tribunal-kit 9.2.4 → 9.2.6

package/.agents/skills/agentic-patterns/SKILL.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: agentic-patterns
-description: "Use when AI agent design principles. Agent loops, tool calling, memory architectures, multi-agent coordination, human-in-the-loop gates, and guardrails. Use when building AI agents, autonomous workflows, or any system where an LLM plans and executes multi-step tasks."
-version: 5.0.0
-last-updated: 2026-09-13
+description: "Use when executing, coordinating, planning, or reviewing agentic patterns agent workflows, cognitive loops, and architecture standards."
+version: 6.0.0
+last-updated: 2026-09-29
 skills:
   - agent-organizer
   - fabel-protocol
@@ -16,266 +16,336 @@ scripts-binding:
 
 # Agentic Patterns
 
----
-
-## 🛠️ Technical Architecture & Reference Recipes
-
----
-
----
-
-## The Agent Loop
-
-Every AI agent follows this fundamental pattern:
-
-```
-PERCEIVE → PLAN → ACT → OBSERVE → (repeat or terminate)
-
-1. PERCEIVE   — What is the current state? What does the agent know?
-2. PLAN       — What action will move toward the goal?
-3. ACT        — Execute the tool, call the API, write the file
-4. OBSERVE    — What changed? Did the action succeed?
-5. EVALUATE   — Goal reached? Continue loop or return?
-```
-
-### When to Terminate
-
-```ts
-// The three termination conditions — always define all three
-type AgentResult = {
-  reason: 'goal_reached' | 'max_steps_exceeded' | 'human_escalation';
-  steps: number;
-  result: string;
-};
-
-const MAX_STEPS = 10; // Hard cap — never let agents loop indefinitely
-```
-
----
-
-## Tool Calling Design
-
-Tools are the agent's interface to the real world. Design them defensively:
-
-```ts
-// Tool definition — what the LLM sees and how to call it
-const tools = [
-  {
-    type: 'function',
-    function: {
-      name: 'search_database',
-      description:
-        'Search the product database. Use this before creating a new record to avoid duplicates.',
-      parameters: {
-        type: 'object',
-        properties: {
-          query: {
-            type: 'string',
-            description: 'Search terms — be specific',
-          },
-          limit: {
-            type: 'number',
-            description: 'Max results to return. Default: 5, max: 20',
-          },
-        },
-        required: ['query'],
-      },
-    },
-  },
-];
-
-// Tool executor — validate before running
-async function executeTool(name: string, args: unknown): Promise<string> {
-  // Validate args before executing — never trust LLM output directly
-  const parsed = ToolArgsSchema.safeParse(args);
-  if (!parsed.success) {
-    return `Error: Invalid arguments — ${parsed.error.message}`;
-  }
-
-  // Scope check — is this tool allowed for this agent's role?
-  if (!agentPermissions.includes(name)) {
-    return `Error: Tool '${name}' is not permitted for this agent`;
-  }
-
-  try {
-    return await tools[name](parsed.data);
-  } catch (err) {
-    return `Error: Tool execution failed — ${(err as Error).message}`;
-  }
-}
-```
-
----
-
-## Memory Architecture
+## Mandatory Pre-Flight Context Inspection
+Before reading, generating, or refactoring code in the `agentic-patterns` 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).
 
-Agents need different types of memory for different purposes:
 
-```
-IN-CONTEXT MEMORY (cheapest, shortest-lived):
-  → Current conversation + recent tool outputs
-  → Limited by context window (~100k tokens)
-  → Good for: current task context
-
-EXTERNAL SEMANTIC MEMORY (vector search):
-  → Long-term knowledge, past conversations
-  → Unlimited, but retrieval is approximate
-  → Good for: "What did we discuss about this topic before?"
-
-EPISODIC MEMORY (structured log):
-  → Exact record of past actions and outcomes
-  → Good for: learning from past mistakes, auditability
-
-PROCEDURAL MEMORY (system prompt + tools):
-  → How the agent knows to behave and what it can do
-  → Good for: skills, personas, behavior rules
-```
-
-```ts
-// External memory: retrieve relevant past context before each turn
-async function buildContext(userId: string, currentQuery: string) {
-  const queryEmbedding = await embed(currentQuery);
+## Activation Boundaries
+- **Activate when:** Use when executing, coordinating, planning, or reviewing agentic patterns agent workflows, cognitive loops, and architecture standards.
+- **DO NOT activate when:** The task falls outside the `agentic-patterns` domain or is managed by a different dedicated specialist agent.
 
-  // Retrieve semantically relevant past interactions
-  const pastMemories = await vectorDB.search({
-    query: queryEmbedding,
-    filter: { userId },
-    limit: 5,
-  });
 
-  return [
-    { role: 'system', content: systemPrompt },
-    // Inject relevant past context — NOT entire history
-    {
-      role: 'system',
-      content: `Relevant past context:\n${pastMemories.map(m => m.content).join('\n')}`,
-    },
-    { role: 'user', content: currentQuery },
-  ];
-}
-```
+## 🔁 Multi-Pass Execution Protocol
 
----
+| Pass | Phase | Core Action | Adaptive Depth |
+|:---|:---|:---|:---|
+| **Pass 1** | **Understand** | Deconstruct the user's explicit objective, implicit requirements, and platform constraints. | Fast / Standard / Deep |
+| **Pass 2** | **Plan** | Decompose task into smallest logical steps; map dependencies, affected files, and tool calls. | Standard / Deep |
+| **Pass 3** | **Execute** | Implement solution with production-grade craft, zero placeholders, and strict typing. | All Modes |
+| **Pass 4** | **Verify** | Run linters, unit tests, or compiler checks to validate structural correctness. | All Modes |
+| **Pass 5** | **Attack & Falsify** | Perform adversarial search for edge-case failures, counterexamples, race conditions, and traps. | Standard / Deep |
+| **Pass 6** | **Harden** | Eliminate discovered friction, optimize performance, and harden error boundaries. | Standard / Deep |
+| **Pass 7** | **Quality Gate** | Enforce Verification-Before-Completion (VBC) with concrete terminal proof before finalizing. | All Modes |
 
-## Multi-Agent Coordination Patterns
 
-When a task requires multiple specialists:
-
-### Supervisor Pattern
+---
+
+## 🛠️ Technical Architecture & Reference Recipes
 
+---
+
+## The Agent Loop
+
+Every AI agent follows this fundamental pattern:
+
+```
+PERCEIVE → PLAN → ACT → OBSERVE → (repeat or terminate)
+
+1. PERCEIVE   — What is the current state? What does the agent know?
+2. PLAN       — What action will move toward the goal?
+3. ACT        — Execute the tool, call the API, write the file
+4. OBSERVE    — What changed? Did the action succeed?
+5. EVALUATE   — Goal reached? Continue loop or return?
+```
+
+### When to Terminate
+
+```ts
+// The three termination conditions — always define all three
+type AgentResult = {
+  reason: 'goal_reached' | 'max_steps_exceeded' | 'human_escalation';
+  steps: number;
+  result: string;
+};
+
+const MAX_STEPS = 10; // Hard cap — never let agents loop indefinitely
+```
+
+---
+
+## Tool Calling Design
+
+Tools are the agent's interface to the real world. Design them defensively:
+
+```ts
+// Tool definition — what the LLM sees and how to call it
+const tools = [
+  {
+    type: 'function',
+    function: {
+      name: 'search_database',
+      description:
+        'Search the product database. Use this before creating a new record to avoid duplicates.',
+      parameters: {
+        type: 'object',
+        properties: {
+          query: {
+            type: 'string',
+            description: 'Search terms — be specific',
+          },
+          limit: {
+            type: 'number',
+            description: 'Max results to return. Default: 5, max: 20',
+          },
+        },
+        required: ['query'],
+      },
+    },
+  },
+];
+
+// Tool executor — validate before running
+async function executeTool(name: string, args: unknown): Promise<string> {
+  // Validate args before executing — never trust LLM output directly
+  const parsed = ToolArgsSchema.safeParse(args);
+  if (!parsed.success) {
+    return `Error: Invalid arguments — ${parsed.error.message}`;
+  }
+
+  // Scope check — is this tool allowed for this agent's role?
+  if (!agentPermissions.includes(name)) {
+    return `Error: Tool '${name}' is not permitted for this agent`;
+  }
+
+  try {
+    return await tools[name](parsed.data);
+  } catch (err) {
+    return `Error: Tool execution failed — ${(err as Error).message}`;
+  }
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Memory Architecture
+
+Agents need different types of memory for different purposes:
+
+```
+IN-CONTEXT MEMORY (cheapest, shortest-lived):
+  → Current conversation + recent tool outputs
+  → Limited by context window (~100k tokens)
+  → Good for: current task context
+
+EXTERNAL SEMANTIC MEMORY (vector search):
+  → Long-term knowledge, past conversations
+  → Unlimited, but retrieval is approximate
+  → Good for: "What did we discuss about this topic before?"
+
+EPISODIC MEMORY (structured log):
+  → Exact record of past actions and outcomes
+  → Good for: learning from past mistakes, auditability
+
+PROCEDURAL MEMORY (system prompt + tools):
+  → How the agent knows to behave and what it can do
+  → Good for: skills, personas, behavior rules
+```
+
+```ts
+// External memory: retrieve relevant past context before each turn
+async function buildContext(userId: string, currentQuery: string) {
+  const queryEmbedding = await embed(currentQuery);
+
+  // Retrieve semantically relevant past interactions
+  const pastMemories = await vectorDB.search({
+    query: queryEmbedding,
+    filter: { userId },
+    limit: 5,
+  });
+
+  return [
+    { role: 'system', content: systemPrompt },
+    // Inject relevant past context — NOT entire history
+    {
+      role: 'system',
+      content: `Relevant past context:\n${pastMemories.map(m => m.content).join('\n')}`,
+    },
+    { role: 'user', content: currentQuery },
+  ];
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Multi-Agent Coordination Patterns
+
+When a task requires multiple specialists:
+
+### Supervisor Pattern
+
+```
+Supervisor agent ─→ breaks task into subtasks
+    │
+    ├─→ Research agent   (reads, gathers information)
+    ├─→ Writer agent     (drafts based on research)
+    └─→ Reviewer agent   (critiques the draft)
+         │
+         └─→ Supervisor collects results, makes final decision
+```
+
+### Peer Review Pattern (Anti-Hallucination for Agents)
+
+```ts
+// Two independent agents answer the same question — supervisor resolves disagreement
+const [answerA, answerB] = await Promise.all([
+  agentA.complete(question),
+  agentB.complete(question),
+]);
+
+if (answerA.answer === answerB.answer) {
+  return answerA; // Agreement — high confidence
+}
+
+// Disagreement — escalate to human or third tiebreaker
+return await supervisor.resolve(question, answerA, answerB);
+```
+
+---
+
+## Human-in-the-Loop Gates
+
+The most important agentic pattern. Agents should request human approval before:
+
+- Deleting data
+- Sending external communications (emails, webhooks)
+- Spending real money (API calls with cost, purchases)
+- Making irreversible changes
+- Acting on low-confidence decisions
+
+```ts
+async function agentLoop(task: string) {
+  for (let step = 0; step < MAX_STEPS; step++) {
+    const planned = await llm.plan(task, history);
+
+    // ✅ Human gate before irreversible actions
+    if (planned.action.isIrreversible) {
+      const approved = await requestHumanApproval({
+        action: planned.action,
+        reason: planned.reasoning,
+        confidence: planned.confidence,
+      });
+      if (!approved) return { reason: 'human_rejected', step };
+    }
+
+    // ✅ Confidence gate — don't act when uncertain
+    if (planned.confidence < 0.7) {
+      return {
+        reason: 'human_escalation',
+        message: `Low confidence (${planned.confidence}) on: ${planned.action.description}`,
+      };
+    }
+
+    const result = await executeTool(planned.action.tool, planned.action.args);
+    history.push({ action: planned.action, result });
+
+    if (planned.goalReached) break;
+  }
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Guardrails
+
+Every production agent needs:
+
+```ts
+const guardrails = {
+  // Input guardrails — reject bad prompts before they reach the agent
+  input: [
+    { check: 'no_prompt_injection', action: 'reject' },
+    { check: 'within_scope', action: 'reject' }, // Off-topic requests
+    { check: 'pii_detection', action: 'redact' }, // Redact before processing
+  ],
+
+  // Output guardrails — validate before returning
+  output: [
+    { check: 'no_hallucinated_citations', action: 'flag' },
+    { check: 'schema_valid', action: 'retry_once' },
+    { check: 'no_pii_leaked', action: 'reject' },
+  ],
+
+  // Resource guardrails — prevent runaway cost/loops
+  resource: [
+    { check: 'max_tokens_per_session', limit: 100_000 },
+    { check: 'max_tool_calls_per_session', limit: 50 },
+    { check: 'max_cost_per_session_usd', limit: 1.0 },
+  ],
+};
+```
+
+---
+
+## Output Format
+
+When this skill completes a task, structure your output as:
+
+```
+━━━ Agentic Patterns Output ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+Task:        [what was performed]
+Result:      [outcome summary — one line]
+─────────────────────────────────────────────────
+Checks:      ✅ [N passed] · ⚠️  [N warnings] · ❌ [N blocked]
+VBC status:  PENDING → VERIFIED
+Evidence:    [link to terminal output, test result, or file diff]
 ```
-Supervisor agent ─→ breaks task into subtasks
-    │
-    ├─→ Research agent   (reads, gathers information)
-    ├─→ Writer agent     (drafts based on research)
-    └─→ Reviewer agent   (critiques the draft)
-         │
-         └─→ Supervisor collects results, makes final decision
-```
-
-### Peer Review Pattern (Anti-Hallucination for Agents)
 
-```ts
-// Two independent agents answer the same question — supervisor resolves disagreement
-const [answerA, answerB] = await Promise.all([
-  agentA.complete(question),
-  agentB.complete(question),
-]);
+## 🚨 Edge-Case & Failure Mode Matrix
 
-if (answerA.answer === answerB.answer) {
-  return answerA; // Agreement — high confidence
-}
+| Scenario | Risk | Production Mitigation |
+|:---|:---|:---|
+| **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 |
 
-// Disagreement — escalate to human or third tiebreaker
-return await supervisor.resolve(question, answerA, answerB);
-```
-
----
 
-## Human-in-the-Loop Gates
+## 🤖 LLM-Specific Traps Table
 
-The most important agentic pattern. Agents should request human approval before:
+| 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 |
 
-- Deleting data
-- Sending external communications (emails, webhooks)
-- Spending real money (API calls with cost, purchases)
-- Making irreversible changes
-- Acting on low-confidence decisions
 
-```ts
-async function agentLoop(task: string) {
-  for (let step = 0; step < MAX_STEPS; step++) {
-    const planned = await llm.plan(task, history);
+## 🏛️ Tribunal Verification & Guardrails
 
-    // ✅ Human gate before irreversible actions
-    if (planned.action.isIrreversible) {
-      const approved = await requestHumanApproval({
-        action: planned.action,
-        reason: planned.reasoning,
-        confidence: planned.confidence,
-      });
-      if (!approved) return { reason: 'human_rejected', step };
-    }
+**Active Reviewers:** `orchestrator` · `agent-organizer` · `logic-reviewer`
+**Slash Command:** `/review` or `/tribunal-full`
 
-    // ✅ Confidence gate — don't act when uncertain
-    if (planned.confidence < 0.7) {
-      return {
-        reason: 'human_escalation',
-        message: `Low confidence (${planned.confidence}) on: ${planned.action.description}`,
-      };
-    }
+### 🔬 Evidence Standard (Tri-State Verification)
+Every finding, audit statement, or completion claim must classify its factual certainty:
+- **`[OBSERVED]`**: Directly confirmed in the codebase or verified via executed terminal command.
+- **`[INFERRED]`**: Logically deduced from code patterns, architectural data flow, or schema relations.
+- **`[UNVERIFIED]`**: Speculative hypothesis or runtime possibility requiring active testing or measurement.
 
-    const result = await executeTool(planned.action.tool, planned.action.args);
-    history.push({ action: planned.action, result });
-
-    if (planned.goalReached) break;
-  }
-}
+### ✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit Checklist
 ```
-
----
-
-## Guardrails
-
-Every production agent needs:
-
-```ts
-const guardrails = {
-  // Input guardrails — reject bad prompts before they reach the agent
-  input: [
-    { check: 'no_prompt_injection', action: 'reject' },
-    { check: 'within_scope', action: 'reject' }, // Off-topic requests
-    { check: 'pii_detection', action: 'redact' }, // Redact before processing
-  ],
-
-  // Output guardrails — validate before returning
-  output: [
-    { check: 'no_hallucinated_citations', action: 'flag' },
-    { check: 'schema_valid', action: 'retry_once' },
-    { check: 'no_pii_leaked', action: 'reject' },
-  ],
-
-  // Resource guardrails — prevent runaway cost/loops
-  resource: [
-    { check: 'max_tokens_per_session', limit: 100_000 },
-    { check: 'max_tool_calls_per_session', limit: 50 },
-    { check: 'max_cost_per_session_usd', limit: 1.0 },
-  ],
-};
+✅ 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?
 ```
 
----
-
-## Output Format
-
-When this skill completes a task, structure your output as:
-
-```
-━━━ Agentic Patterns Output ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-Task:        [what was performed]
-Result:      [outcome summary — one line]
-─────────────────────────────────────────────────
-Checks:      ✅ [N passed] · ⚠️  [N warnings] · ❌ [N blocked]
-VBC status:  PENDING → VERIFIED
-Evidence:    [link to terminal output, test result, or file diff]
-```
+### 🛑 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 test suites, compiler success, or equivalent operational proof) that your output works as intended.