Add document standards, quality gates, and templates for team lifecycle phases

- Introduced `document-standards.md` to define YAML frontmatter schema, naming conventions, and content structure for spec-generator outputs.
- Created `quality-gates.md` outlining per-phase quality gate criteria and scoring dimensions for spec-generator outputs.
- Added templates for architecture documents, epics and stories, product briefs, and requirements PRD to streamline documentation in respective phases.

.claude/skills/team-arch-opt/role-specs/analyzer.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: ANALYZE
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: [explore]
+cli_tools: [explore]
 message_types:
   success: analyze_complete
   error: error
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ Analyze codebase architecture to identify structural issues: dependency cycles,
 | CLI entry / bin/ directory | CLI Tool | Command structure, plugin architecture, configuration layering |
 | No detection | Generic | All architecture dimensions |
 
-3. Use `explore` subagent to map module structure, dependency graph, and layer boundaries within target scope
+3. Use `explore` CLI tool to map module structure, dependency graph, and layer boundaries within target scope
 4. Detect available analysis tools (linters, dependency analyzers, build tools)
 
 ## Phase 3: Architecture Analysis

.claude/skills/team-arch-opt/role-specs/designer.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 prefix: DESIGN
 inner_loop: false
 discuss_rounds: [DISCUSS-REFACTOR]
-subagents: [discuss]
+cli_tools: [discuss]
 message_types:
   success: design_complete
   error: error
@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ Prioritize refactorings by impact/effort ratio:
 | P2 (Medium) | Medium impact + Low effort (duplication extraction) |
 | P3 (Low) | Low impact or High effort -- defer (large God Class decomposition) |
 
-If complexity is High, invoke `discuss` subagent (DISCUSS-REFACTOR round) to evaluate trade-offs between competing strategies before finalizing the plan.
+If complexity is High, invoke `discuss` CLI tool (DISCUSS-REFACTOR round) to evaluate trade-offs between competing strategies before finalizing the plan.
 
 Define measurable success criteria per refactoring (target metric improvement or structural change).
 

.claude/skills/team-arch-opt/role-specs/refactorer.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 prefix: REFACTOR
 inner_loop: true
 additional_prefixes: [FIX]
-subagents: [explore]
+cli_tools: [explore]
 message_types:
   success: refactor_complete
   error: error
@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ Implement architecture refactoring changes following the design plan. For FIX ta
    - **Independent pipeline**: Read `<session>/artifacts/pipelines/{P}/refactoring-plan.md` -- extract this pipeline's plan
 
 4. For FIX: parse review/validation feedback for specific issues to address
-5. Use `explore` subagent to load implementation context for target files
+5. Use `explore` CLI tool to load implementation context for target files
 6. For inner loop (single mode only): load context_accumulator from prior REFACTOR/FIX tasks
 
 **Meta.json namespace**:

.claude/skills/team-arch-opt/role-specs/reviewer.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ prefix: REVIEW
 inner_loop: false
 additional_prefixes: [QUALITY]
 discuss_rounds: [DISCUSS-REVIEW]
-subagents: [discuss]
+cli_tools: [discuss]
 message_types:
   success: review_complete
   error: error
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ Per-dimension review process:
 - Dependency direction follows layer conventions (dependencies flow inward)
 - Appropriate abstraction level (not over-engineered, not under-abstracted)
 
-If any Critical findings detected, invoke `discuss` subagent (DISCUSS-REVIEW round) to validate the assessment before issuing verdict.
+If any Critical findings detected, invoke `discuss` CLI tool (DISCUSS-REVIEW round) to validate the assessment before issuing verdict.
 
 ## Phase 4: Verdict & Feedback