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/agents/team-worker.md

@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ Parse the following fields from your prompt:
    - `prefix`: Task prefix to filter (e.g., `RESEARCH`, `DRAFT`, `IMPL`)
    - `inner_loop`: Override from frontmatter if present
    - `discuss_rounds`: Array of discuss round IDs this role handles
-   - `subagents`: (DEPRECATED - team workers cannot call subagents) Array for documentation only
+   - `delegates_to`: (DEPRECATED - team workers cannot delegate to other agents) Array for documentation only
    - `message_types`: Success/error/fix message type mappings
 3. Parse **body** (content after frontmatter) to get Phase 2-4 execution instructions
 4. Store parsed metadata and instructions for use in execution phases
@@ -123,9 +123,9 @@ After claiming a task, check if output artifacts already exist (indicates resume
 
 The role_spec contains Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4 sections with domain-specific logic. Follow those instructions exactly. Key integration points with built-in infrastructure:
 
-## CRITICAL LIMITATION: No Subagent Delegation
+## CRITICAL LIMITATION: No Agent Delegation
 
-**Team workers CANNOT call the Agent() tool to spawn subagents.**
+**Team workers CANNOT call the Agent() tool to spawn other agents.**
 
 Test evidence shows that team members spawned via Agent tool do not have access to the Agent tool themselves. Only the coordinator (main conversation context) can spawn agents.
 
@@ -142,15 +142,15 @@ Bash(`ccw cli -p "..." --tool gemini --mode analysis`, { run_in_background: fals
 Use Read, Grep, Glob, mcp__ace-tool__search_context directly.
 
 **Option C: Request Coordinator Help**
-Send message to coordinator requesting subagent delegation:
+Send message to coordinator requesting agent delegation:
 ```javascript
 mcp__ccw-tools__team_msg({
   operation: "log",
   session_id: sessionId,
   from: role,
   to: "coordinator",
-  type: "subagent_request",
+  type: "agent_request",
-  summary: "Request exploration subagent for X",
+  summary: "Request exploration agent for X",
   data: { reason: "...", scope: "..." }
 })
 SendMessage({ recipient: "coordinator", content: "..." })

.claude/skills/team-arch-opt/SKILL.md

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ Unified team skill: Analyze codebase architecture, identify structural issues (d
 analyzer desig-  refact- valid-  review-
          ner     orer    ator    er
 
-  Subagents (callable by workers, not team members):
+  CLI Tools (callable by workers inline):
     [explore]  [discuss]
 
 (tw) = team-worker agent
@@ -52,12 +52,12 @@ Parse `$ARGUMENTS`. No `--role` needed -- always routes to coordinator.
 | validator | [role-specs/validator.md](role-specs/validator.md) | VALIDATE-* | validation | false |
 | reviewer | [role-specs/reviewer.md](role-specs/reviewer.md) | REVIEW-* / QUALITY-* | read_only_analysis | false |
 
-### Subagent Registry
+### CLI Tool Registry
 
-| Subagent | Spec | Callable By | Purpose |
+| Tool | Spec | Used By | Purpose |
-|----------|------|-------------|---------|
+|------|------|---------|---------|
-| explore | [subagents/explore-subagent.md](subagents/explore-subagent.md) | analyzer, refactorer | Shared codebase exploration for architecture-critical structures and dependency graphs |
+| explore | [cli-tools/explore.md](cli-tools/explore.md) | analyzer, refactorer | Shared codebase exploration for architecture-critical structures and dependency graphs |
-| discuss | [subagents/discuss-subagent.md](subagents/discuss-subagent.md) | designer, reviewer | Multi-perspective discussion for refactoring approaches and review findings |
+| discuss | [cli-tools/discuss.md](cli-tools/discuss.md) | designer, reviewer | Multi-perspective discussion for refactoring approaches and review findings |
 
 ### Dispatch
 
@@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ Coordinator supports `--resume` / `--continue` for interrupted sessions:
 |----------|------------|
 | Role spec file not found | Error with expected path (role-specs/<name>.md) |
 | Command file not found | Fallback to inline execution in coordinator role.md |
-| Subagent spec not found | Error with expected path (subagents/<name>-subagent.md) |
+| CLI tool spec not found | Error with expected path (cli-tools/<name>.md) |
 | Fast-advance orphan detected | Coordinator resets task to pending on next check |
 | consensus_blocked HIGH | Coordinator creates revision task or pauses pipeline |
 | team-worker agent unavailable | Error: requires .claude/agents/team-worker.md |

.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
 

.claude/skills/team-arch-opt/specs/team-config.json

@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
         "inner_loop": false,
         "additional_prefixes": [],
         "discuss_rounds": [],
-        "subagents": ["explore"],
+        "cli_tools": ["explore"],
         "message_types": {
           "success": "analyze_complete",
           "error": "error"
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@
         "inner_loop": false,
         "additional_prefixes": [],
         "discuss_rounds": ["DISCUSS-REFACTOR"],
-        "subagents": ["discuss"],
+        "cli_tools": ["discuss"],
         "message_types": {
           "success": "design_complete",
           "error": "error"
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@
         "inner_loop": true,
         "additional_prefixes": ["FIX"],
         "discuss_rounds": [],
-        "subagents": ["explore"],
+        "cli_tools": ["explore"],
         "message_types": {
           "success": "refactor_complete",
           "error": "error",
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@
         "inner_loop": false,
         "additional_prefixes": [],
         "discuss_rounds": [],
-        "subagents": [],
+        "cli_tools": [],
         "message_types": {
           "success": "validate_complete",
           "error": "error",
@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@
         "inner_loop": false,
         "additional_prefixes": ["QUALITY"],
         "discuss_rounds": ["DISCUSS-REVIEW"],
-        "subagents": ["discuss"],
+        "cli_tools": ["discuss"],
         "message_types": {
           "success": "review_complete",
           "error": "error",
@@ -193,10 +193,10 @@
     "diagram": "See pipeline-diagram section"
   },
 
-  "subagents": [
+  "cli_tools": [
     {
       "name": "explore",
-      "agent_type": "cli-explore-agent",
+      "implementation": "ccw cli with analysis mode",
       "callable_by": ["analyzer", "refactorer"],
       "purpose": "Shared codebase exploration for architecture-critical structures, dependency graphs, and module boundaries",
       "has_cache": true,
@@ -204,7 +204,7 @@
     },
     {
       "name": "discuss",
-      "agent_type": "cli-discuss-agent",
+      "implementation": "ccw cli with analysis mode",
       "callable_by": ["designer", "reviewer"],
       "purpose": "Multi-perspective discussion for refactoring approaches and review findings",
       "has_cache": false

.claude/skills/team-arch-opt/subagents/discuss-subagent.md

@@ -1,123 +0,0 @@
-# Discuss Subagent
-
-Multi-perspective discussion for evaluating refactoring strategies and reviewing code change quality. Used by designer (DISCUSS-REFACTOR) and reviewer (DISCUSS-REVIEW) when complex trade-offs require multi-angle analysis.
-
-## Design Rationale
-
-Complex refactoring decisions (e.g., choosing between dependency inversion vs mediator pattern to break a cycle) and nuanced code review findings (e.g., evaluating whether a temporary coupling increase is acceptable) benefit from structured multi-perspective analysis. This subagent provides that analysis inline without spawning additional team members.
-
-## Invocation
-
-Called by designer, reviewer after their primary analysis when complexity warrants multi-perspective evaluation:
-
-```javascript
-// Multi-perspective discussion using CLI tools
-Bash({
-  command: `ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Conduct multi-perspective discussion on <topic> for architecture optimization
-TASK: • Evaluate architecture impact • Assess risks and trade-offs • Consider maintainability • Explore alternatives
-MODE: analysis
-CONTEXT: @<session-folder>/discussions/<round-id>.md | Memory: <relevant-context-from-calling-role>
-EXPECTED: Structured recommendation with consensus verdict (proceed/revise/escalate), confidence level, key trade-offs, recommended approach with rationale, dissenting perspectives
-CONSTRAINTS: Focus on <round-id> topic
-
-Round: <round-id>
-Topic: <discussion-topic>
-Session: <session-folder>
-
-Context:
-<relevant-context-from-calling-role>
-
-Perspectives to consider:
-- Architecture impact: Will this actually improve the target structural metric?
-- Risk assessment: What could break? Dangling references? Behavioral changes? Migration risk?
-- Maintainability: Is the refactored code more understandable and maintainable?
-- Alternative approaches: Are there simpler or safer ways to achieve the same structural improvement?
-
-Evaluate trade-offs and provide a structured recommendation with:
-- Consensus verdict: proceed / revise / escalate
-- Confidence level: high / medium / low
-- Key trade-offs identified
-- Recommended approach with rationale
-- Dissenting perspectives (if any)" --tool gemini --mode analysis`,
-  run_in_background: false
-})
-```
-
-**Alternative: Direct multi-perspective analysis**
-
-For simpler discussions, call CLI tool directly without wrapper:
-
-```javascript
-Bash({
-  command: `ccw cli -p "Conduct a multi-perspective discussion on the following topic.
-
-Round: <round-id>
-Topic: <discussion-topic>
-Session: <session-folder>
-
-Context:
-<relevant-context-from-calling-role>
-
-Perspectives to consider:
-- Architecture impact: Will this actually improve the target structural metric?
-- Risk assessment: What could break? Dangling references? Behavioral changes? Migration risk?
-- Maintainability: Is the refactored code more understandable and maintainable?
-- Alternative approaches: Are there simpler or safer ways to achieve the same structural improvement?
-
-Evaluate trade-offs and provide a structured recommendation with:
-- Consensus verdict: proceed / revise / escalate
-- Confidence level: high / medium / low
-- Key trade-offs identified
-- Recommended approach with rationale
-- Dissenting perspectives (if any)`
-})
-```
-
-## Round Configuration
-
-| Round | Artifact | Parameters | Calling Role |
-|-------|----------|------------|-------------|
-| DISCUSS-REFACTOR | <session>/discussions/DISCUSS-REFACTOR.md | Refactoring strategy trade-offs | designer |
-| DISCUSS-REVIEW | <session>/discussions/DISCUSS-REVIEW.md | Code review finding validation | reviewer |
-
-## Integration with Calling Role
-
-The calling role is responsible for:
-
-1. **Before calling**: Complete primary analysis, identify the specific trade-off or finding needing discussion
-2. **Calling**: Invoke subagent with round ID, topic, and relevant context
-3. **After calling**:
-
-| Result | Action |
-|--------|--------|
-| consensus_reached (proceed) | Incorporate recommendation into output, continue |
-| consensus_reached (revise) | Adjust findings/strategy based on discussion insights |
-| consensus_blocked (HIGH) | Report to coordinator via message with severity |
-| consensus_blocked (MEDIUM) | Include in output with recommendation for revision |
-| consensus_blocked (LOW) | Note in output, proceed with original assessment |
-
-## Output Schema
-
-```json
-{
-  "round_id": "<DISCUSS-REFACTOR|DISCUSS-REVIEW>",
-  "topic": "<discussion-topic>",
-  "verdict": "<proceed|revise|escalate>",
-  "confidence": "<high|medium|low>",
-  "trade_offs": [
-    { "dimension": "<architecture|risk|maintainability>", "pro": "<benefit>", "con": "<cost>" }
-  ],
-  "recommendation": "<recommended-approach>",
-  "rationale": "<reasoning>",
-  "dissenting_views": ["<alternative-perspective>"]
-}
-```
-
-## Error Handling
-
-| Scenario | Resolution |
-|----------|------------|
-| Single perspective analysis fails | Continue with partial perspectives |
-| All analyses fail | Return basic recommendation from calling role's primary analysis |
-| Artifact not found | Return error immediately |
-| Discussion inconclusive | Return "revise" verdict with low confidence |

.claude/skills/team-arch-opt/subagents/explore-subagent.md

@@ -1,113 +0,0 @@
-# Explore Subagent
-
-Shared codebase exploration for discovering architecture-critical structures, dependency graphs, module boundaries, and layer organization. Results are cached to avoid redundant exploration across analyzer and refactorer roles.
-
-## Design Rationale
-
-Codebase exploration is a read-only operation shared between analyzer (mapping structural issues) and refactorer (understanding implementation context). Caching explorations avoids redundant work when refactorer re-explores structures the analyzer already mapped.
-
-## Invocation
-
-Called by analyzer, refactorer after needing codebase context for architecture analysis or implementation:
-
-```
-Agent({
-  subagent_type: "Explore",
-  run_in_background: false,
-  description: "Explore codebase for architecture-critical structures in <target-scope>",
-  prompt: `Explore the codebase to identify architecture-critical structures.
-
-Target scope: <target-scope>
-Session: <session-folder>
-Focus: <exploration-focus>
-
-Tasks:
-1. Map the module structure, entry points, and layer boundaries within scope
-2. Build dependency graph (import/require relationships between modules)
-3. Identify architectural patterns (layering, dependency injection, event-driven, plugin architecture)
-4. Note any existing abstractions, interfaces, and module boundaries
-5. List key files with their roles, layer assignment, and dependency relationships
-
-Output a structured exploration report with:
-- Module map (key files, their relationships, and layer assignments)
-- Dependency graph (directed edges between modules, cycle indicators)
-- Layer structure (identified layers and their boundaries)
-- Existing architectural patterns found
-- Architecture-relevant configuration (path aliases, barrel exports, module boundaries)`
-})
-```
-
-## Cache Mechanism
-
-### Cache Index Schema
-
-`<session-folder>/explorations/cache-index.json`:
-
-```json
-{
-  "entries": [
-    {
-      "key": "<scope-hash>",
-      "scope": "<target-scope>",
-      "focus": "<exploration-focus>",
-      "timestamp": "<ISO-8601>",
-      "result_file": "<hash>.md"
-    }
-  ]
-}
-```
-
-### Cache Lookup Rules
-
-| Condition | Action |
-|-----------|--------|
-| Exact scope+focus match exists | Return cached result from <hash>.md |
-| No match | Execute subagent, cache result to <hash>.md, update index |
-| Cache file missing but index has entry | Remove stale entry, re-execute |
-| Cache older than current session | Use cached (explorations are stable within session) |
-
-## Integration with Calling Role
-
-The calling role is responsible for:
-
-1. **Before calling**: Determine target scope and exploration focus
-2. **Calling**: Check cache first, invoke subagent only on cache miss
-3. **After calling**:
-
-| Result | Action |
-|--------|--------|
-| Exploration successful | Use findings to inform analysis/implementation |
-| Exploration partial | Use available findings, note gaps |
-| Exploration failed | Proceed without exploration context, use direct file reading |
-
-## Output Schema
-
-```json
-{
-  "scope": "<target-scope>",
-  "module_map": [
-    { "file": "<path>", "role": "<description>", "layer": "<presentation|domain|data|infra>", "dependency_graph": { "imports": ["<path>"], "imported_by": ["<path>"] } }
-  ],
-  "dependency_graph": {
-    "nodes": ["<module-path>"],
-    "edges": [{ "from": "<path>", "to": "<path>", "type": "<import|re-export|dynamic>" }],
-    "cycles": [["<path-a>", "<path-b>", "<path-a>"]]
-  },
-  "layer_structure": [
-    { "layer": "<name>", "modules": ["<path>"], "violations": ["<description>"] }
-  ],
-  "existing_patterns": [
-    { "type": "<pattern>", "location": "<file:line>", "description": "<what>" }
-  ],
-  "investigation_targets": ["<file-or-pattern>"]
-}
-```
-
-## Error Handling
-
-| Scenario | Resolution |
-|----------|------------|
-| Single exploration angle fails | Continue with partial results |
-| All exploration fails | Return basic result from direct file listing |
-| Target scope not found | Return error immediately |
-| Cache corrupt | Clear cache-index.json, re-execute |

.claude/skills/team-brainstorm/role-specs/challenger.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: CHALLENGE
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: []
+delegates_to: []
 message_types:
   success: critique_ready
   error: error

.claude/skills/team-brainstorm/role-specs/evaluator.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: EVAL
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: []
+delegates_to: []
 message_types:
   success: evaluation_ready
   error: error

.claude/skills/team-brainstorm/role-specs/ideator.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: IDEA
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: []
+delegates_to: []
 message_types:
   success: ideas_ready
   error: error

.claude/skills/team-brainstorm/role-specs/synthesizer.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: SYNTH
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: []
+delegates_to: []
 message_types:
   success: synthesis_ready
   error: error

.claude/skills/team-coordinate/SKILL.md

@@ -27,9 +27,9 @@ Universal team coordination skill: analyze task -> generate role-specs -> dispat
  [team-worker agents, each loaded with a dynamic role-spec]
   (roles generated at runtime from task analysis)
 
-  Subagents (callable by any worker, not team members):
+  CLI Tools (callable by any worker):
-    [discuss-subagent]  - multi-perspective critique (dynamic perspectives)
+    ccw cli --mode analysis  - analysis and exploration
-    [explore-subagent]  - codebase exploration with cache
+    ccw cli --mode write     - code generation and modification
 ```
 
 ## Role Router
@@ -49,12 +49,14 @@ Only coordinator is statically registered. All other roles are dynamic, stored a
 | coordinator | [roles/coordinator/role.md](roles/coordinator/role.md) | built-in orchestrator |
 | (dynamic) | `<session>/role-specs/<role-name>.md` | runtime-generated role-spec |
 
-### Subagent Registry
+### CLI Tool Usage
 
-| Subagent | Spec | Callable By | Purpose |
+Workers can use CLI tools for analysis and code operations:
-|----------|------|-------------|---------|
+
-| discuss | [subagents/discuss-subagent.md](subagents/discuss-subagent.md) | any role | Multi-perspective critique (dynamic perspectives) |
+| Tool | Purpose |
-| explore | [subagents/explore-subagent.md](subagents/explore-subagent.md) | any role | Codebase exploration with cache |
+|------|---------|
+| ccw cli --mode analysis | Analysis, exploration, pattern discovery |
+| ccw cli --mode write | Code generation, modification, refactoring |
 
 ### Dispatch
 
@@ -259,7 +261,7 @@ Coordinator supports `resume` / `continue` for interrupted sessions:
 | Unknown command | Error with available command list |
 | Dynamic role-spec not found | Error, coordinator may need to regenerate |
 | Command file not found | Fallback to inline execution |
-| Discuss subagent fails | Worker proceeds without discuss, logs warning |
+| CLI tool fails | Worker proceeds with direct implementation, logs warning |
 | Explore cache corrupt | Clear cache, re-explore |
 | Fast-advance spawns wrong task | Coordinator reconciles on next callback |
 | capability_gap reported | Coordinator generates new role-spec via handleAdapt |

.claude/skills/team-coordinate/roles/coordinator/commands/analyze-task.md

@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ For each role, determine frontmatter and generation hints:
 |-------|------------|
 | `prefix` | From capability prefix (e.g., RESEARCH, DRAFT, IMPL) |
 | `inner_loop` | `true` if role has 2+ serial same-prefix tasks |
-| `subagents` | Suggested, not mandatory — coordinator may adjust based on task needs |
+| `CLI tools` | Suggested, not mandatory — coordinator may adjust based on task needs |
 | `pattern_hint` | Reference pattern name from role-spec-template (research/document/code/analysis/validation) — guides coordinator's Phase 2-4 composition, NOT a rigid template selector |
 | `output_type` | `artifact` (new files in session/artifacts/) / `codebase` (modify existing project files) / `mixed` (both) — determines verification strategy in Behavioral Traits |
 | `message_types.success` | `<prefix>_complete` |
@@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ Write `<session-folder>/task-analysis.json`:
       "task_count": 1,
       "inner_loop": false,
       "role_spec_metadata": {
-        "subagents": ["explore"],
+        "CLI tools": ["explore"],
         "pattern_hint": "research",
         "output_type": "artifact",
         "message_types": {

.claude/skills/team-coordinate/roles/coordinator/role.md

@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Orchestrate the team-coordinate workflow: task analysis, dynamic role-spec gener
 - **Read source code or perform codebase exploration** (delegate to worker roles)
 - Execute task work directly (delegate to workers)
 - Modify task output artifacts (workers own their deliverables)
-- Call implementation subagents (code-developer, etc.) directly
+- Call implementation agents (code-developer, etc.) directly
 - Skip dependency validation when creating task chains
 - Generate more than 5 worker roles (merge if exceeded)
 - Override consensus_blocked HIGH without user confirmation

.claude/skills/team-coordinate/specs/role-spec-template.md

@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ Template used by coordinator to generate lightweight worker role-spec files at r
 role: <role_name>
 prefix: <PREFIX>
 inner_loop: <true|false>
-subagents: [<subagent-names>]
+CLI tools: [<CLI tool-names>]
 message_types:
   success: <prefix>_complete
   error: error
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ message_types:
 | `role` | Yes | Role name matching session registry |
 | `prefix` | Yes | Task prefix to filter (e.g., RESEARCH, DRAFT, IMPL) |
 | `inner_loop` | Yes | Whether team-worker loops through same-prefix tasks |
-| `subagents` | No | Array of subagent types this role may call |
+| `CLI tools` | No | Array of CLI tool types this role may call |
 | `message_types` | Yes | Message type mapping for team_msg |
 | `message_types.success` | Yes | Type string for successful completion |
 | `message_types.error` | Yes | Type string for errors (usually "error") |
@@ -61,13 +61,13 @@ message_types:
 | ~80 lines target | Lightweight, domain-focused |
 | No pseudocode | Decision tables + text + tool calls only |
 | `<placeholder>` notation | Use angle brackets for variable substitution |
-| Reference subagents by name | team-worker resolves invocation from its delegation templates |
+| Reference CLI tools by name | team-worker resolves invocation from its delegation templates |
 
 ## Behavioral Traits
 
 All dynamically generated role-specs MUST embed these traits into Phase 4. Coordinator copies this section verbatim into every generated role-spec as a Phase 4 appendix.
 
-**Design principle**: Constrain behavioral characteristics (accuracy, feedback, quality gates), NOT specific actions (which tool, which subagent, which path). Tasks are diverse — the coordinator composes task-specific Phase 2-3 instructions, while these traits ensure execution quality regardless of task type.
+**Design principle**: Constrain behavioral characteristics (accuracy, feedback, quality gates), NOT specific actions (which tool, which CLI tool, which path). Tasks are diverse — the coordinator composes task-specific Phase 2-3 instructions, while these traits ensure execution quality regardless of task type.
 
 ### Accuracy — outputs must be verifiable
 
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ Phase 4 must produce a verification summary with these fields:
 
 ### Error Protocol
 
-- Primary approach fails → try alternative (different subagent / different tool)
+- Primary approach fails → try alternative (different CLI tool / different tool)
 - 2 retries exhausted → escalate to coordinator with failure details
 - NEVER: skip verification and report completed
 
@@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ Coordinator MAY reference these patterns when composing Phase 2-4 content for a
 ### Research / Exploration
 
 - Phase 2: Define exploration scope + load prior knowledge from shared state and wisdom
-- Phase 3: Explore via subagents, direct tool calls, or codebase search — approach chosen by agent
+- Phase 3: Explore via CLI tools, direct tool calls, or codebase search — approach chosen by agent
 - Phase 4: Verify findings documented (Behavioral Traits) + update shared state
 
 ### Document / Content
@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ Coordinator MAY reference these patterns when composing Phase 2-4 content for a
 ### Code Implementation
 
 - Phase 2: Load design/spec artifacts from upstream
-- Phase 3: Implement code changes — subagent choice and approach determined by task complexity
+- Phase 3: Implement code changes — CLI tool choice and approach determined by task complexity
 - Phase 4: Syntax check + file verification (Behavioral Traits) + update shared state
 
 ### Analysis / Audit

.claude/skills/team-coordinate/subagents/discuss-subagent.md

@@ -1,132 +0,0 @@
-# Discuss Subagent
-
-Lightweight multi-perspective critique engine. Called inline by any role needing peer review. Perspectives are dynamic -- specified by the calling role, not pre-defined.
-
-## Design
-
-Unlike team-lifecycle-v4's fixed perspective definitions (product, technical, quality, risk, coverage), team-coordinate uses **dynamic perspectives** passed in the prompt. The calling role decides what viewpoints matter for its artifact.
-
-## Invocation
-
-Called by roles after artifact creation:
-
-```javascript
-// Multi-perspective critique using CLI tools
-// The coordinator reads the artifact and launches parallel CLI analyses for each perspective
-Bash({
-  command: `ccw cli -p "## Multi-Perspective Critique: <round-id>
-
-### Input
-- Artifact: <artifact-path>
-- Round: <round-id>
-- Session: <session-folder>
-
-### Perspectives
-<Dynamic perspective list -- each entry defines: name, cli_tool, role_label, focus_areas>
-
-Example:
-| Perspective | CLI Tool | Role | Focus Areas |
-|-------------|----------|------|-------------|
-| Feasibility | gemini | Engineer | Implementation complexity, technical risks, resource needs |
-| Clarity | codex | Editor | Readability, logical flow, completeness of explanation |
-| Accuracy | gemini | Domain Expert | Factual correctness, source reliability, claim verification |
-
-### Execution Steps
-1. Read artifact from <artifact-path>
-2. For each perspective, launch CLI analysis in background:
-   Bash(command="ccw cli -p 'PURPOSE: Analyze from <role> perspective for <round-id>
-   TASK: <focus-areas>
-   MODE: analysis
-   CONTEXT: Artifact content below
-   EXPECTED: JSON with strengths[], weaknesses[], suggestions[], rating (1-5)
-   CONSTRAINTS: Output valid JSON only
-
-   Artifact:
-   <artifact-content>' --tool <cli-tool> --mode analysis", run_in_background=true)
-3. Wait for all CLI results
-4. Divergence detection:
-   - High severity: any rating <= 2, critical issue identified
-   - Medium severity: rating spread (max - min) >= 3, or single perspective rated <= 2 with others >= 3
-   - Low severity: minor suggestions only, all ratings >= 3
-5. Consensus determination:
-   - No high-severity divergences AND average rating >= 3.0 -> consensus_reached
-   - Otherwise -> consensus_blocked
-6. Synthesize:
-   - Convergent themes (agreed by 2+ perspectives)
-   - Divergent views (conflicting assessments)
-   - Action items from suggestions
-7. Write discussion record to: <session-folder>/discussions/<round-id>-discussion.md
-
-### Discussion Record Format
-# Discussion Record: <round-id>
-
-**Artifact**: <artifact-path>
-**Perspectives**: <list>
-**Consensus**: reached / blocked
-**Average Rating**: <avg>/5
-
-## Convergent Themes
-- <theme>
-
-## Divergent Views
-- **<topic>** (<severity>): <description>
-
-## Action Items
-1. <item>
-
-## Ratings
-| Perspective | Rating |
-|-------------|--------|
-| <name> | <n>/5 |
-
-### Return Value
-
-**When consensus_reached**:
-Return a summary string with:
-- Verdict: consensus_reached
-- Average rating
-- Key action items (top 3)
-- Discussion record path
-
-**When consensus_blocked**:
-Return a structured summary with:
-- Verdict: consensus_blocked
-- Severity: HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW
-- Average rating
-- Divergence summary: top 3 divergent points with perspective attribution
-- Action items: prioritized list of required changes
-- Recommendation: revise | proceed-with-caution | escalate
-- Discussion record path
-
-### Error Handling
-- Single CLI fails -> fallback to direct Claude analysis for that perspective
-- All CLI fail -> generate basic discussion from direct artifact reading
-- Artifact not found -> return error immediately`
-})
-```
-
-## Integration with Calling Role
-
-The calling role is responsible for:
-
-1. **Before calling**: Complete primary artifact output
-2. **Calling**: Invoke discuss subagent with appropriate dynamic perspectives
-3. **After calling**:
-
-| Verdict | Severity | Role Action |
-|---------|----------|-------------|
-| consensus_reached | - | Include action items in Phase 5 report, proceed normally |
-| consensus_blocked | HIGH | Include divergence details in Phase 5 SendMessage. Do NOT self-revise -- coordinator decides. |
-| consensus_blocked | MEDIUM | Include warning in Phase 5 SendMessage. Proceed normally. |
-| consensus_blocked | LOW | Treat as consensus_reached with notes. Proceed normally. |
-
-**SendMessage format for consensus_blocked (HIGH or MEDIUM)**:
-
-```
-[<role>] <task-id> complete. Discuss <round-id>: consensus_blocked (severity=<severity>)
-Divergences: <top-3-divergent-points>
-Action items: <prioritized-items>
-Recommendation: <revise|proceed-with-caution|escalate>
-Artifact: <artifact-path>
-Discussion: <discussion-record-path>
-```

.claude/skills/team-coordinate/subagents/explore-subagent.md

@@ -1,120 +0,0 @@
-# Explore Subagent
-
-Shared codebase exploration utility with centralized caching. Callable by any role needing code context.
-
-## Invocation
-
-```
-Agent({
-  subagent_type: "Explore",
-  run_in_background: false,
-  description: "Explore <angle>",
-  prompt: `Explore codebase for: <query>
-
-Focus angle: <angle>
-Keywords: <keyword-list>
-Session folder: <session-folder>
-
-## Cache Check
-1. Read <session-folder>/explorations/cache-index.json (if exists)
-2. Look for entry with matching angle
-3. If found AND file exists -> read cached result, return summary
-4. If not found -> proceed to exploration
-
-## Exploration
-<angle-specific-focus-from-table-below>
-
-## Output
-Write JSON to: <session-folder>/explorations/explore-<angle>.json
-Update cache-index.json with new entry
-
-## Output Schema
-{
-  "angle": "<angle>",
-  "query": "<query>",
-  "relevant_files": [
-    { "path": "...", "rationale": "...", "role": "...", "discovery_source": "...", "key_symbols": [] }
-  ],
-  "patterns": [],
-  "dependencies": [],
-  "external_refs": [],
-  "_metadata": { "created_by": "<calling-role>", "timestamp": "...", "cache_key": "..." }
-}
-
-Return summary: file count, pattern count, top 5 files, output path`
-})
-```
-
-## Cache Mechanism
-
-### Cache Index Schema
-
-`<session-folder>/explorations/cache-index.json`:
-
-```json
-{
-  "entries": [
-    {
-      "angle": "architecture",
-      "keywords": ["auth", "middleware"],
-      "file": "explore-architecture.json",
-      "created_by": "analyst",
-      "created_at": "2026-02-27T10:00:00Z",
-      "file_count": 15
-    }
-  ]
-}
-```
-
-### Cache Lookup Rules
-
-| Condition | Action |
-|-----------|--------|
-| Exact angle match exists | Return cached result |
-| No match | Execute exploration, cache result |
-| Cache file missing but index has entry | Remove stale entry, re-explore |
-
-### Cache Invalidation
-
-Cache is session-scoped. No explicit invalidation needed -- each session starts fresh. If a role suspects stale data, it can pass `force_refresh: true` in the prompt to bypass cache.
-
-## Angle Focus Guide
-
-| Angle | Focus Points | Typical Caller |
-|-------|-------------|----------------|
-| architecture | Layer boundaries, design patterns, component responsibilities, ADRs | any |
-| dependencies | Import chains, external libraries, circular dependencies, shared utilities | any |
-| modularity | Module interfaces, separation of concerns, extraction opportunities | any |
-| integration-points | API endpoints, data flow between modules, event systems | any |
-| security | Auth/authz logic, input validation, sensitive data handling, middleware | any |
-| dataflow | Data transformations, state propagation, validation points | any |
-| performance | Bottlenecks, N+1 queries, blocking operations, algorithm complexity | any |
-| error-handling | Try-catch blocks, error propagation, recovery strategies, logging | any |
-| patterns | Code conventions, design patterns, naming conventions, best practices | any |
-| testing | Test files, coverage gaps, test patterns, mocking strategies | any |
-| general | Broad semantic search for topic-related code | any |
-
-## Exploration Strategies
-
-### Low Complexity (direct search)
-
-For simple queries, use ACE semantic search:
-
-```
-mcp__ace-tool__search_context(project_root_path="<project-root>", query="<query>")
-```
-
-ACE failure fallback: `rg -l '<keywords>' --type ts`
-
-### Medium/High Complexity (multi-angle)
-
-For complex queries, call cli-explore-agent per angle. The calling role determines complexity and selects angles.
-
-## Search Tool Priority
-
-| Tool | Priority | Use Case |
-|------|----------|----------|
-| mcp__ace-tool__search_context | P0 | Semantic search |
-| Grep / Glob | P1 | Pattern matching |
-| cli-explore-agent | Deep | Multi-angle exploration |
-| WebSearch | P3 | External docs |

.claude/skills/team-executor/roles/executor/role.md

@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ Orchestrate the team-executor workflow: session validation, state reconciliation
 ### MUST NOT
 - Execute task work directly (delegate to workers)
 - Modify task output artifacts (workers own their deliverables)
-- Call implementation subagents (code-developer, etc.) directly
+- Call CLI tools or spawn utility members directly for implementation (code-developer, etc.)
 - Generate new role-specs (use existing session role-specs only)
 - Skip session validation
 - Override consensus_blocked HIGH without user confirmation

.claude/skills/team-executor/specs/session-schema.md

@@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ team-executor validates the following before execution:
       "responsibility_type": "<type>",
       "inner_loop": false,
       "role_spec_metadata": {
-        "subagents": [],
+        "additional_members": [],
         "message_types": {
           "success": "<prefix>_complete",
           "error": "error"

.claude/skills/team-frontend/role-specs/analyst.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: ANALYZE
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: []
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: analyze_ready
   error: error

.claude/skills/team-frontend/role-specs/architect.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: ARCH
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: []
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: arch_ready
   error: error

.claude/skills/team-frontend/role-specs/developer.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: DEV
 inner_loop: true
-subagents: []
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: dev_complete
   error: error

.claude/skills/team-frontend/role-specs/qa.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: QA
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: []
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: qa_passed
   error: error

.claude/skills/team-issue/role-specs/explorer.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: EXPLORE
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: [cli-explore-agent]
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: context_ready
   error: error
@@ -44,8 +44,8 @@ Bash("ccw issue status <issueId> --json")
 
 | Score | Complexity | Strategy |
 |-------|------------|----------|
-| >= 4 | High | Deep exploration via cli-explore-agent |
+| >= 4 | High | Deep exploration via CLI tool |
-| 2-3 | Medium | Hybrid: ACE search + selective agent |
+| 2-3 | Medium | Hybrid: ACE search + selective CLI |
 | 0-1 | Low | Direct ACE search only |
 
 **Exploration execution**:

.claude/skills/team-issue/role-specs/integrator.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: MARSHAL
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: [issue-queue-agent]
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: queue_ready
   conflict: conflict_found
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ message_types:
 
 # Issue Integrator
 
-Queue orchestration, conflict detection, and execution order optimization. Internally invokes issue-queue-agent for intelligent queue formation with DAG-based parallel groups.
+Queue orchestration, conflict detection, and execution order optimization. Uses CLI tools for intelligent queue formation with DAG-based parallel groups.
 
 ## Phase 2: Collect Bound Solutions
 

.claude/skills/team-issue/role-specs/planner.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 prefix: SOLVE
 inner_loop: false
 additional_prefixes: [SOLVE-fix]
-subagents: [issue-plan-agent]
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: solution_ready
   multi: multi_solution
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ message_types:
 
 # Issue Planner
 
-Design solutions and decompose into implementation tasks. Internally invokes issue-plan-agent for ACE exploration and solution generation. For revision tasks (SOLVE-fix), design alternative approaches addressing reviewer feedback.
+Design solutions and decompose into implementation tasks. Uses CLI tools for ACE exploration and solution generation. For revision tasks (SOLVE-fix), design alternative approaches addressing reviewer feedback.
 
 ## Phase 2: Context Loading
 

.claude/skills/team-issue/roles/coordinator/role.md

@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ Orchestrates the issue resolution pipeline: manages task chains, spawns team-wor
 - Skip review gate in full/batch modes
 - Force-advance pipeline past failed review
 - Modify source code directly -- delegate to implementer worker
-- Call implementation subagents directly (issue-plan-agent, issue-queue-agent, code-developer)
+- Call CLI tools or spawn utility members directly for implementation (issue-plan-agent, issue-queue-agent, code-developer)
 
 ---
 

.claude/skills/team-iterdev/SKILL.md

@@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ Standard report flow after task completion:
 | Share state via team_msg(type='state_update') | Create tasks for other roles |
 | SendMessage to coordinator | Communicate directly with other workers |
 
-**Coordinator additional restrictions**: No direct code writing, no calling implementation-type subagents, no directly executing analysis/testing/review.
+**Coordinator additional restrictions**: No direct code writing, no directly executing analysis/testing/review.
 
 ### Message Bus
 

.claude/skills/team-iterdev/role-specs/tester.md

@@ -43,12 +43,25 @@ Common commands: npm test, pytest, go test ./..., cargo test
 | 2 | Parse results, check pass rate |
 | 3 | Pass rate >= 95% -> exit loop (success) |
 | 4 | Extract failing test details |
-| 5 | Delegate fix to code-developer subagent |
+| 5 | Apply fix using CLI tool |
 | 6 | Increment iteration counter |
 | 7 | iteration >= MAX (5) -> exit loop (report failures) |
 | 8 | Go to Step 1 |
 
-**Fix delegation**: Spawn code-developer subagent with test output and changed file list. Run synchronously (run_in_background: false).
+**Fix delegation**: Use CLI tool to fix failing tests:
+
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Fix failing tests; success = all listed tests pass
+TASK: • Analyze test failure output • Identify root cause in changed files • Apply minimal fix
+MODE: write
+CONTEXT: @<changed-files> | Memory: Test output from current iteration
+EXPECTED: Code fixes that make failing tests pass without breaking other tests
+CONSTRAINTS: Only modify files in changed list | Minimal changes
+Test output: <test-failure-details>
+Changed files: <file-list>" --tool gemini --mode write --rule development-debug-runtime-issues
+```
+
+Wait for CLI completion before re-running tests.
 
 ## Phase 4: Regression Check + Report
 

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v2/role-specs/architect.md

@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+---
+role: architect
+prefix: ARCH
+inner_loop: false
+discuss_rounds: []
+subagents: [explore]
+message_types:
+  success: arch_ready
+  concern: arch_concern
+  error: error
+---
+
+# Architect — Phase 2-4
+
+## Consultation Modes
+
+| Task Pattern | Mode | Focus |
+|-------------|------|-------|
+| ARCH-SPEC-* | spec-review | Review architecture docs |
+| ARCH-PLAN-* | plan-review | Review plan soundness |
+| ARCH-CODE-* | code-review | Assess code change impact |
+| ARCH-CONSULT-* | consult | Answer architecture questions |
+| ARCH-FEASIBILITY-* | feasibility | Technical feasibility |
+
+## Phase 2: Context Loading
+
+**Common**: session folder, wisdom, project-tech.json, explorations
+
+**Mode-specific**:
+
+| Mode | Additional Context |
+|------|-------------------|
+| spec-review | architecture/_index.md, ADR-*.md |
+| plan-review | plan/plan.json |
+| code-review | git diff, changed files |
+| consult | Question from task description |
+| feasibility | Requirements + codebase |
+
+## Phase 3: Assessment
+
+Analyze using mode-specific criteria. Output: mode, verdict (APPROVE/CONCERN/BLOCK), dimensions[], concerns[], recommendations[].
+
+For complex questions → Gemini CLI with architecture review rule:
+
+```
+Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "..." --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-review-architecture`,
+  run_in_background: true
+})
+```
+
+## Phase 4: Report
+
+Output to `<session-folder>/architecture/arch-<slug>.json`. Contribute decisions to wisdom/decisions.md.
+
+**Frontend project outputs** (when frontend tech stack detected):
+- `<session-folder>/architecture/design-tokens.json` — color, spacing, typography, shadow tokens
+- `<session-folder>/architecture/component-specs/*.md` — per-component design spec
+
+**Report**: mode, verdict, concern count, recommendations, output path(s).
+
+### Coordinator Integration
+
+| Timing | Task |
+|--------|------|
+| After DRAFT-003 | ARCH-SPEC-001: architecture doc review |
+| After PLAN-001 | ARCH-PLAN-001: plan architecture review |
+| On-demand | ARCH-CONSULT-001: architecture consultation |
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Scenario | Resolution |
+|----------|------------|
+| Docs not found | Assess from available context |
+| CLI timeout | Partial assessment |
+| Insufficient context | Request explorer via coordinator |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v2/role-specs/executor.md

@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+---
+role: executor
+prefix: IMPL
+inner_loop: true
+discuss_rounds: []
+subagents: []
+message_types:
+  success: impl_complete
+  progress: impl_progress
+  error: error
+---
+
+# Executor — Phase 2-4
+
+## Phase 2: Task & Plan Loading
+
+**Objective**: Load plan and determine execution strategy.
+
+1. Load plan.json and .task/TASK-*.json from `<session-folder>/plan/`
+
+**Backend selection** (priority order):
+
+| Priority | Source | Method |
+|----------|--------|--------|
+| 1 | Task metadata | task.metadata.executor field |
+| 2 | Plan default | "Execution Backend:" in plan |
+| 3 | Auto-select | Simple (< 200 chars, no refactor) → agent; Complex → codex |
+
+**Code review selection**:
+
+| Priority | Source | Method |
+|----------|--------|--------|
+| 1 | Task metadata | task.metadata.code_review field |
+| 2 | Plan default | "Code Review:" in plan |
+| 3 | Auto-select | Critical keywords (auth, security, payment) → enabled |
+
+## Phase 3: Code Implementation
+
+**Objective**: Execute implementation across batches.
+
+**Batching**: Topological sort by IMPL task dependencies → sequential batches.
+
+| Backend | Invocation | Use Case |
+|---------|-----------|----------|
+| gemini | `ccw cli --tool gemini --mode write` (foreground) | Simple, direct edits |
+| codex | `ccw cli --tool codex --mode write` (foreground) | Complex, architecture |
+| qwen | `ccw cli --tool qwen --mode write` (foreground) | Alternative backend |
+
+## Phase 4: Self-Validation
+
+| Step | Method | Pass Criteria |
+|------|--------|--------------|
+| Syntax check | `tsc --noEmit` (30s) | Exit code 0 |
+| Acceptance criteria | Match criteria keywords vs implementation | All addressed |
+| Test detection | Find .test.ts/.spec.ts for modified files | Tests identified |
+| Code review (optional) | gemini analysis or codex review | No blocking issues |
+
+**Report**: task ID, status, files modified, validation results, backend used.
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Scenario | Resolution |
+|----------|------------|
+| Syntax errors | Retry with error context (max 3) |
+| Missing dependencies | Request from coordinator |
+| Backend unavailable | Fallback to alternative tool |
+| Circular dependencies | Abort, report graph |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v2/role-specs/fe-developer.md

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+---
+role: fe-developer
+prefix: DEV-FE
+inner_loop: false
+discuss_rounds: []
+subagents: []
+message_types:
+  success: dev_fe_complete
+  progress: dev_fe_progress
+  error: error
+---
+
+# FE Developer — Phase 2-4
+
+## Phase 2: Context Loading
+
+**Inputs to load**:
+- Plan: `<session-folder>/plan/plan.json`
+- Design tokens: `<session-folder>/architecture/design-tokens.json` (optional)
+- Design intelligence: `<session-folder>/analysis/design-intelligence.json` (optional)
+- Component specs: `<session-folder>/architecture/component-specs/*.md` (optional)
+- Shared memory, wisdom
+
+**Tech stack detection**:
+
+| Signal | Framework | Styling |
+|--------|-----------|---------|
+| react/react-dom in deps | react | - |
+| vue in deps | vue | - |
+| next in deps | nextjs | - |
+| tailwindcss in deps | - | tailwind |
+| @shadcn/ui in deps | - | shadcn |
+
+## Phase 3: Frontend Implementation
+
+**Step 1**: Generate design token CSS (if tokens available)
+- Convert design-tokens.json → CSS custom properties (`:root { --color-*, --space-*, --text-* }`)
+- Include dark mode overrides via `@media (prefers-color-scheme: dark)`
+- Write to `src/styles/tokens.css`
+
+**Step 2**: Implement components
+
+| Task Size | Strategy |
+|-----------|----------|
+| Simple (<= 3 files, single component) | `ccw cli --tool gemini --mode write` (foreground) |
+| Complex (system, multi-component) | `ccw cli --tool codex --mode write` (foreground) |
+
+**Coding standards** (include in agent/CLI prompt):
+- Use design token CSS variables, never hardcode colors/spacing
+- Interactive elements: cursor: pointer
+- Transitions: 150-300ms
+- Text contrast: minimum 4.5:1
+- Include focus-visible styles
+- Support prefers-reduced-motion
+- Responsive: mobile-first
+- No emoji as functional icons
+
+## Phase 4: Self-Validation
+
+| Check | What |
+|-------|------|
+| hardcoded-color | No #hex outside tokens.css |
+| cursor-pointer | Interactive elements have cursor: pointer |
+| focus-styles | Interactive elements have focus styles |
+| responsive | Has responsive breakpoints |
+| reduced-motion | Animations respect prefers-reduced-motion |
+| emoji-icon | No emoji as functional icons |
+
+Contribute to wisdom/conventions.md. Update shared-memory.json with component inventory.
+
+**Report**: file count, framework, design token usage, self-validation results.
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Scenario | Resolution |
+|----------|------------|
+| Design tokens not found | Use project defaults |
+| Tech stack undetected | Default HTML + CSS |
+| CLI failure | Retry with alternative tool |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v2/role-specs/fe-qa.md

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+---
+role: fe-qa
+prefix: QA-FE
+inner_loop: false
+discuss_rounds: []
+subagents: []
+message_types:
+  success: qa_fe_passed
+  result: qa_fe_result
+  fix: fix_required
+  error: error
+---
+
+# FE QA — Phase 2-4
+
+## Review Dimensions
+
+| Dimension | Weight | Focus |
+|-----------|--------|-------|
+| Code Quality | 25% | TypeScript types, component structure, error handling |
+| Accessibility | 25% | Semantic HTML, ARIA, keyboard nav, contrast, focus-visible |
+| Design Compliance | 20% | Token usage, no hardcoded colors, no emoji icons |
+| UX Best Practices | 15% | Loading/error/empty states, cursor-pointer, responsive |
+| Pre-Delivery | 15% | No console.log, dark mode, i18n readiness |
+
+## Phase 2: Context Loading
+
+**Inputs**: design tokens, design intelligence, shared memory, previous QA results (for GC round tracking), changed frontend files via git diff.
+
+Determine GC round from previous QA results count. Max 2 rounds.
+
+## Phase 3: 5-Dimension Review
+
+For each changed frontend file, check against all 5 dimensions. Score each dimension 0-10, deducting for issues found.
+
+**Scoring deductions**:
+
+| Severity | Deduction |
+|----------|-----------|
+| High | -2 to -3 |
+| Medium | -1 to -1.5 |
+| Low | -0.5 |
+
+**Overall score** = weighted sum of dimension scores.
+
+**Verdict routing**:
+
+| Condition | Verdict |
+|-----------|---------|
+| Score >= 8 AND no critical issues | PASS |
+| GC round >= max AND score >= 6 | PASS_WITH_WARNINGS |
+| GC round >= max AND score < 6 | FAIL |
+| Otherwise | NEEDS_FIX |
+
+## Phase 4: Report
+
+Write audit to `<session-folder>/qa/audit-fe-<task>-r<round>.json`. Update wisdom and shared memory.
+
+**Report**: round, verdict, overall score, dimension scores, critical issues with Do/Don't format, action required (if NEEDS_FIX).
+
+### Generator-Critic Loop
+
+Orchestrated by coordinator:
+```
+Round 1: DEV-FE-001 → QA-FE-001
+  if NEEDS_FIX → coordinator creates DEV-FE-002 + QA-FE-002
+Round 2: DEV-FE-002 → QA-FE-002
+  if still NEEDS_FIX → PASS_WITH_WARNINGS or FAIL (max 2)
+```
+
+**Convergence**: score >= 8 AND critical_count = 0
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Scenario | Resolution |
+|----------|------------|
+| No changed files | Report empty, score N/A |
+| Design tokens not found | Skip design compliance, adjust weights |
+| Max GC rounds exceeded | Force verdict |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v2/role-specs/planner.md

@@ -0,0 +1,98 @@
+---
+role: planner
+prefix: PLAN
+inner_loop: true
+discuss_rounds: []
+subagents: []
+message_types:
+  success: plan_ready
+  revision: plan_revision
+  error: error
+---
+
+# Planner — Phase 2-4
+
+## Phase 1.5: Load Spec Context (Full-Lifecycle)
+
+If `<session-folder>/spec/` exists → load requirements/_index.md, architecture/_index.md, epics/_index.md, spec-config.json. Otherwise → impl-only mode.
+
+**Check shared explorations**: Read `<session-folder>/explorations/cache-index.json` to see if analyst already cached useful explorations. Reuse rather than re-explore.
+
+## Phase 2: Multi-Angle Exploration
+
+**Objective**: Explore codebase to inform planning.
+
+**Complexity routing**:
+
+| Complexity | Criteria | Strategy |
+|------------|----------|----------|
+| Low | < 200 chars, no refactor/architecture keywords | ACE semantic search only |
+| Medium | 200-500 chars or moderate scope | 2-3 angle explore subagent |
+| High | > 500 chars, refactor/architecture, multi-module | 3-5 angle explore subagent |
+
+For each angle, use CLI exploration (cache-aware — check cache-index.json before each call):
+
+```
+Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Explore codebase from <angle> perspective to inform planning
+TASK: • Search for <angle>-specific patterns • Identify relevant files • Document integration points
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @**/* | Memory: Task keywords: <keywords>
+EXPECTED: JSON with: relevant_files[], patterns[], integration_points[], recommendations[]
+CONSTRAINTS: Focus on <angle> perspective" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-analyze-code-patterns`,
+  run_in_background: false
+})
+```
+
+## Phase 3: Plan Generation
+
+**Objective**: Generate structured implementation plan.
+
+| Complexity | Strategy |
+|------------|----------|
+| Low | Direct planning → single TASK-001 with plan.json |
+| Medium/High | cli-lite-planning-agent with exploration results |
+
+**CLI call** (Medium/High):
+
+```
+Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Generate structured implementation plan from exploration results
+TASK: • Create plan.json with overview • Generate TASK-*.json files (2-7 tasks) • Define dependencies • Set convergence criteria
+MODE: write
+CONTEXT: @<session-folder>/explorations/*.json | Memory: Complexity: <complexity>
+EXPECTED: Files: plan.json + .task/TASK-*.json. Schema: ~/.ccw/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/plan-overview-base-schema.json
+CONSTRAINTS: 2-7 tasks, include id/title/files[].change/convergence.criteria/depends_on" --tool gemini --mode write --rule planning-breakdown-task-steps`,
+  run_in_background: false
+})
+```
+
+**Spec context** (full-lifecycle): Reference REQ-* IDs, follow ADR decisions, reuse Epic/Story decomposition.
+
+## Phase 4: Submit for Approval
+
+1. Read plan.json and TASK-*.json
+2. Report to coordinator: complexity, task count, task list, approach, plan location
+3. Wait for response: approved → complete; revision → update and resubmit
+
+**Session files**:
+```
+<session-folder>/explorations/          (shared cache)
++-- cache-index.json
++-- explore-<angle>.json
+
+<session-folder>/plan/
++-- explorations-manifest.json
++-- plan.json
++-- .task/TASK-*.json
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Scenario | Resolution |
+|----------|------------|
+| CLI exploration failure | Plan from description only |
+| CLI planning failure | Fallback to direct planning |
+| Plan rejected 3+ times | Notify coordinator, suggest alternative |
+| Schema not found | Use basic structure |
+| Cache index corrupt | Clear cache, re-explore all angles |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v2/role-specs/tester.md

@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+---
+role: tester
+prefix: TEST
+inner_loop: false
+discuss_rounds: []
+subagents: []
+message_types:
+  success: test_result
+  fix: fix_required
+  error: error
+---
+
+# Tester — Phase 2-4
+
+## Phase 2: Framework Detection & Test Discovery
+
+**Framework detection** (priority order):
+
+| Priority | Method | Frameworks |
+|----------|--------|-----------|
+| 1 | package.json devDependencies | vitest, jest, mocha, pytest |
+| 2 | package.json scripts.test | vitest, jest, mocha, pytest |
+| 3 | Config files | vitest.config.*, jest.config.*, pytest.ini |
+
+**Affected test discovery** from executor's modified files:
+- Search variants: `<name>.test.ts`, `<name>.spec.ts`, `tests/<name>.test.ts`, `__tests__/<name>.test.ts`
+
+## Phase 3: Test Execution & Fix Cycle
+
+**Config**: MAX_ITERATIONS=10, PASS_RATE_TARGET=95%, AFFECTED_TESTS_FIRST=true
+
+1. Run affected tests → parse results
+2. Pass rate met → run full suite
+3. Failures → select strategy → fix → re-run → repeat
+
+**Strategy selection**:
+
+| Condition | Strategy | Behavior |
+|-----------|----------|----------|
+| Iteration <= 3 or pass >= 80% | Conservative | Fix one critical failure at a time |
+| Critical failures < 5 | Surgical | Fix specific pattern everywhere |
+| Pass < 50% or iteration > 7 | Aggressive | Fix all failures in batch |
+
+**Test commands**:
+
+| Framework | Affected | Full Suite |
+|-----------|---------|------------|
+| vitest | `vitest run <files>` | `vitest run` |
+| jest | `jest <files> --no-coverage` | `jest --no-coverage` |
+| pytest | `pytest <files> -v` | `pytest -v` |
+
+## Phase 4: Result Analysis
+
+**Failure classification**:
+
+| Severity | Patterns |
+|----------|----------|
+| Critical | SyntaxError, cannot find module, undefined |
+| High | Assertion failures, toBe/toEqual |
+| Medium | Timeout, async errors |
+| Low | Warnings, deprecations |
+
+**Report routing**:
+
+| Condition | Type |
+|-----------|------|
+| Pass rate >= target | test_result (success) |
+| Pass rate < target after max iterations | fix_required |
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Scenario | Resolution |
+|----------|------------|
+| Framework not detected | Prompt user |
+| No tests found | Report to coordinator |
+| Infinite fix loop | Abort after MAX_ITERATIONS |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v2/specs/document-standards.md

@@ -0,0 +1,192 @@
+# Document Standards
+
+Defines format conventions, YAML frontmatter schema, naming rules, and content structure for all spec-generator outputs.
+
+## When to Use
+
+| Phase | Usage | Section |
+|-------|-------|---------|
+| All Phases | Frontmatter format | YAML Frontmatter Schema |
+| All Phases | File naming | Naming Conventions |
+| Phase 2-5 | Document structure | Content Structure |
+| Phase 6 | Validation reference | All sections |
+
+---
+
+## YAML Frontmatter Schema
+
+Every generated document MUST begin with YAML frontmatter:
+
+```yaml
+---
+session_id: SPEC-{slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}
+phase: {1-6}
+document_type: {product-brief|requirements|architecture|epics|readiness-report|spec-summary}
+status: draft|review|complete
+generated_at: {ISO8601 timestamp}
+stepsCompleted: []
+version: 1
+dependencies:
+  - {list of input documents used}
+---
+```
+
+### Field Definitions
+
+| Field | Type | Required | Description |
+|-------|------|----------|-------------|
+| `session_id` | string | Yes | Session identifier matching spec-config.json |
+| `phase` | number | Yes | Phase number that generated this document (1-6) |
+| `document_type` | string | Yes | One of: product-brief, requirements, architecture, epics, readiness-report, spec-summary |
+| `status` | enum | Yes | draft (initial), review (user reviewed), complete (finalized) |
+| `generated_at` | string | Yes | ISO8601 timestamp of generation |
+| `stepsCompleted` | array | Yes | List of step IDs completed during generation |
+| `version` | number | Yes | Document version, incremented on re-generation |
+| `dependencies` | array | No | List of input files this document depends on |
+
+### Status Transitions
+
+```
+draft -> review -> complete
+  |                   ^
+  +-------------------+  (direct promotion in auto mode)
+```
+
+- **draft**: Initial generation, not yet user-reviewed
+- **review**: User has reviewed and provided feedback
+- **complete**: Finalized, ready for downstream consumption
+
+In auto mode (`-y`), documents are promoted directly from `draft` to `complete`.
+
+---
+
+## Naming Conventions
+
+### Session ID Format
+
+```
+SPEC-{slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}
+```
+
+- **slug**: Lowercase, alphanumeric + Chinese characters, hyphens as separators, max 40 chars
+- **date**: UTC+8 date in YYYY-MM-DD format
+
+Examples:
+- `SPEC-task-management-system-2026-02-11`
+- `SPEC-user-auth-oauth-2026-02-11`
+
+### Output Files
+
+| File | Phase | Description |
+|------|-------|-------------|
+| `spec-config.json` | 1 | Session configuration and state |
+| `discovery-context.json` | 1 | Codebase exploration results (optional) |
+| `product-brief.md` | 2 | Product brief document |
+| `requirements.md` | 3 | PRD document |
+| `architecture.md` | 4 | Architecture decisions document |
+| `epics.md` | 5 | Epic/Story breakdown document |
+| `readiness-report.md` | 6 | Quality validation report |
+| `spec-summary.md` | 6 | One-page executive summary |
+
+### Output Directory
+
+```
+.workflow/.spec/{session-id}/
+```
+
+---
+
+## Content Structure
+
+### Heading Hierarchy
+
+- `#` (H1): Document title only (one per document)
+- `##` (H2): Major sections
+- `###` (H3): Subsections
+- `####` (H4): Detail items (use sparingly)
+
+Maximum depth: 4 levels. Prefer flat structures.
+
+### Section Ordering
+
+Every document follows this general pattern:
+
+1. **YAML Frontmatter** (mandatory)
+2. **Title** (H1)
+3. **Executive Summary** (2-3 sentences)
+4. **Core Content Sections** (H2, document-specific)
+5. **Open Questions / Risks** (if applicable)
+6. **References / Traceability** (links to upstream/downstream docs)
+
+### Formatting Rules
+
+| Element | Format | Example |
+|---------|--------|---------|
+| Requirements | `REQ-{NNN}` prefix | REQ-001: User login |
+| Acceptance criteria | Checkbox list | `- [ ] User can log in with email` |
+| Architecture decisions | `ADR-{NNN}` prefix | ADR-001: Use PostgreSQL |
+| Epics | `EPIC-{NNN}` prefix | EPIC-001: Authentication |
+| Stories | `STORY-{EPIC}-{NNN}` prefix | STORY-001-001: Login form |
+| Priority tags | MoSCoW labels | `[Must]`, `[Should]`, `[Could]`, `[Won't]` |
+| Mermaid diagrams | Fenced code blocks | ````mermaid ... ``` `` |
+| Code examples | Language-tagged blocks | ````typescript ... ``` `` |
+
+### Cross-Reference Format
+
+Use relative references between documents:
+
+```markdown
+See [Product Brief](product-brief.md#section-name) for details.
+Derived from [REQ-001](requirements.md#req-001).
+```
+
+### Language
+
+- Document body: Follow user's input language (Chinese or English)
+- Technical identifiers: Always English (REQ-001, ADR-001, EPIC-001)
+- YAML frontmatter keys: Always English
+
+---
+
+## spec-config.json Schema
+
+```json
+{
+  "session_id": "string (required)",
+  "seed_input": "string (required) - original user input",
+  "input_type": "text|file (required)",
+  "timestamp": "ISO8601 (required)",
+  "mode": "interactive|auto (required)",
+  "complexity": "simple|moderate|complex (required)",
+  "depth": "light|standard|comprehensive (required)",
+  "focus_areas": ["string array"],
+  "seed_analysis": {
+    "problem_statement": "string",
+    "target_users": ["string array"],
+    "domain": "string",
+    "constraints": ["string array"],
+    "dimensions": ["string array - 3-5 exploration dimensions"]
+  },
+  "has_codebase": "boolean",
+  "phasesCompleted": [
+    {
+      "phase": "number (1-6)",
+      "name": "string (phase name)",
+      "output_file": "string (primary output file)",
+      "completed_at": "ISO8601"
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Validation Checklist
+
+- [ ] Every document starts with valid YAML frontmatter
+- [ ] `session_id` matches across all documents in a session
+- [ ] `status` field reflects current document state
+- [ ] All cross-references resolve to valid targets
+- [ ] Heading hierarchy is correct (no skipped levels)
+- [ ] Technical identifiers use correct prefixes
+- [ ] Output files are in the correct directory

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v2/specs/quality-gates.md

@@ -0,0 +1,207 @@
+# Quality Gates
+
+Per-phase quality gate criteria and scoring dimensions for spec-generator outputs.
+
+## When to Use
+
+| Phase | Usage | Section |
+|-------|-------|---------|
+| Phase 2-5 | Post-generation self-check | Per-Phase Gates |
+| Phase 6 | Cross-document validation | Cross-Document Validation |
+| Phase 6 | Final scoring | Scoring Dimensions |
+
+---
+
+## Quality Thresholds
+
+| Gate | Score | Action |
+|------|-------|--------|
+| **Pass** | >= 80% | Continue to next phase |
+| **Review** | 60-79% | Log warnings, continue with caveats |
+| **Fail** | < 60% | Must address issues before continuing |
+
+In auto mode (`-y`), Review-level issues are logged but do not block progress.
+
+---
+
+## Scoring Dimensions
+
+### 1. Completeness (25%)
+
+All required sections present with substantive content.
+
+| Score | Criteria |
+|-------|----------|
+| 100% | All template sections filled with detailed content |
+| 75% | All sections present, some lack detail |
+| 50% | Major sections present but minor sections missing |
+| 25% | Multiple major sections missing or empty |
+| 0% | Document is a skeleton only |
+
+### 2. Consistency (25%)
+
+Terminology, formatting, and references are uniform across documents.
+
+| Score | Criteria |
+|-------|----------|
+| 100% | All terms consistent, all references valid, formatting uniform |
+| 75% | Minor terminology variations, all references valid |
+| 50% | Some inconsistent terms, 1-2 broken references |
+| 25% | Frequent inconsistencies, multiple broken references |
+| 0% | Documents contradict each other |
+
+### 3. Traceability (25%)
+
+Requirements, architecture decisions, and stories trace back to goals.
+
+| Score | Criteria |
+|-------|----------|
+| 100% | Every story traces to a requirement, every requirement traces to a goal |
+| 75% | Most items traceable, few orphans |
+| 50% | Partial traceability, some disconnected items |
+| 25% | Weak traceability, many orphan items |
+| 0% | No traceability between documents |
+
+### 4. Depth (25%)
+
+Content provides sufficient detail for execution teams.
+
+| Score | Criteria |
+|-------|----------|
+| 100% | Acceptance criteria specific and testable, architecture decisions justified, stories estimable |
+| 75% | Most items detailed enough, few vague areas |
+| 50% | Mix of detailed and vague content |
+| 25% | Mostly high-level, lacking actionable detail |
+| 0% | Too abstract for execution |
+
+---
+
+## Per-Phase Quality Gates
+
+### Phase 1: Discovery
+
+| Check | Criteria | Severity |
+|-------|----------|----------|
+| Session ID valid | Matches `SPEC-{slug}-{date}` format | Error |
+| Problem statement exists | Non-empty, >= 20 characters | Error |
+| Target users identified | >= 1 user group | Error |
+| Dimensions generated | 3-5 exploration dimensions | Warning |
+| Constraints listed | >= 0 (can be empty with justification) | Info |
+
+### Phase 2: Product Brief
+
+| Check | Criteria | Severity |
+|-------|----------|----------|
+| Vision statement | Clear, 1-3 sentences | Error |
+| Problem statement | Specific and measurable | Error |
+| Target users | >= 1 persona with needs described | Error |
+| Goals defined | >= 2 measurable goals | Error |
+| Success metrics | >= 2 quantifiable metrics | Warning |
+| Scope boundaries | In-scope and out-of-scope listed | Warning |
+| Multi-perspective | >= 2 CLI perspectives synthesized | Info |
+
+### Phase 3: Requirements (PRD)
+
+| Check | Criteria | Severity |
+|-------|----------|----------|
+| Functional requirements | >= 3 with REQ-NNN IDs | Error |
+| Acceptance criteria | Every requirement has >= 1 criterion | Error |
+| MoSCoW priority | Every requirement tagged | Error |
+| Non-functional requirements | >= 1 (performance, security, etc.) | Warning |
+| User stories | >= 1 per Must-have requirement | Warning |
+| Traceability | Requirements trace to product brief goals | Warning |
+
+### Phase 4: Architecture
+
+| Check | Criteria | Severity |
+|-------|----------|----------|
+| Component diagram | Present (Mermaid or ASCII) | Error |
+| Tech stack specified | Languages, frameworks, key libraries | Error |
+| ADR present | >= 1 Architecture Decision Record | Error |
+| ADR has alternatives | Each ADR lists >= 2 options considered | Warning |
+| Integration points | External systems/APIs identified | Warning |
+| Data model | Key entities and relationships described | Warning |
+| Codebase mapping | Mapped to existing code (if has_codebase) | Info |
+
+### Phase 5: Epics & Stories
+
+| Check | Criteria | Severity |
+|-------|----------|----------|
+| Epics defined | 3-7 epics with EPIC-NNN IDs | Error |
+| MVP subset | >= 1 epic tagged as MVP | Error |
+| Stories per epic | 2-5 stories per epic | Error |
+| Story format | "As a...I want...So that..." pattern | Warning |
+| Dependency map | Cross-epic dependencies documented | Warning |
+| Estimation hints | Relative sizing (S/M/L/XL) per story | Info |
+| Traceability | Stories trace to requirements | Warning |
+
+### Phase 6: Readiness Check
+
+| Check | Criteria | Severity |
+|-------|----------|----------|
+| All documents exist | product-brief, requirements, architecture, epics | Error |
+| Frontmatter valid | All YAML frontmatter parseable and correct | Error |
+| Cross-references valid | All document links resolve | Error |
+| Overall score >= 60% | Weighted average across 4 dimensions | Error |
+| No unresolved Errors | All Error-severity issues addressed | Error |
+| Summary generated | spec-summary.md created | Warning |
+
+---
+
+## Cross-Document Validation
+
+Checks performed during Phase 6 across all documents:
+
+### Completeness Matrix
+
+```
+Product Brief goals  ->  Requirements (each goal has >= 1 requirement)
+Requirements         ->  Architecture (each Must requirement has design coverage)
+Requirements         ->  Epics (each Must requirement appears in >= 1 story)
+Architecture ADRs    ->  Epics (tech choices reflected in implementation stories)
+```
+
+### Consistency Checks
+
+| Check | Documents | Rule |
+|-------|-----------|------|
+| Terminology | All | Same term used consistently (no synonyms for same concept) |
+| User personas | Brief + PRD + Epics | Same user names/roles throughout |
+| Scope | Brief + PRD | PRD scope does not exceed brief scope |
+| Tech stack | Architecture + Epics | Stories reference correct technologies |
+
+### Traceability Matrix Format
+
+```markdown
+| Goal | Requirements | Architecture | Epics |
+|------|-------------|--------------|-------|
+| G-001: ... | REQ-001, REQ-002 | ADR-001 | EPIC-001 |
+| G-002: ... | REQ-003 | ADR-002 | EPIC-002, EPIC-003 |
+```
+
+---
+
+## Issue Classification
+
+### Error (Must Fix)
+
+- Missing required document or section
+- Broken cross-references
+- Contradictory information between documents
+- Empty acceptance criteria on Must-have requirements
+- No MVP subset defined in epics
+
+### Warning (Should Fix)
+
+- Vague acceptance criteria
+- Missing non-functional requirements
+- No success metrics defined
+- Incomplete traceability
+- Missing architecture review notes
+
+### Info (Nice to Have)
+
+- Could add more detailed personas
+- Consider additional ADR alternatives
+- Story estimation hints missing
+- Mermaid diagrams could be more detailed

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v2/templates/architecture-doc.md

@@ -0,0 +1,254 @@
+# Architecture Document Template (Directory Structure)
+
+Template for generating architecture decision documents as a directory of individual ADR files in Phase 4.
+
+## Usage Context
+
+| Phase | Usage |
+|-------|-------|
+| Phase 4 (Architecture) | Generate `architecture/` directory from requirements analysis |
+| Output Location | `{workDir}/architecture/` |
+
+## Output Structure
+
+```
+{workDir}/architecture/
+├── _index.md                      # Overview, components, tech stack, data model, security
+├── ADR-001-{slug}.md              # Individual Architecture Decision Record
+├── ADR-002-{slug}.md
+└── ...
+```
+
+---
+
+## Template: _index.md
+
+```markdown
+---
+session_id: {session_id}
+phase: 4
+document_type: architecture-index
+status: draft
+generated_at: {timestamp}
+version: 1
+dependencies:
+  - ../spec-config.json
+  - ../product-brief.md
+  - ../requirements/_index.md
+---
+
+# Architecture: {product_name}
+
+{executive_summary - high-level architecture approach and key decisions}
+
+## System Overview
+
+### Architecture Style
+{description of chosen architecture style: microservices, monolith, serverless, etc.}
+
+### System Context Diagram
+
+```mermaid
+C4Context
+    title System Context Diagram
+    Person(user, "User", "Primary user")
+    System(system, "{product_name}", "Core system")
+    System_Ext(ext1, "{external_system}", "{description}")
+    Rel(user, system, "Uses")
+    Rel(system, ext1, "Integrates with")
+```
+
+## Component Architecture
+
+### Component Diagram
+
+```mermaid
+graph TD
+    subgraph "{product_name}"
+        A[Component A] --> B[Component B]
+        B --> C[Component C]
+        A --> D[Component D]
+    end
+    B --> E[External Service]
+```
+
+### Component Descriptions
+
+| Component | Responsibility | Technology | Dependencies |
+|-----------|---------------|------------|--------------|
+| {component_name} | {what it does} | {tech stack} | {depends on} |
+
+## Technology Stack
+
+### Core Technologies
+
+| Layer | Technology | Version | Rationale |
+|-------|-----------|---------|-----------|
+| Frontend | {technology} | {version} | {why chosen} |
+| Backend | {technology} | {version} | {why chosen} |
+| Database | {technology} | {version} | {why chosen} |
+| Infrastructure | {technology} | {version} | {why chosen} |
+
+### Key Libraries & Frameworks
+
+| Library | Purpose | License |
+|---------|---------|---------|
+| {library_name} | {purpose} | {license} |
+
+## Architecture Decision Records
+
+| ADR | Title | Status | Key Choice |
+|-----|-------|--------|------------|
+| [ADR-001](ADR-001-{slug}.md) | {title} | Accepted | {one-line summary} |
+| [ADR-002](ADR-002-{slug}.md) | {title} | Accepted | {one-line summary} |
+| [ADR-003](ADR-003-{slug}.md) | {title} | Proposed | {one-line summary} |
+
+## Data Architecture
+
+### Data Model
+
+```mermaid
+erDiagram
+    ENTITY_A ||--o{ ENTITY_B : "has many"
+    ENTITY_A {
+        string id PK
+        string name
+        datetime created_at
+    }
+    ENTITY_B {
+        string id PK
+        string entity_a_id FK
+        string value
+    }
+```
+
+### Data Storage Strategy
+
+| Data Type | Storage | Retention | Backup |
+|-----------|---------|-----------|--------|
+| {type} | {storage solution} | {retention policy} | {backup strategy} |
+
+## API Design
+
+### API Overview
+
+| Endpoint | Method | Purpose | Auth |
+|----------|--------|---------|------|
+| {/api/resource} | {GET/POST/etc} | {purpose} | {auth type} |
+
+## Security Architecture
+
+### Security Controls
+
+| Control | Implementation | Requirement |
+|---------|---------------|-------------|
+| Authentication | {approach} | [NFR-S-{NNN}](../requirements/NFR-S-{NNN}-{slug}.md) |
+| Authorization | {approach} | [NFR-S-{NNN}](../requirements/NFR-S-{NNN}-{slug}.md) |
+| Data Protection | {approach} | [NFR-S-{NNN}](../requirements/NFR-S-{NNN}-{slug}.md) |
+
+## Infrastructure & Deployment
+
+### Deployment Architecture
+
+{description of deployment model: containers, serverless, VMs, etc.}
+
+### Environment Strategy
+
+| Environment | Purpose | Configuration |
+|-------------|---------|---------------|
+| Development | Local development | {config} |
+| Staging | Pre-production testing | {config} |
+| Production | Live system | {config} |
+
+## Codebase Integration
+
+{if has_codebase is true:}
+
+### Existing Code Mapping
+
+| New Component | Existing Module | Integration Type | Notes |
+|--------------|----------------|------------------|-------|
+| {component} | {existing module path} | Extend/Replace/New | {notes} |
+
+### Migration Notes
+{any migration considerations for existing code}
+
+## Quality Attributes
+
+| Attribute | Target | Measurement | ADR Reference |
+|-----------|--------|-------------|---------------|
+| Performance | {target} | {how measured} | [ADR-{NNN}](ADR-{NNN}-{slug}.md) |
+| Scalability | {target} | {how measured} | [ADR-{NNN}](ADR-{NNN}-{slug}.md) |
+| Reliability | {target} | {how measured} | [ADR-{NNN}](ADR-{NNN}-{slug}.md) |
+
+## Risks & Mitigations
+
+| Risk | Impact | Probability | Mitigation |
+|------|--------|-------------|------------|
+| {risk} | High/Medium/Low | High/Medium/Low | {mitigation approach} |
+
+## Open Questions
+
+- [ ] {architectural question 1}
+- [ ] {architectural question 2}
+
+## References
+
+- Derived from: [Requirements](../requirements/_index.md), [Product Brief](../product-brief.md)
+- Next: [Epics & Stories](../epics/_index.md)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Template: ADR-NNN-{slug}.md (Individual Architecture Decision Record)
+
+```markdown
+---
+id: ADR-{NNN}
+status: Accepted
+traces_to: [{REQ-NNN}, {NFR-X-NNN}]
+date: {timestamp}
+---
+
+# ADR-{NNN}: {decision_title}
+
+## Context
+
+{what is the situation that motivates this decision}
+
+## Decision
+
+{what is the chosen approach}
+
+## Alternatives Considered
+
+| Option | Pros | Cons |
+|--------|------|------|
+| {option_1 - chosen} | {pros} | {cons} |
+| {option_2} | {pros} | {cons} |
+| {option_3} | {pros} | {cons} |
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **Positive**: {positive outcomes}
+- **Negative**: {tradeoffs accepted}
+- **Risks**: {risks to monitor}
+
+## Traces
+
+- **Requirements**: [REQ-{NNN}](../requirements/REQ-{NNN}-{slug}.md), [NFR-X-{NNN}](../requirements/NFR-X-{NNN}-{slug}.md)
+- **Implemented by**: [EPIC-{NNN}](../epics/EPIC-{NNN}-{slug}.md) (added in Phase 5)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Variable Descriptions
+
+| Variable | Source | Description |
+|----------|--------|-------------|
+| `{session_id}` | spec-config.json | Session identifier |
+| `{timestamp}` | Runtime | ISO8601 generation timestamp |
+| `{product_name}` | product-brief.md | Product/feature name |
+| `{NNN}` | Auto-increment | ADR/requirement number |
+| `{slug}` | Auto-generated | Kebab-case from decision title |
+| `{has_codebase}` | spec-config.json | Whether existing codebase exists |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v2/templates/epics-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,196 @@
+# Epics & Stories Template (Directory Structure)
+
+Template for generating epic/story breakdown as a directory of individual Epic files in Phase 5.
+
+## Usage Context
+
+| Phase | Usage |
+|-------|-------|
+| Phase 5 (Epics & Stories) | Generate `epics/` directory from requirements decomposition |
+| Output Location | `{workDir}/epics/` |
+
+## Output Structure
+
+```
+{workDir}/epics/
+├── _index.md                      # Overview table + dependency map + MVP scope + execution order
+├── EPIC-001-{slug}.md             # Individual Epic with its Stories
+├── EPIC-002-{slug}.md
+└── ...
+```
+
+---
+
+## Template: _index.md
+
+```markdown
+---
+session_id: {session_id}
+phase: 5
+document_type: epics-index
+status: draft
+generated_at: {timestamp}
+version: 1
+dependencies:
+  - ../spec-config.json
+  - ../product-brief.md
+  - ../requirements/_index.md
+  - ../architecture/_index.md
+---
+
+# Epics & Stories: {product_name}
+
+{executive_summary - overview of epic structure and MVP scope}
+
+## Epic Overview
+
+| Epic ID | Title | Priority | MVP | Stories | Est. Size |
+|---------|-------|----------|-----|---------|-----------|
+| [EPIC-001](EPIC-001-{slug}.md) | {title} | Must | Yes | {n} | {S/M/L/XL} |
+| [EPIC-002](EPIC-002-{slug}.md) | {title} | Must | Yes | {n} | {S/M/L/XL} |
+| [EPIC-003](EPIC-003-{slug}.md) | {title} | Should | No | {n} | {S/M/L/XL} |
+
+## Dependency Map
+
+```mermaid
+graph LR
+    EPIC-001 --> EPIC-002
+    EPIC-001 --> EPIC-003
+    EPIC-002 --> EPIC-004
+    EPIC-003 --> EPIC-005
+```
+
+### Dependency Notes
+{explanation of why these dependencies exist and suggested execution order}
+
+### Recommended Execution Order
+1. [EPIC-{NNN}](EPIC-{NNN}-{slug}.md): {reason - foundational}
+2. [EPIC-{NNN}](EPIC-{NNN}-{slug}.md): {reason - depends on #1}
+3. ...
+
+## MVP Scope
+
+### MVP Epics
+{list of epics included in MVP with justification, linking to each}
+
+### MVP Definition of Done
+- [ ] {MVP completion criterion 1}
+- [ ] {MVP completion criterion 2}
+- [ ] {MVP completion criterion 3}
+
+## Traceability Matrix
+
+| Requirement | Epic | Stories | Architecture |
+|-------------|------|---------|--------------|
+| [REQ-001](../requirements/REQ-001-{slug}.md) | [EPIC-001](EPIC-001-{slug}.md) | STORY-001-001, STORY-001-002 | [ADR-001](../architecture/ADR-001-{slug}.md) |
+| [REQ-002](../requirements/REQ-002-{slug}.md) | [EPIC-001](EPIC-001-{slug}.md) | STORY-001-003 | Component B |
+| [REQ-003](../requirements/REQ-003-{slug}.md) | [EPIC-002](EPIC-002-{slug}.md) | STORY-002-001 | [ADR-002](../architecture/ADR-002-{slug}.md) |
+
+## Estimation Summary
+
+| Size | Meaning | Count |
+|------|---------|-------|
+| S | Small - well-understood, minimal risk | {n} |
+| M | Medium - some complexity, moderate risk | {n} |
+| L | Large - significant complexity, should consider splitting | {n} |
+| XL | Extra Large - high complexity, must split before implementation | {n} |
+
+## Risks & Considerations
+
+| Risk | Affected Epics | Mitigation |
+|------|---------------|------------|
+| {risk description} | [EPIC-{NNN}](EPIC-{NNN}-{slug}.md) | {mitigation} |
+
+## Open Questions
+
+- [ ] {question about scope or implementation 1}
+- [ ] {question about scope or implementation 2}
+
+## References
+
+- Derived from: [Requirements](../requirements/_index.md), [Architecture](../architecture/_index.md)
+- Handoff to: execution workflows (lite-plan, plan, req-plan)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Template: EPIC-NNN-{slug}.md (Individual Epic)
+
+```markdown
+---
+id: EPIC-{NNN}
+priority: {Must|Should|Could}
+mvp: {true|false}
+size: {S|M|L|XL}
+requirements: [REQ-{NNN}]
+architecture: [ADR-{NNN}]
+dependencies: [EPIC-{NNN}]
+status: draft
+---
+
+# EPIC-{NNN}: {epic_title}
+
+**Priority**: {Must|Should|Could}
+**MVP**: {Yes|No}
+**Estimated Size**: {S|M|L|XL}
+
+## Description
+
+{detailed epic description}
+
+## Requirements
+
+- [REQ-{NNN}](../requirements/REQ-{NNN}-{slug}.md): {title}
+- [REQ-{NNN}](../requirements/REQ-{NNN}-{slug}.md): {title}
+
+## Architecture
+
+- [ADR-{NNN}](../architecture/ADR-{NNN}-{slug}.md): {title}
+- Component: {component_name}
+
+## Dependencies
+
+- [EPIC-{NNN}](EPIC-{NNN}-{slug}.md) (blocking): {reason}
+- [EPIC-{NNN}](EPIC-{NNN}-{slug}.md) (soft): {reason}
+
+## Stories
+
+### STORY-{EPIC}-001: {story_title}
+
+**User Story**: As a {persona}, I want to {action} so that {benefit}.
+
+**Acceptance Criteria**:
+- [ ] {criterion 1}
+- [ ] {criterion 2}
+- [ ] {criterion 3}
+
+**Size**: {S|M|L|XL}
+**Traces to**: [REQ-{NNN}](../requirements/REQ-{NNN}-{slug}.md)
+
+---
+
+### STORY-{EPIC}-002: {story_title}
+
+**User Story**: As a {persona}, I want to {action} so that {benefit}.
+
+**Acceptance Criteria**:
+- [ ] {criterion 1}
+- [ ] {criterion 2}
+
+**Size**: {S|M|L|XL}
+**Traces to**: [REQ-{NNN}](../requirements/REQ-{NNN}-{slug}.md)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Variable Descriptions
+
+| Variable | Source | Description |
+|----------|--------|-------------|
+| `{session_id}` | spec-config.json | Session identifier |
+| `{timestamp}` | Runtime | ISO8601 generation timestamp |
+| `{product_name}` | product-brief.md | Product/feature name |
+| `{EPIC}` | Auto-increment | Epic number (3 digits) |
+| `{NNN}` | Auto-increment | Story/requirement number |
+| `{slug}` | Auto-generated | Kebab-case from epic/story title |
+| `{S\|M\|L\|XL}` | CLI analysis | Relative size estimate |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v2/templates/product-brief.md

@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
+# Product Brief Template
+
+Template for generating product brief documents in Phase 2.
+
+## Usage Context
+
+| Phase | Usage |
+|-------|-------|
+| Phase 2 (Product Brief) | Generate product-brief.md from multi-CLI analysis |
+| Output Location | `{workDir}/product-brief.md` |
+
+---
+
+## Template
+
+```markdown
+---
+session_id: {session_id}
+phase: 2
+document_type: product-brief
+status: draft
+generated_at: {timestamp}
+stepsCompleted: []
+version: 1
+dependencies:
+  - spec-config.json
+---
+
+# Product Brief: {product_name}
+
+{executive_summary - 2-3 sentences capturing the essence of the product/feature}
+
+## Vision
+
+{vision_statement - clear, aspirational 1-3 sentence statement of what success looks like}
+
+## Problem Statement
+
+### Current Situation
+{description of the current state and pain points}
+
+### Impact
+{quantified impact of the problem - who is affected, how much, how often}
+
+## Target Users
+
+{for each user persona:}
+
+### {Persona Name}
+- **Role**: {user's role/context}
+- **Needs**: {primary needs related to this product}
+- **Pain Points**: {current frustrations}
+- **Success Criteria**: {what success looks like for this user}
+
+## Goals & Success Metrics
+
+| Goal ID | Goal | Success Metric | Target |
+|---------|------|----------------|--------|
+| G-001 | {goal description} | {measurable metric} | {specific target} |
+| G-002 | {goal description} | {measurable metric} | {specific target} |
+
+## Scope
+
+### In Scope
+- {feature/capability 1}
+- {feature/capability 2}
+- {feature/capability 3}
+
+### Out of Scope
+- {explicitly excluded item 1}
+- {explicitly excluded item 2}
+
+### Assumptions
+- {key assumption 1}
+- {key assumption 2}
+
+## Competitive Landscape
+
+| Aspect | Current State | Proposed Solution | Advantage |
+|--------|--------------|-------------------|-----------|
+| {aspect} | {how it's done now} | {our approach} | {differentiator} |
+
+## Constraints & Dependencies
+
+### Technical Constraints
+- {constraint 1}
+- {constraint 2}
+
+### Business Constraints
+- {constraint 1}
+
+### Dependencies
+- {external dependency 1}
+- {external dependency 2}
+
+## Multi-Perspective Synthesis
+
+### Product Perspective
+{summary of product/market analysis findings}
+
+### Technical Perspective
+{summary of technical feasibility and constraints}
+
+### User Perspective
+{summary of user journey and UX considerations}
+
+### Convergent Themes
+{themes where all perspectives agree}
+
+### Conflicting Views
+{areas where perspectives differ, with notes on resolution approach}
+
+## Open Questions
+
+- [ ] {unresolved question 1}
+- [ ] {unresolved question 2}
+
+## References
+
+- Derived from: [spec-config.json](spec-config.json)
+- Next: [Requirements PRD](requirements.md)
+```
+
+## Variable Descriptions
+
+| Variable | Source | Description |
+|----------|--------|-------------|
+| `{session_id}` | spec-config.json | Session identifier |
+| `{timestamp}` | Runtime | ISO8601 generation timestamp |
+| `{product_name}` | Seed analysis | Product/feature name |
+| `{executive_summary}` | CLI synthesis | 2-3 sentence summary |
+| `{vision_statement}` | CLI product perspective | Aspirational vision |
+| All `{...}` fields | CLI analysis outputs | Filled from multi-perspective analysis |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v2/templates/requirements-prd.md

@@ -0,0 +1,224 @@
+# Requirements PRD Template (Directory Structure)
+
+Template for generating Product Requirements Document as a directory of individual requirement files in Phase 3.
+
+## Usage Context
+
+| Phase | Usage |
+|-------|-------|
+| Phase 3 (Requirements) | Generate `requirements/` directory from product brief expansion |
+| Output Location | `{workDir}/requirements/` |
+
+## Output Structure
+
+```
+{workDir}/requirements/
+├── _index.md                      # Summary + MoSCoW table + traceability matrix + links
+├── REQ-001-{slug}.md              # Individual functional requirement
+├── REQ-002-{slug}.md
+├── NFR-P-001-{slug}.md            # Non-functional: Performance
+├── NFR-S-001-{slug}.md            # Non-functional: Security
+├── NFR-SC-001-{slug}.md           # Non-functional: Scalability
+├── NFR-U-001-{slug}.md            # Non-functional: Usability
+└── ...
+```
+
+---
+
+## Template: _index.md
+
+```markdown
+---
+session_id: {session_id}
+phase: 3
+document_type: requirements-index
+status: draft
+generated_at: {timestamp}
+version: 1
+dependencies:
+  - ../spec-config.json
+  - ../product-brief.md
+---
+
+# Requirements: {product_name}
+
+{executive_summary - brief overview of what this PRD covers and key decisions}
+
+## Requirement Summary
+
+| Priority | Count | Coverage |
+|----------|-------|----------|
+| Must Have | {n} | {description of must-have scope} |
+| Should Have | {n} | {description of should-have scope} |
+| Could Have | {n} | {description of could-have scope} |
+| Won't Have | {n} | {description of explicitly excluded} |
+
+## Functional Requirements
+
+| ID | Title | Priority | Traces To |
+|----|-------|----------|-----------|
+| [REQ-001](REQ-001-{slug}.md) | {title} | Must | [G-001](../product-brief.md#goals--success-metrics) |
+| [REQ-002](REQ-002-{slug}.md) | {title} | Must | [G-001](../product-brief.md#goals--success-metrics) |
+| [REQ-003](REQ-003-{slug}.md) | {title} | Should | [G-002](../product-brief.md#goals--success-metrics) |
+
+## Non-Functional Requirements
+
+### Performance
+
+| ID | Title | Target |
+|----|-------|--------|
+| [NFR-P-001](NFR-P-001-{slug}.md) | {title} | {target value} |
+
+### Security
+
+| ID | Title | Standard |
+|----|-------|----------|
+| [NFR-S-001](NFR-S-001-{slug}.md) | {title} | {standard/framework} |
+
+### Scalability
+
+| ID | Title | Target |
+|----|-------|--------|
+| [NFR-SC-001](NFR-SC-001-{slug}.md) | {title} | {target value} |
+
+### Usability
+
+| ID | Title | Target |
+|----|-------|--------|
+| [NFR-U-001](NFR-U-001-{slug}.md) | {title} | {target value} |
+
+## Data Requirements
+
+### Data Entities
+
+| Entity | Description | Key Attributes |
+|--------|-------------|----------------|
+| {entity_name} | {description} | {attr1, attr2, attr3} |
+
+### Data Flows
+
+{description of key data flows, optionally with Mermaid diagram}
+
+## Integration Requirements
+
+| System | Direction | Protocol | Data Format | Notes |
+|--------|-----------|----------|-------------|-------|
+| {system_name} | Inbound/Outbound/Both | {REST/gRPC/etc} | {JSON/XML/etc} | {notes} |
+
+## Constraints & Assumptions
+
+### Constraints
+- {technical or business constraint 1}
+- {technical or business constraint 2}
+
+### Assumptions
+- {assumption 1 - must be validated}
+- {assumption 2 - must be validated}
+
+## Priority Rationale
+
+{explanation of MoSCoW prioritization decisions, especially for Should/Could boundaries}
+
+## Traceability Matrix
+
+| Goal | Requirements |
+|------|-------------|
+| G-001 | [REQ-001](REQ-001-{slug}.md), [REQ-002](REQ-002-{slug}.md), [NFR-P-001](NFR-P-001-{slug}.md) |
+| G-002 | [REQ-003](REQ-003-{slug}.md), [NFR-S-001](NFR-S-001-{slug}.md) |
+
+## Open Questions
+
+- [ ] {unresolved question 1}
+- [ ] {unresolved question 2}
+
+## References
+
+- Derived from: [Product Brief](../product-brief.md)
+- Next: [Architecture](../architecture/_index.md)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Template: REQ-NNN-{slug}.md (Individual Functional Requirement)
+
+```markdown
+---
+id: REQ-{NNN}
+type: functional
+priority: {Must|Should|Could|Won't}
+traces_to: [G-{NNN}]
+status: draft
+---
+
+# REQ-{NNN}: {requirement_title}
+
+**Priority**: {Must|Should|Could|Won't}
+
+## Description
+
+{detailed requirement description}
+
+## User Story
+
+As a {persona}, I want to {action} so that {benefit}.
+
+## Acceptance Criteria
+
+- [ ] {specific, testable criterion 1}
+- [ ] {specific, testable criterion 2}
+- [ ] {specific, testable criterion 3}
+
+## Traces
+
+- **Goal**: [G-{NNN}](../product-brief.md#goals--success-metrics)
+- **Architecture**: [ADR-{NNN}](../architecture/ADR-{NNN}-{slug}.md) (if applicable)
+- **Implemented by**: [EPIC-{NNN}](../epics/EPIC-{NNN}-{slug}.md) (added in Phase 5)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Template: NFR-{type}-NNN-{slug}.md (Individual Non-Functional Requirement)
+
+```markdown
+---
+id: NFR-{type}-{NNN}
+type: non-functional
+category: {Performance|Security|Scalability|Usability}
+priority: {Must|Should|Could}
+status: draft
+---
+
+# NFR-{type}-{NNN}: {requirement_title}
+
+**Category**: {Performance|Security|Scalability|Usability}
+**Priority**: {Must|Should|Could}
+
+## Requirement
+
+{detailed requirement description}
+
+## Metric & Target
+
+| Metric | Target | Measurement Method |
+|--------|--------|--------------------|
+| {metric} | {target value} | {how measured} |
+
+## Traces
+
+- **Goal**: [G-{NNN}](../product-brief.md#goals--success-metrics)
+- **Architecture**: [ADR-{NNN}](../architecture/ADR-{NNN}-{slug}.md) (if applicable)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Variable Descriptions
+
+| Variable | Source | Description |
+|----------|--------|-------------|
+| `{session_id}` | spec-config.json | Session identifier |
+| `{timestamp}` | Runtime | ISO8601 generation timestamp |
+| `{product_name}` | product-brief.md | Product/feature name |
+| `{NNN}` | Auto-increment | Requirement number (zero-padded 3 digits) |
+| `{slug}` | Auto-generated | Kebab-case from requirement title |
+| `{type}` | Category | P (Performance), S (Security), SC (Scalability), U (Usability) |
+| `{Must\|Should\|Could\|Won't}` | User input / auto | MoSCoW priority tag |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/SKILL.md

@@ -34,10 +34,10 @@ Unified team skill: specification -> implementation -> testing -> review. Built
                                         | fe-qa  |
                                         +--------+
 
-  Subagents (callable by any worker, not team members):
+  Utility Functions (callable by workers):
-    [discuss-subagent]  - multi-perspective critique
+    [multi-perspective discussion]  - CLI tools for critique
-    [explore-subagent]  - codebase exploration with cache
+    [codebase exploration]          - Explore agent with cache
-    [doc-generation]    - document generation (CLI execution)
+    [document generation]           - CLI execution
 ```
 
 ## Role Router
@@ -63,13 +63,13 @@ Parse `$ARGUMENTS`. No `--role` needed — always routes to coordinator.
 | fe-developer | [role-specs/fe-developer.md](role-specs/fe-developer.md) | DEV-FE-* | frontend | false |
 | fe-qa | [role-specs/fe-qa.md](role-specs/fe-qa.md) | QA-FE-* | frontend | false |
 
-### Subagent Registry
+### Utility Functions
 
-| Subagent | Spec | Callable By | Purpose |
+| Function | Implementation | Callable By | Purpose |
-|----------|------|-------------|---------|
+|----------|----------------|-------------|---------|
-| discuss | [subagents/discuss-subagent.md](subagents/discuss-subagent.md) | analyst, writer, reviewer | Multi-perspective critique |
+| Multi-perspective discussion | CLI tools (ccw cli --mode analysis) | analyst, writer, reviewer | Multi-perspective critique |
-| explore | [subagents/explore-subagent.md](subagents/explore-subagent.md) | analyst, planner, any role | Codebase exploration with cache |
+| Codebase exploration | Explore agent | analyst, planner, any role | Codebase exploration with cache |
-| doc-generation | [subagents/doc-generation-subagent.md](subagents/doc-generation-subagent.md) | writer | Document generation (CLI execution) |
+| Document generation | CLI tools (ccw cli --mode write) | writer | Document generation |
 
 ### Dispatch
 
@@ -306,9 +306,6 @@ Coordinator supports `--resume` / `--continue` for interrupted sessions:
 | Requirements Template | [templates/requirements-prd.md](templates/requirements-prd.md) | DRAFT-002 |
 | Architecture Template | [templates/architecture-doc.md](templates/architecture-doc.md) | DRAFT-003 |
 | Epics Template | [templates/epics-template.md](templates/epics-template.md) | DRAFT-004 |
-| Discuss Subagent | [subagents/discuss-subagent.md](subagents/discuss-subagent.md) | Inline discuss protocol |
-| Explore Subagent | [subagents/explore-subagent.md](subagents/explore-subagent.md) | Shared exploration utility |
-| Doc-Gen Subagent | [subagents/doc-generation-subagent.md](subagents/doc-generation-subagent.md) | Document generation engine |
 
 ## Error Handling
 
@@ -317,6 +314,6 @@ Coordinator supports `--resume` / `--continue` for interrupted sessions:
 | Unknown command | Error with available command list |
 | Role spec file not found | Error with expected path |
 | Command file not found | Fallback to inline execution |
-| Discuss subagent fails | Worker proceeds without discuss, logs warning |
+| Multi-perspective discussion fails | Worker proceeds without discuss, logs warning |
 | Explore cache corrupt | Clear cache, re-explore |
 | Fast-advance spawns wrong task | Coordinator reconciles on next callback |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/role-specs/analyst.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ role: analyst
 prefix: RESEARCH
 inner_loop: false
 discuss_rounds: [DISCUSS-001]
-subagents: [discuss]
+cli_tools: [discuss]
 message_types:
   success: research_ready
   progress: research_progress
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ Parse CLI output to build codebase context: tech_stack, architecture_patterns, c
 
 ### 4b: Inline Discuss (DISCUSS-001)
 
-Call discuss subagent with:
+Invoke multi-perspective discussion using CLI tools:
 - Artifact: `<session-folder>/spec/discovery-context.json`
 - Round: DISCUSS-001
 - Perspectives: product, risk, coverage
@@ -93,4 +93,4 @@ Handle discuss verdict per team-worker consensus handling protocol.
 | Codebase detection failed | Continue as new project |
 | Topic too vague | Report with clarification questions |
 | CLI exploration fails | Continue without codebase context |
-| Discuss subagent fails | Proceed without discuss, log warning |
+| Multi-perspective discussion fails | Proceed without discuss, log warning |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/role-specs/architect.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ role: architect
 prefix: ARCH
 inner_loop: false
 discuss_rounds: []
-subagents: [explore]
+cli_tools: [explore]
 message_types:
   success: arch_ready
   concern: arch_concern

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/role-specs/executor.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ role: executor
 prefix: IMPL
 inner_loop: true
 discuss_rounds: []
-subagents: []
+cli_tools: []
 message_types:
   success: impl_complete
   progress: impl_progress

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/role-specs/fe-developer.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ role: fe-developer
 prefix: DEV-FE
 inner_loop: false
 discuss_rounds: []
-subagents: []
+cli_tools: []
 message_types:
   success: dev_fe_complete
   progress: dev_fe_progress

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/role-specs/fe-qa.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ role: fe-qa
 prefix: QA-FE
 inner_loop: false
 discuss_rounds: []
-subagents: []
+cli_tools: []
 message_types:
   success: qa_fe_passed
   result: qa_fe_result

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/role-specs/planner.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ role: planner
 prefix: PLAN
 inner_loop: true
 discuss_rounds: []
-subagents: []
+cli_tools: [explore]
 message_types:
   success: plan_ready
   revision: plan_revision
@@ -27,8 +27,8 @@ If `<session-folder>/spec/` exists → load requirements/_index.md, architecture
 | Complexity | Criteria | Strategy |
 |------------|----------|----------|
 | Low | < 200 chars, no refactor/architecture keywords | ACE semantic search only |
-| Medium | 200-500 chars or moderate scope | 2-3 angle explore subagent |
+| Medium | 200-500 chars or moderate scope | 2-3 angle CLI explore |
-| High | > 500 chars, refactor/architecture, multi-module | 3-5 angle explore subagent |
+| High | > 500 chars, refactor/architecture, multi-module | 3-5 angle CLI explore |
 
 For each angle, use CLI exploration (cache-aware — check cache-index.json before each call):
 

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/role-specs/reviewer.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ prefix: REVIEW
 additional_prefixes: [QUALITY, IMPROVE]
 inner_loop: false
 discuss_rounds: [DISCUSS-006]
-subagents: [discuss]
+cli_tools: [discuss]
 message_types:
   success_review: review_result
   success_quality: quality_result
@@ -73,11 +73,19 @@ message_types:
 
 ### Spec Quality Inline Discuss (DISCUSS-006)
 
-After generating readiness-report.md, call discuss subagent:
+After generating readiness-report.md, call CLI discuss tool:
 - Artifact: `<session-folder>/spec/readiness-report.md`
 - Round: DISCUSS-006
 - Perspectives: product, technical, quality, risk, coverage (all 5)
 
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Multi-perspective critique of spec readiness
+TASK: Review from product, technical, quality, risk, coverage perspectives
+ARTIFACT: @<session-folder>/spec/readiness-report.md
+MODE: analysis
+EXPECTED: JSON with perspectives[], consensus, severity, recommendations[]" --tool gemini --mode analysis
+```
+
 Handle discuss verdict per team-worker consensus handling protocol.
 
 > **Note**: DISCUSS-006 HIGH always triggers user pause (final sign-off gate), regardless of revision count.
@@ -91,4 +99,4 @@ Handle discuss verdict per team-worker consensus handling protocol.
 | Missing context | Request from coordinator |
 | Invalid mode | Abort with error |
 | Analysis failure | Retry, then fallback template |
-| Discuss subagent fails | Proceed without final discuss, log warning |
+| CLI discuss fails | Proceed without final discuss, log warning |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/role-specs/tester.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ role: tester
 prefix: TEST
 inner_loop: false
 discuss_rounds: []
-subagents: []
+cli_tools: []
 message_types:
   success: test_result
   fix: fix_required

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/role-specs/writer.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ role: writer
 prefix: DRAFT
 inner_loop: true
 discuss_rounds: [DISCUSS-002, DISCUSS-003, DISCUSS-004, DISCUSS-005]
-subagents: [discuss]
+cli_tools: [discuss]
 message_types:
   success: draft_ready
   revision: draft_revision
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ message_types:
 | Discussion feedback | `<session-folder>/discussions/<discuss-file>` | If exists |
 | Prior decisions | context_accumulator (in-memory) | If prior tasks exist |
 
-## Phase 3: Subagent Document Generation
+## Phase 3: CLI Document Generation
 
 **Objective**: Generate document using CLI tool.
 
@@ -87,11 +87,19 @@ Parse CLI output for artifact path and summary. Document is written to disk by C
 
 ### 4b: Inline Discuss
 
-Call discuss subagent for this task's discuss round:
+Call CLI discuss tool for this task's discuss round:
 - Artifact: `<output-path>` (the generated document)
 - Round: `<DISCUSS-NNN>` from mapping table
 - Perspectives: from mapping table
 
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Multi-perspective critique of <doc-type>
+TASK: Review from <perspectives>
+ARTIFACT: @<output-path>
+MODE: analysis
+EXPECTED: JSON with perspectives[], consensus, severity, recommendations[]" --tool gemini --mode analysis
+```
+
 Handle discuss verdict per team-worker consensus handling protocol.
 
 **Report**: doc type, validation status, discuss verdict + severity, average rating, summary, output path.
@@ -101,7 +109,7 @@ Handle discuss verdict per team-worker consensus handling protocol.
 | Scenario | Resolution |
 |----------|------------|
 | CLI failure | Retry once with alternative tool. Still fails → log error, continue next task |
-| Discuss subagent fails | Skip discuss, log warning |
+| CLI discuss fails | Skip discuss, log warning |
 | Cumulative 3 task failures | SendMessage to coordinator, STOP |
 | Prior doc not found | Notify coordinator, request prerequisite |
 | Discussion contradicts prior docs | Note conflict, flag for coordinator |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/roles/coordinator/role.md

@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ Orchestrate the team-lifecycle workflow: team creation, task dispatching, progre
 
 ### MUST
 - Parse user requirements and clarify ambiguous inputs via AskUserQuestion
-- Create team and spawn worker subagents in background using **team-worker** agent type
+- Create team and spawn worker agents in background using **team-worker** agent type
 - Dispatch tasks with proper dependency chains (see SKILL.md Task Metadata Registry)
 - Monitor progress via worker callbacks and route messages
 - Maintain session state persistence (team-session.json)
@@ -19,7 +19,6 @@ Orchestrate the team-lifecycle workflow: team creation, task dispatching, progre
 ### MUST NOT
 - Execute spec/impl/research work directly (delegate to workers)
 - Modify task outputs (workers own their deliverables)
-- Call implementation subagents (code-developer, etc.) directly
 - Skip dependency validation when creating task chains
 
 ---

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/specs/team-config.json

@@ -6,7 +6,6 @@
   "architecture": "team-worker agent + role-specs",
   "role_structure": "role-specs/{name}.md (Phase 2-4 only)",
   "worker_agent": "team-worker",
-  "subagent_structure": "subagents/{name}-subagent.md",
 
   "roles": {
     "coordinator": {
@@ -27,7 +26,6 @@
       "role_spec": "role-specs/writer.md",
       "responsibility": "Product Brief / PRD / Architecture / Epics document generation + inline discuss",
       "inner_loop": true,
-      "subagent_type": "universal-executor",
       "inline_discuss": ["DISCUSS-002", "DISCUSS-003", "DISCUSS-004", "DISCUSS-005"],
       "message_types": ["draft_ready", "draft_revision", "error"]
     },
@@ -88,24 +86,24 @@
     }
   },
 
-  "subagents": {
+  "utility_functions": {
     "discuss": {
-      "spec": "subagents/discuss-subagent.md",
+      "type": "cli-tool",
-      "type": "cli-discuss-agent",
       "callable_by": ["analyst", "writer", "reviewer"],
-      "purpose": "Multi-perspective critique with CLI tools, consensus synthesis"
+      "purpose": "Multi-perspective critique with CLI tools, consensus synthesis",
+      "implementation": "Bash with ccw cli --mode analysis"
     },
     "explore": {
-      "spec": "subagents/explore-subagent.md",
+      "type": "explore-agent",
-      "type": "cli-explore-agent",
       "callable_by": ["analyst", "planner", "any"],
-      "purpose": "Codebase exploration with centralized cache"
+      "purpose": "Codebase exploration with centralized cache",
+      "implementation": "Agent with subagent_type: Explore"
     },
     "doc-generation": {
-      "spec": "subagents/doc-generation-subagent.md",
+      "type": "cli-tool",
-      "type": "universal-executor",
       "callable_by": ["writer"],
-      "purpose": "Document generation engine (CLI execution)"
+      "purpose": "Document generation engine (CLI execution)",
+      "implementation": "Bash with ccw cli --mode write"
     }
   },
 
@@ -199,7 +197,7 @@
       "style_decisions": "Accumulated design decisions",
       "qa_history": "From fe-qa, audit trail",
       "industry_context": "Industry + strictness config",
-      "exploration_cache": "From explore subagent, shared by all roles"
+      "exploration_cache": "From exploration utility (Explore agent), shared by all roles"
     }
   },
 

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/subagents/discuss-subagent.md

@@ -1,169 +0,0 @@
-# Discuss Subagent
-
-Lightweight multi-perspective critique engine. Called inline by produce roles (analyst, writer, reviewer) instead of as a separate team member. Eliminates spawn overhead while preserving multi-CLI analysis quality.
-
-## Design Rationale
-
-In v3, `discussant` was a full team role requiring: agent spawn -> Skill load -> Phase 1 task discovery -> Phase 2-4 work -> Phase 5 report + callback. For what is essentially "run CLI analyses + synthesize", the framework overhead exceeded actual work time.
-
-In v4, discuss is a **subagent call** from within the producing role, reducing each discuss round from ~60-90s overhead to ~5s overhead.
-
-## Invocation
-
-Called by produce roles after artifact creation:
-
-```
-Agent({
-  subagent_type: "cli-discuss-agent",
-  run_in_background: false,
-  description: "Discuss <round-id>",
-  prompt: `## Multi-Perspective Critique: <round-id>
-
-### Input
-- Artifact: <artifact-path>
-- Round: <round-id>
-- Perspectives: <perspective-list>
-- Session: <session-folder>
-- Discovery Context: <session-folder>/spec/discovery-context.json (for coverage perspective)
-
-### Perspective Routing
-
-| Perspective | CLI Tool | Role | Focus Areas |
-|-------------|----------|------|-------------|
-| Product | gemini | Product Manager | Market fit, user value, business viability |
-| Technical | codex | Tech Lead | Feasibility, tech debt, performance, security |
-| Quality | claude | QA Lead | Completeness, testability, consistency |
-| Risk | gemini | Risk Analyst | Risk identification, dependencies, failure modes |
-| Coverage | gemini | Requirements Analyst | Requirement completeness vs discovery-context |
-
-### Execution Steps
-1. Read artifact from <artifact-path>
-2. For each perspective, launch CLI analysis in background:
-   Bash(command="ccw cli -p 'PURPOSE: Analyze from <role> perspective for <round-id>
-   TASK: <focus-areas>
-   MODE: analysis
-   CONTEXT: Artifact content below
-   EXPECTED: JSON with strengths[], weaknesses[], suggestions[], rating (1-5)
-   CONSTRAINTS: Output valid JSON only
-
-   Artifact:
-   <artifact-content>' --tool <cli-tool> --mode analysis", run_in_background=true)
-3. Wait for all CLI results
-4. Divergence detection:
-   - Coverage gap: missing_requirements non-empty -> High severity
-   - High risk: risk_level is high or critical -> High severity
-   - Low rating: any perspective rating <= 2 -> Medium severity
-   - Rating spread: max - min >= 3 -> Medium severity
-5. Consensus determination:
-   - No high-severity divergences AND average rating >= 3.0 -> consensus_reached
-   - Otherwise -> consensus_blocked
-6. Synthesize:
-   - Convergent themes (agreed by 2+ perspectives)
-   - Divergent views (conflicting assessments)
-   - Coverage gaps
-   - Action items from suggestions
-7. Write discussion record to: <session-folder>/discussions/<round-id>-discussion.md
-
-### Discussion Record Format
-# Discussion Record: <round-id>
-
-**Artifact**: <artifact-path>
-**Perspectives**: <list>
-**Consensus**: reached / blocked
-**Average Rating**: <avg>/5
-
-## Convergent Themes
-- <theme>
-
-## Divergent Views
-- **<topic>** (<severity>): <description>
-
-## Action Items
-1. <item>
-
-## Ratings
-| Perspective | Rating |
-|-------------|--------|
-| <name> | <n>/5 |
-
-### Return Value
-
-**When consensus_reached**:
-Return a summary string with:
-- Verdict: consensus_reached
-- Average rating
-- Key action items (top 3)
-- Discussion record path
-
-**When consensus_blocked**:
-Return a structured summary with:
-- Verdict: consensus_blocked
-- Severity: HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW
-  - HIGH: any rating <= 2, critical risk identified, or missing_requirements non-empty
-  - MEDIUM: rating spread >= 3, or single perspective rated <= 2 with others >= 3
-  - LOW: minor suggestions only, all ratings >= 3 but divergent views exist
-- Average rating
-- Divergence summary: top 3 divergent points with perspective attribution
-- Action items: prioritized list of required changes
-- Recommendation: revise | proceed-with-caution | escalate
-- Discussion record path
-
-### Error Handling
-- Single CLI fails -> fallback to direct Claude analysis for that perspective
-- All CLI fail -> generate basic discussion from direct artifact reading
-- Artifact not found -> return error immediately`
-})
-```
-
-## Round Configuration
-
-| Round | Artifact | Perspectives | Calling Role |
-|-------|----------|-------------|-------------|
-| DISCUSS-001 | spec/discovery-context.json | product, risk, coverage | analyst |
-| DISCUSS-002 | spec/product-brief.md | product, technical, quality, coverage | writer |
-| DISCUSS-003 | spec/requirements/_index.md | quality, product, coverage | writer |
-| DISCUSS-004 | spec/architecture/_index.md | technical, risk | writer |
-| DISCUSS-005 | spec/epics/_index.md | product, technical, quality, coverage | writer |
-| DISCUSS-006 | spec/readiness-report.md | all 5 | reviewer |
-
-## Integration with Calling Role
-
-The calling role is responsible for:
-
-1. **Before calling**: Complete primary artifact output
-2. **Calling**: Invoke discuss subagent with correct round config
-3. **After calling**:
-
-| Verdict | Severity | Role Action |
-|---------|----------|-------------|
-| consensus_reached | - | Include action items in Phase 5 report, proceed normally |
-| consensus_blocked | HIGH | Include divergence details in Phase 5 SendMessage with structured format (see below). **Do NOT self-revise** -- coordinator decides. |
-| consensus_blocked | MEDIUM | Include warning in Phase 5 SendMessage. Proceed to Phase 5 normally. |
-| consensus_blocked | LOW | Treat as consensus_reached with notes. Proceed normally. |
-
-**SendMessage format for consensus_blocked (HIGH or MEDIUM)**:
-
-```
-[<role>] <task-id> complete. Discuss <round-id>: consensus_blocked (severity=<severity>)
-Divergences: <top-3-divergent-points>
-Action items: <prioritized-items>
-Recommendation: <revise|proceed-with-caution|escalate>
-Artifact: <artifact-path>
-Discussion: <discussion-record-path>
-```
-
-The coordinator receives this and routes per severity (see monitor.md Consensus-Blocked Handling):
-- HIGH -> creates revision task (max 1) or pauses for user
-- MEDIUM -> proceeds with warning logged to wisdom/issues.md
-- DISCUSS-006 HIGH -> always pauses for user decision (final sign-off gate)
-
-## Comparison with v3
-
-| Aspect | v3 (discussant role) | v4 (discuss subagent) |
-|--------|---------------------|----------------------|
-| Spawn | Full general-purpose agent | Inline subagent call |
-| Skill load | Reads SKILL.md + role.md | None (prompt contains all logic) |
-| Task discovery | TaskList + TaskGet + TaskUpdate | None (called with context) |
-| Report overhead | team_msg + SendMessage + TaskUpdate | Return value to caller |
-| Total overhead | ~25-45s framework | ~5s call overhead |
-| Pipeline beat | 1 beat per discuss round | 0 additional beats |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/subagents/doc-generation-subagent.md

@@ -1,62 +0,0 @@
-# Doc Generation Subagent
-
-文档生成执行引擎。由 writer 主 agent 通过 Inner Loop 调用。
-负责 CLI 多视角分析 + 模板填充 + 文件写入。
-
-## Design Rationale
-
-从 v4.0 的 writer 内联 CLI 执行，改为 subagent 隔离调用。
-好处：CLI 调用的大量 token 消耗不污染 writer 主 agent 上下文，
-writer 只拿到压缩摘要，可在多任务间保持上下文连续。
-
-## Invocation
-
-```
-Agent({
-  subagent_type: "universal-executor",
-  run_in_background: false,
-  description: "Generate <doc-type>",
-  prompt: `## Document Generation: <doc-type>
-
-### Session
-- Folder: <session-folder>
-- Spec config: <spec-config-path>
-
-### Document Config
-- Type: <product-brief | requirements | architecture | epics>
-- Template: <template-path>
-- Output: <output-path>
-- Prior discussion: <discussion-file or "none">
-
-### Writer Accumulator (prior decisions)
-<JSON array of prior task summaries>
-
-### Execution Strategy
-<从 generate-doc.md 对应 doc-type 段落加载>
-
-### Output Requirements
-1. Write document to <output-path> (follow template + document-standards.md)
-2. Return JSON summary:
-{
-  "artifact_path": "<path>",
-  "summary": "<100-200字>",
-  "key_decisions": [],
-  "sections_generated": [],
-  "cross_references": [],
-  "warnings": []
-}`
-})
-```
-
-## Doc Type Strategies
-
-(直接引用 generate-doc.md 的 DRAFT-001/002/003/004 策略，不重复)
-See: roles/writer/commands/generate-doc.md
-
-## Error Handling
-
-| Scenario | Resolution |
-|----------|------------|
-| CLI 工具失败 | fallback chain: gemini → codex → claude |
-| Template 不存在 | 返回错误 JSON |
-| Prior doc 不存在 | 返回错误 JSON，writer 决定是否继续 |

.claude/skills/team-lifecycle/subagents/explore-subagent.md

@@ -1,174 +0,0 @@
-# Explore Subagent
-
-Shared codebase exploration utility with centralized caching. Callable by any role needing code context. Replaces v3's standalone explorer role.
-
-## Design Rationale
-
-In v3, exploration happened in 3 separate places:
-- `analyst` Phase 3: ACE semantic search for architecture patterns
-- `planner` Phase 2: multi-angle cli-explore-agent
-- `explorer` role: standalone service with full spawn cycle
-
-Results were scattered across different directories and never shared. In v4, all exploration routes through this subagent with a **unified cache** in `explorations/`.
-
-## Invocation
-
-```
-Agent({
-  subagent_type: "cli-explore-agent",
-  run_in_background: false,
-  description: "Explore <angle>",
-  prompt: `Explore codebase for: <query>
-
-Focus angle: <angle>
-Keywords: <keyword-list>
-Session folder: <session-folder>
-
-## Cache Check
-1. Read <session-folder>/explorations/cache-index.json (if exists)
-2. Look for entry with matching angle
-3. If found AND file exists -> read cached result, return summary
-4. If not found -> proceed to exploration
-
-## Exploration
-<angle-specific-focus-from-table-below>
-
-## Output
-Write JSON to: <session-folder>/explorations/explore-<angle>.json
-Update cache-index.json with new entry
-
-## Output Schema
-{
-  "angle": "<angle>",
-  "query": "<query>",
-  "relevant_files": [
-    { "path": "...", "rationale": "...", "role": "...", "discovery_source": "...", "key_symbols": [] }
-  ],
-  "patterns": [],
-  "dependencies": [],
-  "external_refs": [],
-  "_metadata": { "created_by": "<calling-role>", "timestamp": "...", "cache_key": "..." }
-}
-
-Return summary: file count, pattern count, top 5 files, output path`
-})
-```
-
-## Cache Mechanism
-
-### Cache Index Schema
-
-`<session-folder>/explorations/cache-index.json`:
-
-```json
-{
-  "entries": [
-    {
-      "angle": "architecture",
-      "keywords": ["auth", "middleware"],
-      "file": "explore-architecture.json",
-      "created_by": "analyst",
-      "created_at": "2026-02-27T10:00:00Z",
-      "file_count": 15
-    }
-  ]
-}
-```
-
-### Cache Lookup Rules
-
-| Condition | Action |
-|-----------|--------|
-| Exact angle match exists | Return cached result |
-| No match | Execute exploration, cache result |
-| Cache file missing but index has entry | Remove stale entry, re-explore |
-
-### Cache Invalidation
-
-Cache is session-scoped. No explicit invalidation needed -- each session starts fresh. If a role suspects stale data, it can pass `force_refresh: true` in the prompt to bypass cache.
-
-## Angle Focus Guide
-
-| Angle | Focus Points | Typical Caller |
-|-------|-------------|----------------|
-| architecture | Layer boundaries, design patterns, component responsibilities, ADRs | analyst, planner |
-| dependencies | Import chains, external libraries, circular dependencies, shared utilities | planner |
-| modularity | Module interfaces, separation of concerns, extraction opportunities | planner |
-| integration-points | API endpoints, data flow between modules, event systems | analyst, planner |
-| security | Auth/authz logic, input validation, sensitive data handling, middleware | planner |
-| auth-patterns | Auth flows, session management, token validation, permissions | planner |
-| dataflow | Data transformations, state propagation, validation points | planner |
-| performance | Bottlenecks, N+1 queries, blocking operations, algorithm complexity | planner |
-| error-handling | Try-catch blocks, error propagation, recovery strategies, logging | planner |
-| patterns | Code conventions, design patterns, naming conventions, best practices | analyst, planner |
-| testing | Test files, coverage gaps, test patterns, mocking strategies | planner |
-| general | Broad semantic search for topic-related code | analyst |
-
-## Exploration Strategies
-
-### Low Complexity (direct search)
-
-For simple queries, use ACE semantic search:
-
-```
-mcp__ace-tool__search_context(project_root_path="<project-root>", query="<query>")
-```
-
-ACE failure fallback: `rg -l '<keywords>' --type ts`
-
-### Medium/High Complexity (multi-angle)
-
-For complex queries, call cli-explore-agent per angle. The calling role determines complexity and selects angles (see planner's `commands/explore.md`).
-
-## Search Tool Priority
-
-| Tool | Priority | Use Case |
-|------|----------|----------|
-| mcp__ace-tool__search_context | P0 | Semantic search |
-| Grep / Glob | P1 | Pattern matching |
-| cli-explore-agent | Deep | Multi-angle exploration |
-| WebSearch | P3 | External docs |
-
-## Integration with Roles
-
-### analyst (RESEARCH-001)
-
-```
-# After seed analysis, explore codebase context
-Agent({
-  subagent_type: "cli-explore-agent",
-  description: "Explore general context",
-  run_in_background: false,
-  prompt: "Explore codebase for: <topic>\nFocus angle: general\n..."
-})
-# Result feeds into discovery-context.json
-```
-
-### planner (PLAN-001)
-
-```
-# Multi-angle exploration before plan generation
-for angle in selected_angles:
-  Agent({
-    subagent_type: "cli-explore-agent",
-    description: "Explore <angle>",
-    run_in_background: false,
-    prompt: "Explore codebase for: <task>\nFocus angle: <angle>\n..."
-  })
-# Explorations manifest built from cache-index.json
-```
-
-### Any role needing context
-
-Any role can call explore subagent when needing codebase context for better decisions.
-
-## Comparison with v3
-
-| Aspect | v3 (explorer role) | v4 (explore subagent) |
-|--------|-------------------|----------------------|
-| Identity | Full team member | Utility subagent |
-| Task creation | Coordinator creates EXPLORE-* tasks | No tasks, direct call |
-| Spawn overhead | Full agent lifecycle | Subagent call (~5s) |
-| Result sharing | Isolated in explorations/ | Shared cache with index |
-| Caller | Only via coordinator dispatch | Any role directly |
-| Duplication | analyst + planner + explorer all explore | Single cached path |

.claude/skills/team-perf-opt/SKILL.md

@@ -27,9 +27,6 @@ Unified team skill: Profile application performance, identify bottlenecks, desig
 profiler strate- optim-  bench-  review-
          gist    izer    marker  er
 
-  Subagents (callable by workers, not team members):
-    [explore]  [discuss]
-
 (tw) = team-worker agent
 ```
 
@@ -52,13 +49,6 @@ Parse `$ARGUMENTS`. No `--role` needed -- always routes to coordinator.
 | benchmarker | [role-specs/benchmarker.md](role-specs/benchmarker.md) | BENCH-* | validation | false |
 | reviewer | [role-specs/reviewer.md](role-specs/reviewer.md) | REVIEW-* / QUALITY-* | read_only_analysis | false |
 
-### Subagent Registry
-
-| Subagent | Spec | Callable By | Purpose |
-|----------|------|-------------|---------|
-| explore | [subagents/explore-subagent.md](subagents/explore-subagent.md) | profiler, optimizer | Shared codebase exploration for performance-critical code paths |
-| discuss | [subagents/discuss-subagent.md](subagents/discuss-subagent.md) | strategist, reviewer | Multi-perspective discussion for optimization approaches and review findings |
-
 ### Dispatch
 
 Always route to coordinator. Coordinator reads `roles/coordinator/role.md` and executes its phases.
@@ -459,7 +449,7 @@ Coordinator supports `--resume` / `--continue` for interrupted sessions:
 |----------|------------|
 | Role spec file not found | Error with expected path (role-specs/<name>.md) |
 | Command file not found | Fallback to inline execution in coordinator role.md |
-| Subagent spec not found | Error with expected path (subagents/<name>-subagent.md) |
+| Role file not found | Error with expected path (role-specs/<name>.md) |
 | Fast-advance orphan detected | Coordinator resets task to pending on next check |
 | consensus_blocked HIGH | Coordinator creates revision task or pauses pipeline |
 | team-worker agent unavailable | Error: requires .claude/agents/team-worker.md |

.claude/skills/team-perf-opt/role-specs/optimizer.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 prefix: IMPL
 inner_loop: true
 additional_prefixes: [FIX]
-subagents: [explore]
+delegates_to: []
 message_types:
   success: impl_complete
   error: error
@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ Implement optimization changes following the strategy plan. For FIX tasks, apply
    - **Independent pipeline**: Read `<session>/artifacts/pipelines/{P}/optimization-plan.md` -- extract this pipeline's plan
 
 4. For FIX: parse review/benchmark feedback for specific issues to address
-5. Use `explore` subagent to load implementation context for target files
+5. Use ACE search or CLI tools to load implementation context for target files
 6. For inner loop (single mode only): load context_accumulator from prior IMPL/FIX tasks
 
 **Shared-memory namespace**:

.claude/skills/team-perf-opt/role-specs/profiler.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: PROFILE
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: [explore]
+delegates_to: []
 message_types:
   success: profile_complete
   error: error
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ Profile application performance to identify CPU, memory, I/O, network, and rende
 | CLI entry / bin/ directory | CLI Tool | Startup time, throughput, memory peak |
 | No detection | Generic | All profiling dimensions |
 
-3. Use `explore` subagent to map performance-critical code paths within target scope
+3. Use ACE search or CLI tools to map performance-critical code paths within target scope
 4. Detect available profiling tools (test runners, benchmark harnesses, linting tools)
 
 ## Phase 3: Performance Profiling

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

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ prefix: REVIEW
 inner_loop: false
 additional_prefixes: [QUALITY]
 discuss_rounds: [DISCUSS-REVIEW]
-subagents: [discuss]
+delegates_to: []
 message_types:
   success: review_complete
   error: error
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ Per-dimension review process:
 - Record findings with severity (Critical / High / Medium / Low)
 - Include specific file:line references and suggested fixes
 
-If any Critical findings detected, invoke `discuss` subagent (DISCUSS-REVIEW round) to validate the assessment before issuing verdict.
+If any Critical findings detected, use CLI tools for multi-perspective validation (DISCUSS-REVIEW round) to validate the assessment before issuing verdict.
 
 ## Phase 4: Verdict & Feedback
 

.claude/skills/team-perf-opt/role-specs/strategist.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 prefix: STRATEGY
 inner_loop: false
 discuss_rounds: [DISCUSS-OPT]
-subagents: [discuss]
+delegates_to: []
 message_types:
   success: strategy_complete
   error: error
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ Prioritize optimizations by impact/effort ratio:
 | P2 (Medium) | Medium impact + Low effort |
 | P3 (Low) | Low impact or High effort -- defer |
 
-If complexity is High, invoke `discuss` subagent (DISCUSS-OPT round) to evaluate trade-offs between competing strategies before finalizing the plan.
+If complexity is High, use CLI tools for multi-perspective analysis (DISCUSS-OPT round) to evaluate trade-offs between competing strategies before finalizing the plan.
 
 Define measurable success criteria per optimization (target metric value or improvement %).
 

.claude/skills/team-perf-opt/subagents/discuss-subagent.md

@@ -1,89 +0,0 @@
-# Discuss Subagent
-
-Multi-perspective discussion for evaluating optimization strategies and reviewing code change quality. Used by strategist (DISCUSS-OPT) and reviewer (DISCUSS-REVIEW) when complex trade-offs require multi-angle analysis.
-
-## Design Rationale
-
-Complex optimization decisions (e.g., choosing between algorithmic change vs caching layer) and nuanced code review findings (e.g., evaluating whether a side effect is acceptable) benefit from structured multi-perspective analysis. This subagent provides that analysis inline without spawning additional team members.
-
-## Invocation
-
-Called by strategist, reviewer after their primary analysis when complexity warrants multi-perspective evaluation:
-
-```
-Agent({
-  subagent_type: "cli-discuss-agent",
-  run_in_background: false,
-  description: "Discuss <round-id>: <topic> for performance optimization",
-  prompt: `Conduct a multi-perspective discussion on the following topic.
-
-Round: <round-id>
-Topic: <discussion-topic>
-Session: <session-folder>
-
-Context:
-<relevant-context-from-calling-role>
-
-Perspectives to consider:
-- Performance impact: Will this actually improve the target metric?
-- Risk assessment: What could go wrong? Side effects? Regressions?
-- Maintainability: Is the optimized code still understandable and maintainable?
-- Alternative approaches: Are there simpler or safer ways to achieve the same goal?
-
-Evaluate trade-offs and provide a structured recommendation with:
-- Consensus verdict: proceed / revise / escalate
-- Confidence level: high / medium / low
-- Key trade-offs identified
-- Recommended approach with rationale
-- Dissenting perspectives (if any)`
-})
-```
-
-## Round Configuration
-
-| Round | Artifact | Parameters | Calling Role |
-|-------|----------|------------|-------------|
-| DISCUSS-OPT | <session>/discussions/DISCUSS-OPT.md | Optimization strategy trade-offs | strategist |
-| DISCUSS-REVIEW | <session>/discussions/DISCUSS-REVIEW.md | Code review finding validation | reviewer |
-
-## Integration with Calling Role
-
-The calling role is responsible for:
-
-1. **Before calling**: Complete primary analysis, identify the specific trade-off or finding needing discussion
-2. **Calling**: Invoke subagent with round ID, topic, and relevant context
-3. **After calling**:
-
-| Result | Action |
-|--------|--------|
-| consensus_reached (proceed) | Incorporate recommendation into output, continue |
-| consensus_reached (revise) | Adjust findings/strategy based on discussion insights |
-| consensus_blocked (HIGH) | Report to coordinator via message with severity |
-| consensus_blocked (MEDIUM) | Include in output with recommendation for revision |
-| consensus_blocked (LOW) | Note in output, proceed with original assessment |
-
-## Output Schema
-
-```json
-{
-  "round_id": "<DISCUSS-OPT|DISCUSS-REVIEW>",
-  "topic": "<discussion-topic>",
-  "verdict": "<proceed|revise|escalate>",
-  "confidence": "<high|medium|low>",
-  "trade_offs": [
-    { "dimension": "<performance|risk|maintainability>", "pro": "<benefit>", "con": "<cost>" }
-  ],
-  "recommendation": "<recommended-approach>",
-  "rationale": "<reasoning>",
-  "dissenting_views": ["<alternative-perspective>"]
-}
-```
-
-## Error Handling
-
-| Scenario | Resolution |
-|----------|------------|
-| Single perspective analysis fails | Continue with partial perspectives |
-| All analyses fail | Return basic recommendation from calling role's primary analysis |
-| Artifact not found | Return error immediately |
-| Discussion inconclusive | Return "revise" verdict with low confidence |

.claude/skills/team-perf-opt/subagents/explore-subagent.md

@@ -1,108 +0,0 @@
-# Explore Subagent
-
-Shared codebase exploration for discovering performance-critical code paths, module structures, and optimization opportunities. Results are cached to avoid redundant exploration across profiler and optimizer roles.
-
-## Design Rationale
-
-Codebase exploration is a read-only operation shared between profiler (mapping bottlenecks) and optimizer (understanding implementation context). Caching explorations avoids redundant work when optimizer re-explores paths the profiler already mapped.
-
-## Invocation
-
-Called by profiler, optimizer after needing codebase context for performance analysis or implementation:
-
-```
-Agent({
-  subagent_type: "cli-explore-agent",
-  run_in_background: false,
-  description: "Explore codebase for performance-critical paths in <target-scope>",
-  prompt: `Explore the codebase to identify performance-critical code paths.
-
-Target scope: <target-scope>
-Session: <session-folder>
-Focus: <exploration-focus>
-
-Tasks:
-1. Map the module structure and entry points within scope
-2. Identify hot code paths (frequently called functions, critical loops)
-3. Find performance-relevant patterns (caching, lazy loading, async, pooling)
-4. Note any existing performance optimizations or benchmark harnesses
-5. List key files with their roles in the performance-critical path
-
-Output a structured exploration report with:
-- Module map (key files and their relationships)
-- Hot path analysis (call chains, loop nests, recursive patterns)
-- Existing optimization patterns found
-- Performance-relevant configuration (caching, pooling, batching settings)
-- Recommended investigation targets for profiling`
-})
-```
-
-## Cache Mechanism
-
-### Cache Index Schema
-
-`<session-folder>/explorations/cache-index.json`:
-
-```json
-{
-  "entries": [
-    {
-      "key": "<scope-hash>",
-      "scope": "<target-scope>",
-      "focus": "<exploration-focus>",
-      "timestamp": "<ISO-8601>",
-      "result_file": "<hash>.md"
-    }
-  ]
-}
-```
-
-### Cache Lookup Rules
-
-| Condition | Action |
-|-----------|--------|
-| Exact scope+focus match exists | Return cached result from <hash>.md |
-| No match | Execute subagent, cache result to <hash>.md, update index |
-| Cache file missing but index has entry | Remove stale entry, re-execute |
-| Cache older than current session | Use cached (explorations are stable within session) |
-
-## Integration with Calling Role
-
-The calling role is responsible for:
-
-1. **Before calling**: Determine target scope and exploration focus
-2. **Calling**: Check cache first, invoke subagent only on cache miss
-3. **After calling**:
-
-| Result | Action |
-|--------|--------|
-| Exploration successful | Use findings to inform profiling/implementation |
-| Exploration partial | Use available findings, note gaps |
-| Exploration failed | Proceed without exploration context, use direct file reading |
-
-## Output Schema
-
-```json
-{
-  "scope": "<target-scope>",
-  "module_map": [
-    { "file": "<path>", "role": "<description>", "hot_path": true }
-  ],
-  "hot_paths": [
-    { "chain": "<call-chain>", "frequency": "<high|medium|low>", "files": ["<path>"] }
-  ],
-  "existing_optimizations": [
-    { "type": "<pattern>", "location": "<file:line>", "description": "<what>" }
-  ],
-  "investigation_targets": ["<file-or-pattern>"]
-}
-```
-
-## Error Handling
-
-| Scenario | Resolution |
-|----------|------------|
-| Single exploration angle fails | Continue with partial results |
-| All exploration fails | Return basic result from direct file listing |
-| Target scope not found | Return error immediately |
-| Cache corrupt | Clear cache-index.json, re-execute |

.claude/skills/team-planex/SKILL.md

@@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ When coordinator spawns workers, use `team-worker` agent with role-spec path:
 
 ```
 Agent({
-  subagent_type: "team-worker",
+  agent_type: "team-worker",
   description: "Spawn <role> worker",
   team_name: <team-name>,
   name: "<role>",

.claude/skills/team-planex/role-specs/executor.md

@@ -85,6 +85,6 @@ Send `impl_complete` message to coordinator via team_msg + SendMessage.
 |---------|-----------|
 | Load solution from file | Create or modify issues |
 | Implement via CLI tools (Codex/Gemini) | Modify solution artifacts |
-| Run tests | Spawn subagents (use CLI tools instead) |
+| Run tests | Spawn additional agents (use CLI tools instead) |
 | git commit | Direct user interaction |
 | Update issue status | Create tasks for other roles |

.claude/skills/team-planex/roles/coordinator/commands/monitor.md

@@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ Collect task states from TaskList()
       |   +- EXEC-* -> executor
       +- Spawn team-worker:
          Agent({
-           subagent_type: "team-worker",
+           agent_type: "team-worker",
            description: "Spawn <role> worker for <subject>",
            team_name: <team-name>,
            name: "<role>",

.claude/skills/team-planex/roles/coordinator/role.md

@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ Orchestrate the team-planex pipeline: parse input, create team, dispatch tasks,
 ### MUST NOT
 - Execute planning or implementation work directly (delegate to workers)
 - Modify solution artifacts or code (workers own their deliverables)
-- Call implementation subagents (code-developer, etc.) directly
+- Call implementation CLI tools (code-developer, etc.) directly
 - Skip dependency validation when creating task chains
 
 ---

.claude/skills/team-quality-assurance/SKILL.md

@@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ When coordinator spawns workers, use `team-worker` agent with role-spec path:
 
 ```
 Agent({
-  subagent_type: "team-worker",
+  agent_type: "team-worker",
   description: "Spawn <role> worker",
   team_name: "quality-assurance",
   name: "<role>",
@@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ Execute built-in Phase 1 (task discovery) -> role-spec Phase 2-4 -> built-in Pha
 
 ```
 Agent({
-  subagent_type: "team-worker",
+  agent_type: "team-worker",
   description: "Spawn <role>-<N> worker",
   team_name: "quality-assurance",
   name: "<role>-<N>",

.claude/skills/team-quality-assurance/role-specs/analyst.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: QAANA
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: []
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: analysis_ready
   report: quality_report

.claude/skills/team-quality-assurance/role-specs/executor.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 prefix: QARUN
 inner_loop: true
 additional_prefixes: [QARUN-gc]
-subagents: []
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: tests_passed
   failure: tests_failed
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ Per iteration:
 4. If pass rate >= 95% and iteration >= 2 -> exit loop (good enough)
 5. If iteration >= MAX -> exit loop (report current state)
 6. Extract failure details (error lines, assertion failures)
-7. Delegate fix to code-developer subagent with constraints:
+7. Delegate fix via CLI tool with constraints:
    - ONLY modify test files, NEVER modify source code
    - Fix: incorrect assertions, missing imports, wrong mocks, setup issues
    - Do NOT: skip tests, add `@ts-ignore`, use `as any`

.claude/skills/team-quality-assurance/role-specs/generator.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 prefix: QAGEN
 inner_loop: false
 additional_prefixes: [QAGEN-fix]
-subagents: []
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: tests_generated
   revised: tests_revised
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ Generate test code according to strategist's strategy and layers. Support L1 uni
 |-----------|------|
 | GC fix task | Read failure info from `<session>/results/run-<layer>.json`, fix failing tests only |
 | <= 3 focus files | Direct: inline Read source -> Write test file |
-| > 3 focus files | Batch by module, delegate to code-developer subagent |
+| > 3 focus files | Batch by module, delegate via CLI tool |
 
 **Direct generation flow** (per source file):
 1. Read source file content, extract exports

.claude/skills/team-quality-assurance/role-specs/scout.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: SCOUT
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: []
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: scan_ready
   error: error

.claude/skills/team-quality-assurance/role-specs/strategist.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: QASTRAT
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: []
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: strategy_ready
   error: error

.claude/skills/team-quality-assurance/roles/coordinator/commands/monitor.md

@@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ const STAGE_WORKER_MAP = {
 
 ```
 Agent({
-  subagent_type: "team-worker",
+  agent_type: "team-worker",
   description: "Spawn <role> worker for <task-id>",
   team_name: "quality-assurance",
   name: "<role>",

.claude/skills/team-quality-assurance/roles/coordinator/role.md

@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ Orchestrate the Quality Assurance workflow: requirement clarification, mode sele
 
 ### MUST NOT
 - Directly execute any business tasks (scanning, testing, analysis, etc.)
-- Directly invoke implementation subagents (cli-explore-agent, code-developer, etc.)
+- Directly invoke implementation CLI tools (cli-explore-agent, code-developer, etc.)
 - Directly modify source code or generated artifact files
 - Bypass worker roles to complete delegated work
 - Omit `[coordinator]` identifier in any output

.claude/skills/team-quality-assurance/specs/team-config.json

@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@
       "message_types_received": [],
       "commands": ["scan"],
       "cli_tools": ["gemini"],
-      "subagents": ["cli-explore-agent"]
+      "cli_tools": ["gemini"]
     },
     "strategist": {
       "name": "strategist",
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@
       "message_types_received": [],
       "commands": ["analyze-scope"],
       "cli_tools": ["gemini"],
-      "subagents": ["cli-explore-agent"]
+      "cli_tools": ["gemini"]
     },
     "generator": {
       "name": "generator",
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@
       "message_types_received": [],
       "commands": ["generate-tests"],
       "cli_tools": ["gemini"],
-      "subagents": ["code-developer"]
+      "cli_tools": ["gemini"]
     },
     "executor": {
       "name": "executor",
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@
       "message_types_sent": ["tests_passed", "tests_failed", "coverage_report", "error"],
       "message_types_received": [],
       "commands": ["run-fix-cycle"],
-      "subagents": ["code-developer"]
+      "cli_tools": ["gemini"]
     },
     "analyst": {
       "name": "analyst",

.claude/skills/team-review/SKILL.md

@@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ Cross-task knowledge accumulation. Coordinator creates `wisdom/` directory at se
 | Use tools declared in Toolbox | Create tasks for other roles |
 | Delegate to commands/ files | Modify resources outside own responsibility |
 
-Coordinator additional restrictions: Do not write/modify code directly, do not call implementation subagents, do not execute analysis/test/review directly.
+Coordinator additional restrictions: Do not write/modify code directly, do not call implementation CLI tools, do not execute analysis/test/review directly.
 
 ### Team Configuration
 
@@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ When coordinator spawns workers, use `team-worker` agent with role-spec path:
 
 ```
 Agent({
-  subagent_type: "team-worker",
+  agent_type: "team-worker",
   description: "Spawn <role> worker",
   team_name: "review",
   name: "<role>",

.claude/skills/team-review/roles/coordinator/commands/monitor.md

@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ Ready tasks found?
 
 ```
 Agent({
-  subagent_type: "team-worker",
+  agent_type: "team-worker",
   description: "Spawn <role> worker for <subject>",
   team_name: "review",
   name: "<role>",

.claude/skills/team-review/roles/coordinator/role.md

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ Code review team coordinator. Orchestrates the scan-review-fix pipeline (CP-1 Li
 - Perform code review analysis
 - Bypass worker roles to do delegated work
 - Omit `[coordinator]` prefix on any output
-- Call implementation subagents directly
+- Call implementation CLI tools directly
 
 > **Core principle**: coordinator is the orchestrator, not the executor. All actual work delegated to scanner/reviewer/fixer via task chain.
 

.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/SKILL.md

@@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ All outputs must carry `[role_name]` prefix.
 | Allowed | Forbidden |
 |---------|-----------|
 | Discuss roadmap with user (AskUserQuestion) | Direct code writing/modification |
-| Create task chain (TaskCreate) | Calling implementation subagents |
+| Create task chain (TaskCreate) | Calling CLI tools for implementation |
 | Dispatch tasks to workers | Direct analysis/testing/verification |
 | Monitor progress (message bus) | Bypassing workers |
 | Report results to user | Modifying source code |

.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/role-specs/executor.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
 prefix: EXEC
 inner_loop: true
-subagents:
+cli_tools:
-  - code-developer
+  - gemini --mode write
 message_types:
   success: exec_complete
   progress: exec_progress
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ message_types:
 
 # Executor
 
-Wave-based code implementation per phase. Reads IMPL-*.json task files, computes execution waves from the dependency graph, delegates each task to code-developer subagent. Produces summary-{IMPL-ID}.md per task.
+Wave-based code implementation per phase. Reads IMPL-*.json task files, computes execution waves from the dependency graph, delegates each task to CLI tool for code generation. Produces summary-{IMPL-ID}.md per task.
 
 ## Phase 2: Context Loading
 
@@ -38,13 +38,24 @@ Execute waves sequentially, tasks within each wave can be parallel.
 | Task Count | Strategy |
 |------------|----------|
 | <= 2 | Direct: inline Edit/Write |
-| 3-5 | Single code-developer for all |
+| 3-5 | Single CLI tool call for all |
-| > 5 | Batch: one code-developer per module group |
+| > 5 | Batch: one CLI tool call per module group |
 
 **Per task**:
 1. Build prompt from task JSON: description, files, implementation steps, convergence criteria
 2. Include prior summaries and wisdom as context
-3. Delegate to code-developer subagent (`run_in_background: false`)
+3. Delegate to CLI tool (`run_in_background: false`):
+   ```
+   Bash({
+     command: `ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Implement task ${taskId}: ${description}
+   TASK: ${implementationSteps}
+   MODE: write
+   CONTEXT: @${files.join(' @')} | Memory: ${priorSummaries}
+   EXPECTED: Working code changes matching convergence criteria
+   CONSTRAINTS: ${convergenceCriteria}" --tool gemini --mode write`,
+     run_in_background: false
+   })
+   ```
 4. Write `<session>/phase-{N}/summary-{IMPL-ID}.md` with: task ID, affected files, changes made, status
 
 **Between waves**: report wave progress via team_msg (type: exec_progress)

.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/role-specs/planner.md

@@ -1,9 +1,8 @@
 ---
 prefix: PLAN
 inner_loop: true
-subagents:
+cli_tools:
-  - cli-explore-agent
+  - gemini --mode analysis
-  - action-planning-agent
 message_types:
   success: plan_ready
   progress: plan_progress
@@ -12,7 +11,7 @@ message_types:
 
 # Planner
 
-Research and plan creation per roadmap phase. Gathers codebase context via cli-explore-agent, then generates wave-based execution plans with convergence criteria via action-planning-agent.
+Research and plan creation per roadmap phase. Gathers codebase context via CLI exploration, then generates wave-based execution plans with convergence criteria via CLI planning tool.
 
 ## Phase 2: Context Loading + Research
 
@@ -27,7 +26,18 @@ Research and plan creation per roadmap phase. Gathers codebase context via cli-e
 2. Read config.json for depth setting (quick/standard/comprehensive)
 3. Load prior phase summaries for dependency context
 4. Detect gap closure mode (task description contains "Gap closure")
-5. Launch cli-explore-agent with phase requirements as exploration query:
+5. Launch CLI exploration with phase requirements as exploration query:
+   ```
+   Bash({
+     command: `ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Explore codebase for phase requirements
+   TASK: • Identify files needing modification • Map patterns and dependencies • Assess test infrastructure • Identify risks
+   MODE: analysis
+   CONTEXT: @**/* | Memory: Phase goal: ${phaseGoal}
+   EXPECTED: Structured exploration results with file lists, patterns, risks
+   CONSTRAINTS: Read-only analysis" --tool gemini --mode analysis`,
+     run_in_background: false
+   })
+   ```
    - Target: files needing modification, patterns, dependencies, test infrastructure, risks
 6. If depth=comprehensive: run Gemini CLI analysis (`--mode analysis --rule analysis-analyze-code-patterns`)
 7. Write `<session>/phase-{N}/context.md` combining roadmap requirements + exploration results
@@ -36,12 +46,19 @@ Research and plan creation per roadmap phase. Gathers codebase context via cli-e
 
 1. Load context.md from Phase 2
 2. Create output directory: `<session>/phase-{N}/.task/`
-3. Delegate to action-planning-agent with:
+3. Delegate to CLI planning tool with:
-   - Phase context + roadmap section + prior summaries
+   ```
-   - Task ID format: `IMPL-{phase}{seq}` (e.g., IMPL-101, IMPL-102)
+   Bash({
-   - Convergence criteria rules: measurable, goal-backward, includes file existence + export checks + test checks
+     command: `ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Generate wave-based execution plan for phase ${phaseNum}
-   - Hard limits: <= 10 tasks per phase, valid DAG, no cycles
+   TASK: • Break down requirements into tasks • Define convergence criteria • Build dependency graph • Assign waves
-4. Agent produces: `IMPL_PLAN.md`, `.task/IMPL-*.json`, `TODO_LIST.md`
+   MODE: write
+   CONTEXT: @${contextMd} | Memory: ${priorSummaries}
+   EXPECTED: IMPL_PLAN.md + IMPL-*.json files + TODO_LIST.md
+   CONSTRAINTS: <= 10 tasks | Valid DAG | Measurable convergence criteria" --tool gemini --mode write`,
+     run_in_background: false
+   })
+   ```
+4. CLI tool produces: `IMPL_PLAN.md`, `.task/IMPL-*.json`, `TODO_LIST.md`
 5. If gap closure: only create tasks for gaps, starting from next available ID
 
 ## Phase 4: Self-Validation

.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/role-specs/verifier.md

@@ -1,7 +1,8 @@
 ---
 prefix: VERIFY
 inner_loop: true
-subagents: []
+cli_tools:
+  - gemini --mode analysis
 message_types:
   success: verify_passed
   failure: gaps_found

.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/roles/coordinator/commands/monitor.md

@@ -15,8 +15,8 @@ Handle all coordinator monitoring events for the roadmap-dev pipeline using the
 
 | Prefix | Role | Role Spec | inner_loop |
 |--------|------|-----------|------------|
-| PLAN | planner | `.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/role-specs/planner.md` | true (subagents: cli-explore-agent, action-planning-agent) |
+| PLAN | planner | `.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/role-specs/planner.md` | true (cli_tools: gemini --mode analysis) |
-| EXEC | executor | `.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/role-specs/executor.md` | true (subagents: code-developer) |
+| EXEC | executor | `.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/role-specs/executor.md` | true (cli_tools: gemini --mode write) |
 | VERIFY | verifier | `.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/role-specs/verifier.md` | true |
 
 ### Pipeline Structure

.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/roles/coordinator/commands/roadmap-discuss.md

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ Discuss project roadmap with the user using project-tech.json + specs/*.md as co
 
 ## Strategy
 
-Direct interaction via AskUserQuestion. No delegation to workers or subagents. Coordinator handles this entirely.
+Direct interaction via AskUserQuestion. No delegation to workers or CLI tools. Coordinator handles this entirely.
 
 ## Parameters
 
@@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ if (!autoYes) {
 ### Step 6: Analyze Codebase and Generate Phased Roadmap
 
 ```javascript
-// Use Gemini CLI (or cli-explore-agent) to analyze the codebase
+// Use Gemini CLI (or CLI exploration tool) to analyze the codebase
 // and generate a phased breakdown based on goal + project context
 Bash({
   command: `ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Analyze codebase and generate phased execution roadmap for: ${projectGoal}

.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/roles/coordinator/role.md

@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ Orchestrate the roadmap-driven development workflow: init prerequisites -> roadm
 - Manage state.md updates at every phase transition
 - Route verifier gap results to planner for closure
 - Parse user requirements and clarify ambiguous inputs via AskUserQuestion
-- Create team and spawn worker subagents in background
+- Create team and spawn worker team members in background
 - Dispatch tasks with proper dependency chains
 - Monitor progress via worker callbacks and route messages
 - Maintain session state persistence
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ Orchestrate the roadmap-driven development workflow: init prerequisites -> roadm
 ### MUST NOT
 
 - Execute any business tasks (code, analysis, testing, verification)
-- Call code-developer, cli-explore-agent, or other implementation subagents
+- Call CLI tools for code generation, exploration, or planning
 - Modify source code or generate implementation artifacts
 - Bypass worker roles to do work directly
 - Skip roadmap discussion phase

.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/specs/team-config.json

@@ -29,9 +29,8 @@
       "display_name": "RD Planner",
       "responsibility_type": "Orchestration",
       "task_prefix": "PLAN",
-      "description": "Research, context gathering, task JSON generation via action-planning-agent",
+      "description": "Research, context gathering, task JSON generation via CLI planning tool",
       "commands": ["research", "create-plans"],
-      "subagents": ["cli-explore-agent", "action-planning-agent"],
       "cli_tools": [{"tool": "gemini", "mode": "analysis"}],
       "message_types": ["plan_ready", "plan_progress", "error"]
     },
@@ -42,7 +41,7 @@
       "task_prefix": "EXEC",
       "description": "Code implementation from IMPL-*.json tasks, wave-based parallel execution",
       "commands": ["implement"],
-      "subagents": ["code-developer"],
+      "cli_tools": [{"tool": "gemini", "mode": "write"}],
       "message_types": ["exec_complete", "exec_progress", "error"]
     },
     {

.claude/skills/team-tech-debt/SKILL.md

@@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ TDSCAN-001 内部并行架构:
          ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
          │                  Scanner Worker                     │
          │                                                     │
-         │  Fan-out A: Subagent Exploration (并行 cli-explore) │
+         │  Fan-out A: CLI Exploration (parallel CLI explore)    │
          │  ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐            │
          │  │structure  │ │patterns  │ │deps      │            │
          │  │角度       │ │角度      │ │角度      │             │

.claude/skills/team-tech-debt/role-specs/executor.md

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ message_types:
 
 # Tech Debt Executor
 
-Debt cleanup executor. Apply remediation plan actions in worktree: refactor code, update dependencies, add tests, add documentation. Batch-delegate to code-developer subagent, self-validate after each batch.
+Debt cleanup executor. Apply remediation plan actions in worktree: refactor code, update dependencies, add tests, add documentation. Batch-delegate to CLI tools, self-validate after each batch.
 
 ## Phase 2: Load Remediation Plan
 
@@ -32,14 +32,24 @@ Debt cleanup executor. Apply remediation plan actions in worktree: refactor code
 
 ## Phase 3: Execute Fixes
 
-For each batch, delegate to `code-developer` subagent (synchronous, `run_in_background: false`):
+For each batch, use CLI tool for implementation:
 
 **Worktree constraint**: ALL file operations and commands must execute within worktree path. Use `cd "<worktree-path>" && ...` prefix for all Bash commands.
 
 **Per-batch delegation**:
-- Provide batch type prompt (refactor/update-deps/add-tests/add-docs/restructure)
+
-- List all items with file paths, descriptions, and fix steps
+```bash
-- Enforce: read files before modifying, minimal changes, backward compatibility, no new features, no suppressions
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Apply tech debt fixes in batch; success = all items fixed without breaking changes
+TASK: <batch-type-specific-tasks>
+MODE: write
+CONTEXT: @<worktree-path>/**/* | Memory: Remediation plan context
+EXPECTED: Code changes that fix debt items, maintain backward compatibility, pass existing tests
+CONSTRAINTS: Minimal changes only | No new features | No suppressions | Read files before modifying
+Batch type: <refactor|update-deps|add-tests|add-docs|restructure>
+Items: <list-of-items-with-file-paths-and-descriptions>" --tool gemini --mode write --cd "<worktree-path>"
+```
+
+Wait for CLI completion before proceeding to next batch.
 
 **Fix Results Tracking**:
 

.claude/skills/team-tech-debt/role-specs/scanner.md

@@ -1,7 +1,6 @@
 ---
 prefix: TDSCAN
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: []
 message_types:
   success: scan_complete
   error: error
@@ -47,8 +46,8 @@ Multi-dimension tech debt scanner. Scan codebase across 5 dimensions (code, arch
 
 | Score | Complexity | Strategy |
 |-------|------------|----------|
-| >= 4 | High | Triple Fan-out: subagent explore + CLI 5 dimensions + multi-perspective Gemini |
+| >= 4 | High | Triple Fan-out: CLI explore + CLI 5 dimensions + multi-perspective Gemini |
-| 2-3 | Medium | Dual Fan-out: subagent explore + CLI 3 dimensions |
+| 2-3 | Medium | Dual Fan-out: CLI explore + CLI 3 dimensions |
 | 0-1 | Low | Inline: ACE search + Grep |
 
 ## Phase 3: Multi-Dimension Scan
@@ -58,7 +57,7 @@ Multi-dimension tech debt scanner. Scan codebase across 5 dimensions (code, arch
 - Classify findings into dimensions
 
 **Medium/High Complexity** (Fan-out):
-- Fan-out A: Subagent exploration (structure, patterns, dependencies angles) via `cli-explore-agent`
+- Fan-out A: CLI exploration (structure, patterns, dependencies angles) via `ccw cli --tool gemini --mode analysis`
 - Fan-out B: CLI dimension analysis (parallel gemini per dimension -- code, architecture, testing, dependency, documentation)
 - Fan-out C (High only): Multi-perspective Gemini analysis (security, performance, code-quality, architecture)
 - Fan-in: Merge results, cross-deduplicate by file:line, boost severity for multi-source findings

.claude/skills/team-tech-debt/role-specs/validator.md

@@ -58,8 +58,18 @@ Execute 4-layer validation (all commands in worktree):
 - improvement_percentage = ((before - after) / before) * 100
 
 **Auto-fix attempt** (when total_regressions <= 3):
-- Spawn code-developer subagent to fix regressions in worktree
+- Use CLI tool to fix regressions in worktree:
-- Constraints: fix only regressions, preserve debt cleanup changes, no suppressions
+  ```
+  Bash({
+    command: `cd "${worktreePath}" && ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Fix regressions found in validation
+  TASK: ${regressionDetails}
+  MODE: write
+  CONTEXT: @${modifiedFiles.join(' @')}
+  EXPECTED: Fixed regressions
+  CONSTRAINTS: Fix only regressions | Preserve debt cleanup changes | No suppressions" --tool gemini --mode write`,
+    run_in_background: false
+  })
+  ```
 - Re-run checks after fix attempt
 
 ## Phase 4: Compare & Report

.claude/skills/team-tech-debt/roles/coordinator/role.md

@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
 ### MUST NOT
 - Execute tech debt work directly (delegate to workers)
 - Modify task outputs (workers own their deliverables)
-- Call implementation subagents directly (cli-explore-agent, code-developer, etc.)
+- Call CLI tools for analysis, exploration, or code generation
 - Modify source code or generate artifact files directly
 - Bypass worker roles to complete delegated work
 - Skip dependency validation when creating task chains
@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ For callback/check/resume/complete: load `commands/monitor.md` and execute match
 | `Task` | Tool | Phase 4 | Worker spawning |
 | `AskUserQuestion` | Tool | Phase 1 | Requirement clarification |
 
-> Coordinator does not directly use CLI analysis tools or implementation subagents
+> Coordinator does not directly use CLI analysis tools or CLI code generation
 
 ---
 

.claude/skills/team-tech-debt/specs/team-config.json

@@ -23,8 +23,7 @@
       "message_types_sent": ["scan_complete", "debt_items_found", "error"],
       "message_types_received": [],
       "commands": ["scan-debt"],
-      "cli_tools": ["gemini"],
+      "cli_tools": ["gemini"]
-      "subagents": ["cli-explore-agent"]
     },
     "assessor": {
       "name": "assessor",
@@ -44,8 +43,7 @@
       "message_types_sent": ["plan_ready", "plan_revision", "error"],
       "message_types_received": [],
       "commands": ["create-plan"],
-      "cli_tools": ["gemini"],
+      "cli_tools": ["gemini"]
-      "subagents": ["cli-explore-agent"]
     },
     "executor": {
       "name": "executor",
@@ -55,7 +53,7 @@
       "message_types_sent": ["fix_complete", "fix_progress", "error"],
       "message_types_received": [],
       "commands": ["remediate"],
-      "subagents": ["code-developer"]
+      "cli_tools": [{"tool": "gemini", "mode": "write"}]
     },
     "validator": {
       "name": "validator",
@@ -65,8 +63,7 @@
       "message_types_sent": ["validation_complete", "regression_found", "error"],
       "message_types_received": [],
       "commands": ["verify"],
-      "subagents": ["code-developer"],
+      "cli_tools": [{"tool": "gemini", "mode": "write"}]
-      "cli_tools": ["gemini"]
     }
   },
 

.claude/skills/team-testing/role-specs/executor.md

@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ Glob("<session>/<test-dir>/**/*")
 | 2 | Parse results: pass rate + coverage |
 | 3 | pass_rate >= 0.95 AND coverage >= target -> success, exit |
 | 4 | Extract failing test details |
-| 5 | Delegate fix to code-developer subagent |
+| 5 | Delegate fix to CLI tool (gemini write mode) |
 | 6 | Increment iteration; >= 3 -> exit with failures |
 
 ```

.claude/skills/team-uidesign/SKILL.md

@@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ Cross-task knowledge accumulation. Coordinator creates `wisdom/` directory at se
 | Share state via team_msg(type='state_update') | Create tasks for other roles |
 | Delegate to commands/ files | Modify resources outside own responsibility |
 
-Coordinator additional restrictions: Do not write/modify code directly, do not call implementation subagents, do not execute analysis/audits, do not bypass workers.
+Coordinator additional restrictions: Do not write/modify code directly, do not spawn implementation workers directly, do not execute analysis/audits, do not bypass workers.
 
 ### Output Tagging
 

.claude/skills/team-uidesign/role-specs/researcher.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: RESEARCH
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: [explore]
+additional_members: [explore]
 message_types:
   success: research_ready
   progress: research_progress
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ Analyze existing design system, build component inventory, assess accessibility
 | @shadcn/ui | shadcn |
 | (default) | html-tailwind |
 
-3. Use `explore` subagent to scan for existing design tokens, component files, styling patterns
+3. Use CLI tools (e.g., `ccw cli -p "..." --tool gemini --mode analysis`) or direct tools (Glob, Grep, mcp__ace-tool__search_context) to scan for existing design tokens, component files, styling patterns
 4. Read industry context from session config (industry, strictness, must-have features)
 
 ## Phase 3: Research Execution

.claude/skills/team-ultra-analyze/role-specs/analyst.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 prefix: ANALYZE
 inner_loop: false
 additional_prefixes: [ANALYZE-fix]
-subagents: []
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: analysis_ready
   error: error

.claude/skills/team-ultra-analyze/role-specs/discussant.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 prefix: DISCUSS
 inner_loop: false
-subagents: []
+additional_members: []
 message_types:
   success: discussion_processed
   error: error
@@ -40,9 +40,9 @@ Select strategy by discussion type:
 | Type | Mode | Description |
 |------|------|-------------|
 | initial | inline | Aggregate all analyses: convergent themes, conflicts, top discussion points |
-| deepen | subagent | Spawn cli-explore-agent to investigate open questions deeper |
+| deepen | cli | Use CLI tool to investigate open questions deeper |
 | direction-adjusted | cli | Re-analyze via `ccw cli` from adjusted perspective |
-| specific-questions | subagent | Targeted exploration answering user questions |
+| specific-questions | cli | Targeted exploration answering user questions |
 
 **initial**: Cross-perspective summary -- identify convergent themes, conflicting views, top 5 discussion points and open questions from all analyses.