactions**: Do the prototype's interaction patterns match journey-map touchpoints and competitive differentiation?
+   - **Differentiation**: Does the prototype demonstrate the competitive advantages identified in competitive analysis?
+4. Flag research documents that are contradicted or made stale by prototype decisions.
+5. If `research/positioning.md` exists and contains `> Mode: Market Positioning`, flag as: "Positioning was hypothesized pre-product. Prototype evidence may support re-running `$positioning product` for customer-grounded product positioning."
+
+### Output
+
+Populate `tasks/todo.md` `## Priority Documentation Todo` with research skills that need re-running, using the same format as the standard process. Each item must explain what the prototype revealed that contradicts or supersedes the current research document.
+
+**Next step:** first unchecked queued item in `tasks/todo.md`, using the direct skill command written in that item.
+
+## Post-Spec Process (`--post-spec`)
+
+### Gate
+
+A production spec must exist at `specs/{topic}.md`. If missing, halt and recommend `$spec-interview` first.
+
+### Scan
+
+1. Read the production spec to understand implementation constraints.
+2. Read all research docs.
+3. For each research document, compare against spec constraints:
+   - **Auth model**: Does the research assume an auth model that the spec changed?
+   - **Data model**: Does the research assume data structures that the spec redesigned?
+   - **Performance**: Does the research assume performance characteristics that the spec's architecture contradicts?
+   - **Deployment**: Does the research assume a deployment model that the spec changed?
+4. Flag research documents that are invalidated by spec constraints.
+5. If `research/positioning.md` exists and contains `> Mode: Market Positioning`, flag as: "Positioning was hypothesized pre-product. Spec constraints and prototype evidence may support re-running `$positioning product` for customer-grounded product positioning."
+
+### Output
+
+Populate `tasks/todo.md` `## Priority Documentation Todo` with research skills that need re-running. Each item must explain what spec constraint invalidates the current research document.
+
+**Next step:** first unchecked queued item in `tasks/todo.md`, using the direct skill command written in that item.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Update `tasks/todo.md`, `tasks/record-todo.md`, and `tasks/recurring-todo.md`; it must not run the queued skills.
+- Preserve user-authored todo content outside `## Priority Documentation Todo`.
+- Preserve user-authored record/recurring content outside `## Documentation Records` and `## Documentation Recurring Work`.
+- Every stale item must include timestamp evidence.
+- Every enabled research-producing skill must be represented unless its output is present and fresh.
+- Prefer canonical `research/`, `specs/`, and `tasks/` paths over aliases.
+- In product-path mode, include product-path-scoped commands and output paths.
+- Do not put condition-gated measurements, future validation records, or cadence-based research jobs into `tasks/todo.md` unless they are immediately executable.
+- Do not create or modify source code.
+
+## 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/research-roadmap-{topic}.html`.
+
+## Default Shipping Contract
+
+Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.

package/packs/session-analytics/claude/analyze-sessions/ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Alignment Page — analyze-sessions
 
-When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports, prototypes, or any document output), build a full-depth HTML alignment page at `alignment/analyze-sessions-{topic}.html`. Use a normalized topic slug derived from the app, feature, research subject, report subject, or output filename.
+Alignment pages are optional for this operational skill. By default, report the outcome inline and write only the skill's normal durable artifacts (`tasks/*.md`, reports, queues, benchmark notes, status docs, or other skill-specific files). Build `alignment/analyze-sessions-{topic}.html` only when the user explicitly requests an alignment page or when the agent explicitly identifies a concrete clarification/review need that cannot be resolved cleanly in conversation or the normal artifacts. When an alignment page is created, use the full contract below and a normalized topic slug derived from the app, feature, research subject, report subject, or output filename.
 
 **Visual rendering tier.** Each alignment page declares a rendering tier:
 - `document` (default) — text, tables, approval gates. No charts or interactive elements.
@@ -9,6 +9,8 @@ When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports,
 
 The tier is set per skill via `visual_tier` in SKILL.md frontmatter (or detected by the upgrade script). The bundled ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md receives tier-appropriate rendering guidance from the generator.
 
+**Context intake.** This skill declares `context_intake: artifact_only` (Artifact-driven). Work from concrete artifacts, data, logs, or existing instructions by default; ask concise clarification questions only when the available artifacts are missing, contradictory, or unsafe to interpret.
+
 **Alignment lifecycle.** Alignment pages have three lifecycle states. `review` is the draft/pre-approval page: it contains the complete deliverable preview, evidence, required inline gate questions, section feedback controls, local section-feedback YAML only after a section feedback choice is selected, and one bottom `Compile Responses` control. `confirmed` is the post-approval page after the agent has consumed final compiled response YAML, made any approved user-requested edits, and written or updated the approved canonical artifacts. A confirmed page is finished and current for the completed alignment cycle, but it remains amendable when later research changes or extends the conclusions. `amended` is a future revision of a confirmed page: archive the previous confirmed page first, mark what changed, preserve the prior approval record, and highlight the new evidence, decisions, or scope that changed the earlier conclusion.
 
 **Central alignment index.** When a research-producing skill writes or updates an HTML alignment page, also maintain the repository's central alignment index. Look for `alignment/index.html` at the repository root; if the target repo documents a different central alignment-index path, use that path and report it. If the index does not exist, create it as a self-contained HTML page that works from `file://`, links to every active `alignment/*.html` page except itself, and includes the newly written page. Every index entry must include the page's alignment date in a muted meta span after the link, formatted `YYYY-MM-DD`, for example `<a href="page.html">Title</a> <span class="meta">2026-06-09</span>`. The alignment date is the review or confirmed date written inside the page itself; new pages use today's date. If the index exists, update it instead of blindly appending: preserve valid existing entries, metadata, and entry dates; remove duplicate entries for the same page path; keep links repo-relative; and include the new or updated page. When updating an existing index, add a date only to entries that are missing one, deriving it from the page's internal alignment date, or from file history when the page has no internal date. If a `new` marker is used, combine it with the date as `<span class="meta">new · YYYY-MM-DD</span>`, and remove stale `new` markers from entries that are no longer the latest addition.
@@ -57,7 +59,9 @@ The tier is set per skill via `visual_tier` in SKILL.md frontmatter (or detected
 
 **Report-only research gates.** For report-only or pre-approval research skills, the first `review` alignment page must explicitly contain proposed research scope, source plan, assumptions/confidence, recommended output path, proposed file changes, and approval gates before synthesized research begins and before any working packet, canonical research, spec, or task file is created or updated.
 
-**Staged research workflow.** Heavy report-first research uses a scope-first three-stage approval workflow. Stage 1 is minimal scope discovery only: inspect enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the `review` alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, and research-scope approval gates. Stop for final compiled response YAML approval of the research scope. Do not synthesize findings, rank candidates, recommend a path, or create working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1. Stage 2 starts only after final compiled response YAML approves the research scope with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet. Flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-analyze-sessions-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-analyze-sessions-research.md`. Existing raw evidence or search-log outputs may remain as supporting evidence when the skill contract already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the same `review` alignment page so it renders the full preliminary packet, evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Partial compiled responses revise the working packet and review page, then remain in Stage 2. Stage 3 consumes final compiled response YAML for artifact approval only when it has `approval_status: ready-for-agent-review` and no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>`, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths, and convert the page to `confirmed` with the approval record preserved.
+**Staged research workflow.** Heavy report-first research uses a scope-first three-stage approval workflow. Stage 1 is minimal scope discovery only: inspect enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the `review` alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, research-scope approval gates, and a `Stage 2 Preview / Expected Review Format` section that shows the future Stage 2 review shape before research starts. Stop for final compiled response YAML approval of the research scope. Do not synthesize findings, rank candidates, recommend a path, or create working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1. Stage 2 starts only after final compiled response YAML approves the research scope with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet. Flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-analyze-sessions-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-analyze-sessions-research.md`. Existing raw evidence or search-log outputs may remain as supporting evidence when the skill contract already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the same `review` alignment page so it renders the complete working-packet substance as structured HTML review UI: purpose-built sections, tables, matrices, gates, cards, and tier-appropriate charts or diagrams that preserve every packet section, finding, caveat, and decision detail without summary loss. Raw Markdown packet text may appear only as a supplemental source view after the rendered review UI; do not make a `Full Preliminary Packet` or `Full Working Packet` raw Markdown dump, giant `<pre><code>` block, link-only view, or source-only view the primary review surface. Include the evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Partial compiled responses revise the working packet and review page, then remain in Stage 2. Stage 3 consumes final compiled response YAML for artifact approval only when it has `approval_status: ready-for-agent-review` and no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>`, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths, and convert the page to `confirmed` with the approval record preserved.
+
+**Stage 2 review-page template.** Stage 1 scope-review pages must include a `Stage 2 Preview / Expected Review Format` section that previews the exact section sequence, table shapes, evidence treatment, visual density, and approval gates the user will see after research; make it specific enough for the user to flag preferred content formats, grouping, labels, visuals, and evidence density before the agent does heavy research. After scope approval and research, the Stage 2 review page must include these sections as structured HTML, not as raw Markdown dumps: `Research Scope Approved` status block with approved scope, source plan, output paths, and unresolved caveats; `Executive Findings` or a skill-specific top-findings section with confidence labels; `Evidence Matrix` mapping claim, evidence/source/path, inference, confidence, assumptions, and decision impact; `Working Packet Review` with the complete working-packet substance rendered as purpose-built HTML sections, lists, tables, matrices, cards, and tier-appropriate charts or diagrams; `Alternatives / Rejected or Lower-Confidence Findings`; `Source Coverage & Gaps`; `Assumptions / Confidence Register`; `Proposed Canonical Artifacts & File Changes`; a required `User Format Preferences` gate asking whether the layout, tables, grouping, visuals, labels, and evidence density match expectations; and a required `Final Artifact Approval` gate for Stage 3 readiness. Raw Markdown packet text, search logs, or source notes may appear only as supplemental source views after the rendered review UI and never replace the Stage 2 review sections.
 
 **Visual tier rendering.** This skill's alignment page uses the `visual` tier. Inline charts and diagrams are rendered via self-contained Canvas/SVG within the HTML file. Use the alignment chart snippet library (`scripts/alignment-chart-snippets.js`) as reference — copy needed chart functions directly into the page's `<script>` block. Charts must read CSS variables (`--chart-1` through `--chart-8`) for the data visualization palette. Every chart must include a `<table>` fallback, `aria-label` on canvas/SVG, and a "View as table" toggle. Data is embedded as inline JSON — no external fetches.
 

package/packs/session-analytics/claude/analyze-sessions/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,5 +1,13 @@
 # Changelog
 
+## v0.4 - 2026-06-12
+
+- Made alignment pages optional by default: report inline and write the skill's normal durable artifacts unless the user requests an alignment page or the agent identifies a concrete clarification/review need.
+
+## v0.3 - 2026-06-12
+
+- Standardized active pack and skill install guidance on `npx skillpacks install <pack-or-skill>` instead of agent-native `/pack install` or `$pack install` recommendations.
+
 ## v0.0
 
 - Archived previous skill contract.

package/packs/session-analytics/claude/analyze-sessions/SKILL.md

@@ -2,9 +2,9 @@
 name: analyze-sessions
 description: Analyze Claude Code and Codex session history for cross-session trends, recurring patterns, and automation opportunities
 type: analysis
-version: v0.2
+version: v0.4
 argument-hint: "[history file, session directory, repo path, date range, or trend question]"
-interview_depth: none
+context_intake: artifact_only
 visual_tier: visual
 ---
 
@@ -119,11 +119,11 @@ Produce a structured report with:
 - Do not diagnose one immediate issue here; route it to `/session-triage`.
 - Do not create or modify GitHub Actions workflows.
 - If one source is missing or unreadable, report that clearly and continue with the other source instead of guessing.
-- When recommending a skill from another pack, verify the pack is installed via `.agents/project.json` `enabled_packs`. If not installed, prepend `/pack install <pack-name>` to the recommendation.
+- When recommending a skill from another pack, verify the pack is installed via `.agents/project.json` `enabled_packs`. If not installed, prepend `npx skillpacks install <pack-name>` to the recommendation.
 
 ## 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/analyze-sessions-{topic}.html`.
+By default, this skill reports results inline and writes only its normal durable artifacts (for example `tasks/*.md`, reports, queues, benchmark notes, status docs, or other skill-specific files). Do not build an alignment page automatically. Create `alignment/analyze-sessions-{topic}.html` only when the user explicitly requests an alignment page or when you explicitly identify a concrete clarification/review need that cannot be handled cleanly inline; when you create one, follow `ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md` in this skill's directory.
 
 ## Default Shipping Contract