universal-dev-standards 6.5.0 → 6.6.0

package/bundled/ai/standards/ai-response-navigation.ai.yaml

@@ -3,10 +3,13 @@
 
 id: ai-response-navigation
 meta:
-  version: "1.1.0"
-  updated: "2026-06-10"
+  version: "1.2.0"
+  updated: "2026-08-17"
   source: core/ai-response-navigation.md
-  description: Every substantive AI response must include contextual next-step suggestions with recommended options
+  description: >
+    Every substantive AI response must include contextual next-step suggestions with recommended
+    options (rules 1-6, required). Optional rules 7-9 govern the answer itself: lead with the
+    finding, restate state across turns, no preamble.
 
 rules:
   - id: navigation-footer
@@ -77,7 +80,44 @@ rules:
       Localized notation: 〔模型：Fast〕 / 〔模型：Standard〕 / 〔模型：Capable〕
     priority: optional
 
+  # ── Rules 7-9 (v1.2.0): the answer itself, not the navigation after it ──
+  # Borrowed from ayghri/i-have-adhd (MIT), 3 of its 10 rules. The other 7 were dropped:
+  # 2 duplicate navigation-footer/recommendation-marking above, and 5 conflict with this
+  # standard ("no recap/no closers" contradicts navigation-footer; "cap lists at 5" would
+  # truncate evidence tables) or duplicate estimation-standards.
+  # Optional in the same sense as model-tier-annotation: a project MAY promote them to required.
+  # Their triggers are deliberately precise — a rule too loose to fire is not a rule.
+
+  - id: lead-with-the-finding
+    trigger: a response that answers a question, reports an investigation result, or presents a decision
+    instruction: >
+      Open with what was found or what to do — not the method, not a restatement of the request,
+      not a plan for answering. Evidence (file:line, command output, tables, measurements) is
+      support and belongs after the claim it supports. This orders the evidence; it does not
+      license omitting it.
+    priority: optional
+
+  - id: restate-state-each-turn
+    trigger: work spanning 3 or more exchanges, or a task with 3 or more steps
+    instruction: >
+      Restate in one line where the work stands. The reader cannot be assumed to hold
+      "we are on step 3 of 5" across messages. Composes with the in-progress template:
+      this rule governs the opening, that template governs the footer.
+    priority: optional
+
+  - id: no-preamble
+    trigger: any substantive response
+    instruction: >
+      Start with the answer. Do not open with a summary of what you are about to do, an
+      acknowledgement of the request, or an assessment of the question. Generalizes the
+      anti-sycophancy-prompting prohibition on "opening critique with positive affirmation"
+      from critiques to every substantive response — for a different reason: not flattery,
+      but the delay it puts between the reader and the answer.
+      Does NOT apply to closers: navigation-footer still stands.
+    priority: optional
+
 related_standards:
   - ai-command-behavior
   - ai-instruction-standards
   - ai-agreement-standards
+  - anti-sycophancy-prompting

package/bundled/ai/standards/spec-driven-development.ai.yaml

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
 
 id: spec-driven-development
 meta:
-  version: "1.3.0"
+  version: "1.4.0"
   updated: "2026-08-12"
   source: methodologies/guides/sdd-guide.md
   description: Spec-Driven Development workflow where documentation precedes implementation
@@ -198,6 +198,33 @@ rules:
     instruction: Archive spec with links to commits/PRs
     priority: required
 
+  - id: SDD-AC-VERIFIED
+    name: An AC with no verification item is not an AC
+    name_zh: 沒有驗證項的 AC 不是 AC
+    severity: high
+    rule: >
+      Every acceptance criterion MUST have a verification item pointing at it —
+      a test, a check, a gate, or an explicitly recorded manual step. An AC that
+      no verification item references MUST be demoted to a design intent rather
+      than carried as an AC.
+    rule_zh: >
+      每一條 AC 必須有指向它的驗證項（測試／檢查／閘門／明確記錄的手動步驟）。
+      沒有任何驗證項引用的 AC 必須降級為設計意圖，不得繼續掛在 AC 欄。
+    rationale: >
+      An unverified AC does not fail loudly — it stops being true while the spec
+      continues to assert it. Measured instance (XSPEC-380): a spec's AC-7 required
+      a component be "fully preserved, no regression"; its Test Plan had seven items
+      and none pointed at AC-7. The component stopped running on the day the AC was
+      written and was found three months later by accident.
+    rationale_zh: >
+      未經驗證的 AC 不會大聲失敗——它安靜地停止成立，而規格繼續宣稱它為真。
+      實測案例：某規格的 AC-7 要求「完整保留、無回歸」，Test Plan 七項無一指向它；
+      它保護的東西死在該 AC 被寫下的同一天，三個月後偶然才被發現。
+    anti_pattern: >
+      Treating "the reviewer will notice" as a verification item. A reviewer reads
+      the spec, and the spec says the AC holds. An AC is a claim about the world;
+      only something that touches the world can falsify it.
+
 best_practices:
   do:
     - Keep specs focused and atomic (one change per spec)

package/bundled/core/ai-response-navigation.md

@@ -2,8 +2,8 @@
 
 > **Language**: English | [繁體中文](../locales/zh-TW/core/ai-response-navigation.md) | [简体中文](../locales/zh-CN/core/ai-response-navigation.md)
 
-**Version**: 1.1.0
-**Last Updated**: 2026-06-10
+**Version**: 1.2.0
+**Last Updated**: 2026-08-17
 **Applicability**: All projects using AI-assisted development
 **Scope**: universal
 **Industry Standards**: None (Emerging AI tool practice)
@@ -19,6 +19,12 @@ This standard defines navigation behavior for AI responses: every substantive AI
 
 **Solution**: A standard "Navigation Footer" appended to every substantive AI response, with contextual templates, recommendation marking, and adaptive option quantities.
 
+**Scope note (v1.2.0)**: Rules 1–6 govern what comes *after* the answer. Rules 7–9 — added in 1.2.0
+and **optional** — govern the answer itself: lead with the finding, restate state across turns, no
+preamble. They were added because a response can satisfy every one of Rules 1–6 while burying its
+conclusion, and a reader who cannot find the answer is not helped by a correct footer telling them
+what to do next.
+
 ---
 
 ## Core Rules
@@ -97,6 +103,69 @@ Tier names are **vendor-neutral**. Each tool or platform maps these tiers to its
 
 ---
 
+## The Answer Before the Navigation (Rules 7–9, Optional)
+
+> **Borrowed from**: [`ayghri/i-have-adhd`](https://github.com/ayghri/i-have-adhd) (MIT), 3 of its 10 rules.
+> The other 7 were dropped: 2 are already covered by Rules 1–2 above, and 5 either conflict with
+> this standard (its "no recap / no closers" contradicts Rule 1's Navigation Footer; its
+> "cap lists at 5" would truncate evidence tables and traversal denominators) or duplicate
+> [estimation-standards](estimation-standards.md).
+
+**Why this section exists**: Rules 1–6 govern what follows the answer. Nothing governed the answer
+itself — a response could bury its conclusion under a wall of evidence and still satisfy every rule
+in this standard by appending a correct Navigation Footer. A reader who cannot find the answer is
+not helped by being told what to do next.
+
+**These three rules are optional**, in the same sense as Rule 6: adopting projects are not required
+to enable them, and existing skills need no retroactive update. A project MAY promote any of them to
+required in its own configuration. What is *not* optional is that they have precise triggers — a rule
+phrased so loosely that it never fires is indistinguishable from not having the rule.
+
+### Rule 7: Lead With the Finding, Not the Process （Optional）
+
+**Trigger**: a response that answers a question, reports an investigation result, or presents a decision.
+
+The first line states **what was found or what to do**. Not the method, not a restatement of the
+request, not a plan for answering.
+
+Evidence — file:line references, command output, tables, measurements — is **support**, and belongs
+after the claim it supports. Leading with evidence forces the reader to reconstruct the conclusion
+themselves, which is the work they asked to have done.
+
+| Instead of | Write |
+|-----------|-------|
+| "I checked 44 days of data across 63 domains and found that…" | "Delete those three queries. 46% of what they return is download pages." |
+| "Let me look at how this is configured." | "It is configured in `x.yaml:12`; the value is wrong because…" |
+
+**This does not license omitting the evidence.** It orders it.
+
+### Rule 8: Restate State in Multi-Turn Work （Optional）
+
+**Trigger**: work spanning 3 or more exchanges, or a task with 3 or more steps.
+
+Each response restates where the work stands, in one line. The reader cannot be assumed to hold
+"we are on step 3 of 5" across messages, and the cost of restating it is one sentence.
+
+This composes with Template 4 (*In Progress*) below: Rule 8 governs the **opening**, Template 4
+governs the **footer**.
+
+### Rule 9: No Preamble （Optional）
+
+**Trigger**: any substantive response.
+
+Start with the answer. Do not open with a summary of what you are about to do, an acknowledgement
+of the request, or an assessment of the question.
+
+This generalizes one existing prohibition: [anti-sycophancy-prompting](anti-sycophancy-prompting.md)
+already forbids *"Opening critique with positive affirmation"* — but only for critiques. Rule 9
+extends the same prohibition to every substantive response, for a different reason: not flattery,
+but the delay it puts between the reader and the answer.
+
+**Rule 9 does not apply to closers.** Rule 1 requires a Navigation Footer, and that requirement
+stands — the end of a response is where this standard puts the reader's next move.
+
+---
+
 ## Contextual Templates
 
 ### Template 1: Task Completed
@@ -284,6 +353,9 @@ Each tool's integration layer is responsible for rendering the Navigation Footer
 | R4 | 1–5 options, adapt to context |
 | R5 | Use `/command` format when applicable |
 | R6 | *(Optional)* Append `〔model: Fast\|Standard\|Capable〕` when tier is clear |
+| R7 | *(Optional)* Lead with the finding; evidence follows the claim it supports |
+| R8 | *(Optional)* 3+ turns or 3+ steps → restate state in one line |
+| R9 | *(Optional)* No preamble. Closers still required — see R1 |
 
 | Exempt | Not Exempt |
 |--------|------------|
@@ -307,6 +379,7 @@ Each tool's integration layer is responsible for rendering the Navigation Footer
 
 | Version | Date | Changes |
 |---------|------|---------|
+| 1.2.0 | 2026-08-17 | Add optional R7–R9 governing the answer itself (lead with the finding, restate state, no preamble). Borrowed from `ayghri/i-have-adhd` (MIT), 3 of its 10 rules; the other 7 were dropped as duplicated by R1–R2, in conflict with R1, or covered by estimation-standards. Rules 1–6 could all be satisfied by a response that buries its conclusion — R7–R9 close that |
 | 1.1.0 | 2026-06-10 | Add R6 optional model tier annotation (`〔model: Fast\|Standard\|Capable〕`); vendor-neutral; no forced changes to existing skills |
 | 1.0.0 | 2026-03-25 | Initial release |
 

package/bundled/core/spec-driven-development.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 # Spec-Driven Development (SDD) Standards
 
-**Version**: 2.3.0
-**Last Updated**: 2026-06-08
+**Version**: 2.4.0
+**Last Updated**: 2026-08-17
 **Applicability**: All projects adopting Spec-Driven Development
 **Scope**: universal
 **Industry Standards**: None (Emerging 2025+ methodology)
@@ -50,6 +50,61 @@ UDS supports two AC notations. **GWT is the default and preferred** (Forward Der
 
 Provide **GWT or EARS** per AC (`.ac.yaml`: `given/when/then` **or** `ears`). Prefer GWT for BDD-derivable behaviour; reach for EARS when GWT feels forced. Do not require both; do not remove GWT.
 
+## An AC With No Verification Item Is Not an AC | 沒有驗證項的 AC 不是 AC
+
+Every acceptance criterion must have a **verification item that points at it** — a test, a
+check, a gate, or an explicitly recorded manual step. An AC that no verification item
+references is a **promise nobody kept**, and it does not fail loudly: it simply stops being
+true while the spec continues to assert it.
+
+每一條驗收標準都必須有一個**指向它的驗證項**——測試、檢查、閘門，或一則明確記錄的
+手動步驟。沒有任何驗證項引用的 AC 是**一張沒有人兌現的支票**，而且它不會大聲失敗：
+它只是安靜地停止成立，而規格繼續宣稱它為真。
+
+**Rule**: an AC without a verification item must be **demoted to a design intent**, not
+carried as an AC. Demotion is honest; an unverified AC is not.
+**規則**：沒有驗證項的 AC 必須**降級為設計意圖**，不得繼續掛在 AC 欄。降級是誠實的，
+未經驗證的 AC 不是。
+
+### The measured instance | 實測案例
+
+A 2026-05-14 spec carried `AC-7: the legacy system-report is fully preserved, no
+regression`. Its Test Plan had seven items and **none of them pointed at AC-7**. The
+report's timer was disabled and its deploy function was never called — **from the same day
+the AC was written**. It was found three months later, by accident, while verifying an
+unrelated install.
+
+**It was never wired to a check and later came loose. It was never wired at all.**
+
+一份 2026-05-14 的規格寫著 `AC-7：舊版系統報告完整保留（無回歸）`。它的 Test Plan
+有七項，**沒有一項指向 AC-7**。該報告的 timer 是 disabled、部署函式從未被呼叫——
+**從那條 AC 被寫下的同一天起**。三個月後在驗證另一件無關的安裝時偶然發現。
+
+**它不是後來斷線的。它從來沒有被接上過。**
+
+### Why "someone will check it" is not a verification item
+
+A verification item must be **executable or recorded**, not implied. "The reviewer will
+notice" is not one, because a reviewer reads the spec — and the spec says the AC holds.
+An AC is a claim **about the world**, and only something that touches the world can
+falsify it.
+
+「有人會檢查」不是驗證項。它必須**可執行或有紀錄**，不能是隱含的。「審查者會注意到」
+不算——因為審查者讀的是規格，而規格說那條 AC 成立。**AC 是一個關於世界的宣稱，
+只有碰得到世界的東西才能證偽它。**
+
+### Related | 關聯
+
+- [verification-evidence](verification-evidence.md) — VE-011 requires evidence to come from a
+  fresh run **after the last edit**; this standard is the upstream question of whether any
+  run was ever pointed at the claim in the first place.
+- [class-level-fix](class-level-fix.md) — the same discipline applied to *scope*: traverse the
+  set rather than enumerate it.
+
+## What's New in v2.4.0
+
+- **An AC with no verification item is not an AC** (XSPEC-380 R5). Every acceptance criterion must have a verification item pointing at it; one that has none is demoted to a design intent rather than carried as an AC. Measured instance: a spec's `AC-7` had no matching Test Plan item, and the thing it protected stopped running **on the day the AC was written** — found three months later by accident. An AC is a claim about the world, and only something that touches the world can falsify it.
+
 ## What's New in v2.3.0
 
 - **EARS notation** as an optional AC format (XSPEC-263): 5 EARS templates + `.ac.yaml` `ears` field. GWT remains default & preferred; `given/when/then` relaxed from `required` (backward compatible).

package/bundled/locales/zh-CN/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
 source: ../../CHANGELOG.md
-source_version: 6.5.0
-translation_version: 6.5.0
-last_synced: 2026-08-14
+source_version: 6.6.0
+translation_version: 6.6.0
+last_synced: 2026-08-17
 status: current
 ---
 
@@ -17,6 +17,18 @@ status: current
 
 ## [Unreleased]
 
+## [6.6.0] - 2026-08-17
+
+### 新增
+
+- **`ai-response-navigation` 1.1.0 → 1.2.0 —— 可选规则 R7–R9，管答案本身**（XSPEC 借鉴 B-10，来源 [`ayghri/i-have-adhd`](https://github.com/ayghri/i-have-adhd)，MIT）。规则 1–6 管的是答案**之后**要附什么：导航区块、标记过的推荐、匹配响应类型的模板。**答案本身没有任何规则在管。** 于是一个响应可以把结论埋在一整面证据底下，只要结尾附上正确的导航区块，它仍然满足**本标准的每一条**——而找不到答案的读者，不会因为被告知下一步而得到帮助。
+  - **R7 —— 先讲发现，不要先讲过程。** *触发*：回答问题、汇报调查结果、或提出决策的响应。第一行写**查到了什么**或**该做什么**——不是方法、不是把问题复述一遍、不是回答的计划。证据（`file:line`、命令输出、表格、测量数字）是**佐证**，应放在它所支持的论断之后；以证据开场会迫使读者自行重建结论，而那正是他请你做的工作。本条规范的是**顺序**，**不**代表可以省略证据。
+  - **R8 —— 每一轮重述进度。** *触发*：跨 3 轮以上的对话，或含 3 个以上步骤的任务。用一行说明工作进行到哪里。不能假设读者能在消息之间记住「我们在 5 步中的第 3 步」，而重述它的成本是一个句子。与模板 4（进行中）互补：**R8 管开头，模板管结尾。**
+  - **R9 —— 不要开场白。** *触发*：任何实质性响应。本条把一项既有禁令一般化：[`anti-sycophancy-prompting`](../../core/anti-sycophancy-prompting.md) 已经禁止「以正面肯定开场批评」，但**仅限批评情境**。R9 把同一项禁令扩及每一个实质响应，理由不同——不是为了防拍马屁，而是为了消除它在读者与答案之间制造的延迟。**R9 不适用于结语**；R1 的导航区块要求依然成立。
+  - **来源十条只取三条，其余七条的淘汰理由写进标准本文**，不是只写在待办清单里。两条与 R1–R2 重复。三条与本标准或其他标准冲突：它的「不要 recap／不要结语」**与 R1 的导航区块直接矛盾**；它的「列表上限 5 项」会截断证据表格与遍历分母；它的「具体时间估计」已由 [`estimation-standards`](../../core/estimation-standards.md) 涵盖。
+  - **可选的语义同 R6**（模型级别标注）：采用者不必启用、既有 skill 不需回头补，项目**可以**在自己的配置中把任一条提升为必须。**不可选的是每一条都带有精确的触发条件**——一条松到永远不会启动的规则，与没有这条规则无从分辨，那正是 XSPEC-378 记录的失效模式。
+  - **扩充既有标准而非新建一支**：再开一支管「AI 怎么对人类写回答」的标准，会让同一条轴出现两个实现。
+
 ## [6.5.0] - 2026-08-14
 
 > ⚠️ **本节简体译文待补。** 本次发布包含两批内容：XSPEC 借鉴 B-01 的五条标准补强

package/bundled/locales/zh-CN/README.md

@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ status: current
 
 > **语言**: [English](../../README.md) | [繁體中文](../zh-TW/README.md) | 简体中文
 
-**版本**: 6.5.0 | **发布日期**: 2026-08-14 | **授权**: [双重授权](../../LICENSE) (CC BY 4.0 + MIT)
+**版本**: 6.6.0 | **发布日期**: 2026-08-17 | **授权**: [双重授权](../../LICENSE) (CC BY 4.0 + MIT)
 
 语言无关、框架无关的软件项目文档标准。通过 AI 原生工作流，确保不同技术栈之间的一致性、质量和可维护性。
 

package/bundled/locales/zh-CN/SECURITY.md

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ status: current
 <!-- UDS_SUPPORTED_VERSIONS_START -->
 | 版本 | 支持状态 |
 |------|--------|
-| 6.5.0 | ✅ 最新正式版 |
+| 6.6.0 | ✅ 最新正式版 |
 | < 6.0.0 | ❌ 已终止支持 |
 <!-- UDS_SUPPORTED_VERSIONS_END -->
 

package/bundled/locales/zh-CN/core/ai-response-navigation.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
 source: ../../../core/ai-response-navigation.md
-source_version: 1.1.0
-translation_version: 1.1.0
-last_synced: 2026-06-10
+source_version: 1.2.0
+translation_version: 1.2.0
+last_synced: 2026-08-17
 status: current
 ---
 
@@ -10,8 +10,8 @@ status: current
 
 > **语言**: [English](../../../core/ai-response-navigation.md) | [繁體中文](../../zh-TW/core/ai-response-navigation.md) | 简体中文
 
-**版本**: 1.1.0
-**最后更新**: 2026-06-10
+**版本**: 1.2.0
+**最后更新**: 2026-08-17
 **适用范围**: 所有使用 AI 辅助开发的项目
 **范围**: universal
 **行业标准**: 无（新兴 AI 工具实践）
@@ -27,6 +27,11 @@ status: current
 
 **解决方案**：在每个实质性 AI 响应结尾附加标准化的「导航区块」，包含情境模板、推荐标记和弹性选项数量。
 
+**范围注记（v1.2.0）**：规则 1–6 管的是答案**之后**要附什么。规则 7–9 于 1.2.0 新增、属**可选**，
+管的是答案本身：先讲发现、每轮重述进度、不要开场白。新增的理由是——
+一个响应可以满足规则 1–6 的每一条，同时把结论埋起来；
+**而找不到答案的读者，不会因为结尾有一个正确的导航区块被告知下一步而得到帮助。**
+
 ---
 
 ## 核心规则
@@ -103,6 +108,61 @@ status: current
 
 ---
 
+## 导航之前的那个答案（规则 7–9，可选）
+
+> **借鉴自**：[`ayghri/i-have-adhd`](https://github.com/ayghri/i-have-adhd)（MIT），十条中取三条。
+> 其余七条删去：两条已被上方规则 1–2 涵盖，五条与本标准冲突
+> （它的「不要 recap／不要结语」与规则 1 的导航区块直接矛盾；它的「列表上限 5 项」
+> 会截断证据表格与遍历分母）或与 [estimation-standards](estimation-standards.md) 重复。
+
+**这一节为何存在**：规则 1–6 管的是答案**之后**要附什么，而答案本身没有任何规则在管——
+一个响应可以把结论埋在一整面证据底下，只要结尾附上正确的导航区块，
+它仍然满足本标准的每一条。**找不到答案的读者，不会因为被告知下一步而得到帮助。**
+
+**这三条是可选的**，语义同规则 6：采用项目不必启用，既有 skill 也不需回头补。
+项目**可以**在自己的配置中把任一条提升为必须。**不可选的是它们必须有精确的触发条件**——
+一条松到永远不会启动的规则，与没有这条规则无从分辨。
+
+### 规则 7：先讲发现，不要先讲过程（可选）
+
+**触发条件**：回答问题、汇报调查结果、或提出决策的响应。
+
+第一行写**查到了什么**或**该做什么**。不是方法、不是把问题复述一遍、不是回答的计划。
+
+证据——`file:line`、命令输出、表格、测量数字——是**佐证**，应放在它所支持的论断**之后**。
+以证据开场会迫使读者自行重建结论，而那正是他请你做的工作。
+
+| 不要写 | 改写成 |
+|---|---|
+| 「我检查了 44 天、63 个域名的数据，发现……」 | 「那三组查询删掉。它返回的东西有 46% 是下载页。」 |
+| 「让我看看这是怎么配置的。」 | 「配置在 `x.yaml:12`，值是错的，因为……」 |
+
+**这不代表可以省略证据**，它规范的是顺序。
+
+### 规则 8：多轮工作中每一轮重述进度（可选）
+
+**触发条件**：跨 3 轮以上的对话，或含 3 个以上步骤的任务。
+
+每条响应用一行说明工作进行到哪里。不能假设读者能在消息之间记住
+「我们在 5 步中的第 3 步」，而重述它的成本是一个句子。
+
+本条与下方模板 4（进行中）互补：**规则 8 管开头，模板 4 管结尾。**
+
+### 规则 9：不要开场白（可选）
+
+**触发条件**：任何实质性响应。
+
+从答案开始。不要以「我接下来要做什么」的预告、对请求的确认、或对问题本身的评价开场。
+
+本条把一项既有禁令一般化：[anti-sycophancy-prompting](anti-sycophancy-prompting.md)
+已经禁止「以正面肯定开场批评」，但**仅限批评情境**。规则 9 把同一项禁令扩及每一个实质响应，
+理由不同：不是为了防拍马屁，而是为了消除它在读者与答案之间制造的延迟。
+
+**规则 9 不适用于结语。** 规则 1 要求的导航区块依然成立——
+响应的结尾正是本标准安放「读者下一步」的位置。
+
+---
+
 ## 情境模板
 
 ### 模板 1：任务完成
@@ -290,6 +350,9 @@ AI 需要用户做出选择或提供信息时使用。
 | R4 | 1–5 个选项，依情境调整 |
 | R5 | 适用时使用 `/command` 格式 |
 | R6 | *（可选）* 级别明确时附加 `〔模型：Fast｜Standard｜Capable〕` |
+| R7 | *（可选）* 先讲发现；证据放在它所支持的论断之后 |
+| R8 | *（可选）* 跨 3 轮或 3 步以上 → 用一行重述进度 |
+| R9 | *（可选）* 不要开场白。结语仍为必须——见 R1 |
 
 | 豁免 | 不豁免 |
 |------|--------|
@@ -313,6 +376,7 @@ AI 需要用户做出选择或提供信息时使用。
 
 | 版本 | 日期 | 变更 |
 |------|------|------|
+| 1.2.0 | 2026-08-17 | 新增可选规则 R7–R9，管答案本身（先讲发现、重述进度、不要开场白）。借鉴自 `ayghri/i-have-adhd`（MIT），十条取三；其余七条因已被 R1–R2 涵盖、与 R1 冲突、或与 estimation-standards 重复而删去。规则 1–6 全部可以被一个把结论埋起来的响应满足——R7–R9 补上这个缺口 |
 | 1.1.0 | 2026-06-10 | 新增规则 R6 可选模型级别标注（`〔模型：Fast｜Standard｜Capable〕`）；与厂商无关；不强制既有技能回改 |
 | 1.0.0 | 2026-03-25 | 初始版本 |
 

package/bundled/locales/zh-CN/core/spec-driven-development.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ source_version: 2.3.0
 translation_version: 2.3.0
 last_synced: 2026-06-10
 source_hash: 08dd8c2bee20
-status: current
+status: stale
 ---
 
 # 规格驱动开发 (SDD) 标准

package/bundled/locales/zh-TW/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
 source: ../../CHANGELOG.md
-source_version: 6.5.0
-translation_version: 6.5.0
-last_synced: 2026-08-14
+source_version: 6.6.0
+translation_version: 6.6.0
+last_synced: 2026-08-17
 status: current
 ---
 
@@ -17,6 +17,18 @@ status: current
 
 ## [Unreleased]
 
+## [6.6.0] - 2026-08-17
+
+### 新增
+
+- **`ai-response-navigation` 1.1.0 → 1.2.0 —— 選用規則 R7–R9，管答案本身**（XSPEC 借鑒 B-10，來源 [`ayghri/i-have-adhd`](https://github.com/ayghri/i-have-adhd)，MIT）。規則 1–6 管的是答案**之後**要附什麼：導航區塊、標記過的推薦、匹配回應類型的模板。**答案本身沒有任何規則在管。** 於是一個回應可以把結論埋在一整面證據底下，只要結尾附上正確的導航區塊，它仍然滿足**本標準的每一條**——而找不到答案的讀者，不會因為被告知下一步而得到幫助。
+  - **R7 —— 先講發現，不要先講過程。** *觸發*：回答問題、回報調查結果、或提出決策的回應。第一行寫**查到了什麼**或**該做什麼**——不是方法、不是把問題複述一遍、不是回答的計畫。證據（`file:line`、指令輸出、表格、量測數字）是**佐證**，應放在它所支持的主張之後；以證據開場會迫使讀者自行重建結論，而那正是他請你做的工作。本條規範的是**順序**，**不**代表可以省略證據。
+  - **R8 —— 每一輪重述進度。** *觸發*：跨 3 輪以上的對話，或含 3 個以上步驟的任務。用一行說明工作進行到哪裡。不能假設讀者能在訊息之間記住「我們在 5 步中的第 3 步」，而重述它的成本是一個句子。與模板 4（進行中）互補：**R8 管開頭，模板管結尾。**
+  - **R9 —— 不要開場白。** *觸發*：任何實質性回應。本條把一項既有禁令一般化：[`anti-sycophancy-prompting`](../../core/anti-sycophancy-prompting.md) 已經禁止「以正面肯定開場批評」，但**僅限批評情境**。R9 把同一項禁令擴及每一個實質回應，理由不同——不是為了防拍馬屁，而是為了消除它在讀者與答案之間製造的延遲。**R9 不適用於結語**；R1 的導航區塊要求依然成立。
+  - **來源十條只取三條，其餘七條的淘汰理由寫進標準本文**，不是只寫在待辦清單裡。兩條與 R1–R2 重複。三條與本標準或其他標準衝突：它的「不要 recap／不要結語」**與 R1 的導航區塊直接矛盾**；它的「清單上限 5 項」會切斷證據表格與走訪分母；它的「具體時間估計」已由 [`estimation-standards`](../../core/estimation-standards.md) 涵蓋。
+  - **選用的語義同 R6**（模型級別標注）：採用者不必啟用、既有 skill 不需回頭補，專案**可以**在自己的設定中把任一條提升為必須。**不可選的是每一條都帶有精確的觸發條件**——一條鬆到永遠不會啟動的規則，與沒有這條規則無從分辨，那正是 XSPEC-378 記錄的失效模式。
+  - **擴充既有標準而非新建一支**：再開一支管「AI 怎麼對人類寫回答」的標準，會讓同一條軸出現兩個實作。
+
 ## [6.5.0] - 2026-08-14
 
 ### 新增

package/bundled/locales/zh-TW/README.md

@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ status: current
 
 > **語言**: [English](../../README.md) | 繁體中文 | [简体中文](../zh-CN/README.md)
 
-**版本**: 6.5.0 | **發布日期**: 2026-08-14 | **授權**: [雙重授權](../../LICENSE) (CC BY 4.0 + MIT)
+**版本**: 6.6.0 | **發布日期**: 2026-08-17 | **授權**: [雙重授權](../../LICENSE) (CC BY 4.0 + MIT)
 
 語言無關、框架無關的軟體專案文件標準。透過 AI 原生工作流，確保不同技術堆疊之間的一致性、品質和可維護性。
 

package/bundled/locales/zh-TW/SECURITY.md

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ status: current
 <!-- UDS_SUPPORTED_VERSIONS_START -->
 | 版本 | 支援狀態 |
 |------|--------|
-| 6.5.0 | ✅ 最新正式版 |
+| 6.6.0 | ✅ 最新正式版 |
 | < 6.0.0 | ❌ 已終止支援 |
 <!-- UDS_SUPPORTED_VERSIONS_END -->
 

package/bundled/locales/zh-TW/core/ai-response-navigation.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
 source: ../../../core/ai-response-navigation.md
-source_version: 1.1.0
-translation_version: 1.1.0
-last_synced: 2026-06-10
+source_version: 1.2.0
+translation_version: 1.2.0
+last_synced: 2026-08-17
 status: current
 ---
 
@@ -10,8 +10,8 @@ status: current
 
 > **語言**: [English](../../../core/ai-response-navigation.md) | 繁體中文 | [简体中文](../../zh-CN/core/ai-response-navigation.md)
 
-**版本**: 1.1.0
-**最後更新**: 2026-06-10
+**版本**: 1.2.0
+**最後更新**: 2026-08-17
 **適用範圍**: 所有使用 AI 輔助開發的專案
 **範圍**: universal
 **產業標準**: 無（新興 AI 工具實踐）
@@ -27,6 +27,11 @@ status: current
 
 **解決方案**：在每個實質性 AI 回應結尾附加標準化的「導航區塊」，包含情境模板、推薦標記和彈性選項數量。
 
+**範圍註記（v1.2.0）**：規則 1–6 管的是答案**之後**要附什麼。規則 7–9 於 1.2.0 新增、屬**選用**，
+管的是答案本身：先講發現、每輪重述進度、不要開場白。新增的理由是——
+一個回應可以滿足規則 1–6 的每一條，同時把結論埋起來；
+**而找不到答案的讀者，不會因為結尾有一個正確的導航區塊被告知下一步而得到幫助。**
+
 ---
 
 ## 核心規則
@@ -103,6 +108,61 @@ status: current
 
 ---
 
+## 導航之前的那個答案（規則 7–9，選用）
+
+> **借鑒自**：[`ayghri/i-have-adhd`](https://github.com/ayghri/i-have-adhd)（MIT），十條中取三條。
+> 其餘七條刪去：兩條已被上方規則 1–2 涵蓋，五條與本標準衝突
+> （它的「不要 recap／不要結語」與規則 1 的導航區塊直接矛盾；它的「清單上限 5 項」
+> 會切斷證據表格與走訪分母）或與 [estimation-standards](estimation-standards.md) 重複。
+
+**這一節為何存在**：規則 1–6 管的是答案**之後**要附什麼，而答案本身沒有任何規則在管——
+一個回應可以把結論埋在一整面證據底下，只要結尾附上正確的導航區塊，
+它仍然滿足本標準的每一條。**找不到答案的讀者，不會因為被告知下一步而得到幫助。**
+
+**這三條是選用的**，語義同規則 6：採用專案不必啟用，既有 skill 也不需回頭補。
+專案**可以**在自己的設定中把任一條提升為必須。**不可選的是它們必須有精確的觸發條件**——
+一條鬆到永遠不會啟動的規則，與沒有這條規則無從分辨。
+
+### 規則 7：先講發現，不要先講過程（選用）
+
+**觸發條件**：回答問題、回報調查結果、或提出決策的回應。
+
+第一行寫**查到了什麼**或**該做什麼**。不是方法、不是把問題複述一遍、不是回答的計畫。
+
+證據——`file:line`、指令輸出、表格、量測數字——是**佐證**，應放在它所支持的主張**之後**。
+以證據開場會迫使讀者自行重建結論，而那正是他請你做的工作。
+
+| 不要寫 | 改寫成 |
+|---|---|
+| 「我檢查了 44 天、63 個網域的資料，發現……」 | 「那三組查詢刪掉。它回傳的東西有 46% 是下載頁。」 |
+| 「讓我看看這是怎麼設定的。」 | 「設定在 `x.yaml:12`，值是錯的，因為……」 |
+
+**這不代表可以省略證據**，它規範的是順序。
+
+### 規則 8：多輪工作中每一輪重述進度（選用）
+
+**觸發條件**：跨 3 輪以上的對話，或含 3 個以上步驟的任務。
+
+每則回應用一行說明工作進行到哪裡。不能假設讀者能在訊息之間記住
+「我們在 5 步中的第 3 步」，而重述它的成本是一個句子。
+
+本條與下方模板 4（進行中）互補：**規則 8 管開頭，模板 4 管結尾。**
+
+### 規則 9：不要開場白（選用）
+
+**觸發條件**：任何實質性回應。
+
+從答案開始。不要以「我接下來要做什麼」的預告、對請求的確認、或對問題本身的評價開場。
+
+本條把一項既有禁令一般化：[anti-sycophancy-prompting](anti-sycophancy-prompting.md)
+已經禁止「以正面肯定開場批評」，但**僅限批評情境**。規則 9 把同一項禁令擴及每一個實質回應，
+理由不同：不是為了防拍馬屁，而是為了消除它在讀者與答案之間製造的延遲。
+
+**規則 9 不適用於結語。** 規則 1 要求的導航區塊依然成立——
+回應的結尾正是本標準安放「讀者下一步」的位置。
+
+---
+
 ## 情境模板
 
 ### 模板 1：任務完成
@@ -290,6 +350,9 @@ AI 需要使用者做出選擇或提供資訊時使用。
 | R4 | 1–5 個選項，依情境調整 |
 | R5 | 適用時使用 `/command` 格式 |
 | R6 | *（選用）* 等級明確時附加 `〔模型：Fast｜Standard｜Capable〕` |
+| R7 | *（選用）* 先講發現；證據放在它所支持的主張之後 |
+| R8 | *（選用）* 跨 3 輪或 3 步以上 → 用一行重述進度 |
+| R9 | *（選用）* 不要開場白。結語仍為必須——見 R1 |
 
 | 豁免 | 不豁免 |
 |------|--------|
@@ -313,6 +376,7 @@ AI 需要使用者做出選擇或提供資訊時使用。
 
 | 版本 | 日期 | 變更 |
 |------|------|------|
+| 1.2.0 | 2026-08-17 | 新增選用規則 R7–R9，管答案本身（先講發現、重述進度、不要開場白）。借鑒自 `ayghri/i-have-adhd`（MIT），十條取三；其餘七條因已被 R1–R2 涵蓋、與 R1 衝突、或與 estimation-standards 重複而刪去。規則 1–6 全部可以被一個把結論埋起來的回應滿足——R7–R9 補上這個缺口 |
 | 1.1.0 | 2026-06-10 | 新增規則 R6 選用模型級別標注（`〔模型：Fast｜Standard｜Capable〕`）；與廠商無關；不強制既有技能回改 |
 | 1.0.0 | 2026-03-25 | 初始版本 |
 

package/bundled/locales/zh-TW/core/spec-driven-development.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ source_version: 2.3.0
 translation_version: 2.3.0
 last_synced: 2026-06-10
 source_hash: 08dd8c2bee20
-status: current
+status: stale
 ---
 
 # 規格驅動開發 (SDD) 標準

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "universal-dev-standards",
-  "version": "6.5.0",
+  "version": "6.6.0",
   "description": "CLI tool for adopting Universal Development Standards",
   "keywords": [
     "documentation",

package/standards-registry.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
-  "version": "6.5.0",
+  "version": "6.6.0",
   "lastUpdated": "2026-05-13",
   "description": "Standards registry for universal-dev-standards with integrated skills and AI-optimized formats",
   "formats": {
@@ -58,14 +58,14 @@
     "standards": {
       "name": "universal-dev-standards",
       "url": "https://github.com/AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-standards",
-      "version": "6.5.0"
+      "version": "6.6.0"
     },
     "skills": {
       "name": "universal-dev-standards",
       "url": "https://github.com/AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-standards",
       "localPath": "skills",
       "rawUrl": "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-standards/main/skills",
-      "version": "6.5.0",
+      "version": "6.6.0",
       "note": "Skills are now included in the main repository under skills/"
     }
   },
@@ -2260,7 +2260,7 @@
       "id": "license-compliance",
       "name": "License Compliance Standards",
       "nameZh": "授權合規標準",
-      "version": "6.5.0",
+      "version": "6.6.0",
       "source": {
         "human": "core/license-compliance.md",
         "ai": "ai/standards/license-compliance.ai.yaml"
@@ -2272,7 +2272,7 @@
       "id": "verification-oracle",
       "name": "Verification Oracle Standards",
       "nameZh": "驗證 Oracle 標準",
-      "version": "6.5.0",
+      "version": "6.6.0",
       "source": {
         "human": "core/verification-oracle.md",
         "ai": "ai/standards/verification-oracle.ai.yaml"
@@ -2284,7 +2284,7 @@
       "id": "model-provenance",
       "name": "Model Provenance Policy Standards",
       "nameZh": "模型來源政策標準",
-      "version": "6.5.0",
+      "version": "6.6.0",
       "source": {
         "human": "core/model-provenance.md",
         "ai": "ai/standards/model-provenance.ai.yaml"
@@ -2296,7 +2296,7 @@
       "id": "resource-cost-boundary",
       "name": "Resource / Cost Boundary Declaration Standards",
       "nameZh": "資源／成本邊界宣告標準",
-      "version": "6.5.0",
+      "version": "6.6.0",
       "source": {
         "human": "core/resource-cost-boundary.md",
         "ai": "ai/standards/resource-cost-boundary.ai.yaml"