tribunal-kit 4.5.1 → 4.6.1

package/.agent/skills/plan-writing/SKILL.md

@@ -1,146 +1,152 @@
----
-name: plan-writing
-description: Technical design and implementation planning mastery. Writing structured execution checklists, dependency mapping, establishing rollback protocols, segmenting monolithic tasks, writing ADRs (Architecture Decision Records), and defining verification criteria. Use when transitioning from ideation to coordinated execution.
-allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Glob, Grep
-version: 2.0.0
-last-updated: 2026-04-02
-applies-to-model: gemini-2.5-pro, claude-3-7-sonnet
----
-
-## Hallucination Traps (Read First)
-- ❌ Writing plans without verification criteria -> ✅ Every plan needs a 'How to verify this worked' section
-- ❌ Planning at the wrong granularity (too high or too low) -> ✅ Plans should be at the component/feature level, not line-by-line or system-wide
-- ❌ Skipping the 'What could go wrong' section -> ✅ Identifying failure modes before implementation prevents costly rework
-
----
-
-
-# Plan Writing — Execution Blueprints Mastery
-
----
-
-## 1. The Implementation Plan Structure (ADR-Lite)
-
-Before altering multiple files or introducing a new system architecture, a rigid `implementation_plan.md` MUST be generated and approved. 
-
-**Core Sections:**
-1. **Objective Context:** 2-sentence summary of the requested goal.
-2. **Architectural Handoff:** (What stack, what libraries, what constraints).
-3. **Dependency Tree Execution Order:** (Cannot build frontend UI until backend API exists).
-4. **File Blueprint:** Exact files expected to be touched (`[NEW] src/api/user.ts`, `[MODIFY] src/db/schema.prisma`).
-5. **Verification Protocol:** Exactly how the agent/human will prove the task is completed successfully.
-
----
-
-## 2. Segmenting Monolithic Tasks (Chunking)
-
-LLMs degrade significantly when asked to process >10 file alterations across multiple directories simultaneously. The Plan Writer must break work into logical, isolated "Waves."
-
-```markdown
-### Wave 1: Data Layer (The Foundation)
-1. Add `Subscription` model to Prisma schema.
-2. Generate migration (`npx prisma migrate dev`).
-3. Add mock seed data.
-
-### Wave 2: API Layer (The Bridge)
-1. Build `/api/subscriptions/route.ts` with explicit Zod validation.
-2. Write Vitest logic enforcing authorization roles.
-
-### Wave 3: UI Layer (The Implementation)
-1. Build `SubscriptionCard.tsx`.
-2. Connect to API using MSW mocked tests first.
-3. Integrate into main dashboard.
-```
-
-*Crucial:* Each wave MUST be executable and testable independently. Do not begin Wave 2 until Wave 1 passes Verification Protocols.
-
----
-
-## 3. Rollback & Contingency Planning
-
-No plan survives first contact with the compiler. The plan must implicitly include safe-fail procedures.
-
-- **Non-Destructive Defaults:** If a schema migration fails, how do we revert? (e.g., explicit instruction to backup SQLite DB locally before operations).
-- **Graceful Feature Toggles:** Is the new feature walled behind an environment variable (`ENABLE_NEW_DASHBOARD=true`) so it can be disabled instantly if it crashes in production?
-
----
-
-## 4. The `task.md` Execution Ledger
-
-Unlike the high-level `implementation_plan.md`, the `task.md` serves as the live, mutating execution state.
-
-```markdown
-# Current Objective: Upgrade Authentication
-
-## Pre-Flight
-- [x] Dump existing environment variables locally
-- [x] Verify current tests pass (Baseline health)
-
-## Wave 1 (OAuth Scaffold)
-- [/] Install auth.js dependencies
-- [ ] Connect Google Provider inside `[...nextauth].ts`
-
-## Wave 2 (Database Mappings)
-- [ ] Update Users table to handle polymorphic OAuth links
-```
-
-*Rules:*
-- `[ ]` = Unstarted
-- `[/]` = In Progress (Current Focus)
-- `[x]` = Verified Complete
-
----
-
-
----
-
-
-
-AI coding assistants often fall into specific bad habits when dealing with this domain. These are strictly forbidden:
-
-1. **Over-engineering:** Proposing complex abstractions or distributed systems when a simpler approach suffices.
-2. **Hallucinated Libraries/Methods:** Using non-existent methods or packages. Always `// VERIFY` or check `package.json` / `requirements.txt`.
-3. **Skipping Edge Cases:** Writing the "happy path" and ignoring error handling, timeouts, or data validation.
-4. **Context Amnesia:** Forgetting the user's constraints and offering generic advice instead of tailored solutions.
-5. **Silent Degradation:** Catching and suppressing errors without logging or re-raising.
-
----
-
-
-
-**Slash command: `/review` or `/tribunal-full`**
-**Active reviewers: `logic-reviewer` · `security-auditor`**
-
-### ❌ Forbidden AI Tropes
-
-1. **Blind Assumptions:** Never make an assumption without documenting it clearly with `// VERIFY: [reason]`.
-2. **Silent Degradation:** Catching and suppressing errors without logging or handling.
-3. **Context Amnesia:** Forgetting the user's constraints and offering generic advice instead of tailored solutions.
-
-
-
-Review these questions before confirming output:
-```
-✅ Did I rely ONLY on real, verified tools and methods?
-✅ Is this solution appropriately scoped to the user's constraints?
-✅ Did I handle potential failure modes and edge cases?
-✅ Have I avoided generic boilerplate that doesn't add value?
-```
-
-### 🛑 Verification-Before-Completion (VBC) Protocol
-
-**CRITICAL:** You must follow a strict "evidence-based closeout" state machine.
-- ❌ **Forbidden:** Declaring a task complete because the output "looks correct."
-- ✅ **Required:** You are explicitly forbidden from finalizing any task without providing **concrete evidence** (terminal output, passing tests, compile success, or equivalent proof) that your output works as intended.
-
-
-## Pre-Flight Checklist
-- [ ] Have I reviewed the user's specific constraints and requests?
-- [ ] Have I checked the environment for relevant existing implementations?
-
-## VBC Protocol (Verification-Before-Completion)
-You MUST verify existing code signatures and variables before attempting to modify or call them. No hallucination is permitted.
+---
+name: plan-writing
+description: Technical design and implementation planning mastery. Writing structured execution checklists, dependency mapping, establishing rollback protocols, segmenting monolithic tasks, writing ADRs (Architecture Decision Records), and defining verification criteria. Use when transitioning from ideation to coordinated execution.
+allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Glob, Grep
+version: 2.0.0
+last-updated: 2026-04-02
+applies-to-model: gemini-2.5-pro, claude-3-7-sonnet
+routing:
+  domain: general
+  tier: basic
+---
+
+## Hallucination Traps (Read First)
+
+- ❌ Writing plans without verification criteria -> ✅ Every plan needs a 'How to verify this worked' section
+- ❌ Planning at the wrong granularity (too high or too low) -> ✅ Plans should be at the component/feature level, not line-by-line or system-wide
+- ❌ Skipping the 'What could go wrong' section -> ✅ Identifying failure modes before implementation prevents costly rework
+
+---
+
+# Plan Writing — Execution Blueprints Mastery
+
+---
+
+## 1. The Implementation Plan Structure (ADR-Lite)
+
+Before altering multiple files or introducing a new system architecture, a rigid `implementation_plan.md` MUST be generated and approved.
+
+**Core Sections:**
+
+1. **Objective Context:** 2-sentence summary of the requested goal.
+2. **Architectural Handoff:** (What stack, what libraries, what constraints).
+3. **Dependency Tree Execution Order:** (Cannot build frontend UI until backend API exists).
+4. **File Blueprint:** Exact files expected to be touched (`[NEW] src/api/user.ts`, `[MODIFY] src/db/schema.prisma`).
+5. **Verification Protocol:** Exactly how the agent/human will prove the task is completed successfully.
+
+---
+
+## 2. Segmenting Monolithic Tasks (Chunking)
+
+LLMs degrade significantly when asked to process >10 file alterations across multiple directories simultaneously. The Plan Writer must break work into logical, isolated "Waves."
+
+```markdown
+### Wave 1: Data Layer (The Foundation)
+
+1. Add `Subscription` model to Prisma schema.
+2. Generate migration (`npx prisma migrate dev`).
+3. Add mock seed data.
+
+### Wave 2: API Layer (The Bridge)
+
+1. Build `/api/subscriptions/route.ts` with explicit Zod validation.
+2. Write Vitest logic enforcing authorization roles.
+
+### Wave 3: UI Layer (The Implementation)
+
+1. Build `SubscriptionCard.tsx`.
+2. Connect to API using MSW mocked tests first.
+3. Integrate into main dashboard.
+```
+
+_Crucial:_ Each wave MUST be executable and testable independently. Do not begin Wave 2 until Wave 1 passes Verification Protocols.
+
+---
+
+## 3. Rollback & Contingency Planning
+
+No plan survives first contact with the compiler. The plan must implicitly include safe-fail procedures.
+
+- **Non-Destructive Defaults:** If a schema migration fails, how do we revert? (e.g., explicit instruction to backup SQLite DB locally before operations).
+- **Graceful Feature Toggles:** Is the new feature walled behind an environment variable (`ENABLE_NEW_DASHBOARD=true`) so it can be disabled instantly if it crashes in production?
+
+---
+
+## 4. The `task.md` Execution Ledger
+
+Unlike the high-level `implementation_plan.md`, the `task.md` serves as the live, mutating execution state.
+
+```markdown
+# Current Objective: Upgrade Authentication
+
+## Pre-Flight
+
+- [x] Dump existing environment variables locally
+- [x] Verify current tests pass (Baseline health)
+
+## Wave 1 (OAuth Scaffold)
+
+- [/] Install auth.js dependencies
+- [ ] Connect Google Provider inside `[...nextauth].ts`
+
+## Wave 2 (Database Mappings)
+
+- [ ] Update Users table to handle polymorphic OAuth links
+```
+
+_Rules:_
+
+- `[ ]` = Unstarted
+- `[/]` = In Progress (Current Focus)
+- `[x]` = Verified Complete
 
+---
+
+---
+
+AI coding assistants often fall into specific bad habits when dealing with this domain. These are strictly forbidden:
+
+1. **Over-engineering:** Proposing complex abstractions or distributed systems when a simpler approach suffices.
+2. **Hallucinated Libraries/Methods:** Using non-existent methods or packages. Always `// VERIFY` or check `package.json` / `requirements.txt`.
+3. **Skipping Edge Cases:** Writing the "happy path" and ignoring error handling, timeouts, or data validation.
+4. **Context Amnesia:** Forgetting the user's constraints and offering generic advice instead of tailored solutions.
+5. **Silent Degradation:** Catching and suppressing errors without logging or re-raising.
+
+---
+
+**Slash command: `/review` or `/tribunal-full`**
+**Active reviewers: `logic-reviewer` · `security-auditor`**
+
+### ❌ Forbidden AI Tropes
+
+1. **Blind Assumptions:** Never make an assumption without documenting it clearly with `// VERIFY: [reason]`.
+2. **Silent Degradation:** Catching and suppressing errors without logging or handling.
+3. **Context Amnesia:** Forgetting the user's constraints and offering generic advice instead of tailored solutions.
+
+Review these questions before confirming output:
+
+```
+✅ Did I rely ONLY on real, verified tools and methods?
+✅ Is this solution appropriately scoped to the user's constraints?
+✅ Did I handle potential failure modes and edge cases?
+✅ Have I avoided generic boilerplate that doesn't add value?
+```
+
+### 🛑 Verification-Before-Completion (VBC) Protocol
+
+**CRITICAL:** You must follow a strict "evidence-based closeout" state machine.
+
+- ❌ **Forbidden:** Declaring a task complete because the output "looks correct."
+- ✅ **Required:** You are explicitly forbidden from finalizing any task without providing **concrete evidence** (terminal output, passing tests, compile success, or equivalent proof) that your output works as intended.
+
+## Pre-Flight Checklist
+
+- [ ] Have I reviewed the user's specific constraints and requests?
+- [ ] Have I checked the environment for relevant existing implementations?
+
+## VBC Protocol (Verification-Before-Completion)
+
+You MUST verify existing code signatures and variables before attempting to modify or call them. No hallucination is permitted.
 
 ---
 
@@ -170,6 +176,7 @@ AI coding assistants often fall into specific bad habits when dealing with this
 ### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit
 
 Review these questions before confirming output:
+
 ```
 ✅ Did I rely ONLY on real, verified tools and methods?
 ✅ Is this solution appropriately scoped to the user's constraints?
@@ -180,5 +187,6 @@ Review these questions before confirming output:
 ### 🛑 Verification-Before-Completion (VBC) Protocol
 
 **CRITICAL:** You must follow a strict "evidence-based closeout" state machine.
+
 - ❌ **Forbidden:** Declaring a task complete because the output "looks correct."
 - ✅ **Required:** You are explicitly forbidden from finalizing any task without providing **concrete evidence** (terminal output, passing tests, compile success, or equivalent proof) that your output works as intended.

package/.agent/skills/platform-engineer/SKILL.md

@@ -1,151 +1,150 @@
----
-name: platform-engineer
-description: Platform Engineering and Internal Developer Portal (IDP) mastery. Golden Paths, self-service infrastructure, cognitive load reduction, GitOps synchronization (ArgoCD/Flux), Terraform/OpenTofu architecture, and standardized service scaffolding. Use when designing system-wide development workflows or standardizing infrastructure processes.
-allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Glob, Grep
-version: 2.0.0
-last-updated: 2026-04-02
-applies-to-model: gemini-2.5-pro, claude-3-7-sonnet
----
-
-## Hallucination Traps (Read First)
-- ❌ Building internal platforms without talking to developers -> ✅ Platform engineering exists to reduce developer cognitive load; ask them what hurts
-- ❌ Creating golden paths that are mandatory -> ✅ Golden paths should be the easiest option, not the only option
-- ❌ Over-automating before the process is understood -> ✅ Manual first, then script, then platform; premature automation bakes in bad processes
-
----
-
-
-# Platform Engineering — Developer Experience Mastery
-
----
-
-## 1. The "Golden Path" Architecture
-
-A developer should not have to write a Dockerfile, configure a CI pipeline, request AWS permissions, or setup Prometheus dashboards to launch a new microservice.
-
-The Platform Engineer establishes **Golden Paths**: pre-approved, automated templates that bundle security and infrastructure out-of-the-box.
-
-**Example: Local Service Scaffolding (Backstage / Cookiecutter)**
-Instead of cloning complex repos, the developer runs:
-`platform create my-service --stack node-express --db postgres`
-
-This command:
-1. Generates the standard Node/Express repo.
-2. Applies the unified corporate CI/CD GitHub Action.
-3. Configures default Datadog/OpenTelemetry observability metrics.
-4. Generates a Terraform blueprint to provision the RDS Postgres instance.
-
----
-
-## 2. GitOps (Declarative State Synchronization)
-
-Platform Engineers do not log into AWS consoles to click buttons. They do not run `kubectl apply` from their laptops.
-
-They push code to Git. A continuous reconciliation loop (e.g., ArgoCD) syncs the live infrastructure to match the Git repository mathematically.
-
-```yaml
-# GitOps standard architecture (ArgoCD)
-apiVersion: argoproj.io/v1alpha1
-kind: Application
-metadata:
-  name: auth-service
-  namespace: argocd
-spec:
-  project: default
-  source:
-    repoURL: 'https://github.com/mycorp/infrastructure-ops'
-    path: k8s/auth-service
-    targetRevision: HEAD # Automatically deploys any merge to main
-  destination:
-    server: 'https://kubernetes.default.svc'
-    namespace: auth-prod
-  syncPolicy:
-    automated:
-      prune: true
-      selfHeal: true # If manual changes occur on cluster, force-reverts back to Git state
-```
-
----
-
-## 3. Infrastructure as Code (IaC) Modules
-
-Platform Engineers build reusable Terraform/Tofu modules, hiding extreme complexity from product developers.
-
-```hcl
-# The Platform Engineer writes the complex module (e.g., VPC, Subnets, IAM, KMS Encryptions)
-# The Product Developer simply consumes the module cleanly:
-
-module "product_database" {
-  source  = "github.com/mycorp/tf-modules/secure-rds"
-  version = "v1.2.0"
-
-  app_name      = "checkout-service"
-  capacity      = "medium"           # Abstracts complex instance sizing
-  needs_replica = true               # Abstracts failover architecture
-}
-```
-
----
-
-## 4. Reducing Cognitive Load
-
-DevOps asked product developers to learn Kubernetes, Helm, Terraform, CI/CD, and AWS IAM. The load was too high.
-Platform Engineering hides the Kubernetes complexity behind a portal (e.g., Backstage) or a declarative wrapper (e.g., Score).
-
-Ensure your infrastructure proposals abstract away the YAML mechanics. Give the developer a simple SLA: *"Push to the `main` branch, and the platform guarantees deployment, logs, and metrics within 3 minutes."*
-
----
-
-
----
-
-
-
-AI coding assistants often fall into specific bad habits when dealing with this domain. These are strictly forbidden:
-
-1. **Over-engineering:** Proposing complex abstractions or distributed systems when a simpler approach suffices.
-2. **Hallucinated Libraries/Methods:** Using non-existent methods or packages. Always `// VERIFY` or check `package.json` / `requirements.txt`.
-3. **Skipping Edge Cases:** Writing the "happy path" and ignoring error handling, timeouts, or data validation.
-4. **Context Amnesia:** Forgetting the user's constraints and offering generic advice instead of tailored solutions.
-5. **Silent Degradation:** Catching and suppressing errors without logging or re-raising.
-
----
-
-
-
-**Slash command: `/review` or `/tribunal-full`**
-**Active reviewers: `logic-reviewer` · `security-auditor`**
-
-### ❌ Forbidden AI Tropes
-
-1. **Blind Assumptions:** Never make an assumption without documenting it clearly with `// VERIFY: [reason]`.
-2. **Silent Degradation:** Catching and suppressing errors without logging or handling.
-3. **Context Amnesia:** Forgetting the user's constraints and offering generic advice instead of tailored solutions.
-
-
-
-Review these questions before confirming output:
-```
-✅ Did I rely ONLY on real, verified tools and methods?
-✅ Is this solution appropriately scoped to the user's constraints?
-✅ Did I handle potential failure modes and edge cases?
-✅ Have I avoided generic boilerplate that doesn't add value?
-```
-
-### 🛑 Verification-Before-Completion (VBC) Protocol
-
-**CRITICAL:** You must follow a strict "evidence-based closeout" state machine.
-- ❌ **Forbidden:** Declaring a task complete because the output "looks correct."
-- ✅ **Required:** You are explicitly forbidden from finalizing any task without providing **concrete evidence** (terminal output, passing tests, compile success, or equivalent proof) that your output works as intended.
-
-
-## Pre-Flight Checklist
-- [ ] Have I reviewed the user's specific constraints and requests?
-- [ ] Have I checked the environment for relevant existing implementations?
-
-## VBC Protocol (Verification-Before-Completion)
-You MUST verify existing code signatures and variables before attempting to modify or call them. No hallucination is permitted.
+---
+name: platform-engineer
+description: Platform Engineering and Internal Developer Portal (IDP) mastery. Golden Paths, self-service infrastructure, cognitive load reduction, GitOps synchronization (ArgoCD/Flux), Terraform/OpenTofu architecture, and standardized service scaffolding. Use when designing system-wide development workflows or standardizing infrastructure processes.
+allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Glob, Grep
+version: 2.0.0
+last-updated: 2026-04-02
+applies-to-model: gemini-2.5-pro, claude-3-7-sonnet
+routing:
+  domain: general
+  tier: basic
+---
+
+## Hallucination Traps (Read First)
+
+- ❌ Building internal platforms without talking to developers -> ✅ Platform engineering exists to reduce developer cognitive load; ask them what hurts
+- ❌ Creating golden paths that are mandatory -> ✅ Golden paths should be the easiest option, not the only option
+- ❌ Over-automating before the process is understood -> ✅ Manual first, then script, then platform; premature automation bakes in bad processes
+
+---
+
+# Platform Engineering — Developer Experience Mastery
+
+---
+
+## 1. The "Golden Path" Architecture
+
+A developer should not have to write a Dockerfile, configure a CI pipeline, request AWS permissions, or setup Prometheus dashboards to launch a new microservice.
+
+The Platform Engineer establishes **Golden Paths**: pre-approved, automated templates that bundle security and infrastructure out-of-the-box.
+
+**Example: Local Service Scaffolding (Backstage / Cookiecutter)**
+Instead of cloning complex repos, the developer runs:
+`platform create my-service --stack node-express --db postgres`
+
+This command:
+
+1. Generates the standard Node/Express repo.
+2. Applies the unified corporate CI/CD GitHub Action.
+3. Configures default Datadog/OpenTelemetry observability metrics.
+4. Generates a Terraform blueprint to provision the RDS Postgres instance.
+
+---
+
+## 2. GitOps (Declarative State Synchronization)
+
+Platform Engineers do not log into AWS consoles to click buttons. They do not run `kubectl apply` from their laptops.
+
+They push code to Git. A continuous reconciliation loop (e.g., ArgoCD) syncs the live infrastructure to match the Git repository mathematically.
 
+```yaml
+# GitOps standard architecture (ArgoCD)
+apiVersion: argoproj.io/v1alpha1
+kind: Application
+metadata:
+  name: auth-service
+  namespace: argocd
+spec:
+  project: default
+  source:
+    repoURL: "https://github.com/mycorp/infrastructure-ops"
+    path: k8s/auth-service
+    targetRevision: HEAD # Automatically deploys any merge to main
+  destination:
+    server: "https://kubernetes.default.svc"
+    namespace: auth-prod
+  syncPolicy:
+    automated:
+      prune: true
+      selfHeal: true # If manual changes occur on cluster, force-reverts back to Git state
+```
+
+---
+
+## 3. Infrastructure as Code (IaC) Modules
+
+Platform Engineers build reusable Terraform/Tofu modules, hiding extreme complexity from product developers.
+
+```hcl
+# The Platform Engineer writes the complex module (e.g., VPC, Subnets, IAM, KMS Encryptions)
+# The Product Developer simply consumes the module cleanly:
+
+module "product_database" {
+  source  = "github.com/mycorp/tf-modules/secure-rds"
+  version = "v1.2.0"
+
+  app_name      = "checkout-service"
+  capacity      = "medium"           # Abstracts complex instance sizing
+  needs_replica = true               # Abstracts failover architecture
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## 4. Reducing Cognitive Load
+
+DevOps asked product developers to learn Kubernetes, Helm, Terraform, CI/CD, and AWS IAM. The load was too high.
+Platform Engineering hides the Kubernetes complexity behind a portal (e.g., Backstage) or a declarative wrapper (e.g., Score).
+
+Ensure your infrastructure proposals abstract away the YAML mechanics. Give the developer a simple SLA: _"Push to the `main` branch, and the platform guarantees deployment, logs, and metrics within 3 minutes."_
+
+---
+
+---
+
+AI coding assistants often fall into specific bad habits when dealing with this domain. These are strictly forbidden:
+
+1. **Over-engineering:** Proposing complex abstractions or distributed systems when a simpler approach suffices.
+2. **Hallucinated Libraries/Methods:** Using non-existent methods or packages. Always `// VERIFY` or check `package.json` / `requirements.txt`.
+3. **Skipping Edge Cases:** Writing the "happy path" and ignoring error handling, timeouts, or data validation.
+4. **Context Amnesia:** Forgetting the user's constraints and offering generic advice instead of tailored solutions.
+5. **Silent Degradation:** Catching and suppressing errors without logging or re-raising.
+
+---
+
+**Slash command: `/review` or `/tribunal-full`**
+**Active reviewers: `logic-reviewer` · `security-auditor`**
+
+### ❌ Forbidden AI Tropes
+
+1. **Blind Assumptions:** Never make an assumption without documenting it clearly with `// VERIFY: [reason]`.
+2. **Silent Degradation:** Catching and suppressing errors without logging or handling.
+3. **Context Amnesia:** Forgetting the user's constraints and offering generic advice instead of tailored solutions.
+
+Review these questions before confirming output:
+
+```
+✅ Did I rely ONLY on real, verified tools and methods?
+✅ Is this solution appropriately scoped to the user's constraints?
+✅ Did I handle potential failure modes and edge cases?
+✅ Have I avoided generic boilerplate that doesn't add value?
+```
+
+### 🛑 Verification-Before-Completion (VBC) Protocol
+
+**CRITICAL:** You must follow a strict "evidence-based closeout" state machine.
+
+- ❌ **Forbidden:** Declaring a task complete because the output "looks correct."
+- ✅ **Required:** You are explicitly forbidden from finalizing any task without providing **concrete evidence** (terminal output, passing tests, compile success, or equivalent proof) that your output works as intended.
+
+## Pre-Flight Checklist
+
+- [ ] Have I reviewed the user's specific constraints and requests?
+- [ ] Have I checked the environment for relevant existing implementations?
+
+## VBC Protocol (Verification-Before-Completion)
+
+You MUST verify existing code signatures and variables before attempting to modify or call them. No hallucination is permitted.
 
 ---
 
@@ -175,6 +174,7 @@ AI coding assistants often fall into specific bad habits when dealing with this
 ### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit
 
 Review these questions before confirming output:
+
 ```
 ✅ Did I rely ONLY on real, verified tools and methods?
 ✅ Is this solution appropriately scoped to the user's constraints?
@@ -185,5 +185,6 @@ Review these questions before confirming output:
 ### 🛑 Verification-Before-Completion (VBC) Protocol
 
 **CRITICAL:** You must follow a strict "evidence-based closeout" state machine.
+
 - ❌ **Forbidden:** Declaring a task complete because the output "looks correct."
 - ✅ **Required:** You are explicitly forbidden from finalizing any task without providing **concrete evidence** (terminal output, passing tests, compile success, or equivalent proof) that your output works as intended.