task-pipeline-skill 1.23.0 → 1.24.0

package/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,5 +1,105 @@
 # Changelog
 
+## v1.24.0
+
+### A rule that reached one file, and the guard shape that let it
+
+`v1.23.0` added rule 21 — *a step that consumes what a later step produces is a deadlock*
+— and reordered the retrospective's three acts to **stamp → prune → entry**. It changed
+`references/retrospective.md`. It changed nothing else.
+
+Every other surface still taught the deadlocked *prune first* — the list is the count,
+and it was written down rather than tallied, because a tally of this fix would be the
+defect the fix is about: `SKILL.md` twice (including
+the stage-10 gate row), `references/acceptance.md` three times, `references/stages.md`
+three times, `references/companion-skills.md`, `references/knowledge-sources.md`,
+`templates/retro.md`, `templates/README.md`, `commands/task-pipeline.md`,
+`cursor/rules/task-pipeline.mdc`, `docs/DOCMAP.md`, `README.md` and this repository's own
+`CLAUDE.md`. **`SKILL.md` is what an agent loads first**, so the most-read surface of the
+shipped skill instructed the exact failure its newest rule defines.
+
+**Why every existing guard was green.** Rules 16–21 each have a bespoke check that names
+its consumer files and asserts a needle is present. That answers *"did a consumer drop its
+citation?"* — a real failure, and it catches it. It cannot answer *"does a consumer
+contradict what it cites?"*, because a contradicting consumer **keeps** its citation: the
+link resolves, the section exists, the needle is there. A pointer's validity says nothing
+about whether the two texts agree.
+
+**The new guard compares order, not presence** — and derives the expected order from
+`retrospective.md`'s own heading **at check time**, so it cannot drift from the doctrine it
+guards the way a hardcoded literal would.
+
+Four deterministic shapes, each arrived at by probing rather than by trusting a green:
+
+- an adjacent enumeration (`prune, stamp` / `prune → stamp`);
+- the `first … then` construction, with an aside allowed between;
+- a bare `… then …` sequence with no "first" at all (`prune before you add … then stamp`);
+- an **ordered list** whose items open with the acts — which needs no connector word, and
+  which the first two shapes both missed.
+
+Each of the four was found by running the check and reading the result, not by writing it
+and shipping. Two of them were blind spots in the guard's *own* first version, and one of
+those was blind to the exact wording this release introduced.
+
+**Measured before shipping** (rule 10). The obvious predicate — *both act words in one
+paragraph* — returns 32 hits on this corpus, of which 22 are false, including
+`retrospective.md`'s own correct prose. The shipped predicate returns 8, all true. A
+paragraph narrating the old order as a defect is exempt through an explicit marker list;
+`learned.md`'s rule-21 incident and `retrospective.md`'s own rationale both need it.
+
+Swept in the same change, because the class is *a claim that stopped being true*:
+`SKILL-CARD.md` still said the eval suite was **"Never executed"** and counted "the 26
+files under `references/`" against a directory holding 28.
+
+## v1.23.1
+
+### Four documents that had gone false, and the config this repository never wrote
+
+A review of the hallucination-mitigation literature against this skill produced an
+uncomfortable result: the doctrine already covers almost every applicable mitigation the
+field names — grounding, constrained generation, post-processing that blocks unproven
+assertions, self-contradiction detection. What it does not cover is **this repository
+applying that doctrine to itself.** Everything below is a class the skill documents,
+found in the skill.
+
+**Four surfaces were stating numbers that had stopped being true.**
+
+- `README.md` and `SKILL.md` said `learned.md` carries *"fifteen rules"*. The table has
+  twenty-one. Both now describe the file without counting it — the table is the count,
+  the same fix `CLAUDE.md` already applies to the invariant list, and the reason is that
+  a hand-written count goes stale on the next rule rather than on the next audit.
+- `evals/RESULTS.md` opened with *"the suite is authored and has not been executed"* and
+  ratcheted *"Dated runs recorded 0"* — directly above a dated run, and directly on top
+  of `evals/run.py`, which computes `recorded runs: 1` and had been printing it for five
+  releases. The document and the tool beneath it disagreed, and nothing compared them.
+  The ratchet now carries what actually matters: one run, **self-observed**, and **zero
+  blind** — because collapsing those into a single total is how a self-check gets quoted
+  as a result.
+- `docs/DOCMAP.md` claimed two standing instructions against the retro's four, and
+  duplicated both eval numbers. Its ratchet table now names **homes and commands, never
+  values**. A ratchet copied into a second document is two ratchets, and the copy nobody
+  runs is the one people read.
+
+**`learned.md`'s own routing table stopped at rule 16.** Rules 17–21 were in the rule
+table, each guarded in its consumer files, and absent from *Where these bind in the
+pipeline* — the section an agent reads to learn *when* a rule applies. The rule's own
+failure mode, applied to the map of the rules. All twenty-one now name their stage, and
+the two mis-aimed citations that first attempt introduced were caught by the citation
+guard rather than by a reader, which is the guard doing exactly its job.
+
+**This repository had no `pipeline.json`.** The project that ships the config contract
+had never written its own, so `run.loop` was unrecorded, the mode defaulted to off, and
+every loop it ran was authorised in a chat message. There is now a real one: this repo's
+eleven stages with its real host commands, its release block, and the loop mode recorded
+as a file rather than remembered — including the note that the mode collapses
+discretionary check-ins only, and is never the authorization for the tag push.
+
+**Not fixed here, and named rather than quietly carried:** rule 21 changed the retro's
+order to *stamp first* in `references/retrospective.md` and in no other file. Eight
+sibling surfaces — `SKILL.md` included, which is what an agent loads first — still teach
+the deadlocked *prune first*. That is a gate contract, so it ships on its own branch with
+a guard that compares the class rather than one literal.
+
 ## v1.23.0
 
 ### A step that consumes what a later step produces is a deadlock — `learned.md` rule 21

package/CONTRIBUTING.md

@@ -67,10 +67,13 @@ These are what the validator enforces. Breaking one is not a style disagreement
 it ships a wrong pipeline to every install. Numbered in reading order; the numbers
 are labels, not priorities.
 
-**1. Four-way version sync.** `package.json`, `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json`
-(`plugins[0].version`), `plugins/task-pipeline/.claude-plugin/plugin.json` and the
-top `## vX.Y.Z` heading in `CHANGELOG.md` must all carry the same version.
-`SKILL-CARD.md`'s Version row is held to it too.
+**1. Version sync across every manifest surface.** `package.json`,
+`.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` (`plugins[0].version`),
+`plugins/task-pipeline/.claude-plugin/plugin.json`, the top `## vX.Y.Z` heading in
+`CHANGELOG.md` **and `SKILL-CARD.md`'s Version row** must all carry the same version.
+The invariant was called *four-way* until 2026-08-08 while listing five surfaces and
+while the validator enforced five — a name that counts is a number, and it drifts like
+one. The list is the count.
 
 **2. The stage list lives on three surfaces and may not drift.** `SKILL.md`'s
 table, `references/stages.md`'s per-stage sections, and `pipeline.example.json`.
@@ -257,7 +260,26 @@ every relative link **from the navigator's directory** — it sits one level ove
 everything it names, which is canon 4 in the file that publishes canon 4.
 *(guard: `index that has drifted from its doctrine`)*
 
-**34. Every invariant above names the guard that enforces it, and that guard exists.**This list claims to be *what the validator enforces*; it was eight guards behind when
+**34. No surface enumerates the retrospective's acts in an order that contradicts
+`references/retrospective.md`.** Rule 21 changed the order to *stamp first* in that one
+file and reached **no other surface that states it** — `SKILL.md` included, which is what
+an agent loads first. (No count here on purpose: whether it is nine, twelve or fifteen
+depends on counting files or occurrences, and this repository produced three different
+answers while writing the fix. The guard is the count.) Every per-rule guard has the same
+blind spot: it
+proves a consumer still **cites** the doctrine, and a contradicting consumer keeps its
+citation. So this one compares the **order** against the order derived from
+`retrospective.md`'s own heading at check time rather than a literal — in the shapes
+listed in the guard's own `SCOPE` comment, which is where they are enumerated so this
+list cannot go stale against them. **What the guard does not cover is written there
+too**: inflected forms, lists whose items are separated by blank lines, and any
+statement of the order that names neither act. Those are stated blind spots, not
+unnoticed ones.
+A paragraph that narrates the old order as the defect is exempt by an explicit marker
+list, not by a heuristic.
+*(guard: `enumerates the retro's acts as`)*
+
+**35. Every invariant above names the guard that enforces it, and that guard exists.**This list claims to be *what the validator enforces*; it was eight guards behind when
 an audit measured it. A claim of enforcement is now checked like any other claim.
 *(guard: `whose message does not appear in`)* — and a cited literal must lie inside
 a **single** string in `test/validate.py`: the check reads that file as text, so a

package/README.md

@@ -560,7 +560,9 @@ pipeline notices it is the same one.
 The last act of stage 10 is therefore a **retrospective**, written to
 `docs/superpowers/retro.md` — **one file per project, not per run**
 ([`retrospective.md`](plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/retrospective.md)).
-Every run **prunes and stamps**; only a run that *diverged* writes an entry:
+Every run **stamps and prunes** — in that order, because one retirement trigger
+counts firings across the last five run stamps and a prune ahead of the stamp reads a
+counter its own stage writes afterwards. Only a run that *diverged* writes an entry:
 symptom with evidence, the stage it surfaced at, the stage that **owned** it, the
 root cause, the fix, and the check that catches it the first time from now on.
 
@@ -572,7 +574,8 @@ root cause, the fix, and the check that catches it the first time from now on.
 | 2 — standing instruction | a rule agents read, for what no check can decide | one of ten slots, and its retirement trigger must be written at birth |
 | 3 — a note | something still being understood | expires in two runs, then it is promoted or deleted |
 
-**The prune is mandatory and runs before anything is added.** Every standing
+**The prune is mandatory, and it runs after the stamp and before anything is added.**
+Every standing
 instruction is checked against three retirement triggers — *it became a check* ·
 *every path or command it names is gone* · *it has not fired in the last five run
 stamps* — and the list is held to a **hard cap of ten**. At eleven, the oldest
@@ -808,7 +811,7 @@ recommendation, so you arm the whole run in one exchange. Detail:
 | [`references/adoption.md`](plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/adoption.md) | the first run in a project: greenfield seeding, and the brownfield walkthrough |
 | [`references/setup.md`](plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/setup.md) | the entry audit: seven passes over the docs a project already has, offered once, output as a fix plan |
 | [`references/portability.md`](plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/portability.md) | the manifest of workflow decisions and their homes in the bundle, and the boundary against a project's own answers |
-| [`references/learned.md`](plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/learned.md) | fifteen rules earned by failure on a real multi-repository build, each with its incident, its check and its exit criterion |
+| [`references/learned.md`](plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/learned.md) | rules earned by failure on a real multi-repository build, each with its incident, its check and its exit criterion — the table is the count, and it grows |
 | [`SKILL-CARD.md`](SKILL-CARD.md) | the registry entry and risk-tier disclosure a reviewer needs before deploying it |
 | [`evals/`](evals/RESULTS.md) | the behavioural evaluation suite, its protocol, and what has actually been observed |
 | [`CHANGELOG.md`](CHANGELOG.md) | every release, with the reasoning behind it |
@@ -817,8 +820,8 @@ recommendation, so you arm the whole run in one exchange. Detail:
 ## Contributing
 
 Issues and pull requests are welcome — see [CONTRIBUTING.md](CONTRIBUTING.md) for
-the repo's invariants (the structural validator, four-way version sync, and the
-surfaces that must never drift apart). Security reports:
+the repo's invariants (the structural validator, version sync across every manifest
+surface, and the surfaces that must never drift apart). Security reports:
 [SECURITY.md](SECURITY.md). Everyone participating is expected to follow the
 [Code of Conduct](CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md).
 

package/SKILL-CARD.md

@@ -12,10 +12,10 @@ harmless.
 |---|---|
 | **Purpose** | Runs a substantial task through ten gated delivery stages — intake grill, docs study, brainstorm, spec, plan, subagent build, tests, lint/deploy, post-deploy, docs+registers, acceptance — refusing to advance until each gate passes |
 | **Owner** | ssheleg ([github.com/ssheleg/task-pipeline](https://github.com/ssheleg/task-pipeline)) |
-| **Version** | 1.23.0 |
+| **Version** | 1.24.0 |
 | **Surface** | Claude Code (filesystem skill + plugin) and the vercel `skills` CLI. **Not** uploaded to the Skills API; custom Skills do not sync across surfaces |
 | **Dependencies** | None required. Optional: `context7` (MCP), `figma` (MCP), super-ux, agent-sync, graphify, obsidian-wiki. Every stage's doctrine ships in-repo; the one conditional requirement is super-ux for the stage-3 UX track on a user-facing task |
-| **Evaluation status** | Suite authored (15 evals, 5 categories). **Never executed** — see [`evals/RESULTS.md`](evals/RESULTS.md) |
+| **Evaluation status** | Suite authored, 5 categories. One recorded run, **self-observed by the author**; **zero blind runs on zero of three models** — the split, and the numbers, live in [`evals/RESULTS.md`](evals/RESULTS.md) and are computed by `evals/run.py` |
 
 ## Risk-tier disclosure
 
@@ -34,8 +34,9 @@ apply.
 
 ## What to check before you trust it
 
-1. Read `SKILL.md` and the 26 files under `references/` — that is the whole
-   instruction surface, and every one is linked directly from `SKILL.md`.
+1. Read `SKILL.md` and every file under `references/` — that is the whole
+   instruction surface, and each one is linked directly from `SKILL.md`, so the
+   directory listing is the count.
 2. Read `templates/docgate.sh` before seeding it; it is the only shipped script a
    host project will run on its own repository.
 3. Run `npm run test:all` — every guard has a negative self-test that plants a
@@ -54,7 +55,9 @@ apply.
 - **Versions are pinned by git tag** and mirrored into `sshlg-skills`'s catalogue.
   Rollback is `git checkout v<previous>` or pinning the previous plugin version;
   the previous version is never deleted.
-- **Behavioural evidence is missing, not merely thin.** The structural guards prove
-  the skill is well-formed. Until `evals/RESULTS.md` carries a dated run, nothing in
-  this repository proves it *behaves* — triggers correctly, stays quiet on a
-  question, or performs the steps it documents.
+- **Behavioural evidence is thin to the point of absent.** The structural guards prove
+  the skill is well-formed. `evals/RESULTS.md` carries **one** dated run, and it was
+  self-observed by the author — an observation of instruction-following, not an
+  evaluation. **No blind run has been made on any model.** Nothing in this repository
+  yet proves the skill *behaves* — triggers correctly, stays quiet on a question, or
+  performs the steps it documents.

package/cursor/rules/task-pipeline.mdc

@@ -324,7 +324,12 @@ not authorize an outward, irreversible action — stage 7 stops and asks.
     per project, not per run**. Every gate above is good at *this* run and blind
     across runs: the same class of failure gets caught, fixed and forgotten five
     times and nothing notices it is the same one. So, in this order —
-    **1. Prune before you add.** Check every standing instruction against three
+    **1. Stamp the run first** — date, topic, commit, verdict, counts. It costs one
+    line and it is the only thing that makes the next step computable: one retirement
+    trigger counts firings across the last five run stamps, so a prune placed ahead of
+    the stamp reads a counter its own stage writes afterwards and can never run on real
+    data.
+    **2. Then prune.** Check every standing instruction against three
     retirement triggers: it became a check (a test, a lint rule, a gate, a hook →
     delete it; the check is the memory, and keeping both means it is read twice and
     obeyed once); every path, command or stage it names is gone (→ delete, it
@@ -334,8 +339,6 @@ not authorize an outward, irreversible action — stage 7 stops and asks.
     because "they all matter" is exactly the state in which the list stopped being
     read. **Every deletion writes one line in the log; silent deletion is
     forbidden** — the record stays, the instruction leaves.
-    **2. Stamp the run** — date, topic, verdict, counts. That stamp is what makes
-    "five runs" countable.
     **3. Write an entry, only if the run diverged** — symptom with evidence, the
     stage it *surfaced at*, the stage that **owned** it (usually earlier — a finding
     recorded against the stage that tripped over it comes back), the root cause
@@ -349,8 +352,8 @@ not authorize an outward, irreversible action — stage 7 stops and asks.
     cap is not negotiable and the prune is a gate item, not a good intention.
     Gate: ladder walk ran, no REQ `unknown`, no ledger row without
     a home, every repository clean/pushed/pointed-at, user signs off, **and the
-    retro is written — pruned before anything was added, at or under its cap, every
-    deletion logged, the run stamped, and the counts printed beside this verdict**.
+    retro is written — stamped first, then pruned before anything was added, at or
+    under its cap, every deletion logged, and the counts printed beside this verdict**.
 
 Cross-cutting: answer from the brief's autonomy section rather than re-asking, log every deferral in the ledger, never narrow the task silently, track
 tasks, conventional commits, honest degradation (never claim a failed/skipped step

package/evals/RESULTS.md

@@ -1,8 +1,16 @@
 # Evaluation results — task-pipeline
 
-**Status: the suite is authored and has not been executed.** Recorded here rather
-than left blank, because an empty results file and an unrun suite look identical,
-and this repository's own doctrine calls that the failure — a skip is not a pass.
+**Status: the suite is authored. One run is recorded and it was self-observed by the
+author; no blind run has been made on any model.** Recorded this way rather than left
+blank, because an empty results file and an unrun suite look identical, and this
+repository's own doctrine calls that the failure — a skip is not a pass.
+
+**The numbers below are computed, not asserted.** `python3 evals/run.py` counts the
+suite and the dated run headings in this file. A value typed here that disagrees with
+what it prints is the defect, and it is the document that is wrong — this file said
+*"has not been executed"* and *"Dated runs recorded 0"* for five releases while the
+tool beneath it printed `recorded runs: 1`, which is the self-contradiction canon 2
+exists to prevent, in the one file whose whole job is honesty about evidence.
 
 Running these needs a fresh session per query, per model. That is a human or agent
 step; `evals/run.py` prints the protocol and deliberately never reports a pass it
@@ -29,19 +37,30 @@ or it belongs in a check.
 
 ## Ratchet
 
-| Metric | Value | As of |
-|---|---|---|
-| Evals authored | 15 | 2026-08-03 |
-| Categories covered | 5 of 5 | 2026-08-03 |
-| Models exercised | **0 of 3** | 2026-08-03 |
-| Dated runs recorded | **0** | 2026-08-03 |
+| Metric | Value | Computed by | As of |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| Evals authored | 15 | `python3 evals/run.py` → `suite: N evals` | 2026-08-08 |
+| Categories covered | 5 of 5 | the suite's own `category` fields | 2026-08-08 |
+| Dated runs recorded | **1** | `python3 evals/run.py` → `recorded runs: N` | 2026-08-08 |
+| …of those, **blind** | **0** | run headings not marked `self-observed` | 2026-08-08 |
+| Models exercised blind | **0 of 3** | distinct models across blind runs | 2026-08-08 |
+
+**The last three rows are the honest state of this skill's behavioural evidence**, and
+the split matters more than the total: a run the author watched, knowing the expected
+behaviour, is an observation of instruction-following and not an evaluation. Collapsing
+the two into one "runs recorded" number is how a self-check gets quoted as a result.
+
+That split is **canon 5 applied to evaluation** — *green nobody watched turn red is not
+evidence* ([`documentation.md`](../plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/documentation.md)
+→ *The canons*). A self-observed run is a green the author was steering; a blind run is
+the only one that could have come back red for a reason nobody arranged. The code graph
+surfaced this link before any document stated it, which is the divergence check earning
+its keep.
 
-The bottom two numbers are the honest state of this skill's behavioural evidence.
 Everything else in this repository is proven by structural guards — the count is
-whatever `npm run test:all` prints, deliberately not restated here — that check the
-*form*; these are the only checks that would speak to the *behaviour*, and they have
-not been run yet. Printed here so "63 of 63 green" is never read as "the skill is
-known to work".
+whatever `npm run test:all` prints, deliberately not restated here — and those check
+the *form*. These are the only checks that speak to the *behaviour*. Printed here so a
+green structural suite is never read as "the skill is known to work".
 
 ## Runs
 

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "task-pipeline-skill",
-  "version": "1.23.0",
+  "version": "1.24.0",
   "description": "Full-cycle delivery pipeline for coding agents: a mandatory built-in intake grill, then 10 gated stages (docs, brainstorm+decompose, spec, plan, build, tests, lint/deploy, post-deploy, docs/wiki, acceptance). Every stage's doctrine ships inside the skill — no companion plugin required. This package is the installer CLI.",
   "bin": {
     "task-pipeline": "bin/task-pipeline.js"

package/plugins/task-pipeline/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
   "name": "task-pipeline",
   "displayName": "Task Pipeline",
   "description": "Runs a substantial task through a mandatory built-in intake grill, then 10 gated stages (docs, brainstorm+decompose, spec, plan, subagent build, tests, lint/deploy, post-deploy, docs/wiki, acceptance). Every stage's doctrine is built into the skill — no companion plugin required — with typed auto/manual gates, a frozen requirement spine that must close with evidence, a loop guard that breaks churn, one provider-agnostic model confirmed up front, and an optional super-ux UX track for user-facing work.",
-  "version": "1.23.0",
+  "version": "1.24.0",
   "author": {
     "name": "ssheleg",
     "url": "https://x.com/sshlg93"

package/plugins/task-pipeline/commands/task-pipeline.md

@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ language, ADRs for hard-to-reverse calls) and covering the **autonomy sweep** (w
 would otherwise stop stages 1→10: docs sources incl. doc repos, the wiki and the code graph, branch/tracker
 policy, test and lint commands, deploy target and authorization, log locations, docs/wiki/graph targets, and for UI tasks whether the design is done visually in Figma or text-only, whether the Figma MCP is connected, and — if it isn't — whether to ship text-only or stop and connect it, since the UX chain degrades on its own and never blocks; **and with Figma on, the design destination: which team/org by name and which file** — the recorded one, a URL the operator gives, or creation in that named team explicitly authorized, written into the project's canonical record before the first frame, because a destination decided at drawing time is how a project ends up with three design files and no way to tell which is real. **Never create while a recorded file resolves; if it doesn't resolve, stop and ask — never create a replacement**) —
 until the brief is locked — including the **REQ table**, the request as an addressable list where every row names how it is verified — so the rest runs autonomously and the final stage can account for all of it. The list is frozen: adding is free, removing needs the operator's agreement. Anything deferred goes into the carry-over ledger the moment it's said. For any user-facing task, recommend/use
-**super-ux**. **If the brief describes a platform rather than a change**, stage 2 also cuts it into modules (`references/decomposition.md`) — module map committed, walking skeleton first, every REQ in exactly one module — and stages 3→10 then run per module, one brick at a time. **If any loop starts undoing an earlier pass** (same file edited twice for the same reason, a closed finding returning, a third entry into one stage), stop and run the loop guard (`references/loop-guard.md`): name both shapes, escalate to the layer that owns the conflict, re-plan the check as an ordered list, then go item by item. **The closing stage opens with the ladder walk** (`references/audit.md`): the REQ table finds what was named and lost, but a comparison needs two sides and an absence has one — so walk each REQ bottom-up through its rungs (decision → spec section → contract *and its failure behavior* → task → change → executed test → surface/docs), check the seam at each step, order findings by seam rather than by file, and turn every absence into a new REQ row **before** the coverage table is written. A green from a check nobody has watched fail against a planted defect is not evidence; a finding class seen twice becomes a script rather than a third ledger row; and the carry-over ledger's counts are printed beside every gate verdict, so "green" never reads as "verified". If a searching pass starts finding mostly what the previous pass's own fixes broke, the axis is exhausted — rotate it, don't look harder. **The docs stage closes three artifacts, not two:** module docs, the wiki, **and the code graph** (`/graphify . --update` where `graphify-out/` exists — `references/knowledge-graph.md`), because the graph is what the next run's harvest queries first and a stale one is a false premise carrying the authority of a machine. Then check the graph against the docs: a hub `graphify god-nodes` reports that no document names is an undocumented seam; an edge the docs deny is a leak in the code or a lie in the docs; a doc naming a module the graph no longer has is stale. Doc-side findings are fixed there, absences become REQ rows in the closing stage. **In a project of several repositories, stage 10 closes on the parent too:** a parent records each submodule as a pointer to one commit, and moving the submodule does not move the pointer — so the work can be committed, pushed and green while a clone of the parent still gets the commit before it. Neither repo looks wrong alone, which is why it survives every check that runs inside one. Require `git submodule status` with no line starting `+`, and every repo clean and pushed (`git -C <repo> status --porcelain`, `git -C <repo> log @{u}..HEAD`). The fix is two commands and the second gets forgotten: push the submodule, then `git add <submodule> && git commit`. **The run's last act is the retrospective** (`references/retrospective.md` → `docs/superpowers/retro.md`, one file per project): **prune before you add** — every standing instruction against its three retirement triggers (it became a check; the paths/commands it names are gone; it hasn't fired in five run stamps), the list held to a hard cap of ten, every deletion logged as one line and never silent — then stamp the run, then, only if the run diverged, write the entry: symptom with evidence, the stage it surfaced at, the stage that *owned* it, the root cause, the fix by grade (mechanical check > standing instruction > note that expires in two runs), and the check that catches it next time. Stage 0 reads those standing instructions in full, so the prune is a gate criterion, not a good intention: a rule nobody reads to the end is worse than no rule, because everyone believes it is covered. Honor every stage gate by its type (`auto` = verify yourself;
+**super-ux**. **If the brief describes a platform rather than a change**, stage 2 also cuts it into modules (`references/decomposition.md`) — module map committed, walking skeleton first, every REQ in exactly one module — and stages 3→10 then run per module, one brick at a time. **If any loop starts undoing an earlier pass** (same file edited twice for the same reason, a closed finding returning, a third entry into one stage), stop and run the loop guard (`references/loop-guard.md`): name both shapes, escalate to the layer that owns the conflict, re-plan the check as an ordered list, then go item by item. **The closing stage opens with the ladder walk** (`references/audit.md`): the REQ table finds what was named and lost, but a comparison needs two sides and an absence has one — so walk each REQ bottom-up through its rungs (decision → spec section → contract *and its failure behavior* → task → change → executed test → surface/docs), check the seam at each step, order findings by seam rather than by file, and turn every absence into a new REQ row **before** the coverage table is written. A green from a check nobody has watched fail against a planted defect is not evidence; a finding class seen twice becomes a script rather than a third ledger row; and the carry-over ledger's counts are printed beside every gate verdict, so "green" never reads as "verified". If a searching pass starts finding mostly what the previous pass's own fixes broke, the axis is exhausted — rotate it, don't look harder. **The docs stage closes three artifacts, not two:** module docs, the wiki, **and the code graph** (`/graphify . --update` where `graphify-out/` exists — `references/knowledge-graph.md`), because the graph is what the next run's harvest queries first and a stale one is a false premise carrying the authority of a machine. Then check the graph against the docs: a hub `graphify god-nodes` reports that no document names is an undocumented seam; an edge the docs deny is a leak in the code or a lie in the docs; a doc naming a module the graph no longer has is stale. Doc-side findings are fixed there, absences become REQ rows in the closing stage. **In a project of several repositories, stage 10 closes on the parent too:** a parent records each submodule as a pointer to one commit, and moving the submodule does not move the pointer — so the work can be committed, pushed and green while a clone of the parent still gets the commit before it. Neither repo looks wrong alone, which is why it survives every check that runs inside one. Require `git submodule status` with no line starting `+`, and every repo clean and pushed (`git -C <repo> status --porcelain`, `git -C <repo> log @{u}..HEAD`). The fix is two commands and the second gets forgotten: push the submodule, then `git add <submodule> && git commit`. **The run's last act is the retrospective** (`references/retrospective.md` → `docs/superpowers/retro.md`, one file per project): **stamp the run first** (its commit is what makes the cold-retirement trigger computable), **then prune** — every standing instruction against its three retirement triggers (it became a check; the paths/commands it names are gone; it hasn't fired in five run stamps), the list held to a hard cap of ten, every deletion logged as one line and never silent — then, only if the run diverged, write the entry: symptom with evidence, the stage it surfaced at, the stage that *owned* it, the root cause, the fix by grade (mechanical check > standing instruction > note that expires in two runs), and the check that catches it next time. Stage 0 reads those standing instructions in full, so the prune is a gate criterion, not a good intention: a rule nobody reads to the end is worse than no rule, because everyone believes it is covered. Honor every stage gate by its type (`auto` = verify yourself;
 `manual` = wait for explicit go). Confirm the **model once at preflight** —
 recommend the most capable one the environment offers, never a hardcoded id — then
 run the whole pipeline on it without re-asking.

package/plugins/task-pipeline/skills/evidence-docs/SKILL.md

@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ thing, the canon is the *why* and the rule is the *how*.
 | trust a mechanism that reports success | [`gates.md`](../task-pipeline/references/gates.md) → *False success* | the failure that removes the reason to look |
 | wire a check into the agent's own tooling | [`hooks.md`](../task-pipeline/references/hooks.md) | the hook contract, and why a crashed guard **allows** the action |
 | audit documentation a project already has | [`setup.md`](../task-pipeline/references/setup.md) | seven passes, cheapest first, output is a fix plan |
-| carry a lesson to the next run | [`retrospective.md`](../task-pipeline/references/retrospective.md) | prune first, cap of ten, every lesson names its commit |
+| carry a lesson to the next run | [`retrospective.md`](../task-pipeline/references/retrospective.md) | stamp first (the cold trigger reads it), then prune to a cap of ten; every lesson names its commit |
 | seed a gate into a host project | [`templates/docgate.sh`](../task-pipeline/templates/docgate.sh) | it seeds **green**: dormant where there is no input yet |
 | take a whole change through to acceptance | [`task-pipeline`](../task-pipeline/SKILL.md) | this skill is the standard; that one is how a change reaches the repository |
 

package/plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/SKILL.md

@@ -154,14 +154,18 @@ plus a stable id, never a second act of thinking.
 and forgotten five times with nothing noticing it is the same one. The last act of
 stage 10 is therefore the **retrospective**
 ([`references/retrospective.md`](references/retrospective.md), written to
-`docs/superpowers/retro.md`): **prune first** — every standing instruction checked
-against its retirement triggers (it became a check · its surface is gone · it hasn't
-fired in five runs), the list held to a hard cap of **ten**, every deletion logged —
-then stamp the run, then write an entry **only if the run diverged** (symptom, the
+`docs/superpowers/retro.md`): **stamp the run first** — one line, and the only thing
+that makes the next step computable — **then prune**, every standing instruction
+checked against its retirement triggers (it became a check · its surface is gone · it
+hasn't fired in five run stamps), the list held to a hard cap of **ten**, every
+deletion logged, then write an entry **only if the run diverged** (symptom, the
 stage that *owned* it, root cause, fix, and the check that catches it next time).
 Stage 0 reads those standing instructions in full, which is exactly why the prune is
 a gate criterion and not a good intention: a rule nobody reads to the end is worse
-than no rule, because everyone believes it is covered.
+than no rule, because everyone believes it is covered. **The order is load-bearing,
+not stylistic** — one retirement trigger counts firings across the last five run
+stamps, so a prune placed ahead of the stamp reads a counter its own stage writes
+afterwards and can never run on real data ([`references/learned.md`](references/learned.md) rule 21).
 
 Three things the grill does beyond clarifying the request:
 - **Domain awareness.** It reads the project's own `CONTEXT.md` / `docs/adr/` and
@@ -264,7 +268,7 @@ capable available — see `references/model-tiering.md`).
 | 7 | Lint + deploy | host lint → deploy per host convention | lint clean + suite green before deploy; deploy needs a go (or the brief's specific standing authorization) | manual |
 | 8 | Post-deploy | tail deploy logs / health-check | clean boot or honest degradation report | auto |
 | 9 | Docs + wiki | host module docs/runbook rules → `wiki-update` ([obsidian-wiki](https://github.com/ar9av/obsidian-wiki), recommended) → `/graphify . --update` ([`references/knowledge-graph.md`](references/knowledge-graph.md), recommended) | every stale row of the stage-0 source ledger updated; **the propagation matrix walked for every change type this run produced** — the ledger names what you read, the matrix names what you owe — every settled thing recorded with an id, every answered question resolved, and **the documentation gate green with its ratchet counts printed**; docs synced; wiki synced; **the code graph refreshed where one exists** and checked against the docs (a hub no doc names, a doc naming a node the graph lost); **every number computed rather than restated, every named command or file resolvable** ([`references/learned.md`](references/learned.md)); the carry-over count printed beside the verdict | auto |
-| 10 | **Acceptance** | built in: [`references/audit.md`](references/audit.md) (ladder walk) → [`references/acceptance.md`](references/acceptance.md) (coverage table) → [`references/retrospective.md`](references/retrospective.md) (retro: prune, stamp, entry) | ladder walk ran, its absences became REQ rows; every REQ accounted for with evidence from a check seen failing once; ledger has no unresolved row; **axis rotation recorded** (new findings vs self-inflicted, rule 1 of [`references/learned.md`](references/learned.md)), **every closure verified against the artefact rather than the document describing it**, **each correction swept across its class**, **every deferral a printed ratchet rather than a TODO**; **in a multi-repository project, every repository is clean, pushed and pointed at** (below); operator signs off; **every check this close-out leans on — the documentation gate included — has been seen failing once against a planted defect, and its ratchet counts are printed beside the verdict**; **the retrospective written last — prune before entry, list at or under its cap, every deletion and every entry carrying its commit, entries older than five stamps rotated into the archive, run stamped with its commit, counts printed** | manual |
+| 10 | **Acceptance** | built in: [`references/audit.md`](references/audit.md) (ladder walk) → [`references/acceptance.md`](references/acceptance.md) (coverage table) → [`references/retrospective.md`](references/retrospective.md) (retro: stamp, prune, entry) | ladder walk ran, its absences became REQ rows; every REQ accounted for with evidence from a check seen failing once; ledger has no unresolved row; **axis rotation recorded** (new findings vs self-inflicted, rule 1 of [`references/learned.md`](references/learned.md)), **every closure verified against the artefact rather than the document describing it**, **each correction swept across its class**, **every deferral a printed ratchet rather than a TODO**; **in a multi-repository project, every repository is clean, pushed and pointed at** (below); operator signs off; **every check this close-out leans on — the documentation gate included — has been seen failing once against a planted defect, and its ratchet counts are printed beside the verdict**; **the retrospective written last, and in order — the run stamped with its commit FIRST (the cold-retirement trigger reads that stamp), then the prune with the list at or under its cap and every deletion logged, then the entry; every deletion and every entry carrying its commit, entries older than five stamps rotated into the archive, counts printed** | manual |
 
 
 ### Stage 10 in a project of several repositories
@@ -334,7 +338,7 @@ automation is on — `pipeline.schema.json` is the only contract.
 - `references/deploy-targets.md` — stages 7–8: writing the runbook when there is none, the template, per-platform deploy and log verbs, and the verification trio
 - `references/hooks.md` — agent-time enforcement: the PreToolUse contract, the fail-open hazard, placement, and the Claude-Code-only limit
 - `references/audit.md` — cross-cutting: the L0→L7 ladder and its seams (what was never written), axis rotation, ratchets, proven checks
-- `references/learned.md` — cross-cutting: fifteen rules earned by failure on a real multi-repository build, each with the incident behind it, its check and its exit criterion; plus the two that no check can decide
+- `references/learned.md` — cross-cutting: rules earned by failure on a real multi-repository build, each with the incident behind it, its check and its exit criterion; plus the two that no check can decide. The table is the count — a number written here is a number that goes stale on the next rule
 - `references/brainstorm.md` — stage 2: design dialogue, approaches, UI detection, hard gate
 - `references/spec.md` — stage 3: UX track order, the spec contract, self-review, review gate
 - `references/planning.md` — stage 4: zero-context plan format, parallel groups, no placeholders

package/plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/acceptance.md

@@ -176,16 +176,17 @@ whether the run was finished.
 
 After the closing question, before the run is called done:
 [`retrospective.md`](retrospective.md), written to `docs/superpowers/retro.md`.
-Every run **prunes and stamps**; only a run that *diverged* writes an entry.
+Every run **stamps and prunes**; only a run that *diverged* writes an entry.
 
-The order is fixed, because a lesson that lands in a cluttered file is a lesson
-nobody reaches:
+The order is fixed, and it is a **dependency, not a preference** — step 2 reads the
+counter step 1 writes ([`learned.md`](learned.md) rule 21):
 
-1. **Prune first.** Every standing instruction is checked against its three
+1. **Stamp the run first** — one line: date, topic, commit, verdict, retro counts. It
+   costs nothing and it is the only thing that makes the next step computable.
+2. **Then prune.** Every standing instruction is checked against its three
    retirement triggers — it became a check, its surface is gone, or it has not
    fired in the last five run stamps — and the list is held to its cap of **ten**.
    Every deletion writes one line in the log; silent deletion is forbidden.
-2. **Stamp the run** — one line: date, topic, verdict, retro counts.
 3. **Write the entry, if the run diverged** — symptom, the stage it surfaced at,
    the stage that *owned* it, the root cause, the fix (mechanical > standing
    instruction > note with an expiry), and the check that catches it next time.
@@ -224,11 +225,14 @@ All of:
    shows no `+`, and each repo is clean and pushed. A submodule is finished when
    its parent points at it.
 9. **The operator answers the closing question** and signs off.
-10. **The retrospective is written** ([`retrospective.md`](retrospective.md)) — the
-    prune ran **before** anything was added (standing instructions checked against
-    their retirement triggers, the list at or under its cap of ten, every deletion
-    logged), the run is stamped, and a run that diverged has its entry with a root
-    cause and a named check. The counts are printed beside this verdict, not filed.
+10. **The retrospective is written** ([`retrospective.md`](retrospective.md)) — **in
+    order**: the run is stamped with its commit first, **then** the prune runs before
+    anything is added (standing instructions checked against their retirement triggers,
+    the list at or under its cap of ten, every deletion logged), **then** a run that
+    diverged gets its entry with a root cause and a named check. The stamp precedes the
+    prune because a retirement trigger counts firings across the last five run stamps
+    ([`learned.md`](learned.md) rule 21). The counts are printed beside this verdict,
+    not filed.
 
 Manual by design. An automated check can prove the table is *well-formed*; only
 the person who asked can confirm it is *what they asked for*. Do not let a green

package/plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/companion-skills.md

@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ better, plus one that is required only for user-facing work.
 | 5 Build (isolation, subagents, fix loop) | `references/build.md` + `references/review.md` |
 | 5–6 TDD + suite gate | `references/tdd.md` |
 | 10 Acceptance (REQ close-out) | `references/acceptance.md` |
-| 10 Retrospective (the run's last act: prune, stamp, entry) | `references/retrospective.md` |
+| 10 Retrospective (the run's last act: stamp, prune, entry) | `references/retrospective.md` |
 | 10 + any audit (finding what's missing) | `references/audit.md` |
 | any repeating loop | `references/loop-guard.md` |
 

package/plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/knowledge-sources.md

@@ -286,7 +286,7 @@ The ledger is the stage-9 work list. For each row:
   document class or ratchet. Note that this list and the **propagation matrix** are
   different lists on purpose: the ledger is what you *read*, the matrix is what you
   *owe* ([`documentation.md`](documentation.md)), and stage 9 walks both.
-- **The retro** — prune, stamp, entry, and rotate what aged out into the archive
+- **The retro** — stamp, prune, entry, and rotate what aged out into the archive
   ([`retrospective.md`](retrospective.md)).
 - **Anything the run proved stale** — including a doc that was "wrong but nobody
   had time": that's why the conflict was logged in phase 2 instead of only being

package/plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/learned.md

@@ -196,6 +196,11 @@ answer would have exposed it in a minute.
 | 9 Docs | 8, 14 — every number computed, every target resolvable |
 | 10 Acceptance | 1, 3, 6, 7 — axis rotation recorded, closure verified against artefacts, classes swept, ratchets printed |
 | 10 Acceptance · every loop iteration | 16 — the work-list re-measured at close and printed beside its opening count ([`audit.md`](audit.md), [`continuity.md`](continuity.md)) |
+| 0 Harvest · **before the first edit**, in any repository with an upstream | 17 — `git rev-list --count HEAD..@{u}` measured and its number printed, [`knowledge-sources.md`](knowledge-sources.md) → *The source is not the copy you have*; asked as row `0 Source` of [`grill.md`](grill.md) → *The autonomy sweep* |
+| 0 Harvest · 5 Dev · 6 Tests | 18 — the suite run once against a **freshly created** instance of whatever persists between runs, [`tdd.md`](tdd.md) → *The green from residue*; asked as row `0 Fixtures` of [`grill.md`](grill.md) → *The autonomy sweep* |
+| any command run to establish a fact — 6 Tests · 9 Docs · 10 Acceptance · 5 review | 19 — the output asserted non-empty and shaped as expected, and **quoted** rather than concluded from, [`audit.md`](audit.md) → *Silence is not a reading*; the reviewer's half is in [`review.md`](review.md) |
+| 0 Harvest · 10 Acceptance | 20 — the **consumer** read to learn which copy ships, never the copies compared against each other, [`audit.md`](audit.md) → *Two copies, and which one wins*; asked as row `0 Duplicates` of [`grill.md`](grill.md) → *The autonomy sweep* |
+| 10 Retro · **any gate or check you order** | 21 — each input traced to the step that writes it, and that step proven upstream, [`retrospective.md`](retrospective.md) → *Stamp first, then prune, then write* |
 
 **This file is the shipped list; a project keeps its own.** Every rule in the table
 above was earned on someone else's build and travels with the skill. The lessons *your*

package/plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/stages.md

@@ -484,18 +484,19 @@ never that the work was skipped quietly.
   written to `docs/superpowers/retro.md` — one file per project, not per run. The
   pipeline's gates are good at *this* run and blind across runs: the same class of
   failure can be caught, fixed and forgotten five times and nothing in the flow
-  notices it is the same one. So, in this order: **prune first** (every standing
-  instruction against its three retirement triggers — it became a check, its
-  surface is gone, it hasn't fired in five run stamps — and the list held to its cap
-  of ten, every deletion logged **in the archive, with the commit that retired it**),
-  **stamp the run**, then **write an entry only if
+  notices it is the same one. So, in this order: **stamp the run first** (one line,
+  with its commit — and the only thing that makes the next step computable), **then
+  prune** (every standing instruction against its three retirement triggers — it
+  became a check, its surface is gone, it hasn't fired in five run stamps — and the
+  list held to its cap of ten, every deletion logged **in the archive, with the
+  commit that retired it**), then **write an entry only if
   the run diverged** (symptom · the stage it surfaced at · the stage that *owned* it
   · root cause · fix, mechanical before instruction before expiring note · the check
-  that catches it next time). Every run prunes and stamps; a retro left empty after
+  that catches it next time). Every run stamps and prunes; a retro left empty after
   a messy run is the failure the file exists to stop. Stage 0 reads the standing
   instructions in full next time, which is why the cap is not negotiable.
 - **GATE (manual):** the ladder walk ran and its absences became REQ rows before
-  the table was written; **the retrospective is written — prune before entry, the
+  the table was written; **the retrospective is written — stamped first, then pruned, then the entry; the
   list at or under its cap, every deletion logged in the archive with its commit,
   entries older than five run stamps rotated into `docs/superpowers/retro/`, the run
   stamped with its commit, every SHA in either file resolvable, and the

package/plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/templates/README.md

@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ from `super-ux`.
 | `hygiene.sh` | `scripts/check-hygiene.sh` | 0 seeds it · **5 runs it after every task** · 6 and 9 run it · 10 proves it |
 | `hooks.example.json` | the project's `.claude/settings.json` | 0 — offered, never installed silently |
 | `routing-rule.md` | the operator's `CLAUDE.md` — **offered by `setup`, never written silently** | 0 / `setup` |
-| `retro.md` | `docs/superpowers/retro.md` — **one per project, not per run** | 10 writes (prune → stamp → entry), 0 reads it in full |
+| `retro.md` | `docs/superpowers/retro.md` — **one per project, not per run** | 10 writes (stamp → prune → entry), 0 reads it in full |
 | `retro-archive.md` | `docs/superpowers/retro/YYYY-QN.md` | 10 rotates into it, 0 **queries** it |
 
 The documentation-track templates (`docmap.md`, `decisions.md`,

package/plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/templates/retro.md

@@ -1,7 +1,9 @@
 # Pipeline retrospective — <project>
 
 One file per project, not per run. Written as the **last act of stage 10**:
-prune first, then stamp, then write an entry **only if the run diverged**.
+**stamp first, then prune**, then write an entry **only if the run diverged**.
+The order is load-bearing: the cold-retirement trigger reads the stamp this stage
+writes, so a prune ahead of it can never run on real data (`learned.md` rule 21).
 Doctrine: `references/retrospective.md`.
 
 **What stage 0 reads in full:** *Standing instructions*, *Run stamps* and *Recent