tribunal-kit 8.0.0 → 9.0.1

package/.agent/skills/swiss-design/SKILL.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: swiss-design
-description: International Typographic Style (Swiss Design) principles for web interfaces. Strict grid discipline, asymmetric layouts, bold typographic contrast, flush-left un-justified text, and mathematical negative space.
-version: 3.0.0
-last-updated: 2026-07-30
+description: Use when International Typographic Style (Swiss Design) principles for web interfaces. Strict grid discipline, asymmetric layouts, bold typographic contrast, flush-left un-justified text, and mathematical negative space.
+version: 5.0.0
+last-updated: 2026-09-13
 skills:
   - typeset
   - baseline-ui
@@ -15,17 +15,41 @@ scripts-binding:
 
 # Swiss Design — International Typographic Style for Web
 
----
-
 ## Mandatory Pre-Flight Context Inspection
 
-Before applying Swiss Design aesthetics, you MUST inspect:
+Before generating, refactoring, or reviewing code in the `swiss-design` 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 International Typographic Style (Swiss Design) principles for web interfaces. Strict grid discipline, asymmetric layouts, bold typographic contrast, flush-left un-justified text, and mathematical negative space.
+- **DO NOT activate when:** The task falls outside the `swiss-design` domain or is managed by a different dedicated specialist.
 
-1. `DESIGN.md` / `index.css` → Check grid system tokens and grotesque font declarations (Helvetica, Inter, Geist)
-2. Asymmetric Structural Balance (Section 32) → Align headings and content to strong left vertical axes; strictly prohibit `text-align: justify` or centered body paragraphs
-3. Mathematical Section Numbering (Section 35) → Enforce small uppercase badges (`SECTION 01 // OVERVIEW`) with `tabular-nums`
+## 🔁 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
+
+---
 
-Architect pristine, print-inspired interfaces grounded in grid discipline, objective clarity, and asymmetric typographic hierarchy.
 
 ---
 
@@ -51,28 +75,45 @@ Architect pristine, print-inspired interfaces grounded in grid discipline, objec
 
 ---
 
-## 🤖 LLM-Specific Traps
+## 🚨 Edge-Case & Failure Mode Matrix
+
+| 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 |
+
+---
+
+## 🤖 LLM-Specific Traps Table
 
-1. **Justified Text Alignment**: Setting `text-align: justify` which creates uneven, ugly gaps ("rivers") between words. Use `text-align: left`.
-2. **Centered Text Overuse**: Centering body text paragraphs. Keep content strictly left-aligned.
+| Anti-Pattern | What AI Commonly Does Wrong | What Is Actually Correct |
+|:---|:---|:---|
+| **Uncontrolled Re-render Loop** | Mutating state inside render bodies or omitting hook dependencies | Wrap effects with explicit deps and isolate reactive derivations in useMemo |
+| **Accessibility Neglect** | Interactive <div> without role="button", tabIndex, or onKeyDown | Use semantic <button> or provide ARIA role, keyboard handlers, and focus ring |
+| **Layout Shift Flash** | Images/dynamic content without aspect-ratio or explicit dimensions | Enforce aspect-ratio or skeleton placeholders to guarantee zero CLS |
 
 ---
 
-## 🏛️ Tribunal Integration (Anti-Hallucination)
+## 🏛️ Tribunal Verification & Guardrails
 
-**Active reviewers: `frontend-reviewer` · `ui-ux-auditor`**
+**Active Reviewers:** `frontend-reviewer` · `type-safety` · `ui-ux-auditor` · `complexity-reviewer`
+**Slash Command:** `/review` or `/tribunal-full`
 
-### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit
+### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit Checklist
 
 ```
-✅ Are all text paragraphs aligned flush-left (`text-align: left`)?
-✅ Is layout structured on an explicit grid axis with generous negative space?
-✅ Are tabular numbers (`tabular-nums`) used for numbered section markers?
+✅ Are all component props strictly typed with zero implicit "any"?
+✅ Are responsive breakpoints, fluid typography, and optical balance verified?
+✅ Is accessibility (ARIA labels, keyboard focus, contrast) validated?
+✅ Are re-renders minimized and state lifecycles cleanly separated?
+✅ Did I verify all imported UI components and icon sets actually exist?
 ```
 
 ### 🛑 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/system-design-pro/SKILL.md

@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
 ---
 name: system-design-pro
-description: Industry-level system design mastery for interviews and production. The 6-step design framework, scale estimation (DAU→QPS→storage→bandwidth), core building blocks (load balancers L4/L7, CDN, caches, queues), database selection matrix, CAP Theorem applied, and reference designs for URL shortener, rate limiter, Twitter feed, distributed cache, and notification system. Use when designing systems for scale, conducting architecture reviews, or preparing system design discussions.
-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Edit, Write
-version: 3.0.0
-last-updated: 2026-07-30
+description: Use when Industry-level system design mastery for interviews and production. The 6-step design framework, scale estimation (DAU→QPS→storage→bandwidth), core building blocks (load balancers L4/L7, CDN, caches, queues), database selection matrix, CAP Theorem applied, and reference designs for URL shortener, rate limiter, Twitter feed, distributed cache, and notification system. Use when designing systems for scale, conducting architecture reviews, or preparing system design discussions.
+version: 5.0.0
+last-updated: 2026-09-13
 skills:
   - architecture
   - database-design
   - cloud-architect
+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:
 
 # System Design Pro — Industry-Level Mastery
 
+## Mandatory Pre-Flight Context Inspection
+
+Before generating, refactoring, or reviewing code in the `system-design-pro` 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 Industry-level system design mastery for interviews and production. The 6-step design framework, scale estimation (DAU→QPS→storage→bandwidth), core building blocks (load balancers L4/L7, CDN, caches, queues), database selection matrix, CAP Theorem applied, and reference designs for URL shortener, rate limiter, Twitter feed, distributed cache, and notification system. Use when designing systems for scale, conducting architecture reviews, or preparing system design discussions.
+- **DO NOT activate when:** The task falls outside the `system-design-pro` 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 designing system architecture or writing scale proposals, you MUST inspect:
+---
 
-1. 6-Step Design Framework (Section 27) → Execute Clarify Scope, Scale Estimation, API Definition, Data Model, High-Level Design, and Deep Dive in exact order
-2. Quantified Scale Estimation (Section 65) → Calculate read/write QPS, storage growth, and bandwidth before selecting database or caching tiers
-3. Monolith First Rule (Section 17) → Start with modular monolith for $<10\text{K}$ RPM; ban introducing microservices or sharding prematurely
 
 ## Hallucination Traps (Read First)
 
@@ -35,8 +61,6 @@ Before designing system architecture or writing scale proposals, you MUST inspec
 
 ---
 
-# System Design Pro — Industry-Level Mastery
-
 ## 1. The 6-Step Design Framework
 
 Use this structure for every system design discussion:
@@ -325,34 +349,45 @@ Failure handling:
 
 ---
 
-## 🤖 LLM-Specific Traps
+## 🚨 Edge-Case & Failure Mode Matrix
 
-1. **Premature sharding**: Suggesting database sharding before the user has even mentioned scale issues. Sharding is complex; exhaust simpler options first.
-2. **NoSQL for everything**: DynamoDB and MongoDB are not universally better. They sacrifice joins and ACID. Present the tradeoffs honestly.
-3. **Ignoring the 80/20 of read QPS**: Most web apps are 80-95% reads. Design the read path first (caching, CDN, read replicas) before optimizing writes.
-4. **Forgetting the Coordinator Problem**: Distributed systems need coordination (who is the leader?). Mention ZooKeeper/etcd or leaderless designs when relevant.
-5. **Over-specifying CAP**: Real systems pick AP vs CP at the feature level, not the system level. A shopping cart (AP) and payment processing (CP) can coexist.
+| 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 |
 
 ---
 
-## 🏛️ Tribunal Integration (Anti-Hallucination)
+## 🤖 LLM-Specific Traps Table
 
-**Slash command: `/review` or `/tribunal-full`**
-**Active reviewers: `logic-reviewer` · `system-architect` · `database-architect`**
+| 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 |
 
-### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit
+---
+
+## 🏛️ Tribunal Verification & Guardrails
+
+**Active Reviewers:** `orchestrator` · `agent-organizer` · `logic-reviewer`
+**Slash Command:** `/review` or `/tribunal-full`
+
+### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit Checklist
 
 ```
-✅ Did I quantify the scale before recommending a solution?
-✅ Did I present at least 2 database options with tradeoffs?
-✅ Did I define the read:write ratio before choosing a caching strategy?
-✅ Did I verify the system doesn't need microservices before recommending them?
-✅ Did I define a failure mode and mitigation for the primary bottleneck?
+✅ 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**: Recommending an architecture without first establishing scale numbers.
-- ✅ **Required**: Every system design must include: QPS estimates, data model, caching strategy, and at least one identified bottleneck with a scaling plan.
+- ❌ **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 test suites, compiler success, or equivalent operational proof) that your output works as intended.

package/.agent/skills/systematic-debugging/SKILL.md

@@ -1,29 +1,56 @@
 ---
 name: systematic-debugging
-description: Systematic debugging framework. Root-cause isolation, 4-phase methodology, hypothesis testing, log tracing, avoiding shotgun-surgery, memory allocation analysis, and empirical evidence gathering. Use when debugging complex, highly-coupled, or elusive bugs across mixed execution environments.
-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Edit, Write
-version: 3.0.0
-last-updated: 2026-07-30
+description: Use when Systematic debugging framework. Root-cause isolation, 4-phase methodology, hypothesis testing, log tracing, avoiding shotgun-surgery, memory allocation analysis, and empirical evidence gathering. Use when debugging complex, highly-coupled, or elusive bugs across mixed execution environments.
+version: 5.0.0
+last-updated: 2026-09-13
 skills:
   - diagnosing-bugs
   - test-result-analyzer
   - clean-code
+tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Edit, Write
 scripts-binding:
   - .agent/scripts/test_runner.js
   - .agent/scripts/verify_all.js
+  - .agent/scripts/lint_runner.js
 ---
 
 # Systematic Debugging — Root Cause Mastery
 
+## Mandatory Pre-Flight Context Inspection
+
+Before generating, refactoring, or reviewing code in the `systematic-debugging` 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 Systematic debugging framework. Root-cause isolation, 4-phase methodology, hypothesis testing, log tracing, avoiding shotgun-surgery, memory allocation analysis, and empirical evidence gathering. Use when debugging complex, highly-coupled, or elusive bugs across mixed execution environments.
+- **DO NOT activate when:** The task falls outside the `systematic-debugging` 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 debugging issues or analyzing stack traces, you MUST inspect:
+---
 
-1. Single Variable Isolation (Section 15) → Change ONE variable at a time when debugging; ban shotgun debugging or multi-file edits simultaneously
-2. Deterministic Reproduction Pre-requisite (Section 29) → Write a failing deterministic test/reproduction script FIRST before modifying code logic
-3. Stack Trace Application Line Extraction (Section 98) → Trace up past `node_modules` to locate the top-most application code frame you wrote
 
 ## Hallucination Traps (Read First)
 
@@ -33,8 +60,6 @@ Before debugging issues or analyzing stack traces, you MUST inspect:
 
 ---
 
-# Systematic Debugging — Root Cause Mastery
-
 ---
 
 ## 1. The 4-Phase Debugging Methodology
@@ -69,7 +94,16 @@ Never jump straight into modifying code when a bug is reported.
 
 ---
 
-## 2. Advanced Diagnostic Vectors
+## 2. Specialized Diagnostic Techniques
+
+When debugging intricate or elusive bugs, reference these specialized technique guides:
+- **Root Cause Tracing (`./root-cause-tracing.md`):** Trace backwards up the call stack to identify where invalid data originated, rather than fixing where the error appears.
+- **Condition-Based Waiting (`./condition-based-waiting.md`):** Eliminate flaky tests and timing bugs by waiting for specific deterministic state conditions instead of arbitrary `setTimeout` or `sleep` calls.
+- **Defense in Depth (`./defense-in-depth.md`):** Add validation and runtime assertions at multiple component boundaries.
+
+---
+
+## 3. Advanced Diagnostic Vectors
 
 When pure logic errors are ruled out, look for environmental factors.
 
@@ -120,91 +154,45 @@ Do not skim. Stack traces tell the exact sequence of destruction.
 
 ---
 
----
-
-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.
+| 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 |
 
 ---
 
-## 🤖 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.
-
----
+## 🏛️ Tribunal Verification & Guardrails
 
-## 🏛️ Tribunal Integration (Anti-Hallucination)
+**Active Reviewers:** `orchestrator` · `agent-organizer` · `logic-reviewer`
+**Slash Command:** `/review` or `/tribunal-full`
 
-**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.
-
-### ✅ 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/systematic-debugging/condition-based-waiting.md

@@ -0,0 +1,115 @@
+# Condition-Based Waiting
+
+## Overview
+
+Flaky tests often guess at timing with arbitrary delays. This creates race conditions where tests pass on fast machines but fail under load or in CI.
+
+**Core principle:** Wait for the actual condition you care about, not a guess about how long it takes.
+
+## When to Use
+
+```dot
+digraph when_to_use {
+    "Test uses setTimeout/sleep?" [shape=diamond];
+    "Testing timing behavior?" [shape=diamond];
+    "Document WHY timeout needed" [shape=box];
+    "Use condition-based waiting" [shape=box];
+
+    "Test uses setTimeout/sleep?" -> "Testing timing behavior?" [label="yes"];
+    "Testing timing behavior?" -> "Document WHY timeout needed" [label="yes"];
+    "Testing timing behavior?" -> "Use condition-based waiting" [label="no"];
+}
+```
+
+**Use when:**
+- Tests have arbitrary delays (`setTimeout`, `sleep`, `time.sleep()`)
+- Tests are flaky (pass sometimes, fail under load)
+- Tests timeout when run in parallel
+- Waiting for async operations to complete
+
+**Don't use when:**
+- Testing actual timing behavior (debounce, throttle intervals)
+- Always document WHY if using arbitrary timeout
+
+## Core Pattern
+
+```typescript
+// ❌ BEFORE: Guessing at timing
+await new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, 50));
+const result = getResult();
+expect(result).toBeDefined();
+
+// ✅ AFTER: Waiting for condition
+await waitFor(() => getResult() !== undefined);
+const result = getResult();
+expect(result).toBeDefined();
+```
+
+## Quick Patterns
+
+| Scenario | Pattern |
+|----------|---------|
+| Wait for event | `waitFor(() => events.find(e => e.type === 'DONE'))` |
+| Wait for state | `waitFor(() => machine.state === 'ready')` |
+| Wait for count | `waitFor(() => items.length >= 5)` |
+| Wait for file | `waitFor(() => fs.existsSync(path))` |
+| Complex condition | `waitFor(() => obj.ready && obj.value > 10)` |
+
+## Implementation
+
+Generic polling function:
+```typescript
+async function waitFor<T>(
+  condition: () => T | undefined | null | false,
+  description: string,
+  timeoutMs = 5000
+): Promise<T> {
+  const startTime = Date.now();
+
+  while (true) {
+    const result = condition();
+    if (result) return result;
+
+    if (Date.now() - startTime > timeoutMs) {
+      throw new Error(`Timeout waiting for ${description} after ${timeoutMs}ms`);
+    }
+
+    await new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, 10)); // Poll every 10ms
+  }
+}
+```
+
+See `condition-based-waiting-example.ts` in this directory for complete implementation with domain-specific helpers (`waitForEvent`, `waitForEventCount`, `waitForEventMatch`) from actual debugging session.
+
+## Common Mistakes
+
+**❌ Polling too fast:** `setTimeout(check, 1)` - wastes CPU
+**✅ Fix:** Poll every 10ms
+
+**❌ No timeout:** Loop forever if condition never met
+**✅ Fix:** Always include timeout with clear error
+
+**❌ Stale data:** Cache state before loop
+**✅ Fix:** Call getter inside loop for fresh data
+
+## When Arbitrary Timeout IS Correct
+
+```typescript
+// Tool ticks every 100ms - need 2 ticks to verify partial output
+await waitForEvent(manager, 'TOOL_STARTED'); // First: wait for condition
+await new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, 200));   // Then: wait for timed behavior
+// 200ms = 2 ticks at 100ms intervals - documented and justified
+```
+
+**Requirements:**
+1. First wait for triggering condition
+2. Based on known timing (not guessing)
+3. Comment explaining WHY
+
+## Real-World Impact
+
+From debugging session (2025-10-03):
+- Fixed 15 flaky tests across 3 files
+- Pass rate: 60% → 100%
+- Execution time: 40% faster
+- No more race conditions