ultra-builder-pro-cli 0.9.0 → 0.11.0

package/agents/review-tests.md

@@ -1,8 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: review-tests
-description: |
-  Pipeline test quality analyzer. Detects mock violations, coverage gaps, missing critical paths.
-  Writes JSON findings to file. Used exclusively by /ultra-review.
+description: Review whether changed behavior has trustworthy and proportionate executable evidence, then write a structured engineering artifact.
 tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Write
 model: opus
 maxTurns: 18
@@ -10,84 +8,30 @@ skills:
   - testing-rules
 ---
 
-# Review Tests - Pipeline Test Quality Agent
+# Test evidence review worker
 
-You are a pipeline review agent. Your output goes to a JSON file, NOT to conversation.
+Write findings to the assigned JSON file and return only a file acknowledgement.
 
-## Mission
+## Workflow
 
-Deep analysis of test quality aligned with Ultra Builder Pro testing discipline: real dependencies over mocks, Testcontainers for DB/services, behavioral coverage over line coverage.
+1. Validate `SESSION_PATH`, `OUTPUT_FILE`, `SCHEMA_PATH`, `DIFF_RANGE`, `DIFF_FILES`,
+   HEAD, and the supplied acceptance context.
+2. Map each changed behavior and acceptance claim to an executable test or check.
+3. Follow `testing-rules` to determine what the evidence proves across functional,
+   persistence, protocol, UI, and failure boundaries that matter to this diff.
+4. Inspect test doubles for contract fidelity rather than banning them by name. Flag a
+   double only when it bypasses the behavior under review or diverges from production
+   semantics.
+5. Detect missing error or state-transition coverage, ineffective assertions, hidden
+   skips, flaky assumptions, and tests that never reach the changed code.
+6. Calibrate severity to the escaped product risk and write
+   `ultra-review-findings-v2` following `SCHEMA_PATH`.
 
-## Input
+Use `axis: engineering_standards` and category `test-quality`. After valid output,
+return exactly:
 
-You will receive:
-- `SESSION_PATH`: directory to write output
-- `OUTPUT_FILE`: your output filename (`review-tests.json`)
-- `DIFF_FILES`: list of changed files to review
-- `DIFF_RANGE`: git diff range to analyze
-
-## Process
-
-1. **Identify Test Files**: Find test files related to changed code
-2. **Mock Violation Scan** (highest priority):
-   - `jest.fn()` on Repository, Service, or Domain objects
-   - `class InMemoryRepository` / `class MockXxx` / `class FakeXxx`
-   - `jest.mock('../services/X')` or `jest.mock('../repositories/X')`
-   - `it.skip('...database...')` or similar skip patterns
-   - Any mock of Functional Core components
-3. **Behavioral Coverage Analysis**:
-   - Are happy paths tested?
-   - Are error paths tested? (not just that they throw, but correct error type/message)
-   - Are boundary conditions tested? (empty arrays, null, max values, concurrent access)
-   - Are state transitions tested for domain entities?
-4. **Missing Test Detection**:
-   - New code files without corresponding test files
-   - New public methods without test coverage
-   - Modified logic without updated tests
-   - Boundary-crossing code without integration test (DB, API, queue tested only via mocks/unit tests)
-   - Use case with external dependency but no Testcontainers/real-endpoint test
-5. **Criticality Scoring** (1-10 → severity mapping):
-   - 9-10 = P0 (critical path untested, security bypass untested)
-   - 7-8 = P1 (important business logic untested, mock violation)
-   - 5-6 = P2 (edge case missing, non-critical path)
-   - 1-4 = P3 (style, test naming, minor improvement)
-6. **Write JSON**: Output to `SESSION_PATH/OUTPUT_FILE`
-
-## Severity Guide
-
-| Finding | Severity |
-|---------|----------|
-| Mock violation: jest.fn() on Repository/Service | P1 |
-| Mock violation: InMemoryRepository/MockXxx | P1 |
-| Mock violation: jest.mock domain/service | P1 |
-| Critical business logic untested | P0 |
-| Security-related path untested | P0 |
-| Payment/financial flow untested | P0 |
-| Error path not tested | P1 |
-| Boundary condition missing | P2 |
-| New code without test file | P1 |
-| Boundary crossing without integration test | P1 |
-| Use case with only unit tests for external deps | P2 |
-| Test naming/organization | P3 |
-
-## Recommendations
-
-When reporting missing tests, suggest:
-- Testcontainers for database/service integration tests
-- Direct instantiation for Functional Core unit tests
-- Real collaboration over mocked dependencies
-- Specific test scenarios with expected inputs/outputs
-
-## Output
-
-Write valid JSON to `SESSION_PATH/OUTPUT_FILE` following `ultra-review-findings-v1` schema.
-
-Category for all findings: `test-quality`
-
-After writing, output exactly one line:
-```
+```text
 Wrote N findings (P0:X P1:X P2:X P3:X) to <filepath>
 ```
 
-Use the current checkout and the review inputs supplied by the parent agent. Do
-not create or update a private Ultra memory store.
+Do not modify tests, production code, task state, or projections.

package/agents/tdd-runner.md

@@ -1,27 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: tdd-runner
-description: |
-  Test execution and analysis specialist. Runs test suites, analyzes failures,
-  reports results. Use to isolate verbose test output from main conversation.
-  Proactive trigger: "run tests", "test suite", "check coverage".
-
-  <example>
-  Context: User wants to run tests after code changes
-  user: "Run the test suite and tell me what's failing"
-  assistant: "I'll use the tdd-runner agent to execute tests and analyze results."
-  <commentary>
-  Test execution produces verbose output - isolate in subagent context.
-  </commentary>
-  </example>
-
-  <example>
-  Context: Checking test coverage
-  user: "What's our test coverage looking like?"
-  assistant: "I'll use the tdd-runner agent to run coverage analysis."
-  <commentary>
-  Coverage reports are large - subagent filters to relevant summary.
-  </commentary>
-  </example>
+description: Run the repository's exact test or coverage command, isolate actionable failures, and return concise execution evidence without editing files.
 tools: Bash, Read, Grep, Glob
 model: opus
 maxTurns: 20
@@ -29,65 +8,28 @@ skills:
   - testing-rules
 ---
 
-# Test Execution Specialist
-
-Run tests, analyze failures, report results concisely.
-
-## Scope
-
-**DO**: Execute test suites, analyze failures, check coverage, detect mock violations.
-
-**DON'T**: Write tests (that's the developer's job), modify code, fix bugs.
-
-## Process
-
-1. **Detect framework**: Look for package.json (jest/vitest), pytest.ini, Cargo.toml, etc.
-2. **Execute**: Run appropriate test command
-3. **Analyze failures**: Extract error messages, stack traces, root cause
-4. **Check violations**: Scan for forbidden mock patterns
-5. **Report**: Only failures + summary (not full output)
-
-## Test Commands
-
-Auto-detect and run the appropriate command:
-- Node.js: `npm test` / `npx jest` / `npx vitest`
-- Python: `pytest -v`
-- Rust: `cargo test`
-- Go: `go test ./...`
-
-## Mock Violation Detection
-
-Scan test files for forbidden patterns:
-- `jest.fn()` on Repository/Service/Domain
-- `class InMemoryRepository` / `class MockXxx` / `class FakeXxx`
-- `jest.mock('../services/X')`
-- `it.skip('...database...')`
-
-## Output Format
-
-```markdown
-## Test Results
-
-### Summary
-- Total: X | Pass: X | Fail: X | Skip: X
-- Duration: Xs
-- Coverage: X% (if available)
-
-### Failures
-#### {test name}
-**File**: `path:line`
-**Error**: {concise error message}
-**Cause**: {likely root cause}
-
-### Mock Violations (if any)
-- `file:line` - {violation description}
-
-### Verdict
-ALL PASS / X FAILURES NEED ATTENTION
-```
-
-## Handoff
-
-Return reusable test patterns, common failure causes, and framework quirks to the
-parent agent as explicit evidence. Do not create or update a private Ultra memory
-store; persistent memory belongs to the host's separately installed provider.
+# Test execution specialist
+
+Run tests and analyze their evidence. This assignment is read-only.
+
+## Workflow
+
+1. Resolve the requested scope, checkout, repository guidance, and canonical command
+   from package scripts, CI configuration, or framework files. Ask the parent to
+   resolve ambiguity when different commands prove different contracts.
+2. Run the exact command without weakening flags, skipping failures, or changing test
+   configuration. Capture exit code, duration, pass/fail/skip counts, and coverage only
+   when the runner reports it.
+3. For each failure, identify the first useful error, tight source or test location,
+   whether the failure reproduces, and the most likely boundary that is wrong. Separate
+   product defects, test defects, environment failures, and flaky or nondeterministic
+   evidence.
+4. Evaluate test doubles only when relevant to the failed or requested behavior. Flag
+   one only when it bypasses the contract under test or diverges materially from the
+   production boundary.
+5. Return a concise summary with the exact command, exit code, counts, actionable
+   failures, environment limitations, and residual coverage gaps. Do not paste the full
+   runner transcript unless the parent requests it.
+
+Do not edit tests, production code, task state, or projections. Do not claim a green
+suite when the command did not complete successfully.

package/commands/learn.md

@@ -1,41 +1,10 @@
 ---
-description: Extract one reusable pattern into a valid user skill after explicit approval
-argument-hint: "[pattern-name]"
-allowed-tools: Read, Write, Grep, Glob, AskUserQuestion
-model: opus
+description: Capture one verified reusable workflow as a portable user skill after explicit approval
+argument-hint: "[skill-name]"
 workflow-ref: "@skills/learn/SKILL.md"
 ---
 
-# /learn
+# Capture a reusable skill
 
-## 目标
-
-扫当前会话挑一个最值得保存的「可复用模式」，以 Speculation 级别写到
-`~/.claude/skills/learned-<slug>-unverified/SKILL.md`。写入前必问用户确认。
-
-## 参数
-
-| 位 | 含义 | 缺省 |
-|----|------|------|
-| `$1` | pattern 文件名建议 slug | 由 skill 自动生成 |
-
-## Workflow
-
-完整 5 步见 `@skills/learn/SKILL.md`（review → pick one → draft → 用户确认 → write）。
-
-**命令入口做的事**：
-1. 回溯会话找可提炼的模式（错误修复 / 调试套路 / workaround / 项目级惯例）
-2. 选一个价值最高的（不是多个 — 一个文件一个模式）
-3. 按模板起草 → 直接询问用户选择 Save/Edit/Cancel
-4. 保存到 `~/.claude/skills/learned-<slug>-unverified/SKILL.md`（不覆盖已存在目录）
-
-## 用法
-
-```bash
-/learn                       # 自动挑
-/learn supabase-rls-debug    # 指定文件名 slug
-```
-
-## 下一步
-
-用户以后 review 后手动去掉 `_unverified` 后缀升为 Inference；多次成功使用后升为 Fact。
+Read and follow `@skills/learn/SKILL.md` with `$ARGUMENTS` as optional naming guidance.
+Treat the referenced skill as the only workflow definition.

package/commands/ultra-change.md

@@ -1,48 +1,10 @@
 ---
-description: Start or resume a continuous post-delivery change with bounded context, documentation impact, and linked authoritative tasks
-argument-hint: "[change-id or title] [quick|standard|major|incident]"
-allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Grep, Glob, AskUserQuestion
-model: opus
+description: Open or resume a bounded continuous change with linked authoritative tasks and context
+argument-hint: "[change-id-or-title] [quick|standard|major|incident]"
 workflow-ref: "@skills/ultra-change/SKILL.md"
-mcp_tools_required:
-  - change.create
-  - change.update
-  - change.get
-  - change.list
-  - change.context
-  - task.create
-  - task.list
 ---
 
-# /ultra-change
+# Open or resume a change
 
-## 目标
-
-把初始交付后的日常修复、功能、重构或事故变成一个持续可追踪的 change，避免
-代码、spec、测试证据和项目上下文逐步漂移。
-
-## Workflow
-
-完整流程见 `@skills/ultra-change/SKILL.md`：
-
-1. 先查 active/blocked change，匹配则恢复，避免重复创建。
-2. 按 `quick / standard / major / incident` 分类并声明 docs impact。
-3. 调 `change.create`，为 change 创建至少一个带 `change_id` 的 task。
-4. standard/major 写 delta + plan；incident 完成结构化 `diagnosis.md`。
-5. 调 `change.context` 编译最小上下文；incident 先走 debugger 诊断切片。
-6. 路由到 `/ultra-dev`、`/ultra-test`、`/ultra-review`、`/ultra-deliver`。
-
-Memory 与代码图谱只允许以外部 provider 元数据引用出现；本命令不保存 provider
-正文，也不自动刷新外部 provider。
-
-## 用法
-
-```bash
-/ultra-change auth-timeout quick
-/ultra-change billing-redesign major
-/ultra-change incident-2026-07-17 incident
-```
-
-## 下一步
-
-输出会给出 change id、artifact root、linked task 与准确的下一个 Ultra workflow。
+Read and follow `@skills/ultra-change/SKILL.md`, using `$ARGUMENTS` to identify and classify the change.
+Treat the referenced skill as the only workflow definition.

package/commands/ultra-deliver.md

@@ -1,52 +1,10 @@
 ---
-description: Converge and deliver a verified baseline or continuous change — reconcile specs, archive evidence, version, tag, and push
+description: Converge current evidence and specification learning into an archived or released baseline
 argument-hint: "[version-type]"
-allowed-tools: Task, Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Grep, Glob, AskUserQuestion
-model: opus
 workflow-ref: "@skills/ultra-deliver/SKILL.md"
-cli_fallback: "direct user interaction"
-mcp_tools_required:
-  - change.list
-  - change.get
-  - change.context
-  - change.converge
-  - change.archive
 ---
 
-# /ultra-deliver
+# Converge and deliver
 
-## 目标
-
-`/ultra-test` 绿灯后，把 active delta 合并回 baseline，重跑发布证据，调用
-`change.converge` 与 `change.archive`，再完成版本号、tag、push 和 delivery report。
-
-## 参数
-
-| 位 | 含义 | 缺省 |
-|----|------|------|
-| `$1` | 版本跳跃（`patch`/`minor`/`major`） | 按 commit 类型自动判断 |
-
-## Workflow
-
-完整流程见 `@skills/ultra-deliver/SKILL.md`（绑定 change → baseline reconciliation →
-build/test → release commit → context/convergence/archive → tag/push → report）。
-
-**命令入口做的事**：
-1. 读 `.ultra/test-report.json` 验 `passed=true` + `git_commit === HEAD`
-2. `git status` 清洁检查；不干净 → 通过 Host 原生提问界面选处理方式
-3. 有 active change 时合并 delta、刷新 context，并通过确定性 convergence gate
-4. archive 完成后才允许 tag/push
-5. 写带 change id、archive path、baseline updates 的 delivery report
-
-## 用法
-
-```bash
-/ultra-deliver              # 自动判断版本号
-/ultra-deliver major        # 强制 major bump（breaking changes）
-/ultra-deliver patch        # 强制 patch
-```
-
-## 下一步
-
-部署到 Railway / Vercel，或在 release channel 广播。`delivery-report.json` 里
-`pushed=true` 后即可视作发布完成。
+Read and follow `@skills/ultra-deliver/SKILL.md`, using `$ARGUMENTS` only for an explicitly requested version policy.
+Treat the referenced skill as the only workflow definition.

package/commands/ultra-dev.md

@@ -1,54 +1,10 @@
 ---
-description: Agile development execution — one task through TDD + review gate, writing state via MCP task.update
+description: Execute one authoritative Ultra task through implementation, verification, and review
 argument-hint: "[task-id]"
-allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Grep, Glob, Task, AskUserQuestion, Skill
-model: opus
 workflow-ref: "@skills/ultra-dev/SKILL.md"
-mcp_tools_required:
-  - task.update
-  - task.get
-  - task.list
-  - change.get
-  - change.context
 ---
 
-# /ultra-dev
+# Execute one Ultra task
 
-## 目标
-
-把一个 task 从 `pending` 推到 `completed`：进入 feature 分支 → RED/GREEN/REFACTOR
-TDD → 质量门 → `/ultra-review all` → 完成 → commit/merge。**单写**：状态只通过
-MCP `task.update` 改一次；projector 自动更新 tasks.json + context-md frontmatter。
-MCP 状态工具失败时 fail closed；`LEGACY_STATE_MIGRATION_REQUIRED` 只允许先跑
-v4.4→v4.5 迁移，绝不从 `tasks.json` 回退或直接改投影。
-
-## 参数
-
-| 位 | 含义 | 缺省 |
-|----|------|------|
-| `$1` | task id | 拓扑序第一个 `pending` |
-
-## Workflow
-
-完整 8 步流程见 `@skills/ultra-dev/SKILL.md`（Resume Check → Design Gate → 选 task →
-状态 in_progress → 环境 → TDD → 质量门 → checkpoint → review → 完成 → commit/merge → report）。
-
-**命令入口做的事**：
-1. 读 `.ultra/workflow-state.json` 决定新跑 vs resume
-2. 首跑通过 Host 原生提问触发 Design Approval Gate
-3. 驱动 skill 走 TDD + review 循环；状态仅通过 MCP `task.update`
-4. task 有 `change_id` 时把需求变化写进 active delta，并用 `change.context` 刷新上下文
-5. Step 4.5 review 通过 `/ultra-review` 和 Host 原生 subagent 执行
-6. Step 4.4 pre-review checkpoint 写入 workflow-state.json，不依赖 `/compact`
-
-## 用法
-
-```bash
-/ultra-dev          # 自动选下一个 pending task
-/ultra-dev 3        # 直接做 task 3
-```
-
-## 下一步
-
-单个 task 完成后自动提示下一个 `/ultra-dev`；所有 Walking Skeleton +
-critical-path task 完成 → `/ultra-test` 做交付前质量审计。
+Read and follow `@skills/ultra-dev/SKILL.md`, using `$ARGUMENTS` as the optional task id.
+Treat the referenced skill as the only workflow definition.

package/commands/ultra-doctor.md

@@ -1,36 +1,10 @@
 ---
-description: Inspect Ultra runtime health and optionally run explicit backup-first mechanical recovery
+description: Diagnose Ultra state and installed-plugin health with optional explicit repair
 argument-hint: "[--repair]"
-allowed-tools: Read, Bash
-model: opus
 workflow-ref: "@skills/ultra-doctor/SKILL.md"
-mcp_tools_required:
-  - system.doctor
-cli_fallback: "system doctor"
 ---
 
-# /ultra-doctor
+# Diagnose Ultra health
 
-## 目标
-
-诊断 state.db、projection、incident、session 和 active change artifact 的健康状态。
-默认只读；只有显式传入 `--repair` 才允许备份后执行机械恢复。
-
-## Workflow
-
-完整契约见 `@skills/ultra-doctor/SKILL.md`。
-
-1. 默认调用 `system.doctor {"repair": false}`。
-2. 只报告失败检查、incident、游标落后和归属边界。
-3. `--repair` 时必须先生成 state.db 备份，再恢复 orphan、消费 staleness event、
-   重排超时中断或失败的 projection 并重新投影。
-4. 修复后重新读取报告；仍 degraded 就明确剩余阻塞，不宣称完成。
-
-## 用法
-
-```bash
-/ultra-doctor
-/ultra-doctor --repair
-```
-
-Memory 和代码图谱属于外部 provider，本命令既不收集也不修复它们。
+Read and follow `@skills/ultra-doctor/SKILL.md`; allow repair only when `$ARGUMENTS` explicitly contains `--repair`.
+Treat the referenced skill as the only workflow definition.

package/commands/ultra-init.md

@@ -1,52 +1,10 @@
 ---
-description: Initialize Ultra Builder Pro project — scaffold .ultra/, initialize state.db and continuous-change directories, optional git
-argument-hint: <name> <type> <stack> [git]
-allowed-tools: Read, Write, Bash, Grep, Glob, AskUserQuestion
-model: opus
+description: Initialize an Ultra project with authoritative state and baseline specification files
+argument-hint: "[name] [type] [stack] [git]"
 workflow-ref: "@skills/ultra-init/SKILL.md"
-mcp_tools_required:
-  - task.init_project
-cli_fallback: "task init-project"
 ---
 
-# /ultra-init
+# Initialize an Ultra project
 
-## 目标
-
-搭 `.ultra/` 骨架（specs + tasks + changes + docs + reports），初始化权威
-`state.db`，写入带元数据的初始 `tasks.json`，并按需初始化 git。Claude Code、
-OpenCode、Codex 三个 runtime 行为一致。
-
-## 参数
-
-| 位 | 含义 | 缺省 |
-|----|------|------|
-| `$1` | 项目名 | 当前目录名 |
-| `$2` | 项目类型（`web`/`api`/`cli`/`fullstack`/`other`） | 从 package 文件识别 |
-| `$3` | 技术栈（逗号分隔） | 从 package 文件识别 |
-| `$4` | `git` → 初始化 git | 检测已有 `.git/` 时询问 |
-
-## Workflow
-
-完整流程见 `@skills/ultra-init/SKILL.md`（4 步：状态检测 → 参数补全 →
-`task.init_project` 拉起骨架 → git 集成）。
-
-**命令入口做的事**：
-1. 解析 `$1-$4`，补缺省
-2. 探测 runtime 能力：优先走 MCP `task.init_project`；不可达时退回 `ultra-tools task init-project`
-3. 按 skill 的 4 步工作流推进
-4. 完成后提示下一步命令
-
-## 用法
-
-```bash
-/ultra-init                          # 交互模式（自动识别）
-/ultra-init my-app                   # 带项目名
-/ultra-init my-app api               # 带类型
-/ultra-init my-app fullstack react,postgres git  # 完整 + git
-```
-
-## 下一步
-
-**CRITICAL**：跑 `/ultra-research` 做 17 步 discovery 把 spec 填满，
-**然后**才跑 `/ultra-plan` 生成任务。直接 plan 会产出基于模糊需求的任务。
+Read and follow `@skills/ultra-init/SKILL.md`, using `$ARGUMENTS` as optional project metadata.
+Treat the referenced skill as the only workflow definition.

package/commands/ultra-plan.md

@@ -1,53 +1,10 @@
 ---
-description: Generate task breakdown from complete specs — walking-skeleton first, vertical slices, via MCP task.create
-argument-hint: [scope]
-allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash(mkdir .ultra/*), Grep, Glob, AskUserQuestion
-model: opus
+description: Convert validated requirements into dependency-valid Ultra tasks with bounded context and exact verification
+argument-hint: "[scope]"
 workflow-ref: "@skills/ultra-plan/SKILL.md"
-mcp_tools_required:
-  - task.create
 ---
 
-# /ultra-plan
+# Plan executable slices
 
-## 目标
-
-把 `/ultra-research` 验证过的完整 spec 转成可执行的任务计划：先 Walking
-Skeleton 贯穿所有层，再切 vertical slices，每 3-4 个 feature task 插一个
-Integration Checkpoint。任务写入 state.db（MCP `task.create`），projector
-自动生成 `.ultra/tasks/tasks.json` + contexts/*.md frontmatter。
-
-入口先写 active `.ultra/workflow-state.json`。MCP 不可用或返回
-`LEGACY_STATE_MIGRATION_REQUIRED` 时立即停止，提示运行
-`ultra-tools migrate --from=4.4 --to=4.5 --source-dir <project-root>`；绝不读取或写入
-`tasks.json` 作为回退。
-
-## 参数
-
-| 位 | 含义 | 缺省 |
-|----|------|------|
-| `$1` | scope 模式（EXPAND / SELECTIVE / HOLD / REDUCE） | 询问用户；默认 SELECTIVE |
-
-## Workflow
-
-完整 8 步流程见 `@skills/ultra-plan/SKILL.md`。
-
-**命令入口做的事**：
-1. 探测 spec 完整度 — 未填充则 block 并转 `/ultra-research`
-2. 使用 Host 原生提问界面交互选 scope 模式
-3. 驱动 skill 跑生成 → 依赖分析 → `task.create` 循环 → 写 context-md 正文
-4. 跑 7 项 verification（requirement coverage / 无环 / trace_to / 复杂度等）
-5. 输出 report + 下一步
-
-## 用法
-
-```bash
-/ultra-plan                 # 交互模式；默认 SELECTIVE
-/ultra-plan EXPAND          # 直接进入"激进扩张"模式
-/ultra-plan REDUCE          # MVP 最小化模式
-```
-
-## 下一步
-
-所有 CRITICAL check 过了 → `/clear` 然后 `/ultra-dev` 开始 TDD。
-单个 task 完成后 `/ultra-status` 看进度。
+Read and follow `@skills/ultra-plan/SKILL.md`, using `$ARGUMENTS` to select the requested scope.
+Treat the referenced skill as the only workflow definition.