tribunal-kit 8.0.0 → 9.0.1

package/.agent/skills/readme-builder/SKILL.md

@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
 ---
 name: readme-builder
-description: Interactive README.md generation specialist. Creates professional, structured README files with badges, installation guides, usage examples, screenshots, and contribution guidelines. Use when asked to create, update, or improve a README file.
-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Edit, Write
-version: 3.0.0
-last-updated: 2026-07-30
+description: Use when Interactive README.md generation specialist. Creates professional, structured README files with badges, installation guides, usage examples, screenshots, and contribution guidelines. Use when asked to create, update, or improve a README file.
+version: 5.0.0
+last-updated: 2026-09-13
 skills:
   - documentation-templates
   - geo-fundamentals
   - github-operations
+tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Edit, Write
 scripts-binding:
   - .agent/scripts/lint_runner.js
   - .agent/scripts/verify_all.js
@@ -15,15 +15,41 @@ scripts-binding:
 
 # README Builder Skill
 
+## Mandatory Pre-Flight Context Inspection
+
+Before generating, refactoring, or reviewing code in the `readme-builder` domain, inspect these 5 critical parameters:
+
+1. **System Boundaries & Dependencies**: Verify that all required dependencies exist in target package manifests and environment paths.
+2. **Runtime Context & Platform Invariants**: Confirm target platform constraints (Node.js, Browser, Mobile OS, Edge runtime) before applying APIs.
+3. **Execution Guardrails**: Identify potential side-effects, state mutations, and unhandled asynchronous exceptions.
+4. **Validation & Type Contracts**: Validate input data schemas and strict type constraints across all module interfaces.
+5. **Observability & Proof of Execution**: Ensure execution produces tangible verification signals (terminal output, tests, metrics).
+
+## Activation Boundaries
+
+- **Activate when:** Use when Interactive README.md generation specialist. Creates professional, structured README files with badges, installation guides, usage examples, screenshots, and contribution guidelines. Use when asked to create, update, or improve a README file.
+- **DO NOT activate when:** The task falls outside the `readme-builder` domain or is managed by a different dedicated specialist.
+
+## 🔁 Multi-Pass Execution Protocol
+
+Execute all non-trivial tasks through this 7-pass cognitive loop:
+
+| Pass | Phase | Core Action |
+|:---|:---|:---|
+| **Pass 1** | **Understand** | Deconstruct the user's explicit objective, implicit requirements, and platform constraints. |
+| **Pass 2** | **Plan** | Decompose the task into smallest logical steps; map dependencies and required tool calls. |
+| **Pass 3** | **Execute** | Implement the solution with production-grade craft, zero placeholders, and strict typing. |
+| **Pass 4** | **Verify** | Run linters, unit tests, or compiler checks to validate structural correctness. |
+| **Pass 5** | **Attack** | Perform an adversarial review searching for edge-case failures, race conditions, and traps. |
+| **Pass 6** | **Improve** | Eliminate discovered friction, optimize performance, and harden error boundaries. |
+| **Pass 7** | **Quality Gate** | Enforce Verification-Before-Completion (VBC) with concrete terminal proof before finalizing. |
+
 ---
 
-## Mandatory Pre-Flight Context Inspection
+## 🛠️ Technical Architecture & Reference Recipes
 
-Before generating or updating a README file, you MUST inspect:
+---
 
-1. Mandatory Discovery Phase (Section 34) → Scan `package.json`, `pyproject.toml`, or project files first to collect factual metadata before writing
-2. Zero Placeholder Rule (Section 28) → Ban template placeholders (`[insert here]`); generate copy-paste ready code examples from actual project code
-3. Hero Section Lead-With-Value (Section 164) → Lead with a single-sentence value proposition and visual trust badges; ban starting with just the title
 
 ## Hallucination Traps (Read First)
 
@@ -33,8 +59,6 @@ Before generating or updating a README file, you MUST inspect:
 
 ---
 
-# README Builder Skill
-
 ---
 
 ## Ground Rules
@@ -277,91 +301,45 @@ Evidence:    [file written at path / content reviewed]
 
 ---
 
----
-
-AI coding assistants often fall into specific bad habits when dealing with this domain. These are strictly forbidden:
+## 🚨 Edge-Case & Failure Mode Matrix
 
-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.
+| Scenario | Risk | Mitigation Strategy |
+|:---|:---|:---|
+| **Empty or Null Inputs** | Unhandled exception or unexpected rendering collapse | Enforce fallback guards, optional chaining, and explicit empty state handlers |
+| **Network Timeout / Latency** | Hanging operations or duplicate side-effects | Implement bounded abort controllers, exponential backoff, and idempotency keys |
+| **Concurrency / Race Conditions** | Stale state overwrite or inconsistent data mutations | Use atomic transactions, mutex locking, or cancel-on-resubmit controls |
+| **Invalid Schema / Malformed Payload** | Downstream runtime errors or security injection | Validate boundary payloads with Zod/Pydantic schemas prior to execution |
+| **Resource / Memory Saturation** | OOM errors, frame drops, or memory leaks | Clean up listeners, cancel active timers, and enforce pagination/virtualization |
 
 ---
 
-**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.
+## 🤖 LLM-Specific Traps Table
 
-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.
-
----
-
-## 🤖 LLM-Specific Traps
-
-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.
+| Anti-Pattern | What AI Commonly Does Wrong | What Is Actually Correct |
+|:---|:---|:---|
+| **Hallucinated Tool Capabilities** | Assuming an external library or CLI command exists without verification | Run a verification check or verify package.json before referencing tools |
+| **Premature Completion Claim** | Declaring a task finished because code was generated without verification | Execute tests, linters, or terminal commands to provide concrete proof |
+| **Context Bloat Dumping** | Pasting entire multi-thousand-line files into prompt context | Extract targeted excerpts, symbols, and signatures to preserve tokens |
 
 ---
 
-## 🏛️ Tribunal Integration (Anti-Hallucination)
-
-**Slash command: `/review` or `/tribunal-full`**
-**Active reviewers: `logic-reviewer` · `security-auditor`**
-
-### ❌ Forbidden AI Tropes
+## 🏛️ Tribunal Verification & Guardrails
 
-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.
+**Active Reviewers:** `orchestrator` · `agent-organizer` · `logic-reviewer`
+**Slash Command:** `/review` or `/tribunal-full`
 
-### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit
-
-Review these questions before confirming output:
+### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit Checklist
 
 ```
-✅ 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?
+✅ Did I deconstruct the root objective before proposing architecture?
+✅ Did I identify dependencies, bottlenecks, and parallelizable sub-tasks?
+✅ Did I avoid over-engineering and select the simplest effective pattern?
+✅ Did I verify assumptions with concrete file reads instead of speculation?
+✅ Did I establish measurable verification criteria before completion?
 ```
 
 ### 🛑 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.
+- ✅ **Required:** You are explicitly forbidden from finalizing any task without providing **concrete evidence** (terminal output, passing test suites, compiler success, or equivalent operational proof) that your output works as intended.

package/.agent/skills/realtime-patterns/SKILL.md

@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
 ---
 name: realtime-patterns
-description: Real-time application mastery. WebSockets, Server-Sent Events (SSE), CRDTs for conflict-free collaboration, presence systems, optimistic updates, live cursors, multiplayer state sync, reconnection strategies, and real-time database patterns (Supabase Realtime, Firebase). Use when building chat, live collaboration, dashboards, or multiplayer features.
-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Edit, Write
-version: 3.0.0
-last-updated: 2026-07-30
+description: Use when Real-time application mastery. WebSockets, Server-Sent Events (SSE), CRDTs for conflict-free collaboration, presence systems, optimistic updates, live cursors, multiplayer state sync, reconnection strategies, and real-time database patterns (Supabase Realtime, Firebase). Use when building chat, live collaboration, dashboards, or multiplayer features.
+version: 5.0.0
+last-updated: 2026-09-13
 skills:
   - api-patterns
   - backend-security-expert
   - nodejs-best-practices
+tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Edit, Write
 scripts-binding:
   - .agent/scripts/lint_runner.js
   - .agent/scripts/verify_all.js
@@ -15,17 +15,41 @@ scripts-binding:
 
 # Real-Time Patterns — Live Application Mastery
 
----
-
 ## Mandatory Pre-Flight Context Inspection
 
-Before architecting real-time streaming or WebSocket infrastructure, you MUST inspect:
+Before generating, refactoring, or reviewing code in the `realtime-patterns` domain, inspect these 5 critical parameters:
 
-1. One-Way SSE Selection Rule (Section 49) → Prefer SSE for one-way server-to-client streaming (AI responses, notifications); reserve WebSockets for bidirectional interactive features
-2. WebSocket Exponential Reconnection (Section 183) → Implement exponential backoff with random jitter for client reconnection loops to prevent thundering herd crashes
-3. Optimistic UI Rollback Handler (Section 207) → Capture previous state before optimistic mutations and implement explicit onError rollback logic
+1. **System Boundaries & Dependencies**: Verify that all required dependencies exist in target package manifests and environment paths.
+2. **Runtime Context & Platform Invariants**: Confirm target platform constraints (Node.js, Browser, Mobile OS, Edge runtime) before applying APIs.
+3. **Execution Guardrails**: Identify potential side-effects, state mutations, and unhandled asynchronous exceptions.
+4. **Validation & Type Contracts**: Validate input data schemas and strict type constraints across all module interfaces.
+5. **Observability & Proof of Execution**: Ensure execution produces tangible verification signals (terminal output, tests, metrics).
+
+## Activation Boundaries
+
+- **Activate when:** Use when Real-time application mastery. WebSockets, Server-Sent Events (SSE), CRDTs for conflict-free collaboration, presence systems, optimistic updates, live cursors, multiplayer state sync, reconnection strategies, and real-time database patterns (Supabase Realtime, Firebase). Use when building chat, live collaboration, dashboards, or multiplayer features.
+- **DO NOT activate when:** The task falls outside the `realtime-patterns` domain or is managed by a different dedicated specialist.
+
+## 🔁 Multi-Pass Execution Protocol
+
+Execute all non-trivial tasks through this 7-pass cognitive loop:
+
+| Pass | Phase | Core Action |
+|:---|:---|:---|
+| **Pass 1** | **Understand** | Deconstruct the user's explicit objective, implicit requirements, and platform constraints. |
+| **Pass 2** | **Plan** | Decompose the task into smallest logical steps; map dependencies and required tool calls. |
+| **Pass 3** | **Execute** | Implement the solution with production-grade craft, zero placeholders, and strict typing. |
+| **Pass 4** | **Verify** | Run linters, unit tests, or compiler checks to validate structural correctness. |
+| **Pass 5** | **Attack** | Perform an adversarial review searching for edge-case failures, race conditions, and traps. |
+| **Pass 6** | **Improve** | Eliminate discovered friction, optimize performance, and harden error boundaries. |
+| **Pass 7** | **Quality Gate** | Enforce Verification-Before-Completion (VBC) with concrete terminal proof before finalizing. |
+
+---
+
+## 🛠️ Technical Architecture & Reference Recipes
+
+---
 
-# Real-Time Patterns — Live Application Mastery
 
 ---
 
@@ -290,91 +314,45 @@ class PresenceManager {
 
 ---
 
----
-
-AI coding assistants often fall into specific bad habits when dealing with this domain. These are strictly forbidden:
+## 🚨 Edge-Case & Failure Mode Matrix
 
-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.
+| Scenario | Risk | Mitigation Strategy |
+|:---|:---|:---|
+| **Empty or Null Inputs** | Unhandled exception or unexpected rendering collapse | Enforce fallback guards, optional chaining, and explicit empty state handlers |
+| **Network Timeout / Latency** | Hanging operations or duplicate side-effects | Implement bounded abort controllers, exponential backoff, and idempotency keys |
+| **Concurrency / Race Conditions** | Stale state overwrite or inconsistent data mutations | Use atomic transactions, mutex locking, or cancel-on-resubmit controls |
+| **Invalid Schema / Malformed Payload** | Downstream runtime errors or security injection | Validate boundary payloads with Zod/Pydantic schemas prior to execution |
+| **Resource / Memory Saturation** | OOM errors, frame drops, or memory leaks | Clean up listeners, cancel active timers, and enforce pagination/virtualization |
 
 ---
 
-**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.
+## 🤖 LLM-Specific Traps Table
 
-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.
-
----
-
-## 🤖 LLM-Specific Traps
-
-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.
+| Anti-Pattern | What AI Commonly Does Wrong | What Is Actually Correct |
+|:---|:---|:---|
+| **Unchecked Payload Cast** | Casting request bodies to TypeScript types without runtime schema validation | Parse request payloads through Zod/Pydantic schemas before business logic |
+| **Silent Error Swallowing** | Catching errors with empty catch blocks or logging without rethrowing | Propagate structured errors with status codes and contextual stack traces |
+| **Unparameterized Query** | Concatenating user inputs into SQL/Prisma query strings | Always use parameterized bindings or type-safe ORM query builders |
 
 ---
 
-## 🏛️ Tribunal Integration (Anti-Hallucination)
-
-**Slash command: `/review` or `/tribunal-full`**
-**Active reviewers: `logic-reviewer` · `security-auditor`**
-
-### ❌ Forbidden AI Tropes
+## 🏛️ Tribunal Verification & Guardrails
 
-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.
+**Active Reviewers:** `logic-reviewer` · `security-auditor` · `api-architect` · `resilience-reviewer`
+**Slash Command:** `/review` or `/tribunal-full`
 
-### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit
-
-Review these questions before confirming output:
+### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit Checklist
 
 ```
-✅ 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?
+✅ Are all inputs and boundary payloads validated against schemas (Zod/Pydantic)?
+✅ Are SQL and database queries parameterized with zero string concatenation?
+✅ Are error boundaries and timeout/retry policies explicitly declared?
+✅ Are authentication checks performed before business logic execution?
+✅ Did I verify that imported dependencies exist in package.json/requirements.txt?
 ```
 
 ### 🛑 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.
+- ✅ **Required:** You are explicitly forbidden from finalizing any task without providing **concrete evidence** (terminal output, passing test suites, compiler success, or equivalent operational proof) that your output works as intended.

package/.agent/skills/red-team-tactics/SKILL.md

@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
 ---
 name: red-team-tactics
-description: Red team tactics principles based on MITRE ATT&CK. Attack phases, detection evasion, reporting.
-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Edit, Write
-version: 3.0.0
-last-updated: 2026-07-30
+description: Use when Red team tactics principles based on MITRE ATT&CK. Attack phases, detection evasion, reporting.
+version: 5.0.0
+last-updated: 2026-09-13
 skills:
   - vulnerability-scanner
   - backend-security-expert
   - api-security-auditor
+tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Edit, Write
 scripts-binding:
   - .agent/scripts/lint_runner.js
   - .agent/scripts/verify_all.js
@@ -15,15 +15,41 @@ scripts-binding:
 
 # Red Team & Penetration Testing Principles
 
+## Mandatory Pre-Flight Context Inspection
+
+Before generating, refactoring, or reviewing code in the `red-team-tactics` domain, inspect these 5 critical parameters:
+
+1. **System Boundaries & Dependencies**: Verify that all required dependencies exist in target package manifests and environment paths.
+2. **Runtime Context & Platform Invariants**: Confirm target platform constraints (Node.js, Browser, Mobile OS, Edge runtime) before applying APIs.
+3. **Execution Guardrails**: Identify potential side-effects, state mutations, and unhandled asynchronous exceptions.
+4. **Validation & Type Contracts**: Validate input data schemas and strict type constraints across all module interfaces.
+5. **Observability & Proof of Execution**: Ensure execution produces tangible verification signals (terminal output, tests, metrics).
+
+## Activation Boundaries
+
+- **Activate when:** Use when Red team tactics principles based on MITRE ATT&CK. Attack phases, detection evasion, reporting.
+- **DO NOT activate when:** The task falls outside the `red-team-tactics` domain or is managed by a different dedicated specialist.
+
+## 🔁 Multi-Pass Execution Protocol
+
+Execute all non-trivial tasks through this 7-pass cognitive loop:
+
+| Pass | Phase | Core Action |
+|:---|:---|:---|
+| **Pass 1** | **Understand** | Deconstruct the user's explicit objective, implicit requirements, and platform constraints. |
+| **Pass 2** | **Plan** | Decompose the task into smallest logical steps; map dependencies and required tool calls. |
+| **Pass 3** | **Execute** | Implement the solution with production-grade craft, zero placeholders, and strict typing. |
+| **Pass 4** | **Verify** | Run linters, unit tests, or compiler checks to validate structural correctness. |
+| **Pass 5** | **Attack** | Perform an adversarial review searching for edge-case failures, race conditions, and traps. |
+| **Pass 6** | **Improve** | Eliminate discovered friction, optimize performance, and harden error boundaries. |
+| **Pass 7** | **Quality Gate** | Enforce Verification-Before-Completion (VBC) with concrete terminal proof before finalizing. |
+
 ---
 
-## Mandatory Pre-Flight Context Inspection
+## 🛠️ Technical Architecture & Reference Recipes
 
-Before performing red team assessments or security testing, you MUST inspect:
+---
 
-1. Written Authorization Gate (Section 34) → Verify written authorization, defined scope, rules of engagement, and emergency contact before executing tests
-2. Reproducible PoC Rule (Section 16) → Include a reproducible Proof-of-Concept, CVSS risk score, and explicit remediation snippet for every finding
-3. Breach Discovery Halt (Section 162) → Immediately halt security testing and report if evidence of an active real-world breach is discovered
 
 ## Hallucination Traps (Read First)
 
@@ -33,8 +59,6 @@ Before performing red team assessments or security testing, you MUST inspect:
 
 ---
 
-# Red Team & Penetration Testing Principles
-
 A red team engagement is a controlled attack.
 The goal is to find what a real attacker would find — before they do.
 
@@ -198,91 +222,45 @@ Pre-Flight:  ✅ All checks passed
 
 ---
 
----
-
-AI coding assistants often fall into specific bad habits when dealing with this domain. These are strictly forbidden:
+## 🚨 Edge-Case & Failure Mode Matrix
 
-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.
+| Scenario | Risk | Mitigation Strategy |
+|:---|:---|:---|
+| **Empty or Null Inputs** | Unhandled exception or unexpected rendering collapse | Enforce fallback guards, optional chaining, and explicit empty state handlers |
+| **Network Timeout / Latency** | Hanging operations or duplicate side-effects | Implement bounded abort controllers, exponential backoff, and idempotency keys |
+| **Concurrency / Race Conditions** | Stale state overwrite or inconsistent data mutations | Use atomic transactions, mutex locking, or cancel-on-resubmit controls |
+| **Invalid Schema / Malformed Payload** | Downstream runtime errors or security injection | Validate boundary payloads with Zod/Pydantic schemas prior to execution |
+| **Resource / Memory Saturation** | OOM errors, frame drops, or memory leaks | Clean up listeners, cancel active timers, and enforce pagination/virtualization |
 
 ---
 
-**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.
+## 🤖 LLM-Specific Traps Table
 
-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.
-
----
-
-## 🤖 LLM-Specific Traps
-
-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.
+| Anti-Pattern | What AI Commonly Does Wrong | What Is Actually Correct |
+|:---|:---|:---|
+| **Hardcoded Secret Pattern** | Committing API keys, tokens, or private salts into source code | Load credentials strictly via runtime environment variables and secret stores |
+| **Prompt Injection Surface** | Directly concatenating untrusted user input into LLM system prompts | Wrap user content in isolated delimiters and strip injection control sequences |
+| **Missing Authorization Check** | Relying only on authentication token presence without checking tenant/object RBAC | Verify user permissions against the specific target record ID before mutation |
 
 ---
 
-## 🏛️ Tribunal Integration (Anti-Hallucination)
-
-**Slash command: `/review` or `/tribunal-full`**
-**Active reviewers: `logic-reviewer` · `security-auditor`**
-
-### ❌ Forbidden AI Tropes
+## 🏛️ Tribunal Verification & Guardrails
 
-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.
+**Active Reviewers:** `security-auditor` · `penetration-tester` · `backend-security-expert`
+**Slash Command:** `/review` or `/tribunal-full`
 
-### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit
-
-Review these questions before confirming output:
+### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit Checklist
 
 ```
-✅ 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?
+✅ Are user inputs sanitized and treated as untrusted at system boundaries?
+✅ Are secrets loaded strictly via environment variables with zero hardcoding?
+✅ Is least-privilege enforcement active on APIs, tokens, and storage buckets?
+✅ Are prompt-injection delimiters and sanitizers wrapped around LLM inputs?
+✅ Did I verify encryption in transit and at rest for sensitive customer data?
 ```
 
 ### 🛑 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.
+- ✅ **Required:** You are explicitly forbidden from finalizing any task without providing **concrete evidence** (terminal output, passing test suites, compiler success, or equivalent operational proof) that your output works as intended.