Merge pull request #1025 from mattpocock/chore/link-skills-exclude-misc

link-skills: stop linking misc/ into local skill directories

.agents/adr/0001-explicit-setup-pointer-only-for-hard-dependencies.md

@@ -1,10 +1,10 @@
 # Explicit `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` pointer only for hard dependencies
 
-Engineering skills depend on per-repo config (issue tracker, triage label vocabulary, domain doc layout) seeded by `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`. Some skills cannot meaningfully function without that config — they have to publish to a specific issue tracker or apply a specific label string. Others only use it to sharpen output (vocabulary, ADR awareness) and degrade gracefully without it.
+Engineering skills depend on per-repo config (issue tracker, triage label vocabulary, domain doc layout) seeded by `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`. Some skills cannot meaningfully function without that config: they have to publish to a specific issue tracker or apply a specific label string. Others only use it to sharpen output (vocabulary, ADR awareness) and degrade gracefully without it.
 
 We split these into **hard-dependency** and **soft-dependency** skills:
 
-- **Hard dependency** (`to-tickets`, `to-spec`, `triage`) — include an explicit one-liner: _"… should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not."_ Without the mapping, output is wrong, not just fuzzy.
-- **Soft dependency** (`diagnose`, `tdd`, `improve-codebase-architecture`) — reference "the project's domain glossary" and "ADRs in the area you're touching" in vague prose only. If the docs aren't there, the skill still works; output is just less sharp.
+- **Hard dependency** (`to-tickets`, `to-spec`, `triage`): include an explicit one-liner: _"… should have been provided to you; run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not."_ Without the mapping, output is wrong, not just fuzzy.
+- **Soft dependency** (`diagnose`, `tdd`, `improve-codebase-architecture`): reference "the project's domain glossary" and "ADRs in the area you're touching" in vague prose only. If the docs aren't there, the skill still works; output is just less sharp.
 
 The split keeps soft-dependency skills token-light and avoids cargo-culting the setup pointer into places where it isn't load-bearing.

.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md

@@ -6,30 +6,30 @@ We ship a native **Claude Code plugin** and, for now, **defer** a native **Codex
 
 ## The constraint: bucketed skills vs. single-path selection
 
-Skills live in bucket folders under `skills/` — `engineering/` and `productivity/` are **promoted** (shipped); `misc/`, `personal/`, `in-progress/`, and `deprecated/` are **not**. A plugin must expose only the promoted set, which spans two of those bucket folders.
+Skills live in bucket folders under `skills/`: `engineering/` and `productivity/` are **promoted** (shipped); `misc/`, `personal/`, `in-progress/`, and `deprecated/` are **not**. A plugin must expose only the promoted set, which spans two of those bucket folders.
 
-- **Claude Code** — `.claude-plugin/plugin.json` accepts `skills` as an **array of explicit skill-directory paths**. We list the promoted skills one by one, exclude everything else with zero ambiguity, and add `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` so the repo is its own single-plugin marketplace. Verified end to end: `claude plugin validate . --strict` passes, and `marketplace add` → `install` resolves all promoted skills.
+- **Claude Code**: `.claude-plugin/plugin.json` accepts `skills` as an **array of explicit skill-directory paths**. We list the promoted skills one by one, exclude everything else with zero ambiguity, and add `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` so the repo is its own single-plugin marketplace. Verified end to end: `claude plugin validate . --strict` passes, and `marketplace add` → `install` resolves all promoted skills.
 
-- **Codex** — `.codex-plugin/plugin.json` accepts `skills` only as a **single path string** (arrays are rejected with `missing or invalid plugin.json`), and Codex discovers `SKILL.md` files recursively under it. There is no way to name two bucket folders, or to curate a subset, from one path. Two escape hatches were tested and rejected:
-  - Pointing at `./skills/` would also ship `deprecated/`, `in-progress/`, `personal/`, and `misc/` — retired, draft, and personal skills we deliberately don't promote.
+- **Codex**: `.codex-plugin/plugin.json` accepts `skills` only as a **single path string** (arrays are rejected with `missing or invalid plugin.json`), and Codex discovers `SKILL.md` files recursively under it. There is no way to name two bucket folders, or to curate a subset, from one path. Two escape hatches were tested and rejected:
+  - Pointing at `./skills/` would also ship `deprecated/`, `in-progress/`, `personal/`, and `misc/`: retired, draft, and personal skills we deliberately don't promote.
   - A curated flat directory of **symlinks** into the buckets does not survive install: Codex copies the plugin tree into its cache and **drops symlinks**, so the skills arrive empty.
 
-The only robust ways to give Codex a single promoted-only path are (a) **restructure** so `skills/` contains only promoted skills (moving the non-promoted buckets out — a large blast radius across `CLAUDE.md`, `scripts/link-skills.sh`, the bucket READMEs, and the local dev workflow that relies on `in-progress/` and `personal/`), or (b) **commit duplicate copies** of promoted skills into a flat directory (a sync burden and a second source of truth). Both are structural decisions, not something to bundle into shipping the Claude plugin. This is very likely the original, half-remembered reason a plugin wasn't shipped earlier: the manifest formats didn't cleanly express a curated subset of a bucketed repo.
+The only robust ways to give Codex a single promoted-only path are (a) **restructure** so `skills/` contains only promoted skills (moving the non-promoted buckets out, a large blast radius across `CLAUDE.md`, `scripts/link-skills.sh`, the bucket READMEs, and the local dev workflow that relies on `in-progress/` and `personal/`), or (b) **commit duplicate copies** of promoted skills into a flat directory (a sync burden and a second source of truth). Both are structural decisions, not something to bundle into shipping the Claude plugin. This is very likely the original, half-remembered reason a plugin wasn't shipped earlier: the manifest formats didn't cleanly express a curated subset of a bucketed repo.
 
 ## Decision
 
 - Ship the **Claude Code plugin** now (`.claude-plugin/plugin.json` + `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json`), curated to the promoted set, as the headline v1.2 deliverable.
-- Keep **skills.sh** as the universal installer — it already serves Codex and other harnesses today, so no Codex user is left without an install path.
+- Keep **skills.sh** as the universal installer: it already serves Codex and other harnesses today, so no Codex user is left without an install path.
 - **Defer** the native Codex plugin until we decide between restructuring `skills/` to promoted-only vs. committing a generated flat copy. Revisit when Codex either supports a `skills` array / include-list or preserves symlinks on install.
 
 ## Invariants this creates
 
 - Every promoted skill has an entry in `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`'s `skills` array (this already stood as a `CLAUDE.md` rule; it now also gates the plugin's contents).
-- `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`'s `version` tracks `package.json`'s version — bump both together on release. Claude uses the plugin `version` to decide when installed users see an update.
+- `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`'s `version` tracks `package.json`'s version: bump both together on release. Claude uses the plugin `version` to decide when installed users see an update.
 
 ## Update, 2026-08-05
 
-`mattpocock-skills` was accepted into **Claude Code's official marketplace** — configured name `claude-plugins-official`, source repo `anthropics/claude-plugins-official` — which every Claude Code install has by default. `claude plugins install mattpocock-skills` is now the documented route, and the `marketplace add` → `install` path above is superseded. The install wording lives in [.agents/install-block.md](../install-block.md).
+`mattpocock-skills` was accepted into **Claude Code's official marketplace** (configured name `claude-plugins-official`, source repo `anthropics/claude-plugins-official`), which every Claude Code install has by default. `claude plugins install mattpocock-skills` is now the documented route, and the `marketplace add` → `install` path above is superseded. The install wording lives in [.agents/install-block.md](../install-block.md).
 
 The official listing points at this repo's git URL and reads `.claude-plugin/plugin.json` directly, so it does not depend on `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json`. That file is retained only as a fallback for installing the repo directly (an unreleased commit, or a fork).
 
@@ -37,5 +37,5 @@ Verified 2026-08-05, on Claude Code 2.1.222, against the live listing:
 
 - `claude plugins install mattpocock-skills` resolves with no marketplace added first, and reports `mattpocock-skills@claude-plugins-official`.
 - `claude plugin details mattpocock-skills` then reports version 1.2.0 and loads the promoted skills.
-- The listing's `source` is `{"source": "url", "url": "https://github.com/mattpocock/skills.git", "sha": …}` — the **sha is pinned**, so a release reaches installed users when that pin moves, not the moment we tag. At the time of writing the pin sits two commits behind `main`, which is why it lists 22 skills rather than the 24 in `plugin.json`.
-- The in-session `/plugin install mattpocock-skills` was **not** exercised — `/plugin` is unavailable in headless (`claude -p`) sessions. It runs the same resolver as the CLI, and the documented example form is `/plugin install <name>@claude-plugins-official`.
+- The listing's `source` is `{"source": "url", "url": "https://github.com/mattpocock/skills.git", "sha": …}`: the **sha is pinned**, so a release reaches installed users when that pin moves, not the moment we tag. At the time of writing the pin sits two commits behind `main`, which is why it lists 22 skills rather than the 24 in `plugin.json`.
+- The in-session `/plugin install mattpocock-skills` was **not** exercised: `/plugin` is unavailable in headless (`claude -p`) sessions. It runs the same resolver as the CLI, and the documented example form is `/plugin install <name>@claude-plugins-official`.

.agents/install-block.md

@@ -2,9 +2,9 @@
 
 One install story, one wording. `README.md`, `.changeset/*`, and every page under `docs/` must say **this** and nothing else. Change it here first, then propagate.
 
-`mattpocock-skills` is listed in **Claude Code's official marketplace** — configured name `claude-plugins-official`, source repo `anthropics/claude-plugins-official` — which every Claude Code install has out of the box. There is no marketplace to add first. Official Anthropic marketplaces have auto-update enabled by default ([discover-plugins](https://code.claude.com/docs/en/discover-plugins)), so "updates arrive automatically" is a true claim, not a hope.
+`mattpocock-skills` is listed in **Claude Code's official marketplace** (configured name `claude-plugins-official`, source repo `anthropics/claude-plugins-official`), which every Claude Code install has out of the box. There is no marketplace to add first. Official Anthropic marketplaces have auto-update enabled by default ([discover-plugins](https://code.claude.com/docs/en/discover-plugins)), so "updates arrive automatically" is a true claim, not a hope.
 
-## Claude Code — the plugin
+## Claude Code: the plugin
 
 <canonical-block name="claude-code">
 
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ It's in Claude Code's official marketplace, so there's nothing to add first, and
 
 </canonical-block>
 
-## Codex, and other agents — skills.sh
+## Codex, and other agents: skills.sh
 
 The plugin is Claude Code only. Everywhere else, [skills.sh](https://skills.sh/mattpocock/skills) copies editable skill files into the project. Use the whole-set form on `README.md`:
 
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ The plugin is Claude Code only. Everywhere else, [skills.sh](https://skills.sh/m
 npx skills@latest add mattpocock/skills
 ```
 
-Pick the skills you want, and which coding agents to install them on. **The installer lets you choose which skills to take — make sure `setup-matt-pocock-skills` is one of them.**
+Pick the skills you want, and which coding agents to install them on. **The installer lets you choose which skills to take: make sure `setup-matt-pocock-skills` is one of them.**
 
 </canonical-block>
 
@@ -54,8 +54,8 @@ npx skills@latest update <name>
 
 ## The two routes are exclusive
 
-The plugin is a managed, read-only bundle you subscribe to. skills.sh writes files you own and edit. Installing both leaves the user with every skill twice — always say "pick one".
+The plugin is a managed, read-only bundle you subscribe to. skills.sh writes files you own and edit. Installing both leaves the user with every skill twice: always say "pick one".
 
 ## Not the install story
 
-`.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` makes the repo its own single-plugin marketplace (`/plugin marketplace add mattpocock/skills`, then `/plugin install mattpocock-skills@mattpocock`). The official listing supersedes it. It is kept as a fallback for installing the repo directly — an unreleased commit, or a fork — and is **not** documented to users.
+`.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` makes the repo its own single-plugin marketplace (`/plugin marketplace add mattpocock/skills`, then `/plugin install mattpocock-skills@mattpocock`). The official listing supersedes it. It is kept as a fallback for installing the repo directly (an unreleased commit, or a fork), and is **not** documented to users.

.agents/invocation.md

@@ -1,19 +1,25 @@
 # Model-invoked vs user-invoked
 
-Every `SKILL.md` in this repo is a skill. The one axis that splits them is **invocation** — who can reach it:
+Every `SKILL.md` in this repo is a skill. The one axis that splits them is **invocation**, who can reach it:
 
-- **User-invoked** — reachable **only by the human typing its name**. Set `disable-model-invocation: true` in the frontmatter (Claude Code) and `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` in `agents/openai.yaml` (Codex). The `description` is **human-facing**: a one-line summary read by a person browsing slash-commands. Strip trigger lists ("Use when the user says…").
-- **Model-invoked** — reachable by **model or user**. The default: omit `disable-model-invocation` and the `policy` block from `agents/openai.yaml`. The `description` is **model-facing** and keeps rich trigger phrasing ("Use when the user wants…, mentions…, asks for…") so auto-invocation fires. The test for whether a skill should stay model-invoked: _could the model usefully reach for this autonomously?_ (Reuse is the reason to extract a skill, not the test.)
+- **User-invoked**: reachable **only by the human typing its name**. Set `disable-model-invocation: true` in the frontmatter (Claude Code) and `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` in `agents/openai.yaml` (Codex). The `description` is **human-facing**: a one-line summary read by a person browsing slash-commands. Strip trigger lists ("Use when the user says…").
+- **Model-invoked**: reachable by **model or user**. The default: omit `disable-model-invocation` and the `policy` block from `agents/openai.yaml`. The `description` is **model-facing** and keeps rich trigger phrasing ("Use when the user wants…, mentions…, asks for…") so auto-invocation fires. The test for whether a skill should stay model-invoked: _could the model usefully reach for this autonomously?_ (Reuse is the reason to extract a skill, not the test.)
 
-Each harness excludes a user-invoked skill from the model's reach in its own way, so nothing but the human can fire it — no other skill can. A user-invoked skill may invoke model-invoked skills, but it can never reach another user-invoked skill.
+Each harness excludes a user-invoked skill from the model's reach in its own way, so nothing but the human can fire it: no other skill can. A user-invoked skill may invoke model-invoked skills, but it can never reach another user-invoked skill.
 
-Every skill also carries an `agents/openai.yaml` beside its `SKILL.md`. It holds Codex UI metadata — `interface.display_name` and `interface.short_description` for the skill picker — and, for user-invoked skills, the `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` that pairs with `disable-model-invocation`. Keep the two in sync: a skill is user-invoked in both harnesses or neither.
+Every skill also carries an `agents/openai.yaml` beside its `SKILL.md`. It holds Codex UI metadata: `interface.display_name` and `interface.short_description` for the skill picker, and, for user-invoked skills, the `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` that pairs with `disable-model-invocation`. Keep the two in sync: a skill is user-invoked in both harnesses or neither.
 
 Bucket `README.md`s and the top-level `README.md` group entries into **User-invoked** and **Model-invoked**.
 
 ## Dependencies between them
 
-Dependencies are expressed as **`/skill`-style prose invocation** ("Run the `/grilling` skill"), not deep `../other-skill/FILE.md` cross-references. Shared reference docs live inside the skill that owns them; other skills reach that material by invoking the skill, not by linking across folders.
+Dependencies are expressed as an explicit instruction to **call the Skill tool** with the named skill (`Call the Skill tool with "grilling"`), not deep `../other-skill/FILE.md` cross-references, and not a bare `/skill`-style mention left for the model to interpret. Naming the tool is what gets it fired: most harnesses expose skill invocation as a tool the model calls, and spelling that out gets a higher hit rate than dropping a `/name` into prose and hoping it's read as a command. Dropping the leading `/` also keeps this harness-neutral rather than less: a skill name on its own carries no assumption about which harness's trigger syntax it belongs to. Shared reference docs live inside the skill that owns them; other skills reach that material by calling the Skill tool with it, not by linking across folders.
+
+This is about **operative** instructions: a skill's own steps telling the agent to go run another skill right now. Router prose that just names skills for a human to pick from (`ask-matt`, bucket `README.md`s) isn't invoking anything, so it keeps `/skill`-style names as plain labels.
+
+The Skill tool takes one skill per call. A step that needs two skills is two calls, not one call with two names: say so (`Call the Skill tool twice, for "grilling" and "domain-modeling"`), not "call it with X and Y," which reads as a single call taking both.
+
+This whole convention only holds when the named skill is **model-invoked**. A user-invoked skill can never be reached this way, full stop: per the invariant above, no other skill can call it, including by naming it to the Skill tool. When a step's precondition is a user-invoked skill (e.g. `setup-matt-pocock-skills`), phrase it as an instruction for the human to act on: "tell the user to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`", never as a Skill tool call.
 
 ## Passive vs active domain work
 

.agents/writing-docs.md

@@ -1,69 +1,69 @@
 # Writing docs pages
 
-Every skill in `engineering/` and `productivity/` has a human-facing **docs page** at `docs/<bucket>/<skill-name>.md` — the docs tree mirrors those two bucket folders under `skills/`. It is published at `https://aihero.dev/skills-<skill-name>`; the URL is always `skills-<skill-name>` regardless of bucket, so the docs path is repo organisation only. The page is not the skill and not a copy of `SKILL.md`. Only these two buckets are promoted; the rest (`misc/`, `in-progress/`, `deprecated/`) ship no docs page.
+Every skill in `engineering/` and `productivity/` has a human-facing **docs page** at `docs/<bucket>/<skill-name>.md`. The docs tree mirrors those two bucket folders under `skills/`. It is published at `https://aihero.dev/skills-<skill-name>`; the URL is always `skills-<skill-name>` regardless of bucket, so the docs path is repo organisation only. The page is not the skill and not a copy of `SKILL.md`. Only these two buckets are promoted; the rest (`misc/`, `in-progress/`, `deprecated/`) ship no docs page.
 
-Most of these skills are **user-invoked**: the agent will never fire them for you, so *you* are the index that has to remember they exist and when to reach for them. That memory is **cognitive load**. The job of a docs page is to relieve it — to orient one reader around one skill so they can hold it in their head, know when to reach for it, and see where it sits in the system. The pages are collectively a distributed router; each is a node.
+Most of these skills are **user-invoked**: the agent will never fire them for you, so *you* are the index that has to remember they exist and when to reach for them. That memory is **cognitive load**. The job of a docs page is to relieve it: to orient one reader around one skill so they can hold it in their head, know when to reach for it, and see where it sits in the system. The pages are collectively a distributed router; each is a node.
 
-Act whenever a promoted skill is added, renamed, or has its behaviour changed: create or re-sync its docs page. A rename moves the file too (`docs/<bucket>/<old>.md` → `docs/<bucket>/<new>.md`), because the published URL tracks the name; a skill that moves between `engineering/` and `productivity/` moves its docs file to the matching folder. Skills in `misc/`, `in-progress/`, and `deprecated/` get no page — none of those buckets is promoted. A skill moving *out* of one of them into `engineering/` or `productivity/` gains a page; one moving the other way loses it.
+Act whenever a promoted skill is added, renamed, or has its behaviour changed: create or re-sync its docs page. A rename moves the file too (`docs/<bucket>/<old>.md` → `docs/<bucket>/<new>.md`), because the published URL tracks the name; a skill that moves between `engineering/` and `productivity/` moves its docs file to the matching folder. Skills in `misc/`, `in-progress/`, and `deprecated/` get no page, because none of those buckets is promoted. A skill moving *out* of one of them into `engineering/` or `productivity/` gains a page; one moving the other way loses it.
 
-Because these pages are published on `aihero.dev`, **every link is absolute** — never a repo-relative path. A link to another skill points at `https://aihero.dev/skills-<name>`; a link into the repo points at its full `https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/...` URL. A relative link that works in the repo breaks once published.
+Because these pages are published on `aihero.dev`, **every link is absolute**: never a repo-relative path. A link to another skill points at `https://aihero.dev/skills-<name>`; a link into the repo points at its full `https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/...` URL. A relative link that works in the repo breaks once published.
 
-There is no H1 — the published page takes its title from the slug.
+There is no H1. The published page takes its title from the slug.
 
 ## Page structure
 
 Fill the template below, keeping its order. The **fixed frame** (`## What it does`, `## When to reach for it`, `## Where it fits`) appears on every page. `## Prerequisites` and the free-form substance sections carry only what this particular skill needs; delete the rest.
 
-Four sections make a page worth reading: `What it does`, `When to reach for it`, `Common questions`, `It's working if`. The first two orient the reader; the last two are where the page stops summarising the skill and starts answering the reader's own situation. Each of the last two has a bar to clear, below — but treat a page that clears neither as unfinished, not as finished-and-short.
+Four sections make a page worth reading: `What it does`, `When to reach for it`, `Common questions`, `It's working if`. The first two orient the reader; the last two are where the page stops summarising the skill and starts answering the reader's own situation. Each of the last two has a bar to clear, below, but treat a page that clears neither as unfinished, not as finished-and-short.
 
-**A page carries no install commands.** The ai-hero page template renders the install widget itself — a copy button, the single-skill command, the whole-set command, and the update line — above the body. A page that also writes them out shows the reader the same command twice, and the two copies drift: the hand-written pair on every page went stale against the widget beside it. Install wording is a property of the site, not of the page. If it needs changing, change it in ai-hero; the canonical wording lives in [the install block](./install-block.md).
+**A page carries no install commands.** The ai-hero page template renders the install widget itself (a copy button, the single-skill command, the whole-set command, and the update line) above the body. A page that also writes them out shows the reader the same command twice, and the two copies drift: the hand-written pair on every page went stale against the widget beside it. Install wording is a property of the site, not of the page. If it needs changing, change it in ai-hero; the canonical wording lives in [the install block](./install-block.md).
 
 <page-template>
 
 ## What it does
 
-One or two plain-language paragraphs. Lead with the skill's one-sentence job, then state the **defining constraint** — the single fact that makes this skill behave differently from the obvious default (for `to-spec`: it does not interview the user again, it synthesises what is already known). Write it as a plain declarative sentence — never a labelled aside like "The defining constraint:" or "The key thing:"; the formula reads as filler. This line is the most valuable on the page; never omit it.
+One or two plain-language paragraphs. Lead with the skill's one-sentence job, then state the **defining constraint**: the single fact that makes this skill behave differently from the obvious default (for `to-spec`: it does not interview the user again, it synthesises what is already known). Write it as a plain declarative sentence, never a labelled aside like "The defining constraint:" or "The key thing:"; the formula reads as filler. This line is the most valuable on the page; never omit it.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-How and when you reach for the skill — two beats, both effectively always present:
+How and when you reach for the skill, in two beats that are both effectively always present:
 
-- **Invocation mode.** State whether you type it or the agent fires it. A user-invoked skill: "You invoke this by typing `/<name>` — the agent won't reach for it on its own." A model-invoked skill: "Type `/<name>`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task fits."
-- **Trigger boundary.** The index entry: "reach for this when …". Where the skill is confusable with a sibling, add the other half — "for <X> instead, use [<sibling>](https://aihero.dev/skills-<sibling>)."
+- **Invocation mode.** State whether you type it or the agent fires it. A user-invoked skill: "You invoke this by typing `/<name>`, and the agent won't reach for it on its own." A model-invoked skill: "Type `/<name>`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task fits."
+- **Trigger boundary.** The index entry: "reach for this when …". Where the skill is confusable with a sibling, add the other half: "for <X> instead, use [<sibling>](https://aihero.dev/skills-<sibling>)."
 
 ## Prerequisites
 
-Optional — include only when the skill needs something in place to be functional; omit the heading entirely otherwise. Covers: a **workspace it writes into** (a stateful skill like `grill-with-docs` writes `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs; `teach` builds a whole directory — say what it writes and where), **prior setup** (`triage`/`to-spec`/`to-tickets` need `setup-matt-pocock-skills` to have configured an issue tracker), or **repo-specific tooling**. A stateless skill that runs anywhere has no prerequisites — drop the section.
+Optional: include only when the skill needs something in place to be functional; omit the heading entirely otherwise. Covers: a **workspace it writes into** (a stateful skill like `grill-with-docs` writes `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs; `teach` builds a whole directory, so say what it writes and where), **prior setup** (`triage`/`to-spec`/`to-tickets` need `setup-matt-pocock-skills` to have configured an issue tracker), or **repo-specific tooling**. A stateless skill that runs anywhere has no prerequisites, so drop the section.
 
 ## <free-form middle>
 
-One to three short sections, in the skill's *own vocabulary*, that make it click — choose whatever headings fit the skill: the loop it runs, the artifact it produces, the fork it makes, the one anti-pattern it kills. There is no prescribed heading; the skills are too heterogeneous for one.
+One to three short sections, in the skill's *own vocabulary*, that make it click. Choose whatever headings fit the skill: the loop it runs, the artifact it produces, the fork it makes, the one anti-pattern it kills. There is no prescribed heading; the skills are too heterogeneous for one.
 
-The single non-negotiable: **surface the skill's leading word / defining idea** — `tight` feedback loop, `deep module`, throwaway-code-answers-a-question, red-green. It pays off twice: the reader learns what the skill *is*, and learns the word they'll later think with to *reach for* it.
+The single non-negotiable: **surface the skill's leading word / defining idea** (`tight` feedback loop, `deep module`, throwaway-code-answers-a-question, red-green). It pays off twice: the reader learns what the skill *is*, and learns the word they'll later think with to *reach for* it.
 
 ## Common questions
 
-The questions readers really ask about this skill, each in bold with the answer in the lines beneath it — no sub-headings.
+The questions readers really ask about this skill, each in bold with the answer in the lines beneath it. No sub-headings.
 
 An observed question always beats an invented one, so go and find them before you write any:
 
-- **The wiki.** If `~/repos/matt/personal-wiki` exists on this machine, it is the richest source there is. Its `wiki/audience/` area is organised around what the audience wants, discusses, and **is confused by** — read `wiki/index.md` first for the registry of pages, then the pages bearing on this skill. Every page carries `sources:` linkbacks to the original X, Discord, GitHub, and email threads; the wiki is a secondary source, so quote the asker's own question rather than the wiki's summary of it. Skip this bullet where the directory does not exist.
+- **The wiki.** If `~/repos/matt/personal-wiki` exists on this machine, it is the richest source there is. Its `wiki/audience/` area is organised around what the audience wants, discusses, and **is confused by**: read `wiki/index.md` first for the registry of pages, then the pages bearing on this skill. Every page carries `sources:` linkbacks to the original X, Discord, GitHub, and email threads; the wiki is a secondary source, so quote the asker's own question rather than the wiki's summary of it. Skip this bullet where the directory does not exist.
 - **This repo's issues.** `gh issue list --repo mattpocock/skills --search "<skill-name>" --state all`. A question filed twice is a question the page owes an answer to.
 - **`CHANGELOG.md`.** Anything renamed, moved, or behaviourally changed generates a "where did it go?" that the page has to answer.
 
-Where the hunt comes up thin, the section may also carry a question a reader would plainly ask — but **the count stays honest to the evidence**. A well-discussed skill earns six; an obscure one earns one or two, or none at all. Padding a thin skill out to match a rich one is how the section fills with questions nobody has, and an invented question teaches the reader nothing.
+Where the hunt comes up thin, the section may also carry a question a reader would plainly ask, but **the count stays honest to the evidence**. A well-discussed skill earns six; an obscure one earns one or two, or none at all. Padding a thin skill out to match a rich one is how the section fills with questions nobody has, and an invented question teaches the reader nothing.
 
-Order them by how often each comes up, sharpest first, and say the unflattering thing where it is true — a very long grilling session usually means the scope was too big; a model asked to write its own skill produces something verbose. Omit the heading where there is nothing worth answering.
+Order them by how often each comes up, sharpest first, and say the unflattering thing where it is true: a very long grilling session usually means the scope was too big; a model asked to write its own skill produces something verbose. Omit the heading where there is nothing worth answering.
 
 ## It's working if
 
-A few bullets naming what the reader sees when the skill is doing its job. The bar on each is that the reader can check it without opening `SKILL.md` — a signal in their own work, or in the trace in front of them. "The document gets shorter as it gets better" passes; "the library section is byte-identical to `template.sh`" is a compliance check on the skill's internals wearing this section's name. Include it wherever the tells are crisp; omit the heading where they stay vague.
+A few bullets naming what the reader sees when the skill is doing its job. The bar on each is that the reader can check it without opening `SKILL.md`: a signal in their own work, or in the trace in front of them. "The document gets shorter as it gets better" passes; "the library section is byte-identical to `template.sh`" is a compliance check on the skill's internals wearing this section's name. Include it wherever the tells are crisp; omit the heading where they stay vague.
 
 ## Where it fits
 
 Always present. Situate the skill in the system in a sentence or two:
 
-- **Role.** Name it: a **chain step** (`grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review`), a **run-once setup** (`setup-matt-pocock-skills`), **periodic maintenance** (`improve-codebase-architecture`, "every few days"), or a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone** (`diagnosing-bugs`, `prototype`, `handoff`). A standalone's map is one honest sentence — far better than omitting the section.
+- **Role.** Name it: a **chain step** (`grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review`), a **run-once setup** (`setup-matt-pocock-skills`), **periodic maintenance** (`improve-codebase-architecture`, "every few days"), or a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone** (`diagnosing-bugs`, `prototype`, `handoff`). A standalone's map is one honest sentence, which is far better than omitting the section.
 - **Neighbours.** The one or two siblings that matter, each with a because-clause, linked absolutely.
 - **The map.** Point to [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt), the router over the whole set, so this page stays a node and never has to redraw the graph.
 
@@ -71,9 +71,11 @@ Always present. Situate the skill in the system in a sentence or two:
 
 ## Conventions
 
-- Explain the **why**, not the process. The page orients and situates the skill; it never reproduces the `SKILL.md` steps or template dumps — a human choosing a tool does not need the runbook.
+- Explain the **why**, not the process. The page orients and situates the skill; it never reproduces the `SKILL.md` steps or template dumps: a human choosing a tool does not need the runbook.
+- **Never name the author.** The page is a technical document, not a record of who said what. "Matt says", "Matt's own answer", "his position is", a quoted reply: all of it goes. A finding from the question hunt is worth keeping; its attribution is not. State the substance as a plain claim about the skill ("the fix is a direct instruction: …", "the split comes down to session count") and drop the frame. The reader is deciding whether to use a tool; an opinion carries the same weight either way, and an attributed one dates as soon as the position moves. Quoting a *user* stays fine: "one user reported …" is evidence about the skill in the wild, and stays anonymous.
 - Use the skill's **leading words** (_seam_, _deep module_, _tracer bullet_) so the page and the skill speak one language.
-- **Branches go in a table or a list, never in a paragraph.** Where the page presents a choice — two artifacts the skill can produce, four situations that trigger it, five options at a boundary — the reader is scanning for the one row that matches their situation. A paragraph makes them read all of it to find out. A short markdown table (condition in the left column, what to do in the right) or a bulleted list gives it back in one glance. This applies wherever the branch appears, most often in `## When to reach for it` and the free-form middle.
+- **Use the [AI Coding Dictionary](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary)'s term where one exists, and link its first use on the page.** The dictionary is the house vocabulary for AI coding: _context window_, _subagent_, _harness_, _primary source_, _agent mode_. Prefer its word over a synonym you invent. Link the first occurrence of each term to `https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/<slug>` (the slug is the term lowercased with non-alphanumerics as hyphens: _context window_ → `context-window`), and leave every later occurrence unlinked. Link only where the word carries the dictionary's sense: a domain *model*, background *context* or an auth *token* is a different word that happens to match. Never link inside a heading, a code span, or an existing link, and never link a word that names a skill in this repo rather than the concept. For the full term list, read `~/repos/ai/ai-coding-dictionary/dictionary/` if it exists on this machine (one file per term, the filename *is* the term), and otherwise [mattpocock/dictionary-of-ai-coding](https://github.com/mattpocock/dictionary-of-ai-coding), which is the source of truth either way.
+- **Branches go in a table or a list, never in a paragraph.** Where the page presents a choice (two artifacts the skill can produce, four situations that trigger it, five options at a boundary), the reader is scanning for the one row that matches their situation. A paragraph makes them read all of it to find out. A short markdown table (condition in the left column, what to do in the right) or a bulleted list gives it back in one glance. This applies wherever the branch appears, most often in `## When to reach for it` and the free-form middle.
 - Keep the page itself low-load. It is documentation *about* low-cognitive-load skills; furniture (spare headings, restated links) is the thing it is arguing against.
 
 ## Done when
@@ -81,12 +83,14 @@ Always present. Situate the skill in the system in a sentence or two:
 - The page exists at `docs/<bucket>/<name>.md`, and no stale page survives a rename or bucket move.
 - The page carries no source link and writes no install command of its own.
 - `## What it does` states the defining constraint, as plain prose rather than a labelled aside.
+- The page names no author and quotes no author: every claim stands on its own.
 - `## When to reach for it` states invocation mode and the trigger boundary.
 - `## Where it fits` names the role and links to `ask-matt`.
 - A prerequisite (workspace, prior setup, tooling) is stated where one exists, and the section is absent where none does.
 - The middle surfaces the leading word.
+- Every AI Coding Dictionary term the page uses is spelt the dictionary's way, and its first use (and only its first use) links to the dictionary entry.
 - Every multi-way branch is a table or a list, not a paragraph the reader has to read in full.
-- The hunt for real questions ran — the wiki, the issues, the changelog — and `## Common questions` is sized to what it found, not padded to match a richer skill's page.
+- The hunt for real questions ran (the wiki, the issues, the changelog), and `## Common questions` is sized to what it found, not padded to match a richer skill's page.
 - Every `## It's working if` bullet is checkable without opening `SKILL.md`.
 - The sections appear in the template's order.
 - Every link is absolute, and every one resolves.

.changeset/add-implement-spec-skill.md

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+---
+"mattpocock-skills": patch
+---
+
+Add the `implement-spec` skill (in-progress bucket, user-invoked). It takes a spec and its tickets and drives them to a single PR: the tickets are read as a task graph with blocking edges, so implementer subagents run in background worktrees across the ready frontier for concurrency, a merger subagent folds each one back into the PR branch, and the flow closes with `/code-review` before the PR is marked ready.

.changeset/ask-matt-router.md

@@ -1,20 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": patch
----
-
-Sharpen `/ask-matt` — the router now covers phase boundaries, the two wayfinder mistakes, and two skills it never mentioned.
-
-**Phase boundaries.** A **phase** is a chunk of work inside a session — the grilling, the implementation, the QA — and the boundary between two of them is where you decide what to do with the context you've built. The two-bullet `Crossing sessions` section is replaced by a decision tree carrying all five options in order (**continue**, `/clear`, `/handoff`, **subagent**, `/compact`), with the reasoning disclosed in a new `PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md`. Three fixes come with it:
-
-- **`/handoff` was oversold.** It read as the general bridge between context windows. It's narrow: you need it only when something has to *travel* — a new harness, a new directory, a colleague, or a side task forked mid-phase. What it buys is portability.
-- **`/compact` is the default, not the first reach.** It sits at the bottom of the tree, after the four cheaper or more precise questions above it. Starting there produces a session that's confidently wrong about whatever the summary flattened.
-- **Two branches were missing entirely.** **Continue** is the one to rule out first — it's the only move that keeps the conversation as a primary source rather than a summary of one — and a **subagent** handles anything scoped tightly enough to run AFK.
-
-Context hygiene's escape hatch now says `/compact` rather than `/handoff` (same harness, same directory, at a boundary — the handoff clause doesn't apply), and the smart zone figure is updated from ~120k to ~150k tokens.
-
-**Wayfinder routing.** The two mistakes people most often make with the heaviest, most cognitively demanding flow:
-
-- **Over-reaching for it.** It's slower and denser than a single grill, so it's flagged as the heaviest flow and reserved for the idea that genuinely won't fit one session — a well-scoped feature belongs on `/grill-with-docs`, not here.
-- **Losing the way at the handoff.** When the map clears, wayfinder hands off, it doesn't build: merge onto the main flow at `/to-spec` (which collapses the map's linked decisions into a buildable plan) rather than looping the map straight into `/implement`. Straight-to-`/implement` is only for efforts that turned out genuinely small.
-
-**Missing routes.** `/grilling` and `/resolving-merge-conflicts` were absent from the router altogether and are now in it, and `grill-me` splits from `grill-with-docs` on whether you are in a working directory.

.changeset/codex-skill-metadata.md

@@ -1,10 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": minor
----
-
-Add Codex metadata alongside each skill's Claude Code frontmatter so the set works in both harnesses without generated copies.
-
-- Add an `agents/openai.yaml` beside every `SKILL.md` with Codex UI metadata (`interface.display_name`, `interface.short_description`).
-- Mark every user-invoked skill with `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false`, the Codex analog of `disable-model-invocation: true`, so Codex excludes it from implicit invocation while explicit `$skill` invocation still works.
-- Document the dual-harness invocation model in `.agents/invocation.md`, `CLAUDE.md`, and the promoted-bucket READMEs.
-- Add `AGENTS.md` as a symlink to `CLAUDE.md` so Codex reads the same repo instructions.

.changeset/domain-modeling-trigger-context-adr.md

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+---
+"mattpocock-skills": patch
+---
+
+domain-modeling: trigger on discussing codebase terminology and on writing or editing a CONTEXT.md or an ADR directly, replacing the narrower "pin down domain terminology or a ubiquitous language" / "record an architectural decision" phrasing. Also drops the "another skill needs to maintain the domain model" caveat, since that's the invoking skill's job to state explicitly, not this description's.

.changeset/fix-yaml-frontmatter-colons.md

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+---
+"mattpocock-skills": patch
+---
+
+Quote the `description` front matter in `to-spec`, `code-review`, `setup-matt-pocock-skills`, `writing-fragments`, `writing-shape`, and `wait-what`. An unquoted colon-space left over from the em-dash sweep in #905 made each block invalid YAML, so `skills.sh` skipped all six during discovery and they couldn't be listed or installed via `npx skills`.

.changeset/friendlier-setup-and-local-tickets.md

@@ -1,12 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": patch
----
-
-Make `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` friendlier and align the local-markdown tracker with the current spec.
-
-- **Triage labels** are now asked about only when the `triage` skill is installed, and then as a single recommended-yes question ("keep the default triage labels?") instead of an override interrogation. When `triage` isn't installed, the section — and `docs/agents/triage-labels.md` — are skipped.
-- **External PRs as a request surface** is no longer a setup question. The GitHub/GitLab templates still carry the flag, defaulted off; a user can flip it in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` later.
-- **Domain docs** default to single-context without asking; multi-context is only offered when the repo shows monorepo signals.
-- **Local-markdown tickets** are now one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md` — never a single combined `tickets.md`. `/to-tickets` and the local issue-tracker template now agree, and the spec file is `spec.md` (not `PRD.md`) to match `/to-spec`.
-
-Docs pages for `setup-matt-pocock-skills` and `to-tickets` re-synced.

.changeset/graduate-to-questionnaire.md

@@ -1,9 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": minor
----
-
-Graduate **`to-questionnaire`** out of `in-progress/` into the **Productivity** bucket, so it ships in the plugin. It turns a decision you can't answer alone into a Markdown questionnaire for the one person who can — filled in async, or worked through together in a meeting.
-
-Its defining move is that it grills you about the **send**, not the subject: a normal grilling session interrogates the topic, which is exactly what you can't answer here, so the interview asks only who the questionnaire is going to and what you need back, then aims every question at the gap between the two.
-
-Now wired as a promoted skill — plugin entry, top-level + Productivity READMEs under **User-invoked**, a docs page at `docs/productivity/to-questionnaire.md`, and a Standalone route in `ask-matt` framing it as the inverse of `/grill-me` (mine someone else, not yourself).

.changeset/graduate-wizard.md

@@ -1,13 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": minor
----
-
-Graduate **`wizard`** out of `in-progress/` into the **Engineering** bucket, so it ships in the plugin — and make it model-invoked. It generates an interactive bash script that walks a human through a manual procedure — third-party setup, a one-off migration, an A→B state transition — opening each URL, saying what to click, capturing the values, and writing them into `.env` files and GitHub Actions secrets.
-
-The delightful UX is pre-solved by the bundled `template.sh` (progress with time-remaining, confirmation gates, cross-platform URL opening including WSL, hidden secret entry, idempotent `.env` upserts, `gh secret`/`gh variable` writes with graceful degradation, closing skip summary). Everything above the `STAGES` marker is a fixed library that's never hand-edited — the skill's job is only to scope the procedure and author its **stages**.
-
-Engineering rather than Productivity: it reads `.env*`, `docker-compose*`, framework config and every `secrets.*`/`vars.*` reference in `.github/workflows/` to scope itself, writes CI secrets, and verifies its output with `bash -n` and `shellcheck`.
-
-Because it is model-invoked, the agent can reach for it the moment it hits a step only a human can perform, instead of dumping numbered instructions into the chat and hoping you follow them. Typing `/wizard` works exactly as before — model-invocation only ever *adds* the agent's reach. The description is written as the pointer that decides when it fires: what it produces, four trigger branches (provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, a one-off migration or cutover), and an explicit non-trigger — don't invoke it for steps the agent can perform itself. Work an agent can do, an agent should do; the wizard is for the clicks, approvals and dashboard trips you would not hand to one. The stage-list confirmation before a line is written now doubles as the proposal when the agent fires it mid-build.
-
-Now wired as a promoted skill — plugin entry, top-level + Engineering READMEs under **Model-invoked**, a docs page at `docs/engineering/wizard.md`, and a Standalone route in `ask-matt` for the steps only a human can take. Model-invocation also puts it out of the reach of [#693](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/693), which drops user-invoked skills from the listing on Claude's desktop and web surfaces.

.changeset/grilling-add-hr-between-questions.md

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+---
+"mattpocock-skills": patch
+---
+
+grilling: update the round template so consecutive questions are separated by a horizontal rule (`---`) instead of running together.

.changeset/grilling-general-use.md

@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": patch
----
-
-Reword **`grilling`** for general use. Its description and body no longer scope the interview to a software plan: "this plan" → "this", "enact the plan" → "act on it", and "exploring the codebase" → "exploring the environment". The technique is unchanged; it now reads as a stress-test of any plan, decision, or idea.

.changeset/grilling-remove-em-dashes.md

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+---
+"mattpocock-skills": patch
+---
+
+grilling: remove em-dashes from `SKILL.md`, replacing them with colons and semicolons so the instructions read as plain text.

.changeset/grilling-round-by-round.md

@@ -1,9 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": patch
----
-
-Rework **`grilling`** from one-question-at-a-time to round-by-round. It now maps the decision tree and asks the whole **frontier** — every question whose prerequisites are already settled — in a single numbered round, then recomputes the frontier from the user's answers and asks the next round. Same 13 questions land in ~3 rounds instead of 13. Facts the environment can answer are dispatched to background sub-agents so research never blocks the round: only questions downstream of a running exploration wait for it. The session ends when the frontier is empty.
-
-Every question in a round is emitted in one fixed shape — `❓ **Q1** - **<title>**`, then the body (prose or multiple choices), then the recommendation on its own `➡️` line. A round reads as a scannable numbered list with each recommendation visually separated from the question, so you can answer by number instead of quoting questions back.
-
-`grill-me`, `grill-with-docs` and `triage` run the frontier a round at a time as well — `triage`'s grill step and `grilling`'s Codex `short_description` now say so instead of describing the old rhythm. The opt-out for one-question-at-a-time (a line in your global `CLAUDE.md`) is unchanged.

.changeset/prototype-shareable-primary-source.md

@@ -1,9 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": minor
----
-
-Reshape the **`prototype`** skill around two ideas: the demo is **a single shareable HTML file**, and the prototype is **a primary source**.
-
-The logic branch now produces one self-contained file (plain HTML/CSS/JS, no build, no server) instead of a terminal app — a non-developer can open it by double-click and drive it in their own domain language: a labelled state panel, always-available free-play buttons, and a set of tabbed **guided walkthroughs**, each a scenario with the ordered buttons to press underneath it. The portable pure-logic module still lifts into the real code; the HTML shell is the throwaway.
-
-Throwaway no longer means deleted. Rather than being removed once it has answered its question, the prototype is captured as runnable evidence on a throwaway branch (`prototype/<name>`) out of main, with a context pointer to it left on the implementation issue — so the main branch keeps only the validated decision while the exploration stays findable. The answer (verdict + question) is still captured durably in an issue/ADR/commit.

.changeset/remove-deprecated-and-personal.md

@@ -1,19 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": patch
----
-
-Remove six skills from the repo. None of them was in the Claude Code plugin, but all six were installable through [skills.sh](https://skills.sh/mattpocock/skills), which serves every skill in the repo — so this is what leaves that listing, and where each one went.
-
-Four retired skills, each already absorbed by a skill that does the job better:
-
-- **`ubiquitous-language`** → **`/domain-modeling`**, which builds and maintains the whole domain model rather than dumping a glossary from one conversation.
-- **`design-an-interface`** → **`/codebase-design`**. Nothing is lost: the "design it twice" technique — parallel sub-agents generating radically different designs, from Ousterhout — ships inside that skill as `DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md`.
-- **`qa`** → **`/triage`** and **`/to-tickets`**.
-- **`request-refactor-plan`** → **`/to-spec`** and **`/improve-codebase-architecture`**.
-
-And two that were only ever mine — tied to my own machine and never meant for anyone else. The `personal/` bucket goes with them:
-
-- **`edit-article`**
-- **`obsidian-vault`**, which hardcoded a path to my own Obsidian vault.
-
-`skills/deprecated/` stays as a bucket, now empty. `skills/in-progress/` is unchanged and is now described for what it actually is: a beta channel, published on purpose, installable one skill at a time through skills.sh.

.changeset/remove-em-dashes-repo-wide.md

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+---
+"mattpocock-skills": patch
+---
+
+Remove every em-dash from the repo's prose (docs, `SKILL.md` files, ADRs, `README.md`, scripts, JSON/YAML metadata), hand-rewriting each sentence with a comma, colon, period, parentheses, or conjunction rather than mechanically substituting the character. `CLAUDE.md`/`AGENTS.md` now says not to reintroduce them.

.changeset/ship-as-claude-plugin.md

@@ -1,19 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": minor
----
-
-Ship the skill set as a native **Claude Code plugin**, listed in Claude Code's official marketplace. You can now subscribe to the promoted skills as a managed, read-only bundle instead of copying editable files:
-
-```bash
-claude plugins install mattpocock-skills
-```
-
-Or, from inside a session:
-
-```
-/plugin install mattpocock-skills
-```
-
-There is no marketplace to add first — the official marketplace is configured by default.
-
-`.claude-plugin/plugin.json` carries the full plugin metadata (version, description, author, license, keywords) and the explicit list of promoted skills. `skills.sh` remains the universal installer (and the path for Codex and other harnesses today); a native Codex plugin is deferred — see `.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md` for why.

.changeset/skill-tool-invocation-terminology.md

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+---
+"mattpocock-skills": patch
+---
+
+Standardize cross-skill invocation on an explicit "call the Skill tool" instruction instead of bare `/skill`-style prose, across `code-review`, `diagnosing-bugs`, `grill-with-docs`, `grill-me`, `improve-codebase-architecture`, `tdd`, `to-spec`, `to-tickets`, `triage`, and `wayfinder`.
+
+- A skill that names another skill in prose ("run the `/grilling` skill") does not reliably cause it to load. This is the documented rough edge behind `grill-with-docs`'s most-reported problem. Naming the tool directly (`Call the Skill tool with "grilling"`) is intended to raise the hit rate. Dropping the leading `/` also makes the instruction harness-neutral rather than less: it no longer assumes Claude Code's trigger syntax.
+- A step needing more than one skill now says so as multiple calls ("Call the Skill tool twice, for `grilling` and `domain-modeling`"), not one call carrying two names.
+- Documents the convention in `.agents/invocation.md` for future skills to follow.

.changeset/spec-not-prd.md

@@ -1,12 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": patch
----
-
-Finish the `to-prd` → `to-spec` rename: "spec" is now the only term in the shipped text.
-
-- **`to-spec`** no longer opens with "you may know this document as a PRD" — the parenthetical is dropped from the skill and its docs page. The local-markdown tracker template drops the same hedge.
-- **`code-review`** talks about the originating issue/spec rather than issue/PRD, in its frontmatter description, its two-axis summary, and the spec-source search order. Both READMEs re-synced.
-- **The GitHub and GitLab tracker templates** now say "Issues and specs for this repo live as GitHub/GitLab issues" — they had been left on "PRDs" when the local template was updated, so the stale term propagated into every repo they were written into.
-- **`docs/engineering/research.md`** pointed at `https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd`, a dead slug for the renamed skill; it now links `to-spec` like the other nineteen docs pages do.
-
-The CHANGELOG and existing changesets still name PRDs where they document the rename itself, which is correct.

.changeset/user-invoked-skill-invocation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+---
+"mattpocock-skills": patch
+---
+
+Stop skills from trying to reach user-invoked skills through the Skill tool: fix cross-skill references that violated the "no other skill can call it" invariant in `.agents/invocation.md`, in `to-spec`, `wayfinder`, `to-tickets`, `triage`, `code-review`, and `diagnosing-bugs`.
+
+- `to-spec`, `wayfinder`, `to-tickets`, `triage`, and `code-review` each carried a precondition ("...run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not") that PR #878 rewrote into a literal `Call the Skill tool with "setup-matt-pocock-skills"` instruction. `setup-matt-pocock-skills` is user-invoked, so none of these skills (user-invoked or model-invoked) can call it. Reworded all five as instructions for the agent to tell the human to run it instead.
+- `diagnosing-bugs`'s Phase 6 post-mortem hand off to `improve-codebase-architecture` (also user-invoked) the same way, from an autonomous, often-unattended bug-fixing flow with no human in the loop to catch the failed call. Removed the hand-off outright rather than softening it, since it rarely fired in practice. Phase 6 is now "Cleanup" only; the mechanical checklist is untouched.
+- Added a carve-out paragraph to `.agents/invocation.md`'s "Dependencies between them" section: the `Call the Skill tool with "name"` convention only applies when the named skill is model-invoked. This is the section PR #878 introduced without reconciling it against the user-invoked/model-invoked invariant stated eight lines above it; the gap is most of why this bug reached six call sites instead of one.
+
+Fixes #453.

.changeset/wait-what-context-map.md

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+---
+"mattpocock-skills": patch
+---
+
+wait-what: follow `CONTEXT-MAP.md` to the right `CONTEXT.md` when a repo indexes multiple contexts that way instead of keeping a single root `CONTEXT.md`.

.changeset/wait-what.md

@@ -1,9 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": minor
----
-
-Add **`wait-what`** — a one-word corrective for model verbosity. Type it the moment a message doesn't land, and the agent re-pitches it: a little context, ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English, and the ubiquitous language from your `CONTEXT.md`. User-invoked, three lines long.
-
-The mechanism is the name. Concision skills fail by growing — a 400-line skill still leaves the model verbose — so this one is a single precise leading word and nothing else. Names that describe the *output* (`/tldr`, `/no-fluff`) make the model clip words and lose you further; naming the *listener's* state asks for both halves at once, fewer words **and** the context you were missing. It also reuses the leading words already in your global `CLAUDE.md`, so the skill, `CLAUDE.md` and every `CONTEXT.md` reach for the same tokens.
-
-It repairs one message; it doesn't prevent the next one. The cure for jargon is a shared language built upfront with `/grill-with-docs`; this is what you reach for when you don't have one yet.

.changeset/wayfinder-decision-and-research-tickets.md

@@ -1,9 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": minor
----
-
-Name the `/wayfinder` unit a **decision ticket**, and burn research tickets down with subagents.
-
-People kept reading a wayfinder ticket as an ordinary *implementation* ticket — a slice of a build to execute — when wayfinder uses them as **decision tickets**: questions whose resolution is a decision. The skill description and its opening line now introduce the term (and say what makes it one), with the `ask-matt` / engineering README blurbs and the docs page matching — while "ticket" stays the everyday word once the term is established. `CONTEXT.md` records **Decision ticket** as a domain term, so the "avoid: ticket" guidance no longer contradicts wayfinder's deliberate use of the word.
-
-Research tickets are no longer parked for a separately-launched session. Research stays a real ticket type — it's a genuine shared blocker that downstream decisions hang on, and that dependency is exactly what the frontier's blocking edges exist to render. What changes is how it's resolved: because research is AFK, charting doesn't stop and read it. After creating the tickets, the charting session fires a `/research` subagent for each research ticket to burn it down in parallel, capturing the findings on a throwaway `research/<name>` branch with a context pointer. Research tickets are the one exception to *one ticket per session*.

.changeset/writing-for-agents.md

@@ -1,9 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": minor
----
-
-**Breaking:** rename **`writing-great-skills`** → **`writing-for-agents`**, restructure it, and add a new leading word.
-
-The reference now covers any document an agent consumes — skills, `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md`, docs reached by a pointer — not just skills. `GLOSSARY.md` is merged into `SKILL.md` (one authoritative treatment per term; the `_Avoid_` synonym lists and the standalone Predictability definition are gone); the skill-only mechanics (frontmatter, model- vs user-invoked, router skills, the invocation cut of splitting) are disclosed to a new `SKILL-MECHANICS.md`. The skill is now **model-invoked**: it fires when creating or editing skills or modifying `AGENTS.md`/`CLAUDE.md`. `ask-matt`'s pointer updated. Reinstall under the new name; the old name is gone (no alias).
-
-The pruning section gains **cache**. Single source of truth now reaches past the document into the environment — `package.json` scripts, config files, directory layout, `--help` output are themselves authoritative, so a doc that restates them is a cache of a lookup, earning its load only when the lookup is expensive. The positive target: cache what the agent cannot find by looking (unwritten conventions, the reason behind a choice, gotchas no config confesses), and leave one-file, one-command lookups to the environment, where they cannot go stale.

.changeset/yagni-scope-improve-architecture.md

@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@
----
-"mattpocock-skills": minor
----
-
-Add a YAGNI scoping filter to the **`improve-codebase-architecture`** skill's Explore step. Instead of scanning the whole repo evenly, it now scopes to where change is actually landing: if you name a direction it takes it, otherwise it reads the last ~20 commit messages to bias exploration toward actively-developed paths. A deepening opportunity in code nobody touches is a refactor you'll never cash in — the leverage only pays off where you keep editing — so the report stops tidying dormant corners of the repo.

.claude-plugin/marketplace.json

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
     {
       "name": "mattpocock-skills",
       "source": "./",
-      "description": "Matt Pocock's agent skills for real engineering — grilling, spec/ticket flows, TDD, code review, domain modelling and more.",
+      "description": "Matt Pocock's agent skills for real engineering (grilling, spec/ticket flows, TDD, code review, domain modelling and more).",
       "category": "engineering",
       "keywords": [
         "engineering",

.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 {
   "name": "mattpocock-skills",
-  "version": "1.2.0",
-  "description": "Matt Pocock's agent skills for real engineering — grilling, spec/ticket flows, TDD, code review, domain modelling and more. Plug-and-play, not vibe coding.",
+  "version": "1.2.3",
+  "description": "Matt Pocock's agent skills for real engineering: grilling, spec/ticket flows, TDD, code review, domain modelling and more. Plug-and-play, not vibe coding.",
   "author": {
     "name": "Matt Pocock",
     "url": "https://www.aihero.dev"

.github/workflows/release.yml

@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ jobs:
       - name: Create Version Pull Request
         uses: changesets/action@v1
         with:
-          version: npx changeset version
+          version: npm run version
           publish: npx changeset tag
           commit: "chore: version skills"
           title: "chore: version skills"

.gitignore

@@ -1 +1,2 @@
 node_modules
+.claude

.out-of-scope/mainstream-issue-trackers-only.md

@@ -4,11 +4,11 @@
 
 ## Why this is out of scope
 
-Every issue-tracker backend hard-codes a CLI shape into the skills (commands, flags, output parsing). Each new backend is permanent maintenance surface — it has to keep working as the tool's CLI evolves, and it has to keep being tested against `/to-spec`, `/to-tickets`, `/triage`, and friends. That cost is only worth paying for trackers a meaningful fraction of users actually have.
+Every issue-tracker backend hard-codes a CLI shape into the skills (commands, flags, output parsing). Each new backend is permanent maintenance surface, because it has to keep working as the tool's CLI evolves, and it has to keep being tested against `/to-spec`, `/to-tickets`, `/triage`, and friends. That cost is only worth paying for trackers a meaningful fraction of users actually have.
 
 "Mainstream" is a judgment call, not a numeric bar:
 
-- GitHub, GitLab, and Backlog.md are the kind of tools we'd consider mainstream — broadly known, widely used, well past the experimental phase.
+- GitHub, GitLab, and Backlog.md are the kind of tools we'd consider mainstream: broadly known, widely used, well past the experimental phase.
 - A brand-new agent-focused tool with a few hundred GitHub stars is not, no matter how interesting the design.
 
 Stars, age, and download counts are useful signals when making the call but none of them is the rule. The rule is: would a typical engineer recognise this tool and have plausibly chosen it for their team?
@@ -22,4 +22,4 @@ Neither requires the core skills to know about the specific tool.
 
 ## Prior requests
 
-- #99 — "Add dex as an issue tracker backend" (dex was ~3 months old and ~300 stars at the time of the request)
+- #99: "Add dex as an issue tracker backend" (dex was ~3 months old and ~300 stars at the time of the request)

.out-of-scope/question-limits.md

@@ -4,15 +4,15 @@ The `/grill-me` skill (and grilling sessions inside other skills) does not enfor
 
 ## Why this is out of scope
 
-Grilling is intentionally open-ended. The point is to keep digging until each branch of the decision tree is resolved — some plans need three questions, some need fifty. A fixed cap would either cut off useful exploration on hard problems or feel arbitrary on easy ones.
+Grilling is intentionally open-ended. The point is to keep digging until each branch of the decision tree is resolved: some plans need three questions, some need fifty. A fixed cap would either cut off useful exploration on hard problems or feel arbitrary on easy ones.
 
 If a session feels too long, the right escape hatches already exist:
 
 - The user can stop the session at any time and accept the current state of the plan.
-- The user can tell the model to wrap up, summarise, and move on — natural-language steering is the intended control surface, not a numeric limit.
+- The user can tell the model to wrap up, summarise, and move on, since natural-language steering is the intended control surface, not a numeric limit.
 
 Adding a hard cap would also conflate two different failure modes: a model that asks too many questions because the plan is genuinely under-specified (working as intended) vs. a model that asks redundant or low-value questions (a prompt-quality issue, not a quantity issue). The fix for the latter belongs in the skill prompt, not in a counter.
 
 ## Prior requests
 
-- #44 — "Codex just asked me 200 questions"
+- #44: "Codex just asked me 200 questions"

.out-of-scope/setup-skill-verify-mode.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ This project will not add a dedicated verify/check mode (or a separate verify sk
 
 ## Why this is out of scope
 
-A second skill — or a `--verify` flag — for checking whether `docs/agents/*.md` artifacts still match the seed-template schema would duplicate work the existing setup skill already handles in conversation.
+A second skill (or a `--verify` flag) for checking whether `docs/agents/*.md` artifacts still match the seed-template schema would duplicate work the existing setup skill already handles in conversation.
 
 The intended workflow is: **run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` and tell it to verify your current setup.** The skill is prompt-driven, so the maintainer can scope it to a verification pass ("don't rewrite anything, just check my existing files against the current seed templates and report drift") without needing a separate code path. Adding a flag or a sibling skill would split the surface area of a feature that's already expressible through the natural-language entry point.
 
@@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ Keeping configuration management to a single skill also avoids the maintenance c
 
 ## Prior requests
 
-- #106 — Feature request: verify/check mode for setup-matt-pocock-skills
+- #106: Feature request: verify/check mode for setup-matt-pocock-skills

CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,5 +1,159 @@
 # mattpocock-skills
 
+## 1.2.3
+
+### Patch Changes
+
+- [#779](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/779) [`efce423`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/efce423018fc6468a3239621f1c1bcaacc723801) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Make `diagnosing-bugs` redact secrets.
+
+  - Add a **Redact** section to `SKILL.md`. The skill has the agent show commands, outputs and captured artifacts; the section makes redaction the first move on each — write `<REDACTED>`, build loops against env vars so the credential stays in the environment, and quote only the signal-carrying lines of a captured artifact.
+  - The Phase 1 completion criterion said "paste the invocation and its output". It now says show it redacted, and Phase 1 asks the user for a **redacted** captured artifact.
+  - Note in `scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh` that `capture` prints its value back to the terminal, so it takes observations while signing in stays a `step`.
+
+- [#781](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/781) [`14bfbbd`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/14bfbbd8654a8d2910299e1a004c19c1979687d8) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Drop Claude Code's tool and agent-type names from the subagent-dispatch instructions in `code-review`, `codebase-design`, and `improve-codebase-architecture`, so the step is followable on Codex and other harnesses.
+
+- [#783](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/783) [`c0fd1e9`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/c0fd1e973e040347d424e09934099f1bd6c2dee0) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - wizard: remove the time estimate. The template drops `TOTAL_MINUTES` and the time-remaining display, `stage` takes a name only, and progress is counted in stages.
+
+## 1.2.2
+
+### Patch Changes
+
+- [#766](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/766) [`4aaccb5`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/4aaccb58d40559d7e3c59a029b2290ae5ba538de) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Make `writing-for-agents` model-invokable in Codex again.
+
+  - Drop `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` from `agents/openai.yaml`. Codex filtered the skill out of the model-visible skills list, so its description could not trigger it — only an explicit `$writing-for-agents` mention worked.
+  - Update the stale `interface.display_name` and `interface.short_description`, which still named the old `writing-great-skills` skill.
+  - Move the skill from the **User-invoked** list to the **Model-invoked** list in `README.md` and `skills/productivity/README.md`.
+
+## 1.2.0
+
+### Minor Changes
+
+- [#551](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/551) [`697d4ce`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/697d4ce9742da558fd1ba6697c8e9775e2e302dd) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Add Codex metadata alongside each skill's Claude Code frontmatter so the set works in both harnesses without generated copies.
+
+  - Add an `agents/openai.yaml` beside every `SKILL.md` with Codex UI metadata (`interface.display_name`, `interface.short_description`).
+  - Mark every user-invoked skill with `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false`, the Codex analog of `disable-model-invocation: true`, so Codex excludes it from implicit invocation while explicit `$skill` invocation still works.
+  - Document the dual-harness invocation model in `.agents/invocation.md`, `CLAUDE.md`, and the promoted-bucket READMEs.
+  - Add `AGENTS.md` as a symlink to `CLAUDE.md` so Codex reads the same repo instructions.
+
+- [#593](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/593) [`0f2bdbd`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/0f2bdbdb06220d2df3718b8f0483157c6c8a8600) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Graduate **`to-questionnaire`** out of `in-progress/` into the **Productivity** bucket, so it ships in the plugin. It turns a decision you can't answer alone into a Markdown questionnaire for the one person who can — filled in async, or worked through together in a meeting.
+
+  Its defining move is that it grills you about the **send**, not the subject: a normal grilling session interrogates the topic, which is exactly what you can't answer here, so the interview asks only who the questionnaire is going to and what you need back, then aims every question at the gap between the two.
+
+  Now wired as a promoted skill — plugin entry, top-level + Productivity READMEs under **User-invoked**, a docs page at `docs/productivity/to-questionnaire.md`, and a Standalone route in `ask-matt` framing it as the inverse of `/grill-me` (mine someone else, not yourself).
+
+- [#680](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/680) [`b3376f8`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/b3376f8d39848dd08572ec2667da4739a67c8c04) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Graduate **`wizard`** out of `in-progress/` into the **Engineering** bucket, so it ships in the plugin — and make it model-invoked. It generates an interactive bash script that walks a human through a manual procedure — third-party setup, a one-off migration, an A→B state transition — opening each URL, saying what to click, capturing the values, and writing them into `.env` files and GitHub Actions secrets.
+
+  The delightful UX is pre-solved by the bundled `template.sh` (progress with time-remaining, confirmation gates, cross-platform URL opening including WSL, hidden secret entry, idempotent `.env` upserts, `gh secret`/`gh variable` writes with graceful degradation, closing skip summary). Everything above the `STAGES` marker is a fixed library that's never hand-edited — the skill's job is only to scope the procedure and author its **stages**.
+
+  Engineering rather than Productivity: it reads `.env*`, `docker-compose*`, framework config and every `secrets.*`/`vars.*` reference in `.github/workflows/` to scope itself, writes CI secrets, and verifies its output with `bash -n` and `shellcheck`.
+
+  Because it is model-invoked, the agent can reach for it the moment it hits a step only a human can perform, instead of dumping numbered instructions into the chat and hoping you follow them. Typing `/wizard` works exactly as before — model-invocation only ever _adds_ the agent's reach. The description is written as the pointer that decides when it fires: what it produces, four trigger branches (provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, a one-off migration or cutover), and an explicit non-trigger — don't invoke it for steps the agent can perform itself. Work an agent can do, an agent should do; the wizard is for the clicks, approvals and dashboard trips you would not hand to one. The stage-list confirmation before a line is written now doubles as the proposal when the agent fires it mid-build.
+
+  Now wired as a promoted skill — plugin entry, top-level + Engineering READMEs under **Model-invoked**, a docs page at `docs/engineering/wizard.md`, and a Standalone route in `ask-matt` for the steps only a human can take. Model-invocation also puts it out of the reach of [#693](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/693), which drops user-invoked skills from the listing on Claude's desktop and web surfaces.
+
+- [#763](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/763) [`77d207e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/77d207ef03219cc603e2832e1159cbdd1c91818e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Reshape the **`prototype`** skill around two ideas: the demo is **a single shareable HTML file**, and the prototype is **a primary source**.
+
+  The logic branch now produces one self-contained file (plain HTML/CSS/JS, no build, no server) instead of a terminal app — a non-developer can open it by double-click and drive it in their own domain language: a labelled state panel, always-available free-play buttons, and a set of tabbed **guided walkthroughs**, each a scenario with the ordered buttons to press underneath it. The portable pure-logic module still lifts into the real code; the HTML shell is the throwaway.
+
+  Throwaway no longer means deleted. Rather than being removed once it has answered its question, the prototype is captured as runnable evidence on a throwaway branch (`prototype/<name>`) out of main, with a context pointer to it left on the implementation issue — so the main branch keeps only the validated decision while the exploration stays findable. The answer (verdict + question) is still captured durably in an issue/ADR/commit.
+
+- [#536](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/536) [`42a5b70`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/42a5b70fcacc7baff1977b13f3919fb2f63af14e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Ship the skill set as a native **Claude Code plugin**, listed in Claude Code's official marketplace. You can now subscribe to the promoted skills as a managed, read-only bundle instead of copying editable files:
+
+  ```bash
+  claude plugins install mattpocock-skills
+  ```
+
+  Or, from inside a session:
+
+  ```
+  /plugin install mattpocock-skills
+  ```
+
+  There is no marketplace to add first — the official marketplace is configured by default.
+
+  `.claude-plugin/plugin.json` carries the full plugin metadata (version, description, author, license, keywords) and the explicit list of promoted skills. `skills.sh` remains the universal installer (and the path for Codex and other harnesses today); a native Codex plugin is deferred — see `.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md` for why.
+
+- [#751](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/751) [`355fa74`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/355fa7420b418af838998f7ec4365ceda1c8dfcc) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Add **`wait-what`** — a one-word corrective for model verbosity. Type it the moment a message doesn't land, and the agent re-pitches it: a little context, ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English, and the ubiquitous language from your `CONTEXT.md`. User-invoked, three lines long.
+
+  The mechanism is the name. Concision skills fail by growing — a 400-line skill still leaves the model verbose — so this one is a single precise leading word and nothing else. Names that describe the _output_ (`/tldr`, `/no-fluff`) make the model clip words and lose you further; naming the _listener's_ state asks for both halves at once, fewer words **and** the context you were missing. It also reuses the leading words already in your global `CLAUDE.md`, so the skill, `CLAUDE.md` and every `CONTEXT.md` reach for the same tokens.
+
+  It repairs one message; it doesn't prevent the next one. The cure for jargon is a shared language built upfront with `/grill-with-docs`; this is what you reach for when you don't have one yet.
+
+- [#763](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/763) [`77d207e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/77d207ef03219cc603e2832e1159cbdd1c91818e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Name the `/wayfinder` unit a **decision ticket**, and burn research tickets down with subagents.
+
+  People kept reading a wayfinder ticket as an ordinary _implementation_ ticket — a slice of a build to execute — when wayfinder uses them as **decision tickets**: questions whose resolution is a decision. The skill description and its opening line now introduce the term (and say what makes it one), with the `ask-matt` / engineering README blurbs and the docs page matching — while "ticket" stays the everyday word once the term is established. `CONTEXT.md` records **Decision ticket** as a domain term, so the "avoid: ticket" guidance no longer contradicts wayfinder's deliberate use of the word.
+
+  Research tickets are no longer parked for a separately-launched session. Research stays a real ticket type — it's a genuine shared blocker that downstream decisions hang on, and that dependency is exactly what the frontier's blocking edges exist to render. What changes is how it's resolved: because research is AFK, charting doesn't stop and read it. After creating the tickets, the charting session fires a `/research` subagent for each research ticket to burn it down in parallel, capturing the findings on a throwaway `research/<name>` branch with a context pointer. Research tickets are the one exception to _one ticket per session_.
+
+- [#763](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/763) [`77d207e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/77d207ef03219cc603e2832e1159cbdd1c91818e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - **Breaking:** rename **`writing-great-skills`** → **`writing-for-agents`**, restructure it, and add a new leading word.
+
+  The reference now covers any document an agent consumes — skills, `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md`, docs reached by a pointer — not just skills. `GLOSSARY.md` is merged into `SKILL.md` (one authoritative treatment per term; the `_Avoid_` synonym lists and the standalone Predictability definition are gone); the skill-only mechanics (frontmatter, model- vs user-invoked, router skills, the invocation cut of splitting) are disclosed to a new `SKILL-MECHANICS.md`. The skill is now **model-invoked**: it fires when creating or editing skills or modifying `AGENTS.md`/`CLAUDE.md`. `ask-matt`'s pointer updated. Reinstall under the new name; the old name is gone (no alias).
+
+  The pruning section gains **cache**. Single source of truth now reaches past the document into the environment — `package.json` scripts, config files, directory layout, `--help` output are themselves authoritative, so a doc that restates them is a cache of a lookup, earning its load only when the lookup is expensive. The positive target: cache what the agent cannot find by looking (unwritten conventions, the reason behind a choice, gotchas no config confesses), and leave one-file, one-command lookups to the environment, where they cannot go stale.
+
+- [#533](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/533) [`45afd80`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/45afd8074a8b7de5fe073845d080fa9dd6c429fa) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Add a YAGNI scoping filter to the **`improve-codebase-architecture`** skill's Explore step. Instead of scanning the whole repo evenly, it now scopes to where change is actually landing: if you name a direction it takes it, otherwise it reads the last ~20 commit messages to bias exploration toward actively-developed paths. A deepening opportunity in code nobody touches is a refactor you'll never cash in — the leverage only pays off where you keep editing — so the report stops tidying dormant corners of the repo.
+
+### Patch Changes
+
+- [#763](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/763) [`77d207e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/77d207ef03219cc603e2832e1159cbdd1c91818e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Sharpen `/ask-matt` — the router now covers phase boundaries, the two wayfinder mistakes, and two skills it never mentioned.
+
+  **Phase boundaries.** A **phase** is a chunk of work inside a session — the grilling, the implementation, the QA — and the boundary between two of them is where you decide what to do with the context you've built. The two-bullet `Crossing sessions` section is replaced by a decision tree carrying all five options in order (**continue**, `/clear`, `/handoff`, **subagent**, `/compact`), with the reasoning disclosed in a new `PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md`. Three fixes come with it:
+
+  - **`/handoff` was oversold.** It read as the general bridge between context windows. It's narrow: you need it only when something has to _travel_ — a new harness, a new directory, a colleague, or a side task forked mid-phase. What it buys is portability.
+  - **`/compact` is the default, not the first reach.** It sits at the bottom of the tree, after the four cheaper or more precise questions above it. Starting there produces a session that's confidently wrong about whatever the summary flattened.
+  - **Two branches were missing entirely.** **Continue** is the one to rule out first — it's the only move that keeps the conversation as a primary source rather than a summary of one — and a **subagent** handles anything scoped tightly enough to run AFK.
+
+  Context hygiene's escape hatch now says `/compact` rather than `/handoff` (same harness, same directory, at a boundary — the handoff clause doesn't apply), and the smart zone figure is updated from ~120k to ~150k tokens.
+
+  **Wayfinder routing.** The two mistakes people most often make with the heaviest, most cognitively demanding flow:
+
+  - **Over-reaching for it.** It's slower and denser than a single grill, so it's flagged as the heaviest flow and reserved for the idea that genuinely won't fit one session — a well-scoped feature belongs on `/grill-with-docs`, not here.
+  - **Losing the way at the handoff.** When the map clears, wayfinder hands off, it doesn't build: merge onto the main flow at `/to-spec` (which collapses the map's linked decisions into a buildable plan) rather than looping the map straight into `/implement`. Straight-to-`/implement` is only for efforts that turned out genuinely small.
+
+  **Missing routes.** `/grilling` and `/resolving-merge-conflicts` were absent from the router altogether and are now in it, and `grill-me` splits from `grill-with-docs` on whether you are in a working directory.
+
+- [#502](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/502) [`44eed54`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/44eed545186ffd0263e8004867750b80cfddd215) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Make `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` friendlier and align the local-markdown tracker with the current spec.
+
+  - **Triage labels** are now asked about only when the `triage` skill is installed, and then as a single recommended-yes question ("keep the default triage labels?") instead of an override interrogation. When `triage` isn't installed, the section — and `docs/agents/triage-labels.md` — are skipped.
+  - **External PRs as a request surface** is no longer a setup question. The GitHub/GitLab templates still carry the flag, defaulted off; a user can flip it in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` later.
+  - **Domain docs** default to single-context without asking; multi-context is only offered when the repo shows monorepo signals.
+  - **Local-markdown tickets** are now one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md` — never a single combined `tickets.md`. `/to-tickets` and the local issue-tracker template now agree, and the spec file is `spec.md` (not `PRD.md`) to match `/to-spec`.
+
+  Docs pages for `setup-matt-pocock-skills` and `to-tickets` re-synced.
+
+- [#532](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/532) [`170ad48`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/170ad48655825783d0193e850e31a9aac957bb95) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Reword **`grilling`** for general use. Its description and body no longer scope the interview to a software plan: "this plan" → "this", "enact the plan" → "act on it", and "exploring the codebase" → "exploring the environment". The technique is unchanged; it now reads as a stress-test of any plan, decision, or idea.
+
+- [#593](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/593) [`a4b2009`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/a4b2009a1a3ac9575506c10b4c84f08f9bba7a38) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Rework **`grilling`** from one-question-at-a-time to round-by-round. It now maps the decision tree and asks the whole **frontier** — every question whose prerequisites are already settled — in a single numbered round, then recomputes the frontier from the user's answers and asks the next round. Same 13 questions land in ~3 rounds instead of 13. Facts the environment can answer are dispatched to background sub-agents so research never blocks the round: only questions downstream of a running exploration wait for it. The session ends when the frontier is empty.
+
+  Every question in a round is emitted in one fixed shape — `❓ **Q1** - **<title>**`, then the body (prose or multiple choices), then the recommendation on its own `➡️` line. A round reads as a scannable numbered list with each recommendation visually separated from the question, so you can answer by number instead of quoting questions back.
+
+  `grill-me`, `grill-with-docs` and `triage` run the frontier a round at a time as well — `triage`'s grill step and `grilling`'s Codex `short_description` now say so instead of describing the old rhythm. The opt-out for one-question-at-a-time (a line in your global `CLAUDE.md`) is unchanged.
+
+- [#752](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/752) [`c66bdee`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/c66bdeeee002d81e3f8b21403c07f9a0d7bea6da) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Remove six skills from the repo. None of them was in the Claude Code plugin, but all six were installable through [skills.sh](https://skills.sh/mattpocock/skills), which serves every skill in the repo — so this is what leaves that listing, and where each one went.
+
+  Four retired skills, each already absorbed by a skill that does the job better:
+
+  - **`ubiquitous-language`** → **`/domain-modeling`**, which builds and maintains the whole domain model rather than dumping a glossary from one conversation.
+  - **`design-an-interface`** → **`/codebase-design`**. Nothing is lost: the "design it twice" technique — parallel sub-agents generating radically different designs, from Ousterhout — ships inside that skill as `DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md`.
+  - **`qa`** → **`/triage`** and **`/to-tickets`**.
+  - **`request-refactor-plan`** → **`/to-spec`** and **`/improve-codebase-architecture`**.
+
+  And two that were only ever mine — tied to my own machine and never meant for anyone else. The `personal/` bucket goes with them:
+
+  - **`edit-article`**
+  - **`obsidian-vault`**, which hardcoded a path to my own Obsidian vault.
+
+  `skills/deprecated/` stays as a bucket, now empty. `skills/in-progress/` is unchanged and is now described for what it actually is: a beta channel, published on purpose, installable one skill at a time through skills.sh.
+
+- [#734](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/734) [`a2f9333`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/a2f9333669ff53db762c87ecda5a15442060a3be) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Finish the `to-prd` → `to-spec` rename: "spec" is now the only term in the shipped text.
+
+  - **`to-spec`** no longer opens with "you may know this document as a PRD" — the parenthetical is dropped from the skill and its docs page. The local-markdown tracker template drops the same hedge.
+  - **`code-review`** talks about the originating issue/spec rather than issue/PRD, in its frontmatter description, its two-axis summary, and the spec-source search order. Both READMEs re-synced.
+  - **The GitHub and GitLab tracker templates** now say "Issues and specs for this repo live as GitHub/GitLab issues" — they had been left on "PRDs" when the local template was updated, so the stale term propagated into every repo they were written into.
+  - **`docs/engineering/research.md`** pointed at `https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd`, a dead slug for the renamed skill; it now links `to-spec` like the other nineteen docs pages do.
+
+  The CHANGELOG and existing changesets still name PRDs where they document the rename itself, which is correct.
+
 ## 1.1.0
 
 ### Minor Changes

CLAUDE.md

@@ -1,23 +1,25 @@
 Skills are organized into bucket folders under `skills/`:
 
-- `engineering/` — daily code work
-- `productivity/` — daily non-code workflow tools
-- `misc/` — kept around but rarely used, not promoted
-- `in-progress/` — beta: public on purpose, feedback wanted, not shipped in the plugin
-- `deprecated/` — no longer used
+- `engineering/`: daily code work
+- `productivity/`: daily non-code workflow tools
+- `misc/`: kept around but rarely used, not promoted
+- `in-progress/`: beta: public on purpose, feedback wanted, not shipped in the plugin
+- `deprecated/`: no longer used
 
 Every skill in `engineering/` or `productivity/` (the **promoted** buckets) must have a reference in the top-level `README.md` and an entry in `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`'s `skills` array (the Claude Code plugin ships exactly the promoted set). Skills in `misc/`, `in-progress/`, and `deprecated/` must not appear in either.
 
-Install commands are copied verbatim from [.agents/install-block.md](./.agents/install-block.md). `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` makes the repo its own single-plugin marketplace — a fallback the install block explains, not the documented route. When bumping the release version, keep `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`'s `version` in sync with `package.json`'s — Claude uses the plugin `version` to decide when installed users see an update. Run `claude plugin validate . --strict` after touching either manifest. Why a Claude plugin but not (yet) a Codex one lives in [.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md](./.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md).
+Install commands are copied verbatim from [.agents/install-block.md](./.agents/install-block.md). `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` makes the repo its own single-plugin marketplace (a fallback the install block explains, not the documented route). Run `claude plugin validate . --strict` after touching either manifest. Why a Claude plugin but not (yet) a Codex one lives in [.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md](./.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md).
 
 Each skill entry in the top-level `README.md` must link the skill name to its `SKILL.md`.
 
 Each bucket folder has a `README.md` that lists every skill in the bucket with a one-line description, with the skill name linked to its `SKILL.md`. The promoted buckets' `README.md`s and the top-level `README.md` group entries into **User-invoked** and **Model-invoked**; non-promoted bucket `README.md`s (`misc/`, `in-progress/`) use a flat list.
 
-Skills in `engineering/` and `productivity/` also have a human-facing docs page at `docs/<bucket>/<skill-name>.md` (the docs tree mirrors those two bucket folders under `skills/`). The published URL is `https://aihero.dev/skills-<skill-name>` regardless of bucket — the docs path is repo organisation only. When you add, rename, or change the behaviour of a skill in `engineering/` or `productivity/`, create or re-sync its docs page following [.agents/writing-docs.md](./.agents/writing-docs.md). A finished page carries four sections — **What it does**, **When to reach for it**, **Common questions**, **It's working if** — and `writing-docs.md` holds the template, the section order, and where to hunt for the questions. Skills in the non-promoted buckets (`misc/`, `in-progress/`, `deprecated/`) get **no** docs page.
+Skills in `engineering/` and `productivity/` also have a human-facing docs page at `docs/<bucket>/<skill-name>.md` (the docs tree mirrors those two bucket folders under `skills/`). The published URL is `https://aihero.dev/skills-<skill-name>` regardless of bucket: the docs path is repo organisation only. When you add, rename, or change the behaviour of a skill in `engineering/` or `productivity/`, create or re-sync its docs page following [.agents/writing-docs.md](./.agents/writing-docs.md). A finished page carries four sections: **What it does**, **When to reach for it**, **Common questions**, and **It's working if**. `writing-docs.md` holds the template, the section order, and where to hunt for the questions. Skills in the non-promoted buckets (`misc/`, `in-progress/`, `deprecated/`) get **no** docs page.
 
 Every `SKILL.md` is either user-invoked (`disable-model-invocation: true` plus `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` in `agents/openai.yaml`, reachable only by the human) or model-invoked (model- or user-reachable). See [.agents/invocation.md](./.agents/invocation.md).
 
-[`ask-matt`](./skills/engineering/ask-matt/SKILL.md) is the router that maps every user-reachable skill and how they relate. The same trigger that re-syncs a docs page applies to it: whenever you add, rename, remove, or change how a user-reachable skill fits the flows, re-read `ask-matt`'s `SKILL.md` and update it so the map stays accurate — a new skill it never mentions, or a stale one it still routes to, is a router that lies.
+[`ask-matt`](./skills/engineering/ask-matt/SKILL.md) is the router that maps every user-reachable skill and how they relate. The same trigger that re-syncs a docs page applies to it: whenever you add, rename, remove, or change how a user-reachable skill fits the flows, re-read `ask-matt`'s `SKILL.md` and update it so the map stays accurate: a new skill it never mentions, or a stale one it still routes to, is a router that lies.
 
-To (re)link every skill into the local harness skill directories (`~/.claude/skills`, `~/.agents/skills`), run `scripts/link-skills.sh`. Each entry is a symlink into this repo, so a `git pull` keeps installed skills current; re-run the script after adding, removing, or renaming a skill.
+To (re)link every skill outside `deprecated/` and `misc/` into the local harness skill directories (`~/.claude/skills`, `~/.agents/skills`), run `scripts/link-skills.sh`. Each entry is a symlink into this repo, so a `git pull` keeps installed skills current; re-run the script after adding, removing, or renaming a skill.
+
+No em-dashes anywhere in this repo's prose (`SKILL.md` files, docs, `README.md`, `CHANGELOG.md`, ADRs, changesets, code comments). Where a sentence reaches for one, rewrite it instead with a comma, colon, period, parentheses, or a conjunction, whichever the sentence actually wants; never do a blind character substitution.

CONTEXT.md

@@ -5,15 +5,15 @@ A collection of agent skills (slash commands and behaviors) loaded by Claude Cod
 ## Language
 
 **Issue tracker**:
-The tool that hosts a repo's issues — GitHub Issues, Linear, a local `.scratch/` markdown convention, or similar. Skills like `to-tickets`, `to-spec`, and `triage` read from and write to it.
+The tool that hosts a repo's issues: GitHub Issues, Linear, a local `.scratch/` markdown convention, or similar. Skills like `to-tickets`, `to-spec`, and `triage` read from and write to it.
 _Avoid_: backlog manager, backlog backend, issue host
 
 **Issue**:
-A single tracked unit of work inside an **Issue tracker** — a bug, task, spec, or slice produced by `to-tickets`.
-_Avoid_: ticket (use only when quoting external systems that call them tickets, or for a **Decision ticket** — see below)
+A single tracked unit of work inside an **Issue tracker**: a bug, task, spec, or slice produced by `to-tickets`.
+_Avoid_: ticket (use only when quoting external systems that call them tickets, or for a **Decision ticket**, see below)
 
 **Decision ticket**:
-A `wayfinder` unit — a child **Issue** of a `wayfinder:map` holding a *question* whose resolution is a decision, not a slice of a build to execute. The **decision** qualifier is what keeps it distinct from an implementation ticket; `wayfinder` introduces the term, then uses "ticket".
+A `wayfinder` unit: a child **Issue** of a `wayfinder:map` holding a *question* whose resolution is a decision, not a slice of a build to execute. The **decision** qualifier is what keeps it distinct from an implementation ticket; `wayfinder` introduces the term, then uses "ticket".
 
 **Triage role**:
 A canonical state-machine label applied to an **Issue** during triage (e.g. `needs-triage`, `ready-for-afk`). Each role maps to a real label string in the **Issue tracker** via `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`.
@@ -26,5 +26,5 @@ A canonical state-machine label applied to an **Issue** during triage (e.g. `nee
 
 ## Flagged ambiguities
 
-- "backlog" was previously used to mean both the *tool* hosting issues and the *body of work* inside it — resolved: the tool is the **Issue tracker**; "backlog" is no longer used as a domain term.
-- "backlog backend" / "backlog manager" — resolved: collapsed into **Issue tracker**.
+- "backlog" was previously used to mean both the *tool* hosting issues and the *body of work* inside it. Resolved: the tool is the **Issue tracker**; "backlog" is no longer used as a domain term.
+- "backlog backend" / "backlog manager". Resolved: collapsed into **Issue tracker**.

README.md

@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ If you want to keep up with changes to these skills, and any new ones I create,
 
 ## Installation (30-second setup)
 
-Two ways in, two philosophies. **The [Claude Code plugin](https://code.claude.com/docs/en/plugins)** installs the whole set as a managed, read-only bundle that updates when I ship — you subscribe rather than fork. **[skills.sh](https://skills.sh/mattpocock/skills)** copies editable skill files into your project, so you can hack on them and make them your own. Pick one — installing both leaves you with every skill twice.
+Two ways in, two philosophies. **The [Claude Code plugin](https://code.claude.com/docs/en/plugins)** installs the whole set as a managed, read-only bundle that updates when I ship, so you subscribe rather than fork. **[skills.sh](https://skills.sh/mattpocock/skills)** copies editable skill files into your project, so you can hack on them and make them your own. Pick one: installing both leaves you with every skill twice.
 
 ### 1. Get the skills
 
@@ -52,16 +52,16 @@ It's in Claude Code's official marketplace, so there's nothing to add first, and
 npx skills@latest add mattpocock/skills
 ```
 
-Pick the skills you want, and which coding agents to install them on. **The installer lets you choose which skills to take — make sure `setup-matt-pocock-skills` is one of them.**
+Pick the skills you want, and which coding agents to install them on. **The installer lets you choose which skills to take, so make sure `setup-matt-pocock-skills` is one of them.**
 
-A native Codex plugin is on the roadmap — see [`.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md`](./.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md).
+A native Codex plugin is on the roadmap (see [`.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md`](./.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md)).
 
 </details>
 
 <details>
 <summary><strong>For tinkerers</strong></summary>
 
-Use the same installer, on any agent — including Claude Code:
+Use the same installer, on any agent, including Claude Code:
 
 ```bash
 npx skills@latest add mattpocock/skills
@@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ Software engineering fundamentals matter more than ever. These skills are my bes
 
 ## Reference
 
-These split on one axis — who can invoke them. **User-invoked** skills are reachable only when you type them (e.g. `/grill-me`); their job is to orchestrate. **Model-invoked** skills can be invoked by you _or_ reached for automatically by the agent when the task fits; they hold the reusable discipline. A user-invoked skill may invoke model-invoked skills, but never another user-invoked one.
+These split on one axis: who can invoke them. **User-invoked** skills are reachable only when you type them (e.g. `/grill-me`); their job is to orchestrate. **Model-invoked** skills can be invoked by you _or_ reached for automatically by the agent when the task fits; they hold the reusable discipline. A user-invoked skill may invoke model-invoked skills, but never another user-invoked one.
 
 ### Engineering
 
@@ -191,27 +191,27 @@ Skills I use daily for code work.
 
 **User-invoked**
 
-- **[ask-matt](./skills/engineering/ask-matt/SKILL.md)** — Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the user-invoked skills in this repo.
-- **[grill-with-docs](./skills/engineering/grill-with-docs/SKILL.md)** — Grilling session that also builds your project's domain model, sharpening terminology and updating `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
-- **[triage](./skills/engineering/triage/SKILL.md)** — Move issues through a state machine of triage roles.
-- **[improve-codebase-architecture](./skills/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md)** — Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
-- **[setup-matt-pocock-skills](./skills/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills/SKILL.md)** — Configure this repo for the engineering skills (issue tracker, triage labels, domain doc layout). Run once per repo before using the other engineering skills.
-- **[to-spec](./skills/engineering/to-spec/SKILL.md)** — Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the issue tracker. No interview — just synthesizes what you've already discussed.
-- **[to-tickets](./skills/engineering/to-tickets/SKILL.md)** — Break any plan, spec, or conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges — written as text in a local file, or as native blocking links on a real tracker.
-- **[implement](./skills/engineering/implement/SKILL.md)** — Build the work described by a spec or set of tickets, driving `/tdd` at pre-agreed seams and closing out with `/code-review` before committing.
-- **[wayfinder](./skills/engineering/wayfinder/SKILL.md)** — Plan a huge chunk of work, more than one agent session can hold, as a shared map of decision tickets on the issue tracker — resolve them one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
+- **[ask-matt](./skills/engineering/ask-matt/SKILL.md)**: Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the user-invoked skills in this repo.
+- **[grill-with-docs](./skills/engineering/grill-with-docs/SKILL.md)**: Grilling session that also builds your project's domain model, sharpening terminology and updating `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
+- **[triage](./skills/engineering/triage/SKILL.md)**: Move issues through a state machine of triage roles.
+- **[improve-codebase-architecture](./skills/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md)**: Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
+- **[setup-matt-pocock-skills](./skills/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills/SKILL.md)**: Configure this repo for the engineering skills (issue tracker, triage labels, domain doc layout). Run once per repo before using the other engineering skills.
+- **[to-spec](./skills/engineering/to-spec/SKILL.md)**: Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the issue tracker. No interview, just synthesizes what you've already discussed.
+- **[to-tickets](./skills/engineering/to-tickets/SKILL.md)**: Break any plan, spec, or conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges, written as text in a local file, or as native blocking links on a real tracker.
+- **[implement](./skills/engineering/implement/SKILL.md)**: Build the work described by a spec or set of tickets, driving `/tdd` at pre-agreed seams and closing out with `/code-review` before committing.
+- **[wayfinder](./skills/engineering/wayfinder/SKILL.md)**: Plan a huge chunk of work, more than one agent session can hold, as a shared map of decision tickets on the issue tracker, and resolve them one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
 
 **Model-invoked**
 
-- **[prototype](./skills/engineering/prototype/SKILL.md)** — Build a throwaway prototype to answer a design question — a single shareable HTML file for state/logic questions, or several radically different UI variations toggleable from one route.
-- **[diagnosing-bugs](./skills/engineering/diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md)** — Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions: build a feedback loop that goes red on this bug → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test.
-- **[research](./skills/engineering/research/SKILL.md)** — Investigate a question against high-trust primary sources and capture the findings as a cited Markdown file in the repo, run as a background agent.
-- **[tdd](./skills/engineering/tdd/SKILL.md)** — Test-driven development with a red-green-refactor loop. Builds features or fixes bugs one vertical slice at a time.
-- **[domain-modeling](./skills/engineering/domain-modeling/SKILL.md)** — Actively build and sharpen a project's domain model — challenge terms against the glossary, stress-test with edge-case scenarios, and update `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
-- **[codebase-design](./skills/engineering/codebase-design/SKILL.md)** — Shared discipline and vocabulary for designing deep modules: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface, placed at a clean seam, testable through that interface.
-- **[code-review](./skills/engineering/code-review/SKILL.md)** — Two-axis review of the diff since a fixed point: **Standards** (does it follow the repo's coding standards, plus a Fowler smell baseline?) and **Spec** (does it faithfully implement the originating issue/spec?), run as parallel sub-agents so neither pollutes the other.
-- **[resolving-merge-conflicts](./skills/engineering/resolving-merge-conflicts/SKILL.md)** — Work through an in-progress git merge or rebase conflict hunk by hunk, resolving by intent traced to each side's primary source, then finish the operation — never `--abort`.
-- **[wizard](./skills/engineering/wizard/SKILL.md)** — Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform: provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover.
+- **[prototype](./skills/engineering/prototype/SKILL.md)**: Build a throwaway prototype to answer a design question, either a single shareable HTML file for state/logic questions, or several radically different UI variations toggleable from one route.
+- **[diagnosing-bugs](./skills/engineering/diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md)**: Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions: build a feedback loop that goes red on this bug → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test.
+- **[research](./skills/engineering/research/SKILL.md)**: Investigate a question against high-trust primary sources and capture the findings as a cited Markdown file in the repo, run as a background agent.
+- **[tdd](./skills/engineering/tdd/SKILL.md)**: Test-driven development with a red-green-refactor loop. Builds features or fixes bugs one vertical slice at a time.
+- **[domain-modeling](./skills/engineering/domain-modeling/SKILL.md)**: Actively build and sharpen a project's domain model: challenge terms against the glossary, stress-test with edge-case scenarios, and update `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
+- **[codebase-design](./skills/engineering/codebase-design/SKILL.md)**: Shared discipline and vocabulary for designing deep modules: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface, placed at a clean seam, testable through that interface.
+- **[code-review](./skills/engineering/code-review/SKILL.md)**: Two-axis review of the diff since a fixed point: **Standards** (does it follow the repo's coding standards, plus a Fowler smell baseline?) and **Spec** (does it faithfully implement the originating issue/spec?), run as parallel sub-agents so neither pollutes the other.
+- **[resolving-merge-conflicts](./skills/engineering/resolving-merge-conflicts/SKILL.md)**: Work through an in-progress git merge or rebase conflict hunk by hunk, resolving by intent traced to each side's primary source, then finish the operation (never `--abort`).
+- **[wizard](./skills/engineering/wizard/SKILL.md)**: Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform: provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover.
 
 ### Productivity
 
@@ -219,13 +219,13 @@ General workflow tools, not code-specific.
 
 **User-invoked**
 
-- **[grill-me](./skills/productivity/grill-me/SKILL.md)** — Get relentlessly interviewed about a plan or design until every branch of the design tree is resolved.
-- **[handoff](./skills/productivity/handoff/SKILL.md)** — Compact the current conversation into a handoff document so another agent can continue the work.
-- **[teach](./skills/productivity/teach/SKILL.md)** — Teach the user a new skill or concept over multiple sessions, using the current directory as a stateful teaching workspace.
-- **[to-questionnaire](./skills/productivity/to-questionnaire/SKILL.md)** — Turn a decision you can't answer alone into a Markdown questionnaire for the one person who can — filled in async, or together over a meeting. It grills you about the send (who it's for, what you need back), not the subject.
-- **[wait-what](./skills/productivity/wait-what/SKILL.md)** — Fire this the moment a message doesn't land. The agent re-pitches it with the context you're missing, in plain English, using your `CONTEXT.md` vocabulary.
-- **[writing-for-agents](./skills/productivity/writing-for-agents/SKILL.md)** — Writing documents for agents: skills, AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md, and any doc an agent reaches by a pointer.
+- **[grill-me](./skills/productivity/grill-me/SKILL.md)**: Get relentlessly interviewed about a plan or design until every branch of the design tree is resolved.
+- **[handoff](./skills/productivity/handoff/SKILL.md)**: Compact the current conversation into a handoff document so another agent can continue the work.
+- **[teach](./skills/productivity/teach/SKILL.md)**: Teach the user a new skill or concept over multiple sessions, using the current directory as a stateful teaching workspace.
+- **[to-questionnaire](./skills/productivity/to-questionnaire/SKILL.md)**: Turn a decision you can't answer alone into a Markdown questionnaire for the one person who can, filled in async, or together over a meeting. It grills you about the send (who it's for, what you need back), not the subject.
+- **[wait-what](./skills/productivity/wait-what/SKILL.md)**: Fire this the moment a message doesn't land. The agent re-pitches it with the context you're missing, in plain English, using your `CONTEXT.md` vocabulary.
 
 **Model-invoked**
 
-- **[grilling](./skills/productivity/grilling/SKILL.md)** — Interview the user relentlessly about a plan, decision, or idea until every branch of the design tree is resolved. The reusable interview primitive behind `grill-me`, `grill-with-docs`, `triage`, `wayfinder` and `improve-codebase-architecture`.
+- **[grilling](./skills/productivity/grilling/SKILL.md)**: Interview the user relentlessly about a plan, decision, or idea until every branch of the design tree is resolved. The reusable interview primitive behind `grill-me`, `grill-with-docs`, `triage`, `wayfinder` and `improve-codebase-architecture`.
+- **[writing-for-agents](./skills/productivity/writing-for-agents/SKILL.md)**: Writing documents for agents: skills, AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md, and any doc an agent reaches by a pointer.

docs/engineering/ask-matt.md

@@ -1,26 +1,26 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`ask-matt` is the router over the skills in this repo. You describe the situation you are in — an idea you cannot start, a pile of incoming bug reports, a session that has run long — and it names the skill or the sequence of skills that fits, plus where the human decisions in that sequence sit.
+`ask-matt` is the router over the skills in this repo. You describe the situation you are in (an idea you cannot start, a pile of incoming bug reports, a [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) that has run long), and it names the skill or the sequence of skills that fits, plus where the human decisions in that sequence sit.
 
-It recommends and stops. It does not grill, write a spec, open a file or fire the skill it just named; what you get back is the next thing to type, and you type it. It is also a hand-written map of the skills in this repo rather than a scan of what you have installed, so it will not route you over your own skills or another author's.
+It recommends and stops. It does not grill, write a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec), open a file or fire the skill it just named; what you get back is the next thing to type, and you type it. It is also a hand-written map of the skills in this repo rather than a scan of what you have installed, so it will not route you over your own skills or another author's.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/ask-matt` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
+You invoke this by typing `/ask-matt`; the agent won't reach for it on its own.
 
 | Your situation | What the router gives back |
 | --- | --- |
 | An idea, and no idea where to start | The head of the main flow, and whether the build is small enough to skip the spec |
-| Bugs and requests arriving from other people | The [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) on-ramp, and why tickets you generated yourself don't belong on it |
+| Bugs and requests arriving from other people | The [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) on-ramp, and why [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) you generated yourself don't belong on it |
 | Two skills that look interchangeable | The line between them, and it is usually one concrete test rather than a matter of taste. [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) or [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) turns on whether you are in a working directory; [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) or [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) turns on whether the effort fits one session |
-| A long session and a decision about the context | The ordered tree over the five options at a phase boundary |
+| A long session and a decision about the [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) | The ordered tree over the five options at a phase boundary |
 | A skill you have already picked | Nothing useful. Invoke that skill directly. |
 
 ## Prerequisites
 
 The router names skills; it does not install them. Everything it points at has to be installed for the recommendation to be actionable, and it only knows the promoted skills in this repo.
 
-The tracker-dependent routes — triage, `to-spec`, `to-tickets`, `implement` — assume [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) has already configured an issue tracker in the repo. The router will happily recommend them before that has happened.
+The tracker-dependent routes (triage, `to-spec`, `to-tickets`, `implement`) assume [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) has already configured an issue tracker in the repo. The router will happily recommend them before that has happened.
 
 ## Flows, not skills
 
@@ -28,19 +28,19 @@ The word the skill gives you to think with is **flow**: a path *through* the ski
 
 - **The main flow**, idea to ship. Grill, spec, tickets, implement, review, with two branches inside it: a prototype detour when a question needs runnable code to settle, and the spec-and-tickets split, which only earns its cost when the build spans more than one session.
 - **On-ramps**, for a situation that generates work and then merges onto the main flow: incoming bug reports, something broken, or an effort too foggy and too large to hold in one session.
-- **Standalones**, off every flow, reached for on their own terms — the prototype, the questionnaire, the merge conflict you are already sitting in.
+- **Standalones**, off every flow, reached for on their own terms: the prototype, the questionnaire, the merge conflict you are already sitting in.
 - **A vocabulary layer underneath**, the two references the other skills pull in when the words rather than the process are the problem.
 
 ## The phase boundary
 
-The other idea it hands you is the **phase boundary**. A phase is a chunk of work inside a session — the grilling, the implementation, the QA — and the boundary between two of them is the only place the question "what do I do with this context?" belongs. Mid-phase there is nothing to decide: continue, or split what is left into subagents.
+The other idea it hands you is the **phase boundary**. A phase is a chunk of work inside a session (the [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling), the implementation, the QA), and the boundary between two of them is the only place the question "what do I do with this context?" belongs. Mid-phase there is nothing to decide: continue, or split what is left into [subagents](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent).
 
 | Option | Take it when |
 | --- | --- |
-| **Continue** | The next phase wants this one verbatim, or you have smart zone left. It is the only move that keeps the session as a primary source, so rule it out first |
+| **Continue** | The next phase wants this one verbatim, or you have [smart zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone) left. It is the only move that keeps the session as a [primary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source), so rule it out first |
 | **`/clear`** | Everything behind you is disposable. Cheapest move on the board, and one-way if you were wrong |
-| **[handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff)** | Something has to travel: a new harness, a new directory, a colleague, a side task forked mid-phase |
-| **Subagent** | The task is scoped tightly enough to run with you away from the keyboard |
+| **[handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff)** | Something has to travel: a new [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness), a new directory, a colleague, a side task forked mid-phase |
+| **Subagent** | The task is scoped tightly enough to run with you [away from the keyboard](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk) |
 | **`/compact`** | None of the above. The default, and it lands here often |
 
 Two of those are routinely got wrong, which is why the router carries the order rather than the list. `/handoff` reads like the general bridge between windows and is not: portability is the whole of what it buys. `/compact` is the bottom of the tree rather than the first reach, because the four questions above it are each cheaper or more precise.
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ Two of those are routinely got wrong, which is why the router carries the order
 
 **Isn't there just a list of the skills in the right order?**
 
-People keep asking for one in the README, and Matt's answer is that this is the list: "Use /ask-matt, that's what it's there for." A static table would say `wayfinder → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review` and be wrong for most situations, because the interesting parts are the branches — is there a codebase, does the build span sessions, can this question be settled by talking. The honest cost is that the router is hand-maintained and lags the repo. `/grilling` and `/resolving-merge-conflicts` both shipped long before the router named them.
+People keep asking for one in the README. This skill is that list: it is what it exists for. A static table would say `wayfinder → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review` and be wrong for most situations, because the interesting parts are the branches: is there a codebase, does the build span sessions, can this question be settled by talking. The honest cost is that the router is hand-maintained and lags the repo. `/grilling` and `/resolving-merge-conflicts` both shipped long before the router named them.
 
 **It told me half the skills aren't installed.**
 
@@ -57,11 +57,11 @@ A known bug, unfixed. Most of the skills the router routes you through set `disa
 
 **It described a skill's behaviour, and the skill doesn't do that.**
 
-Also real, also unfixed. The router answers from its own one-line summary of each skill rather than from the skill. One detailed report tracked three instances in a single session, including a recommendation to skip [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) on the strength of the gloss "turn the thread into a spec" — `to-spec/SKILL.md` was never opened. In every case it verified only after the user pushed back, and never on its own initiative. Skipping `to-spec` there cost a real seam check, and the tickets that came out undercounted the work. When the router asserts something load-bearing about another skill, ask it to open that `SKILL.md` first. The same applies to questions the map does not cover at all, such as whether to use plan mode: that answer is the model's inference, not something written down here.
+Also real, also unfixed. The router answers from its own one-line summary of each skill rather than from the skill. One detailed report tracked three instances in a single session, including a recommendation to skip [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) on the strength of the gloss "turn the thread into a spec": `to-spec/SKILL.md` was never opened. In every case it verified only after the user pushed back, and never on its own initiative. Skipping `to-spec` there cost a real seam check, and the tickets that came out undercounted the work. When the router asserts something load-bearing about another skill, ask it to open that `SKILL.md` first. The same applies to questions the map does not cover at all, such as whether to use [plan mode](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent-mode): that answer is the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model)'s inference, not something written down here.
 
 **Why is it prose instead of a numbered checklist?**
 
-A fair complaint, filed as an open issue arguing that most of the routing is deterministic and the narrative makes it hard to scan. Nothing stops you asking for the compressed form — "just give me the sequence" gets you the sequence. What the prose is carrying is the conditional half: the branches, where a human decision is expected, and where to clear or compact between steps. A flat checklist drops exactly that.
+A fair complaint, filed as an open issue arguing that most of the routing is deterministic and the narrative makes it hard to scan. Nothing stops you asking for the compressed form: "just give me the sequence" gets you the sequence. What the prose is carrying is the conditional half: the branches, where a human decision is expected, and where to clear or compact between steps. A flat checklist drops exactly that.
 
 **Can it route over my own skills, or another author's?**
 
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ No. Three separate proposals have asked for a router that reads your local `skil
 
 **It told me to edit a SKILL.md.**
 
-That advice is often correct and rarely durable. Someone asked it how to make [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) close tickets, got told to add a line to the skill, and immediately spotted the problem: `npx skills update` overwrites the file, and the plugin install is read-only. Put standing behaviour in your own `CLAUDE.md` or `AGENTS.md`, or say it in the invocation. Prompt-level adaptations survive updates — pointing the flow at Linear instead of GitHub, or asking it which open tickets could run in parallel, are both things people do this way.
+That advice is often correct and rarely durable. Someone asked it how to make [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) close tickets, got told to add a line to the skill, and immediately spotted the problem: `npx skills update` overwrites the file, and the plugin install is read-only. Put standing behaviour in your own `CLAUDE.md` or `AGENTS.md`, or say it in the invocation. Prompt-level adaptations survive updates: pointing the flow at Linear instead of GitHub, or asking it which open tickets could run in parallel, are both things people do this way.
 
 **It named a skill I don't have, or missed one I do.**
 
@@ -87,4 +87,4 @@ Check the changelog for a rename before assuming it is gone. `writing-great-skil
 
 `ask-matt` is a **standalone router** that sits over the whole set. It is never a step in a chain; it points into every chain, and it is the node the other docs pages link back to so none of them has to redraw the graph. From here you most often land on [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), the head of the main flow, or [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage), the on-ramp for work that arrived rather than work you started.
 
-It is a secondary source over the skills it describes. Where the router and a `SKILL.md` disagree, the `SKILL.md` is right.
+It is a [secondary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/secondary-source) over the skills it describes. Where the router and a `SKILL.md` disagree, the `SKILL.md` is right.

docs/engineering/code-review.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`code-review` reviews the diff between `HEAD` and a fixed point you name — a commit, a branch, a tag, `main`, `HEAD~5` — along two axes. **Standards** asks whether the code follows how this repo writes code. **Spec** asks whether the code does what the originating issue or spec asked for. Each axis runs in its own sub-agent so neither sees the other's reasoning.
+`code-review` reviews the diff between `HEAD` and a fixed point you name (a commit, a branch, a tag, `main`, `HEAD~5`) along two axes. **Standards** asks whether the code follows how this repo writes code. **Spec** asks whether the code does what the originating issue or [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec) asked for. Each axis runs in its own [sub-agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) so neither sees the other's reasoning.
 
-The two axes are never merged and never re-ranked. The report ends with a worst issue *per axis* and refuses to name a single winner across them, because a change can pass one axis and fail the other: code that follows every convention while implementing the wrong thing passes Standards and fails Spec; code that does exactly what the ticket asked while breaking the repo's conventions does the reverse. A blended verdict lets the passing axis hide the failing one.
+The two axes are never merged and never re-ranked. The report ends with a worst issue *per axis* and refuses to name a single winner across them, because a change can pass one axis and fail the other: code that follows every convention while implementing the wrong thing passes Standards and fails Spec; code that does exactly what the [ticket](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) asked while breaking the repo's conventions does the reverse. A blended verdict lets the passing axis hide the failing one.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ Type `/code-review`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when you ask to r
 | Your situation | Reach for |
 | --- | --- |
 | A diff exists and you want to know if it is built right *and* is the right thing | `code-review` |
-| You want bugs hunted in the diff — null paths, races, off-by-one | Claude Code's own built-in review, not this one (see the name clash below) |
+| You want bugs hunted in the diff: null paths, races, off-by-one | Claude Code's own built-in review, not this one (see the name clash below) |
 | Nothing is written yet and you want it written test-first | [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) |
 | A whole spec needs building, review included | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), which calls this skill itself |
 | The whole codebase has drifted, not one diff | [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) |
@@ -41,23 +41,23 @@ Step 1 depends on `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, which [setup-matt-pocock-skill
 | Reports | Documented breaches (can be hard), and smells (always judgement calls) | Missing or partial requirements, scope creep, requirements implemented wrongly |
 | Every finding cites | The standards file and the rule, or the named smell plus the hunk | The line of the spec |
 
-A generic review skill that does not know your standards is the thing this design is trying to avoid — it flags what is deliberate in your codebase and misses the invariants your codebase actually depends on. So the repo's own documentation is the primary source on the Standards axis, and **the repo always overrides**.
+A generic review skill that does not know your standards is the thing this design is trying to avoid: it flags what is deliberate in your codebase and misses the invariants your codebase actually depends on. So the repo's own documentation is the [primary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source) on the Standards axis, and **the repo always overrides**.
 
-The **smell baseline** is the floor underneath it: twelve Fowler code smells from _Refactoring_ ch.3 — Mysterious Name, Duplicated Code, Feature Envy, Data Clumps, Primitive Obsession, Repeated Switches, Shotgun Surgery, Divergent Change, Speculative Generality, Message Chains, Middle Man, Refused Bequest. Each is a labelled heuristic ("possible Feature Envy"), never a hard violation, and each is stated as *what it is* → *how to fix*, so a finding arrives with a move attached rather than a complaint. Anything your linter already enforces is skipped by both axes.
+The **smell baseline** is the floor underneath it, twelve Fowler code smells from _Refactoring_ ch.3: Mysterious Name, Duplicated Code, Feature Envy, Data Clumps, Primitive Obsession, Repeated Switches, Shotgun Surgery, Divergent Change, Speculative Generality, Message Chains, Middle Man, Refused Bequest. Each is a labelled heuristic ("possible Feature Envy"), never a hard violation, and each is stated as *what it is* → *how to fix*, so a finding arrives with a move attached rather than a complaint. Anything your linter already enforces is skipped by both axes.
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **It collides with Claude Code's own `/code-review`. What do I do?**
 
-This is the most reported problem with the skill, and it is not fixed. Claude Code ships its own `/code-review`, which does something different — it hunts bugs in the diff, where this one checks spec compliance and repo standards. Installing this library means one of them wins, and which one wins depends on how you installed. Via the plugin marketplace, everything is aliased under a `mattpocock-skills:` prefix and the built-in becomes hard to reach at the unqualified name; via a plain skills install, the local file wins and this skill shadows the built-in. Matt's own answer is that he removes Claude Code's built-in skills entirely — "Huge context saving and means I don't need to worry about this. I consider the shadowing issue a CC harness bug, I should be free to name my skills whatever." His advice to anyone hitting it has been to rename his copy locally. Editing the frontmatter or renaming the directory gets undone by `npx skills update`; the durable workaround reported by users is to fork the skill to a new name and drop `code-review` from the managed set, keeping a note of the commit you forked from so you can re-sync by hand.
+This is the most reported problem with the skill, and it is not fixed. Claude Code ships its own `/code-review`, which does something different: it hunts bugs in the diff, where this one checks spec compliance and repo standards. Installing this library means one of them wins, and which one wins depends on how you installed. Via the plugin marketplace, everything is aliased under a `mattpocock-skills:` prefix and the built-in becomes hard to reach at the unqualified name; via a plain skills install, the local file wins and this skill shadows the built-in. One clean answer is to remove Claude Code's built-in skills entirely: a large [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) saving, and the collision stops mattering. The shadowing itself is arguably a Claude Code [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) bug (a skill author should be free to name a skill anything), so the other answer is to rename the local copy. Editing the frontmatter or renaming the directory gets undone by `npx skills update`; the durable workaround reported by users is to fork the skill to a new name and drop `code-review` from the managed set, keeping a note of the commit you forked from so you can re-sync by hand.
 
 **Its sub-agents keep invoking `/code-review` again and spawn more agents.**
 
-Known open bug, reproduced by several people and in more than one harness. The Standards and Spec prompts do not forbid delegation, so a sub-agent can rediscover the skill and fan out again — one report reached 50-plus agents. The fix people have applied on forks is one line appended to both sub-agent briefs: "Do not invoke `/code-review` or spawn additional agents — perform this review directly." Some prefer to handle it at the harness level so every skill inherits the guard. Neither is in the shipped skill yet. If you run this unattended, watch the agent count.
+Known open bug, reproduced by several people and in more than one harness. The Standards and Spec prompts do not forbid delegation, so a sub-agent can rediscover the skill and fan out again: one report reached 50-plus agents. The fix people have applied on forks is one line appended to both sub-agent briefs: "Do not invoke `/code-review` or spawn additional agents: perform this review directly." Some prefer to handle it at the harness level so every skill inherits the guard. Neither is in the shipped skill yet. If you run this unattended, watch the agent count.
 
-**Should I run it in the same session that wrote the code?**
+**Should I run it in the same [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) that wrote the code?**
 
-Prefer a fresh one. As one reader put it: "Same context reviewing itself isn't review, it's confirmation bias with a slash command." The reviewing agent in the authoring session holds every assumption that shaped the code, which is exactly the context an independent reviewer would not have. This is also why people ask for [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) without its built-in review step — it runs the review inside the session that just wrote the diff. Invoking `/code-review` yourself from a clean session is the honest version.
+Prefer a fresh one. As one reader put it: "Same context reviewing itself isn't review, it's confirmation bias with a slash command." The reviewing agent in the authoring session holds every assumption that shaped the code, which is exactly the context an independent reviewer would not have. This is also why people ask for [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) without its built-in review step: it runs the review inside the session that just wrote the diff. Invoking `/code-review` yourself from a clean session is the honest version.
 
 **After every ticket, or once at the end?**
 
@@ -65,11 +65,11 @@ Both work, and the skill does not decide for you. Per-ticket keeps each diff sma
 
 **Can I trust the findings?**
 
-Not without checking. Sub-agent output is a hypothesis, not evidence — one team reported a dozen breaking changes that prose-based reviews had waved through. The skill aggregates the two reports verbatim or lightly cleaned rather than re-verifying each claim against the files, so a finding can cite the wrong location or overstate an impact. Read the citation on each finding before acting on it. That every finding is required to carry one — a standards rule, a smell plus its hunk, or a spec line — is what makes this checkable at all.
+Not without checking. Sub-agent output is a hypothesis, not evidence: one team reported a dozen breaking changes that prose-based reviews had waved through. The skill aggregates the two reports verbatim or lightly cleaned rather than re-verifying each claim against the files, so a finding can cite the wrong location or overstate an impact. Read the citation on each finding before acting on it. That every finding is required to carry one (a standards rule, a smell plus its hunk, or a spec line) is what makes this checkable at all.
 
 **Why does it find new problems every single time I run it?**
 
-Because fixes create new surface, and because the judgement-call half of the Standards axis is not deterministic between runs. One reader described the loop plainly: "/code-review and /improve-code-architecture always find new stuff every time. I implement fixes, rerun these skills, and again and again." There is no convergence guarantee. Treat a pass as a list of leads, act on the ones with a cited rule behind them, and stop — do not run it in a loop until it comes back clean, because it will not.
+Because fixes create new surface, and because the judgement-call half of the Standards axis is not deterministic between runs. One reader described the loop plainly: "/code-review and /improve-code-architecture always find new stuff every time. I implement fixes, rerun these skills, and again and again." There is no convergence guarantee. Treat a pass as a list of leads, act on the ones with a cited rule behind them, and stop: do not run it in a loop until it comes back clean, because it will not.
 
 **Does it review my uncommitted work?**
 
@@ -85,10 +85,10 @@ No. It diffs `<fixed-point>...HEAD`, three-dot, which is measured from the merge
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-`code-review` is the review step at the tail of the build chain — `grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review` — and also stands alone on any branch or PR you point it at.
+`code-review` is the review step at the tail of the build chain: `grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review`. It also stands alone on any branch or PR you point it at.
 
 - [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) is the closest neighbour: it drives the build and calls this skill as its own closing review before committing.
 - [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) and [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) produce the document the Spec axis checks against; a vague spec makes that axis vague.
-- [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) is the whole-codebase counterpart — this skill only ever looks at one diff.
+- [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) is the whole-codebase counterpart: this skill only ever looks at one diff.
 
 [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes across the whole set when you are unsure which skill the situation wants.

docs/engineering/codebase-design.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 `codebase-design` fixes the words you use to design a module: **module**, **interface**, **depth**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**, **locality**. It defines each one precisely, bans the loose substitutes ("component", "service", "API", "boundary"), and states the handful of principles that follow from them.
 
-It is a reference, not a process. There is no loop to run, no artifact it produces, no checkpoint where it asks you a question. Every other skill that touches design borrows its vocabulary; on its own it gives you the language and stops. That is the thing to know before you invoke it, because a skill with no process and no stopping rule will improvise one if you point a session at it and say "go" — see the questions below.
+It is a reference, not a process. There is no loop to run, no artifact it produces, no checkpoint where it asks you a question. Every other skill that touches design borrows its vocabulary; on its own it gives you the language and stops. That is the thing to know before you invoke it, because a skill with no process and no stopping rule will improvise one if you point a [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) at it and say "go." See the questions below for what that looks like in practice.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
@@ -14,9 +14,9 @@ Several skills sit close to it. Which one you want depends on what the actual pr
 
 | The problem | The skill |
 |---|---|
-| The shape of one module — its interface, its seam, its depth | `codebase-design` |
-| The *words of the domain* — "account" means three things, two people mean different things by "cancellation" | [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) |
-| You don't yet know *which* module to redesign | [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) — the survey that finds candidates |
+| The shape of one module: its interface, its seam, its depth | `codebase-design` |
+| The *words of the domain*: "account" means three things, two people mean different things by "cancellation" | [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) |
+| You don't yet know *which* module to redesign | [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) (the survey that finds candidates) |
 | You want the design argued with, not just named | [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) |
 | There's a concrete behaviour to build and you want tests that survive a refactor | [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) |
 
@@ -26,13 +26,13 @@ The glossary is the skill. Every term is defined against the others, and each on
 
 | Term | What it means | Don't say |
 |---|---|---|
-| **Module** | Anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic — a function, a class, a package, a slice spanning tiers. | unit, component, service |
+| **Module** | Anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic: a function, a class, a package, a slice spanning tiers. | unit, component, service |
 | **Interface** | Everything a caller must know to use it correctly: the type signature, plus invariants, ordering constraints, error modes, required config, performance characteristics. | API, signature |
-| **Depth** | Leverage at the interface — how much behaviour a caller or a test can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. **Deep**: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface. **Shallow**: the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation. | — |
+| **Depth** | Leverage at the interface: how much behaviour a caller or a test can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. **Deep**: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface. **Shallow**: the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation. | none |
 | **Seam** | Michael Feathers' term: a place you can alter behaviour without editing in that place. It is the *location* of an interface, and where to put it is its own decision, separate from what goes behind it. | boundary |
-| **Adapter** | A concrete thing satisfying an interface at a seam. Names a role, not a substance — an in-memory fake and a Postgres repo are both adapters. | — |
-| **Leverage** | What callers get from depth: more capability per unit of interface learned. | — |
-| **Locality** | What maintainers get from depth: change, bugs and verification concentrate in one place. Fix once, fixed everywhere. | — |
+| **Adapter** | A concrete thing satisfying an interface at a seam. Names a role, not a substance: an in-memory fake and a Postgres repo are both adapters. | none |
+| **Leverage** | What callers get from depth: more capability per unit of interface learned. | none |
+| **Locality** | What maintainers get from depth: change, bugs and verification concentrate in one place. Fix once, fixed everywhere. | none |
 
 Depth is deliberately *not* defined as the ratio of implementation lines to interface lines, which is Ousterhout's own definition. That metric rewards padding the implementation. Depth-as-leverage is used instead.
 
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ Depth is deliberately *not* defined as the ratio of implementation lines to inte
 - **The interface is the test surface.** Callers and tests cross the same seam. If you want to test *past* the interface, the module is the wrong shape.
 - **One adapter means a hypothetical seam. Two adapters means a real one.** Don't cut a seam until something actually varies across it. A single-adapter seam is just indirection.
 
-Two supporting files go further, and the skill reads them on demand rather than up front. [DEEPENING.md](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/engineering/codebase-design/DEEPENING.md) classifies a candidate's dependencies — in-process, local-substitutable, remote-but-owned, true-external — because the category decides how the deepened module gets tested across its seam. [DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/engineering/codebase-design/DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md) spins up parallel sub-agents to produce three or more radically different interfaces for the same module, then compares them on depth, locality and seam placement.
+Two supporting files go further, and the skill reads them on demand rather than up front. [DEEPENING.md](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/engineering/codebase-design/DEEPENING.md) classifies a candidate's dependencies into four categories (in-process, local-substitutable, remote-but-owned, true-external), because the category decides how the deepened module gets tested across its seam. [DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/engineering/codebase-design/DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md) spins up parallel [sub-agents](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) to produce three or more radically different interfaces for the same module, then compares them on depth, locality and seam placement.
 
 ## Common questions
 
@@ -51,27 +51,27 @@ Two supporting files go further, and the skill reads them on demand rather than
 
 This is the most-asked question about the skill and the skill does not answer it. It defines what a deep module *is*; it says nothing about how to stop a stray import from reaching past the interface. [Issue #458](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/458) put it plainly: "let's say we're happy with the interface, it hides the details, etc. But how do we enforce it? I think without linting or clear guardrails, humans and LLMs alike will start making it messy over time." Matt's answer, in that thread, was three options: wrap it in a class or IIFE and accept that the class gets enormous; make it a package in a monorepo and accept the monorepo tooling; or use a linter like [dependency-cruiser](https://github.com/sverweij/dependency-cruiser) to forbid imports that bypass the interface. He has separately called Effect the best mechanism and dependency-cruiser the second-best. There is a `setup-ts-deep-modules` skill in the repo's `in-progress/` bucket that lays down a `src/packages/<name>/index.ts` convention, but it is a beta-channel skill with no docs page, and it has no lint rule shipped with it.
 
-**I pointed a session at it and it burned 100k tokens redesigning things I never asked about.**
+**I pointed a session at it and it burned 100k [tokens](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/token) redesigning things I never asked about.**
 
-Known, and filed as [issue #449](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/449). The skill is model-invoked and describes itself as vocabulary, but nothing in it hard-stops an agent from treating it as a runnable process. Told to "resume in /codebase-design and drive the open decisions", an agent reached for the most action-shaped content it could find — the parallel sub-agents in `DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md` — re-explored code a previous session had already mapped, and ran a long way before asking anything. None of the guardrails a driver skill has (checkpoints, one question at a time, no auto-advance) are present here, because a reference has none. The workaround is to name a driver skill and let this one sit underneath it: `/grill-with-docs`, `/improve-codebase-architecture` or `/tdd` with `codebase-design` as the vocabulary. The issue is open.
+Known, and filed as [issue #449](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/449). The skill is model-invoked and describes itself as vocabulary, but nothing in it hard-stops an agent from treating it as a runnable process. Told to "resume in /codebase-design and drive the open decisions", an agent reached for the most action-shaped content it could find: the parallel sub-agents in `DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md`. It re-explored code a previous session had already mapped, and ran a long way before asking anything. None of the guardrails a driver skill has (checkpoints, one question at a time, no auto-advance) are present here, because a reference has none. The workaround is to name a driver skill and let this one sit underneath it: `/grill-with-docs`, `/improve-codebase-architecture` or `/tdd` with `codebase-design` as the vocabulary. The issue is open.
 
 **Where did `design-an-interface` go? And is there an `/interface-design` skill?**
 
-`design-an-interface` was removed and absorbed into this skill. Nothing was lost: its "design it twice" technique — parallel sub-agents generating radically different designs, from Ousterhout — ships here as `DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md`. Separately, several people have asked for a dedicated `/interface-design` skill for the deep-module/thin-interface philosophy; Matt's reply each time has been that `/codebase-design` is in there. If you came looking for either name, this is the page.
+`design-an-interface` was removed and absorbed into this skill. Nothing was lost: its "design it twice" technique (parallel sub-agents generating radically different designs, from Ousterhout) ships here as `DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md`. Separately, several people have asked for a dedicated `/interface-design` skill for the deep-module/thin-interface philosophy; that philosophy already lives here, and no separate skill is planned. If you came looking for either name, this is the page.
 
-**Isn't this a file-structure convention — folders, barrel files, feature slices?**
+**Isn't this a file-structure convention, such as folders, barrel files, feature slices?**
 
-No, and Matt has been consistent about that under repeated pushback. [Issue #95](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/95) proposed a formalised fractal-tree file structure as the concrete implementation of deep modules; the reply was that the two are orthogonal — "deep modules are about the design of the interface and accessing through a strict interface, no matter what the file system looks like. It seems perfectly possible that you could have shallow modules with this approach." The same came up in #458: "I think you might be tying the concept of modules too closely to the file system. The file system can certainly be a useful hint to the shape of modules, but there's no need to use the file system in the construction of deep modules." The glossary defines **module** as scale-agnostic on purpose.
+No, and the skill has held that line under repeated pushback. [Issue #95](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/95) proposed a formalised fractal-tree file structure as the concrete implementation of deep modules; the reply was that the two are orthogonal: "deep modules are about the design of the interface and accessing through a strict interface, no matter what the file system looks like. It seems perfectly possible that you could have shallow modules with this approach." The same came up in #458: "I think you might be tying the concept of modules too closely to the file system. The file system can certainly be a useful hint to the shape of modules, but there's no need to use the file system in the construction of deep modules." The glossary defines **module** as scale-agnostic on purpose.
 
 **Does `tdd` actually use this vocabulary?**
 
-It does now. For a long time it did not. The inline deep-module notes that used to live inside `tdd` were removed in v1.0 in favour of this shared skill, but the pointer replacing them was never added — so `tdd` defined "seam" for itself and referenced nothing. Matt acknowledged the gap publicly ("Yeah I have a /codebase-design skill, might be that TDD needs to point there too") and the pointer is now in the skill, reached when the shape of the interface is the open question rather than the tests. `tdd` still owns "seam" as the boundary you *test* at; this skill owns the module shape behind it.
+It does now. For a long time it did not. The inline deep-module notes that used to live inside `tdd` were removed in v1.0 in favour of this shared skill, but the pointer replacing them was never added, so `tdd` defined "seam" for itself and referenced nothing. The gap is closed: the pointer is now in the skill, reached when the shape of the interface is the open question rather than the tests. `tdd` still owns "seam" as the boundary you *test* at; this skill owns the module shape behind it.
 
 **Does the design-it-twice pattern work outside Claude Code?**
 
-Not cleanly. `DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md` says "spawn 3+ sub-agents in parallel using the Agent tool", which is Claude Code's tool by Claude Code's name. The repo ships metadata for other harnesses, including Codex, and those may expose nothing under that name — so the parallel-design phase is less portable than the skill's metadata suggests. Tracked in [issue #564](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/564), open.
+Not cleanly. `DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md` says "spawn 3+ sub-agents in parallel using the Agent tool", which is Claude Code's [tool](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/tool) by Claude Code's name. The repo ships metadata for other [harnesses](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness), including Codex, and those may expose nothing under that name, so the parallel-design phase is less portable than the skill's metadata suggests. Tracked in [issue #564](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/564), open.
 
-**Can I add my own concepts to the glossary — connascence, module secrets, progressive disclosure?**
+**Can I add my own concepts to the glossary, such as connascence, module secrets, [progressive disclosure](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/progressive-disclosure)?**
 
 People have proposed exactly those. [Issue #180](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/180) adds Parnas's module secrets and Page-Jones's connascence as a naming layer for *what* is leaking across a seam, with a working diff attached; [issue #303](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/303) proposes progressive disclosure inside the implementation, so a module that is deep at its public interface isn't one undifferentiated slab underneath. Both are open and unmerged. The glossary as shipped is deliberately small, and the reason it stays small is stated in the skill itself: consistent language is the whole point, and a term nobody uses consistently is worse than no term.
 
@@ -80,9 +80,9 @@ People have proposed exactly those. [Issue #180](https://github.com/mattpocock/s
 - The design conversation stops producing the words "component", "service" and "boundary", and starts producing "module", "interface" and "seam".
 - Someone can point at a proposed extraction and say whether it passes the deletion test, without hedging.
 - A proposed seam comes with a second adapter named, not just the first one.
-- Discussion of an interface covers invariants, ordering and error modes — not only the type signature.
+- Discussion of an interface covers invariants, ordering and error modes, not only the type signature.
 - Invoking it does not start a session. If the agent begins reading files and proposing refactors off the back of `/codebase-design` alone, it has mistaken the reference for a driver.
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-`codebase-design` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone**, and the vocabulary layer underneath the engineering skills rather than a step in any chain. Its closest neighbour is [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), the parallel reference for the *problem domain*'s words rather than the module's shape — the two are usually wanted together, since naming a deep module well needs both. [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) is the other: it surveys a codebase for deepening candidates and writes every one of them in this glossary, so it finds the module and this skill is the bench you design it on. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+`codebase-design` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone**, and the vocabulary layer underneath the engineering skills rather than a step in any chain. Its closest neighbour is [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), the parallel reference for the *problem domain*'s words rather than the module's shape. The two are usually wanted together, since naming a deep module well needs both. [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) is the other: it surveys a codebase for deepening candidates and writes every one of them in this glossary, so it finds the module and this skill is the bench you design it on. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/diagnosing-bugs.md

@@ -2,23 +2,23 @@
 
 `diagnosing-bugs` runs a six-phase diagnosis on a hard bug or a performance regression: build a repro, minimise it, rank hypotheses, instrument, fix with a regression test, clean up.
 
-It will not let the agent form a theory until a **tight** feedback loop exists — one named command, already run once, that goes red on *this* bug and green when it is fixed. The default behaviour of a coding agent handed a bug report is to read code and guess; this skill blocks that. If no red-capable command exists, there is no Phase 2. That single gate is what the skill is for. Everything after it — bisection, hypothesis-testing, instrumentation — is mechanical once the signal exists.
+It will not let the agent form a theory until a **tight** feedback loop exists: one named command, already run once, that goes red on *this* bug and green when it is fixed. The default behaviour of a coding agent handed a bug report is to read code and guess; this skill blocks that. If no red-capable command exists, there is no Phase 2. That single gate is what the skill is for. Everything after it (bisection, hypothesis-testing, instrumentation) is mechanical once the signal exists.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-Type `/diagnosing-bugs`, or the agent reaches for it on its own when a task fits — it is model-invoked, and fires on "diagnose" / "debug this" or on a report that something is broken, throwing, failing, or slow.
+Type `/diagnosing-bugs`, or the agent reaches for it on its own when a task fits: it is model-invoked, and fires on "diagnose" / "debug this" or on a report that something is broken, throwing, failing, or slow.
 
 Reach for it on the hard ones: a bug that resists a first look, an intermittent flake, a regression that crept in between two known-good states. It is heavy by design, and the wrong tool for a question you want answered in one message.
 
 | Your situation | Where to go |
 | --- | --- |
 | A specific defect you can describe as a symptom | This skill |
-| A slow endpoint or a timing regression with a known before-and-after | This skill — it has a performance branch (measure a baseline, then bisect) |
-| "Where are the bottlenecks in this codebase?" — no specific symptom | Not this skill. It diagnoses one known failure, it does not audit |
+| A slow endpoint or a timing regression with a known before-and-after | This skill: it has a performance branch (measure a baseline, then bisect) |
+| "Where are the bottlenecks in this codebase?", no specific symptom | Not this skill. It diagnoses one known failure, it does not audit |
 | A raw bug report from someone else, not yet confirmed or written up | [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) first |
 | Throwaway code to answer a design question, not chase a defect | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) |
 | Building a planned behaviour test-first | [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) |
-| No good seam exists to lock the bug down | [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) — this skill hands off there itself |
+| No good seam exists to lock the bug down | [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture): this skill hands off there itself |
 
 ## The tight loop is the skill
 
@@ -28,16 +28,16 @@ Phase 1 gets disproportionate effort because it is the only phase that is hard.
 2. A curl or HTTP script against a running dev server.
 3. A CLI invocation with a fixture input, diffed against a known-good snapshot.
 4. A headless browser script asserting on DOM, console, or network.
-5. A replayed capture — a saved request, payload, or event log, run through the code path in isolation.
+5. A replayed capture: a saved request, payload, or event log, run through the code path in isolation.
 6. A throwaway harness: a minimal subset of the system, one function call.
 7. A property or fuzz loop, for "sometimes wrong output".
 8. A bisection harness you can hand to `git bisect run`.
-9. A differential loop — same input, old version against new.
-10. A human-in-the-loop bash script, last resort. The skill ships `scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh` for this: the agent runs the script, you follow prompts in your terminal, and your answers come back as parseable output.
+9. A differential loop: same input, old version against new.
+10. A [human-in-the-loop](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/human-in-the-loop) bash script, last resort. The skill ships `scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh` for this: the agent runs the script, you follow prompts in your terminal, and your answers come back as parseable output.
 
-*A* loop is not the goal. **Tight** is: fast (seconds), deterministic (same verdict every run), sharp (asserts your exact symptom, not "didn't crash"), and agent-runnable unattended. A 30-second flaky loop is barely better than none. For a bug that only shows up sometimes, the target is not a clean repro but a **higher reproduction rate** — loop the trigger, parallelise, add stress, inject sleeps, until the flake rate is high enough to debug against.
+*A* loop is not the goal. **Tight** is: fast (seconds), deterministic (same verdict every run), sharp (asserts your exact symptom, not "didn't crash"), and agent-runnable unattended. A 30-second flaky loop is barely better than none. For a bug that only shows up sometimes, the target is not a clean repro but a **higher reproduction rate**: loop the trigger, parallelise, add stress, inject sleeps, until the flake rate is high enough to debug against.
 
-When it genuinely cannot build one, it is instructed to stop and say so, list what it tried, and ask you for environment access, a captured artifact, or permission to add temporary instrumentation. It should not proceed to hypothesise anyway.
+When it genuinely cannot build one, it is instructed to stop and say so, list what it tried, and ask you for [environment](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/environment) access, a captured artifact, or permission to add temporary instrumentation. It should not proceed to hypothesise anyway.
 
 ## The gates between phases
 
@@ -46,35 +46,35 @@ The phases are gates, not a checklist. Each one refuses to open until something
 | Gate | What has to be true |
 | --- | --- |
 | Into Phase 2 | A named command, already run and pasted with its output, that can go red on this bug |
-| Into Phase 3 | The repro is reproduced *and* minimised — every remaining element is load-bearing |
+| Into Phase 3 | The repro is reproduced *and* minimised: every remaining element is load-bearing |
 | Into Phase 4 | 3–5 ranked, falsifiable hypotheses exist, each stating its prediction, shown to you before any is tested |
 | Into Phase 5 | Probes map to a specific prediction, one variable at a time, every debug log tagged `[DEBUG-a4f2]`-style so cleanup is one grep |
 | Done | Original repro no longer reproduces, instrumentation gone, and the hypothesis that turned out correct is written into the commit message |
 
-Phase 5 has an escape hatch worth knowing about. The regression test is written before the fix, but only if a **correct seam** exists for it — one where the test exercises the real bug pattern as it occurs at the call site. Where the only available seam is too shallow, the skill is told to say so rather than write a test that gives false confidence. That absence is itself the finding, and it is what routes the post-mortem to `improve-codebase-architecture`.
+Phase 5 has an escape hatch worth knowing about. The regression test is written before the fix, but only if a **correct seam** exists for it: one where the test exercises the real bug pattern as it occurs at the call site. Where the only available seam is too shallow, the skill is told to say so rather than write a test that gives false confidence. That absence is itself the finding, and it is what routes the post-mortem to `improve-codebase-architecture`.
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **It fires on quick questions where I just wanted a direct answer.**
-This is the most-reported problem with the skill, and it is real. On GPT-5.6-Sol especially, users report it triggering on a plain description of a problem: "the model triggers the rather formal diagnosing-bugs skill instead. It then goes on to construct a reproduction scenario — often building a mock scenario with limited value — before giving me a response or suggestion. This results in considerable reply delays." Four separate people reported the same shape on [issue #578](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/578). Matt's answer there: "It sounds to me like I could improve diagnosing-bugs to use a less heavy approach initially and then graduate to a heavier approach if necessary." That change has not landed. The skill is calibrated against Claude Code's invocation behaviour; a model with a lower activation threshold over-fires it. Until it is graduated, the practical fix is to say what you want ("just answer this, don't diagnose") or to disable model invocation for it in your harness.
+This is the most-reported problem with the skill, and it is real. On GPT-5.6-Sol especially, users report it triggering on a plain description of a problem: "the model triggers the rather formal diagnosing-bugs skill instead. It then goes on to construct a reproduction scenario (often building a mock scenario with limited value) before giving me a response or suggestion. This results in considerable reply delays." Four separate people reported the same shape on [issue #578](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/578). The accepted fix is to start with a lighter approach and graduate to the heavier one only where the problem warrants it, but that change has not landed. The skill is calibrated against Claude Code's invocation behaviour; a [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) with a lower activation threshold over-fires it. Until it is graduated, the practical fix is to say what you want ("just answer this, don't diagnose") or to disable model invocation for it in your [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness).
 
 **Can I point it at a codebase and ask where the performance problems are?**
-No. It diagnoses one failure you can already name. Its performance branch is for a regression with a symptom — establish a baseline measurement, then bisect, measure first and fix second — not for a proactive sweep. A skill for the proactive version was [proposed and closed](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/431); there is currently no skill for it.
+No. It diagnoses one failure you can already name. Its performance branch is for a regression with a symptom (establish a baseline measurement, then bisect, measure first and fix second), not for a proactive sweep. A skill for the proactive version was [proposed and closed](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/431); there is currently no skill for it.
 
 **Does it stop and ask me before it writes the fix?**
-No. Only Phase 3 has a human checkpoint — the ranked hypothesis list is shown to you before any is tested, and it proceeds on its own ranking if you are away. There is no gate between instrumentation and the fix, so the agent can start writing code before you have agreed with its root cause. [Issue #124](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/124) asks for that gate and is still open. If you want it, say so when you invoke the skill.
+No. Only Phase 3 has a human checkpoint: the ranked hypothesis list is shown to you before any is tested, and it proceeds on its own ranking if you are away. There is no gate between instrumentation and the fix, so the agent can start writing code before you have agreed with its root cause. [Issue #124](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/124) asks for that gate and is still open. If you want it, say so when you invoke the skill.
 
 **I already ran `/triage` on this bug report. Is this the same work again?**
-Partly, and neither skill admits it. As one reader put it: "Triage's step 3 is essentially a shallow, bounded instance of diagnosing-bugs Phase 1–2, but neither file mentions the other." Triage does a bounded "is this actually a bug, and what is the surface" pass; this skill does the thorough version. Running triage first is not wasted — its verification often gives you most of Phase 1's raw material — but expect to redo it properly here, and expect no cross-reference to tell you that.
+Partly, and neither skill admits it. As one reader put it: "Triage's step 3 is essentially a shallow, bounded instance of diagnosing-bugs Phase 1–2, but neither file mentions the other." Triage does a bounded "is this actually a bug, and what is the surface" pass; this skill does the thorough version. Running triage first is not wasted (its verification often gives you most of Phase 1's raw material), but expect to redo it properly here, and expect no cross-reference to tell you that.
 
 **Will the repro output it pastes leak secrets?**
-It might. The skill asks the agent to paste the invocation and its output, and to request artifacts like HAR files, log dumps, and core dumps. None of those are sanitised by instruction. [Issue #674](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/674) raises exactly this — credentials, tokens, cookies, and personal data riding along into a chat, an issue, or a PR — and proposes a redaction guardrail. It is open and unimplemented. Treat redaction as your job for now, particularly before the output goes anywhere public.
+It might. The skill asks the agent to paste the invocation and its output, and to request artifacts like HAR files, log dumps, and core dumps. None of those are sanitised by instruction. [Issue #674](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/674) raises exactly this (credentials, tokens, cookies, and personal data riding along into a chat, an issue, or a PR) and proposes a redaction guardrail. It is open and unimplemented. Treat redaction as your job for now, particularly before the output goes anywhere public.
 
 **My security scanner flagged this skill as high risk.**
 Snyk flags it, and the flag is a false positive. It is the only skill in the set that ships an executable shell script (`hitl-loop.template.sh`) alongside instructions to run it and to curl a dev server. Shipped `.sh` plus run-it instructions plus outbound HTTP is enough to trip a static scanner. The script itself is about 30 lines of `read -r -p` prompts that pause for human input. The scanner is rating the capability surface, not a proven exploit.
 
 **What happened to `/diagnose`?**
-Renamed to `/diagnosing-bugs` in v1.0.0. The old name no longer exists. Anything of yours that chains `/diagnose` — a wrapper skill, a saved prompt — needs updating.
+Renamed to `/diagnosing-bugs` in v1.0.0. The old name no longer exists. Anything of yours that chains `/diagnose` (a wrapper skill, a saved prompt) needs updating.
 
 ## It's working if
 
@@ -90,4 +90,4 @@ Renamed to `/diagnosing-bugs` in v1.0.0. The old name no longer exists. Anything
 
 `diagnosing-bugs` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone. You drop into it when something is broken and drop out when the fix and its regression test are in; it holds no state and needs no prior setup. [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes "Something's broken" here.
 
-Two neighbours matter. [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) takes the handoff when the real finding is that the code has no seam to lock the bug down — the recommendation is made after the fix is in, when there is more information. [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) sits upstream of it for bugs that arrive as raw reports from other people, and does a shallower version of the same first two phases.
+Two neighbours matter. [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) takes the [handoff](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/handoff) when the real finding is that the code has no seam to lock the bug down; the recommendation is made after the fix is in, when there is more information. [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) sits upstream of it for bugs that arrive as raw reports from other people, and does a shallower version of the same first two phases.

docs/engineering/domain-modeling.md

@@ -1,21 +1,21 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`domain-modeling` builds and sharpens a project's **ubiquitous language** while you are designing — challenging a term that conflicts with the glossary, forcing a precise word where you used a vague one, and stress-testing a relationship with a concrete scenario until the boundaries are exact.
+`domain-modeling` builds and sharpens a project's **ubiquitous language** while you are designing: challenging a term that conflicts with the glossary, forcing a precise word where you used a vague one, and stress-testing a relationship with a concrete scenario until the boundaries are exact.
 
-It is the **active** discipline, not the passive one. Reading `CONTEXT.md` to borrow its vocabulary is a one-line habit any skill can do; this skill is for when you are *changing* the model. That is what makes it interrupt. It writes a resolved term into `CONTEXT.md` at the moment it is resolved, in the middle of the conversation, rather than producing a tidy glossary at the end — because the batched version is a summary of a session, and the inline version is the session's actual output.
+It is the **active** discipline, not the passive one. Reading `CONTEXT.md` to borrow its vocabulary is a one-line habit any skill can do; this skill is for when you are *changing* the model. That is what makes it interrupt. It writes a resolved term into `CONTEXT.md` at the moment it is resolved, in the middle of the conversation, rather than producing a tidy glossary at the end, because the batched version is a summary of a [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), and the inline version is the session's actual output.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-Type `/domain-modeling`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task fits. In practice, automatic invocation is the weakest part of the skill: when `grill-with-docs` or `wayfinder` say to load it, models frequently load `grilling` and skip this one. If a grilling session runs and `CONTEXT.md` is untouched at the end, that is what happened — invoke it by name alongside the other skill.
+Type `/domain-modeling`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task fits. In practice, automatic invocation is the weakest part of the skill: when `grill-with-docs` or `wayfinder` say to load it, [models](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) frequently load `grilling` and skip this one. If a [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) session runs and `CONTEXT.md` is untouched at the end, that is what happened; invoke it by name alongside the other skill.
 
 Reach for it when the *words* are the problem:
 
 | The situation | The move |
 | --- | --- |
-| Two people mean different things by "cancellation" | `domain-modeling` — pick the canonical term, list the other under `_Avoid_` |
-| "Account" is doing three jobs in three files | `domain-modeling` — split it into Customer and User |
-| You just made a hard-to-reverse architectural choice | `domain-modeling` — it offers an ADR, if the choice clears the bar |
-| The module's *shape* is the problem — where the seam goes, how deep the interface is | [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design) |
+| Two people mean different things by "cancellation" | `domain-modeling`: pick the canonical term, list the other under `_Avoid_` |
+| "Account" is doing three jobs in three files | `domain-modeling`: split it into Customer and User |
+| You just made a hard-to-reverse architectural choice | `domain-modeling`: it offers an ADR, if the choice clears the bar |
+| The module's *shape* is the problem: where the seam goes, how deep the interface is | [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design) |
 | You want the whole plan interrogated before you build | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), which drives this skill underneath |
 | You want a term looked up, not changed | Nothing. Read `CONTEXT.md`. It is a file. |
 
@@ -37,50 +37,50 @@ The glossary and the ADR are held to different standards, and conflating them is
 | Holds | Terms. What a thing **is**, in one or two sentences, with rejected synonyms under `_Avoid_` | One decision, in one to three sentences: context, choice, reason |
 | Bar to write | A vague term became canonical | **All three**: hard to reverse, surprising without context, the result of a real trade-off |
 | Written | Inline, the moment the term is settled | Offered, not assumed |
-| Never holds | Implementation details, a spec, a scratch pad, general programming concepts | A diary of every choice made this session |
+| Never holds | Implementation details, a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec), a scratch pad, general programming concepts | A diary of every choice made this session |
 
 Miss any one of the ADR's three tests and there is no ADR. An easily-reversed decision will just get reversed; an unsurprising one is nobody's question; one with no real alternative records that you did the obvious thing.
 
-The `CONTEXT.md` rule is the one to actually hold onto, because it is the one that breaks in the field. **It is a glossary and nothing else.** Left unchecked, models treat "write to `CONTEXT.md`" as permission to persist every answer you give, and the file turns into a running spec — this is the most-reported problem with the skill, across several models.
+The `CONTEXT.md` rule is the one to actually hold onto, because it is the one that breaks in the field. **It is a glossary and nothing else.** Left unchecked, models treat "write to `CONTEXT.md`" as permission to persist every answer you give, and the file turns into a running spec. This is the most-reported problem with the skill, across several models.
 
 ## Cross-referencing, and where it stops
 
-The move that makes the skill click: when you state how something works, it checks the code and surfaces the contradiction. *"Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible — which is right?"* The language and the code are made to agree, out loud, before either is changed.
+The move that makes the skill click: when you state how something works, it checks the code and surfaces the contradiction. *"Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible, which is right?"* The language and the code are made to agree, out loud, before either is changed.
 
 The limit is worth knowing. It cross-references **code** and the committed `CONTEXT.md`/ADRs, and nothing else. It does not search your issue tracker, so a naming collision that was argued out and deliberately settled in a closed issue months ago gets surfaced as if it were new. There is [an open request](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/717) to fix this; until then, the workaround is to put the instruction in your own `docs/agents/domain.md`, which the skills already read.
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **My `CONTEXT.md` is 500 lines. 1,000. 3,000. What do I do?**
-The size is a symptom, not the disease — the file has absorbed implementation detail and decisions that were never glossary material. Matt's fix is a direct instruction: `/grill-with-docs make my CONTEXT.md more concise and remove any implementation details from it`. Run it against a bloated file and most of it goes. Only reach for a `CONTEXT-MAP.md` split once the file is genuinely lean and still covers two domains that a reader would not want to hold at once; splitting a bloated file just gives you several bloated files. The skill's guidance here is not yet strong enough to prevent the growth in the first place, and the issue tracking that is still open.
+The size is a symptom, not the disease: the file has absorbed implementation detail and decisions that were never glossary material. The fix is a direct instruction: `/grill-with-docs make my CONTEXT.md more concise and remove any implementation details from it`. Run it against a bloated file and most of it goes. Only reach for a `CONTEXT-MAP.md` split once the file is genuinely lean and still covers two domains that a reader would not want to hold at once; splitting a bloated file just gives you several bloated files. The skill's guidance here is not yet strong enough to prevent the growth in the first place, and the issue tracking that is still open.
 
 **Why is it `CONTEXT.md` and not `GLOSSARY.md`?**
-This is the most-argued naming question in the whole skill set and it has no settled answer. The case against the current name is good: if it is "a glossary and nothing else", `GLOSSARY.md` says so, and — as one reader put it — "with ai agents everything is context". The case for it is the map: `CONTEXT-MAP.md` pointing at several `CONTEXT.md` files reads naturally in a way `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` does not, and `context` is the standing DDD word for a bounded area of the model. At least one person maintains a local fork purely to rename the file. You can do the same, but every other skill in the set looks for `CONTEXT.md`, so a rename means patching all of them.
+This is the most-argued naming question in the whole skill set and it has no settled answer. The case against the current name is good: if it is "a glossary and nothing else", `GLOSSARY.md` says so, and, as one reader put it, "with ai agents everything is [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context)". The case for it is the map: `CONTEXT-MAP.md` pointing at several `CONTEXT.md` files reads naturally in a way `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` does not, and `context` is the standing DDD word for a bounded area of the model. At least one person maintains a local fork purely to rename the file. You can do the same, but every other skill in the set looks for `CONTEXT.md`, so a rename means patching all of them.
 
 **Where did `/ubiquitous-language` go?**
-It was removed, and it was not deprecated. Its job moved into `domain-modeling`, which maintains the whole model continuously rather than dumping a glossary out of one conversation. Vocabulary enforcement got more load-bearing, not less — it now runs underneath grilling, triage and mapping rather than as a separate pass you remember to do.
+It was removed, and it was not deprecated. Its job moved into `domain-modeling`, which maintains the whole model continuously rather than dumping a glossary out of one conversation. Vocabulary enforcement got more load-bearing, not less: it now runs underneath grilling, triage and mapping rather than as a separate pass you remember to do.
 
 **How do I get a glossary for a codebase that has none?**
-Ask for it explicitly rather than waiting for it to accumulate. `/grill-with-docs help me scaffold my existing repo with a CONTEXT.md` is the documented route; expect a long interrogation — one user reported 50+ questions before the file was in shape. Incidental use builds the glossary far too slowly on a brownfield repo.
+Ask for it explicitly rather than waiting for it to accumulate. `/grill-with-docs help me scaffold my existing repo with a CONTEXT.md` is the documented route; expect a long interrogation: one user reported 50+ questions before the file was in shape. Incidental use builds the glossary far too slowly on a brownfield repo.
 
 **Can I keep the domain model and use my own ADR format?**
-Not cleanly today. The glossary half and the ADR half ship in one skill, so a team with an established ADR convention — different template, different location, different naming — gets instructions that conflict with its house style. The current options are to copy the skill locally and edit it, or to override the ADR conventions in your repo's own agent docs. Splitting the two apart is [an open request](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/557).
+Not cleanly today. The glossary half and the ADR half ship in one skill, so a team with an established ADR convention (different template, different location, different naming) gets instructions that conflict with its house style. The current options are to copy the skill locally and edit it, or to override the ADR conventions in your repo's own agent docs. Splitting the two apart is [an open request](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/557).
 
 **Does a glossary actually earn its keep? It is one more artifact to review, and it can go stale.**
-Sometimes it does not, and it is worth being honest about where. Matt's own position is that DDD "gets less useful the closer it gets to the implementation" — the payoff is upstream, in naming and concept alignment, not in aggregates and layer ceremony. Synonym control matters at naming boundaries: module names, table names, status enums, issue titles, CLI commands. It matters much less in ordinary prose. There is also a live objection that domain terms compress communication *between humans* who already share them, and that an agent responds the same way to the plain-English description — on that reading, the glossary's value is keeping you and your reviewers aligned with what the agent is doing, not making the agent better. On a one-day build, skip it. And an unreviewed, agent-authored glossary is worse than none: it becomes confident-sounding lore that later sessions treat as truth.
+Sometimes it does not, and it is worth being honest about where. DDD gets less useful the closer it gets to the implementation: the payoff is upstream, in naming and concept alignment, not in aggregates and layer ceremony. Synonym control matters at naming boundaries: module names, table names, status enums, issue titles, CLI commands. It matters much less in ordinary prose. There is also a live objection that domain terms compress communication *between humans* who already share them, and that an agent responds the same way to the plain-English description. On that reading, the glossary's value is keeping you and your reviewers aligned with what the agent is doing, not making the agent better. On a one-day build, skip it. And an unreviewed, agent-authored glossary is worse than none: it becomes confident-sounding lore that later sessions treat as truth.
 
 **Can it turn my vague prompts into domain language for me?**
-No, and there is no plan for a skill that does. Matt's answer to that request was flat: *"if you don't understand the domain language itself, it becomes meaningless drivel."* This skill enforces precision once you have the understanding — it does not manufacture vocabulary you do not have. The related trap is using domain words without doing the modelling: right nouns over the wrong conceptual structure produce output that reads correct and is not.
+No, and there is no plan for a skill that does. A domain language you do not understand yourself becomes meaningless drivel once written down. This skill enforces precision once you have the understanding; it does not manufacture vocabulary you do not have. The related trap is using domain words without doing the modelling: right nouns over the wrong conceptual structure produce output that reads correct and is not.
 
 ## It's working if
 
 - It stops you mid-sentence to ask which of two things you meant, instead of picking one and moving on.
 - `CONTEXT.md` changes **during** the conversation, not in a burst at the end.
-- It refuses to write an ADR for something you could undo tomorrow — and says which of the three tests failed.
+- It refuses to write an ADR for something you could undo tomorrow, and says which of the three tests failed.
 - New entries define what a thing *is* in one or two sentences and name the words you are giving up under `_Avoid_`.
 - It quotes your code back at you when your code and your sentence disagree.
 - `CONTEXT.md` gets shorter as often as it gets longer.
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-`domain-modeling` is a **model-invoked reference** that runs *underneath* other skills more often than it runs on its own. [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) drives it through a grilling session, [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) loads it while charting a map, [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) uses it to keep tickets in the project's own words, and [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) calls it as decisions crystallise. Its closest sibling is [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design): the two are the vocabulary layer under everything else, this one for the *domain*, that one for the module's *shape*. It is also reachable directly, when you want the discipline without committing to the steps of whatever skill would normally pull it in. When you are unsure which skill fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+`domain-modeling` is a **model-invoked reference** that runs *underneath* other skills more often than it runs on its own. [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) drives it through a grilling session, [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) loads it while charting a map, [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) uses it to keep [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) in the project's own words, and [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) calls it as decisions crystallise. Its closest sibling is [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design): the two are the vocabulary layer under everything else, this one for the *domain*, that one for the module's *shape*. It is also reachable directly, when you want the discipline without committing to the steps of whatever skill would normally pull it in. When you are unsure which skill fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/grill-with-docs.md

@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`grill-with-docs` interviews you about a plan or design until you and the agent share one understanding of it, and writes the vocabulary and the hard decisions into your repo while it does. It is the same interview [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) runs — a round of questions, then wait, then the next round — pointed at a codebase.
+`grill-with-docs` interviews you about a plan or design until you and the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) share one understanding of it, and writes the vocabulary and the hard decisions into your repo while it does. It is the same interview [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) runs (a round of questions, then wait, then the next round), pointed at a codebase.
 
-It is **stateful**. Every other grilling skill leaves the session in your head; this one leaves files on disk. A term gets resolved and it lands in `CONTEXT.md` the moment it resolves, not batched at the end. A decision passes three gates and it lands as an ADR. That is the whole difference, and it is also the source of most of the trouble people have with the skill: the artifacts are real files in a real repo, so they can be absent when you expected them, and they can drift when more than one person is writing them.
+It is **[stateful](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/stateful)**. Every other grilling skill leaves the [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) in your head; this one leaves files on disk. A term gets resolved and it lands in `CONTEXT.md` the moment it resolves, not batched at the end. A decision passes three gates and it lands as an ADR. That is the whole difference, and it is also the source of most of the trouble people have with the skill: the artifacts are real files in a real repo, so they can be absent when you expected them, and they can drift when more than one person is writing them.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/grill-with-docs` — the agent will not reach for it on its own.
+You invoke this by typing `/grill-with-docs`; the agent will not reach for it on its own.
 
 Reach for it at the start of a change, in a repo, when the plan is still fuzzy and the words for the thing are not settled yet. It is the single-session tool. Which grilling skill you want depends on what is in front of you:
 
@@ -14,15 +14,15 @@ Reach for it at the start of a change, in a repo, when the plan is still fuzzy a
 | --- | --- |
 | You aren't working in a working directory at all | [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) |
 | A repo, and a change you can settle in one session | `grill-with-docs` |
-| An effort too big to hold in one session — a greenfield build, a large feature | [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) |
+| An effort too big to hold in one session (a greenfield build, a large feature) | [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) |
 | A repo with no domain docs at all, and no particular feature in mind | `grill-with-docs`, aimed at the repo rather than a change |
 | A decision blocked on knowledge in someone else's head | [to-questionnaire](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-questionnaire) |
 
-Matt's own line on the wayfinder split: "Use /grill-with-docs for single-session planning. Use /wayfinder for multi-session planning."
+The wayfinder split comes down to session count: `/grill-with-docs` for single-session planning, `/wayfinder` for multi-session planning.
 
 ## Prerequisites
 
-The skill writes into your repo, so you need to be somewhere it is safe to write. Resolved terms go to a `CONTEXT.md` glossary at the root — or to the relevant context's `CONTEXT.md`, if a `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the root marks the repo as multi-context. Decisions go to `docs/adr/`. Both are created lazily; nothing exists until the first term or decision crystallises, so there is nothing to scaffold up front.
+The skill writes into your repo, so you need to be somewhere it is safe to write. Resolved terms go to a `CONTEXT.md` glossary at the root, or to the relevant context's `CONTEXT.md`, if a `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the root marks the repo as multi-context. Decisions go to `docs/adr/`. Both are created lazily; nothing exists until the first term or decision crystallises, so there is nothing to scaffold up front.
 
 It also needs two other skills present, because its own `SKILL.md` is one line that delegates to them: [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) supplies the interview, [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) supplies the writing. Installing `grill-with-docs` alone gets you a skill that does not work.
 
@@ -32,47 +32,41 @@ Three things come out of a session, and they are not equal.
 
 | What resolved | Where it lands |
 | --- | --- |
-| A term — the project's own word for a thing | `CONTEXT.md`, inline, the moment it resolves |
+| A term: the project's own word for a thing | `CONTEXT.md`, inline, the moment it resolves |
 | A decision that is hard to reverse, surprising without context, and a real trade-off | An ADR under `docs/adr/` |
 | Everything else you decided | The conversation, and nowhere else |
 
-That third row is the one that catches people out. `CONTEXT.md` is a glossary and is deliberately kept as one — no implementation details, no spec, no scratch notes. ADRs are gated on all three conditions at once, so most decisions do not qualify and most sessions produce none. A session that yields a sharper glossary and zero ADRs is working as designed, but it means the bulk of what you agreed exists only in the context window you agreed it in. Hand that same conversation to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) rather than clearing it.
+That third row is the one that catches people out. `CONTEXT.md` is a glossary and is deliberately kept as one: no implementation details, no [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec), no scratch notes. ADRs are gated on all three conditions at once, so most decisions do not qualify and most sessions produce none. A session that yields a sharper glossary and zero ADRs is working as designed, but it means the bulk of what you agreed exists only in the [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window) you agreed it in. Hand that same conversation to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) rather than [clearing](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/clearing) it.
 
-The glossary is the point. Domain language is the thing this skill is actually building — the project's own words, agreed once, so you, the agent and your colleagues stop paying to re-derive them. It is worth saying that not everyone agrees this buys you agent performance: the sharpest public pushback is that a term and its plain-English expansion get the same result from the model, and that the vocabulary really compresses communication between the humans who share it. That reading still leaves the glossary valuable; it just moves the value.
-
-## It assumes one writer
-
-The stateful outputs assume a single person curating them. A two-developer team running four months in one repo reported state drift on roughly 20% of sampled merged PRs, with ADR citations and README claims the highest-drift surfaces — deliberate, human-curated docs drifted worse than agent memory did. Pruning the stale docs did not hold; the same sweep was stale again within days. What worked was deleting shadow state outright and adding a deterministic citation and link linter to CI.
-
-Related: running the skill repeatedly across unrelated changes in one repo tends to accumulate mixed-topic docs, because nothing separates one session's output from another's. Neither of these is fixed in the skill today.
+The glossary is the point. Domain language is the thing this skill is actually building: the project's own words, agreed once, so you, the agent and your colleagues stop paying to re-derive them. It is worth saying that not everyone agrees this buys you agent performance: the sharpest public pushback is that a term and its plain-English expansion get the same result from the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model), and that the vocabulary really compresses communication between the humans who share it. That reading still leaves the glossary valuable; it just moves the value.
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **Should I use this or `/wayfinder`?**
-Scope decides it. Use this for anything you can settle in one session; use [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) when the effort is too big to hold in one, and it charts the work as a map of decision tickets first. Wayfinder is slower and denser, and reaching for it on a well-scoped feature is the common mistake. It does not replace this skill — it can drop into a grilling session for the parts of the map that suit one.
+Scope decides it. Use this for anything you can settle in one session; use [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) when the effort is too big to hold in one, and it charts the work as a map of decision [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) first. Wayfinder is slower and denser, and reaching for it on a well-scoped feature is the common mistake. It does not replace this skill: it can drop into a grilling session for the parts of the map that suit one.
 
 **It ran, but no `CONTEXT.md` and no ADRs appeared.**
-Two known causes. The mundane one: nothing qualified. ADRs need all three gates, and a session about a change with no new vocabulary genuinely has nothing to write. The real bug: when the skill runs inside another orchestration layer — a spec-driven-development wrapper, a multi-agent framework, a rule that invokes it as a step in someone else's pipeline — the file-writing half is reported to silently not happen, while the interview still runs. This is filed and unfixed. If you are in that setup, check the working directory before you trust the session's output.
+Two known causes. The mundane one: nothing qualified. ADRs need all three gates, and a session about a change with no new vocabulary genuinely has nothing to write. The real bug: when the skill runs inside another orchestration layer (a spec-driven-development wrapper, a multi-agent framework, a rule that invokes it as a step in someone else's pipeline), the file-writing half is reported to silently not happen, while the interview still runs. This is filed and unfixed. If you are in that setup, check the working directory before you trust the session's output.
 
 **It asked everything at once, with no recommendations, and never mentioned `CONTEXT.md`.**
-That is the skill failing to load its two dependencies. Because `SKILL.md` is a one-line delegation, an agent that does not pick up [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) guesses at what grilling means, and you get an undifferentiated question dump. Partial loading is the more confusing case — `grilling` loads, `domain-modeling` does not, and you get a good interview with no paper trail. It correlates with model and effort level, and it is the most reported problem with this skill. If you suspect it, ask the agent directly which skills it loaded.
+That is the skill failing to load its two dependencies. Because `SKILL.md` is a one-line delegation, an agent that does not pick up [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) guesses at what grilling means, and you get an undifferentiated question dump. Partial loading is the more confusing case: `grilling` loads, `domain-modeling` does not, and you get a good interview with no paper trail. It correlates with model and [effort](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/effort) level, and it is the most reported problem with this skill. If you suspect it, ask the agent directly which skills it loaded.
 
 **Where did all my other decisions go?**
-Into the conversation only. This is the most substantive open complaint about the skill: the glossary is not a spec, most answers do not earn an ADR, and there is no ledger tying each resolved answer through to a spec, a ticket and a test. Precise answers — ordering guarantees, negative requirements, numeric defaults — get softened into weaker prose downstream, and the result can look complete while missing the thing you actually decided. The mitigation available today is to keep the session and feed it straight to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), and to re-read the spec against your own answers rather than assuming it captured them.
+Into the conversation only. This is the most substantive open complaint about the skill: the glossary is not a spec, most answers do not earn an ADR, and there is no ledger tying each resolved answer through to a spec, a ticket and a test. Precise answers (ordering guarantees, negative requirements, numeric defaults) get softened into weaker prose downstream, and the result can look complete while missing the thing you actually decided. The mitigation available today is to keep the session and feed it straight to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), and to re-read the spec against your own answers rather than assuming it captured them.
 
 **Can I point it at an existing repo that has no docs at all?**
-Yes. Matt's advice for a codebase with no ADRs, no domain language and no design principles is this skill — "just say 'help me document my repo'." The community pattern pairs it with [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) for building or repairing a `CONTEXT.md`. Expect to steer it: it will read code and ask you about what it finds, and you are the one who says which of the words already in the codebase are the right ones.
+Yes. This is the right skill for a codebase with no ADRs, no domain language and no design principles: invoke it and say "help me document my repo". The community pattern pairs it with [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) for building or repairing a `CONTEXT.md`. Expect to steer it: it will read code and ask you about what it finds, and you are the one who says which of the words already in the codebase are the right ones.
 
 **What should I do when the session ends?**
 The skill's closing message tends to be open-ended, which is a known rough edge. In the main flow the answer is [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), in the same conversation. If the change is small enough to build immediately, go straight to [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) instead.
 
 **Why is it called that?**
-Nobody is happy with the name, Matt included — he has called it a bad one publicly, and there is an open suggestion to rename it `grill-domain-model`, which describes the behaviour more honestly. Nothing has moved on it. If a rename ever lands, the docs page moves with it and the URL changes.
+Nobody is happy with the name. There is an open suggestion to rename it `grill-domain-model`, which describes the behaviour more honestly. Nothing has moved on it. If a rename ever lands, the docs page moves with it and the URL changes.
 
 ## It's working if
 
 - `CONTEXT.md` changes *during* the session, term by term, rather than appearing in one lump at the end.
-- The glossary reads as pure vocabulary — your project's words with tight definitions — and contains no implementation detail or spec-like prose.
+- The glossary reads as pure vocabulary (your project's words with tight definitions) and contains no implementation detail or spec-like prose.
 - Questions the codebase can answer get answered by reading the codebase, not asked of you.
 - You get few or no ADRs, and the ones you get are decisions you would be annoyed to have to re-litigate.
 - It challenges a word you used because your existing glossary defines it differently.
@@ -85,4 +79,4 @@ Nobody is happy with the name, Matt included — he has called it a bad one publ
 grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review
 ```
 
-It comes before anything is written down as a spec — it produces the shared understanding and settled vocabulary that [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) then synthesises without interviewing you again. Its close neighbours are [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me), the same interview with no repo and no files, and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), the glossary-and-ADR discipline it drives; both sit on the [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) primitive. Upstream of it, [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) charts efforts too large for one session and can hand parts of the map back down to it. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+It comes before anything is written down as a spec: it produces the shared understanding and settled vocabulary that [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) then synthesises without interviewing you again. Its close neighbours are [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me), the same interview with no repo and no files, and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), the glossary-and-ADR discipline it drives; both sit on the [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) primitive. Upstream of it, [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) charts efforts too large for one session and can hand parts of the map back down to it. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/implement.md

@@ -1,18 +1,18 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`implement` builds work that has already been decided. You point it at a ticket, a spec, or the plan you just agreed in the conversation, and it writes the code, drives [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) at the seams, typechecks as it goes, runs [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) at the end, and commits to the current branch.
+`implement` builds work that has already been decided. You point it at a [ticket](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket), a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec), or the plan you just agreed in the conversation, and it writes the code, drives [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) at the seams, typechecks as it goes, runs [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) at the end, and commits to the current branch.
 
-It never reopens the plan. There is no interview, no clarifying round, no proposal of a different approach. Whatever was settled upstream is the input, and the skill's whole job is to turn that into a commit. That is what separates it from typing "build this" at a fresh agent, which will happily redesign the work while it builds it.
+It never reopens the plan. There is no interview, no clarifying round, no proposal of a different approach. Whatever was settled upstream is the input, and the skill's whole job is to turn that into a commit. That is what separates it from typing "build this" at a fresh [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent), which will happily redesign the work while it builds it.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/implement` — the agent won't reach for it on its own. It ships with `disable-model-invocation: true`, so no other skill can call it either. Wherever [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) or [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) says "then `/implement` per ticket", that is an instruction to you, not something the agent will do unprompted.
+You invoke this by typing `/implement` yourself: the agent won't reach for it on its own. It ships with `disable-model-invocation: true`, so no other skill can call it either. Wherever [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) or [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) says "then `/implement` per ticket", that is an instruction to you, not something the agent will do unprompted.
 
 Where the work currently lives decides whether this is the right skill:
 
 | The work is… | Reach for |
 | --- | --- |
-| A ticket on the tracker | `/implement #42`, one ticket per session, clearing context between tickets |
+| A ticket on the tracker | `/implement #42`, one ticket per [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), [clearing](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/clearing) context between tickets |
 | A spec, not yet split up, and the build spans sessions | [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) first, then `/implement` per ticket |
 | A spec, and the build is small | `/implement` directly against the spec |
 | Only in the conversation you just had, and it's still small | `/implement` right there, in the same window |
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ Where the work currently lives decides whether this is the right skill:
 | One concrete behaviour you want test-first, with no spec | [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) directly |
 | Already built, and you want it checked | [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) directly |
 
-The same-session case is worth naming because the skill's own first line doesn't cover it. `SKILL.md` says "the spec or tickets", which nudges the model to go hunting for a file that doesn't exist. If the plan lives only in the thread, say so when you invoke it.
+The same-session case is worth naming because the skill's own first line doesn't cover it. `SKILL.md` says "the spec or tickets", which nudges the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) to go hunting for a file that doesn't exist. If the plan lives only in the thread, say so when you invoke it.
 
 ## Prerequisites
 
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ A run is five beats, in order:
 4. Run the full test suite once, at the end.
 5. Run [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review), then commit to the current branch.
 
-One run covers one ticket. The tickets [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) produces are tracer-bullet vertical slices sized to fit a single fresh context window, so the intended rhythm is: clear context, implement one ticket, commit, clear again. Each ticket is self-contained, which is what makes the previous ticket's context disposable.
+One run covers one ticket. The tickets [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) produces are tracer-bullet vertical slices sized to fit a single fresh [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window), so the intended rhythm is: clear context, implement one ticket, commit, clear again. Each ticket is self-contained, which is what makes the previous ticket's context disposable.
 
 ## Pre-agreed seams
 
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ Correct, and expected. `implement` has no completion step. It ends at the commit
 
 **Can I point it at all my tickets at once, or run several in parallel?**
 
-No. One invocation, one ticket. Batch dispatch across a ticket queue and subagent fan-out are both requested repeatedly, and neither exists. Running several `/implement` sessions side by side in one checkout is worse than unsupported: one field report describes a `git commit --amend` in one session landing on another session's commit, a stash vanishing from `refs/stash`, and commits landing on the wrong branch, all in a single afternoon across three issues. The sessions share one working directory, one index, and one HEAD. Git worktrees are the community workaround, and note that `refs/stash` is shared across worktrees too, so worktrees alone do not fix the stash case. If you want parallelism today, you are assembling it yourself.
+No. One invocation, one ticket. Batch dispatch across a ticket queue and [subagent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) fan-out are both requested repeatedly, and neither exists. Running several `/implement` sessions side by side in one checkout is worse than unsupported: one field report describes a `git commit --amend` in one session landing on another session's commit, a stash vanishing from `refs/stash`, and commits landing on the wrong branch, all in a single afternoon across three issues. The sessions share one working directory, one index, and one HEAD. Git worktrees are the community workaround, and note that `refs/stash` is shared across worktrees too, so worktrees alone do not fix the stash case. If you want parallelism today, you are assembling it yourself.
 
 **Can it open a pull request instead of committing?**
 
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ Separately, some people deliberately do not want the review inside the run at al
 
 **One ticket burned 150k tokens. Am I using it wrong?**
 
-Probably the ticket is too big rather than the skill being misused. A run does codebase exploration, a red-green loop per seam, a full suite, and a review, so a non-trivial ticket exceeding 100k tokens is normal rather than a sign something broke. The lever is upstream: right-size the tickets in [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) so each fits one fresh window. If a single ticket keeps blowing out, split it rather than raising the effort level.
+Probably the ticket is too big rather than the skill being misused. A run does codebase exploration, a red-green loop per seam, a full suite, and a review, so a non-trivial ticket exceeding 100k [tokens](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/token) is normal rather than a sign something broke. The lever is upstream: right-size the tickets in [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) so each fits one fresh window. If a single ticket keeps blowing out, split it rather than raising the [effort](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/effort) level.
 
 **`/implement #2` in a fresh session worked on something completely unrelated.**
 

docs/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture.md

@@ -1,39 +1,39 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`improve-codebase-architecture` surveys a codebase for **deepening opportunities** — places where a shallow module (an interface nearly as complex as the thing it hides) could become a deep one — writes them up as a self-contained HTML report, and then grills you through whichever one you pick.
+`improve-codebase-architecture` surveys a codebase for **deepening opportunities**: places where a shallow module (an interface nearly as complex as the thing it hides) could become a deep one. It writes them up as a self-contained HTML report, and then [grills](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) you through whichever one you pick.
 
-It never changes the code. The whole run produces one HTML file in your OS temp directory and a conversation; the refactor itself happens later, in a separate session, through the normal build flow. That is what makes it a survey rather than a refactoring tool, and it is why the skill is worth running on a codebase you are not ready to touch yet.
+It never changes the code. The whole run produces one HTML file in your OS temp directory and a conversation; the refactor itself happens later, in a separate [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), through the normal build flow. That is what makes it a survey rather than a refactoring tool, and it is why the skill is worth running on a codebase you are not ready to touch yet.
 
-Two filters keep the report from becoming generic cleanup advice. Every candidate has to pass the **deletion test** — would removing this module concentrate complexity behind a smaller interface, or just spread it across callers? Only the "concentrates" cases earn a card. And unless you point it at a specific area, it reads recent commit history first and biases the scan toward paths that are actively changing, on the grounds that a deepening in code nobody touches is a refactor you will never cash in.
+Two filters keep the report from becoming generic cleanup advice. Every candidate has to pass the **deletion test**: would removing this module concentrate complexity behind a smaller interface, or just spread it across callers? Only the "concentrates" cases earn a card. And unless you point it at a specific area, it reads recent commit history first and biases the scan toward paths that are actively changing, on the grounds that a deepening in code nobody touches is a refactor you will never cash in.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/improve-codebase-architecture` — the agent will not reach for it on its own.
+You invoke this by typing `/improve-codebase-architecture`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) will not reach for it on its own.
 
-It sits outside the build loop. Matt's own positioning, in answer to a question about test suites, is that it is "outside of the main loop... something you run periodically to queue up more work to improve the codebase." The four situations it gets used in:
+It sits outside the build loop: it is not a step in the main loop but something you run periodically to queue up more work to improve the codebase. The four situations it gets used in:
 
 | Situation | How it is used |
 | --- | --- |
 | Routine upkeep | Run it every few days, or whenever a spare moment appears, to stop structure rotting between features. |
-| Before a big build | Point it at the spec: "how can we make this change easy?" This is Matt's own most-used prompt for it. |
-| Brownfield audit | Run it on a large, unstructured or vibe-coded repo to find out what shape it is actually in. |
+| Before a big build | Point it at the [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec): "how can we make this change easy?" This is the most effective prompt for it. |
+| Brownfield audit | Run it on a large, unstructured or [vibe-coded](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/vibe-coding) repo to find out what shape it is actually in. |
 | Legacy test work | Use it to find the missing seams first, before writing tests against untestable code. |
 
 Where it is confusable with siblings:
 
-- For designing one module you have already chosen, use [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design) — that is the bench, this is the survey that finds what to put on it.
+- For designing one module you have already chosen, use [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design): that is the bench, this is the survey that finds what to put on it.
 - For a whole effort too big to hold in one session, use [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder).
 - For "this specific thing is broken," use [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs). It hands back here when the real finding is that there is no good seam to lock the bug down.
 
 ## Prerequisites
 
-None to run it. It reads `CONTEXT.md` and any ADRs in `docs/adr/` if they exist, and speaks in your domain's own nouns when they do — a candidate reads as "deepen the Order intake module," not "refactor the FooBarHandler."
+None to run it. It reads `CONTEXT.md` and any ADRs in `docs/adr/` if they exist, and speaks in your domain's own nouns when they do: a candidate reads as "deepen the Order intake module," not "refactor the FooBarHandler."
 
 It writes in two places. The report goes to `<tmpdir>/architecture-review-<timestamp>.html`, outside the repo. During the grilling loop it will add or sharpen terms in `CONTEXT.md`, creating that file if it does not exist, and offer to record a rejected candidate as an ADR so a future run does not re-suggest it.
 
 ## Depth, and the report that hunts for it
 
-The skill turns on one idea: **depth**. A deep module puts a lot of behaviour behind a small, stable interface. A shallow one leaks its implementation through an interface nearly as wide as the code beneath it. The report is a hunt for shallowness — pure functions extracted only for testability while the real bugs live in how they are called (no **locality**), modules leaking across their **seams**, a concept you cannot understand without opening five files — and a proposal for the deepening that fixes it.
+The skill turns on one idea: **depth**. A deep module puts a lot of behaviour behind a small, stable interface. A shallow one leaks its implementation through an interface nearly as wide as the code beneath it. The report hunts for shallowness in three forms: pure functions extracted only for testability while the real bugs live in how they are called (no **locality**), modules leaking across their **seams**, and a concept you cannot understand without opening five files. It closes with a proposal for the deepening that fixes it.
 
 Each candidate is a card: the files involved, the friction, a plain-English solution, the benefit stated in terms of **locality** and **leverage**, a before/after diagram, and a strength badge.
 
@@ -43,17 +43,17 @@ Each candidate is a card: the files involved, the friction, a plain-English solu
 | `Worth exploring` | Plausible deepening, but the payoff depends on where the code is going next. |
 | `Speculative` | Surfaced for completeness. Most of these are safe to ignore. |
 
-The report ends with a **Top recommendation** — the one it would tackle first — and then the skill stops and asks which candidate you want to explore. Nothing has been decided at that point, and no code has moved.
+The report ends with a **Top recommendation** (the one it would tackle first), and then the skill stops and asks which candidate you want to explore. Nothing has been decided at that point, and no code has moved.
 
 ## What happens after you pick one
 
-Picking a candidate starts a [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) session over it: constraints, what sits behind the seam, which tests survive, what the deepened interface should look like. The output of that session is a decision, not a diff. From there the normal flow applies — take the decision into [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), then [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets), then [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement).
+Picking a candidate starts a [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) session over it: constraints, what sits behind the seam, which tests survive, what the deepened interface should look like. The output of that session is a decision, not a diff. From there the normal flow applies: take the decision into [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), then [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets), then [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement).
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **It grilled me for an hour about one idea instead of showing me options. Can I turn that off?**
 
-Yes — say so when you invoke it ("don't grill me, just show the report"). This is the loudest complaint the skill has. One user put it bluntly: they liked it as "a convenient way to get a thorough analysis of improvements," and after the grilling loop was added found it "borderline unusable," reporting sessions where it proposed a single solution and then asked "10's or 100's of questions." The design intent is that the report comes first and the grill only starts on a candidate you chose, but weaker models skip straight to interviewing you about the first idea they had. Reports in that thread vary sharply by model, and it is an open issue — the skill does not yet have a documented no-grill mode.
+Yes: say so when you invoke it ("don't grill me, just show the report"). This is the loudest complaint the skill has. One user put it bluntly: they liked it as "a convenient way to get a thorough analysis of improvements," and after the grilling loop was added found it "borderline unusable," reporting sessions where it proposed a single solution and then asked "10's or 100's of questions." The design intent is that the report comes first and the grill only starts on a candidate you chose, but weaker [models](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) skip straight to interviewing you about the first idea they had. Reports in that thread vary sharply by model, and it is an open issue: the skill does not yet have a documented no-grill mode.
 
 **The report opened as unstyled raw HTML with no diagrams. What happened?**
 
@@ -61,27 +61,27 @@ The report loads Tailwind and Mermaid from CDNs, so it needs network access when
 
 **It gave me twelve candidates. Do I work through them in the same session or start a new one?**
 
-One candidate per session. Working through several in one conversation fills the context window with the report, the grilling, the domain-model edits and the code changes all at once. The report only lives in a temp file, so carry the candidate itself rather than the file: pick one, grill it, take the decision into `/to-spec`, and turn the rest into tickets you can pick up independently later. Matt's answer to the same question was to put the chosen improvement into a spec rather than going straight to implementation. This is a recurring question with no documented workflow in the skill itself.
+One candidate per session. Working through several in one conversation fills the [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window) with the report, the grilling, the domain-model edits and the code changes all at once. The report only lives in a temp file, so carry the candidate itself rather than the file: pick one, grill it, take the decision into `/to-spec`, and turn the rest into [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) you can pick up independently later. Put the chosen improvement into a spec rather than going straight to implementation. This is a recurring question with no documented workflow in the skill itself.
 
 **How should I prompt it?**
 
-With the next thing you are building in mind. Matt: "Usually I prompt it with the next thing I'm building in mind. If I've got a big build coming up I might point it at the spec and say 'how can we make this change easy'." An unprompted run scans for hot spots on its own, which is fine for routine upkeep, but naming a direction is what makes the report actionable.
+With the next thing you are building in mind. Where a big build is coming up, point it at the spec and ask "how can we make this change easy?" An unprompted run scans for hot spots on its own, which is fine for routine upkeep, but naming a direction is what makes the report actionable.
 
 **Does it work on a large legacy codebase?**
 
-Partly. Asked directly about big existing codebases lacking consistent structure, Matt's answer was "Yep, /improve-codebase-architecture is extremely good here," and it is the recommended upkeep mechanism after any one-time structural setup. The honest counterweight: users with genuinely out-of-control projects report it "helped a little but still doesn't seem to cut it," and one developer with an eight-year legacy codebase reported the model going in circles where the same skill produces a clean graph on a tidy repo. There is no dedicated `/refactor` skill for that case yet. If the codebase has no shared vocabulary at all, [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) to establish one first tends to make this skill's output much better.
+Partly. It is strong on big existing codebases lacking consistent structure, and it is the recommended upkeep mechanism after any one-time structural setup. The honest counterweight: users with genuinely out-of-control projects report it "helped a little but still doesn't seem to cut it," and one developer with an eight-year legacy codebase reported the model going in circles where the same skill produces a clean graph on a tidy repo. There is no dedicated `/refactor` skill for that case yet. If the codebase has no shared vocabulary at all, [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) to establish one first tends to make this skill's output much better.
 
 **How is this different from `/codebase-design`?**
 
-`/codebase-design` is a reference, not a session driver. It supplies the vocabulary — module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage, locality — and this skill borrows it. Pointing a fresh agent at `/codebase-design` as the thing to "do" is a known failure: with no process of its own to follow, the agent invents one, re-explores code and runs for a very long time before asking you anything. Drive with this skill; consume that one.
+`/codebase-design` is a reference, not a session driver. It supplies the vocabulary (module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage, locality), and this skill borrows it. Pointing a fresh agent at `/codebase-design` as the thing to "do" is a known failure: with no process of its own to follow, the agent invents one, re-explores code and runs for a very long time before asking you anything. Drive with this skill; consume that one.
 
 **Will it ever tell me the codebase is fine?**
 
-Rarely, and you should know that going in. The skill is built to output findings, so the framing pushes it toward producing candidates rather than concluding that nothing is wrong. The strength badges are the defence — a report where everything is `Speculative` is the skill telling you it found nothing, in the only way it knows how.
+Rarely, and you should know that going in. The skill is built to output findings, so the framing pushes it toward producing candidates rather than concluding that nothing is wrong. The strength badges are the defence: a report where everything is `Speculative` is the skill telling you it found nothing, in the only way it knows how.
 
 **Does it work in Codex or another harness?**
 
-Partially. The exploration step names Claude Code's `Agent` tool with `subagent_type=Explore` directly, so a harness without that tool may skip the parallel exploration rather than substitute its own. The skill still runs; the scan is just less thorough. A harness-neutral rewrite has been proposed but is not merged.
+Partially. The exploration step names Claude Code's `Agent` tool with `subagent_type=Explore` directly, so a [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) without that tool may skip the parallel exploration rather than substitute its own. The skill still runs; the scan is just less thorough. A harness-neutral rewrite has been proposed but is not merged.
 
 **How do I actually implement deep modules in TypeScript?**
 
@@ -89,13 +89,13 @@ There is no good answer shipped with the skill. The recurring request is for a `
 
 ## It's working if
 
-- The candidates name your domain's concepts, not invented class names — "the Order intake module," not "the FooBarHandler."
+- The candidates name your domain's concepts, not invented class names: "the Order intake module," not "the FooBarHandler."
 - The candidates cluster in files you have edited recently, not in dormant corners of the repo.
 - No code changed during the run. The only new file is the HTML report in your temp directory.
 - It stops after the report and asks which candidate you want, rather than continuing on its own.
-- Each card explains the payoff as locality or leverage, and says which tests get simpler — not just "this is cleaner."
+- Each card explains the payoff as locality or leverage, and says which tests get simpler, not just "this is cleaner."
 - Rejecting a candidate for a durable reason gets you an offer to record an ADR, so the next run does not re-suggest it.
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-`improve-codebase-architecture` is **periodic maintenance** — run it every few days, outside any chain, to queue up work rather than to do it. Its neighbours are [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design), which owns the depth-and-seam vocabulary every candidate is written in, [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling), which walks the decision tree once you have chosen a candidate, and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), which keeps `CONTEXT.md` and the ADRs current as the decision settles. What it produces is an idea, which re-enters the main build flow at [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) or [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec). For which skill fits a situation, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) is the router over the whole set.
+`improve-codebase-architecture` is **periodic maintenance**: run it every few days, outside any chain, to queue up work rather than to do it. Its neighbours are [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design), which owns the depth-and-seam vocabulary every candidate is written in, [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling), which walks the decision tree once you have chosen a candidate, and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), which keeps `CONTEXT.md` and the ADRs current as the decision settles. What it produces is an idea, which re-enters the main build flow at [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) or [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec). For which skill fits a situation, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) is the router over the whole set.

docs/engineering/prototype.md

@@ -1,66 +1,66 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`prototype` writes **throwaway code that answers a question** — does this state model feel right, or what should this screen look like. The question comes first and decides the shape of everything that follows; a prototype that answers the wrong question is pure waste, however good it looks.
+`prototype` writes **throwaway code that answers a question**: does this state model feel right, or what should this screen look like. The question comes first and decides the shape of everything that follows; a prototype that answers the wrong question is pure waste, however good it looks.
 
-Throwaway is a constraint on how the code is *written*, not a promise to destroy it. No tests, no error handling beyond what makes it run, no abstractions, no persistence — because none of that helps you learn the one thing you're trying to learn. What survives is the answer, folded into the real code, and the prototype itself, parked on a branch out of main as the evidence the answer came from.
+Throwaway is a constraint on how the code is *written*, not a promise to destroy it. No tests, no error handling beyond what makes it run, no abstractions, no persistence, because none of that helps you learn the one thing you're trying to learn. What survives is the answer, folded into the real code, and the prototype itself, parked on a branch out of main as the evidence the answer came from.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-Type `/prototype`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task fits.
+Type `/prototype`, or the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) reaches for it automatically when a task fits.
 
-Reach for it the moment you hit a question you can't settle by talking — a state machine whose edge cases you can't hold in your head, a screen you can't picture until you see three versions side by side. Grilling sessions balloon on exactly these questions: the agent rephrases, you guess, and the scope grows to fill the uncertainty. Stop grilling, build the throwaway version, look at it, then answer in one line. If instead something already built is misbehaving and you want to know why, use [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs) — prototyping explores what to build, not why the built thing is broken.
+Reach for it the moment you hit a question you can't settle by talking: a state machine whose edge cases you can't hold in your head, a screen you can't picture until you see three versions side by side. [Grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) sessions balloon on exactly these questions: the agent rephrases, you guess, and the scope grows to fill the uncertainty. Stop grilling, build the throwaway version, look at it, then answer in one line. If instead something already built is misbehaving and you want to know why, use [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs); prototyping explores what to build, not why the built thing is broken.
 
-You will also arrive here without choosing to. [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) files `prototype` decision tickets on its map, and working one is this skill.
+You will also arrive here without choosing to. [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) files `prototype` decision [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) on its map, and working one is this skill.
 
 ## Two branches
 
 The question picks the branch, and the branches produce very different artifacts:
 
-- **"Does this logic / state model feel right?"** — a **single shareable HTML file**. One self-contained page, no build and no server, that someone opens by double-clicking. It carries a labelled state panel that re-renders after every click, free-play buttons for poking at the model in any order, and tabbed **guided walkthroughs** — one scenario per tab, each with the ordered buttons to press underneath it. Everything is labelled in domain language, so you can hand it to a designer, a PM or a domain expert and let them feel the model themselves. The logic behind the page is a small pure module — a reducer, a machine, a set of functions — kept clean of the DOM so the validated version lifts straight into the real code.
-- **"What should this look like?"** — several **radically different** UI variations on one route, switchable from a floating bottom bar and a `?variant=` URL param. Variants must disagree about structure, not colour; three tweaked card grids is wallpaper, not a prototype. They render inside a real page wherever possible, against real data and real density, because a variant judged in a vacuum always looks fine.
+- **"Does this logic / state model feel right?"**: a **single shareable HTML file**. One self-contained page, no build and no server, that someone opens by double-clicking. It carries a labelled state panel that re-renders after every click, free-play buttons for poking at the model in any order, and tabbed **guided walkthroughs** (one scenario per tab, each with the ordered buttons to press underneath it). Everything is labelled in domain language, so you can hand it to a designer, a PM or a domain expert and let them feel the model themselves. The logic behind the page is a small pure module (a reducer, a machine, a set of functions) kept clean of the DOM so the validated version lifts straight into the real code.
+- **"What should this look like?"**: several **radically different** UI variations on one route, switchable from a floating bottom bar and a `?variant=` URL param. Variants must disagree about structure, not colour; three tweaked card grids is wallpaper, not a prototype. They render inside a real page wherever possible, against real data and real density, because a variant judged in a vacuum always looks fine.
 
-Both keep state in memory, start with no thinking required, and show you the full state after every step. The moment you find yourself hardening one — adding a test, wiring the real database, generalising for a case you might want later — you have stopped prototyping.
+Both keep state in memory, start with no thinking required, and show you the full state after every step. The moment you find yourself hardening one (adding a test, wiring the real database, generalising for a case you might want later), you have stopped prototyping.
 
 ## The prototype is a primary source
 
 A finished prototype leaves two things, and they go to different places.
 
-The **answer** — the verdict plus the question it settled — is captured durably: a commit message, an ADR, the implementation issue. That is what the main branch keeps, folded into the real code.
+The **answer** (the verdict plus the question it settled) is captured durably: a commit message, an ADR, the implementation issue. That is what the main branch keeps, folded into the real code.
 
-The **prototype** is the runnable evidence the answer came from, and it is not deleted. It doesn't belong in main either — there is nothing there to maintain and it rots fast — so it is committed to a throwaway `prototype/<name>` branch out of main, never merged, with a context pointer to that branch left on the implementation issue. Main stays clean; the exploration stays findable and re-runnable by whoever picks the work up next.
+The **prototype** is the runnable evidence the answer came from, and it is not deleted. It doesn't belong in main either: there is nothing there to maintain and it rots fast. So it is committed to a throwaway `prototype/<name>` branch out of main, never merged, with a [context pointer](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-pointer) to that branch left on the implementation issue. Main stays clean; the exploration stays findable and re-runnable by whoever picks the work up next.
 
 ## Common questions
 
-**Wait — isn't the prototype supposed to be deleted?**
-Not any more. It used to be: build it, keep the answer, bin the code. The sharpest objection to that was never about speed — it was *who picks up the work next session, and what do they have to work from?* A prose summary of a prototype loses the thing that made it convincing. So the prototype is now treated as a primary source: it lands on a `prototype/<name>` branch out of main and the implementation issue points at it. What changed is where the code lives, not the discipline — it still never merges into main.
+**Wait, isn't the prototype supposed to be deleted?**
+Not any more. It used to be: build it, keep the answer, bin the code. The sharpest objection to that was never about speed: it was *who picks up the work next [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), and what do they have to work from?* A prose summary of a prototype loses the thing that made it convincing. So the prototype is now treated as a [primary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source): it lands on a `prototype/<name>` branch out of main and the implementation issue points at it. What changed is where the code lives, not the discipline; it still never merges into main.
 
 **It used to build a terminal app. Where did that go?**
-The logic branch now emits a single shareable HTML file instead. A terminal app can only be driven by someone with the repo cloned and a runtime installed, which rules out exactly the people whose opinion the prototype needs — the designer, the PM, the domain expert who knows what the state model is supposed to mean. One self-contained file that opens by double-click and survives being emailed can be driven by anyone. The pure logic module underneath is unchanged, and is still the part that lifts into the real code.
+The logic branch now emits a single shareable HTML file instead. A terminal app can only be driven by someone with the repo cloned and a runtime installed, which rules out exactly the people whose opinion the prototype needs: the designer, the PM, the domain expert who knows what the state model is supposed to mean. One self-contained file that opens by double-click and survives being emailed can be driven by anyone. The pure logic module underneath is unchanged, and is still the part that lifts into the real code.
 
 **An agent told me to `/prototype` when I should have been implementing.**
 Known, and it is a naming problem. `prototype` is a generic, appealing word that reads to a flow-unaware agent as "the obvious next step" once tickets exist, so it gets recommended by name even where the design was fully settled in conversation. If you already know what to build, the next step is `/implement`, per ticket. Reach for a prototype only when a specific design question is genuinely unresolved and talking won't resolve it.
 
-**Should I prototype the whole application before building any of its production features — say, to demo it to prospects?**
-That is a different artifact wearing this skill's name. A prototype here is scoped to one question, and "what is the whole app?" isn't one. A full-app prototype has no natural stopping point, so it becomes the production app by momentum: the cleanup pass never happens, and code written under prototype rules — no tests, no error handling — ends up in front of users. If you need a sales demo, build it deliberately as a demo and be explicit that none of it is production. If you need to settle a design question, cut it down to that question.
+**Should I prototype the whole application before building any of its production features (say, to demo it to prospects)?**
+That is a different artifact wearing this skill's name. A prototype here is scoped to one question, and "what is the whole app?" isn't one. A full-app prototype has no natural stopping point, so it becomes the production app by momentum: the cleanup pass never happens, and code written under prototype rules (no tests, no error handling) ends up in front of users. If you need a sales demo, build it deliberately as a demo and be explicit that none of it is production. If you need to settle a design question, cut it down to that question.
 
 **How do I run it in its own session?**
-A prototype lives in its own directory and generates a lot of context you don't want in the thread that asked the question, so run it somewhere else and bring back only the answer. [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff) is the bridge in both directions.
+A prototype lives in its own directory and generates a lot of [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) you don't want in the thread that asked the question, so run it somewhere else and bring back only the answer. [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff) is the bridge in both directions.
 
 **Isn't this the fastest possible way to burn tokens?**
-It can be, if you prototype questions you could have answered by talking, or let one prototype sprawl across a whole feature. The comparison that matters isn't tokens against zero; it's tokens against building the wrong state model and finding out after it has production callers. Keep the question narrow and the run short, and the spend stays proportionate.
+It can be, if you prototype questions you could have answered by talking, or let one prototype sprawl across a whole feature. The comparison that matters isn't tokens against zero; it's [tokens](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/token) against building the wrong state model and finding out after it has production callers. Keep the question narrow and the run short, and the spend stays proportionate.
 
 ## It's working if
 
-- You can say in one sentence what question the prototype exists to answer — and it's written at the top of the demo, not just in your head.
+- You can say in one sentence what question the prototype exists to answer, and it's written at the top of the demo, not just in your head.
 - Someone who doesn't read code can drive the logic demo. They open the file, press the buttons in a walkthrough tab, and describe what they see in their own words.
 - Someone says "wait, that shouldn't be possible" or "huh, I assumed X". That's a bug in the *idea*, which is the entire point.
-- The UI variants disagree about layout and information hierarchy, not just colour and copy — and the feedback you get is "the header from B with the sidebar from C".
+- The UI variants disagree about layout and information hierarchy, not just colour and copy, and the feedback you get is "the header from B with the sidebar from C".
 - It is answered in one sitting. If you're still building it a day later, the question was too big; split it.
 - When it's over, main contains the decision and none of the prototype, and the implementation issue points at the branch that still holds it.
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-`prototype` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone** — you drop into it to settle one design question, then drop back out — and it is also machinery another skill runs on.
+`prototype` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone**: you drop into it to settle one design question, then drop back out, and it is also machinery another skill runs on.
 
 Its largest consumer is [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder). A wayfinder map is made of **decision tickets**, and `prototype` is one of the four types a ticket can be: the one used when the blocking question is "how should this look" or "how should it behave", which no amount of discussion resolves. Wayfinder raises the fidelity of a foggy discussion by making something concrete to react to, and this skill is how that concrete thing gets built. A prototype ticket is resolved by the answer, and the prototype is linked from the map as an asset.
 

docs/engineering/research.md

@@ -1,14 +1,14 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`research` answers a question by reading the sources that own the answer, then leaves a cited Markdown file in the repo. It works only from **primary sources** — official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs — and follows every claim back to the source that owns it, so it will not repeat a blog post's account of an API when the API's own docs are reachable.
+`research` answers a question by reading the sources that own the answer, then leaves a cited Markdown file in the repo. It works only from **[primary sources](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source)**: official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs. It follows every claim back to the source that owns it, so it will not repeat a blog post's account of an API when the API's own docs are reachable.
 
-It does not answer you in the conversation. The output is a file, written where the repo already keeps such notes, with a link on each claim. That is the point: a document you can react to, hand to another agent, or throw away, rather than an answer that vanishes when the session ends.
+It does not answer you in the conversation. The output is a file, written where the repo already keeps such notes, with a link on each claim. That is the point: a document you can react to, hand to another agent, or throw away, rather than an answer that vanishes when the [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) ends.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-Type `/research`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task turns into reading legwork.
+Type `/research`, or the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) reaches for it automatically when a task turns into reading legwork.
 
-Reach for it when the next step is *finding something out* from outside the working directory — how a third-party API behaves, what a spec actually says, whether a version claim holds — and you'd rather not stall your own thread doing the reading. What you need decides which skill:
+Reach for it when the next step is *finding something out* from outside the working directory (how a third-party API behaves, what a spec actually says, whether a version claim holds), and you'd rather not stall your own thread doing the reading. What you need decides which skill:
 
 | What you need | Reach for |
 | --- | --- |
@@ -18,11 +18,11 @@ Reach for it when the next step is *finding something out* from outside the work
 | To find out whether an approach works in your codebase | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) |
 | A plan too big to hold in one session | [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) |
 
-The line between `research` and `grill-with-docs` is the **shelf life of what comes back**. Research produces short-lived assets — what this library's auth mechanism does as of this week. An ADR records a decision you keep. If what you are producing is a decision rather than a fact, you are grilling, not researching.
+The line between `research` and `grill-with-docs` is the **shelf life of what comes back**. Research produces short-lived assets: what this library's auth mechanism does as of this week. An ADR records a decision you keep. If what you are producing is a decision rather than a fact, you are [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling), not researching.
 
 ## Delegated legwork
 
-The defining move is that the reading runs as a **background agent**. You keep working; it goes off, follows each claim to its primary source, writes one Markdown file, and reports back. Research is legwork you delegate, not thinking you outsource — you get a document to grill, plan, or design against, and you still make the call.
+The defining move is that the reading runs as a **background agent**. You keep working; it goes off, follows each claim to its primary source, writes one Markdown file, and reports back. Research is legwork you delegate, not thinking you outsource: you get a document to grill, plan, or design against, and you still make the call.
 
 The delegation is unguarded, and the background agent can spawn a further background agent of its own. This is the skill's best-documented rough edge.
 
@@ -30,42 +30,42 @@ Where the file lands is decided by the repo, not by the skill: it matches whatev
 
 ## Common questions
 
-**It spawned a second research agent — is that meant to happen?**
+**It spawned a second research agent. Is that meant to happen?**
 
-No. This is an open bug, [issue #530](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/530). The skill tells its caller to spin up a background agent but does not restrict the agent type, so the agent it spawns is a `general-purpose` one that holds the `Agent` tool and the same instructions — and fires them again. One reporter measured a single research task costing roughly 450k tokens across three overlapping runs, with the duplicate finishing half an hour later entirely out of view. It reproduces outside Claude Code too; the same nesting was confirmed in Codex with GPT-5.6-sol. There is no shipped fix. Users have patched their own installed copy with a line telling an agent that is already a subagent to do the work itself, which helps but is instruction-level, not structural. Watch your background task list after invoking, and stop the duplicate.
+No. This is an open bug, [issue #530](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/530). The skill tells its caller to spin up a background agent but does not restrict the agent type, so the agent it spawns is a `general-purpose` one that holds the `Agent` tool and the same instructions, and fires them again. One reporter measured a single research task costing roughly 450k [tokens](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/token) across three overlapping runs, with the duplicate finishing half an hour later entirely out of view. It reproduces outside Claude Code too; the same nesting was confirmed in Codex with GPT-5.6-sol. There is no shipped fix. Users have patched their own installed copy with a line telling an agent that is already a [subagent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) to do the work itself, which helps but is instruction-level, not structural. Watch your background task list after invoking, and stop the duplicate.
 
 The opposite failure exists as well: if your own global instructions forbid an agent from re-delegating work, the background agent will politely decline the task and the skill quietly does nothing.
 
-**Where should the file live — and should I commit it?**
+**Where should the file live, and should I commit it?**
 
-The skill puts the file where the repo already keeps notes and does not have an opinion beyond that. The community one is fairly settled: ADRs are kept, research files are not. The sharpest version of it, from a Discord thread on exactly this question: "ADRs yes. Everything else archive or delete after done. It otherwise becomes cruft of work and can poison future repo reads if you've drifted away from the spec/research." A research file records what was true on the day it was written, so a stale one is worse than none. Matt's own position is that these artifacts don't really belong in git, and there is no ruling from him on a canonical home — people use Obsidian, a separate knowledge repo, or the issue tracker instead.
+The skill puts the file where the repo already keeps notes and does not have an opinion beyond that. The community one is fairly settled: ADRs are kept, research files are not. The sharpest version of it, from a Discord thread on exactly this question: "ADRs yes. Everything else archive or delete after done. It otherwise becomes cruft of work and can poison future repo reads if you've drifted away from the spec/research." A research file records what was true on the day it was written, so a stale one is worse than none. On balance these artifacts don't really belong in git, and there is no canonical home for them: people use Obsidian, a separate knowledge repo, or the issue tracker instead.
 
 **What counts as a "high-trust" primary source, and who decides?**
 
-The model does. The skill names the *kinds* of source that qualify — official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs — and there is no allowlist, no domain gate, and no verification pass. This was the loudest objection when the skill was first proposed and it has never been answered publicly: "Five research subagents pointed at junk just gives you five confident wrong answers faster. How are you gating what counts as high-trust sources?" The mitigation you actually have is the citation on each claim. Follow two or three of them. If they land on a summary of the thing rather than the thing, the run failed at its one job.
+The [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) does. The skill names the *kinds* of source that qualify (official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs), and there is no allowlist, no domain gate, and no verification pass. This was the loudest objection when the skill was first proposed and it has never been answered publicly: "Five research subagents pointed at junk just gives you five confident wrong answers faster. How are you gating what counts as high-trust sources?" The mitigation you actually have is the citation on each claim. Follow two or three of them. If they land on a summary of the thing rather than the thing, the run failed at its one job.
 
 **Does a later session reuse what an earlier run found?**
 
-No. Nothing auto-loads a past research file; it is a document sitting in the repo until a human or a skill points at it. This was raised early as the strongest challenge to the design — "the value's the markdown becoming context the agent re-reads later, not the fetch itself. A write-once dead file is just a fancy search" — and the shipped skill does not solve it. In practice the file earns its keep by being fed into the next step deliberately: attach it to a spec, quote it into a grilling session, point a ticket at it.
+No. Nothing auto-loads a past research file; it is a document sitting in the repo until a human or a skill points at it. This was raised early as the strongest challenge to the design: "the value's the markdown becoming context the agent re-reads later, not the fetch itself. A write-once dead file is just a fancy search." The shipped skill does not solve it. In practice the file earns its keep by being fed into the next step deliberately: attach it to a spec, quote it into a grilling session, point a [ticket](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) at it.
 
 **Why not just ask the agent to go read the docs?**
 
-You can, and Matt did for a long time — his hesitation before shipping this was "I tend to just say that verbatim." Two things the skill buys over the prompt: it runs in the background so your session keeps its context clean, and the primary-source constraint and the cited-file output come out the same way every time rather than however you happened to phrase it. Against a harness's own deep-research mode, the difference is the artifact and the source discipline, not the search. If a two-line prompt gets you what you need on a small question, use the two-line prompt.
+You can, and a two-line prompt saying exactly that was the practice this skill replaced. Two things the skill buys over the prompt: it runs in the background so your session keeps its [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) clean, and the primary-source constraint and the cited-file output come out the same way every time rather than however you happened to phrase it. Against a [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness)'s own deep-research mode, the difference is the artifact and the source discipline, not the search. If a two-line prompt gets you what you need on a small question, use the two-line prompt.
 
 **When does it stop reading?**
 
-There is no stopping criterion in the skill, and this shows up as two complaints that look opposite but are the same gap: agents that go far too deep, and agents that cover a topic broadly while missing the one specific detail that mattered. One practitioner put it as "deep-research skills are a bit too deep sometimes. And telling an agent to research usually results in missing crucial details." Scoping is on you. A narrow, answerable question — one API, one behaviour, one version claim — comes back far better than "research X".
+There is no stopping criterion in the skill, and this shows up as two complaints that look opposite but are the same gap: agents that go far too deep, and agents that cover a topic broadly while missing the one specific detail that mattered. One practitioner put it as "deep-research skills are a bit too deep sometimes. And telling an agent to research usually results in missing crucial details." Scoping is on you. A narrow, answerable question (one API, one behaviour, one version claim) comes back far better than "research X".
 
-**`/wayfinder` created research tickets — do I resolve those myself?**
+**`/wayfinder` created research tickets. Do I resolve those myself?**
 
-No, it now fires them for you. In the unreleased changes since v1.1, a charting session spawns a `/research` subagent per research ticket and burns them down in parallel, capturing findings on a throwaway `research/<name>` branch with a context pointer from the ticket. Research tickets are the one exception to wayfinder's one-ticket-per-session rule, because they are AFK — nothing waits on you. Two known snags with those branches: the subagent has been seen opening a draft PR from a branch that is never meant to merge ([issue #576](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/576)), and deleting the branch later breaks the context pointers the tickets hold.
+No, it now fires them for you. In the unreleased changes since v1.1, a charting session spawns a `/research` subagent per research ticket and burns them down in parallel, capturing findings on a throwaway `research/<name>` branch with a [context pointer](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-pointer) from the ticket. Research tickets are the one exception to wayfinder's one-ticket-per-session rule, because they are [AFK](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk): nothing waits on you. Two known snags with those branches: the subagent has been seen opening a draft PR from a branch that is never meant to merge ([issue #576](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/576)), and deleting the branch later breaks the context pointers the tickets hold.
 
 ## It's working if
 
 - Your own session keeps going. If you are sitting watching it read, the delegation didn't happen.
 - Exactly one new background task appears. A second one with a near-identical name is the nesting bug.
 - One new Markdown file shows up, in the folder the repo already uses for notes, and the agent tells you the path.
-- Every claim in it carries a link, and following two at random lands you on an official doc, a spec, or the actual source file — not on someone's write-up of it.
+- Every claim in it carries a link, and following two at random lands you on an official doc, a spec, or the actual source file, not on someone's write-up of it.
 - You can make the decision you were stuck on from the file alone, without going back to the sources yourself.
 
 ## Where it fits

docs/engineering/resolving-merge-conflicts.md

@@ -2,11 +2,11 @@
 
 `resolving-merge-conflicts` works through an in-progress git merge or rebase, hunk by hunk, then runs the project's own checks and finishes the operation with a commit.
 
-It refuses to treat a conflict as a text problem. Before touching a hunk it traces each side back to its **primary source** — the commit message, the PR, the original issue — so it is choosing between two intents rather than between two blocks of text, and it preserves both wherever they are compatible. Where they genuinely are not, it picks the side matching the merge's stated goal and names the trade-off. It invents no new behaviour to paper over a clash, and `--abort` is not an option it has: the merge is always carried to a finished commit.
+It refuses to treat a conflict as a text problem. Before touching a hunk it traces each side back to its **[primary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source)** (the commit message, the PR, the original issue), so it is choosing between two intents rather than between two blocks of text, and it preserves both wherever they are compatible. Where they genuinely are not, it picks the side matching the merge's stated goal and names the trade-off. It invents no new behaviour to paper over a clash, and `--abort` is not an option it has: the merge is always carried to a finished commit.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-Type `/resolving-merge-conflicts`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task fits.
+Type `/resolving-merge-conflicts`, or the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) reaches for it automatically when a task fits.
 
 Reach for it when git has already stopped on conflicts it could not resolve itself. It is scoped to the conflict in front of you, not to anything either side of it:
 
@@ -14,25 +14,25 @@ Reach for it when git has already stopped on conflicts it could not resolve itse
 | --- | --- |
 | Mid-merge or mid-rebase, conflict markers in the tree | This one |
 | Merge finished, something now misbehaves for reasons you can't see | [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs) |
-| Planning how to slice work so branches collide less | Neither — see the parallel-work question below |
+| Planning how to slice work so branches collide less | Neither: see the parallel-work question below |
 
 ## Primary sources over `ours` and `theirs`
 
 The failure mode this exists to kill is resolving by flag: `--ours`, `--theirs`, or hand-deleting whichever block looks less important, so the markers go away and the build compiles. That resolution can be syntactically perfect and still silently drop a change somebody made on purpose.
 
-You cannot preserve an intent you have not read. So the work starts in the history — commits, PRs, tickets — and only then moves to the diff. Another step in the loop exists for the same reason: the skill finds the repo's own automated checks and runs them before committing, because a merge is the easiest place in git to produce code that satisfies both branches and passes neither's tests.
+You cannot preserve an intent you have not read. So the work starts in the history (commits, PRs, [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket)) and only then moves to the diff. Another step in the loop exists for the same reason: the skill finds the repo's own [automated checks](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/automated-check) and runs them before committing, because a merge is the easiest place in git to produce code that satisfies both branches and passes neither's tests.
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **Claude Code already resolves conflicts pretty well on its own. Why does this need a skill?**
 
-This was asked directly when the skill was published. Matt's answer: "The 'find the primary sources' + 'run feedback loops' bits are the added value, I'd always need to manually prompt those." An unprompted agent will usually produce a plausible resolution from the diff alone and stop there. The skill's value is the two steps it will not let the agent skip — reading why each side exists, and running the checks afterwards. That is a thin margin over a good model, and it is meant to be: at least one reader has predicted this is a whole skill that becomes a no-op as models improve.
+The added value is the "find the primary sources" and "run feedback loops" steps, which otherwise have to be prompted by hand every time. An unprompted agent will usually produce a plausible resolution from the diff alone and stop there. The skill's value is the two steps it will not let the agent skip: reading why each side exists, and running the checks afterwards. That is a thin margin over a good [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model), and it is meant to be: at least one reader has predicted this is a whole skill that becomes a no-op as models improve.
 
 **Should I keep parallel agents off the same files to avoid conflicts in the first place?**
 
-Mostly no. Asked whether he uses zones or similar to minimise conflicts across parallel tasks, Matt's answer was: "Genuinely, AI is so good at doing merge conflicts that this tradeoff is not as harsh as you might think." The one piece of discipline he keeps: "You just make sure that large refactors are done first and that's basically it." A large rename landing after ten branches have forked off it is the case that stays expensive.
+Mostly no. Zoning files off between parallel tasks costs more than it saves, because agents are good enough at merge conflicts that the tradeoff is not as harsh as it looks. The one piece of discipline worth keeping is to do large refactors first. A large rename landing after ten branches have forked off it is the case that stays expensive.
 
-One caveat from a user report on parallel worktrees: when sibling sessions each build a ticket in their own tree, the merge back is best done by the session that wrote the change, because it is the one that already knows the intent. Batching everybody's conflicts onto one agent at the end throws away exactly the context step 2 of this skill has to go and reconstruct.
+One caveat from a user report on parallel worktrees: when sibling [sessions](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) each build a ticket in their own tree, the merge back is best done by the session that wrote the change, because it is the one that already knows the intent. Batching everybody's conflicts onto one agent at the end throws away exactly the [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) step 2 of this skill has to go and reconstruct.
 
 **Why never `--abort`?**
 
@@ -44,8 +44,8 @@ Aborting throws away the resolution work and returns you to the same conflict, u
 - Every hunk ends up with both sides' behaviour, or with an explicit note naming what was dropped and why.
 - Nothing appears in the result that was on neither branch.
 - Typecheck, tests and format were located and run green *before* the commit, not after you noticed something broken.
-- You end on a clean tree with the operation completed — including every remaining commit in a multi-commit rebase.
+- You end on a clean tree with the operation completed, including every remaining commit in a multi-commit rebase.
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-A reach-for-it-anytime standalone with no dependencies on any other skill: it starts when git stalls and ends when the tree is clean and committed. Its only real neighbour is [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs), which takes over at the point where a merge resolved cleanly but the merged code misbehaves — a diagnosis problem, not a conflict one. It sits off the main idea-to-ship flow entirely, so [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) is the map for what runs before and after it.
+A reach-for-it-anytime standalone with no dependencies on any other skill: it starts when git stalls and ends when the tree is clean and committed. Its only real neighbour is [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs), which takes over at the point where a merge resolved cleanly but the merged code misbehaves: a diagnosis problem, not a conflict one. It sits off the main idea-to-ship flow entirely, so [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) is the map for what runs before and after it.

docs/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills.md

@@ -1,16 +1,16 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`setup-matt-pocock-skills` answers three questions about one repo — where issues live, what the triage labels are called, and where the domain docs sit — and records the answers as markdown files under `docs/agents/`.
+`setup-matt-pocock-skills` answers three questions about one repo: where issues live, what the triage labels are called, and where the domain docs sit. It records the answers as markdown files under `docs/agents/`.
 
-Those files are the only thing that varies between repos. The skills themselves are identical everywhere; they read `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` at run time and do what it says. That is why the set is not tied to GitHub, and why no skill file ever needs editing to point it somewhere else. Matt's public version of this: *"just run '/setup-matt-pocock-skills link the skills to a custom issue tracker'. Works with literally anything you can connect to programmatically, with zero changes to the skills."*
+Those files are the only thing that varies between repos. The skills themselves are identical everywhere; they read `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` at run time and do what it says. That is why the set is not tied to GitHub, and why no skill file ever needs editing to point it somewhere else. Invoking it with "link the skills to a custom issue tracker" works with anything you can connect to programmatically, with zero changes to the skills.
 
 It is a prompt-driven skill, not a deterministic script. It reads your `git remote`, your existing `CLAUDE.md`, your existing `CONTEXT.md`, proposes what it found, and waits for you to confirm before writing anything.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` — the agent won't reach for it on its own. It is deliberately marked non-invokable, so no other skill can fire it for you.
+You invoke this by typing `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own. It is deliberately marked non-invokable, so no other skill can fire it for you.
 
-Reach for it once per repo, before the first use of any other engineering skill. If [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage), [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) or [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) start guessing where your issues go, or apply labels your tracker doesn't have, they have not been set up here yet. A repo already halfway through a project is a fine place to run it — asked exactly that, Matt's answer was *"Just run /setup-matt-pocock-skills and you're good."*
+Reach for it once per repo, before the first use of any other engineering skill. If [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage), [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) or [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) start guessing where your issues go, or apply labels your tracker doesn't have, they have not been set up here yet. A repo already halfway through a project is a fine place to run it; the skill reads what is already there and no earlier work is wasted.
 
 ## Prerequisites
 
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ It leads each section with the recommended answer, and skips whatever exploratio
 
 | Decision | What it proposes | When it actually asks |
 | --- | --- | --- |
-| **Issue tracker** | the one matching your `git remote` | always — this is the one real choice |
+| **Issue tracker** | the one matching your `git remote` | always: this is the one real choice |
 | **Triage labels** | keep the five canonical names (`needs-triage`, `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, `wontfix`) | only if the `triage` skill is installed |
 | **Domain docs** | single-context: one `CONTEXT.md` plus `docs/adr/` at the root | only if it spots monorepo signals, and then it offers a multi-context `CONTEXT-MAP.md` |
 
@@ -41,12 +41,12 @@ The tracker options:
 | --- | --- | --- |
 | **GitHub** | the repo's GitHub Issues | the `gh` CLI |
 | **GitLab** | the repo's GitLab Issues | the `glab` CLI |
-| **Local markdown** | files under `.scratch/<feature>/` in this repo | nothing — no remote at all |
+| **Local markdown** | files under `.scratch/<feature>/` in this repo | nothing: no remote at all |
 | **Other** | wherever you say | one paragraph from you describing the workflow |
 
-The first three ship as templates in the skill and work out of the box. Local markdown is a first-class option, not a fallback: a solo project with no remote is fully supported. Matt's caveat is worth repeating though — *"Don't use local markdown if you're using GitHub."* They are alternatives, not layers.
+The first three ship as templates in the skill and work out of the box. Local markdown is a first-class option, not a fallback: a solo project with no remote is fully supported. One caveat is worth repeating: don't use local markdown if you're using GitHub. They are alternatives, not layers.
 
-"Other" is not a stub either. It is the reason Jira, Linear, Azure DevOps and Beads all work: you describe the workflow, the skill records your prose in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, and the downstream skills follow the prose. The community has already done this — a Jira-over-MCP variant, a Gitea CLI shaped like `gh`, a hand-built local dashboard.
+"Other" is not a stub either. It is the reason Jira, Linear, Azure DevOps and Beads all work: you describe the workflow, the skill records your prose in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, and the downstream skills follow the prose. The community has already done this: a Jira-over-[MCP](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/mcp) variant, a Gitea CLI shaped like `gh`, a hand-built local dashboard.
 
 ## Common questions
 
@@ -56,20 +56,20 @@ No. GitHub, GitLab and local markdown under `.scratch/` all ship as ready-made t
 
 **Do I need to re-run it after updating the skills?**
 
-Asked directly after v1.1, Matt said yes. The skill's own closing message is softer — it tells you re-running is only needed to switch trackers or start over. Both are defensible and the reason for the gap is real: the seed templates change between versions, so a `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` written by an older release can go stale against the skills now reading it. If a downstream skill starts doing something the docs describe differently, re-running is the cheap fix.
+Asked directly after v1.1, Matt said yes. The skill's own closing message is softer: it tells you re-running is only needed to switch trackers or start over. Both are defensible and the reason for the gap is real: the seed templates change between versions, so a `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` written by an older release can go stale against the skills now reading it. If a downstream skill starts doing something the docs describe differently, re-running is the cheap fix.
 
 **It wrote to `CLAUDE.md`, but I'm on Codex.**
 
-Known gap, still open. The file-selection rule is "edit `CLAUDE.md` if it exists, else `AGENTS.md`" — it checks which file exists, not which harness is running. A repo with a `CLAUDE.md` left over from Claude Code will get its `## Agent skills` block somewhere Codex never reads. Two workarounds are in circulation: move the block to `AGENTS.md` by hand, or keep `AGENTS.md` canonical and make `CLAUDE.md` a one-line pointer at it. If neither file exists, the skill asks you which to create rather than picking, which has confused people who expected it to just decide.
+Known gap, still open. The file-selection rule is "edit `CLAUDE.md` if it exists, else `AGENTS.md`": it checks which file exists, not which [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) is running. A repo with a `CLAUDE.md` left over from Claude Code will get its `## Agent skills` block somewhere Codex never reads. Two workarounds are in circulation: move the block to `AGENTS.md` by hand, or keep `AGENTS.md` canonical and make `CLAUDE.md` a one-line pointer at it. If neither file exists, the skill asks you which to create rather than picking, which has confused people who expected it to just decide.
 
 **It didn't create my triage labels.**
 
-It doesn't. `docs/agents/triage-labels.md` is a *mapping* — it tells `/triage` which strings in your tracker correspond to the five canonical roles. It does not run `gh label create`. On a fresh GitHub repo the labels genuinely do not exist yet, and this has been filed as a bug more than once. Two follow-ons:
+It doesn't. `docs/agents/triage-labels.md` is a *mapping*: it tells `/triage` which strings in your tracker correspond to the five canonical roles. It does not run `gh label create`. On a fresh GitHub repo the labels genuinely do not exist yet, and this has been filed as a bug more than once. Two follow-ons:
 
 - If your tracker already uses the canonical names, the mapping is an identity table and there is nothing to configure. That is the intended common case, not a missing step.
 - [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder)'s `wayfinder:map` and `wayfinder:<type>` labels are not created here either, and `gh issue create --label <missing>` fails outright rather than creating the label. Create them by hand before the first wayfinder run on a GitHub repo.
 
-**Can I configure the other skills' behaviour here — grilling cadence, question format, tone?**
+**Can I configure the other skills' behaviour here ([grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) cadence, question format, tone)?**
 
 No. It configures three things: tracker, labels, doc layout. There have been direct requests to make it the home for per-user preferences, and the standing answer is that skills stay opinionated: *"Config is death."* Preferences belong in your `CLAUDE.md` as plain instructions, which every skill already reads.
 
@@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ Not today. There is an open request for exactly this from someone running the sk
 
 **Isn't it strange to have a skill that configures the other skills?**
 
-One long-standing complaint says yes, in these words: *"having a skill to set up the other skill does not feel right to me — that means the LLM is configuring its own skills."* The trade is real and acknowledged: the alternative to a setup step is duplicating tracker instructions into every skill that touches issues. The output is inspectable, editable markdown, which is the mitigation — you can read every file it wrote and change it by hand, and day-to-day tweaks are exactly that, not another run.
+One long-standing complaint says yes, in these words: *"having a skill to set up the other skill does not feel right to me: that means the LLM is configuring its own skills."* The trade is real and acknowledged: the alternative to a setup step is duplicating tracker instructions into every skill that touches issues. The output is inspectable, editable markdown, which is the mitigation: you can read every file it wrote and change it by hand, and day-to-day tweaks are exactly that, not another run.
 
 ## It's working if
 
@@ -91,4 +91,4 @@ One long-standing complaint says yes, in these words: *"having a skill to set up
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-`setup-matt-pocock-skills` is the **run-once setup** for the engineering flow, the precondition everything else assumes rather than a step in the chain. Its neighbours are its readers: [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage), which applies the label vocabulary written here; [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) and [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets), which publish into the tracker named here; and [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder), which reads the "Wayfinding operations" section of the same tracker file to know how maps and child tickets are stored. The domain-doc layout it records is the one [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) fills in later — it creates `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs lazily, when a term or decision actually gets resolved, so an empty repo after setup is the expected state. For which skill to reach for next, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes the whole set.
+`setup-matt-pocock-skills` is the **run-once setup** for the engineering flow, the precondition everything else assumes rather than a step in the chain. Its neighbours are its readers: [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage), which applies the label vocabulary written here; [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) and [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets), which publish into the tracker named here; and [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder), which reads the "Wayfinding operations" section of the same tracker file to know how maps and child [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) are stored. The domain-doc layout it records is the one [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) fills in later: it creates `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs lazily, when a term or decision actually gets resolved, so an empty repo after setup is the expected state. For which skill to reach for next, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes the whole set.

docs/engineering/tdd.md

@@ -1,70 +1,70 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`tdd` builds a feature or fixes a bug test-first: one failing test, then just enough code to pass it, then the next behaviour. It carries the standards that make that loop produce tests worth keeping — what a good test is, where tests go, what mocks are for, and the three anti-patterns that quietly ruin a suite.
+`tdd` builds a feature or fixes a bug test-first: one failing test, then just enough code to pass it, then the next behaviour. It carries the standards that make that loop produce tests worth keeping: what a good test is, where tests go, what mocks are for, and the three anti-patterns that quietly ruin a suite.
 
-It writes no test at a seam you have not agreed to first. Before any test exists, it names the public boundaries it intends to test at and stops for your confirmation, because testing effort is finite and this is where you spend it on the critical paths instead of on every edge case. The other thing to know is that `tdd` is a **reference**, not a driver. Matt's own description of it is "just a reference on how to do TDD" — it holds the rules of the loop, and something else (you, or [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement)) runs the session that applies them.
+It writes no test at a seam you have not agreed to first. Before any test exists, it names the public boundaries it intends to test at and stops for your confirmation, because testing effort is finite and this is where you spend it on the critical paths instead of on every edge case. The other thing to know is that `tdd` is a **reference**, not a driver. It holds the rules of the loop, and something else (you, or [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement)) runs the [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) that applies them.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-Type `/tdd`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task fits — building a feature or fixing a bug test-first, or when you say "red-green-refactor".
+Type `/tdd`, or the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) reaches for it automatically when a task fits: building a feature or fixing a bug test-first, or when you say "red-green-refactor".
 
 Reach for it when there is a concrete behaviour to build, with an input and an observable output, and you want tests that survive a refactor.
 
 | Your situation | Where to go |
 | --- | --- |
-| A behaviour with defined inputs and outputs — business logic, a request/response contract, a transformation, validation | `tdd` |
+| A behaviour with defined inputs and outputs (business logic, a request/response contract, a transformation, validation) | `tdd` |
 | The behaviour isn't pinned down yet | [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), which also agrees the test seams before any code is written |
 | The question is really the shape of the interface, not the tests | [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design) |
-| You have a spec or tickets and want the whole build run for you | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), which drives `tdd` per ticket |
-| Config, wiring, glue, type annotations, straight CRUD delegation | Nothing here fits well — see the open gap below |
+| You have a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec) or [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) and want the whole build run for you | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), which drives `tdd` per ticket |
+| Config, wiring, glue, type annotations, straight CRUD delegation | Nothing here fits well; see the open gap below |
 
-That last row is a real hole, not a stylistic preference. The skill decides *where* the seams go; nothing in it decides *whether* a change is worth the loop at all. Run it on a change with no independent source of truth to assert against and you get a test that restates the implementation — the tautological anti-pattern the skill itself warns about, arrived at from the other direction. It is [issue #746](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/746) and it is open. Until it closes, that judgement is yours or your `CLAUDE.md`'s.
+That last row is a real hole, not a stylistic preference. The skill decides *where* the seams go; nothing in it decides *whether* a change is worth the loop at all. Run it on a change with no independent source of truth to assert against and you get a test that restates the implementation: the tautological anti-pattern the skill itself warns about, arrived at from the other direction. It is [issue #746](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/746) and it is open. Until it closes, that judgement is yours or your `CLAUDE.md`'s.
 
 ## Prerequisites
 
-[codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design) needs to be installed. `tdd` used to carry its own deep-module and interface-design notes; in v1.0 those were deleted in favour of the shared skill, and `tdd` now leans on it for interface-design vocabulary. Nothing else — the skill is stateless and writes no files of its own.
+[codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design) needs to be installed. `tdd` used to carry its own deep-module and interface-design notes; in v1.0 those were deleted in favour of the shared skill, and `tdd` now leans on it for interface-design vocabulary. Nothing else; the skill is [stateless](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/stateless) and writes no files of its own.
 
 ## The loop, and the seam it runs at
 
 Three words carry this skill.
 
-**Red-green.** Write the failing test, then only enough code to pass it. No anticipating the test after next. There is no refactor phase: Matt dropped it in June 2026 because "my experience of using it was that it never, ever, ever did it," and because review and implementation work better as separate sessions. Refactoring belongs to [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review).
+**Red-green.** Write the failing test, then only enough code to pass it. No anticipating the test after next. There is no refactor phase: it was dropped in June 2026 because agents essentially never performed it, and because review and implementation work better as separate sessions. Refactoring belongs to [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review).
 
-**Vertical slice.** One seam, one test, one minimal implementation, then repeat — the first cycle being a **tracer bullet** that proves a single path end to end. The opposite is horizontal slicing: all the tests first, then all the code. Bulk tests verify *imagined* behaviour, they check the shape of things rather than what a user does, and they commit you to a test structure before you understand the implementation.
+**Vertical slice.** One seam, one test, one minimal implementation, then repeat, the first cycle being a **tracer bullet** that proves a single path end to end. The opposite is horizontal slicing: all the tests first, then all the code. Bulk tests verify *imagined* behaviour, they check the shape of things rather than what a user does, and they commit you to a test structure before you understand the implementation.
 
-**Pre-agreed seam.** A seam is the public boundary you observe behaviour at without reaching inside. The rule is absolute: no test at an unconfirmed seam. In the full chain the seams are agreed earlier, during [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) — "`/tdd` is told to only work at pre-agreed test seams, `/code-review` checks that only agreed-upon test seams were used." Invoked on its own, `tdd` asks you directly.
+**Pre-agreed seam.** A seam is the public boundary you observe behaviour at without reaching inside. The rule is absolute: no test at an unconfirmed seam. In the full chain the seams are agreed earlier, during [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec): "`/tdd` is told to only work at pre-agreed test seams, `/code-review` checks that only agreed-upon test seams were used." Invoked on its own, `tdd` asks you directly.
 
 The three anti-patterns it is written to prevent:
 
 | Anti-pattern | The tell |
 | --- | --- |
 | Implementation-coupled | The test breaks when you rename an internal function, though behaviour did not change. Mocked internal collaborators, asserted call counts, database queries used to verify instead of the interface. |
-| Tautological | The expected value is computed the way the code computes it, so the test passes by construction. Expected values have to come from somewhere else — a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec. |
+| Tautological | The expected value is computed the way the code computes it, so the test passes by construction. Expected values have to come from somewhere else: a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec. |
 | Horizontal slicing | A batch of tests landed before any implementation. |
 
-Mocks are for system boundaries only — external APIs, time, randomness, sometimes the filesystem or the database. Not your own modules.
+Mocks are for system boundaries only: external APIs, time, randomness, sometimes the filesystem or the database. Not your own modules.
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **Why doesn't it refactor? The description says "red-green-refactor".**
 
-Because the refactor step was removed and the description was not. Matt dropped it deliberately: agents essentially never did it, and keeping implementation and review in separate sessions works better. Asked whether that is still TDD, his answer was "does it matter?" The mismatch between the trigger phrase and the body is filed as [issue #589](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/589) and is still open, so "red-green-refactor" continues to work as a phrase that fires the skill. What you get is red → green, and refactoring in [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review).
+Because the refactor step was removed and the description was not. The removal was deliberate: agents essentially never did it, and keeping implementation and review in separate sessions works better. Whether the result still counts as TDD by the book matters less than whether the loop produces better code. The mismatch between the trigger phrase and the body is filed as [issue #589](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/589) and is still open, so "red-green-refactor" continues to work as a phrase that fires the skill. What you get is red → green, and refactoring in [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review).
 
 **It asked me to choose a test seam and I had no idea which to pick.**
 
-This is the most-reported friction with the skill ([issue #607](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/607)). The prompt lists candidate seams by name only, with nothing about what each one catches or misses, so you are choosing between labels. There is no fix shipped yet. The practical workaround is to ask the agent for the trade-offs before answering — what does the component-level seam miss that the integration seam catches, and how much slower is it. It is also why the chain agrees seams up front in `to-spec`, where you have the whole feature in view rather than one prompt.
+This is the most-reported friction with the skill ([issue #607](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/607)). The prompt lists candidate seams by name only, with nothing about what each one catches or misses, so you are choosing between labels. There is no fix shipped yet. The practical workaround is to ask the agent for the trade-offs before answering: what does the component-level seam miss that the integration seam catches, and how much slower is it. It is also why the chain agrees seams up front in `to-spec`, where you have the whole feature in view rather than one prompt.
 
 **It wrote the implementation before the test, even though the skill says red first.**
 
-It happens. One user pushed the model on it and got an unusually honest answer: "I knew the skill said 'one test at a time, watch it fail for the right reason' — I read it. I just defaulted to my normal habit." Matt's position is to live with it: "I've not managed to get agents to do anything 100% of the time. Being too forceful about this is also negative because we don't want to restrict an agent's creativity. So what I've done is I've just accepted that sometimes it will not follow TDD strictly. But overall I still get better results." If strict adherence matters for a particular slice, watch the run rather than trusting the skill to enforce it.
+It happens. One user pushed the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) on it and got an unusually honest answer: "I knew the skill said 'one test at a time, watch it fail for the right reason'. I read it. I just defaulted to my normal habit." The skill is written to live with this. No instruction makes an agent comply 100% of the time, and forcing the point harder restricts the agent's creativity for little gain; the loop is worth running even when it is not followed strictly, because the results are still better overall. If strict adherence matters for a particular slice, watch the run rather than trusting the skill to enforce it.
 
 **Should it write browser or end-to-end tests first?**
 
-Usually not, and the skill will not stop it. A user reported the agent writing a Playwright test first, then burning a long loop re-running it and concluding the *test* was broken for a feature that did not exist yet. Matt's answer: "I would configure this in your CLAUDE.md." Browser tests are slow enough that the red-green feedback loop stops paying for itself; declare in your repo's `CLAUDE.md` that they are written after the behaviour works.
+Usually not, and the skill will not stop it. A user reported the agent writing a Playwright test first, then burning a long loop re-running it and concluding the *test* was broken for a feature that did not exist yet. Configure this in your `CLAUDE.md`. Browser tests are slow enough that the red-green feedback loop stops paying for itself; declare in your repo's `CLAUDE.md` that they are written after the behaviour works.
 
 **Does `/tdd` replace `/implement`, or the course's `/do-work`?**
 
-No. `/tdd` documents the methodology; `/implement` is, in Matt's words, "a very simple work→feedback→commit loop" and is the direct stand-in for `/do-work`. The course's single `/do-work` step is now split across `/implement`, `/tdd` and `/code-review`. If you are asking which one to run against a ticket, the answer is almost always `/implement`.
+No. `/tdd` documents the methodology; `/implement` is a very simple work→feedback→commit loop and is the direct stand-in for `/do-work`. The course's single `/do-work` step is now split across `/implement`, `/tdd` and `/code-review`. If you are asking which one to run against a ticket, the answer is almost always `/implement`.
 
 **Where did the deep-modules and interface-design guidance go?**
 
@@ -77,11 +77,11 @@ No. Run against one ticket, it will happily propose work that belongs to a sibli
 ## It's working if
 
 - It stops and names the seams it intends to test at, and waits, before any test file exists.
-- One test appears, goes red, gets just enough code to pass, and only then does the next test appear — not a batch of tests followed by a batch of code.
+- One test appears, goes red, gets just enough code to pass, and only then does the next test appear, not a batch of tests followed by a batch of code.
 - Test names read as capabilities ("user can checkout with valid cart"), not as internals ("checkout calls paymentService.process").
 - Expected values in assertions are literals you can trace to the spec, not values recomputed the way the code computes them.
 - Renaming an internal function breaks nothing in the suite.
-- Mocks appear only at external boundaries — the payment API, the clock — and never around your own modules.
+- Mocks appear only at external boundaries (the payment API, the clock) and never around your own modules.
 
 ## Where it fits
 
@@ -91,4 +91,4 @@ No. Run against one ticket, it will happily propose work that belongs to a sibli
 grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review
 ```
 
-[to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) agrees the test seams up front, [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) drives `tdd` per ticket, and [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) checks afterwards that only the agreed seams were used — and owns the refactoring `tdd` no longer does. Its other neighbour is [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design), the shared source of the seam and deep-module vocabulary `tdd` speaks. You can also reach for it on its own, whenever there is a concrete behaviour to build and no full spec in play. When you are unsure which skill fits your situation, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+[to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) agrees the test seams up front, [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) drives `tdd` per ticket, and [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) checks afterwards that only the agreed seams were used, and owns the refactoring `tdd` no longer does. Its other neighbour is [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design), the shared source of the seam and deep-module vocabulary `tdd` speaks. You can also reach for it on its own, whenever there is a concrete behaviour to build and no full spec in play. When you are unsure which skill fits your situation, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/to-spec.md

@@ -1,19 +1,19 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`to-spec` turns the conversation you have just had into a **spec**, and publishes it to your issue tracker as a single issue.
+`to-spec` turns the conversation you have just had into a **[spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec)**, and publishes it to your issue tracker as a single issue.
 
-It does not interview you. By the time you reach for it the deciding is already done, so it synthesises what is known — from the thread, from the codebase, from your `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs — rather than opening a fresh round of questions. The spec is a record of decisions already made, not a place where new ones get made.
+It does not interview you. By the time you reach for it the deciding is already done, so it synthesises what is known (from the thread, from the codebase, from your `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs) rather than opening a fresh round of questions. The spec is a record of decisions already made, not a place where new ones get made.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/to-spec` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
+You invoke this by typing `/to-spec`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own.
 
-Reach for it when the build is too big for one agent session and has to survive being split across several. That is the whole trigger:
+Reach for it when the build is too big for one agent [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) and has to survive being split across several. That is the whole trigger:
 
 | Where you are | What to run |
 | --- | --- |
 | You haven't decided anything yet | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) first |
-| Decided, and the work fits one context window | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) — skip the spec |
+| Decided, and the work fits one [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window) | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement): skip the spec |
 | Decided, and the work spans several sessions | `/to-spec`, then [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) |
 | A [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) map has cleared | `/to-spec #<map_issue>` |
 
@@ -23,44 +23,44 @@ Reach for it when the build is too big for one agent session and has to survive
 
 ## The spec is a decision record
 
-The spec exists because context windows end. Everything you settled while grilling — the shape of the solution, the choices you argued through, what you deliberately refused — is in one conversation that is about to be cleared. The spec is what survives that.
+The spec exists because context windows end. Everything you settled while [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) (the shape of the solution, the choices you argued through, what you deliberately refused) is in one conversation that is about to be cleared. The spec is what survives that.
 
 So it does not validate anything, and it does not decide anything. It captures what was decided, in your project's own vocabulary, so that a fresh session can pick the work up without you re-explaining it. Anything the spec asserts that you never actually said is a defect.
 
 ## Seams before prose
 
-Before it writes a word, `to-spec` sketches the **seams** the feature will be tested at, and checks them with you. It prefers seams that already exist to new ones, and takes the highest seam it can — the ideal number across a change is one.
+Before it writes a word, `to-spec` sketches the **seams** the feature will be tested at, and checks them with you. It prefers seams that already exist to new ones, and takes the highest seam it can: the ideal number across a change is one.
 
-Those agreed seams then travel. [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) works only at pre-agreed seams, and [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) reviews the diff against the spec, so a seam nobody agreed to shows up as a review finding. The binding is indirect — it runs through this document — which is exactly why the seam conversation is worth taking seriously here rather than deferring it to implementation.
+Those agreed seams then travel. [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) works only at pre-agreed seams, and [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) reviews the diff against the spec, so a seam nobody agreed to shows up as a review finding. The binding is indirect: it runs through this document, which is exactly why the seam conversation is worth taking seriously here rather than deferring it to implementation.
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **Where did `/to-prd` go?**
-It is this skill, renamed in v1.1. "Spec" is now the single through-line term, and the old `to-prd` slug is dead — reinstall under the new name. The pair that replaced the old vocabulary is *spec* and *tickets*: the spec is the destination and the decisions that fix it, the tickets are the execution steps that get there. If you pivot, delete the unfinished tickets and keep the spec.
+It is this skill, renamed in v1.1. "Spec" is now the single through-line term, and the old `to-prd` slug is dead; reinstall under the new name. The pair that replaced the old vocabulary is *spec* and *tickets*: the spec is the destination and the decisions that fix it, the [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) are the execution steps that get there. If you pivot, delete the unfinished tickets and keep the spec.
 
 **Why does the spec get the `ready-for-agent` label? I don't want an agent implementing off it.**
-The label means "no further triage needed" — the document is complete enough for an agent to work from. It is an input designation, not a work order. But if you run AFK agents that poll for `ready-for-agent`, that distinction isn't visible to them, and they will happily try to build the whole spec in one run instead of picking up the ticket slices. This is the most-reported rough edge on the skill. Until it changes, exclude the parent spec explicitly in your AFK agent's prompt, or strip the label once `/to-tickets` has run.
+The label means "no further triage needed": the document is complete enough for an agent to work from. It is an input designation, not a work order. But if you run [AFK](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk) agents that poll for `ready-for-agent`, that distinction isn't visible to them, and they will happily try to build the whole spec in one run instead of picking up the ticket slices. This is the most-reported rough edge on the skill. Until it changes, exclude the parent spec explicitly in your AFK agent's prompt, or strip the label once `/to-tickets` has run.
 
 **Why not go straight from grilling to `/to-tickets` and skip the spec?**
-Often you should — the spec earns its step only on multi-session work. Where it pays is that the tickets are disposable and the spec isn't: each ticket is sized for one fresh context window and gets deleted or closed, while the spec stays as the one place the reasoning behind them lives. On a single-session change that buys you nothing, and you have paid an extra synthesis step where the model can drift. Go grilling → `/implement`.
+Often you should; the spec earns its step only on multi-session work. Where it pays is that the tickets are disposable and the spec isn't: each ticket is sized for one fresh context window and gets deleted or closed, while the spec stays as the one place the reasoning behind them lives. On a single-session change that buys you nothing, and you have paid an extra synthesis step where the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) can drift. Go grilling → `/implement`.
 
 **I just finished a wayfinder map. What do I feed it?**
-The main map issue — `/to-spec #<map_issue>`, not the individual decision tickets. [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) produces decisions rather than deliverables, scattered across a map; `to-spec` is the step that collapses them into one buildable document. Looping the map straight into `/implement` throws that collapse away.
+The main map issue: `/to-spec #<map_issue>`, not the individual decision tickets. [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) produces decisions rather than deliverables, scattered across a map; `to-spec` is the step that collapses them into one buildable document. Looping the map straight into `/implement` throws that collapse away.
 
 **Is the spec for me to review, or is it just for the agent?**
-Mostly for the agent, and it reads that way — complete, dense, reference-heavy. The parts worth your eyes are the seams and the out-of-scope section, because those are the two places a wrong decision is cheapest to catch and most expensive to discover later. Reading the whole thing end to end is a real complaint people have, and there is no summary mode: the honest answer is that if the spec surprises you, the grilling was too shallow, not the spec too long.
+Mostly for the agent, and it reads that way: complete, dense, reference-heavy. The parts worth your eyes are the seams and the out-of-scope section, because those are the two places a wrong decision is cheapest to catch and most expensive to discover later. Reading the whole thing end to end is a real complaint people have, and there is no summary mode: the honest answer is that if the spec surprises you, the grilling was too shallow, not the spec too long.
 
 **Do I keep the spec frozen once tickets start, or let the agent rewrite it?**
-Nothing keeps it in sync, so in practice it is a snapshot of what you knew at that moment, and it goes stale the first time implementation teaches you something. Treat it as throwaway once the work ships. The artifacts meant to outlive it are your `CONTEXT.md` and your ADRs — if something learned during implementation deserves to last, it belongs there, not in an edited spec.
+Nothing keeps it in sync, so in practice it is a snapshot of what you knew at that moment, and it goes stale the first time implementation teaches you something. Treat it as throwaway once the work ships. The artifacts meant to outlive it are your `CONTEXT.md` and your ADRs; if something learned during implementation deserves to last, it belongs there, not in an edited spec.
 
 **My work is a refactor or a module boundary, not a feature. Does the template fit?**
-Less well, and this is a known limitation. The template leans hard on user stories, which is the wrong shape for architectural work — you end up writing stories nobody asked for around decisions that are really about interfaces and invariants. Lean on the implementation-decisions and testing-decisions sections instead, and let the durable architectural calls land as ADRs via [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) rather than trying to make the spec carry them.
+Less well, and this is a known limitation. The template leans hard on user stories, which is the wrong shape for architectural work: you end up writing stories nobody asked for around decisions that are really about interfaces and invariants. Lean on the implementation-decisions and testing-decisions sections instead, and let the durable architectural calls land as ADRs via [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) rather than trying to make the spec carry them.
 
 **Will it check the tracker for related work, or cite the ADRs it's respecting?**
-No to both. It reads and respects the ADRs covering the area it touches, but it doesn't link them, and it doesn't search the tracker for overlapping issues before drafting — so a spec can quietly duplicate work someone already filed. Search the tracker yourself first if the area is busy.
+No to both. It reads and respects the ADRs covering the area it touches, but it doesn't link them, and it doesn't search the tracker for overlapping issues before drafting, so a spec can quietly duplicate work someone already filed. Search the tracker yourself first if the area is busy.
 
-**`/to-tickets` couldn't read my spec — it kept truncating.**
-Very large specs can outgrow what a tracker issue will serve back cleanly, and there is no local copy to fall back on. The fix is context hygiene: don't clear or compact between `/to-spec` and `/to-tickets`. Run them in the same window and the spec never has to be re-fetched at all.
+**`/to-tickets` couldn't read my spec: it kept truncating.**
+Very large specs can outgrow what a tracker issue will serve back cleanly, and there is no local copy to fall back on. The fix is context hygiene: don't [clear](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/clearing) or [compact](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/compaction) between `/to-spec` and `/to-tickets`. Run them in the same window and the spec never has to be re-fetched at all.
 
 ## It's working if
 
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ Very large specs can outgrow what a tracker issue will serve back cleanly, and t
 - It puts the seams to you before it writes, and proposes as few as it can get away with.
 - It comes back in your project's nouns, not generic product-management boilerplate.
 - Every decision in it is one you can remember making. Nothing was invented to fill a section.
-- The out-of-scope section has real things in it — the things you refused are usually the most useful lines on the page.
+- The out-of-scope section has real things in it: the things you refused are usually the most useful lines on the page.
 
 ## Where it fits
 

docs/engineering/to-tickets.md

@@ -1,22 +1,22 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`to-tickets` takes a plan, a spec, or the conversation you are in, and breaks it into a set of **tickets** on your issue tracker. Each ticket declares its **blocking edges** — the other tickets that have to finish before it can start.
+`to-tickets` takes a plan, a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec), or the conversation you are in, and breaks it into a set of **[tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket)** on your issue tracker. Each ticket declares its **blocking edges**: the other tickets that have to finish before it can start.
 
-Every ticket is a **tracer bullet**: a narrow but complete path through every layer of the change — schema, API, UI, tests — that can be demoed on its own the moment it lands. That is the constraint that makes it behave differently from the obvious way to split work, which is to cut one layer at a time and integrate at the end. It also sizes each ticket to fit in a single fresh context window, because the thing that will pick the ticket up is a session that has never seen your spec.
+Every ticket is a **tracer bullet**: a narrow but complete path through every layer of the change (schema, API, UI, tests) that can be demoed on its own the moment it lands. That is the constraint that makes it behave differently from the obvious way to split work, which is to cut one layer at a time and integrate at the end. It also sizes each ticket to fit in a single fresh [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window), because the thing that will pick the ticket up is a [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) that has never seen your spec.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/to-tickets` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
+You invoke this by typing `/to-tickets`. The [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own.
 
 | Where you are | What to run |
 | --- | --- |
 | You have a spec issue and the build spans several sessions | `/to-tickets`, or `/to-tickets #<spec_issue>` |
-| The plan is only in the conversation, never written up | `/to-tickets` reads the thread directly — no spec needed |
-| The whole change fits in one context window | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) — skip the tickets |
+| The plan is only in the conversation, never written up | `/to-tickets` reads the thread directly, no spec needed |
+| The whole change fits in one context window | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), skip the tickets |
 | Nothing is decided yet | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), then [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) |
 | A [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) map has cleared | [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) first, to collapse the map, then `/to-tickets` |
 
-Tickets that `to-tickets` produced are agent-ready by construction. Don't run [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) over them — triage is for work that arrived from someone else.
+Tickets that `to-tickets` produced are agent-ready by construction. Don't run [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) over them. Triage is for work that arrived from someone else.
 
 ## Prerequisites
 
@@ -24,11 +24,11 @@ Tickets that `to-tickets` produced are agent-ready by construction. Don't run [t
 
 ## Tracer bullets, not layers
 
-A **horizontal** slice ships one layer of the change. Nothing works until every layer has landed, and each ticket's acceptance criteria have to reach into work that another ticket owns. A **vertical** slice — the tracer bullet — ships one thin path through all the layers at once, so it is verifiable alone and owns everything it grades.
+A **horizontal** slice ships one layer of the change. Nothing works until every layer has landed, and each ticket's acceptance criteria have to reach into work that another ticket owns. A **vertical** slice (the tracer bullet) ships one thin path through all the layers at once, so it is verifiable alone and owns everything it grades.
 
-This is the rule people break most often, and the consequences are well documented. One team ran a 26-ticket stack sliced by layer — corpus, producer, aggregator, selector — and got roughly twenty agent runs per closed ticket, about three quarters of them rework. Their own post-mortem traced every failure class back to the horizontal slicing rather than to the implementations.
+This is the rule people break most often, and the consequences are well documented. One team ran a 26-ticket stack sliced by layer (corpus, producer, aggregator, selector) and got roughly twenty agent runs per closed ticket, about three quarters of them rework. Their own post-mortem traced every failure class back to the horizontal slicing rather than to the implementations.
 
-Two things happen before anything is published. `to-tickets` looks for prefactoring — "make the change easy, then make the easy change" — and orders that work first. Then it presents the breakdown as a numbered list and quizzes you on it: is the granularity right, are the blocking edges real, should anything merge or split. Nothing reaches the tracker until you approve, and that quiz is the place to push back.
+Two things happen before anything is published. `to-tickets` looks for prefactoring (the principle "make the change easy, then make the easy change") and orders that work first. Then it presents the breakdown as a numbered list and quizzes you on it: is the granularity right, are the blocking edges real, should anything merge or split. Nothing reaches the tracker until you approve, and that quiz is the place to push back.
 
 ## Blocking edges
 
@@ -39,49 +39,49 @@ The edges are the point of the artifact. They read two ways depending on the tra
 | Local markdown | Text in one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered blockers-first | Top to bottom, by hand |
 | A real tracker (GitHub, Linear) | Native blocking links, or sub-issues where the tracker has them | Any ticket whose blockers are done is on the **frontier** and can be grabbed |
 
-The edges live in the ticket either way. The medium only decides whether anything can act on them in parallel. `to-tickets` produces the artifact; running it — one session at a time, or a fleet — is your job, not the skill's.
+The edges live in the ticket either way. The medium only decides whether anything can act on them in parallel. `to-tickets` produces the artifact; running it (one session at a time, or a fleet) is your job, not the skill's.
 
 ## The wide-refactor exception
 
-One shape breaks the tracer-bullet rule. A **wide refactor** is a single mechanical change — rename a column, retype a shared symbol — whose **blast radius** fans across the whole codebase, so one edit breaks thousands of call sites and no vertical slice can land green.
+One shape breaks the tracer-bullet rule. A **wide refactor** is a single mechanical change (rename a column, retype a shared symbol) whose **blast radius** fans across the whole codebase, so one edit breaks thousands of call sites and no vertical slice can land green.
 
 `to-tickets` sequences that as **expand–contract** instead:
 
-- **Expand** — add the new form beside the old, so nothing breaks.
-- **Migrate** — move call sites over in batches sized by blast radius (per package, per directory), one ticket per batch, each blocked by the expand. CI stays green because the old form still exists.
-- **Contract** — delete the old form once no caller remains, in a ticket blocked by every migrate batch.
+- **Expand**: add the new form beside the old, so nothing breaks.
+- **Migrate**: move call sites over in batches sized by blast radius (per package, per directory), one ticket per batch, each blocked by the expand. CI stays green because the old form still exists.
+- **Contract**: delete the old form once no caller remains, in a ticket blocked by every migrate batch.
 
 Where even the batches can't stay green alone, they share an integration branch and all block a final integrate-and-verify ticket. Green is promised only there.
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **It produced twelve tickets for a three-line change.**
-Over-decomposition is the most reported friction on this skill, and it is consistent across practitioners: the model defaults to atomic units and loses the grouping that would make them meaningful. The quiz step exists for exactly this — ask it to merge, and it will. The deeper answer is that the tickets have a floor: if the whole change fits in one context window, you don't need this skill at all. Go straight to [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement).
+Over-decomposition is the most reported friction on this skill, and it is consistent across practitioners: the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) defaults to atomic units and loses the grouping that would make them meaningful. The quiz step exists for exactly this: ask it to merge, and it will. The deeper answer is that the tickets have a floor: if the whole change fits in one context window, you don't need this skill at all. Go straight to [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement).
 
-**The tickets came out one per layer — all the schema in one, all the API in another.**
+**The tickets came out one per layer: all the schema in one, all the API in another.**
 This is the failure the vertical-slice rule is written against, and the skill still produces it sometimes. Catch it at the quiz step by asking one question per ticket: what can I demo when this is done? A ticket with no answer is a horizontal slice. Some people add a "demo path" line to each ticket for this reason, and report it nudges the model toward vertical decomposition.
 
 **On GitHub the tickets weren't created as sub-issues of the spec issue.**
 Known and unfixed. It has been reported across a dozen runs and several models, [most fully in issue #554](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/554), and it is worse on Codex than on Claude. `gh` has supported this natively since v2.94: `gh issue create --parent <n>`, and `gh issue edit <parent> --add-sub-issue <n>` after the fact. Until the tracker template prefers those, wiring the parent links yourself after a run is the reliable move.
 
 **"Blocked by" was written into the issue body instead of a real blocking link.**
-Same class of problem, [reported in issue #513](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/513), where the agent went as far as asserting GitHub has no native blocking relationship at all. It does — `gh issue create --blocked-by 12,15`. Because blockers are published first, their numbers are always available at creation time. The body text is meant to be the fallback for trackers with no native edge, not the default.
+Same class of problem, [reported in issue #513](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/513), where the agent went as far as asserting GitHub has no native blocking relationship at all. It does: `gh issue create --blocked-by 12,15`. Because blockers are published first, their numbers are always available at creation time. The body text is meant to be the fallback for trackers with no native edge, not the default.
 
 **Where do the local tickets go? The v1.1 notes said a root-level `tickets.md`.**
-They did, and that was a bug — a single shared file also raced when parallel agents wrote to it. Local mode now writes one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, in dependency order, matching the layout the local tracker template already described. The `NN` prefix is a real ticket ID, so `/implement 03` works instead of retyping a long title.
+They did, and that was a bug: a single shared file also raced when parallel agents wrote to it. Local mode now writes one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, in dependency order, matching the layout the local tracker template already described. The `NN` prefix is a real ticket ID, so `/implement 03` works instead of retyping a long title.
 
 **It kept truncating when it tried to read my spec.**
-A very large spec can outgrow what a tracker issue serves back cleanly, and there is no local copy to fall back on — the agent then burns tool calls re-fetching chunks and never reaches the end. Don't clear or compact between `/to-spec` and `/to-tickets`. Run them in the same context window and the spec never has to be fetched back at all.
+A very large spec can outgrow what a tracker issue serves back cleanly, and there is no local copy to fall back on, so the agent then burns [tool calls](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/tool-call) re-fetching chunks and never reaches the end. Don't [clear](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/clearing) or [compact](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/compaction) between `/to-spec` and `/to-tickets`. Run them in the same context window and the spec never has to be fetched back at all.
 
-**The acceptance criteria graded nothing — some passed before any work was done.**
-The template asks for criteria and says nothing about whether they can fail, so this happens. Three shapes recur: a criterion already true at the base commit, a criterion that can only be satisfied by work another ticket owns, and one that restates the request rather than deriving from the artifact. Vertical slicing prevents most of it — a slice that delivers behaviour which didn't exist before is red at the base commit by construction — but the check is worth doing by hand. For each criterion, name the observation that would show it false, and confirm it fails at the commit the implementer starts from.
+**The acceptance criteria graded nothing: some passed before any work was done.**
+The template asks for criteria and says nothing about whether they can fail, so this happens. Three shapes recur: a criterion already true at the base commit, a criterion that can only be satisfied by work another ticket owns, and one that restates the request rather than deriving from the artifact. Vertical slicing prevents most of it (a slice that delivers behaviour which didn't exist before is red at the base commit by construction), but the check is worth doing by hand. For each criterion, name the observation that would show it false, and confirm it fails at the commit the implementer starts from.
 
 **The tickets are published. How do I actually run them?**
-The skill stops at the artifact, and there is no auto-dispatch mode. Matt's own answer is manual: look at the board, count the tickets with no open blockers, and open that many agent sessions. One ticket per fresh context, cleared between them. Be aware that [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) does not reliably close or check off the ticket when it finishes, on GitHub or in local markdown, so the ticket's state is yours to update.
+The skill stops at the artifact, and there is no auto-dispatch mode. Dispatch is manual: look at the board, count the tickets with no open blockers, and open that many agent sessions. One ticket per fresh context, cleared between them. Be aware that [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) does not reliably close or check off the ticket when it finishes, on GitHub or in local markdown, so the ticket's state is yours to update.
 
 ## It's working if
 
-- Every ticket has an answer to "what can I demo when this is done?" — and the answer is behaviour, not a layer.
+- Every ticket has an answer to "what can I demo when this is done?", and the answer is behaviour, not a layer.
 - The list comes back to you numbered, with a "Blocked by" line on each, before anything is published.
 - The ticket at the top has no blockers and can be started immediately.
 - Nothing in a ticket body is a file path or a line number, except a snippet a prototype produced.
@@ -96,4 +96,4 @@ The skill stops at the artifact, and there is no auto-dispatch mode. Matt's own
 grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review
 ```
 
-Upstream is [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), which hands it a settled spec to slice against — keep both in one unbroken context window. Downstream is [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), which builds one ticket per fresh session, driving [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) for the tests and closing with [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review). When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+Upstream is [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), which hands it a settled spec to slice against; keep both in one unbroken context window. Downstream is [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), which builds one ticket per fresh session, driving [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) for the tests and closing with [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review). When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/triage.md

@@ -1,20 +1,20 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`triage` works through the issues on your project's tracker, moving each one through a small state machine of **triage roles** — a category role and a state role — and leaving behind either an agent-ready brief, a specific question for the reporter, or a closed issue with a recorded reason.
+`triage` works through the issues on your project's tracker, moving each one through a small state machine of **triage roles** (a category role and a state role) and leaving behind either an agent-ready brief, a specific question for the reporter, or a closed issue with a recorded reason.
 
-It is only for issues **you didn't create**. Raw bug reports, incoming feature requests, an external pull request that arrived unannounced — work that landed in the tracker from outside, in whatever shape the reporter left it. Tickets that [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) produced are already agent-ready by construction, and running `triage` over them is wasted work at best. Matt's own wording, when a user asked why their generated issues weren't being picked up: "/triage is only for incoming issues, not for issues you have created."
+It is only for issues **you didn't create**. Raw bug reports, incoming feature requests, an external pull request that arrived unannounced: work that landed in the tracker from outside, in whatever shape the reporter left it. [Tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) that [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) produced are already agent-ready by construction, and running `triage` over them is wasted work at best. The rule is flat: `/triage` is only for incoming issues, not for issues you created yourself.
 
 The second thing that separates it from labelling by hand: it recommends and waits. It tells you its category and state call with reasoning, plus what it found in the codebase, and applies nothing until you direct it.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/triage` and then describing what you want in plain language — the agent won't reach for it on its own. "Show me anything that needs my attention", "let's look at #42", "move #42 to ready-for-agent".
+You invoke this by typing `/triage` and then describing what you want in plain language. The [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own. "Show me anything that needs my attention", "let's look at #42", "move #42 to ready-for-agent".
 
 | What you have | Where to go |
 | --- | --- |
 | A tracker full of raw reports from other people | `/triage` |
 | A rough idea of your own, nothing written down | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) |
-| A settled conversation to turn into a spec | [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) |
+| A settled conversation to turn into a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec) | [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) |
 | A spec to split into agent-ready tickets | [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) |
 | A confirmed bug that needs a root cause, not a label | [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs) |
 
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ You invoke this by typing `/triage` and then describing what you want in plain l
 
 `triage` reads and writes your issue tracker, so [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) has to have configured that tracker and its label vocabulary first. The role names below are **canonical**; the label strings in your tracker may differ, and the mapping is what setup provides. If your tracker already uses the canonical names exactly, there is nothing to map and nothing to set up.
 
-The tracker config also decides whether external pull requests count as a request surface, and who counts as external. That flag defaults to off and is no longer a setup question — flip it in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` if you want PRs in scope.
+The tracker config also decides whether external pull requests count as a request surface, and who counts as external. That flag defaults to off and is no longer a setup question, so flip it in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` if you want PRs in scope.
 
 ## The state machine
 
@@ -32,62 +32,62 @@ Every triaged item ends up carrying exactly one category role and one state role
 | --- | --- |
 | `needs-triage` | You need to evaluate it. Where an unlabelled issue normally lands first. |
 | `needs-info` | Waiting on the reporter. Returns to `needs-triage` when they reply. |
-| `ready-for-agent` | Fully specified, with an agent brief attached. An AFK agent can take it. |
-| `ready-for-human` | The same brief, plus why this can't be delegated — judgment, external access, manual testing. |
+| `ready-for-agent` | Fully specified, with an agent brief attached. An [AFK](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk) agent can take it. |
+| `ready-for-human` | The same brief, plus why this can't be delegated: judgment, external access, manual testing. |
 | `wontfix` | Closed, with the reason recorded. |
 
-That is the whole vocabulary, and the "exactly one state role" invariant is what keeps the queries simple. It is also the most-requested area of the skill: users have asked for a sixth state for work that is specified but blocked on another issue, for `deferred` work gated on a future trigger, and for a terminal `implemented` state. None of those has shipped. See the questions below.
+That is the whole vocabulary, and the "exactly one state role" invariant is what keeps the queries simple. It is also the most-requested area of the [skill](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/skill): users have asked for a sixth state for work that is specified but blocked on another issue, for `deferred` work gated on a future trigger, and for a terminal `implemented` state. None of those has shipped. See the questions below.
 
 `wontfix` splits three ways, and the difference matters because only one of them writes to the knowledge base:
 
 | Why you're closing it | What happens |
 | --- | --- |
-| Already implemented | A comment pointing at where it already lives. Nothing is written to `.out-of-scope/` — it's a built feature, not a rejected one, and filing it there would poison the dedup checks. |
+| Already implemented | A comment pointing at where it already lives. Nothing is written to `.out-of-scope/`, because it's a built feature, not a rejected one, and filing it there would poison the dedup checks. |
 | Rejected bug | Polite explanation, then close. |
 | Rejected enhancement | A file in `.out-of-scope/`, linked from the closing comment, then close. |
 
-`.out-of-scope/` is one markdown file per rejected **concept**, not per issue, written as a short design document rather than a database row: what was rejected, why, and every issue that has asked for it. `triage` reads the whole directory before it evaluates anything, and matches by concept rather than keyword — "night theme" matches `dark-mode.md`. When it hits a match it surfaces the old decision and asks whether you still feel the same way, instead of re-litigating the request from scratch.
+`.out-of-scope/` is one markdown file per rejected **concept**, not per issue, written as a short design document rather than a database row: what was rejected, why, and every issue that has asked for it. `triage` reads the whole directory before it evaluates anything, and matches by concept rather than keyword, so "night theme" matches `dark-mode.md`. When it hits a match it surfaces the old decision and asks whether you still feel the same way, instead of re-litigating the request from scratch.
 
 ## Verify before you brief
 
-Before any grilling, `triage` checks that the claim actually holds. For a bug, it reproduces it from the reporter's steps. For a PR, it checks the branch out and runs the relevant tests. Then it reports which of three things happened: confirmed, with the code path; failed to reproduce; or not enough detail to try, which is itself the strongest `needs-info` signal there is.
+Before any [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling), `triage` checks that the claim actually holds. For a bug, it reproduces it from the reporter's steps. For a PR, it checks the branch out and runs the relevant tests. Then it reports which of three things happened: confirmed, with the code path; failed to reproduce; or not enough detail to try, which is itself the strongest `needs-info` signal there is.
 
-It runs two more checks against the codebase in the same pass — **redundancy** (is this already implemented, searched by domain concept rather than by the reporter's wording?) and **prior rejection** (does `.out-of-scope/` already say no?). Both are cheap, and both produce a `wontfix` when they hit.
+It runs two more checks against the codebase in the same pass: **redundancy** (is this already implemented, searched by domain concept rather than by the reporter's wording?) and **prior rejection** (does `.out-of-scope/` already say no?). Both are cheap, and both produce a `wontfix` when they hit.
 
 All of it exists to make one artifact good: the **agent brief**, the structured comment posted when an issue moves to `ready-for-agent`. Once it's posted, the brief is the contract and the original report is only context. Briefs are written to be **durable** rather than precise, because an issue can sit in `ready-for-agent` for weeks while the code moves underneath it. So they name types, signatures and behavioural contracts, and never file paths or line numbers. A confirmed reproduction makes a far stronger brief than a guess does.
 
 ## A PR is an issue with attached code
 
-Where the tracker treats external pull requests as a request surface, they run through the same machine — same categories, same states, same transitions. The states just read against the diff: `ready-for-agent` means a brief is attached and an agent should take the next step on the code, `ready-for-human` means it's ready for a person to merge. A brief on a PR describes what's left to do to the existing diff, not how to build the thing from nothing.
+Where the tracker treats external pull requests as a request surface, they run through the same machine, with the same categories, same states, same transitions. The states just read against the diff: `ready-for-agent` means a brief is attached and an agent should take the next step on the code, `ready-for-human` means it's ready for a person to merge. A brief on a PR describes what's left to do to the existing diff, not how to build the thing from nothing.
 
-Discovery surfaces only *external* PRs, because a collaborator's in-flight branch is not triage work. That filter is discovery-only — name a PR explicitly and it gets triaged whoever wrote it. One rough edge: the GitHub template's external-PR listing command asks `gh pr list` for an `authorAssociation` field that `gh` does not expose, so the command as written fails outright ([#468](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/468)).
+Discovery surfaces only *external* PRs, because a collaborator's in-flight branch is not triage work. That filter is discovery-only, and naming a PR explicitly gets it triaged whoever wrote it. One rough edge: the GitHub template's external-PR listing command asks `gh pr list` for an `authorAssociation` field that `gh` does not expose, so the command as written fails outright ([#468](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/468)).
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **I ran `/to-spec` and `/to-tickets`, and now those tickets are sitting there untriaged. Do I run `/triage` over them?**
-No. They are already agent-ready — `to-tickets` applies the `ready-for-agent` label as it publishes, precisely so an AFK runner picks them up without another pass. The user who hit this had run the spec flow, seen `needs-triage` on the output, and found their AFK runner ignoring everything. `triage` is the on-ramp for work that arrives from outside; the spec flow is the lane for work you originate. They meet at `ready-for-agent`, not before.
+No. They are already agent-ready, because `to-tickets` applies the `ready-for-agent` label as it publishes, precisely so an AFK runner picks them up without another pass. The user who hit this had run the spec flow, seen `needs-triage` on the output, and found their AFK runner ignoring everything. `triage` is the on-ramp for work that arrives from outside; the spec flow is the lane for work you originate. They meet at `ready-for-agent`, not before.
 
 **Is `triage` still relevant now that there's a `to-spec` → `to-tickets` → `implement` flow?**
-Only if you have inbound work. `triage` predates that spine and does a different job: it is the lane for reports other people filed. If everything in your tracker came out of your own planning, you will rarely open it. If you maintain anything public, or your team files bugs at you, it is the front door. Matt's own use is open-source repos taking issues from external contributors.
+Only if you have inbound work. `triage` predates that spine and does a different job: it is the lane for reports other people filed. If everything in your tracker came out of your own planning, you will rarely open it. If you maintain anything public, or your team files bugs at you, it is the front door. The main use is open-source repos taking issues from external contributors.
 
 **The agent tried to apply `ready-for-agent` and `gh` said the label doesn't exist.**
 Known open bug ([#616](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/616)). `setup-matt-pocock-skills` writes the label vocabulary into `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`, but does not create the labels in your tracker. Create the five state labels and two category labels yourself, once, with `gh label create` or the tracker's UI, and it stops. There is a community fix branch linked from the issue that hasn't been merged.
 
-**Five states aren't enough — what about blocked, or deferred, or implemented?**
-This is the most-filed gap on the skill, in three shapes. An issue that is fully specified but waiting on another issue to close ([#139](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/139)) — the reporter's complaint was that `ready-for-agent` is "technically true" there but misleading, so an agent picks it up and hits a wall. Trigger-gated future work that is intended but not actionable yet ([#297](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/297)). And a terminal state for "implemented, awaiting verification", without which an AFK runner can re-queue finished tickets. Matt has agreed the blocked case is real and is undecided on the name (`blocked` versus `paused`). None of it has shipped. The workaround people use is a repo-local extra label alongside the category, which keeps the canonical state slot occupied by something honest at the cost of the skill not knowing about it. One community derivative goes further, adding `needs-slicing`, `tracking` and effort labels — that works, but it is theirs, not the skill's.
+**Five states aren't enough: what about blocked, or deferred, or implemented?**
+This is the most-filed gap on the skill, in three shapes. An issue that is fully specified but waiting on another issue to close ([#139](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/139)), where the reporter's complaint was that `ready-for-agent` is "technically true" there but misleading, so an agent picks it up and hits a wall. Trigger-gated future work that is intended but not actionable yet ([#297](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/297)). And a terminal state for "implemented, awaiting verification", without which an AFK runner can re-queue finished tickets. Matt has agreed the blocked case is real and is undecided on the name (`blocked` versus `paused`). None of it has shipped. The workaround people use is a repo-local extra label alongside the category, which keeps the canonical state slot occupied by something honest at the cost of the skill not knowing about it. One community derivative goes further, adding `needs-slicing`, `tracking` and effort labels. That works, but it is theirs, not the skill's.
 
 **How is this different from `/diagnosing-bugs`?**
-The verification step here is deliberately shallow — enough to answer "is this real, and roughly where does it live", not to find a root cause. When a bug won't reproduce from the reporter's steps in a few minutes, the honest move is `needs-info`, or [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs) if you want to chase it now. Neither skill's text currently mentions the other; a user found that seam, and it is still open.
+The verification step here is deliberately shallow (enough to answer "is this real, and roughly where does it live"), not to find a root cause. When a bug won't reproduce from the reporter's steps in a few minutes, the honest move is `needs-info`, or [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs) if you want to chase it now. Neither skill's text currently mentions the other; a user found that seam, and it is still open.
 
 **Can I point it at my whole backlog and let it run?**
-You can ask, but watch what it reads. The "show what needs attention" pass is a cheap listing meant for *selection* — you pick one, and then it gathers full context on the one you picked. Run it across twenty issues at once and an agent can quietly fall back to that cheap listing as its evidence base, which returns issue bodies but not comments. A user hit exactly this: three issues already carried a comment saying "already fixed, recommend closing", and all three got fresh agent briefs instead. If you want a bulk pass, say explicitly that comments must be read per issue.
+You can ask, but watch what it reads. The "show what needs attention" pass is a cheap listing meant for *selection*, where you pick one, and then it gathers full [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) on the one you picked. Run it across twenty issues at once and an agent can quietly fall back to that cheap listing as its evidence base, which returns issue bodies but not comments. A user hit exactly this: three issues already carried a comment saying "already fixed, recommend closing", and all three got fresh agent briefs instead. If you want a bulk pass, say explicitly that comments must be read per issue.
 
 **Does it work with Linear, or anything other than GitHub Issues?**
-Yes — the tracker is config, not a hard-coded assumption, and people run it against Linear (via the `linear` CLI), GitLab, and plain markdown files under `.scratch/`. A common split is Linear for issues and planning, GitHub for code and PRs: skills that say "issue tracker" map to Linear, skills that say "PR" map to GitHub. On the local-markdown tracker there is an open template bug where the generated file can carry the acceptance criteria twice, once at the top level and once inside the agent brief ([#200](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/200)).
+Yes, the tracker is config, not a hard-coded assumption, and people run it against Linear (via the `linear` CLI), GitLab, and plain markdown files under `.scratch/`. A common split is Linear for issues and planning, GitHub for code and PRs: skills that say "issue tracker" map to Linear, skills that say "PR" map to GitHub. On the local-markdown tracker there is an open template bug where the generated file can carry the acceptance criteria twice, once at the top level and once inside the agent brief ([#200](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/200)).
 
 ## It's working if
 
-- Every item it touches ends with exactly one category role and one state role — never zero, never two states in conflict.
+- Every item it touches ends with exactly one category role and one state role, never zero, never two states in conflict.
 - It gives you a recommendation with reasoning and stops, rather than relabelling and moving on.
 - The bug got reproduced, or the PR got checked out and run, before anything reached `ready-for-agent`.
 - The briefs it writes name types and behaviours, and contain no file paths and no line numbers.
@@ -96,4 +96,4 @@ Yes — the tracker is config, not a hard-coded assumption, and people run it ag
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-`triage` is an **on-ramp**, not a step in the main chain. The main flow runs from an idea you had — grill, spec, tickets, implement, review — and `triage` is the parallel lane for work that arrived instead. It merges at the same place: an issue labelled `ready-for-agent` with a brief on it, which [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) picks up exactly as it would a ticket from [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets). When a request needs sharpening before it can be briefed, `triage` runs [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) together, a round of questions at a time, so decisions land in `CONTEXT.md` and the ADRs as they're made. When you're not sure which lane you are in, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+`triage` is an **on-ramp**, not a step in the main chain. The main flow runs from an idea you had (grill, spec, tickets, implement, review), and `triage` is the parallel lane for work that arrived instead. It merges at the same place: an issue labelled `ready-for-agent` with a brief on it, which [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) picks up exactly as it would a ticket from [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets). When a request needs sharpening before it can be briefed, `triage` runs [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) together, a round of questions at a time, so decisions land in `CONTEXT.md` and the ADRs as they're made. When you're not sure which lane you are in, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/wayfinder.md

@@ -1,22 +1,22 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`wayfinder` takes an effort too big for one agent session — an idea whose **destination** you can name but whose route you cannot yet see — and charts it as a shared **map** of **decision tickets** on your issue tracker, then resolves them one at a time until the way is clear.
+`wayfinder` takes an effort too big for one agent [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session): an idea whose **destination** you can name but whose route you cannot yet see, and charts it as a shared **map** of **decision tickets** on your issue tracker, then resolves them one at a time until the way is clear.
 
-It plans, it does not do. Every ticket holds a question whose resolution is a decision, not a slice of a build to execute, and the map is finished when nothing is left to decide before someone goes and builds the thing. That one rule is what separates a wayfinder ticket from an ordinary implementation ticket, and it is the rule agents break most often. When the map clears, wayfinder hands off; it does not carry on into code.
+It plans, it does not do. Every ticket holds a question whose resolution is a decision, not a slice of a build to execute, and the map is finished when nothing is left to decide before someone goes and builds the thing. That one rule is what separates a wayfinder ticket from an ordinary implementation [ticket](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket), and it is the rule agents break most often. When the map clears, wayfinder hands off; it does not carry on into code.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/wayfinder` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
+You invoke this by typing `/wayfinder`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own.
 
-It is the heaviest, densest flow in the set, so the trigger is narrow: the effort has to be genuinely larger than one agent session can hold, and the route to the destination has to be foggy. Matt's own line for the split is "use `/grill-with-docs` for single-session planning, use `/wayfinder` for multi-session planning."
+It is the heaviest, densest flow in the set, so the trigger is narrow: the effort has to be genuinely larger than one agent session can hold, and the route to the destination has to be foggy. The split is a clean one: `/grill-with-docs` for single-session planning, `/wayfinder` for multi-session planning.
 
 | What you have in front of you | What to run |
 | --- | --- |
 | A well-scoped feature you can settle in one sitting | [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me), or [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) when there is a codebase |
 | A greenfield project, or a build spanning many sessions, with the route still unclear | `/wayfinder` |
-| A thread where the deciding is already done | [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) — skip straight past the map |
+| A thread where the deciding is already done | [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec): skip straight past the map |
 | A cleared wayfinder map | [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), then [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) and [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) |
-| An existing session that has already grown too big | say "hand off to `/wayfinder`" — [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff) bridges into a map as well as out of one |
+| An existing session that has already grown too big | say "hand off to `/wayfinder`" ([handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff) bridges into a map as well as out of one) |
 
 Greenfield is not a requirement. Wayfinder is used routinely on legacy and half-built codebases, and it is arguably sharper there, because a lot of the fog is "what is already true here" rather than "what should we do".
 
@@ -24,73 +24,73 @@ Greenfield is not a requirement. Wayfinder is used routinely on legacy and half-
 
 The map and its tickets live on the repo's issue tracker, so wayfinder needs the tracker wiring that [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) lays down. That step writes a "Wayfinding operations" section describing how the map, its child tickets, blocking edges, and frontier queries are expressed for GitHub, GitLab, or local markdown. Wayfinder resolves that doc through the pointer in your `CLAUDE.md` / `AGENTS.md` rather than a fixed path; with no tracker configured at all it falls back to local markdown files.
 
-The tracker is not decoration. Blocking is what renders the frontier visually in the tracker's own UI, and a tracker without native dependency links — a self-hosted Gitea, say — degrades wayfinder to inferring blockers from the map text, which works but needs closer supervision.
+The tracker is not decoration. Blocking is what renders the frontier visually in the tracker's own UI, and a tracker without native dependency links (a self-hosted Gitea, say) degrades wayfinder to inferring blockers from the map text, which works but needs closer supervision.
 
 ## The map, the fog, and the frontier
 
-The **map** is a single issue labelled `wayfinder:map`; its tickets are its child issues. It is an **index, not a store** — a decision lives in exactly one place, its ticket, and the map only gists it and links. A session loads the map at low resolution and zooms into individual tickets on demand, which is what lets a map keep growing without every session paying for its whole history.
+The **map** is a single issue labelled `wayfinder:map`; its tickets are its child issues. It is an **index, not a store**: a decision lives in exactly one place, its ticket, and the map only gists it and links. A session loads the map at low resolution and zooms into individual tickets on demand, which is what lets a map keep growing without every session paying for its whole history.
 
 Four things live on it:
 
-- **Destination** — what reaching the end of this map looks like. Naming it is the first act of charting, before any ticket exists, because the destination fixes the scope every ticket is measured against.
-- **Decisions so far** — one line per closed ticket, each linking to where the detail actually lives.
-- **Not yet specified** — the **fog of war**. Decisions you can tell are coming but cannot yet phrase sharply. The test for fog versus ticket is whether you can state the question precisely *now*, not whether you can answer it. Resolving a ticket clears the fog ahead of it and graduates whatever is now specifiable into fresh tickets.
-- **Out of scope** — work ruled beyond the destination. Fog only ever gathers *toward* the destination, so out-of-scope work is closed and never graduates.
+- **Destination**: what reaching the end of this map looks like. Naming it is the first act of charting, before any ticket exists, because the destination fixes the scope every ticket is measured against.
+- **Decisions so far**: one line per closed ticket, each linking to where the detail actually lives.
+- **Not yet specified**: the **fog of war**. Decisions you can tell are coming but cannot yet phrase sharply. The test for fog versus ticket is whether you can state the question precisely *now*, not whether you can answer it. Resolving a ticket clears the fog ahead of it and graduates whatever is now specifiable into fresh tickets.
+- **Out of scope**: work ruled beyond the destination. Fog only ever gathers *toward* the destination, so out-of-scope work is closed and never graduates.
 
-The **frontier** is the open, unblocked, unclaimed tickets — the edge of the known. A session claims a ticket by assigning it to itself before doing any work, so the assignee *is* the claim and concurrent sessions skip it. Tickets are referred to by name throughout, never by a bare `#42`; a wall of issue numbers is illegible in narration.
+The **frontier** is the open, unblocked, unclaimed tickets (the edge of the known). A session claims a ticket by assigning it to itself before doing any work, so the assignee *is* the claim and concurrent sessions skip it. Tickets are referred to by name throughout, never by a bare `#42`; a wall of issue numbers is illegible in narration.
 
 ## The four decision-ticket types
 
-Every ticket carries a `wayfinder:<type>` label, and is either **HITL** — worked with a human who speaks for themselves — or **AFK**, driven by the agent alone. A HITL ticket only resolves through the live exchange; an agent that answers its own grilling questions has broken it.
+Every ticket carries a `wayfinder:<type>` label, and is either **[HITL](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/human-in-the-loop)** (worked with a human who speaks for themselves) or **[AFK](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk)**, driven by the agent alone. A HITL ticket only resolves through the live exchange; an agent that answers its own [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) questions has broken it.
 
 | Type | Mode | Reach for it when | Resolved by |
 | --- | --- | --- | --- |
 | `grilling` | HITL | The default. The question can be settled by talking it through. | [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) plus [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), in a fresh session |
-| `prototype` | HITL | "How should this look" or "how should this behave" — a question talking cannot settle. | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype), with the built artifact linked from the ticket as an asset |
-| `research` | AFK | A fact outside the working directory is blocking a decision. | A [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research) subagent, fired at charting time and burned down in parallel on a `research/<name>` branch |
-| `task` | Either | Nothing to decide, but manual work blocks a decision — provisioning access, signing up for a service, moving data so its shape can be seen. | The agent alone where it can, otherwise a precise checklist for the human |
+| `prototype` | HITL | "How should this look" or "how should this behave": a question talking cannot settle. | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype), with the built artifact linked from the ticket as an asset |
+| `research` | AFK | A fact outside the working directory is blocking a decision. | A [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research) [subagent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent), fired at charting time and burned down in parallel on a `research/<name>` branch |
+| `task` | Either | Nothing to decide, but manual work blocks a decision, such as provisioning access, signing up for a service, or moving data so its shape can be seen. | The agent alone where it can, otherwise a precise checklist for the human |
 
-`task` is the only type that *does* rather than decides, and it earns its place by unblocking a decision — never by delivering a piece of the destination. This is the type that goes wrong most often in practice: agents interpret it as an implementation step and start writing product code inside the map.
+`task` is the only type that *does* rather than decides, and it earns its place by unblocking a decision, never by delivering a piece of the destination. This is the type that goes wrong most often in practice: agents interpret it as an implementation step and start writing product code inside the map.
 
 Research is the only exception to *one ticket per session*.
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **How is this different from `/grill-with-docs`? Which should I start with?**
-Session count, not project size. `/grill-with-docs` is single-session planning; wayfinder is multi-session planning. If you can hold the whole thing in one conversation, grilling is the cheaper and better tool, and wayfinder is genuinely slower and denser for that case. The community shorthand that has settled on it: wayfinder only makes sense if the work doesn't fit into a single session. This is by a distance the most-asked wayfinder question, and it keeps being asked because the descriptions do not tell you where your own task sits on that line — you have to judge the session count yourself.
+Session count, not project size. `/grill-with-docs` is single-session planning; wayfinder is multi-session planning. If you can hold the whole thing in one conversation, grilling is the cheaper and better tool, and wayfinder is genuinely slower and denser for that case. The community shorthand that has settled on it: wayfinder only makes sense if the work doesn't fit into a single session. This is by a distance the most-asked wayfinder question, and it keeps being asked because the descriptions do not tell you where your own task sits on that line. You have to judge the session count yourself.
 
 **When it asks for the "destination", does it mean the end of this session or the end of everything?**
-The whole map. Matt's own clarification: "it's asking about the destination of the entire map, not just the initial session." The question reads ambiguously because wayfinder is by definition a multi-session tool, so a session-scoped answer never makes sense. Typical destinations are a spec to hand off, a decision to lock before planning starts, a proof of concept, or a change made in place like a data migration.
+The whole map. That means the destination of the entire map, not just the initial session. The question reads ambiguously because wayfinder is by definition a multi-session tool, so a session-scoped answer never makes sense. Typical destinations are a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec) to hand off, a decision to lock before planning starts, a proof of concept, or a change made in place like a data migration.
 
-**The map is cleared. Why do I still need `/to-spec` and `/to-tickets` — didn't wayfinder already write the spec and make the tickets?**
-No. Wayfinder's tickets are decision tickets, and by the time the map closes they are all closed too. What is left is a map full of linked decisions, which is not a build plan. [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) collapses those linked decisions into one spec — `/to-spec #<map_issue>` — and [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) slices that into tracer-bullet implementation tickets. Looping the map straight into [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) skips the collapse and throws the linked detail away. Go straight to implementation only when the effort turned out genuinely small. People do run the abbreviated pipeline and report it working; the two extra steps buy you an explicit spec artifact that a reviewer or a colleague can read, which matters more the less solo you are.
+**The map is cleared. Didn't wayfinder already write the spec and make the tickets? Why do I still need `/to-spec` and `/to-tickets`?**
+No. Wayfinder's tickets are decision tickets, and by the time the map closes they are all closed too. What is left is a map full of linked decisions, which is not a build plan. [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) collapses those linked decisions into one spec (`/to-spec #<map_issue>`) and [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) slices that into tracer-bullet implementation tickets. Looping the map straight into [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) skips the collapse and throws the linked detail away. Go straight to implementation only when the effort turned out genuinely small. People do run the abbreviated pipeline and report it working; the two extra steps buy you an explicit spec artifact that a reviewer or a colleague can read, which matters more the less solo you are.
 
 **My agent started writing production code in the middle of a wayfinder session.**
-The most-reported failure with this skill, and there is a real hole behind it. Wayfinder's "plan, don't do" default can be overridden in the map's **Notes** — but the Notes are written by the agent, so the constraint and its exemption live in the same file the constrained party owns. One user watched an agent write "this map carries execution" into its own Notes and then read it back in later sessions as its own licence, building on a live server. There is no hard in-skill stop for "I meant the default." Until there is: read the Notes on any map you didn't chart yourself, keep implementation in its own sessions, and treat any `wayfinder:task` that looks like a slice of the build as mis-typed.
+The most-reported failure with this skill, and there is a real hole behind it. Wayfinder's "plan, don't do" default can be overridden in the map's **Notes**, but the Notes are written by the agent, so the constraint and its exemption live in the same file the constrained party owns. One user watched an agent write "this map carries execution" into its own Notes and then read it back in later sessions as its own licence, building on a live server. There is no hard in-skill stop for "I meant the default." Until there is: read the Notes on any map you didn't chart yourself, keep implementation in its own sessions, and treat any `wayfinder:task` that looks like a slice of the build as mis-typed.
 
 **I charted 27 tickets, and by the time I got to the thirteenth, the rest no longer made sense.**
-A real and repeatedly-reported outcome, verbatim from a field report. Wayfinder's default instinct is to plan comprehensively, and a map whose later tickets rest on assumptions the earlier ones invalidate is exactly the waterfall trap the skill is accused of. Two things push back on it. Scope the map to a bounded destination rather than to the whole product — practitioners consistently report that maps scoped to one defined epic behave better than a sprawling "implement V1", and Matt's answer to "should planning something super big even be the goal?" was "shipping small increments, definitely." And prototype aggressively: the whole reason the route stays current is that uncertainty is flushed out by cheap concrete artifacts before implementation depends on it. Matt characterises wayfinder as "prototypemaxxing", not "planmaxxing".
+A real and repeatedly-reported outcome, verbatim from a field report. Wayfinder's default instinct is to plan comprehensively, and a map whose later tickets rest on assumptions the earlier ones invalidate is exactly the waterfall trap the skill is accused of. Two things push back on it. Scope the map to a bounded destination rather than to the whole product. Practitioners consistently report that maps scoped to one defined epic behave better than a sprawling "implement V1", and planning something very big is not the goal in the first place: shipping small increments is. And [prototype](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/prototyping) aggressively: the whole reason the route stays current is that uncertainty is flushed out by cheap concrete artifacts before implementation depends on it. Wayfinder is "prototypemaxxing", not "planmaxxing".
 
 **Can I work several tickets in parallel?**
-The frontier is built to show you what is takeable, and blocking edges are there so parallel work is safe on paper. In practice one-at-a-time is the safer default. Users working two grilling tickets at once get asked in one session a question they just answered in the other, because the sessions share no context. There is also a known gap on prototype tickets: an agent has been reported building three UI variations, choosing one itself, and closing the ticket — the selection is yours to make, and the skill does not currently say so loudly enough. If you do run in parallel, review the dependency graph yourself first.
+The frontier is built to show you what is takeable, and blocking edges are there so parallel work is safe on paper. In practice one-at-a-time is the safer default. Users working two grilling tickets at once get asked in one session a question they just answered in the other, because the sessions share no [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context). There is also a known gap on prototype tickets: an agent has been reported building three UI variations, choosing one itself, and closing the ticket. The selection is yours to make, and the skill does not currently say so loudly enough. If you do run in parallel, review the dependency graph yourself first.
 
 **Do I have to use GitHub Issues?**
-No — "whatever issue tracker you like." GitHub is the best-supported path because its native sub-issues and blocking relationships are what make the frontier visible without opening the map; GitLab, Linear, Jira and local markdown all get used. Two honest caveats. A tracker with no native blocking means the dependency graph is inferred from text and needs manual correction. And local markdown puts the artifacts in your repo, which Matt does not recommend: "storing this stuff in the repo tends to lead to accidental persistence which is pretty rough." Open-source maintainers hit the opposite problem — public trackers filling with agent-generated planning tickets — and tend to choose local markdown anyway.
+No. Any issue tracker works. GitHub is the best-supported path because its native sub-issues and blocking relationships are what make the frontier visible without opening the map; GitLab, Linear, Jira and local markdown all get used. Two honest caveats. A tracker with no native blocking means the dependency graph is inferred from text and needs manual correction. And local markdown puts the artifacts in your repo, which is not recommended: storing this material in the repo tends to lead to accidental persistence. Open-source maintainers hit the opposite problem (public trackers filling with agent-generated planning tickets) and tend to choose local markdown anyway.
 
 **The grilling is exhausting. Every question is three paragraphs long.**
-This is the sharpest live complaint about wayfinder and it is not resolved. The decomposition one user gave: the verbosity itself causes decision exhaustion, and the length strips out *why* a question is being asked, so you lose the chain from decision to decision as the map gets longer. Matt's answer was "this appears to be an issue with the current set of models, I am also fighting this battle." Practitioner mitigations in circulation: run a lower reasoning effort, and put a plain-language instruction in your global `CLAUDE.md`. Expect to spend real thought here regardless — the amount of thinking wayfinder demands from you is not a defect, it is most of what it is for.
+This is the sharpest live complaint about wayfinder and it is not resolved. The decomposition one user gave: the verbosity itself causes decision exhaustion, and the length strips out *why* a question is being asked, so you lose the chain from decision to decision as the map gets longer. The verbosity looks like a property of the current set of [models](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) rather than of the skill, and no fix has landed. Practitioner mitigations in circulation: run a lower [reasoning effort](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/effort), and put a plain-language instruction in your global `CLAUDE.md`. Expect to spend real thought here regardless, since the amount of thinking wayfinder demands from you is not a defect but most of what it is for.
 
 **A decision I already closed turned out to be wrong. Do I edit the old ticket or make a new one?**
-There is no official guidance, and the agent's instinct is unhelpful: it tends to design around the bad decision rather than challenge it, so you have to steer manually. What does work is telling wayfinder plainly what changed — it updates the map, revises the affected tickets, and comments on already-closed ones. Scope changes mid-map are recoverable. A map you *designed* to change is a scoping smell.
+There is no official guidance, and the agent's instinct is unhelpful: it tends to design around the bad decision rather than challenge it, so you have to steer manually. What does work is telling wayfinder plainly what changed; it updates the map, revises the affected tickets, and comments on already-closed ones. Scope changes mid-map are recoverable. A map you *designed* to change is a scoping smell.
 
 **Where did `decision-mapping` go?**
-It is this skill, renamed to `wayfinder` in v1.1 and invoked as `/wayfinder`. "Decision map" was jargon and was also inaccurate, since only one of the four ticket types is really a decision by itself. The reframe gave the skill one coherent vocabulary — destination, fog of war, frontier, the map — instead of an invented term layered on top. The unit kept the "decision" word, though: a **decision ticket** is what a wayfinder ticket is called, precisely to stop people reading it as an implementation ticket.
+It is this skill, renamed to `wayfinder` in v1.1 and invoked as `/wayfinder`. "Decision map" was jargon and was also inaccurate, since only one of the four ticket types is really a decision by itself. The reframe gave the skill one coherent vocabulary (destination, fog of war, frontier, the map) instead of an invented term layered on top. The unit kept the "decision" word, though: a **decision ticket** is what a wayfinder ticket is called, precisely to stop people reading it as an implementation ticket.
 
 ## It's working if
 
 - The destination is written down and agreed before a single ticket exists.
 - Every open ticket reads as a question. Any ticket that reads "build the X" is either mis-typed or belongs downstream of the map.
-- You can look at your tracker and see which tickets are takeable without opening the map — that is the frontier rendering itself through native blocking.
+- You can look at your tracker and see which tickets are takeable without opening the map, since that is the frontier rendering itself through native blocking.
 - A session resolves one ticket, posts the answer as a resolution comment, closes it, and leaves one line on the map's *Decisions so far*. Then it stops.
 - **Not yet specified** shrinks over time. A patch of fog that graduates into a ticket disappears from that section rather than living in both places.
 - When the opening breadth-first grill turns up no fog at all, the skill stops and tells you the effort is small enough to skip the map.
@@ -100,4 +100,4 @@ It is this skill, renamed to `wayfinder` in v1.1 and invoked as `/wayfinder`. "D
 
 `wayfinder` is a **situational on-ramp**, not the default front door. The grill-led idea → ship chain is still where most work starts; wayfinder is what you climb onto when the idea is too big to hold in one session, and it merges back onto that chain at [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), because a cleared map hands off rather than builds.
 
-Underneath, it is mostly other skills wearing wayfinder's scheduling: [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) resolve the default ticket type, [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) resolves the tickets that talking cannot, and [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research) runs as a subagent so its reading never lands in your session. [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff) is the bridge in and out — into a map from a conversation that outgrew itself, out of one when a side quest appears mid-session. For anything else, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes over the whole set.
+Underneath, it is mostly other skills wearing wayfinder's scheduling: [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) resolve the default ticket type, [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) resolves the tickets that talking cannot, and [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research) runs as a subagent so its reading never lands in your session. [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff) is the bridge in and out: into a map from a conversation that outgrew itself, out of one when a side quest appears mid-session. For anything else, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes over the whole set.

docs/engineering/wizard.md

@@ -1,35 +1,35 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`wizard` generates an interactive bash script that walks a human, step by step, through a manual procedure — wiring up third-party services, running a one-off migration, moving a project from state A to state B. It opens each URL, says what to click and copy, captures what comes back, and writes it into `.env` files and GitHub Actions secrets.
+`wizard` generates an interactive bash script that walks a human, step by step, through a manual procedure: wiring up third-party services, running a one-off migration, moving a project from state A to state B. It opens each URL, says what to click and copy, captures what comes back, and writes it into `.env` files and GitHub Actions secrets.
 
-You reach for it only where a human is genuinely in the loop. If the agent could just do the step itself, it should do it, and a wizard for that step is a worse version of a tool call. Matt's reason for keeping the human there is provisioning: asked why an agent-browser doesn't do the whole setup unattended, his answer was "because it requires HITL to stop it provisioning stupid things." A wizard is for the clicks, approvals and dashboard trips you would not hand to an agent, packaged so you stop re-explaining them to one every time.
+The [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) writes the script; it never runs it. You do, on your own machine. So a wizard is not a list of instructions you follow; it is a program that drives the procedure and holds the state, and your part is to click, paste, and press Enter.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You can type `/wizard`, and the agent can also reach for it on its own. When it hits a step only you can perform — a key it can't mint, a dashboard it can't click — it builds you a wizard instead of writing the instructions into the chat, where they scroll away.
+You can type `/wizard`, and the agent can also reach for it on its own. When it hits a step you have to take (a key it can't mint, a dashboard it can't click), it builds you a wizard instead of writing the instructions into the chat, where they scroll away.
 
-Reach for it when the next thing blocking you is a human clicking through a dashboard:
+Reach for it when the next thing blocking you is a trip through a dashboard:
 
 | Situation | What the wizard does |
 | --- | --- |
 | A new dev needs six services configured before the app boots | Opens each dashboard in order, captures the keys, writes them to `.env` and CI |
 | A one-off migration needs switches flipped in a specific order | Sequences the irreversible steps behind confirmation gates |
 | A project has to move from state A to state B once | Walks the transition and reports what it could not do |
-| You are about to write those steps into a README | Writes an executable version instead, which cannot rot as quietly |
+| You are about to write those steps into a README | Writes an executable version instead, which can't rot as quietly |
 
-Don't reach for it when the procedure is scriptable end to end — that is a script, and the agent should write and run it. Don't reach for it to *decide* what to build; for that, [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) and [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) are the tools.
+Don't reach for it to *decide* what to build; for that, [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) and [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) are the tools.
 
 ## Prerequisites
 
-None to generate one. The wizard it writes runs on bash, and reaches for `gh` when a stage sets a GitHub secret or variable. If `gh` is missing or unauthenticated, that stage degrades to a warning and the closing summary tells the human what to set by hand, rather than failing the run.
+None to generate one. The wizard it writes runs on bash, and uses `gh` when a stage sets a GitHub secret or variable. If `gh` is missing or unauthenticated, that stage becomes a warning and the closing summary tells you what to set by hand, instead of failing the run.
 
 ## Stages
 
-A **stage** is the unit of authoring and the unit of attention: one focused task, one screen. The script clears the terminal between stages, so anything that doesn't fit the screen is anything the human loses. You author them in dependency order and set an honest `TOTAL_STAGES` and `TOTAL_MINUTES`, which is what drives the time-remaining display. That estimate is a promise to the person running it.
+A **stage** is one focused task on one screen. The script clears the terminal between stages, so a stage that overflows the screen loses the part that scrolled away. You author stages in dependency order and set `TOTAL_STAGES`, which drives the progress display.
 
-Scoping happens before a line is written. The skill reads the repo rather than asking cold — `.env*`, `docker-compose*`, framework config, and every `secrets.*` / `vars.*` reference in `.github/workflows/`, each of which is a value the wizard must produce. Then it shows you the ordered stage list to confirm, and only then maps each stage to the precise path a human follows ("Dashboard → Developers → API keys → Reveal test key → copy"). Where it doesn't know the current UI, it asks or checks the docs; it doesn't invent clicks that may not exist.
+Scoping happens before a line is written. The [skill](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/skill) reads the repo instead of asking cold: `.env*`, `docker-compose*`, framework config, and every `secrets.*` / `vars.*` reference in `.github/workflows/`: each of those is a value the wizard has to produce. It then shows you the ordered stage list to confirm, and only after that maps each stage to the exact path a human follows ("Dashboard → Developers → API keys → Reveal test key → copy"). Where it doesn't know the current UI, it asks you or checks the docs rather than inventing clicks.
 
-For each captured value, scoping has to settle where it lands:
+For each captured value, scoping settles where it lands:
 
 | Destination | When |
 | --- | --- |
@@ -37,13 +37,13 @@ For each captured value, scoping has to settle where it lands:
 | GitHub secret | CI reads it, and it's sensitive |
 | GitHub variable | CI reads it, and it's public |
 | Both `.env` and a secret | Local dev and CI both need it |
-| Nowhere | The stage is a pure action — a switch flipped, a plan upgraded |
+| Nowhere | The stage is a pure action: a switch flipped, a plan upgraded |
 
-## The UX is not yours to design
+## The template already solves the UX
 
-A [template](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/engineering/wizard/template.sh) already solves it: progress with time remaining, confirmation gates, cross-platform URL opening including WSL, hidden entry for secrets, idempotent `.env` upserts, `gh secret` / `gh variable` writes, and a closing summary of everything it had to skip. Everything above the `STAGES` marker is a fixed library, identical in every wizard, never hand-edited. The consistency is the point. Your job is only to scope the procedure and author its stages.
+The [template](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/engineering/wizard/template.sh) ships the whole experience: progress with time remaining, confirmation gates, cross-platform URL opening including WSL, hidden entry for secrets, idempotent `.env` upserts, `gh secret` / `gh variable` writes, and a closing summary of everything it had to skip. Everything above the `STAGES` marker is a fixed library, identical in every wizard and never hand-edited. The consistency is the point. Your job is only to scope the procedure and author its stages.
 
-The agent that writes a wizard never runs it end to end — it opens browsers and blocks on human input. Verification is static instead: `bash -n`, `shellcheck` where available, and a trace that every value lands where scoping said it would, with every `set_secret` name matching a real `secrets.*` reference in CI. That is worth knowing because it sets your expectations honestly. The first person to run the wizard is you, and you are the test.
+The agent that writes a wizard never runs it end to end, because it opens browsers and waits for human input. It verifies statically instead: `bash -n`, `shellcheck` where available, and a trace that every value lands where scoping said it would, with every `set_secret` name matching a real `secrets.*` reference in CI. Set your expectations accordingly: the first run is yours, and that run is the test.
 
 ## Ephemeral by default
 
@@ -56,43 +56,37 @@ The agent that writes a wizard never runs it end to end — it opens browsers an
 
 **Do my API keys end up in the model's context?**
 
-No. The agent writes a script; it doesn't run it. You run the script yourself, and it captures the key with hidden terminal entry and writes it straight to `.env` or `gh secret`. Matt's answer to this on launch day was "No, because it's a CLI — the LLM is not connected to it." The caveat worth stating: that holds for values the wizard captures at runtime. If you paste a key into the chat while scoping the procedure, it's in the context like any other pasted text.
+No. The agent writes a script; it doesn't run it. You run the script yourself, and it captures the key with hidden terminal entry and writes it straight to `.env` or `gh secret`. The wizard is a CLI, and the model is not connected to it. One caveat: that holds for values the wizard captures at runtime. If you paste a key into the chat while scoping the procedure, it's in the [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) like any other pasted text.
 
 **Can I go back and fix a value I mistyped?**
 
-Not mid-run. There is no back button — the stages run forward, and a wrong answer on stage 3 means Ctrl-C and re-run. Re-running is cheap by design: any value already written to `.env` is offered back as a default, so you press Enter through the stages you got right and retype only the wrong one. This came up in the launch week and hasn't been closed since: "loved it! One thing though — is there a way to go back and correct what you've entered?"
+Not mid-run. There is no back button: the stages run forward, and a wrong answer on stage 3 means Ctrl-C and re-run. Re-running is cheap by design: any value already written to `.env` is offered back as a default, so you press Enter through the stages you got right and retype only the wrong one. This came up in the launch week and hasn't been closed since: "loved it! One thing though, is there a way to go back and correct what you've entered?"
 
 There's a related open bug. Arrow keys in an `ask` prompt insert `^[[D` / `^[[C` instead of moving the cursor, because the prompt uses `read -r` rather than Readline ([issue #741](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/741)). Backspace works; arrow keys don't. Delete back to the mistake rather than moving the cursor into it.
 
 **Does it know what I've already set up?**
 
-Partly, and less than the launch reactions assumed. It reads the repo before it asks — your `.env` files, `docker-compose`, framework config, the `secrets.*` references in CI — so it scopes to values that are genuinely missing rather than starting from zero the way a README does. What it doesn't do is check the third-party service. If a key exists in your `.env` the wizard offers it back and Enter keeps it; if you already created the Stripe account but never saved the key, the wizard still sends you to the dashboard for it.
+Partly, and less than the launch reactions assumed. It reads the repo before it asks (your `.env` files, `docker-compose`, framework config, the `secrets.*` references in CI), so it scopes to values that are genuinely missing rather than starting from zero the way a README does. What it doesn't do is check the third-party service. If a key exists in your `.env` the wizard offers it back and Enter keeps it; if you already created the Stripe account but never saved the key, the wizard still sends you to the dashboard for it.
 
-**Why not let an agent-browser do the whole setup automatically?**
+**Where does it sit in the workflow, after grilling and the spec?**
 
-Because provisioning is where an unattended agent spends your money and creates things you didn't want. The human in the loop is the point of the skill, not a limitation of it. Where a step genuinely is safe to automate, the agent should do it directly and the wizard shouldn't carry it at all.
-
-**Where does it sit in the workflow — after grilling and the spec?**
-
-Nowhere in particular. It's a standalone, not a chain step. The common guess is `/grill-with-docs → /to-spec → /wizard`, and that sequence is fine, but the trigger is a human-only procedure showing up, which can happen at any point: before you start, mid-build, or long after ship. It also works as a discovery tool — scoping surfaces the hidden prerequisites of a task, like the three API keys you hadn't thought about, before you commit to the work.
+Nowhere in particular. It's a standalone, not a chain step. The common guess is `/grill-with-docs → /to-spec → /wizard`, and that sequence is fine, but the trigger is a manual procedure showing up, which can happen at any point: before you start, mid-build, or long after ship. It also works as a discovery tool: scoping surfaces the hidden prerequisites of a task, like the three API keys you hadn't thought about, before you commit to the work.
 
 **Does it work outside Claude Code?**
 
-The artifact does, unconditionally: it's a plain bash script and it doesn't care what harness generated it. The skill itself is model-invoked, so it's listed everywhere — type `/wizard` in Claude Code or `$wizard` in Codex, or just describe the setup you're stuck on. Being model-invoked also keeps it clear of [#693](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/693), where Claude's desktop and web surfaces drop *user-invoked* skills from the model's listing and report them as not installed.
+The artifact does, unconditionally: it's a plain bash script and it doesn't care what [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) generated it. The skill itself is model-invoked, so it's listed everywhere: type `/wizard` in Claude Code or `$wizard` in Codex, or just describe the setup you're stuck on. Being model-invoked also keeps it clear of [#693](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/693), where Claude's desktop and web surfaces drop *user-invoked* skills from the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model)'s listing and report them as not installed.
 
 **Didn't this used to be user-invoked?**
 
-It did. It's now model-invoked, so the agent reaches for it unprompted when it hits a step only you can take. Nothing you could do before stopped working — model-invocation *adds* the agent's reach, it never removes yours, so `/wizard` behaves exactly as it did. What changed is the failure mode it retires: the agent hitting a credentials wall mid-build and dumping six numbered steps into the chat for you to follow by hand.
+It did. It's now model-invoked, so the agent reaches for it unprompted when it hits a step you have to take. Nothing you could do before stopped working: model-invocation *adds* the agent's reach, it never removes yours, so `/wizard` behaves exactly as it did. What changed is the failure mode it retires: the agent hitting a credentials wall mid-build and dumping six numbered steps into the chat for you to follow by hand.
 
-The guard against the opposite failure is in the description itself — don't invoke it for steps the agent can perform itself. Work an agent can do, an agent should do.
-
-**It used to be in `in-progress/` — where is it now?**
+**It used to be in `in-progress/`: where is it now?**
 
 `engineering/`, as of v1.2. It graduated out of the beta bucket and now ships in the plugin, so it arrives with the rest of the promoted set rather than needing an individual install. Its behaviour didn't change on graduation.
 
 ## It's working if
 
-- You're shown an ordered list of stages, and the values each one produces, and asked to confirm — before any script exists.
+- You're shown an ordered list of stages, and the values each one produces, and asked to confirm, before any script exists.
 - Every URL is opened before the value from that page is asked for. You're never asked to paste something you haven't been sent to fetch.
 - Secrets are typed blind. Nothing sensitive echoes into your scrollback.
 - Each stage fits one screen. Nothing you still need has scrolled away.
@@ -101,4 +95,4 @@ The guard against the opposite failure is in the description itself — don't in
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-`wizard` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone, sitting at the line where automation stops and a human has to click. Its nearest neighbour is [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills), because both exist to get a repo into a working state — that one configures this skill set, while `wizard` generates a setup path for everything else. It also pairs with [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement): when a build lands a feature that needs credentials or a manual cutover, a wizard is how the human half gets done. When you're unsure which skill fits the moment, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+`wizard` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone, sitting at the line where automation stops and a human has to click. Its nearest neighbour is [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills), because both exist to get a repo into a working state: that one configures this skill set, while `wizard` generates a setup path for everything else. It also pairs with [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement): when a build lands a feature that needs credentials or a manual cutover, a wizard is how the human half gets done. When you're unsure which skill fits the moment, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/productivity/grill-me.md

@@ -1,38 +1,38 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`grill-me` takes a **loose idea** and interviews you until it has real decisions in it. You do not need a worked-out plan to start — producing one is what the session is for. It asks in **rounds**: each round is the whole **frontier** — every question whose prerequisites you have already settled — so you are never asked something that hinges on an answer it hasn't heard yet.
+`grill-me` takes a **loose idea** and interviews you until you can commit to it. You do not need a worked-out plan to start: producing one is what the [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) is for. It asks in **rounds**: each round is the whole **frontier** (every question whose prerequisites you have already settled), so you are never asked something that hinges on an answer it hasn't heard yet.
 
-It is **stateless**. It writes no files and leaves no workspace behind. The only thing it leaves is a sharper version of the idea, in your own head.
+It is **[stateless](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/stateless)**. It writes no files and leaves no workspace behind. The only thing it leaves is a sharper version of the idea, in your own head.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/grill-me` — the agent won't reach for it on its own. Start it in a **fresh conversation**, not on top of a plan you already had an agent write.
+You invoke this by typing `/grill-me`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own. Start it in a **fresh conversation**, not on top of a plan you already had an agent write.
 
-Reach for it as soon as you have an idea worth taking seriously — a feature, a product direction, a business call, a piece of writing — and long before you have worked out what it involves. Vagueness is not a reason to wait; it is the thing the session eats. If you can already specify the thing precisely, you don't need to grill it.
+Reach for it as soon as you have an idea worth taking seriously (a feature, a product direction, a business call, a piece of writing), and long before you have worked out what it involves. Vagueness is not a reason to wait; it is the thing the session eats. If you can already specify the thing precisely, you don't need to grill it.
 
 Which of the three grilling skills you want depends on what is in front of you:
 
-- **Anything, anywhere** — `grill-me`. It needs no repo and writes no files, and the subject doesn't have to be code.
-- **A codebase to align against** — [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs). The same interview, but stateful: it reads your code and keeps what it learns in `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs.
-- **Too big for one session** — [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder). It charts the effort as a map and runs grilling sessions inside it.
+- **Anything, anywhere**: `grill-me`. It needs no repo and writes no files, and the subject doesn't have to be code.
+- **A codebase to align against**: [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs). The same interview, but [stateful](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/stateful): it reads your code and keeps what it learns in `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs.
+- **Too big for one session**: [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder). It charts the effort as a map and runs grilling sessions inside it.
 
-Leave plan mode off. Plan mode primes the agent to rush toward producing a plan, which is the opposite of staying in inquiry.
+Leave [plan mode](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent-mode) off. Plan mode primes the agent to rush toward producing a plan, which is the opposite of staying in inquiry.
 
 ## It's a conversation, not an interview
 
 The skill asks the questions, but **you** own the scope. That is the part people miss, and it separates a session that turns an idea into decisions from one that produces confident nonsense.
 
-The failure mode is **passivity** — answering "agreed, agreed, agreed" for forty questions and coming out with a plan the agent wrote and you nodded at. It feels productive because it was long. Nothing was actually decided, and the result carries a certainty it hasn't earned.
+The failure mode is **passivity**: answering "agreed, agreed, agreed" for forty questions and coming out with a plan the agent wrote and you nodded at. It feels productive because it was long. Nothing was actually decided, and the result carries a certainty it hasn't earned.
 
 Being active means steering. Push back on a question pitched beneath the fidelity you need. Say when the scope is drifting. Answer "I don't know" and mean it. This skill is built to aid an engineer, not to replace one: what comes out tracks the quality of your answers, not the number of questions asked.
 
-The opposite error is real but rarer — staying in the interview so long you never reach code.
+The opposite error is real but rarer: staying in the interview so long you never reach code.
 
 ## Grillable and ungrillable
 
 Some questions can be answered by talking. Others can't, and no amount of grilling will get you there.
 
-"One long form or three pages?" and "how should this interaction feel?" are **ungrillable** — they need something to react to. When you hit one, stop grilling. Build the throwaway version with [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype), look at it, then come back and answer in one line.
+"One long form or three pages?" and "how should this interaction feel?" are **ungrillable**: they need something to react to. When you hit one, stop grilling. Build the throwaway version with [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype), look at it, then come back and answer in one line.
 
 Talking your way through an ungrillable question is where sessions balloon. The agent keeps rephrasing, you keep guessing, and the scope grows to fill the uncertainty.
 
@@ -46,10 +46,10 @@ Talking your way through an ungrillable question is where sessions balloon. The
 ## Common questions
 
 **How many questions should I expect, and how do I know when it ends?**
-Count rounds, not questions. Forty-six questions across four rounds is an ordinary session. It ends when the frontier is empty — every branch visited, nothing left silently assumed.
+Count rounds, not questions. Forty-six questions across four rounds is an ordinary session. It ends when the frontier is empty: every branch visited, nothing left silently assumed.
 
 **It asked me two hundred questions. What went wrong?**
-Usually the scope was too large. Ask the agent to break the work into smaller pieces first, then grill each one. Very long sessions also drift into the **dumb zone**, where the context window is full enough that the questions get worse.
+Usually the scope was too large. Ask the agent to break the work into smaller pieces first, then grill each one. Very long sessions also drift into the **[dumb zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone)**, where the [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window) is full enough that the questions get worse.
 
 **Can I go back to one question at a time?**
 Yes. Add this to your global `CLAUDE.md`:
@@ -62,15 +62,15 @@ When grilling, ask one question at a time.
 Say so. "I don't know" is a real answer, and a question you can't answer is usually a sign to prototype rather than to guess.
 
 **Do I start a fresh session before writing the spec?**
-No. The value of the session is the context you just built. Hand the same conversation straight to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec).
+No. The value of the session is the [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) you just built. Hand the same conversation straight to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec).
 
 **Does the model matter?**
-More than for most skills. Grilling leans on the model's own sense of how systems break, so give it your best one. Implementation mostly follows context and tolerates a cheaper model.
+More than for most skills. Grilling leans on the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model)'s own sense of how systems break, so give it your best one. Implementation mostly follows context and tolerates a cheaper model.
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-`grill-me` is a **standalone you can run anywhere, on anything**. Being stateless is what makes it portable: no repo, no workspace, no setup, and no assumption that the idea is even about software. People point it at business decisions, at writing, at what to do next — anything that won't sit still in their head.
+`grill-me` is a **standalone you can run anywhere, on anything**. Being stateless is what makes it portable: no repo, no workspace, no setup, and no assumption that the idea is even about software. People point it at business decisions, at writing, at what to do next: anything that won't sit still in their head.
 
 That portability is the whole difference from [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), which runs the same interview but reads a codebase to align against and records what it learns as `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs. Both sit on the [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) primitive; `grill-me` is the user-invoked front door that carries nothing with it.
 
-If what you grilled does turn out to be software, you can hand the same conversation to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) and carry on into the build flow — an option, not the point of the skill. When you're unsure which flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+If what you grilled does turn out to be software, you can hand the same conversation to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) and carry on into the build flow (an option, not the point of the skill). When you're unsure which flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/productivity/grilling.md

@@ -1,32 +1,32 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`grilling` is the interview loop that stress-tests a plan, a decision, or an idea before anyone acts on it. It maps the subject as a **design tree** — every decision branches into the decisions that hang off it — and interviews you branch by branch until nothing is left silently assumed.
+`grilling` is the interview loop that stress-tests a plan, a decision, or an idea before anyone acts on it. It maps the subject as a **design tree**: every decision branches into the decisions that hang off it, and interviews you branch by branch until nothing is left silently assumed.
 
-It does not ask one question at a time, and it does not ask everything at once. Each **round** asks the whole **frontier**: every decision whose prerequisites are already settled, and nothing else. Two questions never share a round if one depends on the other — a question that hinges on an answer still open belongs to a later round. Your answers settle decisions, the frontier moves outward, and the next round asks what that unblocked. Thirteen questions typically land in about three rounds rather than thirteen.
+It does not ask one question at a time, and it does not ask everything at once. Each **round** asks the whole **frontier**: every decision whose prerequisites are already settled, and nothing else. Two questions never share a round if one depends on the other; a question that hinges on an answer still open belongs to a later round. Your answers settle decisions, the frontier moves outward, and the next round asks what that unblocked. Thirteen questions typically land in about three rounds rather than thirteen.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-Type `/grilling`, or the agent reaches for it on its own when a task fits. It is the only skill in the grilling family that is model-invoked, which is why you rarely type it: usually a skill you *did* type is running it for you.
+Type `/grilling`, or the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) reaches for it on its own when a task fits. It is the only [skill](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/skill) in the grilling family that is model-invoked, which is why you rarely type it: usually a skill you *did* type is running it for you.
 
 Typing `/grilling` directly gets you the plain interview and nothing else. Where you want something more than that:
 
 | What you have | Reach for |
 | --- | --- |
-| You aren't working in a working directory | [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) — the same session, under a name the agent will never fire by itself |
-| You are in a working directory | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) — the same session, and it writes `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs as it goes |
-| An effort too big to hold in one session | [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) — it charts a map and runs grilling inside the decision tickets |
-| A question that talking cannot settle — how something should look or feel | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) — build the throwaway version, then come back |
+| You aren't working in a working directory | [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me): the same [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), under a name the agent will never fire by itself |
+| You are in a working directory | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs): the same session, and it writes `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs as it goes |
+| An effort too big to hold in one session | [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder): it charts a map and runs grilling inside the decision tickets |
+| A question that talking cannot settle: how something should look or feel | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype): build the throwaway version, then come back |
 | A skill of your own that needs an interview | Invoke `/grilling` from it, rather than writing another interview |
 
 ## The round, the frontier, and who decides
 
 Three ideas carry the whole skill.
 
-The **design tree** is the model of the subject: decisions with decisions hanging off them. The **frontier** is the set of decisions whose prerequisites are all settled — the only questions that can honestly be asked yet. A **round** is one frontier, asked in full and answered in full.
+The **design tree** is the model of the subject: decisions with decisions hanging off them. The **frontier** is the set of decisions whose prerequisites are all settled: the only questions that can honestly be asked yet. A **round** is one frontier, asked in full and answered in full.
 
-Inside a round every question arrives in a fixed shape: numbered and titled behind a `❓`, then the body, then the agent's recommended answer alone on a `➡️` line. That is what makes a round answerable by number — "1 yes, 2 the second option, 3 no, here's why" — instead of by quoting questions back. The format has one known rough edge: the recommendation sometimes argues *against* the question as it was worded, so agreeing with the recommendation means answering "no" to the question. When that happens, answer the recommendation and say so.
+Inside a round every question arrives in a fixed shape: numbered and titled behind a `❓`, then the body, then the agent's recommended answer alone on a `➡️` line. That is what makes a round answerable by number ("1 yes, 2 the second option, 3 no, here's why") instead of by quoting questions back. The format has one known rough edge: the recommendation sometimes argues *against* the question as it was worded, so agreeing with the recommendation means answering "no" to the question. When that happens, answer the recommendation and say so.
 
-The other half of the design is the split between facts and decisions. Facts are the skill's own job: when a frontier question needs something the environment can settle, it dispatches a sub-agent to go and find out rather than asking you. It does not block on that — only the questions downstream of a running exploration wait. Decisions are yours, and it must wait for them. An agent running `grilling` that answers its own decisions has broken the skill, not interpreted it liberally. The session ends when the frontier is empty, and it will not act on what you agreed until you confirm you have reached a shared understanding.
+The other half of the design is the split between facts and decisions. Facts are the skill's own job: when a frontier question needs something the [environment](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/environment) can settle, it dispatches a [sub-agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) to go and find out rather than asking you. It does not block on that; only the questions downstream of a running exploration wait. Decisions are yours, and it must wait for them. An agent running `grilling` that answers its own decisions has broken the skill, not interpreted it liberally. The session ends when the frontier is empty, and it will not act on what you agreed until you confirm you have reached a shared understanding.
 
 The honest limit: the frontier is the agent's judgement, not a computed graph. It can put two questions in one round and only afterwards discover that one answer should have changed the other. There is no guard against that beyond telling it, which reopens the affected branch in the next round.
 
@@ -52,32 +52,32 @@ When grilling, ask one question at a time.
 The round-based default is genuinely contested. Practitioners who read slowly, who work in a second language, or who use the sequential format as focus scaffolding all report the one-at-a-time rhythm is better for them, and the opt-out is supported rather than tolerated.
 
 **Where did `/batch-grill-me` go?**
-Into this skill. Round-based questioning shipped briefly as a separate skill, then moved into `grilling` itself, so everything built on the primitive — `grill-me`, `grill-with-docs`, `triage`, `wayfinder` — got it at once. There is no `batch-grill-me` to install, and no separate sequential skill either; the `CLAUDE.md` line above is the way back to one-at-a-time.
+Into this skill. Round-based questioning shipped briefly as a separate skill, then moved into `grilling` itself, so everything built on the primitive (`grill-me`, `grill-with-docs`, `triage`, `wayfinder`) got it at once. There is no `batch-grill-me` to install, and no separate sequential skill either; the `CLAUDE.md` line above is the way back to one-at-a-time.
 
 **Asking a whole round at once must lose the questions my earlier answers would have raised. Doesn't it?**
-This is the most common objection to the round design, and the frontier is the answer to it: a round only ever contains questions that do not depend on each other, so no answer in a round can invalidate another question in that round. Answers still reshape everything downstream — the next round is recomputed, not pre-written. What you lose is smaller than "all questions at once" implies, and larger than nothing: see the frontier's limit above.
+This is the most common objection to the round design, and the frontier is the answer to it: a round only ever contains questions that do not depend on each other, so no answer in a round can invalidate another question in that round. Answers still reshape everything downstream: the next round is recomputed, not pre-written. What you lose is smaller than "all questions at once" implies, and larger than nothing: see the frontier's limit above.
 
 **It ran out of questions and started building.**
-A confirmation gate exists precisely for this: the skill is not finished when the frontier empties, it is finished when you say the understanding is shared. Weaker and faster models still break it — this is reported most often on lower-effort or non-frontier models, which collapse "interview until shared understanding" into a couple of questions and an outline. If yours does it, the reliable fix is a line in your own `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md` telling the agent not to implement without permission.
+A confirmation gate exists precisely for this: the skill is not finished when the frontier empties, it is finished when you say the understanding is shared. Weaker and faster [models](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) still break it; this is reported most often on lower-effort or non-frontier models, which collapse "interview until shared understanding" into a couple of questions and an outline. If yours does it, the reliable fix is a line in your own `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md` telling the agent not to implement without permission.
 
 **It answered its own questions instead of asking me.**
 That is a bug in the run, not the intended behaviour, and it was the reason facts and decisions were separated in the skill's text. It shows up most when another skill runs `grilling` inside a resolve-this-ticket frame, where the surrounding task reads as licence to keep moving. The same constraint is why there is no async mode: people have asked for a variant that reads a GitHub issue and posts one consolidated decision memo, and that is a different skill, because a grilling session that nobody answers has produced the agent's opinion rather than yours.
 
 **Can I cap the number of questions?**
-No, and a cap is deliberately out of scope. Some plans need three questions and some need fifty; a fixed ceiling either truncates the hard case or feels arbitrary on the easy one. Steering in plain language is the intended control — tell it to wrap up, or stop and accept the plan where it stands. If a session is running very long, the cause is usually that the scope was too big; break the work up and grill the pieces.
+No, and a cap is deliberately out of scope. Some plans need three questions and some need fifty; a fixed ceiling either truncates the hard case or feels arbitrary on the easy one. Steering in plain language is the intended control: tell it to wrap up, or stop and accept the plan where it stands. If a session is running very long, the cause is usually that the scope was too big; break the work up and grill the pieces.
 
 **I installed `grill-me` on its own and nothing happens.**
 `grill-me` is a one-line skill whose whole body is "run a `/grilling` session", so it needs this skill installed too. The same is true of `grill-with-docs`, which additionally needs [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling). Installing the whole set avoids the problem; installing selectively means installing the primitives as well.
 
 **`grill-with-docs` ran, but it never loaded `grilling`.**
-A real and unfixed rough edge, reported across harnesses and models: a skill that names another skill does not reliably cause that skill to load, and `grill-with-docs` names two. The tell is a session that asks everything at once with no recommendations attached — that is the model improvising an interview rather than running this one. Asking the agent directly whether it loaded `grilling` and `domain-modeling` usually recovers it.
+A real and unfixed rough edge, reported across [harnesses](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) and models: a skill that names another skill does not reliably cause that skill to load, and `grill-with-docs` names two. The tell is a session that asks everything at once with no recommendations attached: that is the model improvising an interview rather than running this one. Asking the agent directly whether it loaded `grilling` and `domain-modeling` usually recovers it.
 
 ## It's working if
 
 - A round arrives as a numbered list, each question with its recommendation on a separate `➡️` line, and you can answer the whole round by number.
 - Nothing in a round needs another question in the same round answered first.
 - Later rounds ask things the first round could not have asked.
-- It goes and looks facts up — reading files, dispatching a sub-agent — rather than asking you something it could have found out.
+- It goes and looks facts up (reading files, dispatching a sub-agent) rather than asking you something it could have found out.
 - Research running in the background does not stall the round; only the questions that depend on it wait.
 - It stops at the end and asks you to confirm the understanding is shared, instead of starting work.
 - Question count stays high while round count stays low.

docs/productivity/handoff.md

@@ -1,23 +1,23 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`handoff` compacts the conversation you are in into a **handoff document** — one markdown file, written to your OS's temporary directory rather than into the workspace, that a fresh agent can read to pick the work up.
+`handoff` compacts the conversation you are in into a **handoff document**: one markdown file, written to your OS's temporary directory rather than into the workspace, that a fresh [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) can read to pick the work up.
 
-What it buys is **portability**, not compression. That makes the skill narrower than it sounds. You need a file only when the work has to *travel* — to a new harness, a new directory, a colleague, or a side task you want to fork off. If nothing is travelling, you do not need a handoff: staying in the session, `/clear`, a subagent and `/compact` cover the ordinary end-of-phase case, and `/compact` covers it more often than this skill does.
+What it buys is **portability**, not compression. That makes the skill narrower than it sounds. You need a file only when the work has to *travel*: to a new [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness), a new directory, a colleague, or a side task you want to fork off. If nothing is travelling, you do not need a handoff: staying in the [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), `/clear`, a [subagent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) and `/compact` cover the ordinary end-of-phase case, and `/compact` covers it more often than this skill does.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/handoff` — the agent won't reach for it on its own. Pass a note about what the next session is for, and the document is written for it.
+You invoke this by typing `/handoff`; the agent won't reach for it on its own. Pass a note about what the next session is for, and the document is written for it.
 
 Four situations are the whole trigger:
 
 | Situation | Why a file |
 | --- | --- |
-| Swapping harness — Claude → Codex | The new harness cannot see the old context |
+| Swapping harness (Claude → Codex) | The new harness cannot see the old [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) |
 | Moving to a different directory or repo | A prototype directory is the common case |
 | Sending the work to a colleague | They need something they can read |
 | Forking a side task found mid-phase | You keep working; a second agent takes the fork |
 
-For anything else — same harness, same directory, you are done grilling and moving to implementation — `/compact` is the move. [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) carries the ordered tree over all five options at a phase boundary.
+For anything else (same harness, same directory, you are done [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) and moving to implementation), `/compact` is the move. [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) carries the ordered tree over all five options at a phase boundary.
 
 ## Branching is the use people skip
 
@@ -29,38 +29,38 @@ Three of the five options at a phase boundary preserve different things: `/compa
 
 ## What travels, and what doesn't
 
-The document carries the live thread — what's in flight, why, and what's next — plus a **suggested skills** section naming what the next agent should reach for. Secrets are redacted before it's written.
+The document carries the live thread (what's in flight, why, and what's next) plus a **suggested skills** section naming what the next agent should reach for. Secrets are redacted before it's written.
 
 What it deliberately does not carry is anything already written down. Specs, plans, ADRs, issues, commits and diffs are referenced by path or URL, never copied. That keeps the file small, and it keeps the settled detail in one place instead of two that drift.
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **Handoff or compact?**
-`/compact` unless something is travelling. Asked directly whether you hand off or compact when you're still on the same task, Matt's answer was "mostly `/compact`" — same harness, same directory, and you need to stay in the loop is where the phase-boundary tree lands most days. `/handoff`'s advantage is not that it summarises better; it's that the result is a file you can carry somewhere `/compact` can't reach.
+`/compact` unless something is travelling. Staying on the same task is a compact, not a handoff: same harness, same directory, and you need to stay in the loop is where the phase-boundary tree lands most days. `/handoff`'s advantage is not that it summarises better; it's that the result is a file you can carry somewhere `/compact` can't reach.
 
 **So what's the actual difference between compact, clear and handoff?**
-Three different things being preserved. `/compact` compresses this context and keeps you going in a fresh window — intent survives. `/clear` empties the window and starts from nothing — correct when everything behind you is disposable, and one-way if it isn't. `/handoff` writes a portable file — the work survives the move to somewhere else. Note that all three turn a **primary source** (the conversation as it happened) into a **secondary source** (a summary of it). Continuing is the only move that doesn't, which is why it's the first one to rule out.
+Three different things being preserved. `/compact` compresses this context and keeps you going in a fresh window: intent survives. `/clear` empties the window and starts from nothing: correct when everything behind you is disposable, and one-way if it isn't. `/handoff` writes a portable file: the work survives the move to somewhere else. Note that all three turn a **[primary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source)** (the conversation as it happened) into a **[secondary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/secondary-source)** (a summary of it). Continuing is the only move that doesn't, which is why it's the first one to rule out.
 
 **Where did my handoff file go?**
-The temp directory, which is the most-reported friction with the skill: the paths are long, they differ per OS, and on Windows agents sometimes take several attempts to find the right one. Ask for the path back and keep it before you move on. Temp is deliberate: a handoff is a transit document, not an artifact you maintain. It is not a durable one either — see the next question.
+The temp directory, which is the most-reported friction with the skill: the paths are long, they differ per OS, and on Windows agents sometimes take several attempts to find the right one. Ask for the path back and keep it before you move on. Temp is deliberate: a handoff is a transit document, not an artifact you maintain. It is not a durable one either; see the next question.
 
 **My handoff vanished between sessions.**
-Some environments clear temp between sessions — Codex is the reported case — and `/private/tmp` goes on reboot. If the next session isn't starting within the hour, or is starting under a different harness, copy the file somewhere durable yourself as soon as it's written. The same applies to anything the document *points at*: a dispatch that references other files in temp is a dispatch the next agent can't follow.
+Some environments clear temp between sessions (Codex is the reported case), and `/private/tmp` goes on reboot. If the next session isn't starting within the hour, or is starting under a different harness, copy the file somewhere durable yourself as soon as it's written. The same applies to anything the document *points at*: a dispatch that references other files in temp is a dispatch the next agent can't follow.
 
 **How do I actually hand it to the next agent?**
-Open the fresh session and point it at the path: read this file, then continue. Point at the file rather than pasting the summary into a shell command — a summary containing backticks or `$(...)` gets mangled when it's interpolated into `claude "<summary>"`, and the usual failure is silent truncation rather than an error, so the new agent starts with a quietly incomplete brief.
+Open the fresh session and point it at the path: read this file, then continue. Point at the file rather than pasting the summary into a shell command: a summary containing backticks or `$(...)` gets mangled when it's interpolated into `claude "<summary>"`, and the usual failure is silent truncation rather than an error, so the new agent starts with a quietly incomplete brief.
 
 **Is this the same as `/branch`, `--fork-session`, or the built-in `/handoff`?**
-Analogous, not identical, and `/branch` isn't a shipped skill here — `/handoff` is the canonical name. A fork inherits an exact copy of the context; this skill produces a *targeted* compression aimed at a stated next task, in a file. Where a fork will do — same machine, same harness, same directory — a fork is less work. The file wins the moment the destination is somewhere the fork can't go.
+Analogous, not identical, and `/branch` isn't a shipped skill here; `/handoff` is the canonical name. A fork inherits an exact copy of the context; this skill produces a *targeted* compression aimed at a stated next task, in a file. Where a fork will do (same machine, same harness, same directory), a fork is less work. The file wins the moment the destination is somewhere the fork can't go.
 
 **When does something belong in `CLAUDE.md` instead?**
 Ask whether it's true next month. `CLAUDE.md` is standing context about the project, loaded into every session whether it's relevant or not. A handoff is about one piece of work in flight and is dead once that work lands. Facts that keep getting re-explained are a `CLAUDE.md` problem; a half-finished task is a handoff.
 
 **It captures the what, not the why.**
-A fair and repeated criticism. Two things help. Pass the argument — tell it what the next session is for — so the reasoning that bears on *that* is kept rather than flattened. And watch for confident claims the session never actually verified: "X isn't built", "Y is done". The next agent treats the document as a contract and will not re-check it, so a belief written as a fact becomes a false premise for everything that follows. Read the document before you hand it over, and downgrade anything you only assumed.
+A fair and repeated criticism. Two things help. Pass the argument (tell it what the next session is for) so the reasoning that bears on *that* is kept rather than flattened. And watch for confident claims the session never actually verified: "X isn't built", "Y is done". The next agent treats the document as a contract and will not re-check it, so a belief written as a fact becomes a false premise for everything that follows. Read the document before you hand it over, and downgrade anything you only assumed.
 
 **Why is it a skill rather than a slash command?**
-Both work; they suit different situations. As a skill it ships and updates through the same install path as everything else here, which is what makes it shareable — the constraint that the agent won't fire it itself is set by its frontmatter rather than by the mechanism.
+Both work; they suit different situations. As a skill it ships and updates through the same install path as everything else here, which is what makes it shareable; the constraint that the agent won't fire it itself is set by its frontmatter rather than by the mechanism.
 
 ## It's working if
 
@@ -73,4 +73,4 @@ Both work; they suit different situations. As a skill it ships and updates throu
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-`handoff` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone** that lives at the seam between sessions rather than inside a build chain — but a narrow one, and the honest map is that you'll use it less often than the other four options at a phase boundary. Its closest neighbour is [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype), because a prototype lives in its own directory and the round trip out and back is exactly the crossing this skill is for. When you're at a boundary and unsure whether to continue, clear, hand off, delegate or compact, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) carries the tree that orders those five — and routes you over the rest of the set.
+`handoff` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone** that lives at the seam between sessions rather than inside a build chain, but a narrow one, and the honest map is that you'll use it less often than the other four options at a phase boundary. Its closest neighbour is [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype), because a prototype lives in its own directory and the round trip out and back is exactly the crossing this skill is for. When you're at a boundary and unsure whether to continue, clear, hand off, delegate or compact, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) carries the tree that orders those five, and routes you over the rest of the set.

docs/productivity/teach.md

@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`teach` turns the directory you run it in into a standing teaching workspace and teaches you one topic across many sessions, in short self-contained HTML lessons.
+`teach` turns the directory you run it in into a standing teaching workspace and teaches you one topic across many [sessions](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), in short self-contained HTML lessons.
 
-It does not teach from what the model already knows. Parametric knowledge is treated as untrusted: before it teaches, it goes and finds high-trust resources, records them in `RESOURCES.md`, and cites them inside every lesson. The other structural fact is that it is stateful — the mission, the resources, the lessons and the record of what you have learned all live in the directory as files, so the next session picks up from those files rather than from whatever is left of the last conversation.
+It does not teach from what the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) already knows. [Parametric knowledge](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/parametric-knowledge) is treated as untrusted: before it teaches, it goes and finds high-trust resources, records them in `RESOURCES.md`, and cites them inside every lesson. The other structural fact is that it is [stateful](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/stateful): the mission, the resources, the lessons and the record of what you have learned all live in the directory as files, so the next session picks up from those files rather than from whatever is left of the last conversation.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/teach` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
+You invoke this by typing `/teach`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own.
 
 Reach for it when the learning is the project: a language, a framework, a codebase you have just joined, yoga, shaders, a certification. It is not the tool for one explanation in passing.
 
@@ -16,12 +16,12 @@ Reach for it when the learning is the project: a language, a framework, a codeba
 | One idea explained inside the session you are already in | Just ask, in that session |
 | The agent's last message re-pitched because it didn't land | [wait-what](https://aihero.dev/skills-wait-what) |
 | To sharpen thinking you already have, rather than acquire new material | [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) |
-| A background agent to read primary sources and leave you a cited document | [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research) |
-| To learn something that came up mid-grilling, without derailing the grilling | [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff) out to a teaching workspace, then `teach` there |
+| A background agent to read [primary sources](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source) and leave you a cited document | [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research) |
+| To learn something that came up mid-grilling, without derailing the [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) | [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff) out to a teaching workspace, then `teach` there |
 
 ## Prerequisites
 
-`teach` builds a directory rather than producing a file, and the skill assumes one mission per workspace — so run it somewhere you are happy to give over to a single topic. Matt's own guidance, when someone proposed routing the output to a global `~/.learnings/` folder, was to keep it out of the project you are working in: "you can just put them in a separate repo." A dedicated repo also makes the lessons committable, which is how teams have shared them.
+`teach` builds a directory rather than producing a file, and the skill assumes one mission per workspace, so run it somewhere you are happy to give over to a single topic. Keep it out of the project you are working in: a separate repo is the recommended home, rather than a global `~/.learnings/` folder or the working project itself. A dedicated repo also makes the lessons committable, which is how teams have shared them.
 
 What accumulates in that directory:
 
@@ -29,27 +29,27 @@ What accumulates in that directory:
 | --- | --- |
 | `MISSION.md` | Why you are learning this. Everything else hangs off it; if it is missing, the first thing `teach` does is interview you until it isn't |
 | `RESOURCES.md` | The vetted sources it teaches from, split into Knowledge and Wisdom (communities) |
-| `lessons/*.html` | The numbered lessons — the primary unit of teaching |
+| `lessons/*.html` | The numbered lessons: the primary unit of teaching |
 | `reference/*.html` | Compressed cheat-sheets, algorithms, glossaries: the documents you actually return to |
 | `learning-records/*.md` | ADR-style notes on what you have demonstrably learned, used to decide what to teach next |
-| `assets/*` | Reusable components — a shared stylesheet first — so the lessons look like one course |
+| `assets/*` | Reusable components, starting with a shared stylesheet, so the lessons look like one course |
 | `NOTES.md` | Your stated teaching preferences |
 
-Two honest notes on that list. A glossary suits most topics, but the skill ships a `GLOSSARY-FORMAT.md` that `SKILL.md` no longer links to, so you will only get one if you ask ([issue #559](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/559)). And the workspace is not always created where you expect — see the first question below before you build a long course on top of it.
+Two honest notes on that list. A glossary suits most topics, but the skill ships a `GLOSSARY-FORMAT.md` that `SKILL.md` no longer links to, so you will only get one if you ask ([issue #559](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/559)). And the workspace is not always created where you expect, so see the first question below before you build a long course on top of it.
 
 ## Storage strength, not fluency
 
-The word to think with is **storage strength**: long-term retention, as opposed to **fluency**, the in-the-moment recall that feels like mastery while you are reading and is gone a week later. `teach` builds the former through desirable difficulty — retrieval practice, spacing, interleaving. Knowledge comes first, where difficulty is the enemy because it eats the working memory you need in order to understand; then the skill is drilled through a tight feedback loop, where difficulty is the tool.
+The word to think with is **storage strength**: long-term retention, as opposed to **fluency**, the in-the-moment recall that feels like mastery while you are reading and is gone a week later. `teach` builds the former through desirable difficulty: retrieval practice, spacing, interleaving. Knowledge comes first, where difficulty is the enemy because it eats the working memory you need in order to understand; then the skill is drilled through a tight feedback loop, where difficulty is the tool.
 
-Two things steer what you get taught. The **mission** — the concrete real-world reason you want this — grounds every lesson; without it the lessons drift abstract and nothing decides what comes next. From the mission and the learning records, `teach` picks the next lesson inside your **zone of proximal development**: challenging enough to take effort, not so far ahead that it stops being learnable.
+Two things steer what you get taught. The **mission** (the concrete real-world reason you want this) grounds every lesson; without it the lessons drift abstract and nothing decides what comes next. From the mission and the learning records, `teach` picks the next lesson inside your **zone of proximal development**: challenging enough to take effort, not so far ahead that it stops being learnable.
 
-It is also why the skill pushes back rather than obliges. A question that needs **wisdom** — real-world judgement — gets an attempted answer and then a pointer to a community where you can test it. A quiz is a gate, not a formality: one user reported saying "thanks a lot" and being told the drill was still live.
+It is also why the skill pushes back rather than obliges. A question that needs **wisdom** (real-world judgement) gets an attempted answer and then a pointer to a community where you can test it. A quiz is a gate, not a formality: one user reported saying "thanks a lot" and being told the drill was still live.
 
 ## Lessons, references and components
 
 A **lesson** is one self-contained HTML file, short enough to finish in a sitting, tied to the mission, giving one tangible win. It cites its sources, recommends one primary source to go and read yourself, and links to sibling lessons and reference documents.
 
-The split worth knowing: lessons are rarely revisited, reference documents are. So the compressed essence of a lesson — the syntax table, the algorithm, the pose sequence, the glossary — belongs in `reference/`, not buried in the lesson that introduced it.
+The split worth knowing: lessons are rarely revisited, reference documents are. So the compressed essence of a lesson (the syntax table, the algorithm, the pose sequence, the glossary) belongs in `reference/`, not buried in the lesson that introduced it.
 
 Lessons are built from **components** in `assets/`: stylesheets, quiz widgets, simulators, diagram helpers. Reuse is the default. The agent reads `assets/` before authoring a lesson and builds from what is there, and anything new that a second lesson could use is written as a component rather than inlined. The shared stylesheet is the first component every workspace earns; it is what stops the output being a pile of one-offs.
 
@@ -59,25 +59,25 @@ Lessons are built from **components** in `assets/`: stylesheets, quiz widgets, s
 A real, open bug ([#377](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/377)). `SKILL.md` uses `./` for two different roots at once: `./MISSION-FORMAT.md` and its siblings really do sit next to `SKILL.md` in the installed skill, while `./lessons/`, `./reference/`, `./learning-records/` and `./assets/` are meant to be in your directory. An agent that resolves the first kind against the skill's install directory goes on to resolve the second kind there too, and writes your course into the skill folder. Check where the first lesson landed before you build on it, and name the directory explicitly when you start rather than relying on "the current directory" being understood.
 
 **Do I stay in one session, or start a new one per lesson?**
-Asked which of three approaches he uses — stay in the same session, re-invoke `/teach` in a new session, or open a new session in the same folder — Matt's answer was "All three will work." Asked whether each lesson is its own invocation, he confirmed: "Yes, each session." The folder is the continuity, not the conversation. Common practice is to open a fresh session in the workspace and say `/teach next lesson for <topic>`.
+All three approaches work: staying in the same session, re-invoking `/teach` in a new session, or opening a new session in the same folder. Each lesson is its own invocation. The folder is the continuity, not the conversation. Common practice is to open a fresh session in the workspace and say `/teach next lesson for <topic>`.
 
 **How do I know it isn't teaching me something it made up?**
-You don't, on the skill's word alone. Asked exactly this, Matt's answer was "You read the primary sources" — and asked whether that made `teach` reliable, "Of course not, see my video 'never trust an LLM'." The grounding machinery — `RESOURCES.md`, citations in every lesson, one recommended primary source per lesson — exists to make verification cheap, not to remove the need for it. The failure is not hypothetical: one user learning a 2x2 Rubik's cube was given fabricated move sequences that don't solve it. Matt's diagnostic questions in that thread were "Model, harness, effort? And, what was the source?", which is the right checklist. Risk is highest in procedural domains with precise notation, and lowest where the output is immediately verifiable, like code you can run.
+You don't, on the skill's word alone. You read the primary sources. `teach` is not reliable enough to trust unchecked, and no skill built on an LLM is. The grounding machinery (`RESOURCES.md`, citations in every lesson, one recommended primary source per lesson) exists to make verification cheap, not to remove the need for it. The failure is not hypothetical: one user learning a 2x2 Rubik's cube was given fabricated move sequences that don't solve it. The diagnostic checklist for a case like that is model, harness, effort, and what the source was. Risk is highest in procedural domains with precise notation, and lowest where the output is immediately verifiable, like code you can run.
 
 **The correct quiz answer is always the first option.**
-Confirmed by several people, on Sonnet, on Opus and on GLM, and still unfixed. `SKILL.md` now requires every answer to be the same number of words, which kills a different tell — the correct answer used to be the only fully-reasoned one — but says nothing about position. One contributor tested an instruction-level fix for position and reported the correct answer still landing in slot A 33 times out of 33 across nine lessons ([#335](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/335)), which points at a shuffling quiz component in `assets/` as the real fix rather than better wording. Until that ships, treat answer position as meaningless. Your `assets/` directory is yours to change, so asking for a component that shuffles at render time is a legitimate local fix.
+Confirmed by several people, on Sonnet, on Opus and on GLM, and still unfixed. `SKILL.md` now requires every answer to be the same number of words, which kills a different tell (the correct answer used to be the only fully-reasoned one), but says nothing about position. One contributor tested an instruction-level fix for position and reported the correct answer still landing in slot A 33 times out of 33 across nine lessons ([#335](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/335)), which points at a shuffling quiz component in `assets/` as the real fix rather than better wording. Until that ships, treat answer position as meaningless. Your `assets/` directory is yours to change, so asking for a component that shuffles at render time is a legitimate local fix.
 
 **It assumed I already knew things, and used terms it never defined.**
-The commonest substantive complaint. There is no assessment step: `teach` infers your level from the mission and the learning records, and in session one there are no learning records. One user running it inside a wayfinder pipeline put it plainly — "It never did grilling to establish my starting point so it made lots of assumptions of what I already knew." Another reported lessons leaning on undefined jargon, and a lesson tailored to their hardware that covered what the hardware could do while never saying what it couldn't. Two things help: state your prior knowledge and your gaps in the first message, and correct the level out loud when a lesson misses, because the correction becomes a learning record and steers the next one. An explicit knowledge-assessment step is a standing feature request ([#725](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/725)), not shipped behaviour.
+The commonest substantive complaint. There is no assessment step: `teach` infers your level from the mission and the learning records, and in session one there are no learning records. One user running it inside a wayfinder pipeline put it plainly: "It never did grilling to establish my starting point so it made lots of assumptions of what I already knew." Another reported lessons leaning on undefined jargon, and a lesson tailored to their hardware that covered what the hardware could do while never saying what it couldn't. Two things help: state your prior knowledge and your gaps in the first message, and correct the level out loud when a lesson misses, because the correction becomes a learning record and steers the next one. An explicit knowledge-assessment step is a standing feature request ([#725](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/725)), not shipped behaviour.
 
 **Does it do spaced repetition, and does it know when to stop teaching?**
-No to the first, and not reliably to the second. Spacing and interleaving are principles the lessons are designed against, but nothing schedules a review, and there is no Anki or calendar integration — both are recurring requests. The related gap is exit criteria: as one user put it, `teach` "is good at making the next lesson, but not as good at knowing when to stop and switch to review or real practice." If you want review or drilling instead of new material, ask for it; the skill will not propose the switch on its own.
+No to the first, and not reliably to the second. Spacing and interleaving are principles the lessons are designed against, but nothing schedules a review, and there is no Anki or calendar integration; both are recurring requests. The related gap is exit criteria: as one user put it, `teach` "is good at making the next lesson, but not as good at knowing when to stop and switch to review or real practice." If you want review or drilling instead of new material, ask for it; the skill will not propose the switch on its own.
 
 **Is it only useful for code?**
-No, and the non-coding use is the larger part of the record: Korean, Japanese formal register, piano, guitar, board game design, OpenSCAD, film plots, Azure and CCNA certifications, university exams, and children of eight and ten getting printable books on escape rooms and fire salamanders. Nothing in the skill is programming-specific — mission, resources, zone of proximal development and drill work the same way in any domain. Within code, the strongest reported use is not learning a language from scratch but getting oriented in an unfamiliar codebase or a new team's stack.
+No, and the non-coding use is the larger part of the record: Korean, Japanese formal register, piano, guitar, board game design, OpenSCAD, film plots, Azure and CCNA certifications, university exams, and children of eight and ten getting printable books on escape rooms and fire salamanders. Nothing in the skill is programming-specific: mission, resources, zone of proximal development and drill work the same way in any domain. Within code, the strongest reported use is not learning a language from scratch but getting oriented in an unfamiliar codebase or a new team's stack.
 
 **Which model should I run it with?**
-There is no canonical answer, and the reported differences are large. Higher reasoning effort has been reported to produce noticeably better lessons than the medium setting. One user ran the same skill through Copilot CLI with Codex and got a single 30-line HTML card where Claude Code produced a full lesson. It runs unmodified in Claude Cowork, subject to whether your organisation allows skills to be added there. If the lessons come out thin, change model, harness or effort before rewriting your prompt.
+There is no canonical answer, and the reported differences are large. Higher [reasoning effort](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/effort) has been reported to produce noticeably better lessons than the medium setting. One user ran the same skill through Copilot CLI with Codex and got a single 30-line HTML card where Claude Code produced a full lesson. It runs unmodified in Claude Cowork, subject to whether your organisation allows skills to be added there. If the lessons come out thin, change model, [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) or effort before rewriting your prompt.
 
 ## It's working if
 
@@ -87,11 +87,11 @@ There is no canonical answer, and the reported differences are large. Higher rea
 - A lesson takes one sitting and leaves you able to do one thing you couldn't before.
 - Opening a fresh session in the folder and saying "next lesson" continues the course instead of restarting it.
 - `learning-records/` grows, and lessons stop re-teaching what you have already demonstrated.
-- The lessons look like one course — they link the stylesheet in `assets/` rather than each carrying its own.
+- The lessons look like one course: they link the stylesheet in `assets/` rather than each carrying its own.
 - A question that needs judgement gets you pointed at a forum, subreddit or class, not just an answer.
 
 ## Where it fits
 
 `teach` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone**. It is not a step in a build chain and shares no artifacts with the engineering flow; it owns its directory and lives there for as long as the topic lasts.
 
-Its one real neighbour is [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff), through the composition Matt named as the answer to "what do I do if I'm being grilled about something I don't understand?": don't stop the grilling to learn — `/handoff` to a teaching workspace, learn it there with `/teach`, then go back and pick up where you left off. The nearby alternative is [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research), for when what you want is a cited document rather than lessons and retention. When you are not sure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you over the whole set.
+Its one real neighbour is [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff), through the composition Matt named as the answer to "what do I do if I'm being grilled about something I don't understand?": don't stop the grilling to learn: `/handoff` to a teaching workspace, learn it there with `/teach`, then go back and pick up where you left off. The nearby alternative is [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research), for when what you want is a cited document rather than lessons and retention. When you are not sure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you over the whole set.

docs/productivity/to-questionnaire.md

@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`to-questionnaire` turns a decision you can't settle on your own into a **questionnaire** — a Markdown document you hand to the one person who holds what you're missing, for them to fill in async or for the two of you to work through in a meeting.
+`to-questionnaire` turns a decision you can't settle on your own into a **questionnaire**: a Markdown document you hand to the one person who holds what you're missing, for them to fill in async or for the two of you to work through in a meeting.
 
-It grills you about the **send**, never the subject. Interviewing you about the topic is pointless here: not knowing the topic is why you're writing to someone else. So it asks the two things you can always answer — who this is going to, and what you need back from them — and aims every question in the document at the **gap** between the two.
+It grills you about the **send**, never the subject. Interviewing you about the topic is pointless here: not knowing the topic is why you're writing to someone else. So it asks the two things you can always answer (who this is going to, and what you need back from them) and aims every question in the document at the **gap** between the two.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/to-questionnaire` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
+You invoke this by typing `/to-questionnaire`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own.
 
 Reach for it when a decision is blocked on knowledge that lives in one other person's head: a client, a domain expert, an exec who owns the business rules, a colleague on a team you don't sit with. Which skill you want depends on where the answers actually are:
 
@@ -15,53 +15,53 @@ Reach for it when a decision is blocked on knowledge that lives in one other per
 | Your own head, unsharpened | [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) |
 | The codebase | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) |
 | Someone else's head | `to-questionnaire` |
-| Nobody's head yet — the question needs something to react to | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) |
+| Nobody's head yet, the question needs something to react to | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) |
 
-The common case is a grilling session that stalls: some of what surfaced isn't yours to answer. Run `/to-questionnaire` in that same conversation to take those questions offline, then bring the answers back and carry on.
+The common case is a [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) session that stalls: some of what surfaced isn't yours to answer. Run `/to-questionnaire` in that same conversation to take those questions offline, then bring the answers back and carry on.
 
 ## The send, not the subject
 
 The interview is two exchanges, and then it stops.
 
-- **Who is it going to?** Their role, their expertise, their relationship to you. This fixes the tone and how much context the document has to carry — an outside client needs orienting, a teammate does not.
+- **Who is it going to?** Their role, their expertise, their relationship to you. This fixes the tone and how much context the document has to carry: an outside client needs orienting, a teammate does not.
 - **What do you need back?** The concrete decisions or facts you can't resolve alone. This becomes the checklist the finished document is measured against: every item you named gets a question aimed at it.
 
 Everything after that is drafting. The file lands at `to-questionnaire-<slug>.md` in the current directory. There is no setup, no workspace, and nothing to configure.
 
 ## The document
 
-It is framed as a **discovery questionnaire** — you lack the context, the recipient holds it — and that framing drives its shape:
+It is framed as a **discovery questionnaire** (you lack the context, the recipient holds it), and that framing drives its shape:
 
 - A purpose line naming the decision riding on it, and a short context section for a recipient who was never in your head.
 - Questions ordered **most-important-first** and grouped under themed headings, because async means you may only get one pass.
 - One idea per question, never compound, with an answer stub beneath it and a *why this matters* line only where a question could be misread.
-- Explicit permission to answer "I don't know" — a flagged uncertainty is useful; a confident guess that reads like a fact is not.
+- Explicit permission to answer "I don't know": a flagged uncertainty is useful; a confident guess that reads like a fact is not.
 - A closing catch-all: anything we didn't ask that we should know?
 
-Two things it deliberately isn't. It isn't **branching** — the questions are a flat, grouped list, not a tree that skips section D if you answered A. And it isn't **multi-recipient** — one run produces one document for one person.
+Two things it deliberately isn't. It isn't **branching**: the questions are a flat, grouped list, not a tree that skips section D if you answered A. And it isn't **multi-recipient**: one run produces one document for one person.
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **Does it read my grilling session and extract the questions from it?**
-Not as a step of its own. The skill has no ingest phase: it asks about the send, then drafts. What makes it work after a grilling session is that you run it in the **same conversation**, so the session is already in context and the drafting can draw on it. Start it in a fresh session and it knows nothing about the grilling — you'll be re-supplying the topic yourself when you answer "what do you need back?".
+Not as a step of its own. The skill has no ingest phase: it asks about the send, then drafts. What makes it work after a grilling session is that you run it in the **same conversation**, so the [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) is already in [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) and the drafting can draw on it. Start it in a fresh session and it knows nothing about the grilling; you'll be re-supplying the topic yourself when you answer "what do you need back?".
 
 **The missing answers don't all live with the same person. Can it split them by recipient?**
 No. Step one asks for *the* recipient, singular, and the tone and context of the whole document are pitched at them. If three people hold three parts of the answer, run it three times, once per person. Routing questions by discipline or role inside a single document is a request people have made; it isn't what shipped.
 
-**Are the questions dependent — does it skip sections based on earlier answers?**
-No. The dependent-question design was explored and did not ship. The output is a static document: themed groups, most-important-first, every question live. The objection against it is a fair one — a model planning more than two or three questions ahead of a real answer plans badly, and a branching document has to plan all of them ahead of every answer.
+**Are the questions dependent: does it skip sections based on earlier answers?**
+No. The dependent-question design was explored and did not ship. The output is a static document: themed groups, most-important-first, every question live. The objection against it is a fair one: a [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) planning more than two or three questions ahead of a real answer plans badly, and a branching document has to plan all of them ahead of every answer.
 
 **What if the recipient doesn't know either?**
 The document tells them to say so. "I don't know" and partial answers are asked for explicitly, and a flagged uncertainty is worth more than a guess, because a vague answer and a confidently wrong one look identical once they're back in your context.
 
-**Does it send it anywhere — Slack, an issue tracker, email?**
-No. It writes a Markdown file in the current directory and tells you the path. Delivery is yours: paste it into a ticket, drop it in a Slack thread, attach it to an email, or open it on a shared screen and work through it live. People have wired up all four by hand.
+**Does it send it anywhere (Slack, an issue tracker, email)?**
+No. It writes a Markdown file in the current directory and tells you the path. Delivery is yours: paste it into a [ticket](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket), drop it in a Slack thread, attach it to an email, or open it on a shared screen and work through it live. People have wired up all four by hand.
 
 **Isn't this just `/grill-me` in batch mode?**
-No, and the distinction is worth holding. `grill-me` already asks in **rounds** — the whole frontier at once, then recomputed from your answers — so the "give me all the questions at once" need is met there. `to-questionnaire` is about a different axis: not how the questions are delivered, but whose head the answers are in. Answering them yourself faster is `grill-me`; getting them out of someone else is this.
+No, and the distinction is worth holding. `grill-me` already asks in **rounds**: the whole frontier at once, then recomputed from your answers, so the "give me all the questions at once" need is met there. `to-questionnaire` is about a different axis: not how the questions are delivered, but whose head the answers are in. Answering them yourself faster is `grill-me`; getting them out of someone else is this.
 
 **Couldn't I just ask the agent for this without a skill?**
-Yes, and plenty of people did before it existed — `OPEN_QUESTIONS.md` files, spreadsheets sent to clients, a "needs more info" ticket per unanswered question. The skill buys you two things: the interview never drifts onto the subject, and the document comes out in a shape a non-technical recipient can actually fill in. If you already have a house format that works, the honest answer is that you don't need this.
+Yes, and plenty of people did before it existed: `OPEN_QUESTIONS.md` files, spreadsheets sent to clients, a "needs more info" ticket per unanswered question. The skill buys you two things: the interview never drifts onto the subject, and the document comes out in a shape a non-technical recipient can actually fill in. If you already have a house format that works, the honest answer is that you don't need this.
 
 ## It's working if
 
@@ -73,6 +73,6 @@ Yes, and plenty of people did before it existed — `OPEN_QUESTIONS.md` files, s
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-`to-questionnaire` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone. It sits at the boundary of your own knowledge, where the next move is another person rather than another skill — most often mid-flow, when planning has stalled on something that isn't yours to decide.
+`to-questionnaire` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone. It sits at the boundary of your own knowledge, where the next move is another person rather than another skill, most often mid-flow, when planning has stalled on something that isn't yours to decide.
 
-Its neighbour is [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me), and the two split on where the answers live: grilling mines you, a questionnaire mines someone else. What comes back is raw material — feed it into another grilling round, or into [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) or [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) if the work is heading for a build. When you're unsure which skill fits the moment, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+Its neighbour is [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me), and the two split on where the answers live: grilling mines you, a questionnaire mines someone else. What comes back is raw material: feed it into another grilling round, or into [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) or [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) if the work is heading for a build. When you're unsure which skill fits the moment, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/productivity/wait-what.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`wait-what` is what you type when a message didn't land. The agent then re-pitches what it just said. It adds the context you were missing, writes in plain English, and uses the vocabulary from your project's `CONTEXT.md`.
+`wait-what` is what you type when a message didn't land. The [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) then re-pitches what it just said. It adds the context you were missing, writes in plain English, and uses the vocabulary from your project's `CONTEXT.md`.
 
-The skill is three lines long. That is the design, not an unfinished draft. Skills that fight verbosity fail by growing: a four-hundred-line concision skill still leaves the model verbose, because the model reads the volume, not the plea. This one carries a single precise leading word and nothing else.
+The skill is three lines long. That is the design, not an unfinished draft. Skills that fight verbosity fail by growing: a four-hundred-line concision skill still leaves the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) verbose, because the model reads the volume, not the plea. This one carries a single precise leading word and nothing else.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
@@ -20,9 +20,9 @@ The skill says re-pitch **that**, not "that last message". What lost you is usua
 
 ## It plugs into the language you already have
 
-The body reuses the leading words already in your global `CLAUDE.md` and your project's `CONTEXT.md`. ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English sets the register. The ubiquitous language supplies the nouns. The skill, `CLAUDE.md` and `CONTEXT.md` reach for the same tokens, so invoking it is not a new instruction. It is a reminder of one the agent already agreed to.
+The body reuses the leading words already in your global `CLAUDE.md` and your project's `CONTEXT.md`. ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English sets the register. The ubiquitous language supplies the nouns. The skill, `CLAUDE.md` and `CONTEXT.md` reach for the same [tokens](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/token), so invoking it is not a new instruction. It is a reminder of one the agent already agreed to.
 
-If you have no `CONTEXT.md`, the skill still works. You lose only the domain-vocabulary half.
+If you have no `CONTEXT.md` (and no `CONTEXT-MAP.md` pointing to one for the context at hand), the skill still works. You lose only the domain-vocabulary half.
 
 ## It's working if
 
@@ -33,4 +33,4 @@ If you have no `CONTEXT.md`, the skill still works. You lose only the domain-voc
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-You can use `wait-what` at any point, in any conversation, inside any other skill. It repairs one message after the fact. The real cure is a shared language agreed upfront, and that is [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs): a grilling session that runs [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) as it goes, so the words you both use land in your `CONTEXT.md`. If you're unsure which skill fits the moment, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+You can use `wait-what` at any point, in any conversation, inside any other skill. It repairs one message after the fact. The real cure is a shared language agreed upfront, and that is [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs): a [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) session that runs [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) as it goes, so the words you both use land in your `CONTEXT.md`. If you're unsure which skill fits the moment, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/productivity/writing-for-agents.md

@@ -1,62 +1,62 @@
 ## What it does
 
-`writing-for-agents` is the reference you write agent-facing documents against — a skill, an `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md`, a spec, a runtime prompt, a README, any doc an agent reads. The packaging differs; the writing does not: the same levers make each one predictable, so the agent takes the same *process* every run rather than producing the same output.
+`writing-for-agents` is the reference you write agent-facing documents against: a skill, an `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md`, a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec), a runtime prompt, a README, any doc an [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) reads. The packaging differs; the writing does not: the same levers make each one predictable, so the agent takes the same *process* every run rather than producing the same output.
 
-Its default move is deletion, not explanation. Ask an agent to write instructions for another agent and it spends most of its words explaining what the model already knows — every one of those lines is a **no-op**, paying context and changing no behaviour. This reference is the lens that finds them, which is why it earns its keep at least as often on a document you already have as on a blank file.
+Its default move is deletion, not explanation. Ask an agent to write instructions for another agent and it spends most of its words explaining what the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) already knows. Every one of those lines is a **no-op**, paying [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) and changing no behaviour. This reference is the lens that finds them, which is why it earns its keep at least as often on a document you already have as on a blank file.
 
-It was called `writing-great-skills` until v1.1. The rename tracks what it always was underneath: almost none of it is skill-specific. The skill-only mechanics — frontmatter, the model- versus user-invoked choice, router skills — are disclosed to a linked `SKILL-MECHANICS.md` you read only when the document in front of you is a skill.
+It was called `writing-great-skills` until v1.1. The rename tracks what it always was underneath: almost none of it is skill-specific. The skill-only mechanics (frontmatter, the model- versus user-invoked choice, router skills) are disclosed to a linked `SKILL-MECHANICS.md` you read only when the document in front of you is a skill.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
 Type `/writing-for-agents`, or the agent reaches for it on its own when you're creating or editing a skill, or modifying `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md`.
 
-Reach for it by hand for everything else an agent reads: your docs, specs and tickets, system and AFK prompts. The test is one question — does an agent read this? — and it does not matter how the document gets in front of it, whether a pointer names it, a human pastes it, or it simply sits in the repo. For working out what a codebase actually contains in the first place, use [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) — this reference governs how a document reads, not what it knows.
+Reach for it by hand for everything else an agent reads: your docs, specs and [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket), system and [AFK](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk) prompts. The test is one question: does an agent read this? And it does not matter how the document gets in front of it, whether a pointer names it, a human pastes it, or it simply sits in the repo. For working out what a codebase actually contains in the first place, use [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs); this reference governs how a document reads, not what it knows.
 
 ## The two loads
 
 The idea the whole reference turns on is a pair of budgets every document and pointer spends:
 
-- **Context load** — the cost of always-loaded material on the agent's window: an `AGENTS.md` line, a skill description, anything sitting in context every turn whether or not it fires.
-- **Cognitive load** — the cost on you: which documents exist, and when to reach for each. You are the index. Not a cost to minimise — it is the price of human agency.
+- **Context load**: the cost of always-loaded material on the agent's window: an `AGENTS.md` line, a skill description, anything sitting in context every [turn](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/turn) whether or not it fires.
+- **Cognitive load**: the cost on you, namely which documents exist and when to reach for each. You are the index. Not a cost to minimise: it is the price of human agency.
 
-Once you think in these two loads, most authoring decisions — split or don't, inline or disclose, point or push — become the same trade made in different places.
+Once you think in these two loads, most authoring decisions (split or don't, inline or disclose, point or push) become the same trade made in different places.
 
 ## The levers
 
-- **Context pointers** — the reference held in context that names out-of-context material and encodes when to reach it. A skill description and an `AGENTS.md` line naming a doc are the same object; the pointer's *wording*, not its target, decides how reliably the agent reaches through it.
-- **Information hierarchy** — the ladder from in-file step, to in-file reference, to disclosed reference behind a pointer. **Progressive disclosure** is the move down that ladder so the top stays legible.
-- **Completion criteria** — the clarity and demand of each step's done-condition, and the **legwork** that demand drives; the defence against **premature completion**.
-- **Leading words** — a compact concept already in the model's pretraining (*tight*, *red*, *tracer bullet*) that the agent thinks with while running the document. It anchors twice: execution in the body, invocation in the pointer.
-- **Pruning** — single source of truth, relevance, and the no-op test applied sentence by sentence, against **duplication**, **sediment** and **sprawl**.
+- **[Context pointers](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-pointer)**: the reference held in context that names out-of-context material and encodes when to reach it. A skill description and an `AGENTS.md` line naming a doc are the same object; the pointer's *wording*, not its target, decides how reliably the agent reaches through it.
+- **Information hierarchy**: the ladder from in-file step, to in-file reference, to disclosed reference behind a pointer. **[Progressive disclosure](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/progressive-disclosure)** is the move down that ladder so the top stays legible.
+- **Completion criteria**: the clarity and demand of each step's done-condition, and the **legwork** that demand drives; the defence against **premature completion**.
+- **Leading words**: a compact concept already in the model's pretraining (*tight*, *red*, *tracer bullet*) that the agent thinks with while running the document. It anchors twice: execution in the body, invocation in the pointer.
+- **Pruning**: single source of truth, relevance, and the no-op test applied sentence by sentence, against **duplication**, **sediment** and **sprawl**.
 
 ## Common questions
 
 **Where did `/writing-great-skills` go?**
-It is this skill, renamed in v1.1. Practitioners were already pointing it at `AGENTS.md`, docs, specs, tickets and runtime prompts long before the name caught up; structure, leading words and pruning turn out to be the craft of any text an agent reads. There is no alias — reinstall under the new name.
+It is this skill, renamed in v1.1. Practitioners were already pointing it at `AGENTS.md`, docs, specs, tickets and runtime prompts long before the name caught up; structure, leading words and pruning turn out to be the craft of any text an agent reads. There is no alias. Reinstall under the new name.
 
-**"Writing for agents" — so the agent does the writing?**
+**"Writing for agents": so the agent does the writing?**
 The other way round. You are the author; the agent is the reader. That is the whole difficulty of the genre: you are writing for a reader who has already read everything, so explanation is waste and precision is the entire job.
 
 **Can't I just ask the agent to write it for me?**
-You can, and it will produce something verbose. Left alone the model explains what it already knows, and it will not apply the no-op test or reach for a leading word on its own. Use the reference on the draft — a review pass is where most of its value lands.
+You can, and it will produce something verbose. Left alone the model explains what it already knows, and it will not apply the no-op test or reach for a leading word on its own. Use the reference on the draft: a review pass is where most of its value lands.
 
 **I asked an agent to trim a document and it cut the functionality.**
-Agents told to "streamline" optimise for length, because length is the thing they can see. The no-op test is behavioural, not aesthetic: delete the line and ask whether the agent's behaviour changed. When a sentence fails, delete the whole sentence rather than trim words from it — and settle a disagreement about it by running the document, not by arguing.
+Agents told to "streamline" optimise for length, because length is the thing they can see. The no-op test is behavioural, not aesthetic: delete the line and ask whether the agent's behaviour changed. When a sentence fails, delete the whole sentence rather than trim words from it, and settle a disagreement about it by running the document, not by arguing.
 
 **How do I know when it's done?**
-When it works, and you can no longer find duplication, sediment or no-ops. There is no automated eval here; the check is a manual run plus the failure-mode vocabulary as a diagnostic. When a document misbehaves, that vocabulary is also the repair kit — name the failure mode first, then fix that.
+When it works, and you can no longer find duplication, sediment or no-ops. There is no automated eval here; the check is a manual run plus the failure-mode vocabulary as a diagnostic. When a document misbehaves, that vocabulary is also the repair kit: name the failure mode first, then fix that.
 
 **Should this live in `CLAUDE.md` or somewhere else?**
-Ask which load you want to pay. `CLAUDE.md` loads into every session unconditionally; material behind a pointer costs only the pointer's own line until it fires. Anything that applies in one context out of ten is paying context load the nine other times.
+Ask which load you want to pay. `CLAUDE.md` loads into every [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) unconditionally; material behind a pointer costs only the pointer's own line until it fires. Anything that applies in one context out of ten is paying context load the nine other times.
 
 **Do I need to rewrite my documents for each new model?**
 Mostly no, and over-fitting to one model is its own trap. Updating for a new model is usually another no-op pass rather than a rewrite.
 
 **My skill only works on the exact task I built it from.**
-The common route — do the work once, then have the agent write it up as a skill — over-indexes on that one run, and the exemplars come out too specific. Keep the run as evidence, then abstract deliberately: strip what belonged to that repo and those files, and write for the class of task.
+The common route (do the work once, then have the agent write it up as a skill) over-indexes on that one run, and the exemplars come out too specific. Keep the run as evidence, then abstract deliberately: strip what belonged to that repo and those files, and write for the class of task.
 
 **English isn't my first language. Do I lose the leading-word advantage?**
-No — finding the word that packs the most behaviour into the fewest tokens is work the reference does for you. It is one of the things it is for.
+No. Finding the word that packs the most behaviour into the fewest [tokens](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/token) is work the reference does for you. It is one of the things it is for.
 
 ## It's working if
 
@@ -67,4 +67,4 @@ No — finding the word that packs the most behaviour into the fewest tokens is
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-This is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone reference. It has no neighbour in the chain because it sits underneath the whole set rather than beside any one skill: every skill here was written against it, and the documents the other skills leave behind — a `CONTEXT.md` and its ADRs, a spec, a ticket — are exactly the text it governs once an agent has to read them. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits a task, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you over the whole set.
+This is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone reference. It has no neighbour in the chain because it sits underneath the whole set rather than beside any one skill: every skill here was written against it, and the documents the other skills leave behind (a `CONTEXT.md` and its ADRs, a spec, a ticket) are exactly the text it governs once an agent has to read them. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits a task, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you over the whole set.

package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "mattpocock-skills",
-  "version": "1.1.0",
+  "version": "1.2.3",
   "private": true,
   "description": "Matt Pocock's agent skills for real engineering",
   "repository": {
@@ -10,7 +10,8 @@
   "license": "MIT",
   "scripts": {
     "changeset": "changeset",
-    "version": "changeset version"
+    "version": "changeset version && node scripts/sync-plugin-version.mjs",
+    "check-plugin-version": "node scripts/sync-plugin-version.mjs --check"
   },
   "devDependencies": {
     "@changesets/changelog-github": "^0.7.0",

scripts/link-skills.sh

@@ -2,27 +2,33 @@
 set -euo pipefail
 
 # NOTE: This is a dev-only script, intended for use by maintainers of this repo.
-# It is not a supported installer. Modifications to it — or requests for
-# modifications — will not be approved.
+# It is not a supported installer. Modifications to it, or requests for
+# modifications, will not be approved.
 #
 # Links all skills in the repository into the local skill directories used by
 # each agent harness:
-#   - ~/.claude/skills  — Claude Code
-#   - ~/.agents/skills  — Codex and other Agent Skills-compatible harnesses
+#   - ~/.claude/skills: Claude Code
+#   - ~/.agents/skills: Codex and other Agent Skills-compatible harnesses
 # Each entry is a symlink into this repo, so a `git pull` is all that's needed
 # to keep installed skills up to date.
 
 REPO="$(cd "$(dirname "$0")/.." && pwd)"
 DESTS=("$HOME/.claude/skills" "$HOME/.agents/skills")
 
-# Collect the repo's skills once, link into every destination.
+# Collect the repo's skills once, link into every destination. `deprecated/`
+# is retired, and `misc/` is kept around but rarely used and not promoted (see
+# each bucket's own README): neither belongs in a daily-driver skill
+# directory, so both are skipped here, same as everywhere else non-promoted
+# skills are kept out. `in-progress/` IS still linked: it's public on purpose,
+# feedback wanted, and this local install is exactly where that feedback loop
+# runs.
 names=()
 srcs=()
 while IFS= read -r -d '' skill_md; do
   src="$(dirname "$skill_md")"
   names+=("$(basename "$src")")
   srcs+=("$src")
-done < <(find "$REPO/skills" -name SKILL.md -not -path '*/node_modules/*' -not -path '*/deprecated/*' -print0)
+done < <(find "$REPO/skills" -name SKILL.md -not -path '*/node_modules/*' -not -path '*/deprecated/*' -not -path '*/misc/*' -print0)
 
 for DEST in "${DESTS[@]}"; do
   # If $DEST is a symlink that resolves into this repo, we'd end up writing the

scripts/sync-plugin-version.mjs

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env node
+// Copies package.json's version into .claude-plugin/plugin.json.
+// Runs as part of `npm run version`, immediately after `changeset version`.
+// With --check it changes nothing and exits 1 if the two versions differ.
+
+import { readFileSync, writeFileSync } from "node:fs";
+import { dirname, join } from "node:path";
+import { fileURLToPath } from "node:url";
+
+const repo = join(dirname(fileURLToPath(import.meta.url)), "..");
+const pluginPath = join(repo, ".claude-plugin", "plugin.json");
+
+const { version } = JSON.parse(readFileSync(join(repo, "package.json"), "utf8"));
+const source = readFileSync(pluginPath, "utf8");
+const plugin = JSON.parse(source);
+
+if (plugin.version === version) {
+  console.log(`plugin.json version is ${version} (already in sync)`);
+  process.exit(0);
+}
+
+if (process.argv.includes("--check")) {
+  console.error(
+    `plugin.json version is ${plugin.version}, package.json is ${version}. Run \`node scripts/sync-plugin-version.mjs\`.`,
+  );
+  process.exit(1);
+}
+
+// Rewrite only the version line, to keep the key order and the formatting.
+const updated = source.replace(
+  /("version"\s*:\s*")[^"]*(")/,
+  `$1${version}$2`,
+);
+
+if (JSON.parse(updated).version !== version) {
+  console.error(`Could not find a version field to replace in ${pluginPath}.`);
+  process.exit(1);
+}
+
+writeFileSync(pluginPath, updated);
+console.log(`plugin.json version ${plugin.version} -> ${version}`);

skills/deprecated/README.md

@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
 # Deprecated
 
-Skills I no longer use. This bucket is currently empty — a retired skill is deleted, and the changeset that removes it names whatever replaced it.
+Skills I no longer use. This bucket is currently empty: a retired skill is deleted, and the changeset that removes it names whatever replaced it.

skills/engineering/README.md

@@ -6,27 +6,27 @@ Skills I use daily for code work.
 
 Reachable only when you type them (Claude Code: `disable-model-invocation: true`; Codex: `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` in `agents/openai.yaml`).
 
-- **[ask-matt](./ask-matt/SKILL.md)** — Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the user-invoked skills in this repo.
-- **[grill-with-docs](./grill-with-docs/SKILL.md)** — Grilling session that also builds your project's domain model, sharpening terminology and updating `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
-- **[triage](./triage/SKILL.md)** — Move issues through a state machine of triage roles.
-- **[improve-codebase-architecture](./improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md)** — Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
-- **[setup-matt-pocock-skills](./setup-matt-pocock-skills/SKILL.md)** — Configure this repo for the engineering skills (issue tracker, triage labels, domain doc layout). Run once per repo.
-- **[to-spec](./to-spec/SKILL.md)** — Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the issue tracker.
-- **[to-tickets](./to-tickets/SKILL.md)** — Break any plan, spec, or conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges — text in a local file, or native blocking links on a real tracker.
-- **[implement](./implement/SKILL.md)** — Build the work described by a spec or set of tickets, driving `/tdd` at pre-agreed seams and closing out with `/code-review` before committing.
-- **[wayfinder](./wayfinder/SKILL.md)** — Plan a huge chunk of work — more than one agent session can hold — as a shared map of decision tickets on the issue tracker, resolved one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
+- **[ask-matt](./ask-matt/SKILL.md)**: Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the user-invoked skills in this repo.
+- **[grill-with-docs](./grill-with-docs/SKILL.md)**: Grilling session that also builds your project's domain model, sharpening terminology and updating `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
+- **[triage](./triage/SKILL.md)**: Move issues through a state machine of triage roles.
+- **[improve-codebase-architecture](./improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md)**: Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
+- **[setup-matt-pocock-skills](./setup-matt-pocock-skills/SKILL.md)**: Configure this repo for the engineering skills (issue tracker, triage labels, domain doc layout). Run once per repo.
+- **[to-spec](./to-spec/SKILL.md)**: Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the issue tracker.
+- **[to-tickets](./to-tickets/SKILL.md)**: Break any plan, spec, or conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges, whether as text in a local file or as native blocking links on a real tracker.
+- **[implement](./implement/SKILL.md)**: Build the work described by a spec or set of tickets, driving `/tdd` at pre-agreed seams and closing out with `/code-review` before committing.
+- **[wayfinder](./wayfinder/SKILL.md)**: Plan a huge chunk of work (more than one agent session can hold) as a shared map of decision tickets on the issue tracker, resolved one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
 
 ## Model-invoked
 
 Model- or user-reachable (rich trigger phrasing so the model can reach for them).
 
-- **[prototype](./prototype/SKILL.md)** — Build a throwaway prototype to answer a design question: a single shareable HTML file for state/logic, or several toggleable UI variations.
+- **[prototype](./prototype/SKILL.md)**: Build a throwaway prototype to answer a design question: a single shareable HTML file for state/logic, or several toggleable UI variations.
 
-- **[diagnosing-bugs](./diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md)** — Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions: build a feedback loop that goes red on this bug → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test.
-- **[research](./research/SKILL.md)** — Investigate a question against high-trust primary sources and capture the findings as a cited Markdown file in the repo, run as a background agent.
-- **[tdd](./tdd/SKILL.md)** — Test-driven development with a red-green-refactor loop. Builds features or fixes bugs one vertical slice at a time.
-- **[domain-modeling](./domain-modeling/SKILL.md)** — Actively build and sharpen a project's domain model — challenge terms, stress-test with scenarios, update `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
-- **[codebase-design](./codebase-design/SKILL.md)** — Shared discipline and vocabulary for designing deep modules: small interfaces, clean seams, testable through the interface.
-- **[code-review](./code-review/SKILL.md)** — Two-axis review of the diff since a fixed point: **Standards** (does it follow the repo's coding standards, plus a Fowler smell baseline?) and **Spec** (does it faithfully implement the originating issue/spec?), run as parallel sub-agents.
-- **[resolving-merge-conflicts](./resolving-merge-conflicts/SKILL.md)** — Work through an in-progress git merge or rebase conflict hunk by hunk, resolving by intent traced to each side's primary source, then finish the operation — never `--abort`.
-- **[wizard](./wizard/SKILL.md)** — Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform: provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover.
+- **[diagnosing-bugs](./diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md)**: Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions: build a feedback loop that goes red on this bug → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test.
+- **[research](./research/SKILL.md)**: Investigate a question against high-trust primary sources and capture the findings as a cited Markdown file in the repo, run as a background agent.
+- **[tdd](./tdd/SKILL.md)**: Test-driven development with a red-green-refactor loop. Builds features or fixes bugs one vertical slice at a time.
+- **[domain-modeling](./domain-modeling/SKILL.md)**: Actively build and sharpen a project's domain model by challenging terms, stress-testing with scenarios, and updating `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
+- **[codebase-design](./codebase-design/SKILL.md)**: Shared discipline and vocabulary for designing deep modules: small interfaces, clean seams, testable through the interface.
+- **[code-review](./code-review/SKILL.md)**: Two-axis review of the diff since a fixed point: **Standards** (does it follow the repo's coding standards, plus a Fowler smell baseline?) and **Spec** (does it faithfully implement the originating issue/spec?), run as parallel sub-agents.
+- **[resolving-merge-conflicts](./resolving-merge-conflicts/SKILL.md)**: Work through an in-progress git merge or rebase conflict hunk by hunk, resolving by intent traced to each side's primary source, then finish the operation, never `--abort`.
+- **[wizard](./wizard/SKILL.md)**: Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform: provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover.

skills/engineering/ask-matt/PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # Phase boundaries
 
-A **phase** is a chunk of work inside a session — the grilling, the implementation, the QA. The definition is fuzzy on purpose: a phase ends when you think *"ok, we're done with that"*.
+A **phase** is a chunk of work inside a session: the grilling, the implementation, the QA. The definition is fuzzy on purpose: a phase ends when you think *"ok, we're done with that"*.
 
-The **phase boundary** is the gap between two phases, and it is the only place this decision belongs. Mid-phase there is no decision to make — continue, or split the work that's left into subagents. Compacting mid-phase makes the agent lose the thread.
+The **phase boundary** is the gap between two phases, and it is the only place this decision belongs. Mid-phase there is no decision to make: continue, or split the work that's left into subagents. Compacting mid-phase makes the agent lose the thread.
 
 ## The five options
 
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ Work top to bottom at the boundary. The first **yes** wins.
 
 **1. Can you continue in this session?** Two things make the answer yes: the next phase needs this phase as a **primary source**, or you have enough [smart zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone) left (~150k tokens) for the next phase to fit. Grilling → implementation is the standard yes: the implementation wants the reasoning verbatim, not a summary of it. Continue costs nothing and loses nothing, so rule it out before anything else.
 
-**2. Is the context irrelevant to what comes next?** Is everything in this session — the exploration, the decisions, the dead ends — disposable? If so, **`/clear`**. It is the cheapest move on the board: it takes no time and hands back the whole window. `/clear` also isn't terminal — the old session stays resumable.
+**2. Is the context irrelevant to what comes next?** Is everything in this session (the exploration, the decisions, the dead ends) disposable? If so, **`/clear`**. It is the cheapest move on the board: it takes no time and hands back the whole window. `/clear` also isn't terminal: the old session stays resumable.
 
 The cost of getting this wrong is one-way. Clear a *relevant* context and you lose the **why** behind what you built, and no amount of reading the diff back gets it returned.
 
@@ -31,17 +31,17 @@ The cost of getting this wrong is one-way. Clear a *relevant* context and you lo
 - sending the work to a **colleague**,
 - or forking a side task you found **mid-phase** without derailing what you're doing.
 
-That list is the whole clause. What `/handoff` buys is **portability** — a file that travels. If nothing is travelling, you don't need it.
+That list is the whole clause. What `/handoff` buys is **portability**: a file that travels. If nothing is travelling, you don't need it.
 
 **4. Can the task be done AFK?** Is it scoped tightly enough to run with you away from the keyboard, no steering? Then send it to a **subagent** and leave this session untouched. Automated review is the standard case: the agent reads the diff and reports, and you aren't needed while it does.
 
-**5. Otherwise, `/compact`.** Relevant context, same harness, same directory, and you need to stay in the loop — this is where the tree lands, and it lands here often. Pass it an instruction (`/compact we're going to QA this area`) so the summary keeps what the next phase needs.
+**5. Otherwise, `/compact`.** Relevant context, same harness, same directory, and you need to stay in the loop: this is where the tree lands, and it lands here often. Pass it an instruction (`/compact we're going to QA this area`) so the summary keeps what the next phase needs.
 
 `/compact` is the **default, not the first reach**. It sits at the bottom because the four questions above it are all cheaper or more precise. The failure mode when people start here is a fresh session that is confidently wrong about a decision the summary flattened.
 
 ## Primary and secondary sources
 
-Every move except **Continue** turns a **primary source** into a **secondary source** — the session as it happened, replaced by a summary of it. The trade is always the same shape:
+Every move except **Continue** turns a **primary source** into a **secondary source**: the session as it happened, replaced by a summary of it. The trade is always the same shape:
 
 | Source                            | Information | Noise | Room to move |
 | --------------------------------- | ----------- | ----- | ------------ |
@@ -52,4 +52,4 @@ This is why question 1 comes first. You only pay the lossiness when staying cost
 
 ## These are judgement calls
 
-The questions are not objective — each has taste in it, and the same boundary can go two ways on two days. The value is in asking them **in order**, at the boundary rather than in the middle of the work.
+The questions are not objective: each has taste in it, and the same boundary can go two ways on two days. The value is in asking them **in order**, at the boundary rather than in the middle of the work.

skills/engineering/ask-matt/SKILL.md

@@ -14,22 +14,22 @@ A **flow** is a path through the skills. Most paths run along one **main flow**,
 
 The route most work travels. You have an idea and want it built.
 
-1. **`/grill-with-docs`** — sharpen the idea by interview. Start here whenever you are **working in a working directory**: it's stateful, retaining what it learns in `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs. (No working directory? Use `/grill-me` — see Standalone. Both run the same `/grilling` primitive; `grill-with-docs` is the one that leaves a paper trail, which makes it the better of the two whenever a repo is there to leave it in.)
-2. **Branch — can you settle every question in conversation?** If a question needs a runnable answer (state, business logic, a UI you have to see), detour through a prototype, bridged by **`/handoff`** in both directions (a prototype lives in its own directory, which is exactly what `/handoff` is for — see Phase boundaries):
+1. **`/grill-with-docs`** sharpens the idea by interview. Start here whenever you are **working in a working directory**: it's stateful, retaining what it learns in `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs. (No working directory? Use `/grill-me` instead, covered under Standalone. Both run the same `/grilling` primitive; `grill-with-docs` is the one that leaves a paper trail, which makes it the better of the two whenever a repo is there to leave it in.)
+2. **Branch: can you settle every question in conversation?** If a question needs a runnable answer (state, business logic, a UI you have to see), detour through a prototype, bridged by **`/handoff`** in both directions (a prototype lives in its own directory, which is exactly what `/handoff` is for; see Phase boundaries):
    - **`/handoff`** out, then open a fresh session against that file,
    - **`/prototype`** to answer the question with throwaway code,
    - **`/handoff`** back what you learned, and reference it from the original idea thread.
-3. **Branch — is this a multi-session build?**
-   - **Yes** → **`/to-spec`** (turn the thread into a spec), then **`/to-tickets`** to split it into tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its **blocking edges**. On a local tracker that's one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature>/issues/`, worked blockers-first by hand; on a real tracker the edges become native blocking links, so any ticket whose blockers are done can be grabbed — kick off **`/implement`** per ticket, **`/clear`ing context between each one**. Each ticket is self-contained, so the last one's context is disposable.
+3. **Branch: is this a multi-session build?**
+   - **Yes** → **`/to-spec`** (turn the thread into a spec), then **`/to-tickets`** to split it into tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its **blocking edges**. On a local tracker that's one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature>/issues/`, worked blockers-first by hand; on a real tracker the edges become native blocking links, so any ticket whose blockers are done can be grabbed: kick off **`/implement`** per ticket, **`/clear`ing context between each one**. Each ticket is self-contained, so the last one's context is disposable.
    - **No** → **`/implement`** right here, in the same context window.
 
-   Either way, **`/implement`** builds each issue by driving **`/tdd`** internally — one red-green slice at a time — then closes out by running **`/code-review`**, a two-axis review (Standards + Spec) of the diff, before committing. Reach for **`/tdd`** on its own when you just want to build a concrete behaviour test-first without a full spec, and **`/code-review`** on its own whenever you want to review a branch or PR against a fixed point.
+   Either way, **`/implement`** builds each issue by driving **`/tdd`** internally (one red-green slice at a time), then closes out by running **`/code-review`**, a two-axis review (Standards + Spec) of the diff, before committing. Reach for **`/tdd`** on its own when you just want to build a concrete behaviour test-first without a full spec, and **`/code-review`** on its own whenever you want to review a branch or PR against a fixed point.
 
 ### Context hygiene
 
-Keep steps 1–3 in **one unbroken context window** — don't compact or clear until after `/to-tickets` — so the grilling, spec, and tickets all build on the same thinking. Each `/implement` then starts fresh, working from the ticket.
+Keep steps 1–3 in **one unbroken context window** (don't compact or clear until after `/to-tickets`) so the grilling, spec, and tickets all build on the same thinking. Each `/implement` then starts fresh, working from the ticket.
 
-The limit on this is the **[smart zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone)**: the window (~150k tokens on state-of-the-art models) within which the model still reasons sharply. If a session approaches it before `/to-tickets`, don't push on degraded — `/compact` at the nearest phase boundary and carry on (see Phase boundaries).
+The limit on this is the **[smart zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone)**: the window (~150k tokens on state-of-the-art models) within which the model still reasons sharply. If a session approaches it before `/to-tickets`, don't push on degraded; `/compact` at the nearest phase boundary and carry on (see Phase boundaries).
 
 ## On-ramps
 
@@ -37,54 +37,54 @@ A starting situation that generates work, then merges onto the main flow.
 
 - **Bugs and requests piling up** → **`/triage`**. It moves issues through triage roles and produces agent-ready issues, which **`/implement`** later picks up.
 
-  Triage is only for issues **you didn't create** — bug reports, incoming feature requests, anything that arrives raw. Tickets that `/to-tickets` produced are already agent-ready, so **don't triage them**.
+  Triage is only for issues **you didn't create**: bug reports, incoming feature requests, anything that arrives raw. Tickets that `/to-tickets` produced are already agent-ready, so **don't triage them**.
 
-- **Something's broken** → **`/diagnosing-bugs`**. For the hard ones: the bug that resists a first glance, the intermittent flake, the regression that crept in between two known-good states. It refuses to theorise until it has a **tight feedback loop** — one command that already goes red on *this* bug — then fixes with a regression test. Its post-mortem hands off to **`/improve-codebase-architecture`** when the real finding is that there's no good seam to lock the bug down.
+- **Something's broken** → **`/diagnosing-bugs`**. For the hard ones: the bug that resists a first glance, the intermittent flake, the regression that crept in between two known-good states. It refuses to theorise until it has a **tight feedback loop** (one command that already goes red on *this* bug), then fixes with a regression test. Its post-mortem hands off to **`/improve-codebase-architecture`** when the real finding is that there's no good seam to lock the bug down.
 
-- **A huge, foggy effort — a greenfield project or a huge feature build, too big for one session** → **`/wayfinder`**, the most cognitively demanding flow here. When the way from here to the destination isn't visible yet, it charts a **shared map** of **decision tickets** on the issue tracker and resolves them one at a time — producing **decisions, not deliverables** — until the fog is pushed back and the way is clear. Where **`/grill-with-docs`** sharpens an idea you can hold in one session, wayfinder is for the idea you can't — and it's slower and denser, so save it for exactly that, never a well-scoped feature.
+- **A huge, foggy effort: a greenfield project or a huge feature build, too big for one session** → **`/wayfinder`**, the most cognitively demanding flow here. When the way from here to the destination isn't visible yet, it charts a **shared map** of **decision tickets** on the issue tracker and resolves them one at a time, producing **decisions, not deliverables**, until the fog is pushed back and the way is clear. Where **`/grill-with-docs`** sharpens an idea you can hold in one session, wayfinder is for the idea you can't, and it's slower and denser, so save it for exactly that, never a well-scoped feature.
 
-  When the map clears, **it hands off, it doesn't build**: merge onto the main flow at **`/to-spec`**, which collapses the map's linked decisions into a buildable plan, then `/to-tickets` and `/implement` as usual. Looping the map straight into `/implement` skips that collapse and throws the linked detail away — go straight to `/implement` only when the effort turned out genuinely small.
+  When the map clears, **it hands off, it doesn't build**: merge onto the main flow at **`/to-spec`**, which collapses the map's linked decisions into a buildable plan, then `/to-tickets` and `/implement` as usual. Looping the map straight into `/implement` skips that collapse and throws the linked detail away, so go straight to `/implement` only when the effort turned out genuinely small.
 
 ## Codebase health
 
-Not feature work — upkeep.
+Not feature work, just upkeep.
 
-- **`/improve-codebase-architecture`** — run whenever you have a spare moment to keep the codebase good for agents to operate in. It surfaces **deepening opportunities**; picking one _generates an idea_ you can take into the main flow at `/grill-with-docs`. It's the survey that finds the candidates; **`/codebase-design`** (below) is the bench you design the chosen one on.
+- **`/improve-codebase-architecture`** runs whenever you have a spare moment to keep the codebase good for agents to operate in. It surfaces **deepening opportunities**; picking one _generates an idea_ you can take into the main flow at `/grill-with-docs`. It's the survey that finds the candidates; **`/codebase-design`** (below) is the bench you design the chosen one on.
 
 ## Vocabulary underneath
 
-Two model-invoked references that run *beneath* the other skills — each the single source of truth for its vocabulary. Reach for them directly when the **words**, not the process, are the problem; or let the skills above pull them in.
+Two model-invoked references that run *beneath* the other skills, each the single source of truth for its vocabulary. Reach for them directly when the **words**, not the process, are the problem; or let the skills above pull them in.
 
-- **`/domain-modeling`** — sharpen the project's *domain* language: challenge a fuzzy term, resolve an overloaded word ("account" doing three jobs), record a hard-to-reverse decision as an ADR. It's the active discipline `/grill-with-docs` drives to keep `CONTEXT.md` a clean glossary.
-- **`/codebase-design`** — the deep-module vocabulary (module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage, locality) for designing a module's *shape*: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface at a clean seam. `/tdd` and `/improve-codebase-architecture` both speak it.
+- **`/domain-modeling`**: sharpen the project's *domain* language: challenge a fuzzy term, resolve an overloaded word ("account" doing three jobs), record a hard-to-reverse decision as an ADR. It's the active discipline `/grill-with-docs` drives to keep `CONTEXT.md` a clean glossary.
+- **`/codebase-design`** is the deep-module vocabulary (module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage, locality) for designing a module's *shape*: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface at a clean seam. `/tdd` and `/improve-codebase-architecture` both speak it.
 
 ## Phase boundaries
 
-A **phase** is a chunk of work inside a session — the grilling, the implementation, the QA. At the **boundary** between two of them you have five options, and picking between them is the fuzziest decision in this whole map:
+A **phase** is a chunk of work inside a session: the grilling, the implementation, the QA. At the **boundary** between two of them you have five options, and picking between them is the fuzziest decision in this whole map:
 
-- **Continue** — stay put. Costs nothing, loses nothing.
-- **`/clear`** — empty the window, when nothing here matters to what's next.
-- **`/handoff`** — write a portable markdown file. Narrow: only for a **new harness**, a **new directory**, a **colleague**, or forking a side task **mid-phase**. What it buys is portability.
-- **Subagent** — send a tightly-scoped task to its own window and get a report back.
-- **`/compact`** — compress this context and seed a fresh session with it. The **default**, at the bottom of the tree rather than the first reach.
+- **Continue**: stay put. Costs nothing, loses nothing.
+- **`/clear`**: empty the window, when nothing here matters to what's next.
+- **`/handoff`** writes a portable markdown file. Narrow: only for a **new harness**, a **new directory**, a **colleague**, or forking a side task **mid-phase**. What it buys is portability.
+- **Subagent**: send a tightly-scoped task to its own window and get a report back.
+- **`/compact`** compresses this context and seeds a fresh session with it. The **default**, at the bottom of the tree rather than the first reach.
 
-Read [PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md](PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md) for the ordered tree — the five questions, the reasoning behind each branch, and why the primary-source cost makes **Continue** the one to rule out first. Make the decision **at** a boundary; mid-phase, continue or split the rest into subagents.
+Read [PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md](PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md) for the ordered tree: the five questions, the reasoning behind each branch, and why the primary-source cost makes **Continue** the one to rule out first. Make the decision **at** a boundary; mid-phase, continue or split the rest into subagents.
 
 ## Standalone
 
 Off the main flow entirely.
 
-- **`/grill-me`** — the same relentless interview as `/grill-with-docs`, but **stateless**: it saves nothing locally and builds no `CONTEXT.md`. Reach for it when you are **not working in a working directory** — sharpening a plan, a design, a piece of writing, anything with no repo under it. If you are in a working directory, use `/grill-with-docs` instead: it runs the same interview and leaves a paper trail, so it is strictly the better one.
-- **`/grilling`** — the interview primitive itself: rounds, the frontier, facts are the agent's job and decisions are yours. `/grill-me` and `/grill-with-docs` are the two named ways in, and `/triage`, `/wayfinder` and `/improve-codebase-architecture` all run it internally. Reach for it directly only when you want the interview with no wrapper around it.
-- **`/resolving-merge-conflicts`** — work an in-progress merge or rebase conflict hunk by hunk, resolving by **intent** traced to each side's primary source rather than by picking lines, then finish the operation. It never runs `--abort`. Standalone and off every flow: reach for it when you are already mid-conflict.
-- **`/prototype`** — a small, throwaway program that answers one design question: does this state model feel right, or what should this UI look like. Throwaway is a constraint on how the code is written, not a promise to destroy it: the answer folds into the real code, and the prototype itself is kept as a **primary source** on a `prototype/<name>` branch out of main, pointed at from the implementation issue. It's the detour in step 2 of the main flow, but reach for it any time a design question is hard to settle on paper.
-- **`/research`** — delegate reading legwork to a **background agent**: it investigates a question against **primary sources**, then leaves a cited Markdown file in the repo. Keep working while it reads. The file it produces is something to take *into* the main flow at `/grill-with-docs` — research feeds the thinking, it doesn't replace it.
-- **`/to-questionnaire`** — when the thing blocking you isn't in your head or the codebase but in **someone else's**, this writes them a questionnaire to fill in. It's the inverse of `/grill-me`: instead of interviewing you about the subject, it interviews you about the **send** — who it's going to, what you need back — and aims the questions at the gap. What comes back is material for `/grill-with-docs` or `/to-spec`.
-- **`/wizard`** — for the steps only a **human** can take: provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, clicking through an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, running a one-off migration or cutover. It generates an interactive bash script that opens each URL, captures each value, and writes it into `.env` and GitHub secrets — so the procedure stops being something you re-explain to an agent every time. Model-invoked, so the agent reaches for it the moment it hits a wall only you can pass. If the agent could just do it itself, it should; this is for where a human is genuinely in the loop.
-- **`/wait-what`** — the corrective for a message that didn't land. Use it mid-conversation, inside any other skill, and the agent re-pitches what it just said with the context you were missing, in plain English, using the `CONTEXT.md` vocabulary. It works after the fact; `/grill-with-docs` is the upfront cure, because a shared language agreed early is what stops the jargon arriving at all.
-- **`/teach`** — learn a concept over multiple sessions, using the current directory as a stateful workspace.
-- **`/writing-for-agents`** — reference for writing documents agents consume: skills, AGENTS.md, pointed-at docs.
+- **`/grill-me`**: the same relentless interview as `/grill-with-docs`, but **stateless**: it saves nothing locally and builds no `CONTEXT.md`. Reach for it when you are **not working in a working directory** (sharpening a plan, a design, a piece of writing, anything with no repo under it). If you are in a working directory, use `/grill-with-docs` instead: it runs the same interview and leaves a paper trail, so it is strictly the better one.
+- **`/grilling`** is the interview primitive itself: rounds, the frontier, facts are the agent's job and decisions are yours. `/grill-me` and `/grill-with-docs` are the two named ways in, and `/triage`, `/wayfinder` and `/improve-codebase-architecture` all run it internally. Reach for it directly only when you want the interview with no wrapper around it.
+- **`/resolving-merge-conflicts`** works an in-progress merge or rebase conflict hunk by hunk, resolving by **intent** traced to each side's primary source rather than by picking lines, then finishes the operation. It never runs `--abort`. Standalone and off every flow: reach for it when you are already mid-conflict.
+- **`/prototype`** is a small, throwaway program that answers one design question: does this state model feel right, or what should this UI look like. Throwaway is a constraint on how the code is written, not a promise to destroy it: the answer folds into the real code, and the prototype itself is kept as a **primary source** on a `prototype/<name>` branch out of main, pointed at from the implementation issue. It's the detour in step 2 of the main flow, but reach for it any time a design question is hard to settle on paper.
+- **`/research`**: delegate reading legwork to a **background agent**: it investigates a question against **primary sources**, then leaves a cited Markdown file in the repo. Keep working while it reads. The file it produces is something to take *into* the main flow at `/grill-with-docs`, since research feeds the thinking rather than replacing it.
+- **`/to-questionnaire`** comes in when the thing blocking you isn't in your head or the codebase but in **someone else's**, and it writes them a questionnaire to fill in. It's the inverse of `/grill-me`: instead of interviewing you about the subject, it interviews you about the **send** (who it's going to, what you need back) and aims the questions at the gap. What comes back is material for `/grill-with-docs` or `/to-spec`.
+- **`/wizard`** is for the steps only a **human** can take: provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, clicking through an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, running a one-off migration or cutover. It generates an interactive bash script that opens each URL, captures each value, and writes it into `.env` and GitHub secrets, so the procedure stops being something you re-explain to an agent every time. Model-invoked, so the agent reaches for it the moment it hits a wall only you can pass. If the agent could just do it itself, it should; this is for where a human is genuinely in the loop.
+- **`/wait-what`** is the corrective for a message that didn't land. Use it mid-conversation, inside any other skill, and the agent re-pitches what it just said with the context you were missing, in plain English, using the `CONTEXT.md` vocabulary. It works after the fact; `/grill-with-docs` is the upfront cure, because a shared language agreed early is what stops the jargon arriving at all.
+- **`/teach`**: learn a concept over multiple sessions, using the current directory as a stateful workspace.
+- **`/writing-for-agents`** is the reference for writing documents agents consume: skills, AGENTS.md, pointed-at docs.
 
 ## Precondition
 
-**`/setup-matt-pocock-skills`** — run before your first engineering flow to configure the issue tracker, triage labels, and doc layout the other skills assume. Custom issue trackers also work.
+**`/setup-matt-pocock-skills`**: run before your first engineering flow to configure the issue tracker, triage labels, and doc layout the other skills assume. Custom issue trackers also work.

skills/engineering/code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -1,32 +1,32 @@
 ---
 name: code-review
-description: Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes — Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/spec asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to "review since X".
+description: "Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes: Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/spec asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to \"review since X\"."
 ---
 
 Two-axis review of the diff between `HEAD` and a fixed point the user supplies:
 
-- **Standards** — does the code conform to this repo's documented coding standards?
-- **Spec** — does the code faithfully implement the originating issue / spec?
+- **Standards**: does the code conform to this repo's documented coding standards?
+- **Spec**: does the code faithfully implement the originating issue / spec?
 
 Both axes run as **parallel sub-agents** so they don't pollute each other's context, then this skill aggregates their findings.
 
-The issue tracker should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` is missing.
+The issue tracker should have been provided to you. If `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` is missing, tell the user to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`.
 
 ## Process
 
 ### 1. Pin the fixed point
 
-Whatever the user said is the fixed point — a commit SHA, branch name, tag, `main`, `HEAD~5`, etc. If they didn't specify one, ask for it.
+Whatever the user said is the fixed point (a commit SHA, branch name, tag, `main`, `HEAD~5`, etc.). If they didn't specify one, ask for it.
 
 Capture the diff command once: `git diff <fixed-point>...HEAD` (three-dot, so the comparison is against the merge-base). Also note the list of commits via `git log <fixed-point>..HEAD --oneline`.
 
-Before going further, confirm the fixed point resolves (`git rev-parse <fixed-point>`) and the diff is non-empty. A bad ref or empty diff should fail here — not inside two parallel sub-agents.
+Before going further, confirm the fixed point resolves (`git rev-parse <fixed-point>`) and the diff is non-empty. A bad ref or empty diff should fail here, not inside two parallel sub-agents.
 
 ### 2. Identify the spec source
 
 Look for the originating spec, in this order:
 
-1. Issue references in the commit messages (`#123`, `Closes #45`, GitLab `!67`, etc.) — fetch via the workflow in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`.
+1. Issue references in the commit messages (`#123`, `Closes #45`, GitLab `!67`, etc.), fetched via the workflow in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`.
 2. A path the user passed as an argument.
 3. A spec file under `docs/`, `specs/`, or `.scratch/` matching the branch name or feature.
 4. If nothing is found, ask the user where the spec is. If they say there isn't one, the **Spec** sub-agent will skip and report "no spec available".
@@ -35,37 +35,35 @@ Look for the originating spec, in this order:
 
 Anything in the repo that documents how code should be written, such as `CODING_STANDARDS.md` or `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
 
-On top of whatever the repo documents, the Standards axis always carries the **smell baseline** below — a fixed set of Fowler code smells (_Refactoring_, ch.3) that applies even when a repo documents nothing. Two rules bind it:
+On top of whatever the repo documents, the Standards axis always carries the **smell baseline** below: a fixed set of Fowler code smells (_Refactoring_, ch.3) that applies even when a repo documents nothing. Two rules bind it:
 
 - **The repo overrides.** A documented repo standard always wins; where it endorses something the baseline would flag, suppress the smell.
-- **Always a judgement call.** Each smell is a labelled heuristic ("possible Feature Envy"), never a hard violation — and, like any standard here, skip anything tooling already enforces.
+- **Always a judgement call.** Each smell is a labelled heuristic ("possible Feature Envy"), never a hard violation. Like any standard here, skip anything tooling already enforces.
 
 Each smell reads *what it is* → *how to fix*; match it against the diff:
 
-- **Mysterious Name** — a function, variable, or type whose name doesn't reveal what it does or holds. → rename it; if no honest name comes, the design's murky.
-- **Duplicated Code** — the same logic shape appears in more than one hunk or file in the change. → extract the shared shape, call it from both.
-- **Feature Envy** — a method that reaches into another object's data more than its own. → move the method onto the data it envies.
-- **Data Clumps** — the same few fields or params keep travelling together (a type wanting to be born). → bundle them into one type, pass that.
-- **Primitive Obsession** — a primitive or string standing in for a domain concept that deserves its own type. → give the concept its own small type.
-- **Repeated Switches** — the same `switch`/`if`-cascade on the same type recurs across the change. → replace with polymorphism, or one map both sites share.
-- **Shotgun Surgery** — one logical change forces scattered edits across many files in the diff. → gather what changes together into one module.
-- **Divergent Change** — one file or module is edited for several unrelated reasons. → split so each module changes for one reason.
-- **Speculative Generality** — abstraction, parameters, or hooks added for needs the spec doesn't have. → delete it; inline back until a real need shows.
-- **Message Chains** — long `a.b().c().d()` navigation the caller shouldn't depend on. → hide the walk behind one method on the first object.
-- **Middle Man** — a class or function that mostly just delegates onward. → cut it, call the real target direct.
-- **Refused Bequest** — a subclass or implementer that ignores or overrides most of what it inherits. → drop the inheritance, use composition.
+- **Mysterious Name**: a function, variable, or type whose name doesn't reveal what it does or holds. → rename it; if no honest name comes, the design's murky.
+- **Duplicated Code**: the same logic shape appears in more than one hunk or file in the change. → extract the shared shape, call it from both.
+- **Feature Envy**: a method that reaches into another object's data more than its own. → move the method onto the data it envies.
+- **Data Clumps**: the same few fields or params keep travelling together (a type wanting to be born). → bundle them into one type, pass that.
+- **Primitive Obsession**: a primitive or string standing in for a domain concept that deserves its own type. → give the concept its own small type.
+- **Repeated Switches**: the same `switch`/`if`-cascade on the same type recurs across the change. → replace with polymorphism, or one map both sites share.
+- **Shotgun Surgery**: one logical change forces scattered edits across many files in the diff. → gather what changes together into one module.
+- **Divergent Change**: one file or module is edited for several unrelated reasons. → split so each module changes for one reason.
+- **Speculative Generality**: abstraction, parameters, or hooks added for needs the spec doesn't have. → delete it; inline back until a real need shows.
+- **Message Chains**: long `a.b().c().d()` navigation the caller shouldn't depend on. → hide the walk behind one method on the first object.
+- **Middle Man**: a class or function that mostly just delegates onward. → cut it, call the real target direct.
+- **Refused Bequest**: a subclass or implementer that ignores or overrides most of what it inherits. → drop the inheritance, use composition.
 
 ### 4. Spawn both sub-agents in parallel
 
-Send a single message with two `Agent` tool calls. Use the `general-purpose` subagent for both.
-
-**Standards sub-agent prompt** — include:
+**Standards sub-agent prompt** should include:
 
 - The full diff command and commit list.
-- The list of standards-source files you found in step 3, **plus the smell baseline from step 3** pasted in full — the sub-agent has no other access to it.
-- The brief: "Report — per file/hunk where relevant — (a) every place the diff violates a documented standard: cite the standard (file + the rule); and (b) any baseline smell you spot: name it and quote the hunk. Distinguish hard violations from judgement calls — documented-standard breaches can be hard, but baseline smells are always judgement calls, and a documented repo standard overrides the baseline. Skip anything tooling enforces. Under 400 words."
+- The list of standards-source files you found in step 3, **plus the smell baseline from step 3** pasted in full (the sub-agent has no other access to it).
+- The brief: "Report, per file/hunk where relevant, (a) every place the diff violates a documented standard: cite the standard (file + the rule); and (b) any baseline smell you spot: name it and quote the hunk. Distinguish hard violations from judgement calls: documented-standard breaches can be hard, but baseline smells are always judgement calls, and a documented repo standard overrides the baseline. Skip anything tooling enforces. Under 400 words."
 
-**Spec sub-agent prompt** — include:
+**Spec sub-agent prompt** should include:
 
 - The diff command and commit list.
 - The path or fetched contents of the spec.
@@ -75,9 +73,9 @@ If the spec is missing, skip the Spec sub-agent and note this in the final repor
 
 ### 5. Aggregate
 
-Present the two reports under `## Standards` and `## Spec` headings, verbatim or lightly cleaned. Do **not** merge or rerank findings — the two axes are deliberately separate (see _Why two axes_).
+Present the two reports under `## Standards` and `## Spec` headings, verbatim or lightly cleaned. Do **not** merge or rerank findings, because the two axes are deliberately separate (see _Why two axes_).
 
-End with a one-line summary: total findings per axis, and the worst issue _within each axis_ (if any). Don't pick a single winner across axes — that's the reranking the separation exists to prevent.
+End with a one-line summary: total findings per axis, and the worst issue _within each axis_ (if any). Don't pick a single winner across axes: that's the reranking the separation exists to prevent.
 
 ## Why two axes
 

skills/engineering/codebase-design/DEEPENING.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Deepening
 
-How to deepen a cluster of shallow modules safely, given its dependencies. Assumes the vocabulary in [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) — **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**.
+How to deepen a cluster of shallow modules safely, given its dependencies. Assumes the vocabulary in [SKILL.md](SKILL.md): **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**.
 
 ## Dependency categories
 
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ When assessing a candidate for deepening, classify its dependencies. The categor
 
 ### 1. In-process
 
-Pure computation, in-memory state, no I/O. Always deepenable — merge the modules and test through the new interface directly. No adapter needed.
+Pure computation, in-memory state, no I/O. Always deepenable: merge the modules and test through the new interface directly. No adapter needed.
 
 ### 2. Local-substitutable
 
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ Third-party services (Stripe, Twilio, etc.) you don't control. The deepened modu
 
 ## Testing strategy: replace, don't layer
 
-- Old unit tests on shallow modules become waste once tests at the deepened module's interface exist — delete them.
+- Old unit tests on shallow modules become waste once tests at the deepened module's interface exist; delete them.
 - Write new tests at the deepened module's interface. The **interface is the test surface**.
 - Tests assert on observable outcomes through the interface, not internal state.
-- Tests should survive internal refactors — they describe behaviour, not implementation. If a test has to change when the implementation changes, it's testing past the interface.
+- Tests should survive internal refactors, since they describe behaviour, not implementation. If a test has to change when the implementation changes, it's testing past the interface.

skills/engineering/codebase-design/DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # Design It Twice
 
-When the user wants to explore alternative interfaces for a chosen deepening candidate, use this parallel sub-agent pattern. Based on "Design It Twice" (Ousterhout) — your first idea is unlikely to be the best.
+When the user wants to explore alternative interfaces for a chosen deepening candidate, use this parallel sub-agent pattern. Based on "Design It Twice" (Ousterhout): your first idea is unlikely to be the best.
 
-Uses the vocabulary in [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) — **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**.
+Uses the vocabulary in [SKILL.md](SKILL.md): **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**.
 
 ## Process
 
@@ -12,33 +12,33 @@ Before spawning sub-agents, write a user-facing explanation of the problem space
 
 - The constraints any new interface would need to satisfy
 - The dependencies it would rely on, and which category they fall into (see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md))
-- A rough illustrative code sketch to ground the constraints — not a proposal, just a way to make the constraints concrete
+- A rough illustrative code sketch to ground the constraints, not a proposal, just a way to make the constraints concrete
 
 Show this to the user, then immediately proceed to Step 2. The user reads and thinks while the sub-agents work in parallel.
 
 ### 2. Spawn sub-agents
 
-Spawn 3+ sub-agents in parallel using the Agent tool. Each must produce a **radically different** interface for the deepened module.
+Spawn 3+ sub-agents in parallel. Each must produce a **radically different** interface for the deepened module.
 
 Prompt each sub-agent with a separate technical brief (file paths, coupling details, dependency category from [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md), what sits behind the seam). The brief is independent of the user-facing problem-space explanation in Step 1. Give each agent a different design constraint:
 
-- Agent 1: "Minimize the interface — aim for 1–3 entry points max. Maximise leverage per entry point."
-- Agent 2: "Maximise flexibility — support many use cases and extension."
-- Agent 3: "Optimise for the most common caller — make the default case trivial."
+- Agent 1: "Minimize the interface: aim for 1–3 entry points max. Maximise leverage per entry point."
+- Agent 2: "Maximise flexibility: support many use cases and extension."
+- Agent 3: "Optimise for the most common caller: make the default case trivial."
 - Agent 4 (if applicable): "Design around ports & adapters for cross-seam dependencies."
 
 Include both [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) vocabulary and CONTEXT.md vocabulary in the brief so each sub-agent names things consistently with the architecture language and the project's domain language.
 
 Each sub-agent outputs:
 
-1. Interface (types, methods, params — plus invariants, ordering, error modes)
+1. Interface (types, methods, params, plus invariants, ordering, error modes)
 2. Usage example showing how callers use it
 3. What the implementation hides behind the seam
 4. Dependency strategy and adapters (see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md))
-5. Trade-offs — where leverage is high, where it's thin
+5. Trade-offs: where leverage is high, where it's thin
 
 ### 3. Present and compare
 
 Present designs sequentially so the user can absorb each one, then compare them in prose. Contrast by **depth** (leverage at the interface), **locality** (where change concentrates), and **seam placement**.
 
-After comparing, give your own recommendation: which design you think is strongest and why. If elements from different designs would combine well, propose a hybrid. Be opinionated — the user wants a strong read, not a menu.
+After comparing, give your own recommendation: which design you think is strongest and why. If elements from different designs would combine well, propose a hybrid. Be opinionated: the user wants a strong read, not a menu.

skills/engineering/codebase-design/SKILL.md

@@ -9,23 +9,23 @@ Design **deep modules**: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface, placed at
 
 ## Glossary
 
-Use these terms exactly — don't substitute "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." Consistent language is the whole point.
+Use these terms exactly: don't substitute "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." Consistent language is the whole point.
 
-**Module** — anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic: a function, class, package, or tier-spanning slice. _Avoid_: unit, component, service.
+**Module**: anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic: a function, class, package, or tier-spanning slice. _Avoid_: unit, component, service.
 
-**Interface** — everything a caller must know to use the module correctly: the type signature, but also invariants, ordering constraints, error modes, required configuration, and performance characteristics. _Avoid_: API, signature (too narrow — they refer only to the type-level surface).
+**Interface**: everything a caller must know to use the module correctly: the type signature, but also invariants, ordering constraints, error modes, required configuration, and performance characteristics. _Avoid_: API, signature (too narrow, they refer only to the type-level surface).
 
-**Implementation** — what's inside a module, its body of code. Distinct from **Adapter**: a thing can be a small adapter with a large implementation (a Postgres repo) or a large adapter with a small implementation (an in-memory fake). Reach for "adapter" when the seam is the topic; "implementation" otherwise.
+**Implementation**: what's inside a module, its body of code. Distinct from **Adapter**: a thing can be a small adapter with a large implementation (a Postgres repo) or a large adapter with a small implementation (an in-memory fake). Reach for "adapter" when the seam is the topic; "implementation" otherwise.
 
-**Depth** — leverage at the interface: the amount of behaviour a caller (or test) can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. A module is **deep** when a large amount of behaviour sits behind a small interface, **shallow** when the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation.
+**Depth**: leverage at the interface. The amount of behaviour a caller (or test) can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. A module is **deep** when a large amount of behaviour sits behind a small interface, **shallow** when the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation.
 
-**Seam** _(Michael Feathers)_ — a place where you can alter behaviour without editing in that place; the *location* at which a module's interface lives. Where to put the seam is its own design decision, distinct from what goes behind it. _Avoid_: boundary (overloaded with DDD's bounded context).
+**Seam** _(Michael Feathers)_: a place where you can alter behaviour without editing in that place; the *location* at which a module's interface lives. Where to put the seam is its own design decision, distinct from what goes behind it. _Avoid_: boundary (overloaded with DDD's bounded context).
 
-**Adapter** — a concrete thing that satisfies an interface at a seam. Describes *role* (what slot it fills), not substance (what's inside).
+**Adapter**: a concrete thing that satisfies an interface at a seam. Describes *role* (what slot it fills), not substance (what's inside).
 
-**Leverage** — what callers get from depth: more capability per unit of interface they learn. One implementation pays back across N call sites and M tests.
+**Leverage**: what callers get from depth. More capability per unit of interface they learn. One implementation pays back across N call sites and M tests.
 
-**Locality** — what maintainers get from depth: change, bugs, knowledge, and verification concentrate in one place rather than spreading across callers. Fix once, fixed everywhere.
+**Locality**: what maintainers get from depth. Change, bugs, knowledge, and verification concentrate in one place rather than spreading across callers. Fix once, fixed everywhere.
 
 ## Deep vs shallow
 
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ When designing an interface, ask:
 
 ## Principles
 
-- **Depth is a property of the interface, not the implementation.** A deep module can be internally composed of small, mockable, swappable parts — they just aren't part of the interface. A module can have **internal seams** (private to its implementation, used by its own tests) as well as the **external seam** at its interface.
+- **Depth is a property of the interface, not the implementation.** A deep module can be internally composed of small, mockable, swappable parts; they just aren't part of the interface. A module can have **internal seams** (private to its implementation, used by its own tests) as well as the **external seam** at its interface.
 - **The deletion test.** Imagine deleting the module. If complexity vanishes, it was a pass-through. If complexity reappears across N callers, it was earning its keep.
 - **The interface is the test surface.** Callers and tests cross the same seam. If you want to test *past* the interface, the module is probably the wrong shape.
 - **One adapter means a hypothetical seam. Two adapters means a real one.** Don't introduce a seam unless something actually varies across it.
@@ -105,10 +105,10 @@ Good interfaces make testing natural:
 ## Rejected framings
 
 - **Depth as ratio of implementation-lines to interface-lines** (Ousterhout): rewards padding the implementation. We use depth-as-leverage instead.
-- **"Interface" as the TypeScript `interface` keyword or a class's public methods**: too narrow — interface here includes every fact a caller must know.
+- **"Interface" as the TypeScript `interface` keyword or a class's public methods**: too narrow: interface here includes every fact a caller must know.
 - **"Boundary"**: overloaded with DDD's bounded context. Say **seam** or **interface**.
 
 ## Going deeper
 
-- **Deepening a cluster given its dependencies** — see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md): dependency categories, seam discipline, and replace-don't-layer testing.
-- **Exploring alternative interfaces** — see [DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md](DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md): spin up parallel sub-agents to design the interface several radically different ways, then compare on depth, locality, and seam placement.
+- **Deepening a cluster given its dependencies**, see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md): dependency categories, seam discipline, and replace-don't-layer testing.
+- **Exploring alternative interfaces**, see [DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md](DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md): spin up parallel sub-agents to design the interface several radically different ways, then compare on depth, locality, and seam placement.

skills/engineering/diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md

@@ -9,18 +9,24 @@ A discipline for hard bugs. Skip phases only when explicitly justified.
 
 When exploring the codebase, read `CONTEXT.md` (if it exists) to get a clear mental model of the relevant modules, and check ADRs in the area you're touching.
 
-## Phase 1 — Build a feedback loop
+## Redact
 
-**This is the skill.** Everything else is mechanical. If you have a **tight** pass/fail signal for the bug — one that goes red on _this_ bug — you will find the cause; bisection, hypothesis-testing, and instrumentation all just consume it. If you don't have one, no amount of staring at code will save you.
+This skill has you show commands, outputs and captured artifacts. **Redact every secret first**: write `<REDACTED>` in its place. Build loops against env vars, so the credential stays in the environment rather than in what you show. Captured artifacts carry auth headers: quote only the lines that carry the signal.
+
+If the redacted output is not enough to diagnose the bug, say so and ask the user.
+
+## Phase 1: Build a feedback loop
+
+**This is the skill.** Everything else is mechanical. If you have a **tight** pass/fail signal for the bug (one that goes red on _this_ bug), you will find the cause; bisection, hypothesis-testing, and instrumentation all just consume it. If you don't have one, no amount of staring at code will save you.
 
 Spend disproportionate effort here. **Be aggressive. Be creative. Refuse to give up.**
 
-### Ways to construct one — try them in roughly this order
+### Ways to construct one, in roughly this order
 
-1. **Failing test** at whatever seam reaches the bug — unit, integration, e2e.
+1. **Failing test** at whatever seam reaches the bug: unit, integration, e2e.
 2. **Curl / HTTP script** against a running dev server.
 3. **CLI invocation** with a fixture input, diffing stdout against a known-good snapshot.
-4. **Headless browser script** (Playwright / Puppeteer) — drives the UI, asserts on DOM/console/network.
+4. **Headless browser script** (Playwright / Puppeteer) that drives the UI and asserts on DOM/console/network.
 5. **Replay a captured trace.** Save a real network request / payload / event log to disk; replay it through the code path in isolation.
 6. **Throwaway harness.** Spin up a minimal subset of the system (one service, mocked deps) that exercises the bug code path with a single function call.
 7. **Property / fuzz loop.** If the bug is "sometimes wrong output", run 1000 random inputs and look for the failure mode.
@@ -38,48 +44,48 @@ Treat the loop as a product. Once you have _a_ loop, **tighten** it:
 - Can I make the signal sharper? (Assert on the specific symptom, not "didn't crash".)
 - Can I make it more deterministic? (Pin time, seed RNG, isolate filesystem, freeze network.)
 
-A 30-second flaky loop is barely better than no loop; a 2-second deterministic one is tight — a debugging superpower.
+A 30-second flaky loop is barely better than no loop; a 2-second deterministic one is tight, a debugging superpower.
 
 ### Non-deterministic bugs
 
-The goal is not a clean repro but a **higher reproduction rate**. Loop the trigger 100×, parallelise, add stress, narrow timing windows, inject sleeps. A 50%-flake bug is debuggable; 1% is not — keep raising the rate until it's debuggable.
+The goal is not a clean repro but a **higher reproduction rate**. Loop the trigger 100×, parallelise, add stress, narrow timing windows, inject sleeps. A 50%-flake bug is debuggable; 1% is not, so keep raising the rate until it's debuggable.
 
 ### When you genuinely cannot build a loop
 
-Stop and say so explicitly. List what you tried. Ask the user for: (a) access to whatever environment reproduces it, (b) a captured artifact (HAR file, log dump, core dump, screen recording with timestamps), or (c) permission to add temporary production instrumentation. Do **not** proceed to hypothesise without a loop.
+Stop and say so explicitly. List what you tried. Ask the user for: (a) access to whatever environment reproduces it, (b) a redacted captured artifact (HAR file, log dump, core dump, screen recording with timestamps), or (c) permission to add temporary production instrumentation. Do **not** proceed to hypothesise without a loop.
 
-### Completion criterion — a tight loop that goes red
+### Completion criterion: a tight loop that goes red
 
-Phase 1 is done when the loop is **tight** and **red-capable**: you can name **one command** — a script path, a test invocation, a curl — that you have **already run at least once** (paste the invocation and its output), and that is:
+Phase 1 is done when the loop is **tight** and **red-capable**: you can name **one command** (a script path, a test invocation, a curl) that you have **already run at least once** (show the invocation and its output, redacted), and that is:
 
-- [ ] **Red-capable** — it drives the actual bug code path and asserts the **user's exact symptom**, so it can go red on this bug and green once fixed. Not "runs without erroring" — it must be able to _catch this specific bug_.
-- [ ] **Deterministic** — same verdict every run (flaky bugs: a pinned, high reproduction rate, per above).
-- [ ] **Fast** — seconds, not minutes.
-- [ ] **Agent-runnable** — you can run it unattended; a human in the loop only via `scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh`.
+- [ ] **Red-capable**: it drives the actual bug code path and asserts the **user's exact symptom**, so it can go red on this bug and green once fixed. Not "runs without erroring"; it must be able to _catch this specific bug_.
+- [ ] **Deterministic**: same verdict every run (flaky bugs: a pinned, high reproduction rate, per above).
+- [ ] **Fast**: seconds, not minutes.
+- [ ] **Agent-runnable**: you can run it unattended; a human in the loop only via `scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh`.
 
-If you catch yourself reading code to build a theory before this command exists, **stop — jumping straight to a hypothesis is the exact failure this skill prevents.** No red-capable command, no Phase 2.
+If you catch yourself reading code to build a theory before this command exists, **stop: jumping straight to a hypothesis is the exact failure this skill prevents.** No red-capable command, no Phase 2.
 
-## Phase 2 — Reproduce + minimise
+## Phase 2: Reproduce + minimise
 
-Run the loop. Watch it go red — the bug appears.
+Run the loop. Watch it go red as the bug appears.
 
 Confirm:
 
-- [ ] The loop produces the failure mode the **user** described — not a different failure that happens to be nearby. Wrong bug = wrong fix.
+- [ ] The loop produces the failure mode the **user** described, not a different failure that happens to be nearby. Wrong bug = wrong fix.
 - [ ] The failure is reproducible across multiple runs (or, for non-deterministic bugs, reproducible at a high enough rate to debug against).
 - [ ] You have captured the exact symptom (error message, wrong output, slow timing) so later phases can verify the fix actually addresses it.
 
 ### Minimise
 
-Once it's red, shrink the repro to the **smallest scenario that still goes red**. Cut inputs, callers, config, data, and steps **one at a time**, re-running the loop after each cut — keep only what's load-bearing for the failure.
+Once it's red, shrink the repro to the **smallest scenario that still goes red**. Cut inputs, callers, config, data, and steps **one at a time**, re-running the loop after each cut, and keep only what's load-bearing for the failure.
 
 Why bother: a minimal repro shrinks the hypothesis space in Phase 3 (fewer moving parts left to suspect) and becomes the clean regression test in Phase 5.
 
-Done when **every remaining element is load-bearing** — removing any one of them makes the loop go green.
+Done when **every remaining element is load-bearing**: removing any one of them makes the loop go green.
 
 Do not proceed until you have reproduced **and** minimised.
 
-## Phase 3 — Hypothesise
+## Phase 3: Hypothesise
 
 Generate **3–5 ranked hypotheses** before testing any of them. Single-hypothesis generation anchors on the first plausible idea.
 
@@ -87,11 +93,11 @@ Each hypothesis must be **falsifiable**: state the prediction it makes.
 
 > Format: "If <X> is the cause, then <changing Y> will make the bug disappear / <changing Z> will make it worse."
 
-If you cannot state the prediction, the hypothesis is a vibe — discard or sharpen it.
+If you cannot state the prediction, the hypothesis is a vibe: discard or sharpen it.
 
-**Show the ranked list to the user before testing.** They often have domain knowledge that re-ranks instantly ("we just deployed a change to #3"), or know hypotheses they've already ruled out. Cheap checkpoint, big time saver. Don't block on it — proceed with your ranking if the user is AFK.
+**Show the ranked list to the user before testing.** They often have domain knowledge that re-ranks instantly ("we just deployed a change to #3"), or know hypotheses they've already ruled out. Cheap checkpoint, big time saver. Don't block on it; proceed with your ranking if the user is AFK.
 
-## Phase 4 — Instrument
+## Phase 4: Instrument
 
 Each probe must map to a specific prediction from Phase 3. **Change one variable at a time.**
 
@@ -105,9 +111,9 @@ Tool preference:
 
 **Perf branch.** For performance regressions, logs are usually wrong. Instead: establish a baseline measurement (timing harness, `performance.now()`, profiler, query plan), then bisect. Measure first, fix second.
 
-## Phase 5 — Fix + regression test
+## Phase 5: Fix + regression test
 
-Write the regression test **before the fix** — but only if there is a **correct seam** for it.
+Write the regression test **before the fix**, but only if there is a **correct seam** for it.
 
 A correct seam is one where the test exercises the **real bug pattern** as it occurs at the call site. If the only available seam is too shallow (single-caller test when the bug needs multiple callers, unit test that can't replicate the chain that triggered the bug), a regression test there gives false confidence.
 
@@ -121,7 +127,7 @@ If a correct seam exists:
 4. Watch it pass.
 5. Re-run the Phase 1 feedback loop against the original (un-minimised) scenario.
 
-## Phase 6 — Cleanup + post-mortem
+## Phase 6: Cleanup
 
 Required before declaring done:
 
@@ -129,6 +135,4 @@ Required before declaring done:
 - [ ] Regression test passes (or absence of seam is documented)
 - [ ] All `[DEBUG-...]` instrumentation removed (`grep` the prefix)
 - [ ] Throwaway prototypes deleted (or moved to a clearly-marked debug location)
-- [ ] The hypothesis that turned out correct is stated in the commit / PR message — so the next debugger learns
-
-**Then ask: what would have prevented this bug?** If the answer involves architectural change (no good test seam, tangled callers, hidden coupling) hand off to the `/improve-codebase-architecture` skill with the specifics. Make the recommendation **after** the fix is in, not before — you have more information now than when you started.
+- [ ] The hypothesis that turned out correct is stated in the commit / PR message, so the next debugger learns

skills/engineering/diagnosing-bugs/scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh

@@ -11,6 +11,9 @@
 #   capture VAR "<question>"      → show question, read response into VAR
 #
 # At the end, captured values are printed as KEY=VALUE for the agent to parse.
+#
+# `capture` prints its value back to the terminal, where the agent reads it,
+# so capture observations, and leave signing in to the user as a `step`.
 
 set -euo pipefail
 

skills/engineering/domain-modeling/ADR-FORMAT.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 ADRs live in `docs/adr/` and use sequential numbering: `0001-slug.md`, `0002-slug.md`, etc.
 
-Create the `docs/adr/` directory lazily — only when the first ADR is needed.
+Create the `docs/adr/` directory lazily: only when the first ADR is needed.
 
 ## Template
 
@@ -12,15 +12,15 @@ Create the `docs/adr/` directory lazily — only when the first ADR is needed.
 {1-3 sentences: what's the context, what did we decide, and why.}
 ```
 
-That's it. An ADR can be a single paragraph. The value is in recording *that* a decision was made and *why* — not in filling out sections.
+That's it. An ADR can be a single paragraph. The value is in recording *that* a decision was made and *why*, not in filling out sections.
 
 ## Optional sections
 
 Only include these when they add genuine value. Most ADRs won't need them.
 
-- **Status** frontmatter (`proposed | accepted | deprecated | superseded by ADR-NNNN`) — useful when decisions are revisited
-- **Considered Options** — only when the rejected alternatives are worth remembering
-- **Consequences** — only when non-obvious downstream effects need to be called out
+- **Status** frontmatter (`proposed | accepted | deprecated | superseded by ADR-NNNN`): useful when decisions are revisited
+- **Considered Options**: only when the rejected alternatives are worth remembering
+- **Consequences**: only when non-obvious downstream effects need to be called out
 
 ## Numbering
 
@@ -30,18 +30,18 @@ Scan `docs/adr/` for the highest existing number and increment by one.
 
 All three of these must be true:
 
-1. **Hard to reverse** — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful
-2. **Surprising without context** — a future reader will look at the code and wonder "why on earth did they do it this way?"
-3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons
+1. **Hard to reverse**: the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful
+2. **Surprising without context**: a future reader will look at the code and wonder "why on earth did they do it this way?"
+3. **The result of a real trade-off**: there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons
 
-If a decision is easy to reverse, skip it — you'll just reverse it. If it's not surprising, nobody will wonder why. If there was no real alternative, there's nothing to record beyond "we did the obvious thing."
+If a decision is easy to reverse, skip it: you'll just reverse it. If it's not surprising, nobody will wonder why. If there was no real alternative, there's nothing to record beyond "we did the obvious thing."
 
 ### What qualifies
 
 - **Architectural shape.** "We're using a monorepo." "The write model is event-sourced, the read model is projected into Postgres."
 - **Integration patterns between contexts.** "Ordering and Billing communicate via domain events, not synchronous HTTP."
-- **Technology choices that carry lock-in.** Database, message bus, auth provider, deployment target. Not every library — just the ones that would take a quarter to swap out.
+- **Technology choices that carry lock-in.** Database, message bus, auth provider, deployment target. Not every library: just the ones that would take a quarter to swap out.
 - **Boundary and scope decisions.** "Customer data is owned by the Customer context; other contexts reference it by ID only." The explicit no-s are as valuable as the yes-s.
 - **Deliberate deviations from the obvious path.** "We're using manual SQL instead of an ORM because X." Anything where a reasonable reader would assume the opposite. These stop the next engineer from "fixing" something that was deliberate.
 - **Constraints not visible in the code.** "We can't use AWS because of compliance requirements." "Response times must be under 200ms because of the partner API contract."
-- **Rejected alternatives when the rejection is non-obvious.** If you considered GraphQL and picked REST for subtle reasons, record it — otherwise someone will suggest GraphQL again in six months.
+- **Rejected alternatives when the rejection is non-obvious.** If you considered GraphQL and picked REST for subtle reasons, record it; otherwise someone will suggest GraphQL again in six months.

skills/engineering/domain-modeling/CONTEXT-FORMAT.md

@@ -40,9 +40,9 @@ _Avoid_: Client, buyer, account
 
 ## Contexts
 
-- [Ordering](./src/ordering/CONTEXT.md) — receives and tracks customer orders
-- [Billing](./src/billing/CONTEXT.md) — generates invoices and processes payments
-- [Fulfillment](./src/fulfillment/CONTEXT.md) — manages warehouse picking and shipping
+- [Ordering](./src/ordering/CONTEXT.md): receives and tracks customer orders
+- [Billing](./src/billing/CONTEXT.md): generates invoices and processes payments
+- [Fulfillment](./src/fulfillment/CONTEXT.md): manages warehouse picking and shipping
 
 ## Relationships
 

skills/engineering/domain-modeling/SKILL.md

@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
 ---
 name: domain-modeling
-description: Build and sharpen a project's domain model. Use when the user wants to pin down domain terminology or a ubiquitous language, record an architectural decision, or when another skill needs to maintain the domain model.
+description: Build and sharpen a project's domain model. Use when discussing codebase terminology, writing or editing a CONTEXT.md, or recording or editing an ADR.
 ---
 
 # Domain Modeling
 
-Actively build and sharpen the project's domain model as you design. This is the *active* discipline — challenging terms, inventing edge-case scenarios, and writing the glossary and decisions down the moment they crystallise. (Merely *reading* `CONTEXT.md` for vocabulary is not this skill — that's a one-line habit any skill can do. This skill is for when you're changing the model, not just consuming it.)
+Actively build and sharpen the project's domain model as you design. This is the *active* discipline: challenging terms, inventing edge-case scenarios, and writing the glossary and decisions down the moment they crystallise. (Merely *reading* `CONTEXT.md` for vocabulary is not this skill: that's a one-line habit any skill can do. This skill is for when you're changing the model, not just consuming it.)
 
 ## File structure
 
@@ -37,17 +37,17 @@ If a `CONTEXT-MAP.md` exists at the root, the repo has multiple contexts. The ma
 │       └── docs/adr/
 ```
 
-Create files lazily — only when you have something to write. If no `CONTEXT.md` exists, create one when the first term is resolved. If no `docs/adr/` exists, create it when the first ADR is needed.
+Create files lazily: only when you have something to write. If no `CONTEXT.md` exists, create one when the first term is resolved. If no `docs/adr/` exists, create it when the first ADR is needed.
 
 ## During the session
 
 ### Challenge against the glossary
 
-When the user uses a term that conflicts with the existing language in `CONTEXT.md`, call it out immediately. "Your glossary defines 'cancellation' as X, but you seem to mean Y — which is it?"
+When the user uses a term that conflicts with the existing language in `CONTEXT.md`, call it out immediately. "Your glossary defines 'cancellation' as X, but you seem to mean Y. Which is it?"
 
 ### Sharpen fuzzy language
 
-When the user uses vague or overloaded terms, propose a precise canonical term. "You're saying 'account' — do you mean the Customer or the User? Those are different things."
+When the user uses vague or overloaded terms, propose a precise canonical term. "You're saying 'account': do you mean the Customer or the User? Those are different things."
 
 ### Discuss concrete scenarios
 
@@ -55,11 +55,11 @@ When domain relationships are being discussed, stress-test them with specific sc
 
 ### Cross-reference with code
 
-When the user states how something works, check whether the code agrees. If you find a contradiction, surface it: "Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible — which is right?"
+When the user states how something works, check whether the code agrees. If you find a contradiction, surface it: "Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible. Which is right?"
 
 ### Update CONTEXT.md inline
 
-When a term is resolved, update `CONTEXT.md` right there. Don't batch these up — capture them as they happen. Use the format in [CONTEXT-FORMAT.md](./CONTEXT-FORMAT.md).
+When a term is resolved, update `CONTEXT.md` right there. Don't batch these up: capture them as they happen. Use the format in [CONTEXT-FORMAT.md](./CONTEXT-FORMAT.md).
 
 `CONTEXT.md` should be totally devoid of implementation details. Do not treat `CONTEXT.md` as a spec, a scratch pad, or a repository for implementation decisions. It is a glossary and nothing else.
 
@@ -67,8 +67,8 @@ When a term is resolved, update `CONTEXT.md` right there. Don't batch these up
 
 Only offer to create an ADR when all three are true:
 
-1. **Hard to reverse** — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful
-2. **Surprising without context** — a future reader will wonder "why did they do it this way?"
-3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons
+1. **Hard to reverse**: the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful
+2. **Surprising without context**: a future reader will wonder "why did they do it this way?"
+3. **The result of a real trade-off**: there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons
 
 If any of the three is missing, skip the ADR. Use the format in [ADR-FORMAT.md](./ADR-FORMAT.md).

skills/engineering/grill-with-docs/SKILL.md

@@ -4,4 +4,4 @@ description: A relentless interview to sharpen a plan or design, which also crea
 disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
-Run a `/grilling` session, using the `/domain-modeling` skill.
+Call the Skill tool twice, for "grilling" and "domain-modeling".

skills/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture/HTML-REPORT.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # HTML Report Format
 
-The architectural review is rendered as a single self-contained HTML file in the OS temp directory. Tailwind and Mermaid both come from CDNs. Mermaid handles graph-shaped diagrams reliably; hand-built divs and inline SVG handle the more editorial visuals (mass diagrams, cross-sections). Mix the two — don't lean on Mermaid for everything, it'll start to look generic.
+The architectural review is rendered as a single self-contained HTML file in the OS temp directory. Tailwind and Mermaid both come from CDNs. Mermaid handles graph-shaped diagrams reliably; hand-built divs and inline SVG handle the more editorial visuals (mass diagrams, cross-sections). Mix the two: don't lean on Mermaid for everything, it'll start to look generic.
 
 ## Scaffold
 
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ The architectural review is rendered as a single self-contained HTML file in the
 <html lang="en">
   <head>
     <meta charset="utf-8" />
-    <title>Architecture review — {{repo name}}</title>
+    <title>Architecture review for {{repo name}}</title>
     <script src="https://cdn.tailwindcss.com"></script>
     <script type="module">
       import mermaid from "https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/mermaid@11/dist/mermaid.esm.min.mjs";
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ The architectural review is rendered as a single self-contained HTML file in the
 
 ## Header
 
-Repo name, date, and a compact legend: solid box = module, dashed line = seam, red arrow = leakage, thick dark box = deep module. No introduction paragraph — straight into the candidates.
+Repo name, date, and a compact legend: solid box = module, dashed line = seam, red arrow = leakage, thick dark box = deep module. No introduction paragraph. Straight into the candidates.
 
 ## Candidate card
 
@@ -43,20 +43,20 @@ The diagrams carry the weight. Prose is sparse, plain, and uses the glossary ter
 
 Each candidate is one `<article>`:
 
-- **Title** — short, names the deepening (e.g. "Collapse the Order intake pipeline").
-- **Badge row** — recommendation strength (`Strong` = emerald, `Worth exploring` = amber, `Speculative` = slate), plus a tag for the dependency category (`in-process`, `local-substitutable`, `ports & adapters`, `mock`).
-- **Files** — monospaced list, `font-mono text-sm`.
-- **Before / After diagram** — the centrepiece. Two columns, side by side. See patterns below.
-- **Problem** — one sentence. What hurts.
-- **Solution** — one sentence. What changes.
-- **Wins** — bullets, ≤6 words each. e.g. "Tests hit one interface", "Pricing logic stops leaking", "Delete 4 shallow wrappers".
-- **ADR callout** (if applicable) — one line in an amber-tinted box.
+- **Title**: short, names the deepening (e.g. "Collapse the Order intake pipeline").
+- **Badge row**: recommendation strength (`Strong` = emerald, `Worth exploring` = amber, `Speculative` = slate), plus a tag for the dependency category (`in-process`, `local-substitutable`, `ports & adapters`, `mock`).
+- **Files**: monospaced list, `font-mono text-sm`.
+- **Before / After diagram**: the centrepiece. Two columns, side by side. See patterns below.
+- **Problem**: one sentence. What hurts.
+- **Solution**: one sentence. What changes.
+- **Wins**: bullets, ≤6 words each. e.g. "Tests hit one interface", "Pricing logic stops leaking", "Delete 4 shallow wrappers".
+- **ADR callout** (if applicable): one line in an amber-tinted box.
 
 No paragraphs of explanation. If the diagram needs a paragraph to be understood, redraw the diagram.
 
 ## Diagram patterns
 
-Pick the pattern that fits the candidate. Mix them. Don't make every diagram look the same — variety is part of the point.
+Pick the pattern that fits the candidate. Mix them. Don't make every diagram look the same. Variety is part of the point.
 
 ### Mermaid graph (the workhorse for dependencies / call flow)
 
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ Use a Mermaid `flowchart` or `graph` when the point is "X calls Y calls Z, and l
 
 ### Hand-built boxes-and-arrows (when Mermaid's layout fights you)
 
-Modules as `<div>`s with borders and labels. Arrows as inline SVG `<line>` or `<path>` elements positioned absolutely over a relative container. Reach for this when you want the "after" diagram to feel like one thick-bordered deep module with greyed-out internals — Mermaid won't render that with the right weight.
+Modules as `<div>`s with borders and labels. Arrows as inline SVG `<line>` or `<path>` elements positioned absolutely over a relative container. Reach for this when you want the "after" diagram to feel like one thick-bordered deep module with greyed-out internals, since Mermaid won't render that with the right weight.
 
 ### Cross-section (good for layered shallowness)
 
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ Stack horizontal bands (`h-12 border-l-4`) to show layers a call passes through.
 
 ### Mass diagram (good for "interface as wide as implementation")
 
-Two rectangles per module — one for interface surface area, one for implementation. Before: interface rectangle is nearly as tall as the implementation rectangle (shallow). After: interface rectangle is short, implementation rectangle is tall (deep).
+Two rectangles per module: one for interface surface area, one for implementation. Before: interface rectangle is nearly as tall as the implementation rectangle (shallow). After: interface rectangle is short, implementation rectangle is tall (deep).
 
 ### Call-graph collapse
 
@@ -96,8 +96,8 @@ Before: a tree of function calls rendered as nested boxes. After: the same tree
 - Lean editorial, not corporate-dashboard. Generous whitespace. Serif optional for headings (`font-serif` works well with stone/slate).
 - Colour sparingly: one accent (emerald or indigo) plus red for leakage and amber for warnings.
 - Keep diagrams ~320px tall so before/after sits comfortably side by side without scrolling.
-- Use `text-xs uppercase tracking-wider` for module labels inside diagrams — they should read as schematic, not as UI.
-- The only scripts are the Tailwind CDN and the Mermaid ESM import. The report is otherwise static — no app code, no interactivity beyond Mermaid's own rendering.
+- Use `text-xs uppercase tracking-wider` for module labels inside diagrams, so they read as schematic, not as UI.
+- The only scripts are the Tailwind CDN and the Mermaid ESM import. The report is otherwise static: no app code, no interactivity beyond Mermaid's own rendering.
 
 ## Top recommendation section
 
@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ One larger card. Candidate name, one sentence on why, anchor link to its card. T
 
 ## Tone
 
-Plain English, concise — but the architectural nouns and verbs come straight from the `/codebase-design` skill. Concision is not an excuse to drift.
+Plain English, concise, but the architectural nouns and verbs come straight from the `/codebase-design` skill. Concision is not an excuse to drift.
 
 **Use exactly:** module, interface, implementation, depth, deep, shallow, seam, adapter, leverage, locality.
 
@@ -113,11 +113,11 @@ Plain English, concise — but the architectural nouns and verbs come straight f
 
 **Phrasings that fit the style:**
 
-- "Order intake module is shallow — interface nearly matches the implementation."
+- "Order intake module is shallow: interface nearly matches the implementation."
 - "Pricing leaks across the seam."
 - "Deepen: one interface, one place to test."
 - "Two adapters justify the seam: HTTP in prod, in-memory in tests."
 
-**Wins bullets** name the gain in glossary terms: *"locality: bugs concentrate in one module"*, *"leverage: one interface, N call sites"*, *"interface shrinks; implementation absorbs the wrappers"*. Don't write *"easier to maintain"* or *"cleaner code"* — those terms aren't in the glossary and don't earn their place.
+**Wins bullets** name the gain in glossary terms: *"locality: bugs concentrate in one module"*, *"leverage: one interface, N call sites"*, *"interface shrinks; implementation absorbs the wrappers"*. Don't write *"easier to maintain"* or *"cleaner code"*, because those terms aren't in the glossary and don't earn their place.
 
 No hedging, no throat-clearing, no "it's worth noting that…". If a sentence could be a bullet, make it a bullet. If a bullet could be cut, cut it. If a term isn't in the `/codebase-design` glossary, reach for one that is before inventing a new one.

skills/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md

@@ -6,28 +6,28 @@ disable-model-invocation: true
 
 # Improve Codebase Architecture
 
-Surface architectural friction and propose **deepening opportunities** — refactors that turn shallow modules into deep ones. The aim is testability and AI-navigability.
+Surface architectural friction and propose **deepening opportunities**: refactors that turn shallow modules into deep ones. The aim is testability and AI-navigability.
 
 This command is _informed_ by the project's domain model and built on a shared design vocabulary:
 
-- Run the `/codebase-design` skill for the architecture vocabulary (**module**, **interface**, **depth**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**, **locality**) and its principles (the deletion test, "the interface is the test surface", "one adapter = hypothetical seam, two = real"). Use these terms exactly in every suggestion — don't drift into "component," "service," "API," or "boundary."
+- Call the Skill tool with "codebase-design" for the architecture vocabulary (**module**, **interface**, **depth**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**, **locality**) and its principles (the deletion test, "the interface is the test surface", "one adapter = hypothetical seam, two = real"). Use these terms exactly in every suggestion, and don't drift into "component," "service," "API," or "boundary."
 - The domain language in `CONTEXT.md` gives names to good seams; ADRs in `docs/adr/` record decisions this command should not re-litigate.
 
 ## Process
 
 ### 1. Explore
 
-**Scope before you scan — YAGNI.** Deepening a module pays off by making future changes to it easier, so put extra weight on the parts of the codebase that have recently changed. Decide *where* to look before you look:
+**Scope before you scan: YAGNI.** Deepening a module pays off by making future changes to it easier, so put extra weight on the parts of the codebase that have recently changed. Decide *where* to look before you look:
 
-- If the user named a direction — a module, a subsystem, a pain point — take it, and skip the inference below.
-- Otherwise, walk back a good stretch of the commit history (`git log --oneline`) to find the codebase's hot spots — the files and areas that keep coming up — and let those paths pull your attention first. If the changes are scattered with no clear hot spot, widen the net.
+- If the user named a direction (a module, a subsystem, a pain point), take it, and skip the inference below.
+- Otherwise, walk back a good stretch of the commit history (`git log --oneline`) to find the codebase's hot spots, the files and areas that keep coming up, and let those paths pull your attention first. If the changes are scattered with no clear hot spot, widen the net.
 
 Read the project's domain glossary (`CONTEXT.md`) and any ADRs in the area you're touching first.
 
-Then use the Agent tool with `subagent_type=Explore` to walk the codebase. Don't follow rigid heuristics — explore organically and note where you experience friction:
+Then spawn a sub-agent to walk the codebase. Don't follow rigid heuristics; explore organically and note where you experience friction:
 
 - Where does understanding one concept require bouncing between many small modules?
-- Where are modules **shallow** — interface nearly as complex as the implementation?
+- Where are modules **shallow**, with an interface nearly as complex as the implementation?
 - Where have pure functions been extracted just for testability, but the real bugs hide in how they're called (no **locality**)?
 - Where do tightly-coupled modules leak across their seams?
 - Which parts of the codebase are untested, or hard to test through their current interface?
@@ -36,24 +36,24 @@ Apply the **deletion test** to anything you suspect is shallow: would deleting i
 
 ### 2. Present candidates as an HTML report
 
-Write a self-contained HTML file to the OS temp directory so nothing lands in the repo. Resolve the temp dir from `$TMPDIR`, falling back to `/tmp` (or `%TEMP%` on Windows), and write to `<tmpdir>/architecture-review-<timestamp>.html` so each run gets a fresh file. Open it for the user — `xdg-open <path>` on Linux, `open <path>` on macOS, `start <path>` on Windows — and tell them the absolute path.
+Write a self-contained HTML file to the OS temp directory so nothing lands in the repo. Resolve the temp dir from `$TMPDIR`, falling back to `/tmp` (or `%TEMP%` on Windows), and write to `<tmpdir>/architecture-review-<timestamp>.html` so each run gets a fresh file. Open it for the user (`xdg-open <path>` on Linux, `open <path>` on macOS, `start <path>` on Windows) and tell them the absolute path.
 
-The report uses **Tailwind via CDN** for layout and styling, and **Mermaid via CDN** for diagrams where a graph/flow/sequence reliably communicates the structure. Mix Mermaid with hand-crafted CSS/SVG visuals — use Mermaid when relationships are graph-shaped (call graphs, dependencies, sequences), and hand-built divs/SVG when you want something more editorial (mass diagrams, cross-sections, collapse animations). Each candidate gets a **before/after visualisation**. Be visual.
+The report uses **Tailwind via CDN** for layout and styling, and **Mermaid via CDN** for diagrams where a graph/flow/sequence reliably communicates the structure. Mix Mermaid with hand-crafted CSS/SVG visuals: use Mermaid when relationships are graph-shaped (call graphs, dependencies, sequences), and hand-built divs/SVG when you want something more editorial (mass diagrams, cross-sections, collapse animations). Each candidate gets a **before/after visualisation**. Be visual.
 
 For each candidate, render a card with:
 
-- **Files** — which files/modules are involved
-- **Problem** — why the current architecture is causing friction
-- **Solution** — plain English description of what would change
-- **Benefits** — explained in terms of locality and leverage, and how tests would improve
-- **Before / After diagram** — side-by-side, custom-drawn, illustrating the shallowness and the deepening
-- **Recommendation strength** — one of `Strong`, `Worth exploring`, `Speculative`, rendered as a badge
+- **Files**: which files/modules are involved
+- **Problem**: why the current architecture is causing friction
+- **Solution**: plain English description of what would change
+- **Benefits**: explained in terms of locality and leverage, and how tests would improve
+- **Before / After diagram**: side-by-side, custom-drawn, illustrating the shallowness and the deepening
+- **Recommendation strength**: one of `Strong`, `Worth exploring`, `Speculative`, rendered as a badge
 
 End the report with a **Top recommendation** section: which candidate you'd tackle first and why.
 
-**Use CONTEXT.md vocabulary for the domain, and the `/codebase-design` vocabulary for the architecture.** If `CONTEXT.md` defines "Order," talk about "the Order intake module" — not "the FooBarHandler," and not "the Order service."
+**Use CONTEXT.md vocabulary for the domain, and the `/codebase-design` vocabulary for the architecture.** If `CONTEXT.md` defines "Order," talk about "the Order intake module," not "the FooBarHandler," and not "the Order service."
 
-**ADR conflicts**: if a candidate contradicts an existing ADR, only surface it when the friction is real enough to warrant revisiting the ADR. Mark it clearly in the card (e.g. a warning callout: _"contradicts ADR-0007 — but worth reopening because…"_). Don't list every theoretical refactor an ADR forbids.
+**ADR conflicts**: if a candidate contradicts an existing ADR, only surface it when the friction is real enough to warrant revisiting the ADR. Mark it clearly in the card (e.g. a warning callout: _"contradicts ADR-0007, but worth reopening because…"_). Don't list every theoretical refactor an ADR forbids.
 
 See [HTML-REPORT.md](HTML-REPORT.md) for the full HTML scaffold, diagram patterns, and styling guidance.
 
@@ -61,11 +61,11 @@ Do NOT propose interfaces yet. After the file is written, ask the user: "Which o
 
 ### 3. Grilling loop
 
-Once the user picks a candidate, run the `/grilling` skill to walk the decision tree with them — constraints, dependencies, the shape of the deepened module, what sits behind the seam, what tests survive.
+Once the user picks a candidate, call the Skill tool with "grilling" to walk the decision tree with them: constraints, dependencies, the shape of the deepened module, what sits behind the seam, what tests survive.
 
-Side effects happen inline as decisions crystallize — run the `/domain-modeling` skill to keep the domain model current as you go:
+Side effects happen inline as decisions crystallize; call the Skill tool with "domain-modeling" to keep the domain model current as you go:
 
 - **Naming a deepened module after a concept not in `CONTEXT.md`?** Add the term to `CONTEXT.md`. Create the file lazily if it doesn't exist.
 - **Sharpening a fuzzy term during the conversation?** Update `CONTEXT.md` right there.
-- **User rejects the candidate with a load-bearing reason?** Offer an ADR, framed as: _"Want me to record this as an ADR so future architecture reviews don't re-suggest it?"_ Only offer when the reason would actually be needed by a future explorer to avoid re-suggesting the same thing — skip ephemeral reasons ("not worth it right now") and self-evident ones.
-- **Want to explore alternative interfaces for the deepened module?** Run the `/codebase-design` skill and use its design-it-twice parallel sub-agent pattern.
+- **User rejects the candidate with a load-bearing reason?** Offer an ADR, framed as: _"Want me to record this as an ADR so future architecture reviews don't re-suggest it?"_ Only offer when the reason would actually be needed by a future explorer to avoid re-suggesting the same thing; skip ephemeral reasons ("not worth it right now") and self-evident ones.
+- **Want to explore alternative interfaces for the deepened module?** Call the Skill tool with "codebase-design" and use its design-it-twice parallel sub-agent pattern.

skills/engineering/prototype/LOGIC.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # Logic Prototype
 
-A single, self-contained HTML file — a **shareable demo** — that lets anyone drive a state model by clicking buttons. Use this when the question is about **business logic, state transitions, or data shape** — the kind of thing that looks reasonable on paper but only feels wrong once you push it through real cases.
+A single, self-contained HTML file (a **shareable demo**) that lets anyone drive a state model by clicking buttons. Use this when the question is about **business logic, state transitions, or data shape**: the kind of thing that looks reasonable on paper but only feels wrong once you push it through real cases.
 
-Because it's one file with nothing to install, you can hand it to a non-developer — a designer, a PM, a domain expert — and let them feel the model for themselves. So it speaks their language, not the code's.
+Because it's one file with nothing to install, you can hand it to a non-developer (a designer, a PM, a domain expert) and let them feel the model for themselves. So it speaks their language, not the code's.
 
 ## When this is the right shape
 
@@ -11,51 +11,51 @@ Because it's one file with nothing to install, you can hand it to a non-develope
 - "I want to feel out what the API should look like before writing it."
 - Anything where someone wants to **press buttons and watch state change**.
 
-If the question is "what should this look like" — wrong branch. Use [UI.md](UI.md).
+If the question is "what should this look like," this is the wrong branch. Use [UI.md](UI.md).
 
 ## Process
 
 ### 1. State the question
 
-Before writing code, write down what state model and what question you're prototyping. One paragraph, at the top of the demo (in a visible intro, not just a comment). A logic prototype that answers the wrong question is pure waste — make the question explicit so it can be checked later, whether the user is watching now or returning to it AFK.
+Before writing code, write down what state model and what question you're prototyping. One paragraph, at the top of the demo (in a visible intro, not just a comment). A logic prototype that answers the wrong question is pure waste, so make the question explicit so it can be checked later, whether the user is watching now or returning to it AFK.
 
 ### 2. Isolate the logic in a portable module
 
-Put the actual logic — the bit that's answering the question — in a single `<script>` block written as a small, pure module that could be lifted out and dropped into the real codebase later. The page around it is throwaway; this module isn't.
+Put the actual logic (the bit that's answering the question) in a single `<script>` block written as a small, pure module that could be lifted out and dropped into the real codebase later. The page around it is throwaway; this module isn't.
 
 The right shape depends on the question:
 
-- **A pure reducer** — `(state, action) => state`. Good when actions are discrete events and state is a single value.
-- **A state machine** — explicit states and transitions. Good when "which actions are even legal right now" is part of the question.
-- **A small set of pure functions** over a plain data type. Good when there's no implicit current state — just transformations.
+- **A pure reducer**: `(state, action) => state`. Good when actions are discrete events and state is a single value.
+- **A state machine**: explicit states and transitions. Good when "which actions are even legal right now" is part of the question.
+- **A small set of pure functions** over a plain data type. Good when there's no implicit current state, just transformations.
 - **A class or module with a clear method surface** when the logic genuinely owns ongoing internal state.
 
 Pick whichever shape best fits the question being asked, *not* whichever is easiest to wire to a page. Keep it pure: no DOM, no `document`, no button handlers reaching inside it. The page calls into it; nothing flows the other direction. This is what makes the prototype useful past its own lifetime: once the question's answered, the validated reducer / machine / function set lifts into the real module on its own.
 
 ### 3. Build the shareable HTML file
 
-One file, plain HTML/CSS/JS — no framework, no bundler, no server, everything inline so it opens by double-click and survives being emailed around. Anyone should be able to run it by opening it.
+One file, plain HTML/CSS/JS: no framework, no bundler, no server, everything inline so it opens by double-click and survives being emailed around. Anyone should be able to run it by opening it.
 
-Write it for a non-developer. Every label is in **domain language**, not code — buttons and state read like the business, not the reducer. Explain in plain words what's happening.
+Write it for a non-developer. Every label is in **domain language**, not code: buttons and state read like the business, not the reducer. Explain in plain words what's happening.
 
 Lay it out with a clean hierarchy, top to bottom:
 
 1. **Title and one-line explanation** of what this demo lets you explore (the question from step 1).
-2. **Current state** — the full relevant state, rendered as a readable panel (labelled fields, not a raw JSON dump), re-rendered after every click so the change is visible. Where it helps a non-developer follow, call out what just changed.
-3. **Free-play buttons** — one button per action, always available, so anyone can poke at the model in any order. Each click dispatches its action and re-renders the state.
-4. **Guided walkthroughs** — a set of **scenarios**, one per tab. Each tab holds a short plain-language description of the scenario — the situation it sets up and what to watch for — and underneath it, the ordered **buttons to press** for that scenario. Each step is a real button: clicking it performs that action and moves to the next step. Starting a walkthrough resets to a known initial state so the scenario runs the same way every time.
+2. **Current state**: the full relevant state, rendered as a readable panel (labelled fields, not a raw JSON dump), re-rendered after every click so the change is visible. Where it helps a non-developer follow, call out what just changed.
+3. **Free-play buttons**: one button per action, always available, so anyone can poke at the model in any order. Each click dispatches its action and re-renders the state.
+4. **Guided walkthroughs**: a set of **scenarios**, one per tab. Each tab holds a short plain-language description of the scenario (the situation it sets up and what to watch for) and underneath it, the ordered **buttons to press** for that scenario. Each step is a real button: clicking it performs that action and moves to the next step. Starting a walkthrough resets to a known initial state so the scenario runs the same way every time.
 
-Choose scenarios that demonstrate the awkward cases — the happy path, a tricky edge case, an attempt at something that should be illegal — the ones hard to reason about on paper.
+Choose scenarios that demonstrate the awkward cases, the ones hard to reason about on paper: the happy path, a tricky edge case, an attempt at something that should be illegal.
 
-Keep it beautiful but restrained: clean typography, generous spacing, one accent colour. No animations, no gimmicks — nothing that competes with the state and the buttons.
+Keep it beautiful but restrained: clean typography, generous spacing, one accent colour. No animations, no gimmicks: nothing that competes with the state and the buttons.
 
 ### 4. Hand it over
 
-Send them the file, or open it for them. They'll click through the walkthroughs and free-play whenever they get to it; the interesting moments are when they say "wait, that shouldn't be possible" or "huh, I assumed X would be different" — those are the bugs in the _idea_, which is the whole point. If they want new actions or a new scenario, add them. Prototypes evolve.
+Send them the file, or open it for them. They'll click through the walkthroughs and free-play whenever they get to it; the interesting moments are when they say "wait, that shouldn't be possible" or "huh, I assumed X would be different"; those are the bugs in the _idea_, which is the whole point. If they want new actions or a new scenario, add them. Prototypes evolve.
 
 ### 5. Capture the answer and the prototype
 
-Once the prototype has answered its question, capture the answer, then capture the prototype the way the [SKILL](SKILL.md) describes. The logic-specific mapping: the validated reducer / machine / function set lifts into the real module (the decision, absorbed); the HTML shell rides along to the throwaway branch that keeps the prototype as a primary source — and being one self-contained file, it stays trivially re-runnable there.
+Once the prototype has answered its question, capture the answer, then capture the prototype the way the [SKILL](SKILL.md) describes. The logic-specific mapping: the validated reducer / machine / function set lifts into the real module (the decision, absorbed); the HTML shell rides along to the throwaway branch that keeps the prototype as a primary source, and being one self-contained file, it stays trivially re-runnable there.
 
 ## Anti-patterns
 

skills/engineering/prototype/SKILL.md

@@ -9,18 +9,18 @@ A prototype is **throwaway code that answers a question**. The question decides
 
 ## Pick a branch
 
-Identify which question is being answered — from the user's prompt, the surrounding code, or by asking if the user is around:
+Identify which question is being answered, using the user's prompt, the surrounding code, or by asking if the user is around:
 
-- **"Does this logic / state model feel right?"** → [LOGIC.md](LOGIC.md). Build a single shareable HTML file — free-play buttons plus tabbed guided walkthroughs — that pushes the state machine through cases that are hard to reason about on paper, and that a non-developer can drive.
+- **"Does this logic / state model feel right?"** → [LOGIC.md](LOGIC.md). Build a single shareable HTML file (free-play buttons plus tabbed guided walkthroughs) that pushes the state machine through cases that are hard to reason about on paper, and that a non-developer can drive.
 - **"What should this look like?"** → [UI.md](UI.md). Generate several radically different UI variations on a single route, switchable via a URL search param and a floating bottom bar.
 
-The two branches produce very different artifacts — getting this wrong wastes the whole prototype. If the question is genuinely ambiguous and the user isn't reachable, default to whichever branch better matches the surrounding code (a backend module → logic; a page or component → UI) and state the assumption at the top of the prototype.
+The two branches produce very different artifacts, so getting this wrong wastes the whole prototype. If the question is genuinely ambiguous and the user isn't reachable, default to whichever branch better matches the surrounding code (a backend module → logic; a page or component → UI) and state the assumption at the top of the prototype.
 
 ## Rules that apply to both
 
-1. **Throwaway from day one, and clearly marked as such.** Locate the prototype code close to where it will actually be used (next to the module or page it's prototyping for) so context is obvious — but name it so a casual reader can see it's a prototype, not production. For throwaway UI routes, obey whatever routing convention the project already uses; don't invent a new top-level structure.
-2. **Trivial to run.** A UI prototype starts from one command in the project's task runner — `pnpm <name>`, `python <path>`, `bun <path>`, etc. A logic demo is a single HTML file the user double-clicks. Either way, no thinking required to start it.
-3. **No persistence by default.** State lives in memory. Persistence is the thing the prototype is _checking_, not something it should depend on. If the question explicitly involves a database, hit a scratch DB or a local file with a clear "PROTOTYPE — wipe me" name.
+1. **Throwaway from day one, and clearly marked as such.** Locate the prototype code close to where it will actually be used (next to the module or page it's prototyping for) so context is obvious, but name it so a casual reader can see it's a prototype, not production. For throwaway UI routes, obey whatever routing convention the project already uses; don't invent a new top-level structure.
+2. **Trivial to run.** A UI prototype starts from one command in the project's task runner: `pnpm <name>`, `python <path>`, `bun <path>`, etc. A logic demo is a single HTML file the user double-clicks. Either way, no thinking required to start it.
+3. **No persistence by default.** State lives in memory. Persistence is the thing the prototype is _checking_, not something it should depend on. If the question explicitly involves a database, hit a scratch DB or a local file with a clear "PROTOTYPE, wipe me" name.
 4. **Skip the polish.** No tests, no error handling beyond what makes the prototype _runnable_, no abstractions. The point is to learn something fast.
 5. **Surface the state.** After every action (logic) or on every variant switch (UI), print or render the full relevant state so the user can see what changed.
-6. **Capture it when done.** Fold any validated decision into the real code, then capture the prototype itself as a **primary source**: commit it to a throwaway branch, out of main, and leave a context pointer to that branch on the implementation issue. Capture the answer too — the verdict and the question it settled — in the issue or a commit. The main branch keeps only the validated decision.
+6. **Capture it when done.** Fold any validated decision into the real code, then capture the prototype itself as a **primary source**: commit it to a throwaway branch, out of main, and leave a context pointer to that branch on the implementation issue. Capture the answer too (the verdict and the question it settled) in the issue or a commit. The main branch keeps only the validated decision.

skills/engineering/prototype/UI.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 Generate **several radically different UI variations** on a single route, switchable from a floating bottom bar. The user flips between variants in the browser, picks one (or steals bits from each), then throws the rest away.
 
-If the question is about logic/state rather than what something looks like — wrong branch. Use [LOGIC.md](LOGIC.md).
+If the question is about logic/state rather than what something looks like, this is the wrong branch. Use [LOGIC.md](LOGIC.md).
 
 ## When this is the right shape
 
@@ -11,21 +11,21 @@ If the question is about logic/state rather than what something looks like — w
 - "Try a different layout for the settings screen."
 - Any time the user would otherwise spend a day picking between three vague mockups in their head.
 
-## Two sub-shapes — strongly prefer sub-shape A
+## Two sub-shapes: strongly prefer sub-shape A
 
-A UI prototype is much easier to judge when it's **butting up against the rest of the app** — real header, real sidebar, real data, real density. A throwaway route on its own is a vacuum: every variant looks fine in isolation. Default to sub-shape A whenever there's a plausible existing page to host the variants. Only reach for sub-shape B if the prototype genuinely has no nearby home.
+A UI prototype is much easier to judge when it's **butting up against the rest of the app**: real header, real sidebar, real data, real density. A throwaway route on its own is a vacuum: every variant looks fine in isolation. Default to sub-shape A whenever there's a plausible existing page to host the variants. Only reach for sub-shape B if the prototype genuinely has no nearby home.
 
-### Sub-shape A — adjustment to an existing page (preferred)
+### Sub-shape A: adjustment to an existing page (preferred)
 
-The route already exists. Variants are rendered **on the same route**, gated by a `?variant=` URL search param. The existing data fetching, params, and auth all stay — only the rendering swaps. This is the default; pick it unless there's a specific reason not to.
+The route already exists. Variants are rendered **on the same route**, gated by a `?variant=` URL search param. The existing data fetching, params, and auth all stay. Only the rendering swaps. This is the default; pick it unless there's a specific reason not to.
 
-If the prototype is for something that doesn't yet have a page but *would naturally live inside one* (a new section of the dashboard, a new card on the settings screen, a new step in an existing flow) — that's still sub-shape A. Mount the variants inside the host page.
+If the prototype is for something that doesn't yet have a page but *would naturally live inside one* (a new section of the dashboard, a new card on the settings screen, a new step in an existing flow), it's still sub-shape A. Mount the variants inside the host page.
 
-### Sub-shape B — a new page (last resort)
+### Sub-shape B: a new page (last resort)
 
-Only use this when the thing being prototyped genuinely has no existing page to live inside — e.g. an entirely new top-level surface, or a flow that can't be embedded anywhere sensible.
+Only use this when the thing being prototyped genuinely has no existing page to live inside (e.g. an entirely new top-level surface, or a flow that can't be embedded anywhere sensible).
 
-Create a **throwaway route** following whatever routing convention the project already uses — don't invent a new top-level structure. Name it so it's obviously a prototype (e.g. include the word `prototype` in the path or filename). Same `?variant=` pattern.
+Create a **throwaway route** following whatever routing convention the project already uses. Don't invent a new top-level structure. Name it so it's obviously a prototype (e.g. include the word `prototype` in the path or filename). Same `?variant=` pattern.
 
 Before committing to sub-shape B, sanity-check: is there really no existing page this could be embedded in? An empty route hides design problems that a populated one would expose.
 
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ In both sub-shapes the floating bottom bar is identical.
 
 ### 1. State the question and pick N
 
-Default to **3 variants**. More than 5 stops being radically different and starts being noise — cap there.
+Default to **3 variants**. More than 5 stops being radically different and starts being noise, so cap there.
 
 Write down the plan in one line, in the prototype's location or a top-of-file comment:
 
@@ -51,14 +51,14 @@ Draft each variant. Hold each one to:
 - The project's component library / styling system (TailwindCSS, shadcn, MUI, plain CSS, whatever).
 - A clear exported component name, e.g. `VariantA`, `VariantB`, `VariantC`.
 
-Variants must be **structurally different** — different layout, different information hierarchy, different primary affordance, not just different colours. Three slightly-tweaked card grids isn't a UI prototype, it's wallpaper. If two drafts come out too similar, redo one with explicit "do not use a card grid" guidance.
+Variants must be **structurally different**: different layout, different information hierarchy, different primary affordance, not just different colours. Three slightly-tweaked card grids isn't a UI prototype, it's wallpaper. If two drafts come out too similar, redo one with explicit "do not use a card grid" guidance.
 
 ### 3. Wire them together
 
 Create a single switcher component on the route:
 
 ```tsx
-// pseudo-code — adapt to the project's framework
+// pseudo-code, adapt to the project's framework
 const variant = searchParams.get('variant') ?? 'A';
 return (
   <>
@@ -78,35 +78,35 @@ For sub-shape B (new page): the throwaway route under `/prototype/<name>` mounts
 
 A small fixed-position bar at the bottom-centre of the screen with three pieces:
 
-- **Left arrow** — cycles to the previous variant (wraps around).
-- **Variant label** — shows the current variant key and, if the variant exports a name, that name too. e.g. `B — Sidebar layout`.
-- **Right arrow** — cycles forward (wraps around).
+- **Left arrow**: cycles to the previous variant (wraps around).
+- **Variant label**: shows the current variant key and, if the variant exports a name, that name too. e.g. `B (Sidebar layout)`.
+- **Right arrow**: cycles forward (wraps around).
 
 Behaviour:
 
-- Clicking an arrow updates the URL search param (use the framework's router — `router.replace` on Next, `navigate` on React Router, etc) so the variant is shareable and reload-stable.
+- Clicking an arrow updates the URL search param (use the framework's router, e.g. `router.replace` on Next, `navigate` on React Router, etc) so the variant is shareable and reload-stable.
 - Keyboard: `←` and `→` arrow keys also cycle. Don't intercept arrow keys when an `<input>`, `<textarea>`, or `[contenteditable]` is focused.
 - Visually distinct from the page (e.g. high-contrast pill, subtle shadow) so it's obviously not part of the design being evaluated.
-- Hidden in production builds — gate on `process.env.NODE_ENV !== 'production'` or an equivalent check, so a stray prototype merge can't ship the bar to users.
+- Hidden in production builds: gate on `process.env.NODE_ENV !== 'production'` or an equivalent check, so a stray prototype merge can't ship the bar to users.
 
 Put the switcher in a single shared component so both sub-shapes can reuse it. Locate it wherever shared UI lives in the project.
 
 ### 5. Hand it over
 
-Surface the URL (and the `?variant=` keys). The user will flip through whenever they get to it. The interesting feedback is usually **"I want the header from B with the sidebar from C"** — that's the actual design they want.
+Surface the URL (and the `?variant=` keys). The user will flip through whenever they get to it. The interesting feedback is usually **"I want the header from B with the sidebar from C"**, which is the actual design they want.
 
 ### 6. Capture the answer and clean up
 
-Once a variant has won, capture the answer — which variant and why — then capture the prototype the way the [SKILL](SKILL.md) describes. Fold the winner into the real code and move the rest onto the throwaway branch, not into main:
+Once a variant has won, capture the answer (which variant and why), then capture the prototype the way the [SKILL](SKILL.md) describes. Fold the winner into the real code and move the rest onto the throwaway branch, not into main:
 
-- **Sub-shape A** — fold the winner into the existing page; drop the losing variants and the switcher from main.
-- **Sub-shape B** — promote the winning variant to a real route; drop the throwaway route and the switcher from main.
+- **Sub-shape A**: fold the winner into the existing page; drop the losing variants and the switcher from main.
+- **Sub-shape B**: promote the winning variant to a real route; drop the throwaway route and the switcher from main.
 
-The full set of variants is the primary source, so it lands on the throwaway branch, not the bin — variant components and the switcher left in the main branch rot fast and confuse the next reader.
+The full set of variants is the primary source, so it lands on the throwaway branch, not the bin, since variant components and the switcher left in the main branch rot fast and confuse the next reader.
 
 ## Anti-patterns
 
 - **Variants that differ only in colour or copy.** That's a tweak, not a prototype. Real variants disagree about structure.
 - **Sharing too much code between variants.** A shared `<Header>` is fine; a shared `<Layout>` defeats the point. Each variant should be free to throw out the layout.
-- **Wiring variants to real mutations.** Read-only prototypes are fine. If a variant needs to mutate, point it at a stub — the question is "what should this look like", not "does the backend work".
+- **Wiring variants to real mutations.** Read-only prototypes are fine. If a variant needs to mutate, point it at a stub: the question is "what should this look like", not "does the backend work".
 - **Promoting the prototype directly to production.** The variant code was written under prototype constraints (no tests, minimal error handling). Rewrite it properly when you fold it in.

skills/engineering/research/SKILL.md

@@ -7,6 +7,6 @@ Spin up a **background agent** to do the research, so you keep working while it
 
 Its job:
 
-1. Investigate the question against **primary sources** — official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs — not a secondary write-up of them. Follow every claim back to the source that owns it.
+1. Investigate the question against **primary sources** (official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs), not a secondary write-up of them. Follow every claim back to the source that owns it.
 2. Write the findings to a single Markdown file, citing each claim's source.
 3. Save it where the repo already keeps such notes; match the existing convention, and if there is none, put it somewhere sensible and say where.

skills/engineering/resolving-merge-conflicts/SKILL.md

@@ -9,6 +9,6 @@ description: "Use when you need to resolve an in-progress git merge/rebase confl
 
 3. **Resolve each hunk.** Preserve both intents where possible. Where incompatible, pick the one matching the merge's stated goal and note the trade-off. Do **not** invent new behaviour. Always resolve; never `--abort`.
 
-4. Discover the project's **automated checks** and run them — typically typecheck, then tests, then format. Fix anything the merge broke.
+4. Discover the project's **automated checks** and run them, typically typecheck, then tests, then format. Fix anything the merge broke.
 
 5. **Finish the merge/rebase.** Stage everything and commit. If rebasing, continue the rebase process until all commits are rebased.

skills/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: setup-matt-pocock-skills
-description: Configure this repo for the engineering skills — set up its issue tracker, triage label vocabulary, and domain doc layout. Run once before first use of the other engineering skills.
+description: "Configure this repo for the engineering skills: set up its issue tracker, triage label vocabulary, and domain doc layout. Run once before first use of the other engineering skills."
 disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
@@ -8,9 +8,9 @@ disable-model-invocation: true
 
 Scaffold the per-repo configuration that the engineering skills assume:
 
-- **Issue tracker** — where issues live (GitHub by default; local markdown is also supported out of the box)
-- **Triage labels** — the strings used for the five canonical triage roles
-- **Domain docs** — where `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs live, and the consumer rules for reading them
+- **Issue tracker**: where issues live (GitHub by default; local markdown is also supported out of the box)
+- **Triage labels**: the strings used for the five canonical triage roles
+- **Domain docs**: where `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs live, and the consumer rules for reading them
 
 This is a prompt-driven skill, not a deterministic script. Explore, present what you found, confirm with the user, then write.
 
@@ -20,45 +20,45 @@ This is a prompt-driven skill, not a deterministic script. Explore, present what
 
 Look at the current repo to understand its starting state. Read whatever exists; don't assume:
 
-- `git remote -v` and `.git/config` — is this a GitHub repo? Which one?
-- `AGENTS.md` and `CLAUDE.md` at the repo root — does either exist? Is there already an `## Agent skills` section in either?
+- `git remote -v` and `.git/config`: is this a GitHub repo? Which one?
+- `AGENTS.md` and `CLAUDE.md` at the repo root: does either exist? Is there already an `## Agent skills` section in either?
 - `CONTEXT.md` and `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the repo root
 - `docs/adr/` and any `src/*/docs/adr/` directories
-- `docs/agents/` — does this skill's prior output already exist?
-- `.scratch/` — sign that a local-markdown issue tracker convention is already in use
+- `docs/agents/`: does this skill's prior output already exist?
+- `.scratch/`: a sign that a local-markdown issue tracker convention is already in use
 - Is the `triage` skill installed? (a `triage` skill folder alongside this one, or `triage` in your available skills.) This decides whether Section B runs at all.
-- Monorepo signals — a `pnpm-workspace.yaml`, a `workspaces` field in `package.json`, or a populated `packages/*` with its own `src/`. Present only in a genuinely large multi-package repo; their absence means single-context, which is almost every repo.
+- Monorepo signals: a `pnpm-workspace.yaml`, a `workspaces` field in `package.json`, or a populated `packages/*` with its own `src/`. These are present only in a genuinely large multi-package repo; their absence means single-context, which is almost every repo.
 
 ### 2. Present findings and ask
 
-Summarise what's present and what's missing. Then take the sections in order — one section, one answer, then the next.
+Summarise what's present and what's missing. Then take the sections in order. One section, one answer, then the next.
 
 Lead each section with the recommended answer so the user can accept it in a word. Give a one-line explainer only when the choice genuinely branches; skip the section entirely when exploration already settled it (Section B when `triage` isn't installed, Section C when there's no monorepo).
 
-**Section A — Issue tracker.**
+**Section A: Issue tracker.**
 
-> Explainer: The "issue tracker" is where issues live for this repo. Skills like `to-tickets`, `triage`, and `to-spec` read from and write to it — they need to know whether to call `gh issue create`, write a markdown file under `.scratch/`, or follow some other workflow you describe. Pick the place you actually track work for this repo.
+> Explainer: The "issue tracker" is where issues live for this repo. Skills like `to-tickets`, `triage`, and `to-spec` read from and write to it. They need to know whether to call `gh issue create`, write a markdown file under `.scratch/`, or follow some other workflow you describe. Pick the place you actually track work for this repo.
 
 Default posture: these skills were designed for GitHub. If a `git remote` points at GitHub, propose that. If a `git remote` points at GitLab (`gitlab.com` or a self-hosted host), propose GitLab. Otherwise (or if the user prefers), offer:
 
-- **GitHub** — issues live in the repo's GitHub Issues (uses the `gh` CLI)
-- **GitLab** — issues live in the repo's GitLab Issues (uses the [`glab`](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/cli) CLI)
-- **Local markdown** — issues live as files under `.scratch/<feature>/` in this repo (good for solo projects or repos without a remote)
-- **Other** (Jira, Linear, etc.) — ask the user to describe the workflow in one paragraph; the skill will record it as freeform prose
+- **GitHub**: issues live in the repo's GitHub Issues (uses the `gh` CLI)
+- **GitLab**: issues live in the repo's GitLab Issues (uses the [`glab`](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/cli) CLI)
+- **Local markdown**: issues live as files under `.scratch/<feature>/` in this repo (good for solo projects or repos without a remote)
+- **Other** (Jira, Linear, etc.): ask the user to describe the workflow in one paragraph; the skill will record it as freeform prose
 
-Record the choice in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`. The GitHub and GitLab templates carry a "PRs as a request surface" flag, defaulted **off** — leave it off and don't raise it; a user who wants external PRs in the triage queue can flip the flag in the file later.
+Record the choice in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`. The GitHub and GitLab templates carry a "PRs as a request surface" flag, defaulted **off**. Leave it off and don't raise it: a user who wants external PRs in the triage queue can flip the flag in the file later.
 
-**Section B — Triage label vocabulary.** Skip this section entirely if the `triage` skill isn't installed (exploration told you) — an uninstalled skill needs no labels.
+**Section B: Triage label vocabulary.** Skip this section entirely if the `triage` skill isn't installed (exploration told you), since an uninstalled skill needs no labels.
 
 If it is installed, ask exactly one question:
 
 > Do you want to keep the default triage labels? (recommended: **yes**)
 
-The defaults are the five canonical roles, each label string equal to its name: `needs-triage`, `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, `wontfix`. On **yes**, write them as-is. Only if the user says no — usually because their tracker already uses other names (e.g. `bug:triage` for `needs-triage`) — collect the overrides so `triage` applies existing labels instead of creating duplicates.
+The defaults are the five canonical roles, each label string equal to its name: `needs-triage`, `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, `wontfix`. On **yes**, write them as-is. Only if the user says no, usually because their tracker already uses other names (e.g. `bug:triage` for `needs-triage`), collect the overrides so `triage` applies existing labels instead of creating duplicates.
 
-**Section C — Domain docs.** Default to **single-context** — one `CONTEXT.md` + `docs/adr/` at the repo root. This fits almost every repo; write it without asking.
+**Section C: Domain docs.** Default to **single-context** (one `CONTEXT.md` + `docs/adr/` at the repo root). This fits almost every repo; write it without asking.
 
-Offer **multi-context** — a root `CONTEXT-MAP.md` pointing to per-context `CONTEXT.md` files — only when exploration found monorepo signals. Then confirm which layout they want.
+Offer **multi-context** (a root `CONTEXT-MAP.md` pointing to per-context `CONTEXT.md` files) only when exploration found monorepo signals. Then confirm which layout they want.
 
 ### 3. Confirm and edit
 
@@ -75,9 +75,9 @@ Let them edit before writing.
 
 - If `CLAUDE.md` exists, edit it.
 - Else if `AGENTS.md` exists, edit it.
-- If neither exists, ask the user which one to create — don't pick for them.
+- If neither exists, ask the user which one to create; don't pick for them.
 
-Never create `AGENTS.md` when `CLAUDE.md` already exists (or vice versa) — always edit the one that's already there.
+Never create `AGENTS.md` when `CLAUDE.md` already exists (or vice versa); always edit the one that's already there.
 
 If an `## Agent skills` block already exists in the chosen file, update its contents in-place rather than appending a duplicate. Don't overwrite user edits to the surrounding sections.
 
@@ -96,21 +96,21 @@ The block:
 
 ### Domain docs
 
-[one-line summary of layout — "single-context" or "multi-context"]. See `docs/agents/domain.md`.
+[one-line summary of layout: "single-context" or "multi-context"]. See `docs/agents/domain.md`.
 ```
 
 Include the `### Triage labels` sub-block, and write `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`, only when `triage` is installed and Section B ran. When it isn't, both are omitted.
 
 Then write the docs files using the seed templates in this skill folder as a starting point:
 
-- [issue-tracker-github.md](./issue-tracker-github.md) — GitHub issue tracker
-- [issue-tracker-gitlab.md](./issue-tracker-gitlab.md) — GitLab issue tracker
-- [issue-tracker-local.md](./issue-tracker-local.md) — local-markdown issue tracker
-- [triage-labels.md](./triage-labels.md) — label mapping (only if `triage` is installed)
-- [domain.md](./domain.md) — domain doc consumer rules + layout
+- [issue-tracker-github.md](./issue-tracker-github.md): GitHub issue tracker
+- [issue-tracker-gitlab.md](./issue-tracker-gitlab.md): GitLab issue tracker
+- [issue-tracker-local.md](./issue-tracker-local.md): local-markdown issue tracker
+- [triage-labels.md](./triage-labels.md): label mapping (only if `triage` is installed)
+- [domain.md](./domain.md): domain doc consumer rules + layout
 
 For "other" issue trackers, write `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` from scratch using the user's description.
 
 ### 5. Done
 
-Tell the user the setup is complete and which engineering skills will now read from these files. Mention they can edit `docs/agents/*.md` directly later — re-running this skill is only necessary if they want to switch issue trackers or restart from scratch.
+Tell the user the setup is complete and which engineering skills will now read from these files. Mention they can edit `docs/agents/*.md` directly later; re-running this skill is only necessary if they want to switch issue trackers or restart from scratch.

skills/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills/domain.md

@@ -5,8 +5,8 @@ How the engineering skills should consume this repo's domain documentation when
 ## Before exploring, read these
 
 - **`CONTEXT.md`** at the repo root, or
-- **`CONTEXT-MAP.md`** at the repo root if it exists — it points at one `CONTEXT.md` per context. Read each one relevant to the topic.
-- **`docs/adr/`** — read ADRs that touch the area you're about to work in. In multi-context repos, also check `src/<context>/docs/adr/` for context-scoped decisions.
+- **`CONTEXT-MAP.md`** at the repo root if it exists: it points at one `CONTEXT.md` per context. Read each one relevant to the topic.
+- **`docs/adr/`**: read ADRs that touch the area you're about to work in. In multi-context repos, also check `src/<context>/docs/adr/` for context-scoped decisions.
 
 If any of these files don't exist, **proceed silently**. Don't flag their absence; don't suggest creating them upfront. The `/domain-modeling` skill (reached via `/grill-with-docs` and `/improve-codebase-architecture`) creates them lazily when terms or decisions actually get resolved.
 
@@ -42,10 +42,10 @@ Multi-context repo (presence of `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the root):
 
 When your output names a domain concept (in an issue title, a refactor proposal, a hypothesis, a test name), use the term as defined in `CONTEXT.md`. Don't drift to synonyms the glossary explicitly avoids.
 
-If the concept you need isn't in the glossary yet, that's a signal — either you're inventing language the project doesn't use (reconsider) or there's a real gap (note it for `/domain-modeling`).
+If the concept you need isn't in the glossary yet, that's a signal: either you're inventing language the project doesn't use (reconsider) or there's a real gap (note it for `/domain-modeling`).
 
 ## Flag ADR conflicts
 
 If your output contradicts an existing ADR, surface it explicitly rather than silently overriding:
 
-> _Contradicts ADR-0007 (event-sourced orders) — but worth reopening because…_
+> _Contradicts ADR-0007 (event-sourced orders), but worth reopening because…_

skills/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills/issue-tracker-github.md

@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ Issues and specs for this repo live as GitHub issues. Use the `gh` CLI for all o
 - **Apply / remove labels**: `gh issue edit <number> --add-label "..."` / `--remove-label "..."`
 - **Close**: `gh issue close <number> --comment "..."`
 
-Infer the repo from `git remote -v` — `gh` does this automatically when run inside a clone.
+Infer the repo from `git remote -v`; `gh` does this automatically when run inside a clone.
 
 ## Pull requests as a triage surface
 
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ When set to `yes`, PRs run through the same labels and states as issues, using t
 - **List external PRs for triage**: `gh pr list --state open --json number,title,body,labels,author,authorAssociation,comments` then keep only `authorAssociation` of `CONTRIBUTOR`, `FIRST_TIME_CONTRIBUTOR`, or `NONE` (drop `OWNER`/`MEMBER`/`COLLABORATOR`).
 - **Comment / label / close**: `gh pr comment`, `gh pr edit --add-label`/`--remove-label`, `gh pr close`.
 
-GitHub shares one number space across issues and PRs, so a bare `#42` may be either — resolve with `gh pr view 42` and fall back to `gh issue view 42`.
+GitHub shares one number space across issues and PRs, so a bare `#42` may be either: resolve with `gh pr view 42` and fall back to `gh issue view 42`.
 
 ## When a skill says "publish to the issue tracker"
 
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ Used by `/wayfinder`. The **map** is a single issue with **child** issues as tic
 
 - **Map**: a single issue labelled `wayfinder:map`, holding the Notes / Decisions-so-far / Fog body. `gh issue create --label wayfinder:map`.
 - **Child ticket**: an issue linked to the map as a GitHub sub-issue (`gh api` on the sub-issues endpoint). Where sub-issues aren't enabled, add the child to a task list in the map body and put `Part of #<map>` at the top of the child body. Labels: `wayfinder:<type>` (`research`/`prototype`/`grilling`/`task`). Once claimed, the ticket is assigned to the driving dev.
-- **Blocking**: GitHub's **native issue dependencies** — the canonical, UI-visible representation. Add an edge with `gh api --method POST repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<child>/dependencies/blocked_by -F issue_id=<blocker-db-id>`, where `<blocker-db-id>` is the blocker's numeric **database id** (`gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<n> --jq .id`, _not_ the `#number` or `node_id`). GitHub reports `issue_dependencies_summary.blocked_by` (open blockers only — the live gate). Where dependencies aren't available, fall back to a `Blocked by: #<n>, #<n>` line at the top of the child body. A ticket is unblocked when every blocker is closed.
+- **Blocking**: GitHub's **native issue dependencies**, the canonical, UI-visible representation. Add an edge with `gh api --method POST repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<child>/dependencies/blocked_by -F issue_id=<blocker-db-id>`, where `<blocker-db-id>` is the blocker's numeric **database id** (`gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<n> --jq .id`, _not_ the `#number` or `node_id`). GitHub reports `issue_dependencies_summary.blocked_by` (open blockers only, the live gate). Where dependencies aren't available, fall back to a `Blocked by: #<n>, #<n>` line at the top of the child body. A ticket is unblocked when every blocker is closed.
 - **Frontier query**: list the map's open children (`gh issue list --state open`, scoped to the map's sub-issues / task list), drop any with an open blocker (`issue_dependencies_summary.blocked_by > 0`, or an open issue in the `Blocked by` line) or an assignee; first in map order wins.
-- **Claim**: `gh issue edit <n> --add-assignee @me` — the session's first write.
+- **Claim**: `gh issue edit <n> --add-assignee @me`, the session's first write.
 - **Resolve**: `gh issue comment <n> --body "<answer>"`, then `gh issue close <n>`, then append a context pointer (gist + link) to the map's Decisions-so-far.

skills/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills/issue-tracker-gitlab.md

@@ -10,9 +10,9 @@ Issues and specs for this repo live as GitLab issues. Use the [`glab`](https://g
 - **Comment on an issue**: `glab issue note <number> --message "..."`. GitLab calls comments "notes".
 - **Apply / remove labels**: `glab issue update <number> --label "..."` / `--unlabel "..."`. Multiple labels can be comma-separated or by repeating the flag.
 - **Close**: `glab issue close <number>`. `glab issue close` does not accept a closing comment, so post the explanation first with `glab issue note <number> --message "..."`, then close.
-- **Merge requests**: GitLab calls PRs "merge requests". Use `glab mr create`, `glab mr view`, `glab mr note`, etc. — the same shape as `gh pr ...` with `mr` in place of `pr` and `note`/`--message` in place of `comment`/`--body`.
+- **Merge requests**: GitLab calls PRs "merge requests". Use `glab mr create`, `glab mr view`, `glab mr note`, etc., the same shape as `gh pr ...` with `mr` in place of `pr` and `note`/`--message` in place of `comment`/`--body`.
 
-Infer the repo from `git remote -v` — `glab` does this automatically when run inside a clone.
+Infer the repo from `git remote -v`; `glab` does this automatically when run inside a clone.
 
 ## Merge requests as a triage surface
 
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ Used by `/wayfinder`. The **map** is a single issue with **child** issues as tic
 
 - **Map**: a single issue labelled `wayfinder:map`, holding the Notes / Decisions-so-far / Fog body. `glab issue create --label wayfinder:map`. (On GitLab tiers with native epics, an epic may hold the map instead; a labelled issue works everywhere.)
 - **Child ticket**: an issue carrying `Part of #<map>` at the top of its description and labels `wayfinder:<type>` (`research`/`prototype`/`grilling`/`task`). Once claimed, the ticket is assigned to the driving dev.
-- **Blocking**: GitLab's **native blocking link** — the canonical, UI-visible representation. Add it with the `/blocked_by #<n>` quick action, posted as a note (`glab issue note <child> --message "/blocked_by #<blocker>"`). Native blocking links are a Premium/Ultimate feature; on the free tier (or where unavailable) fall back to a `Blocked by: #<n>, #<n>` line at the top of the description. A ticket is unblocked when every blocker is closed.
-- **Frontier query**: `glab issue list -F json` scoped to the map's children, drop any with an open blocker — a native `blocked_by` link to an open issue (`glab api projects/:id/issues/:iid/links`), or an open issue in the `Blocked by` line — or an assignee; first in map order wins.
-- **Claim**: `glab issue update <n> --assignee @me` — the session's first write.
+- **Blocking**: GitLab's **native blocking link**, the canonical, UI-visible representation. Add it with the `/blocked_by #<n>` quick action, posted as a note (`glab issue note <child> --message "/blocked_by #<blocker>"`). Native blocking links are a Premium/Ultimate feature; on the free tier (or where unavailable) fall back to a `Blocked by: #<n>, #<n>` line at the top of the description. A ticket is unblocked when every blocker is closed.
+- **Frontier query**: `glab issue list -F json` scoped to the map's children, drop any with an open blocker: a native `blocked_by` link to an open issue (`glab api projects/:id/issues/:iid/links`), or an open issue in the `Blocked by` line, or an assignee; first in map order wins.
+- **Claim**: `glab issue update <n> --assignee @me`, the session's first write.
 - **Resolve**: `glab issue note <n> --message "<answer>"`, then `glab issue close <n>`, then append a context pointer (gist + link) to the map's Decisions-so-far.

skills/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills/issue-tracker-local.md

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Issues and specs for this repo live as markdown files in `.scratch/`.
 
 - One feature per directory: `.scratch/<feature-slug>/`
 - The spec is `.scratch/<feature-slug>/spec.md`
-- Implementation issues are one file per ticket at `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01` — never a single combined tickets file
+- Implementation issues are one file per ticket at `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01`, never a single combined tickets file
 - Triage state is recorded as a `Status:` line near the top of each issue file (see `triage-labels.md` for the role strings)
 - Comments and conversation history append to the bottom of the file under a `## Comments` heading
 
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ Read the file at the referenced path. The user will normally pass the path or th
 
 Used by `/wayfinder`. The **map** is a file with one **child** file per ticket.
 
-- **Map**: `.scratch/<effort>/map.md` — the Notes / Decisions-so-far / Fog body.
+- **Map**: `.scratch/<effort>/map.md` (the Notes / Decisions-so-far / Fog body).
 - **Child ticket**: `.scratch/<effort>/issues/NN-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01`, with the question in the body. A `Type:` line records the ticket type (`research`/`prototype`/`grilling`/`task`); a `Status:` line records `claimed`/`resolved`.
 - **Blocking**: a `Blocked by: NN, NN` line near the top. A ticket is unblocked when every file it lists is `resolved`.
 - **Frontier**: scan `.scratch/<effort>/issues/` for files that are open, unblocked, and unclaimed; first by number wins.

skills/engineering/tdd/SKILL.md

@@ -5,31 +5,31 @@ description: Test-driven development. Use when the user wants to build features
 
 # Test-Driven Development
 
-TDD is the red → green loop. This skill is the reference that makes that loop produce tests worth keeping: what a good test is, where tests go, the anti-patterns, and the rules of the loop. Every section applies on every cycle — consult them before and during the loop, not after.
+TDD is the red → green loop. This skill is the reference that makes that loop produce tests worth keeping: what a good test is, where tests go, the anti-patterns, and the rules of the loop. Every section applies on every cycle: consult them before and during the loop, not after.
 
 When exploring the codebase, read `CONTEXT.md` (if it exists) so test names and interface vocabulary match the project's domain language, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.
 
 ## What a good test is
 
-Tests verify behavior through public interfaces, not implementation details. Code can change entirely; tests shouldn't. A good test reads like a specification — "user can checkout with valid cart" tells you exactly what capability exists — and survives refactors because it doesn't care about internal structure.
+Tests verify behavior through public interfaces, not implementation details. Code can change entirely; tests shouldn't. A good test reads like a specification: "user can checkout with valid cart" tells you exactly what capability exists, and it survives refactors because it doesn't care about internal structure.
 
 See [tests.md](tests.md) for examples and [mocking.md](mocking.md) for mocking guidelines.
 
-## Seams — where tests go
+## Seams: where tests go
 
 A **seam** is the public boundary you test at: the interface where you observe behavior without reaching inside. Tests live at seams, never against internals.
 
-**Test only at pre-agreed seams.** Before writing any test, write down the seams under test and confirm them with the user. No test is written at an unconfirmed seam. You can't test everything — agreeing the seams up front is how testing effort lands on the critical paths and complex logic instead of every edge case.
+**Test only at pre-agreed seams.** Before writing any test, write down the seams under test and confirm them with the user. No test is written at an unconfirmed seam. You can't test everything, so agreeing the seams up front is how testing effort lands on the critical paths and complex logic instead of every edge case.
 
 Ask: "What's the public interface, and which seams should we test?"
 
-When the shape of that interface is itself in question — how deep the module is, where the seam belongs, what the interface should expose — use the `/codebase-design` skill for the vocabulary. It is the shared source of the module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage and locality terms, and it is a reference to consult, not a session to run.
+When the shape of that interface is itself in question (how deep the module is, where the seam belongs, what the interface should expose), call the Skill tool with "codebase-design" for the vocabulary. It is the shared source of the module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage and locality terms, and it is a reference to consult, not a session to run.
 
 ## Anti-patterns
 
-- **Implementation-coupled** — mocks internal collaborators, tests private methods, or verifies through a side channel (querying the database instead of using the interface). The tell: the test breaks when you refactor but behavior hasn't changed.
-- **Tautological** — the assertion recomputes the expected value the way the code does (`expect(add(a, b)).toBe(a + b)`, a snapshot derived by hand the same way, a constant asserted equal to itself), so it passes by construction and can never disagree with the code. Expected values must come from an independent source of truth — a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec.
-- **Horizontal slicing** — writing all tests first, then all implementation. Bulk tests verify _imagined_ behavior: you test the _shape_ of things rather than user-facing behavior, the tests go insensitive to real changes, and you commit to test structure before understanding the implementation. Work in **vertical slices** instead — one test → one implementation → repeat, each test a **tracer bullet** that responds to what the last cycle taught you.
+- **Implementation-coupled**: mocks internal collaborators, tests private methods, or verifies through a side channel (querying the database instead of using the interface). The tell: the test breaks when you refactor but behavior hasn't changed.
+- **Tautological**: the assertion recomputes the expected value the way the code does (`expect(add(a, b)).toBe(a + b)`, a snapshot derived by hand the same way, a constant asserted equal to itself), so it passes by construction and can never disagree with the code. Expected values must come from an independent source of truth: a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec.
+- **Horizontal slicing**: writing all tests first, then all implementation. Bulk tests verify _imagined_ behavior: you test the _shape_ of things rather than user-facing behavior, the tests go insensitive to real changes, and you commit to test structure before understanding the implementation. Work in **vertical slices** instead: one test → one implementation → repeat, each test a **tracer bullet** that responds to what the last cycle taught you.
 
 ## Rules of the loop
 

skills/engineering/to-spec/SKILL.md

@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
 ---
 name: to-spec
-description: Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the project issue tracker — no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed.
+description: "Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the project issue tracker: no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed."
 disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
-This skill takes the current conversation context and codebase understanding and produces a spec. Do NOT interview the user — just synthesize what you already know.
+This skill takes the current conversation context and codebase understanding and produces a spec. Do NOT interview the user; just synthesize what you already know.
 
-The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
+The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you. If not, tell the user to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`.
 
 ## Process
 
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ A list of implementation decisions that were made. This can include:
 
 Do NOT include specific file paths or code snippets. They may end up being outdated very quickly.
 
-Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it within the relevant decision and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts — not a working demo, just the important bits.
+Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it within the relevant decision and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts, not a working demo, just the important bits.
 
 ## Testing Decisions
 

skills/engineering/to-tickets/SKILL.md

@@ -1,14 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: to-tickets
-description: Break a plan, spec, or the current conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges, published to the configured tracker — edges as text in one file per ticket locally, or native blocking links on a real tracker.
+description: Break a plan, spec, or the current conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges, published to the configured tracker (edges as text in one file per ticket locally, or native blocking links on a real tracker).
 disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
 # To Tickets
 
-Break a plan, spec, or conversation into a set of **tickets** — tracer-bullet vertical slices, each declaring the tickets that **block** it.
+Break a plan, spec, or conversation into a set of **tickets**: tracer-bullet vertical slices, each declaring the tickets that **block** it.
 
-The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
+The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you. If not, tell the user to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`.
 
 ## Process
 
@@ -28,16 +28,16 @@ Break the work into **tracer bullet** tickets.
 
 <vertical-slice-rules>
 
-- Each slice cuts a narrow but COMPLETE path through every layer (schema, API, UI, tests) — vertical, NOT a horizontal slice of one layer
+- Each slice cuts a narrow but COMPLETE path through every layer (schema, API, UI, tests): vertical, NOT a horizontal slice of one layer
 - A completed slice is demoable or verifiable on its own
 - Each slice is sized to fit in a single fresh context window
 - Any prefactoring should be done first
 
 </vertical-slice-rules>
 
-Give each ticket its **blocking edges** — the other tickets that must complete before it can start. A ticket with no blockers can start immediately.
+Give each ticket its **blocking edges**: the other tickets that must complete before it can start. A ticket with no blockers can start immediately.
 
-**Wide refactors are the exception to vertical slicing.** A **wide refactor** is one mechanical change — rename a column, retype a shared symbol — whose **blast radius** fans across the whole codebase, so a single edit breaks thousands of call sites at once and no vertical slice can land green. Don't force it into a tracer bullet; sequence it as **expand–contract**. First expand: add the new form beside the old so nothing breaks. Then migrate the call sites over in batches sized by blast radius (per package, per directory), each batch its own ticket blocked by the expand, keeping CI green batch to batch because the old form still exists. Finally contract: delete the old form once no caller remains, in a ticket blocked by every migrate batch. When even the batches can't stay green alone, keep the sequence but let them share an integration branch that all block a final integrate-and-verify ticket — green is promised only there.
+**Wide refactors are the exception to vertical slicing.** A **wide refactor** is one mechanical change (rename a column, retype a shared symbol) whose **blast radius** fans across the whole codebase, so a single edit breaks thousands of call sites at once and no vertical slice can land green. Don't force it into a tracer bullet; sequence it as **expand–contract**. First expand: add the new form beside the old so nothing breaks. Then migrate the call sites over in batches sized by blast radius (per package, per directory), each batch its own ticket blocked by the expand, keeping CI green batch to batch because the old form still exists. Finally contract: delete the old form once no caller remains, in a ticket blocked by every migrate batch. When even the batches can't stay green alone, keep the sequence but let them share an integration branch that all block a final integrate-and-verify ticket; green is promised only there.
 
 ### 4. Quiz the user
 
@@ -50,17 +50,17 @@ Present the proposed breakdown as a numbered list. For each ticket, show:
 Ask the user:
 
 - Does the granularity feel right? (too coarse / too fine)
-- Are the blocking edges correct — does each ticket only depend on tickets that genuinely gate it?
+- Are the blocking edges correct: does each ticket only depend on tickets that genuinely gate it?
 - Should any tickets be merged or split further?
 
 Iterate until the user approves the breakdown.
 
 ### 5. Publish the tickets to the configured tracker
 
-Publish the approved tickets. **How** depends on the tracker `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` configured — the tickets are the same either way, only the shape of the blocking edges changes:
+Publish the approved tickets. **How** depends on the tracker `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` configured; the tickets are the same either way, only the shape of the blocking edges changes:
 
-- **Local files** → write one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01` in dependency order (blockers first). Each file's "Blocked by" lists the numbers/titles it depends on. Use the per-ticket file template below — one ticket per file, never a single combined file.
-- **A real issue tracker (GitHub, Linear, …)** → publish one issue per ticket in dependency order (blockers first) so each ticket's blocking edges can reference real identifiers. Use the platform's native blocking / sub-issue relationship where it has one; otherwise set each ticket's "Blocked by" to the blocking issues. Apply the `ready-for-agent` triage label unless instructed otherwise — the tickets are agent-grabbable by construction.
+- **Local files** → write one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01` in dependency order (blockers first). Each file's "Blocked by" lists the numbers/titles it depends on. Use the per-ticket file template below: one ticket per file, never a single combined file.
+- **A real issue tracker (GitHub, Linear, …)** → publish one issue per ticket in dependency order (blockers first) so each ticket's blocking edges can reference real identifiers. Use the platform's native blocking / sub-issue relationship where it has one; otherwise set each ticket's "Blocked by" to the blocking issues. Apply the `ready-for-agent` triage label unless instructed otherwise; the tickets are agent-grabbable by construction.
 
 Work the **frontier**: any ticket whose blockers are all done. For a purely linear chain that means top to bottom.
 
@@ -68,11 +68,11 @@ Do NOT close or modify any parent issue.
 
 <local-ticket-template>
 
-# <NN> — <Ticket title>
+# <NN>: <Ticket title>
 
-**What to build:** the end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective — not a layer-by-layer implementation list.
+**What to build:** the end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective, not a layer-by-layer implementation list.
 
-**Blocked by:** the numbers/titles of the tickets that gate this one, or "None — can start immediately".
+**Blocked by:** the numbers/titles of the tickets that gate this one, or "None (can start immediately)".
 
 **Status:** ready-for-agent
 
@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ A reference to the parent issue on the tracker (if the source was an existing is
 
 ## What to build
 
-The end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective — not layer-by-layer implementation.
+The end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective, not layer-by-layer implementation.
 
 ## Acceptance criteria
 
@@ -98,8 +98,8 @@ The end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective —
 
 ## Blocked by
 
-- A reference to each blocking ticket, or "None — can start immediately".
+- A reference to each blocking ticket, or "None (can start immediately)".
 
 </issue-template>
 
-In either form, avoid specific file paths or code snippets — they go stale fast. Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts — not a working demo, just the important bits.
+In either form, avoid specific file paths or code snippets: they go stale fast. Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts, not a working demo, just the important bits.

skills/engineering/triage/AGENT-BRIEF.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # Writing Agent Briefs
 
-An agent brief is a structured comment posted on a GitHub issue or PR when it moves to `ready-for-agent`. It is the authoritative specification that an AFK agent will work from. The original body and discussion are context — the agent brief is the contract.
+An agent brief is a structured comment posted on a GitHub issue or PR when it moves to `ready-for-agent`. It is the authoritative specification that an AFK agent will work from. The original body and discussion are context: the agent brief is the contract.
 
-The brief states **what the agent should do**, which stretches to both surfaces: for an issue, that's building the change from nothing; for a PR, it's what's left to do *to the existing diff* — finish it, close gaps, address review points. Same principles either way; the PR example below shows the difference.
+The brief states **what the agent should do**, which stretches to both surfaces: for an issue, that's building the change from nothing; for a PR, it's what's left to do *to the existing diff*: finish it, close gaps, address review points. Same principles either way; the PR example below shows the difference.
 
 ## Principles
 
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ The issue may sit in `ready-for-agent` for days or weeks. The codebase will chan
 
 - **Do** describe interfaces, types, and behavioral contracts
 - **Do** name specific types, function signatures, or config shapes that the agent should look for or modify
-- **Don't** reference file paths — they go stale
+- **Don't** reference file paths: they go stale
 - **Don't** reference line numbers
 - **Don't** assume the current implementation structure will remain the same
 
@@ -53,9 +53,9 @@ Describe what should happen after the agent's work is complete.
 Be specific about edge cases and error conditions.
 
 **Key interfaces:**
-- `TypeName` — what needs to change and why
-- `functionName()` return type — what it currently returns vs what it should return
-- Config shape — any new configuration options needed
+- `TypeName`: what needs to change and why
+- `functionName()` return type: what it currently returns vs what it should return
+- Config shape: any new configuration options needed
 
 **Acceptance criteria:**
 - [ ] Specific, testable criterion 1
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ Truncation should break at the last word boundary before 1024 characters
 and append "..." to indicate truncation.
 
 **Key interfaces:**
-- The `SkillMetadata` type's `description` field — no type change needed,
+- The `SkillMetadata` type's `description` field: no type change needed,
   but the validation/processing logic that populates it needs to respect
   word boundaries
 - Any function that reads SKILL.md frontmatter and extracts the description
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ requested the feature. When triaging new issues, these files should be
 checked for matches.
 
 **Key interfaces:**
-- Markdown file format in `.out-of-scope/` — each file should have a
+- Markdown file format in `.out-of-scope/`: each file should have a
   `# Concept Name` heading, a `**Decision:**` line, a `**Reason:**` line,
   and a `**Prior requests:**` list with issue links
 - The triage workflow should read all `.out-of-scope/*.md` files early
@@ -162,7 +162,7 @@ remain: errors are still printed as human text (not JSON), and the new flag has
 no test coverage.
 
 **Desired behavior:**
-With `--json`, all output — including errors — is well-formed JSON on stdout,
+With `--json`, all output (including errors) is well-formed JSON on stdout,
 and the command's exit codes are unchanged. The existing human-readable output
 is untouched when the flag is absent.
 

skills/engineering/triage/OUT-OF-SCOPE.md

@@ -2,8 +2,8 @@
 
 The `.out-of-scope/` directory in a repo stores persistent records of rejected feature requests. It serves two purposes:
 
-1. **Institutional memory** — why a feature was rejected, so the reasoning isn't lost when the issue is closed
-2. **Deduplication** — when a new issue comes in that matches a prior rejection, the skill can surface the previous decision instead of re-litigating it
+1. **Institutional memory**: why a feature was rejected, so the reasoning isn't lost when the issue is closed
+2. **Deduplication**: when a new issue comes in that matches a prior rejection, the skill can surface the previous decision instead of re-litigating it
 
 ## Directory structure
 
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ One file per **concept**, not per issue. Multiple issues requesting the same thi
 
 ## File format
 
-The file should be written in a relaxed, readable style — more like a short design document than a database entry. Use paragraphs, code samples, and examples to make the reasoning clear and useful to someone encountering it for the first time.
+The file should be written in a relaxed, readable style, more like a short design document than a database entry. Use paragraphs, code samples, and examples to make the reasoning clear and useful to someone encountering it for the first time.
 
 ```markdown
 # Dark Mode
@@ -48,9 +48,9 @@ interface ThemeConfig {
 
 ## Prior requests
 
-- #42 — "Add dark mode support"
-- #87 — "Night theme for accessibility"
-- #134 — "Dark theme option"
+- #42: "Add dark mode support"
+- #87: "Night theme for accessibility"
+- #134: "Dark theme option"
 ```
 
 ### Naming the file
@@ -59,31 +59,31 @@ Use a short, descriptive kebab-case name for the concept: `dark-mode.md`, `plugi
 
 ### Writing the reason
 
-The reason should be substantive — not "we don't want this" but why. Good reasons reference:
+The reason should be substantive: not "we don't want this" but why. Good reasons reference:
 
 - Project scope or philosophy ("This project focuses on X; theming is a downstream concern")
 - Technical constraints ("Supporting this would require Y, which conflicts with our Z architecture")
 - Strategic decisions ("We chose to use A instead of B because...")
 
-The reason should be durable. Avoid referencing temporary circumstances ("we're too busy right now") — those aren't real rejections, they're deferrals.
+The reason should be durable. Avoid referencing temporary circumstances ("we're too busy right now"); those aren't real rejections, they're deferrals.
 
 ## When to check `.out-of-scope/`
 
 During triage (Step 1: Gather context), read all files in `.out-of-scope/`. When evaluating a new issue:
 
 - Check if the request matches an existing out-of-scope concept
-- Matching is by concept similarity, not keyword — "night theme" matches `dark-mode.md`
-- If there's a match, surface it to the maintainer: "This is similar to `.out-of-scope/dark-mode.md` — we rejected this before because [reason]. Do you still feel the same way?"
+- Matching is by concept similarity, not keyword: "night theme" matches `dark-mode.md`
+- If there's a match, surface it to the maintainer: "This is similar to `.out-of-scope/dark-mode.md`. We rejected this before because [reason]. Do you still feel the same way?"
 
 The maintainer may:
 
-- **Confirm** — the new issue gets added to the existing file's "Prior requests" list, then closed
-- **Reconsider** — the out-of-scope file gets deleted or updated, and the issue proceeds through normal triage
-- **Disagree** — the issues are related but distinct, proceed with normal triage
+- **Confirm**: the new issue gets added to the existing file's "Prior requests" list, then closed
+- **Reconsider**: the out-of-scope file gets deleted or updated, and the issue proceeds through normal triage
+- **Disagree**: the issues are related but distinct, proceed with normal triage
 
 ## When to write to `.out-of-scope/`
 
-Only when an **enhancement** (not a bug) is *rejected* as `wontfix`. This applies to enhancement PRs exactly as it does to issues — a rejected PR is recorded here so the same request doesn't return as fresh code.
+Only when an **enhancement** (not a bug) is *rejected* as `wontfix`. This applies to enhancement PRs exactly as it does to issues: a rejected PR is recorded here so the same request doesn't return as fresh code.
 
 Do **not** write here when something is closed as `wontfix` because it's **already implemented**. That's a built feature, not a rejected one; recording it would poison the dedup checks with false rejections. Instead, the closing comment points to where the feature already lives.
 
@@ -101,5 +101,5 @@ The flow:
 If the maintainer changes their mind about a previously rejected concept:
 
 - Delete the `.out-of-scope/` file
-- The skill does not need to reopen old issues — they're historical records
+- The skill does not need to reopen old issues; they're historical records
 - The new issue that triggered the reconsideration proceeds through normal triage

skills/engineering/triage/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: triage
-description: Move issues and external PRs through a state machine of triage roles — categorise, verify, grill if needed, and write agent-ready briefs.
+description: Move issues and external PRs through a state machine of triage roles, categorise, verify, grill if needed, and write agent-ready briefs.
 disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ disable-model-invocation: true
 
 Move issues on the project issue tracker through a small state machine of triage roles.
 
-If this repo treats external pull requests as a request surface (see the issue-tracker config), triage covers them too: **a PR is an issue with attached code** — same roles, same states, same machine, with a few deltas marked "for a PR" below. Resolve a bare `#42` to an issue or PR per the tracker config.
+If this repo treats external pull requests as a request surface (see the issue-tracker config), triage covers them too: **a PR is an issue with attached code**, using the same roles, same states, and same machine, with a few deltas marked "for a PR" below. Resolve a bare `#42` to an issue or PR per the tracker config.
 
 Every comment or issue posted to the issue tracker during triage **must** start with this disclaimer:
 
@@ -18,31 +18,31 @@ Every comment or issue posted to the issue tracker during triage **must** start
 
 ## Reference docs
 
-- [AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md) — how to write durable agent briefs
-- [OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md) — how the `.out-of-scope/` knowledge base works
+- [AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md): how to write durable agent briefs
+- [OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md): how the `.out-of-scope/` knowledge base works
 
 ## Roles
 
 Two **category** roles:
 
-- `bug` — something is broken
-- `enhancement` — new feature or improvement
+- `bug`: something is broken
+- `enhancement`: new feature or improvement
 
 Five **state** roles:
 
-- `needs-triage` — maintainer needs to evaluate
-- `needs-info` — waiting on reporter for more information
-- `ready-for-agent` — fully specified, ready for an AFK agent
-- `ready-for-human` — needs human implementation
-- `wontfix` — will not be actioned
+- `needs-triage`: maintainer needs to evaluate
+- `needs-info`: waiting on reporter for more information
+- `ready-for-agent`: fully specified, ready for an AFK agent
+- `ready-for-human`: needs human implementation
+- `wontfix`: will not be actioned
 
 For a PR, the same states read against the attached code: `ready-for-agent` means a brief is attached and an agent should take the next step on the diff; `ready-for-human` means it's ready for a human to merge.
 
 Every triaged issue should carry exactly one category role and one state role. If state roles conflict, flag it and ask the maintainer before doing anything else.
 
-These are canonical role names — the actual label strings used in the issue tracker may differ. The mapping should have been provided to you - run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
+These are canonical role names. The actual label strings used in the issue tracker may differ. The mapping should have been provided to you. If not, tell the user to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`.
 
-State transitions: an unlabeled issue normally goes to `needs-triage` first; from there it moves to `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, or `wontfix`. `needs-info` returns to `needs-triage` once the reporter replies. The maintainer can override at any time — flag transitions that look unusual and ask before proceeding.
+State transitions: an unlabeled issue normally goes to `needs-triage` first; from there it moves to `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, or `wontfix`. `needs-info` returns to `needs-triage` once the reporter replies. The maintainer can override at any time; flag transitions that look unusual and ask before proceeding.
 
 ## Invocation
 
@@ -57,33 +57,33 @@ The maintainer invokes `/triage` and describes what they want in natural languag
 
 Query the issue tracker and present three buckets, oldest first:
 
-1. **Unlabeled** — never triaged.
-2. **`needs-triage`** — evaluation in progress.
-3. **`needs-info` with reporter activity since the last triage notes** — needs re-evaluation.
+1. **Unlabeled**: never triaged.
+2. **`needs-triage`**: evaluation in progress.
+3. **`needs-info` with reporter activity since the last triage notes**: needs re-evaluation.
 
-When PRs are in scope, include external PRs in these buckets and tag each line `[PR]` or `[issue]`. Discovery surfaces only *external* PRs (the tracker config defines who counts as external) — a collaborator's in-flight PR is not triage work. This filter is discovery-only; an explicitly named PR is always triaged regardless of author.
+When PRs are in scope, include external PRs in these buckets and tag each line `[PR]` or `[issue]`. Discovery surfaces only *external* PRs (the tracker config defines who counts as external), so a collaborator's in-flight PR is not triage work. This filter is discovery-only; an explicitly named PR is always triaged regardless of author.
 
 Show counts and a one-line summary per item. Let the maintainer pick.
 
 ## Triage a specific issue or PR
 
-1. **Gather context.** Read the full issue or PR (body, comments, labels, author, dates; for a PR, the diff too). Parse any prior triage notes so you don't re-ask resolved questions. Explore the codebase using the project's domain glossary, respecting ADRs in the area. Run two checks against the codebase: (a) **redundancy** — search for an existing implementation of the requested behavior by domain concept (not just the request's wording), and report where you looked. If found, it's an already-implemented `wontfix` (step 5). (b) **prior rejection** — read `.out-of-scope/*.md` and surface any that resembles this request.
+1. **Gather context.** Read the full issue or PR (body, comments, labels, author, dates; for a PR, the diff too). Parse any prior triage notes so you don't re-ask resolved questions. Explore the codebase using the project's domain glossary, respecting ADRs in the area. Run two checks against the codebase: (a) **redundancy**: search for an existing implementation of the requested behavior by domain concept (not just the request's wording), and report where you looked. If found, it's an already-implemented `wontfix` (step 5). (b) **prior rejection**: read `.out-of-scope/*.md` and surface any that resembles this request.
 
-2. **Recommend.** Tell the maintainer your category and state recommendation with reasoning, plus a brief codebase summary relevant to the request — including whether it's already implemented. Wait for direction.
+2. **Recommend.** Tell the maintainer your category and state recommendation with reasoning, plus a brief codebase summary relevant to the request (including whether it's already implemented). Wait for direction.
 
-3. **Verify the claim.** Before any grilling, check that the claim holds up. For a bug, reproduce it from the reporter's steps. For a PR, confirm the diff does what it claims — check it out, run the relevant tests or commands. Report what happened: confirmed (with code path), failed, or insufficient detail (a strong `needs-info` signal). A confirmed verification makes a much stronger agent brief.
+3. **Verify the claim.** Before any grilling, check that the claim holds up. For a bug, reproduce it from the reporter's steps. For a PR, confirm the diff does what it claims: check it out, run the relevant tests or commands. Report what happened: confirmed (with code path), failed, or insufficient detail (a strong `needs-info` signal). A confirmed verification makes a much stronger agent brief.
 
-4. **Grill (if needed).** If the request needs fleshing out, run the `/grilling` and `/domain-modeling` skills together — grill it into shape a round of questions at a time, sharpening domain terms and updating `CONTEXT.md`/ADRs inline as decisions land.
+4. **Grill (if needed).** If the request needs fleshing out, call the Skill tool twice, for "grilling" and "domain-modeling", and grill it into shape a round of questions at a time, sharpening domain terms and updating `CONTEXT.md`/ADRs inline as decisions land.
 
 5. **Apply the outcome:**
-   - `ready-for-agent` — post an agent brief comment ([AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md)).
-   - `ready-for-human` — same structure as an agent brief, but note why it can't be delegated (judgment calls, external access, design decisions, manual testing).
-   - `needs-info` — post triage notes (template below).
-   - `wontfix` — close, with the comment depending on *why*:
-     - **Already implemented** — the change already exists in the codebase. Point to where it lives; do **not** write to `.out-of-scope/` (that KB is for *rejected* requests, not built ones).
-     - **Rejected (bug)** — polite explanation, then close.
-     - **Rejected (enhancement)** — write to `.out-of-scope/`, link to it from a comment, then close ([OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md)).
-   - `needs-triage` — apply the role. Optional comment if there's partial progress.
+   - `ready-for-agent`: post an agent brief comment ([AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md)).
+   - `ready-for-human`: same structure as an agent brief, but note why it can't be delegated (judgment calls, external access, design decisions, manual testing).
+   - `needs-info`: post triage notes (template below).
+   - For `wontfix`, close the issue, with the comment depending on *why*:
+     - **Already implemented**: the change already exists in the codebase. Point to where it lives; do **not** write to `.out-of-scope/` (that KB is for *rejected* requests, not built ones).
+     - **Rejected (bug)**: give a polite explanation, then close.
+     - **Rejected (enhancement)**: write to `.out-of-scope/`, link to it from a comment, then close ([OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md)).
+   - `needs-triage`: apply the role. Optional comment if there's partial progress.
 
 ## Quick state override