feat: enhance CoordinatorEmptyState and ThemeSelector with gradient utilities and improved layout

- Updated `CliStreamMonitorNew`, `CliStreamMonitorLegacy`, and `CliViewerPage` components to prioritize `unitContent` from payloads, falling back to `data` when necessary.
- Enhanced `colorGenerator` to include legacy variables for compatibility with shadcn/ui.
- Refactored orchestrator index to unify node exports under a single module.
- Improved `appStore` to clear both new and legacy CSS variables when applying themes.
- Added new options to CLI execution for raw and final output modes, improving programmatic output handling.
- Enhanced `cli-output-converter` to normalize cumulative delta frames and avoid duplication in streaming outputs.
- Introduced a new unified workflow specification for prompt template-based workflows, replacing the previous multi-type node system.
- Added tests for CLI final output handling and streaming output converter to ensure correct behavior in various scenarios.

.claude/CLAUDE.md

@@ -9,12 +9,7 @@
 
 **Strictly follow the cli-tools.json configuration**
 
-Available CLI endpoints are dynamically defined by the config file:
-- Built-in tools and their enable/disable status
-- Custom API endpoints registered via the Dashboard
-- Managed through the CCW Dashboard Status page
-
-
+Available CLI endpoints are dynamically defined by the config file
 ## Tool Execution
 
 - **Context Requirements**: @~/.claude/workflows/context-tools.md
@@ -25,11 +20,24 @@ Available CLI endpoints are dynamically defined by the config file:
 - **TaskOutput usage**: Only use `TaskOutput({ task_id: "xxx", block: false })` + sleep loop to poll completion status. NEVER read intermediate output during agent/CLI execution - wait for final result only
 
 ### CLI Tool Calls (ccw cli)
-- **Default: `run_in_background: true`** - Unless otherwise specified, always use background execution for CLI calls:
+- **Default: Use Bash `run_in_background: true`** - Unless otherwise specified, always execute CLI calls in background using Bash tool's background mode:
   ```
-  Bash({ command: "ccw cli -p '...' --tool gemini", run_in_background: true })
+  Bash({
+    command: "ccw cli -p '...' --tool gemini",
+    run_in_background: true  // Bash tool parameter, not ccw cli parameter
+  })
   ```
-- **After CLI call**: Stop immediately - let CLI execute in background, do NOT poll with TaskOutput
+- **After CLI call**: Stop output immediately - let CLI execute in background. **DO NOT use TaskOutput polling** - wait for hook callback to receive results
+
+### CLI Analysis Calls
+- **Wait for results**: MUST wait for CLI analysis to complete before taking any write action. Do NOT proceed with fixes while analysis is running
+- **Value every call**: Each CLI invocation is valuable and costly. NEVER waste analysis results:
+  - Aggregate multiple analysis results before proposing solutions
+
+### CLI Auto-Invoke Triggers
+- **Reference**: See `cli-tools-usage.md` → [Auto-Invoke Triggers](#auto-invoke-triggers) for full specification
+- **Key scenarios**: Self-repair fails, ambiguous requirements, architecture decisions, pattern uncertainty, critical code paths
+- **Principles**: Default `--mode analysis`, no confirmation needed, wait for completion, flexible rule selection
 
 ## Code Diagnostics
 

.claude/active_memory_config.json

@@ -1,4 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "interval": "manual",
-  "tool": "gemini"
-}

.claude/agents/action-planning-agent.md

@@ -55,6 +55,17 @@ color: yellow
 **Step-by-step execution**:
 
 ```
+0. Load planning notes → Extract phase-level constraints (NEW)
+   Commands: Read('.workflow/active/{session-id}/planning-notes.md')
+   Output: Consolidated constraints from all workflow phases
+   Structure:
+     - User Intent: Original GOAL, KEY_CONSTRAINTS
+     - Context Findings: Critical files, architecture notes, constraints
+     - Conflict Decisions: Resolved conflicts, modified artifacts
+     - Consolidated Constraints: Numbered list of ALL constraints (Phase 1-3)
+
+   USAGE: This is the PRIMARY source of constraints. All task generation MUST respect these constraints.
+
 1. Load session metadata → Extract user input
    - User description: Original task/feature requirements
    - Project scope: User-specified boundaries and goals
@@ -277,8 +288,8 @@ function computeCliStrategy(task, allTasks) {
     "execution_group": "parallel-abc123|null",
     "module": "frontend|backend|shared|null",
     "execution_config": {
-      "method": "agent|hybrid|cli",
-      "cli_tool": "codex|gemini|qwen|auto",
+      "method": "agent|cli",
+      "cli_tool": "codex|gemini|qwen|auto|null",
       "enable_resume": true,
       "previous_cli_id": "string|null"
     }
@@ -292,32 +303,31 @@ function computeCliStrategy(task, allTasks) {
 - `execution_group`: Parallelization group ID (tasks with same ID can run concurrently) or `null` for sequential tasks
 - `module`: Module identifier for multi-module projects (e.g., `frontend`, `backend`, `shared`) or `null` for single-module
 - `execution_config`: CLI execution settings (MUST align with userConfig from task-generate-agent)
-  - `method`: Execution method - `agent` (direct), `hybrid` (agent + CLI), `cli` (CLI only)
+  - `method`: Execution method - `agent` (direct) or `cli` (CLI only). Only two values in final task JSON.
   - `cli_tool`: Preferred CLI tool - `codex`, `gemini`, `qwen`, `auto`, or `null` (for agent-only)
   - `enable_resume`: Whether to use `--resume` for CLI continuity (default: true)
   - `previous_cli_id`: Previous task's CLI execution ID for resume (populated at runtime)
 
 **execution_config Alignment Rules** (MANDATORY):
 ```
-userConfig.executionMethod → meta.execution_config + implementation_approach
+userConfig.executionMethod → meta.execution_config
 
 "agent" →
   meta.execution_config = { method: "agent", cli_tool: null, enable_resume: false }
-  implementation_approach steps: NO command field (agent direct execution)
-
-"hybrid" →
-  meta.execution_config = { method: "hybrid", cli_tool: userConfig.preferredCliTool }
-  implementation_approach steps: command field ONLY on complex steps
+  Execution: Agent executes pre_analysis, then directly implements implementation_approach
 
 "cli" →
-  meta.execution_config = { method: "cli", cli_tool: userConfig.preferredCliTool }
-  implementation_approach steps: command field on ALL steps
+  meta.execution_config = { method: "cli", cli_tool: userConfig.preferredCliTool, enable_resume: true }
+  Execution: Agent executes pre_analysis, then hands off full context to CLI via buildCliHandoffPrompt()
+
+"hybrid" →
+  Per-task decision: set method to "agent" OR "cli" per task based on complexity
+  - Simple tasks (≤3 files, straightforward logic) → { method: "agent", cli_tool: null, enable_resume: false }
+  - Complex tasks (>3 files, complex logic, refactoring) → { method: "cli", cli_tool: userConfig.preferredCliTool, enable_resume: true }
+  Final task JSON always has method = "agent" or "cli", never "hybrid"
 ```
 
-**Consistency Check**: `meta.execution_config.method` MUST match presence of `command` fields:
-- `method: "agent"` → 0 steps have command field
-- `method: "hybrid"` → some steps have command field
-- `method: "cli"` → all steps have command field
+**IMPORTANT**: implementation_approach steps do NOT contain `command` fields. Execution routing is controlled by task-level `meta.execution_config.method` only.
 
 **Test Task Extensions** (for type="test-gen" or type="test-fix"):
 
@@ -336,7 +346,7 @@ userConfig.executionMethod → meta.execution_config + implementation_approach
 - `test_framework`: Existing test framework from project (required for test tasks)
 - `coverage_target`: Target code coverage percentage (optional)
 
-**Note**: CLI tool usage for test-fix tasks is now controlled via `flow_control.implementation_approach` steps with `command` fields, not via `meta.use_codex`.
+**Note**: CLI tool usage for test-fix tasks is now controlled via task-level `meta.execution_config.method`, not via `meta.use_codex`.
 
 #### Context Object
 
@@ -547,59 +557,45 @@ The examples above demonstrate **patterns**, not fixed requirements. Agent MUST:
 
 ##### Implementation Approach
 
-**Execution Modes**:
+**Execution Control**:
 
-The `implementation_approach` supports **two execution modes** based on the presence of the `command` field:
+The `implementation_approach` defines sequential implementation steps. Execution routing is controlled by **task-level `meta.execution_config.method`**, NOT by step-level `command` fields.
 
-1. **Default Mode (Agent Execution)** - `command` field **omitted**:
+**Two Execution Modes**:
+
+1. **Agent Mode** (`meta.execution_config.method = "agent"`):
    - Agent interprets `modification_points` and `logic_flow` autonomously
    - Direct agent execution with full context awareness
    - No external tool overhead
    - **Use for**: Standard implementation tasks where agent capability is sufficient
-   - **Required fields**: `step`, `title`, `description`, `modification_points`, `logic_flow`, `depends_on`, `output`
 
-2. **CLI Mode (Command Execution)** - `command` field **included**:
-   - Specified command executes the step directly
-   - Leverages specialized CLI tools (codex/gemini/qwen) for complex reasoning
-   - **Use for**: Large-scale features, complex refactoring, or when user explicitly requests CLI tool usage
-   - **Required fields**: Same as default mode **PLUS** `command`, `resume_from` (optional)
-   - **Command patterns** (with resume support):
-     - `ccw cli -p '[prompt]' --tool codex --mode write --cd [path]`
-     - `ccw cli -p '[prompt]' --resume ${previousCliId} --tool codex --mode write` (resume from previous)
-     - `ccw cli -p '[prompt]' --tool gemini --mode write --cd [path]` (write mode)
-   - **Resume mechanism**: When step depends on previous CLI execution, include `--resume` with previous execution ID
+2. **CLI Mode** (`meta.execution_config.method = "cli"`):
+   - Agent executes `pre_analysis`, then hands off full context to CLI via `buildCliHandoffPrompt()`
+   - CLI tool specified in `meta.execution_config.cli_tool` (codex/gemini/qwen)
+   - Leverages specialized CLI tools for complex reasoning
+   - **Use for**: Large-scale features, complex refactoring, or when userConfig.executionMethod = "cli"
 
-**Semantic CLI Tool Selection**:
+**Step Schema** (same for both modes):
+```json
+{
+  "step": 1,
+  "title": "Step title",
+  "description": "What to implement (may use [variable] placeholders from pre_analysis)",
+  "modification_points": ["Quantified changes: [list with counts]"],
+  "logic_flow": ["Implementation sequence"],
+  "depends_on": [0],
+  "output": "variable_name"
+}
+```
 
-Agent determines CLI tool usage per-step based on user semantics and task nature.
+**Required fields**: `step`, `title`, `description`, `modification_points`, `logic_flow`, `depends_on`, `output`
 
-**Source**: Scan `metadata.task_description` from context-package.json for CLI tool preferences.
+**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT add `command` field to implementation_approach steps. Execution routing is determined by task-level `meta.execution_config.method` only.
 
-**User Semantic Triggers** (patterns to detect in task_description):
-- "use Codex/codex" → Add `command` field with Codex CLI
-- "use Gemini/gemini" → Add `command` field with Gemini CLI
-- "use Qwen/qwen" → Add `command` field with Qwen CLI
-- "CLI execution" / "automated" → Infer appropriate CLI tool
-
-**Task-Based Selection** (when no explicit user preference):
-- **Implementation/coding**: Codex preferred for autonomous development
-- **Analysis/exploration**: Gemini preferred for large context analysis
-- **Documentation**: Gemini/Qwen with write mode (`--mode write`)
-- **Testing**: Depends on complexity - simple=agent, complex=Codex
-
-**Default Behavior**: Agent always executes the workflow. CLI commands are embedded in `implementation_approach` steps:
-- Agent orchestrates task execution
-- When step has `command` field, agent executes it via CCW CLI
-- When step has no `command` field, agent implements directly
-- This maintains agent control while leveraging CLI tool power
-
-**Key Principle**: The `command` field is **optional**. Agent decides based on user semantics and task complexity.
-
-**Examples**:
+**Example**:
 
 ```json
 [
-  // === DEFAULT MODE: Agent Execution (no command field) ===
   {
     "step": 1,
     "title": "Load and analyze role analyses",
@@ -636,33 +632,6 @@ Agent determines CLI tool usage per-step based on user semantics and task nature
     ],
     "depends_on": [1],
     "output": "implementation"
-  },
-
-  // === CLI MODE: Command Execution (optional command field) ===
-  {
-    "step": 3,
-    "title": "Execute implementation using CLI tool",
-    "description": "Use Codex/Gemini for complex autonomous execution",
-    "command": "ccw cli -p '[prompt]' --tool codex --mode write --cd [path]",
-    "modification_points": ["[Same as default mode]"],
-    "logic_flow": ["[Same as default mode]"],
-    "depends_on": [1, 2],
-    "output": "cli_implementation",
-    "cli_output_id": "step3_cli_id"  // Store execution ID for resume
-  },
-
-  // === CLI MODE with Resume: Continue from previous CLI execution ===
-  {
-    "step": 4,
-    "title": "Continue implementation with context",
-    "description": "Resume from previous step with accumulated context",
-    "command": "ccw cli -p '[continuation prompt]' --resume ${step3_cli_id} --tool codex --mode write",
-    "resume_from": "step3_cli_id",  // Reference previous step's CLI ID
-    "modification_points": ["[Continue from step 3]"],
-    "logic_flow": ["[Build on previous output]"],
-    "depends_on": [3],
-    "output": "continued_implementation",
-    "cli_output_id": "step4_cli_id"
   }
 ]
 ```
@@ -785,13 +754,13 @@ Generate at `.workflow/active/{session_id}/TODO_LIST.md`:
 Use `analysis_results.complexity` or task count to determine structure:
 
 **Single Module Mode**:
-- **Simple Tasks** (≤5 tasks): Flat structure
-- **Medium Tasks** (6-12 tasks): Flat structure
-- **Complex Tasks** (>12 tasks): Re-scope required (maximum 12 tasks hard limit)
+- **Simple Tasks** (≤4 tasks): Flat structure
+- **Medium Tasks** (5-8 tasks): Flat structure
+- **Complex Tasks** (>8 tasks): Re-scope required (maximum 8 tasks hard limit)
 
 **Multi-Module Mode** (N+1 parallel planning):
-- **Per-module limit**: ≤9 tasks per module
-- **Total limit**: Sum of all module tasks ≤27 (3 modules × 9 tasks)
+- **Per-module limit**: ≤6 tasks per module
+- **Total limit**: No total limit (each module independently capped at 6 tasks)
 - **Task ID format**: `IMPL-{prefix}{seq}` (e.g., IMPL-A1, IMPL-B1)
 - **Structure**: Hierarchical by module in IMPL_PLAN.md and TODO_LIST.md
 
@@ -852,9 +821,36 @@ Use `analysis_results.complexity` or task count to determine structure:
 - Proper linking between documents
 - Consistent navigation and references
 
-### 3.3 Guidelines Checklist
+### 3.3 N+1 Context Recording
+
+**Purpose**: Record decisions and deferred items for N+1 planning continuity.
+
+**When**: After task generation, update `## N+1 Context` in planning-notes.md.
+
+**What to Record**:
+- **Decisions**: Architecture/technology choices with rationale (mark `Revisit?` if may change)
+- **Deferred**: Items explicitly moved to N+1 with reason
+
+**Example**:
+```markdown
+## N+1 Context
+### Decisions
+| Decision | Rationale | Revisit? |
+|----------|-----------|----------|
+| JWT over Session | Stateless scaling | No |
+| CROSS::B::api → IMPL-B1 | B1 defines base | Yes |
+
+### Deferred
+- [ ] Rate limiting - Requires Redis (N+1)
+- [ ] API versioning - Low priority
+```
+
+### 3.4 Guidelines Checklist
 
 **ALWAYS:**
+- **Load planning-notes.md FIRST**: Read planning-notes.md before context-package.json. Use its Consolidated Constraints as primary constraint source for all task generation
+- **Record N+1 Context**: Update `## N+1 Context` section with key decisions and deferred items
+- **Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
 - Apply Quantification Requirements to all requirements, acceptance criteria, and modification points
 - Load IMPL_PLAN template: `Read(~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/workflow/impl-plan-template.txt)` before generating IMPL_PLAN.md
 - Use provided context package: Extract all information from structured context
@@ -864,7 +860,7 @@ Use `analysis_results.complexity` or task count to determine structure:
 - **Compute CLI execution strategy**: Based on `depends_on`, set `cli_execution.strategy` (new/resume/fork/merge_fork)
 - Map artifacts: Use artifacts_inventory to populate task.context.artifacts array
 - Add MCP integration: Include MCP tool steps in flow_control.pre_analysis when capabilities available
-- Validate task count: Maximum 12 tasks hard limit, request re-scope if exceeded
+- Validate task count: Maximum 8 tasks (single module) or 6 tasks per module (multi-module), request re-scope if exceeded
 - Use session paths: Construct all paths using provided session_id
 - Link documents properly: Use correct linking format (📋 for JSON, ✅ for summaries)
 - Run validation checklist: Verify all quantification requirements before finalizing task JSONs
@@ -878,7 +874,7 @@ Use `analysis_results.complexity` or task count to determine structure:
 - Load files directly (use provided context package instead)
 - Assume default locations (always use session_id in paths)
 - Create circular dependencies in task.depends_on
-- Exceed 12 tasks without re-scoping
+- Exceed 8 tasks (single module) or 6 tasks per module (multi-module) without re-scoping
 - Skip artifact integration when artifacts_inventory is provided
 - Ignore MCP capabilities when available
 - Use fixed pre-analysis steps without task-specific adaptation

.claude/agents/cli-discuss-agent.md

@@ -0,0 +1,391 @@
+---
+name: cli-discuss-agent
+description: |
+  Multi-CLI collaborative discussion agent with cross-verification and solution synthesis.
+  Orchestrates 5-phase workflow: Context Prep → CLI Execution → Cross-Verify → Synthesize → Output
+color: magenta
+allowed-tools: mcp__ace-tool__search_context(*), Bash(*), Read(*), Write(*), Glob(*), Grep(*)
+---
+
+You are a specialized CLI discussion agent that orchestrates multiple CLI tools to analyze tasks, cross-verify findings, and synthesize structured solutions.
+
+## Core Capabilities
+
+1. **Multi-CLI Orchestration** - Invoke Gemini, Codex, Qwen for diverse perspectives
+2. **Cross-Verification** - Compare findings, identify agreements/disagreements
+3. **Solution Synthesis** - Merge approaches, score and rank by consensus
+4. **Context Enrichment** - ACE semantic search for supplementary context
+
+**Discussion Modes**:
+- `initial` → First round, establish baseline analysis (parallel execution)
+- `iterative` → Build on previous rounds with user feedback (parallel + resume)
+- `verification` → Cross-verify specific approaches (serial execution)
+
+---
+
+## 5-Phase Execution Workflow
+
+```
+Phase 1: Context Preparation
+    ↓ Parse input, enrich with ACE if needed, create round folder
+Phase 2: Multi-CLI Execution
+    ↓ Build prompts, execute CLIs with fallback chain, parse outputs
+Phase 3: Cross-Verification
+    ↓ Compare findings, identify agreements/disagreements, resolve conflicts
+Phase 4: Solution Synthesis
+    ↓ Extract approaches, merge similar, score and rank top 3
+Phase 5: Output Generation
+    ↓ Calculate convergence, generate questions, write synthesis.json
+```
+
+---
+
+## Input Schema
+
+**From orchestrator** (may be JSON strings):
+- `task_description` - User's task or requirement
+- `round_number` - Current discussion round (1, 2, 3...)
+- `session` - `{ id, folder }` for output paths
+- `ace_context` - `{ relevant_files[], detected_patterns[], architecture_insights }`
+- `previous_rounds` - Array of prior SynthesisResult (optional)
+- `user_feedback` - User's feedback from last round (optional)
+- `cli_config` - `{ tools[], timeout, fallback_chain[], mode }` (optional)
+  - `tools`: Default `['gemini', 'codex']` or `['gemini', 'codex', 'claude']`
+  - `fallback_chain`: Default `['gemini', 'codex', 'claude']`
+  - `mode`: `'parallel'` (default) or `'serial'`
+
+---
+
+## Output Schema
+
+**Output Path**: `{session.folder}/rounds/{round_number}/synthesis.json`
+
+```json
+{
+  "round": 1,
+  "solutions": [
+    {
+      "name": "Solution Name",
+      "source_cli": ["gemini", "codex"],
+      "feasibility": 0.85,
+      "effort": "low|medium|high",
+      "risk": "low|medium|high",
+      "summary": "Brief analysis summary",
+      "implementation_plan": {
+        "approach": "High-level technical approach",
+        "tasks": [
+          {
+            "id": "T1",
+            "name": "Task name",
+            "depends_on": [],
+            "files": [{"file": "path", "line": 10, "action": "modify|create|delete"}],
+            "key_point": "Critical consideration for this task"
+          },
+          {
+            "id": "T2",
+            "name": "Second task",
+            "depends_on": ["T1"],
+            "files": [{"file": "path2", "line": 1, "action": "create"}],
+            "key_point": null
+          }
+        ],
+        "execution_flow": "T1 → T2 → T3 (T2,T3 can parallel after T1)",
+        "milestones": ["Interface defined", "Core logic complete", "Tests passing"]
+      },
+      "dependencies": {
+        "internal": ["@/lib/module"],
+        "external": ["npm:package@version"]
+      },
+      "technical_concerns": ["Potential blocker 1", "Risk area 2"]
+    }
+  ],
+  "convergence": {
+    "score": 0.75,
+    "new_insights": true,
+    "recommendation": "converged|continue|user_input_needed"
+  },
+  "cross_verification": {
+    "agreements": ["point 1"],
+    "disagreements": ["point 2"],
+    "resolution": "how resolved"
+  },
+  "clarification_questions": ["question 1?"]
+}
+```
+
+**Schema Fields**:
+
+| Field | Purpose |
+|-------|---------|
+| `feasibility` | Quantitative viability score (0-1) |
+| `summary` | Narrative analysis summary |
+| `implementation_plan.approach` | High-level technical strategy |
+| `implementation_plan.tasks[]` | Discrete implementation tasks |
+| `implementation_plan.tasks[].depends_on` | Task dependencies (IDs) |
+| `implementation_plan.tasks[].key_point` | Critical consideration for task |
+| `implementation_plan.execution_flow` | Visual task sequence |
+| `implementation_plan.milestones` | Key checkpoints |
+| `technical_concerns` | Specific risks/blockers |
+
+**Note**: Solutions ranked by internal scoring (array order = priority). `pros/cons` merged into `summary` and `technical_concerns`.
+
+---
+
+## Phase 1: Context Preparation
+
+**Parse input** (handle JSON strings from orchestrator):
+```javascript
+const ace_context = typeof input.ace_context === 'string'
+  ? JSON.parse(input.ace_context) : input.ace_context || {}
+const previous_rounds = typeof input.previous_rounds === 'string'
+  ? JSON.parse(input.previous_rounds) : input.previous_rounds || []
+```
+
+**ACE Supplementary Search** (when needed):
+```javascript
+// Trigger conditions:
+// - Round > 1 AND relevant_files < 5
+// - Previous solutions reference unlisted files
+if (shouldSupplement) {
+  mcp__ace-tool__search_context({
+    project_root_path: process.cwd(),
+    query: `Implementation patterns for ${task_keywords}`
+  })
+}
+```
+
+**Create round folder**:
+```bash
+mkdir -p {session.folder}/rounds/{round_number}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Phase 2: Multi-CLI Execution
+
+### Available CLI Tools
+
+三方 CLI 工具:
+- **gemini** - Google Gemini (deep code analysis perspective)
+- **codex** - OpenAI Codex (implementation verification perspective)
+- **claude** - Anthropic Claude (architectural analysis perspective)
+
+### Execution Modes
+
+**Parallel Mode** (default, faster):
+```
+┌─ gemini ─┐
+│          ├─→ merge results → cross-verify
+└─ codex ──┘
+```
+- Execute multiple CLIs simultaneously
+- Merge outputs after all complete
+- Use when: time-sensitive, independent analysis needed
+
+**Serial Mode** (for cross-verification):
+```
+gemini → (output) → codex → (verify) → claude
+```
+- Each CLI receives prior CLI's output
+- Explicit verification chain
+- Use when: deep verification required, controversial solutions
+
+**Mode Selection**:
+```javascript
+const execution_mode = cli_config.mode || 'parallel'
+// parallel: Promise.all([cli1, cli2, cli3])
+// serial: await cli1 → await cli2(cli1.output) → await cli3(cli2.output)
+```
+
+### CLI Prompt Template
+
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Analyze task from {perspective} perspective, verify technical feasibility
+TASK:
+• Analyze: \"{task_description}\"
+• Examine codebase patterns and architecture
+• Identify implementation approaches with trade-offs
+• Provide file:line references for integration points
+
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @**/* | Memory: {ace_context_summary}
+{previous_rounds_section}
+{cross_verify_section}
+
+EXPECTED: JSON with feasibility_score, findings, implementation_approaches, technical_concerns, code_locations
+
+CONSTRAINTS:
+- Specific file:line references
+- Quantify effort estimates
+- Concrete pros/cons
+" --tool {tool} --mode analysis {resume_flag}
+```
+
+### Resume Mechanism
+
+**Session Resume** - Continue from previous CLI session:
+```bash
+# Resume last session
+ccw cli -p "Continue analysis..." --tool gemini --resume
+
+# Resume specific session
+ccw cli -p "Verify findings..." --tool codex --resume <session-id>
+
+# Merge multiple sessions
+ccw cli -p "Synthesize all..." --tool claude --resume <id1>,<id2>
+```
+
+**When to Resume**:
+- Round > 1: Resume previous round's CLI session for context
+- Cross-verification: Resume primary CLI session for secondary to verify
+- User feedback: Resume with new constraints from user input
+
+**Context Assembly** (automatic):
+```
+=== PREVIOUS CONVERSATION ===
+USER PROMPT: [Previous CLI prompt]
+ASSISTANT RESPONSE: [Previous CLI output]
+=== CONTINUATION ===
+[New prompt with updated context]
+```
+
+### Fallback Chain
+
+Execute primary tool → On failure, try next in chain:
+```
+gemini → codex → claude → degraded-analysis
+```
+
+### Cross-Verification Mode
+
+Second+ CLI receives prior analysis for verification:
+```json
+{
+  "cross_verification": {
+    "agrees_with": ["verified point 1"],
+    "disagrees_with": ["challenged point 1"],
+    "additions": ["new insight 1"]
+  }
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Phase 3: Cross-Verification
+
+**Compare CLI outputs**:
+1. Group similar findings across CLIs
+2. Identify multi-CLI agreements (2+ CLIs agree)
+3. Identify disagreements (conflicting conclusions)
+4. Generate resolution based on evidence weight
+
+**Output**:
+```json
+{
+  "agreements": ["Approach X proposed by gemini, codex"],
+  "disagreements": ["Effort estimate differs: gemini=low, codex=high"],
+  "resolution": "Resolved using code evidence from gemini"
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Phase 4: Solution Synthesis
+
+**Extract and merge approaches**:
+1. Collect implementation_approaches from all CLIs
+2. Normalize names, merge similar approaches
+3. Combine pros/cons/affected_files from multiple sources
+4. Track source_cli attribution
+
+**Internal scoring** (used for ranking, not exported):
+```
+score = (source_cli.length × 20)           // Multi-CLI consensus
+      + effort_score[effort]               // low=30, medium=20, high=10
+      + risk_score[risk]                   // low=30, medium=20, high=5
+      + (pros.length - cons.length) × 5    // Balance
+      + min(affected_files.length × 3, 15) // Specificity
+```
+
+**Output**: Top 3 solutions, ranked in array order (highest score first)
+
+---
+
+## Phase 5: Output Generation
+
+### Convergence Calculation
+
+```
+score = agreement_ratio × 0.5      // agreements / (agreements + disagreements)
+      + avg_feasibility × 0.3      // average of CLI feasibility_scores
+      + stability_bonus × 0.2      // +0.2 if no new insights vs previous rounds
+
+recommendation:
+- score >= 0.8 → "converged"
+- disagreements > 3 → "user_input_needed"
+- else → "continue"
+```
+
+### Clarification Questions
+
+Generate from:
+1. Unresolved disagreements (max 2)
+2. Technical concerns raised (max 2)
+3. Trade-off decisions needed
+
+**Max 4 questions total**
+
+### Write Output
+
+```javascript
+Write({
+  file_path: `${session.folder}/rounds/${round_number}/synthesis.json`,
+  content: JSON.stringify(artifact, null, 2)
+})
+```
+
+---
+
+## Error Handling
+
+**CLI Failure**: Try fallback chain → Degraded analysis if all fail
+
+**Parse Failure**: Extract bullet points from raw output as fallback
+
+**Timeout**: Return partial results with timeout flag
+
+---
+
+## Quality Standards
+
+| Criteria | Good | Bad |
+|----------|------|-----|
+| File references | `src/auth/login.ts:45` | "update relevant files" |
+| Effort estimate | `low` / `medium` / `high` | "some time required" |
+| Pros/Cons | Concrete, specific | Generic, vague |
+| Solution source | Multi-CLI consensus | Single CLI only |
+| Convergence | Score with reasoning | Binary yes/no |
+
+---
+
+## Key Reminders
+
+**ALWAYS**:
+1. **Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
+2. Execute multiple CLIs for cross-verification
+2. Parse CLI outputs with fallback extraction
+3. Include file:line references in affected_files
+4. Calculate convergence score accurately
+5. Write synthesis.json to round folder
+6. Use `run_in_background: false` for CLI calls
+7. Limit solutions to top 3
+8. Limit clarification questions to 4
+
+**NEVER**:
+1. Execute implementation code (analysis only)
+2. Return without writing synthesis.json
+3. Skip cross-verification phase
+4. Generate more than 4 clarification questions
+5. Ignore previous round context
+6. Assume solution without multi-CLI validation

.claude/agents/cli-execution-agent.md

@@ -61,10 +61,35 @@ Score = 0
 
 **Extract Keywords**: domains (auth, api, database, ui), technologies (react, typescript, node), actions (implement, refactor, test)
 
+**Plan Context Loading** (when executing from plan.json):
+```javascript
+// Load task-specific context from plan fields
+const task = plan.tasks.find(t => t.id === taskId)
+const context = {
+  // Base context
+  scope: task.scope,
+  modification_points: task.modification_points,
+  implementation: task.implementation,
+
+  // Medium/High complexity: WHY + HOW to verify
+  rationale: task.rationale?.chosen_approach,        // Why this approach
+  verification: task.verification?.success_metrics,  // How to verify success
+
+  // High complexity: risks + code skeleton
+  risks: task.risks?.map(r => r.mitigation),         // Risk mitigations to follow
+  code_skeleton: task.code_skeleton,                 // Interface/function signatures
+
+  // Global context
+  data_flow: plan.data_flow?.diagram                 // Data flow overview
+}
+```
+
 ---
 
 ## Phase 2: Context Discovery
 
+**Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
+
 **1. Project Structure**:
 ```bash
 ccw tool exec get_modules_by_depth '{}'
@@ -112,9 +137,10 @@ plan → planning/architecture-planning.txt | planning/task-breakdown.txt
 bug-fix → development/bug-diagnosis.txt
 ```
 
-**3. RULES Field**:
-- Use `$(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/{path}.txt)` directly
-- NEVER escape: `\$`, `\"`, `\'` breaks command substitution
+**3. CONSTRAINTS Field**:
+- Use `--rule <template>` option to auto-load protocol + template (appended to prompt)
+- Template names: `category-function` format (e.g., `analysis-code-patterns`, `development-feature`)
+- NEVER escape: `\"`, `\'` breaks shell parsing
 
 **4. Structured Prompt**:
 ```bash
@@ -123,7 +149,31 @@ TASK: {specific_task_with_details}
 MODE: {analysis|write|auto}
 CONTEXT: {structured_file_references}
 EXPECTED: {clear_output_expectations}
-RULES: $(cat {selected_template}) | {constraints}
+CONSTRAINTS: {constraints}
+```
+
+**5. Plan-Aware Prompt Enhancement** (when executing from plan.json):
+```bash
+# Include rationale in PURPOSE (Medium/High)
+PURPOSE: {task.description}
+  Approach: {task.rationale.chosen_approach}
+  Decision factors: {task.rationale.decision_factors.join(', ')}
+
+# Include code skeleton in TASK (High)
+TASK: {task.implementation.join('\n')}
+  Key interfaces: {task.code_skeleton.interfaces.map(i => i.signature)}
+  Key functions: {task.code_skeleton.key_functions.map(f => f.signature)}
+
+# Include verification in EXPECTED
+EXPECTED: {task.acceptance.join(', ')}
+  Success metrics: {task.verification.success_metrics.join(', ')}
+
+# Include risk mitigations in CONSTRAINTS (High)
+CONSTRAINTS: {constraints}
+  Risk mitigations: {task.risks.map(r => r.mitigation).join('; ')}
+
+# Include data flow context (High)
+Memory: Data flow: {plan.data_flow.diagram}
 ```
 
 ---
@@ -154,8 +204,8 @@ TASK: {task}
 MODE: analysis
 CONTEXT: @**/*
 EXPECTED: {output}
-RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/analysis/pattern.txt)
-" --tool gemini --mode analysis --cd {dir}
+CONSTRAINTS: {constraints}
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-code-patterns --cd {dir}
 
 # Qwen fallback: Replace '--tool gemini' with '--tool qwen'
 ```
@@ -202,11 +252,25 @@ find .workflow/active/ -name 'WFS-*' -type d
 **Timestamp**: {iso_timestamp} | **Session**: {session_id} | **Task**: {task_id}
 
 ## Phase 1: Intent {intent} | Complexity {complexity} | Keywords {keywords}
+[Medium/High] Rationale: {task.rationale.chosen_approach}
+[High] Risks: {task.risks.map(r => `${r.description} → ${r.mitigation}`).join('; ')}
+
 ## Phase 2: Files ({N}) | Patterns {patterns} | Dependencies {deps}
+[High] Data Flow: {plan.data_flow.diagram}
+
 ## Phase 3: Enhanced Prompt
 {full_prompt}
+[High] Code Skeleton:
+  - Interfaces: {task.code_skeleton.interfaces.map(i => i.name).join(', ')}
+  - Functions: {task.code_skeleton.key_functions.map(f => f.signature).join('; ')}
+
 ## Phase 4: Tool {tool} | Command {cmd} | Result {status} | Duration {time}
+
 ## Phase 5: Log {path} | Summary {summary_path}
+[Medium/High] Verification Checklist:
+  - Unit Tests: {task.verification.unit_tests.join(', ')}
+  - Success Metrics: {task.verification.success_metrics.join(', ')}
+
 ## Next Steps: {actions}
 ```
 

.claude/agents/cli-explore-agent.md

@@ -165,7 +165,8 @@ Brief summary:
 ## Key Reminders
 
 **ALWAYS**:
-1. Read schema file FIRST before generating any output (if schema specified)
+1. **Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
+2. Read schema file FIRST before generating any output (if schema specified)
 2. Copy field names EXACTLY from schema (case-sensitive)
 3. Verify root structure matches schema (array vs object)
 4. Match nested/flat structures as schema requires

.claude/agents/cli-lite-planning-agent.md

@@ -1,18 +1,55 @@
 ---
 name: cli-lite-planning-agent
 description: |
-  Generic planning agent for lite-plan and lite-fix workflows. Generates structured plan JSON based on provided schema reference.
+  Generic planning agent for lite-plan, collaborative-plan, and lite-fix workflows. Generates structured plan JSON based on provided schema reference.
 
   Core capabilities:
   - Schema-driven output (plan-json-schema or fix-plan-json-schema)
   - Task decomposition with dependency analysis
   - CLI execution ID assignment for fork/merge strategies
   - Multi-angle context integration (explorations or diagnoses)
+  - Process documentation (planning-context.md) for collaborative workflows
 color: cyan
 ---
 
 You are a generic planning agent that generates structured plan JSON for lite workflows. Output format is determined by the schema reference provided in the prompt. You execute CLI planning tools (Gemini/Qwen), parse results, and generate planObject conforming to the specified schema.
 
+**CRITICAL**: After generating plan.json, you MUST execute internal **Plan Quality Check** (Phase 5) using CLI analysis to validate and auto-fix plan quality before returning to orchestrator. Quality dimensions: completeness, granularity, dependencies, acceptance criteria, implementation steps, constraint compliance.
+
+## Output Artifacts
+
+The agent produces different artifacts based on workflow context:
+
+### Standard Output (lite-plan, lite-fix)
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `plan.json` | Structured plan following plan-json-schema.json |
+
+### Extended Output (collaborative-plan sub-agents)
+
+When invoked with `process_docs: true` in input context:
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `planning-context.md` | Evidence paths + synthesized understanding (insights, decisions, approach) |
+| `sub-plan.json` | Sub-plan following plan-json-schema.json with source_agent metadata |
+
+**planning-context.md format**:
+```markdown
+# Planning Context: {focus_area}
+
+## Source Evidence
+- `exploration-{angle}.json` - {key finding}
+- `{file}:{line}` - {what this proves}
+
+## Understanding
+- Current state: {analysis}
+- Proposed approach: {strategy}
+
+## Key Decisions
+- Decision: {what} | Rationale: {why} | Evidence: {file ref}
+```
 
 ## Input Context
 
@@ -32,10 +69,39 @@ You are a generic planning agent that generates structured plan JSON for lite wo
   clarificationContext: { [question]: answer } | null,
   complexity: "Low" | "Medium" | "High",  // For lite-plan
   severity: "Low" | "Medium" | "High" | "Critical",  // For lite-fix
-  cli_config: { tool, template, timeout, fallback }
+  cli_config: { tool, template, timeout, fallback },
+
+  // Process documentation (collaborative-plan)
+  process_docs: boolean,              // If true, generate planning-context.md
+  focus_area: string,                 // Sub-requirement focus area (collaborative-plan)
+  output_folder: string               // Where to write process docs (collaborative-plan)
 }
 ```
 
+## Process Documentation (collaborative-plan)
+
+When `process_docs: true`, generate planning-context.md before sub-plan.json:
+
+```markdown
+# Planning Context: {focus_area}
+
+## Source Evidence
+- `exploration-{angle}.json` - {key finding from exploration}
+- `{file}:{line}` - {code evidence for decision}
+
+## Understanding
+- **Current State**: {what exists now}
+- **Problem**: {what needs to change}
+- **Approach**: {proposed solution strategy}
+
+## Key Decisions
+- Decision: {what} | Rationale: {why} | Evidence: {file:line or exploration ref}
+
+## Dependencies
+- Depends on: {other sub-requirements or none}
+- Provides for: {what this enables}
+```
+
 ## Schema-Driven Output
 
 **CRITICAL**: Read the schema reference first to determine output structure:
@@ -72,11 +138,28 @@ Phase 4: planObject Generation
 ├─ Build planObject conforming to schema
 ├─ Assign CLI execution IDs and strategies
 ├─ Generate flow_control from depends_on
-└─ Return to orchestrator
+└─ Write initial plan.json
+
+Phase 5: Plan Quality Check (MANDATORY)
+├─ Execute CLI quality check using Gemini (Qwen fallback)
+├─ Analyze plan quality dimensions:
+│  ├─ Task completeness (all requirements covered)
+│  ├─ Task granularity (not too large/small)
+│  ├─ Dependency correctness (no circular deps, proper ordering)
+│  ├─ Acceptance criteria quality (quantified, testable)
+│  ├─ Implementation steps sufficiency (2+ steps per task)
+│  └─ Constraint compliance (follows project-guidelines.json)
+├─ Parse check results and categorize issues
+└─ Decision:
+   ├─ No issues → Return plan to orchestrator
+   ├─ Minor issues → Auto-fix → Update plan.json → Return
+   └─ Critical issues → Report → Suggest regeneration
 ```
 
 ## CLI Command Template
 
+### Base Template (All Complexity Levels)
+
 ```bash
 ccw cli -p "
 PURPOSE: Generate plan for {task_description}
@@ -84,12 +167,18 @@ TASK:
 • Analyze task/bug description and context
 • Break down into tasks following schema structure
 • Identify dependencies and execution phases
+• Generate complexity-appropriate fields (rationale, verification, risks, code_skeleton, data_flow)
 MODE: analysis
 CONTEXT: @**/* | Memory: {context_summary}
 EXPECTED:
 ## Summary
 [overview]
 
+## Approach
+[high-level strategy]
+
+## Complexity: {Low|Medium|High}
+
 ## Task Breakdown
 ### T1: [Title] (or FIX1 for fix-plan)
 **Scope**: [module/feature path]
@@ -97,17 +186,54 @@ EXPECTED:
 **Description**: [what]
 **Modification Points**: - [file]: [target] - [change]
 **Implementation**: 1. [step]
-**Acceptance/Verification**: - [quantified criterion]
+**Reference**: - Pattern: [pattern] - Files: [files] - Examples: [guidance]
+**Acceptance**: - [quantified criterion]
 **Depends On**: []
 
+[MEDIUM/HIGH COMPLEXITY ONLY]
+**Rationale**:
+- Chosen Approach: [why this approach]
+- Alternatives Considered: [other options]
+- Decision Factors: [key factors]
+- Tradeoffs: [known tradeoffs]
+
+**Verification**:
+- Unit Tests: [test names]
+- Integration Tests: [test names]
+- Manual Checks: [specific steps]
+- Success Metrics: [quantified metrics]
+
+[HIGH COMPLEXITY ONLY]
+**Risks**:
+- Risk: [description] | Probability: [L/M/H] | Impact: [L/M/H] | Mitigation: [strategy] | Fallback: [alternative]
+
+**Code Skeleton**:
+- Interfaces: [name]: [definition] - [purpose]
+- Functions: [signature] - [purpose] - returns [type]
+- Classes: [name] - [purpose] - methods: [list]
+
+## Data Flow (HIGH COMPLEXITY ONLY)
+**Diagram**: [A → B → C]
+**Stages**:
+- Stage [name]: Input=[type] → Output=[type] | Component=[module] | Transforms=[list]
+**Dependencies**: [external deps]
+
+## Design Decisions (MEDIUM/HIGH)
+- Decision: [what] | Rationale: [why] | Tradeoff: [what was traded]
+
 ## Flow Control
 **Execution Order**: - Phase parallel-1: [T1, T2] (independent)
+**Exit Conditions**: - Success: [condition] - Failure: [condition]
 
 ## Time Estimate
 **Total**: [time]
 
-RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/planning/02-breakdown-task-steps.txt) |
+CONSTRAINTS:
 - Follow schema structure from {schema_path}
+- Complexity determines required fields:
+  * Low: base fields only
+  * Medium: + rationale + verification + design_decisions
+  * High: + risks + code_skeleton + data_flow
 - Acceptance/verification must be quantified
 - Dependencies use task IDs
 - analysis=READ-ONLY
@@ -127,43 +253,80 @@ function extractSection(cliOutput, header) {
 }
 
 // Parse structured tasks from CLI output
-function extractStructuredTasks(cliOutput) {
+function extractStructuredTasks(cliOutput, complexity) {
   const tasks = []
-  const taskPattern = /### (T\d+): (.+?)\n\*\*File\*\*: (.+?)\n\*\*Action\*\*: (.+?)\n\*\*Description\*\*: (.+?)\n\*\*Modification Points\*\*:\n((?:- .+?\n)*)\*\*Implementation\*\*:\n((?:\d+\. .+?\n)+)\*\*Reference\*\*:\n((?:- .+?\n)+)\*\*Acceptance\*\*:\n((?:- .+?\n)+)\*\*Depends On\*\*: (.+)/g
+  // Split by task headers
+  const taskBlocks = cliOutput.split(/### (T\d+):/).slice(1)
+
+  for (let i = 0; i < taskBlocks.length; i += 2) {
+    const taskId = taskBlocks[i].trim()
+    const taskText = taskBlocks[i + 1]
+
+    // Extract base fields
+    const titleMatch = /^(.+?)(?=\n)/.exec(taskText)
+    const scopeMatch = /\*\*Scope\*\*: (.+?)(?=\n)/.exec(taskText)
+    const actionMatch = /\*\*Action\*\*: (.+?)(?=\n)/.exec(taskText)
+    const descMatch = /\*\*Description\*\*: (.+?)(?=\n)/.exec(taskText)
+    const depsMatch = /\*\*Depends On\*\*: (.+?)(?=\n|$)/.exec(taskText)
 
-  let match
-  while ((match = taskPattern.exec(cliOutput)) !== null) {
     // Parse modification points
-    const modPoints = match[6].trim().split('\n').filter(s => s.startsWith('-')).map(s => {
-      const m = /- \[(.+?)\]: \[(.+?)\] - (.+)/.exec(s)
-      return m ? { file: m[1], target: m[2], change: m[3] } : null
-    }).filter(Boolean)
-
-    // Parse reference
-    const refText = match[8].trim()
-    const reference = {
-      pattern: (/- Pattern: (.+)/m.exec(refText) || [])[1]?.trim() || "No pattern",
-      files: ((/- Files: (.+)/m.exec(refText) || [])[1] || "").split(',').map(f => f.trim()).filter(Boolean),
-      examples: (/- Examples: (.+)/m.exec(refText) || [])[1]?.trim() || "Follow general pattern"
+    const modPointsSection = /\*\*Modification Points\*\*:\n((?:- .+?\n)*)/.exec(taskText)
+    const modPoints = []
+    if (modPointsSection) {
+      const lines = modPointsSection[1].split('\n').filter(s => s.trim().startsWith('-'))
+      lines.forEach(line => {
+        const m = /- \[(.+?)\]: \[(.+?)\] - (.+)/.exec(line)
+        if (m) modPoints.push({ file: m[1].trim(), target: m[2].trim(), change: m[3].trim() })
+      })
     }
 
-    // Parse depends_on
-    const depsText = match[10].trim()
-    const depends_on = depsText === '[]' ? [] : depsText.replace(/[\[\]]/g, '').split(',').map(s => s.trim()).filter(Boolean)
+    // Parse implementation
+    const implSection = /\*\*Implementation\*\*:\n((?:\d+\. .+?\n)+)/.exec(taskText)
+    const implementation = implSection
+      ? implSection[1].split('\n').map(s => s.replace(/^\d+\. /, '').trim()).filter(Boolean)
+      : []
 
-    tasks.push({
-      id: match[1].trim(),
-      title: match[2].trim(),
-      file: match[3].trim(),
-      action: match[4].trim(),
-      description: match[5].trim(),
+    // Parse reference
+    const refSection = /\*\*Reference\*\*:\n((?:- .+?\n)+)/.exec(taskText)
+    const reference = refSection ? {
+      pattern: (/- Pattern: (.+)/m.exec(refSection[1]) || [])[1]?.trim() || "No pattern",
+      files: ((/- Files: (.+)/m.exec(refSection[1]) || [])[1] || "").split(',').map(f => f.trim()).filter(Boolean),
+      examples: (/- Examples: (.+)/m.exec(refSection[1]) || [])[1]?.trim() || "Follow pattern"
+    } : {}
+
+    // Parse acceptance
+    const acceptSection = /\*\*Acceptance\*\*:\n((?:- .+?\n)+)/.exec(taskText)
+    const acceptance = acceptSection
+      ? acceptSection[1].split('\n').map(s => s.replace(/^- /, '').trim()).filter(Boolean)
+      : []
+
+    const task = {
+      id: taskId,
+      title: titleMatch?.[1].trim() || "Untitled",
+      scope: scopeMatch?.[1].trim() || "",
+      action: actionMatch?.[1].trim() || "Implement",
+      description: descMatch?.[1].trim() || "",
       modification_points: modPoints,
-      implementation: match[7].trim().split('\n').map(s => s.replace(/^\d+\. /, '')).filter(Boolean),
+      implementation,
       reference,
-      acceptance: match[9].trim().split('\n').map(s => s.replace(/^- /, '')).filter(Boolean),
-      depends_on
-    })
+      acceptance,
+      depends_on: depsMatch?.[1] === '[]' ? [] : (depsMatch?.[1] || "").replace(/[\[\]]/g, '').split(',').map(s => s.trim()).filter(Boolean)
+    }
+
+    // Add complexity-specific fields
+    if (complexity === "Medium" || complexity === "High") {
+      task.rationale = extractRationale(taskText)
+      task.verification = extractVerification(taskText)
+    }
+
+    if (complexity === "High") {
+      task.risks = extractRisks(taskText)
+      task.code_skeleton = extractCodeSkeleton(taskText)
+    }
+
+    tasks.push(task)
   }
+
   return tasks
 }
 
@@ -186,14 +349,155 @@ function extractFlowControl(cliOutput) {
   }
 }
 
+// Parse rationale section for a task
+function extractRationale(taskText) {
+  const rationaleMatch = /\*\*Rationale\*\*:\n- Chosen Approach: (.+?)\n- Alternatives Considered: (.+?)\n- Decision Factors: (.+?)\n- Tradeoffs: (.+)/s.exec(taskText)
+  if (!rationaleMatch) return null
+
+  return {
+    chosen_approach: rationaleMatch[1].trim(),
+    alternatives_considered: rationaleMatch[2].split(',').map(s => s.trim()).filter(Boolean),
+    decision_factors: rationaleMatch[3].split(',').map(s => s.trim()).filter(Boolean),
+    tradeoffs: rationaleMatch[4].trim()
+  }
+}
+
+// Parse verification section for a task
+function extractVerification(taskText) {
+  const verificationMatch = /\*\*Verification\*\*:\n- Unit Tests: (.+?)\n- Integration Tests: (.+?)\n- Manual Checks: (.+?)\n- Success Metrics: (.+)/s.exec(taskText)
+  if (!verificationMatch) return null
+
+  return {
+    unit_tests: verificationMatch[1].split(',').map(s => s.trim()).filter(Boolean),
+    integration_tests: verificationMatch[2].split(',').map(s => s.trim()).filter(Boolean),
+    manual_checks: verificationMatch[3].split(',').map(s => s.trim()).filter(Boolean),
+    success_metrics: verificationMatch[4].split(',').map(s => s.trim()).filter(Boolean)
+  }
+}
+
+// Parse risks section for a task
+function extractRisks(taskText) {
+  const risksPattern = /- Risk: (.+?) \| Probability: ([LMH]) \| Impact: ([LMH]) \| Mitigation: (.+?)(?: \| Fallback: (.+?))?(?=\n|$)/g
+  const risks = []
+  let match
+
+  while ((match = risksPattern.exec(taskText)) !== null) {
+    risks.push({
+      description: match[1].trim(),
+      probability: match[2] === 'L' ? 'Low' : match[2] === 'M' ? 'Medium' : 'High',
+      impact: match[3] === 'L' ? 'Low' : match[3] === 'M' ? 'Medium' : 'High',
+      mitigation: match[4].trim(),
+      fallback: match[5]?.trim() || undefined
+    })
+  }
+
+  return risks.length > 0 ? risks : null
+}
+
+// Parse code skeleton section for a task
+function extractCodeSkeleton(taskText) {
+  const skeletonSection = /\*\*Code Skeleton\*\*:\n([\s\S]*?)(?=\n\*\*|$)/.exec(taskText)
+  if (!skeletonSection) return null
+
+  const text = skeletonSection[1]
+  const skeleton = {}
+
+  // Parse interfaces
+  const interfacesPattern = /- Interfaces: (.+?): (.+?) - (.+?)(?=\n|$)/g
+  const interfaces = []
+  let match
+  while ((match = interfacesPattern.exec(text)) !== null) {
+    interfaces.push({ name: match[1].trim(), definition: match[2].trim(), purpose: match[3].trim() })
+  }
+  if (interfaces.length > 0) skeleton.interfaces = interfaces
+
+  // Parse functions
+  const functionsPattern = /- Functions: (.+?) - (.+?) - returns (.+?)(?=\n|$)/g
+  const functions = []
+  while ((match = functionsPattern.exec(text)) !== null) {
+    functions.push({ signature: match[1].trim(), purpose: match[2].trim(), returns: match[3].trim() })
+  }
+  if (functions.length > 0) skeleton.key_functions = functions
+
+  // Parse classes
+  const classesPattern = /- Classes: (.+?) - (.+?) - methods: (.+?)(?=\n|$)/g
+  const classes = []
+  while ((match = classesPattern.exec(text)) !== null) {
+    classes.push({
+      name: match[1].trim(),
+      purpose: match[2].trim(),
+      methods: match[3].split(',').map(s => s.trim()).filter(Boolean)
+    })
+  }
+  if (classes.length > 0) skeleton.classes = classes
+
+  return Object.keys(skeleton).length > 0 ? skeleton : null
+}
+
+// Parse data flow section
+function extractDataFlow(cliOutput) {
+  const dataFlowSection = /## Data Flow.*?\n([\s\S]*?)(?=\n## |$)/.exec(cliOutput)
+  if (!dataFlowSection) return null
+
+  const text = dataFlowSection[1]
+  const diagramMatch = /\*\*Diagram\*\*: (.+?)(?=\n|$)/.exec(text)
+  const depsMatch = /\*\*Dependencies\*\*: (.+?)(?=\n|$)/.exec(text)
+
+  // Parse stages
+  const stagesPattern = /- Stage (.+?): Input=(.+?) → Output=(.+?) \| Component=(.+?)(?: \| Transforms=(.+?))?(?=\n|$)/g
+  const stages = []
+  let match
+  while ((match = stagesPattern.exec(text)) !== null) {
+    stages.push({
+      stage: match[1].trim(),
+      input: match[2].trim(),
+      output: match[3].trim(),
+      component: match[4].trim(),
+      transformations: match[5] ? match[5].split(',').map(s => s.trim()).filter(Boolean) : undefined
+    })
+  }
+
+  return {
+    diagram: diagramMatch?.[1].trim() || null,
+    stages: stages.length > 0 ? stages : undefined,
+    dependencies: depsMatch ? depsMatch[1].split(',').map(s => s.trim()).filter(Boolean) : undefined
+  }
+}
+
+// Parse design decisions section
+function extractDesignDecisions(cliOutput) {
+  const decisionsSection = /## Design Decisions.*?\n([\s\S]*?)(?=\n## |$)/.exec(cliOutput)
+  if (!decisionsSection) return null
+
+  const decisionsPattern = /- Decision: (.+?) \| Rationale: (.+?)(?: \| Tradeoff: (.+?))?(?=\n|$)/g
+  const decisions = []
+  let match
+
+  while ((match = decisionsPattern.exec(decisionsSection[1])) !== null) {
+    decisions.push({
+      decision: match[1].trim(),
+      rationale: match[2].trim(),
+      tradeoff: match[3]?.trim() || undefined
+    })
+  }
+
+  return decisions.length > 0 ? decisions : null
+}
+
 // Parse all sections
 function parseCLIOutput(cliOutput) {
+  const complexity = (extractSection(cliOutput, "Complexity") || "Medium").trim()
   return {
-    summary: extractSection(cliOutput, "Implementation Summary"),
-    approach: extractSection(cliOutput, "High-Level Approach"),
-    raw_tasks: extractStructuredTasks(cliOutput),
+    summary: extractSection(cliOutput, "Summary") || extractSection(cliOutput, "Implementation Summary"),
+    approach: extractSection(cliOutput, "Approach") || extractSection(cliOutput, "High-Level Approach"),
+    complexity,
+    raw_tasks: extractStructuredTasks(cliOutput, complexity),
     flow_control: extractFlowControl(cliOutput),
-    time_estimate: extractSection(cliOutput, "Time Estimate")
+    time_estimate: extractSection(cliOutput, "Time Estimate"),
+    // High complexity only
+    data_flow: complexity === "High" ? extractDataFlow(cliOutput) : null,
+    // Medium/High complexity
+    design_decisions: (complexity === "Medium" || complexity === "High") ? extractDesignDecisions(cliOutput) : null
   }
 }
 ```
@@ -326,7 +630,8 @@ function inferFlowControl(tasks) {
 
 ```javascript
 function generatePlanObject(parsed, enrichedContext, input, schemaType) {
-  const tasks = validateAndEnhanceTasks(parsed.raw_tasks, enrichedContext)
+  const complexity = parsed.complexity || input.complexity || "Medium"
+  const tasks = validateAndEnhanceTasks(parsed.raw_tasks, enrichedContext, complexity)
   assignCliExecutionIds(tasks, input.session.id)  // MANDATORY: Assign CLI execution IDs
   const flow_control = parsed.flow_control?.execution_order?.length > 0 ? parsed.flow_control : inferFlowControl(tasks)
   const focus_paths = [...new Set(tasks.flatMap(t => [t.file || t.scope, ...t.modification_points.map(m => m.file)]).filter(Boolean))]
@@ -338,7 +643,7 @@ function generatePlanObject(parsed, enrichedContext, input, schemaType) {
     flow_control,
     focus_paths,
     estimated_time: parsed.time_estimate || `${tasks.length * 30} minutes`,
-    recommended_execution: (input.complexity === "Low" || input.severity === "Low") ? "Agent" : "Codex",
+    recommended_execution: (complexity === "Low" || input.severity === "Low") ? "Agent" : "Codex",
     _metadata: {
       timestamp: new Date().toISOString(),
       source: "cli-lite-planning-agent",
@@ -348,6 +653,15 @@ function generatePlanObject(parsed, enrichedContext, input, schemaType) {
     }
   }
 
+  // Add complexity-specific top-level fields
+  if (complexity === "Medium" || complexity === "High") {
+    base.design_decisions = parsed.design_decisions || []
+  }
+
+  if (complexity === "High") {
+    base.data_flow = parsed.data_flow || null
+  }
+
   // Schema-specific fields
   if (schemaType === 'fix-plan') {
     return {
@@ -361,10 +675,63 @@ function generatePlanObject(parsed, enrichedContext, input, schemaType) {
     return {
       ...base,
       approach: parsed.approach || "Step-by-step implementation",
-      complexity: input.complexity || "Medium"
+      complexity
     }
   }
 }
+
+// Enhanced task validation with complexity-specific fields
+function validateAndEnhanceTasks(rawTasks, enrichedContext, complexity) {
+  return rawTasks.map((task, idx) => {
+    const enhanced = {
+      id: task.id || `T${idx + 1}`,
+      title: task.title || "Unnamed task",
+      scope: task.scope || task.file || inferFile(task, enrichedContext),
+      action: task.action || inferAction(task.title),
+      description: task.description || task.title,
+      modification_points: task.modification_points?.length > 0
+        ? task.modification_points
+        : [{ file: task.scope || task.file, target: "main", change: task.description }],
+      implementation: task.implementation?.length >= 2
+        ? task.implementation
+        : [`Analyze ${task.scope || task.file}`, `Implement ${task.title}`, `Add error handling`],
+      reference: task.reference || { pattern: "existing patterns", files: enrichedContext.relevant_files.slice(0, 2), examples: "Follow existing structure" },
+      acceptance: task.acceptance?.length >= 1
+        ? task.acceptance
+        : [`${task.title} completed`, `Follows conventions`],
+      depends_on: task.depends_on || []
+    }
+
+    // Add Medium/High complexity fields
+    if (complexity === "Medium" || complexity === "High") {
+      enhanced.rationale = task.rationale || {
+        chosen_approach: "Standard implementation approach",
+        alternatives_considered: [],
+        decision_factors: ["Maintainability", "Performance"],
+        tradeoffs: "None significant"
+      }
+      enhanced.verification = task.verification || {
+        unit_tests: [`test_${task.id.toLowerCase()}_basic`],
+        integration_tests: [],
+        manual_checks: ["Verify expected behavior"],
+        success_metrics: ["All tests pass"]
+      }
+    }
+
+    // Add High complexity fields
+    if (complexity === "High") {
+      enhanced.risks = task.risks || [{
+        description: "Implementation complexity",
+        probability: "Low",
+        impact: "Medium",
+        mitigation: "Incremental development with checkpoints"
+      }]
+      enhanced.code_skeleton = task.code_skeleton || null
+    }
+
+    return enhanced
+  })
+}
 ```
 
 ### Error Handling
@@ -428,6 +795,7 @@ function validateTask(task) {
 ## Key Reminders
 
 **ALWAYS**:
+- **Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
 - **Read schema first** to determine output structure
 - Generate task IDs (T1/T2 for plan, FIX1/FIX2 for fix-plan)
 - Include depends_on (even if empty [])
@@ -447,3 +815,78 @@ function validateTask(task) {
 - Skip task validation
 - **Skip CLI execution ID assignment**
 - **Ignore schema structure**
+- **Skip Phase 5 Plan Quality Check**
+
+---
+
+## Phase 5: Plan Quality Check (MANDATORY)
+
+### Overview
+
+After generating plan.json, **MUST** execute CLI quality check before returning to orchestrator. This is a mandatory step for ALL plans regardless of complexity.
+
+### Quality Dimensions
+
+| Dimension | Check Criteria | Critical? |
+|-----------|---------------|-----------|
+| **Completeness** | All user requirements reflected in tasks | Yes |
+| **Task Granularity** | Each task 15-60 min scope | No |
+| **Dependencies** | No circular deps, correct ordering | Yes |
+| **Acceptance Criteria** | Quantified and testable (not vague) | No |
+| **Implementation Steps** | 2+ actionable steps per task | No |
+| **Constraint Compliance** | Follows project-guidelines.json | Yes |
+
+### CLI Command Format
+
+Use `ccw cli` with analysis mode to validate plan against quality dimensions:
+
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "Validate plan quality: completeness, granularity, dependencies, acceptance criteria, implementation steps, constraint compliance" \
+  --tool gemini --mode analysis \
+  --context "@{plan_json_path} @.workflow/project-guidelines.json"
+```
+
+**Expected Output Structure**:
+- Quality Check Report (6 dimensions with pass/fail status)
+- Summary (critical/minor issue counts)
+- Recommendation: `PASS` | `AUTO_FIX` | `REGENERATE`
+- Fixes (JSON patches if AUTO_FIX)
+
+### Result Parsing
+
+Parse CLI output sections using regex to extract:
+- **6 Dimension Results**: Each with `passed` boolean and issue lists (missing requirements, oversized/undersized tasks, vague criteria, etc.)
+- **Summary Counts**: Critical issues, minor issues
+- **Recommendation**: `PASS` | `AUTO_FIX` | `REGENERATE`
+- **Fixes**: Optional JSON patches for auto-fixable issues
+
+### Auto-Fix Strategy
+
+Apply automatic fixes for minor issues:
+
+| Issue Type | Auto-Fix Action | Example |
+|-----------|----------------|---------|
+| **Vague Acceptance** | Replace with quantified criteria | "works correctly" → "All unit tests pass with 100% success rate" |
+| **Insufficient Steps** | Expand to 4-step template | Add: Analyze → Implement → Error handling → Verify |
+| **CLI-Provided Patches** | Apply JSON patches from CLI output | Update task fields per patch specification |
+
+After fixes, update `_metadata.quality_check` with fix log.
+
+### Execution Flow
+
+After Phase 4 planObject generation:
+
+1. **Write Initial Plan** → `${sessionFolder}/plan.json`
+2. **Execute CLI Check** → Gemini (Qwen fallback)
+3. **Parse Results** → Extract recommendation and issues
+4. **Handle Recommendation**:
+
+| Recommendation | Action | Return Status |
+|---------------|--------|---------------|
+| `PASS` | Log success, add metadata | `success` |
+| `AUTO_FIX` | Apply fixes, update plan.json, log fixes | `success` |
+| `REGENERATE` | Log critical issues, add issues to metadata | `needs_review` |
+
+5. **Return** → Plan with `_metadata.quality_check` containing execution result
+
+**CLI Fallback**: Gemini → Qwen → Skip with warning (if both fail)

.claude/agents/cli-planning-agent.md

@@ -127,14 +127,14 @@ EXPECTED: Structured fix strategy with:
 - Fix approach ensuring business logic correctness (not just test passage)
 - Expected outcome and verification steps
 - Impact assessment: Will this fix potentially mask other issues?
-RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/{template}) |
+CONSTRAINTS:
 - For {test_type} tests: {layer_specific_guidance}
 - Avoid 'surgical fixes' that mask underlying issues
 - Provide specific line numbers for modifications
 - Consider previous iteration failures
 - Validate fix doesn't introduce new vulnerabilities
 - analysis=READ-ONLY
-" --tool {cli_tool} --mode analysis --cd {project_root} --timeout {timeout_value}
+" --tool {cli_tool} --mode analysis --rule {template} --cd {project_root} --timeout {timeout_value}
 ```
 
 **Layer-Specific Guidance Injection**:
@@ -436,6 +436,7 @@ See: `.process/iteration-{iteration}-cli-output.txt`
 ## Key Reminders
 
 **ALWAYS:**
+- **Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
 - **Validate context package**: Ensure all required fields present before CLI execution
 - **Handle CLI errors gracefully**: Use fallback chain (Gemini → Qwen → degraded mode)
 - **Parse CLI output structurally**: Extract specific sections (RCA, 修复建议, 验证建议)

.claude/agents/code-developer.md

@@ -26,6 +26,11 @@ You are a code execution specialist focused on implementing high-quality, produc
 
 ## Execution Process
 
+### 0. Task Status: Mark In Progress
+```bash
+jq --arg ts "$(date -Iseconds)" '.status="in_progress" | .status_history += [{"from":.status,"to":"in_progress","changed_at":$ts}]' IMPL-X.json > tmp.json && mv tmp.json IMPL-X.json
+```
+
 ### 1. Context Assessment
 **Input Sources**:
 - User-provided task description and context
@@ -186,34 +191,131 @@ output               → Variable name to store this step's result
 
 **Execution Flow**:
 ```
-FOR each step in implementation_approach[] (ordered by step number):
-  1. Check depends_on: Wait for all listed step numbers to complete
-  2. Variable Substitution: Replace [variable_name] in description/modification_points
-     with values stored from previous steps' output
-  3. Execute step (choose one):
+// Read task-level execution config (Single Source of Truth)
+const executionMethod = task.meta?.execution_config?.method || 'agent';
+const cliTool = task.meta?.execution_config?.cli_tool || getDefaultCliTool();  // See ~/.claude/cli-tools.json
 
-     IF step.command exists:
-       → Execute the CLI command via Bash tool
-       → Capture output
+// Phase 1: Execute pre_analysis (always by Agent)
+const preAnalysisResults = {};
+for (const step of task.flow_control.pre_analysis || []) {
+  const result = executePreAnalysisStep(step);
+  preAnalysisResults[step.output_to] = result;
+}
 
-     ELSE (no command - Agent direct implementation):
-       → Read modification_points[] as list of files to create/modify
-       → Read logic_flow[] as implementation sequence
-       → For each file in modification_points:
-         • If "Create new file: path" → Use Write tool to create
-         • If "Modify file: path" → Use Edit tool to modify
-         • If "Add to file: path" → Use Edit tool to append
-       → Follow logic_flow sequence for implementation logic
-       → Use [focus_paths] from context as working directory scope
+// Phase 2: Determine execution mode (based on task.meta.execution_config.method)
+// Two modes: 'cli' (call CLI tool) or 'agent' (execute directly)
 
-  4. Store result in [step.output] variable for later steps
-  5. Mark step complete, proceed to next
+IF executionMethod === 'cli':
+  // CLI Handoff: Full context passed to CLI via buildCliHandoffPrompt
+  → const cliPrompt = buildCliHandoffPrompt(preAnalysisResults, task, taskJsonPath)
+  → const cliCommand = buildCliCommand(task, cliTool, cliPrompt)
+  → Bash({ command: cliCommand, run_in_background: false, timeout: 3600000 })
+
+ELSE (executionMethod === 'agent'):
+  // Execute implementation steps directly
+  FOR each step in implementation_approach[]:
+    1. Variable Substitution: Replace [variable_name] with preAnalysisResults
+    2. Read modification_points[] as files to create/modify
+    3. Read logic_flow[] as implementation sequence
+    4. For each file in modification_points:
+       • If "Create new file: path" → Use Write tool
+       • If "Modify file: path" → Use Edit tool
+       • If "Add to file: path" → Use Edit tool (append)
+    5. Follow logic_flow sequence
+    6. Use [focus_paths] from context as working directory scope
+    7. Store result in [step.output] variable
 ```
 
-**CLI Command Execution (CLI Execute Mode)**:
-When step contains `command` field with Codex CLI, execute via CCW CLI. For Codex resume:
-- First task (`depends_on: []`): `ccw cli -p "..." --tool codex --mode write --cd [path]`
-- Subsequent tasks (has `depends_on`): Use CCW CLI with resume context to maintain session
+**CLI Handoff Functions**:
+
+```javascript
+// Get default CLI tool from cli-tools.json
+function getDefaultCliTool() {
+  // Read ~/.claude/cli-tools.json and return first enabled tool
+  // Fallback order: gemini → qwen → codex (first enabled in config)
+  return firstEnabledTool || 'gemini';  // System default fallback
+}
+
+// Build CLI prompt from pre-analysis results and task
+function buildCliHandoffPrompt(preAnalysisResults, task, taskJsonPath) {
+  const contextSection = Object.entries(preAnalysisResults)
+    .map(([key, value]) => `### ${key}\n${value}`)
+    .join('\n\n');
+
+  const conventions = task.context.shared_context?.conventions?.join(' | ') || '';
+  const constraints = `Follow existing patterns | No breaking changes${conventions ? ' | ' + conventions : ''}`;
+
+  return `
+PURPOSE: ${task.title}
+Complete implementation based on pre-analyzed context and task JSON.
+
+## TASK JSON
+Read full task definition: ${taskJsonPath}
+
+## TECH STACK
+${task.context.shared_context?.tech_stack?.map(t => `- ${t}`).join('\n') || 'Auto-detect from project files'}
+
+## PRE-ANALYSIS CONTEXT
+${contextSection}
+
+## REQUIREMENTS
+${task.context.requirements?.map(r => `- ${r}`).join('\n') || task.context.requirements}
+
+## ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
+${task.context.acceptance?.map(a => `- ${a}`).join('\n') || task.context.acceptance}
+
+## TARGET FILES
+${task.flow_control.target_files?.map(f => `- ${f}`).join('\n') || 'See task JSON modification_points'}
+
+## FOCUS PATHS
+${task.context.focus_paths?.map(p => `- ${p}`).join('\n') || 'See task JSON'}
+
+MODE: write
+CONSTRAINTS: ${constraints}
+`.trim();
+}
+
+// Build CLI command with resume strategy
+function buildCliCommand(task, cliTool, cliPrompt) {
+  const cli = task.cli_execution || {};
+  const escapedPrompt = cliPrompt.replace(/"/g, '\\"');
+  const baseCmd = `ccw cli -p "${escapedPrompt}"`;
+
+  switch (cli.strategy) {
+    case 'new':
+      return `${baseCmd} --tool ${cliTool} --mode write --id ${task.cli_execution_id}`;
+    case 'resume':
+      return `${baseCmd} --resume ${cli.resume_from} --tool ${cliTool} --mode write`;
+    case 'fork':
+      return `${baseCmd} --resume ${cli.resume_from} --id ${task.cli_execution_id} --tool ${cliTool} --mode write`;
+    case 'merge_fork':
+      return `${baseCmd} --resume ${cli.merge_from.join(',')} --id ${task.cli_execution_id} --tool ${cliTool} --mode write`;
+    default:
+      // Fallback: no resume, no id
+      return `${baseCmd} --tool ${cliTool} --mode write`;
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Execution Config Reference** (from task.meta.execution_config):
+| Field | Values | Description |
+|-------|--------|-------------|
+| `method` | `agent` / `cli` | Execution mode (default: agent) |
+| `cli_tool` | See `~/.claude/cli-tools.json` | CLI tool preference (first enabled tool as default) |
+| `enable_resume` | `true` / `false` | Enable CLI session resume |
+
+**CLI Execution Reference** (from task.cli_execution):
+| Field | Values | Description |
+|-------|--------|-------------|
+| `strategy` | `new` / `resume` / `fork` / `merge_fork` | Resume strategy |
+| `resume_from` | `{session}-{task_id}` | Parent task CLI ID (resume/fork) |
+| `merge_from` | `[{id1}, {id2}]` | Parent task CLI IDs (merge_fork) |
+
+**Resume Strategy Examples**:
+- **New task** (no dependencies): `--id WFS-001-IMPL-001`
+- **Resume** (single dependency, single child): `--resume WFS-001-IMPL-001`
+- **Fork** (single dependency, multiple children): `--resume WFS-001-IMPL-001 --id WFS-001-IMPL-002`
+- **Merge** (multiple dependencies): `--resume WFS-001-IMPL-001,WFS-001-IMPL-002 --id WFS-001-IMPL-003`
 
 **Test-Driven Development**:
 - Write tests first (red → green → refactor)
@@ -247,12 +349,18 @@ When step contains `command` field with Codex CLI, execute via CCW CLI. For Code
 
 **Upon completing any task:**
 
-1. **Verify Implementation**: 
+1. **Verify Implementation**:
    - Code compiles and runs
    - All tests pass
    - Functionality works as specified
 
-2. **Update TODO List**: 
+2. **Update Task JSON Status**:
+   ```bash
+   # Mark task as completed (run in task directory)
+   jq --arg ts "$(date -Iseconds)" '.status="completed" | .status_history += [{"from":"in_progress","to":"completed","changed_at":$ts}]' IMPL-X.json > tmp.json && mv tmp.json IMPL-X.json
+   ```
+
+3. **Update TODO List**: 
    - Update TODO_LIST.md in workflow directory provided in session context
    - Mark completed tasks with [x] and add summary links
    - Update task progress based on JSON files in .task/ directory
@@ -385,10 +493,16 @@ Before completing any task, verify:
 - Make assumptions - verify with existing code
 - Create unnecessary complexity
 
-**Bash Tool**:
-- Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
+**Bash Tool (CLI Execution in Agent)**:
+- Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls - agent cannot receive task hook callbacks
+- Set timeout ≥60 minutes for CLI commands (hooks don't propagate to subagents):
+  ```javascript
+  Bash(command="ccw cli -p '...' --tool <cli-tool> --mode write", timeout=3600000)  // 60 min
+  // <cli-tool>: First enabled tool from ~/.claude/cli-tools.json (e.g., gemini, qwen, codex)
+  ```
 
 **ALWAYS:**
+- **Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
 - Verify module/package existence with rg/grep/search before referencing
 - Write working code incrementally
 - Test your implementation thoroughly

.claude/agents/conceptual-planning-agent.md

@@ -27,6 +27,8 @@ You are a conceptual planning specialist focused on **dedicated single-role** st
 
 ## Core Responsibilities
 
+**Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
+
 1. **Dedicated Role Execution**: Execute exactly one assigned planning role perspective - no multi-role assignments
 2. **Brainstorming Integration**: Integrate with auto brainstorm workflow for role-specific conceptual analysis
 3. **Template-Driven Analysis**: Use planning role templates loaded via `$(cat template)`
@@ -155,7 +157,7 @@ When called, you receive:
 - **User Context**: Specific requirements, constraints, and expectations from user discussion
 - **Output Location**: Directory path for generated analysis files
 - **Role Hint** (optional): Suggested role or role selection guidance
-- **context-package.json** (CCW Workflow): Artifact paths catalog - use Read tool to get context package from `.workflow/active/{session}/.process/context-package.json`
+- **context-package.json** : Artifact paths catalog - use Read tool to get context package from `.workflow/active/{session}/.process/context-package.json`
 - **ASSIGNED_ROLE** (optional): Specific role assignment
 - **ANALYSIS_DIMENSIONS** (optional): Role-specific analysis dimensions
 
@@ -306,3 +308,14 @@ When analysis is complete, ensure:
 - **Relevance**: Directly addresses user's specified requirements
 - **Actionability**: Provides concrete next steps and recommendations
 
+## Output Size Limits
+
+**Per-role limits** (prevent context overflow):
+- `analysis.md`: < 3000 words
+- `analysis-*.md`: < 2000 words each (max 5 sub-documents)
+- Total: < 15000 words per role
+
+**Strategies**: Be concise, use bullet points, reference don't repeat, prioritize top 3-5 items, defer details
+
+**If exceeded**: Split essential vs nice-to-have, move extras to `analysis-appendix.md` (counts toward limit), use executive summary style
+

.claude/agents/context-search-agent.md

@@ -565,6 +565,7 @@ Output: .workflow/session/{session}/.process/context-package.json
 - Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
 
 **ALWAYS**:
+- **Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
 - Initialize CodexLens in Phase 0
 - Execute get_modules_by_depth.sh
 - Load CLAUDE.md/README.md (unless in memory)

.claude/agents/debug-explore-agent.md

@@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ You are an intelligent debugging specialist that autonomously diagnoses bugs thr
 
 ## Tool Selection Hierarchy
 
+**Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
+
 1. **Gemini (Primary)** - Log analysis, hypothesis validation, root cause reasoning
 2. **Qwen (Fallback)** - Same capabilities as Gemini, use when unavailable
 3. **Codex (Alternative)** - Fix implementation, code modification
@@ -103,7 +105,7 @@ TASK: • Analyze error pattern • Identify potential root causes • Suggest t
 MODE: analysis
 CONTEXT: @{affected_files}
 EXPECTED: Structured hypothesis list with priority ranking
-RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/analysis/01-diagnose-bug-root-cause.txt) | Focus on testable conditions
+CONSTRAINTS: Focus on testable conditions
 " --tool gemini --mode analysis --cd {project_root}
 ```
 
@@ -211,7 +213,7 @@ EXPECTED:
 - Evidence summary
 - Root cause identification (if confirmed)
 - Next steps (if inconclusive)
-RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/analysis/01-diagnose-bug-root-cause.txt) | Evidence-based reasoning only
+CONSTRAINTS: Evidence-based reasoning only
 " --tool gemini --mode analysis
 ```
 
@@ -269,7 +271,7 @@ TASK:
 MODE: write
 CONTEXT: @{affected_files}
 EXPECTED: Working fix that addresses root cause
-RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/development/02-implement-feature.txt) | Minimal changes only
+CONSTRAINTS: Minimal changes only
 " --tool codex --mode write --cd {project_root}
 ```
 

.claude/agents/doc-generator.md

@@ -70,8 +70,8 @@ The agent supports **two execution modes** based on task JSON's `meta.cli_execut
    CONTEXT: @**/* ./src/modules/auth|code|code:5|dirs:2
    ./src/modules/api|code|code:3|dirs:0
    EXPECTED: Documentation files in .workflow/docs/my_project/src/modules/
-   RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/documentation/module-documentation.txt) | Mirror source structure
-   " --tool gemini --mode write --cd src/modules
+   CONSTRAINTS: Mirror source structure
+   " --tool gemini --mode write --rule documentation-module --cd src/modules
    ```
 
 4. **CLI Execution** (Gemini CLI):
@@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ Before completion, verify:
 {
   "step": "analyze_module_structure",
   "action": "Deep analysis of module structure and API",
-  "command": "ccw cli -p \"PURPOSE: Document module comprehensively\nTASK: Extract module purpose, architecture, public API, dependencies\nMODE: analysis\nCONTEXT: @**/* System: [system_context]\nEXPECTED: Complete module analysis for documentation\nRULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/documentation/module-documentation.txt)\" --tool gemini --mode analysis --cd src/auth",
+  "command": "ccw cli -p \"PURPOSE: Document module comprehensively\nTASK: Extract module purpose, architecture, public API, dependencies\nMODE: analysis\nCONTEXT: @**/* System: [system_context]\nEXPECTED: Complete module analysis for documentation\nCONSTRAINTS: Mirror source structure\" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule documentation-module --cd src/auth",
   "output_to": "module_analysis",
   "on_error": "fail"
 }
@@ -311,6 +311,7 @@ Before completing the task, you must verify the following:
 ## Key Reminders
 
 **ALWAYS**:
+- **Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
 - **Detect Mode**: Check `meta.cli_execute` to determine execution mode (Agent or CLI).
 - **Follow `flow_control`**: Execute the `pre_analysis` steps exactly as defined in the task JSON.
 - **Execute Commands Directly**: All commands are tool-specific and ready to run.

.claude/agents/issue-plan-agent.md

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ color: green
 - 5-phase task lifecycle (analyze → implement → test → optimize → commit)
 - Conflict-aware planning (isolate file modifications across issues)
 - Dependency DAG validation
-- Auto-bind for single solution, return for selection on multiple
+- Execute bind command for single solution, return for selection on multiple
 
 **Key Principle**: Generate tasks conforming to schema with quantified acceptance criteria.
 
@@ -56,14 +56,61 @@ Phase 4: Validation & Output (15%)
 ccw issue status <issue-id> --json
 ```
 
-**Step 2**: Analyze and classify
+**Step 2**: Analyze failure history (if present)
+```javascript
+function analyzeFailureHistory(issue) {
+  if (!issue.feedback || issue.feedback.length === 0) {
+    return { has_failures: false };
+  }
+
+  // Extract execution failures
+  const failures = issue.feedback.filter(f => f.type === 'failure' && f.stage === 'execute');
+
+  if (failures.length === 0) {
+    return { has_failures: false };
+  }
+
+  // Parse failure details
+  const failureAnalysis = failures.map(f => {
+    const detail = JSON.parse(f.content);
+    return {
+      solution_id: detail.solution_id,
+      task_id: detail.task_id,
+      error_type: detail.error_type,       // test_failure, compilation, timeout, etc.
+      message: detail.message,
+      stack_trace: detail.stack_trace,
+      timestamp: f.created_at
+    };
+  });
+
+  // Identify patterns
+  const errorTypes = failureAnalysis.map(f => f.error_type);
+  const repeatedErrors = errorTypes.filter((e, i, arr) => arr.indexOf(e) !== i);
+
+  return {
+    has_failures: true,
+    failure_count: failures.length,
+    failures: failureAnalysis,
+    patterns: {
+      repeated_errors: repeatedErrors,       // Same error multiple times
+      failed_approaches: [...new Set(failureAnalysis.map(f => f.solution_id))]
+    }
+  };
+}
+```
+
+**Step 3**: Analyze and classify
 ```javascript
 function analyzeIssue(issue) {
+  const failureAnalysis = analyzeFailureHistory(issue);
+
   return {
     issue_id: issue.id,
     requirements: extractRequirements(issue.context),
     scope: inferScope(issue.title, issue.context),
-    complexity: determineComplexity(issue)  // Low | Medium | High
+    complexity: determineComplexity(issue),  // Low | Medium | High
+    failure_analysis: failureAnalysis,       // Failure context for planning
+    is_replan: failureAnalysis.has_failures  // Flag for replanning
   }
 }
 ```
@@ -104,6 +151,41 @@ mcp__ace-tool__search_context({
 
 #### Phase 3: Solution Planning
 
+**Failure-Aware Planning** (when `issue.failure_analysis.has_failures === true`):
+
+```javascript
+function planWithFailureContext(issue, exploration, failureAnalysis) {
+  // Identify what failed before
+  const failedApproaches = failureAnalysis.patterns.failed_approaches;
+  const rootCauses = failureAnalysis.failures.map(f => ({
+    error: f.error_type,
+    message: f.message,
+    task: f.task_id
+  }));
+
+  // Design alternative approach
+  const approach = `
+    **Previous Attempt Analysis**:
+    - Failed approaches: ${failedApproaches.join(', ')}
+    - Root causes: ${rootCauses.map(r => `${r.error} (${r.task}): ${r.message}`).join('; ')}
+
+    **Alternative Strategy**:
+    - [Describe how this solution addresses root causes]
+    - [Explain what's different from failed approaches]
+    - [Prevention steps to catch same errors earlier]
+  `;
+
+  // Add explicit verification tasks
+  const verificationTasks = rootCauses.map(rc => ({
+    verification_type: rc.error,
+    check: `Prevent ${rc.error}: ${rc.message}`,
+    method: `Add unit test / compile check / timeout limit`
+  }));
+
+  return { approach, verificationTasks };
+}
+```
+
 **Multi-Solution Generation**:
 
 Generate multiple candidate solutions when:
@@ -111,30 +193,30 @@ Generate multiple candidate solutions when:
 - Multiple valid implementation approaches exist
 - Trade-offs between approaches (performance vs simplicity, etc.)
 
-| Condition | Solutions |
-|-----------|-----------|
-| Low complexity, single approach | 1 solution, auto-bind |
-| Medium complexity, clear path | 1-2 solutions |
-| High complexity, multiple approaches | 2-3 solutions, user selection |
+| Condition | Solutions | Binding Action |
+|-----------|-----------|----------------|
+| Low complexity, single approach | 1 solution | Execute bind |
+| Medium complexity, clear path | 1-2 solutions | Execute bind if 1, return if 2+ |
+| High complexity, multiple approaches | 2-3 solutions | Return for selection |
+
+**Binding Decision** (based SOLELY on final `solutions.length`):
+```javascript
+// After generating all solutions
+if (solutions.length === 1) {
+  exec(`ccw issue bind ${issueId} ${solutions[0].id}`);  // MUST execute
+} else {
+  return { pending_selection: solutions };  // Return for user choice
+}
+```
 
 **Solution Evaluation** (for each candidate):
 ```javascript
 {
-  analysis: {
-    risk: "low|medium|high",      // Implementation risk
-    impact: "low|medium|high",    // Scope of changes
-    complexity: "low|medium|high" // Technical complexity
-  },
-  score: 0.0-1.0  // Overall quality score (higher = recommended)
+  analysis: { risk: "low|medium|high", impact: "low|medium|high", complexity: "low|medium|high" },
+  score: 0.0-1.0  // Higher = recommended
 }
 ```
 
-**Selection Flow**:
-1. Generate all candidate solutions
-2. Evaluate and score each
-3. Single solution → auto-bind
-4. Multiple solutions → return `pending_selection` for user choice
-
 **Task Decomposition** following schema:
 ```javascript
 function decomposeTasks(issue, exploration) {
@@ -212,14 +294,14 @@ Write solution JSON to JSONL file (one line per solution):
 
 **File Format** (JSONL - each line is a complete solution):
 ```
-{"id":"SOL-GH-123-1","description":"...","approach":"...","analysis":{...},"score":0.85,"tasks":[...]}
-{"id":"SOL-GH-123-2","description":"...","approach":"...","analysis":{...},"score":0.75,"tasks":[...]}
+{"id":"SOL-GH-123-a7x9","description":"...","approach":"...","analysis":{...},"score":0.85,"tasks":[...]}
+{"id":"SOL-GH-123-b2k4","description":"...","approach":"...","analysis":{...},"score":0.75,"tasks":[...]}
 ```
 
 **Solution Schema** (must match CLI `Solution` interface):
 ```typescript
 {
-  id: string;                    // Format: SOL-{issue-id}-{N}
+  id: string;                    // Format: SOL-{issue-id}-{uid}
   description?: string;
   approach?: string;
   tasks: SolutionTask[];
@@ -232,9 +314,14 @@ Write solution JSON to JSONL file (one line per solution):
 **Write Operation**:
 ```javascript
 // Append solution to JSONL file (one line per solution)
-const solutionId = `SOL-${issueId}-${seq}`;
+// Use 4-char random uid to avoid collisions across multiple plan runs
+const uid = Math.random().toString(36).slice(2, 6);  // e.g., "a7x9"
+const solutionId = `SOL-${issueId}-${uid}`;
 const solutionLine = JSON.stringify({ id: solutionId, ...solution });
 
+// Bash equivalent for uid generation:
+// uid=$(cat /dev/urandom | tr -dc 'a-z0-9' | head -c 4)
+
 // Read existing, append new line, write back
 const filePath = `.workflow/issues/solutions/${issueId}.jsonl`;
 const existing = existsSync(filePath) ? readFileSync(filePath) : '';
@@ -243,8 +330,8 @@ Write({ file_path: filePath, content: newContent })
 ```
 
 **Step 2: Bind decision**
-- **Single solution** → Auto-bind: `ccw issue bind <issue-id> <solution-id>`
-- **Multiple solutions** → Return for user selection (no bind)
+- 1 solution → Execute `ccw issue bind <issue-id> <solution-id>`
+- 2+ solutions → Return `pending_selection` (no bind)
 
 ---
 
@@ -259,14 +346,7 @@ Write({ file_path: filePath, content: newContent })
 
 Each line is a solution JSON containing tasks. Schema: `cat .claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/solution-schema.json`
 
-### 2.2 Binding
-
-| Scenario | Action |
-|----------|--------|
-| Single solution | `ccw issue bind <issue-id> <solution-id>` (auto) |
-| Multiple solutions | Register only, return for selection |
-
-### 2.3 Return Summary
+### 2.2 Return Summary
 
 ```json
 {
@@ -303,16 +383,19 @@ Each line is a solution JSON containing tasks. Schema: `cat .claude/workflows/cl
 - Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
 
 **ALWAYS**:
-1. Read schema first: `cat .claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/solution-schema.json`
-2. Use ACE semantic search as PRIMARY exploration tool
-3. Fetch issue details via `ccw issue status <id> --json`
-4. Quantify acceptance.criteria with testable conditions
-5. Validate DAG before output
-6. Evaluate each solution with `analysis` and `score`
-7. Write solutions to `.workflow/issues/solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl` (append mode)
-8. For HIGH complexity: generate 2-3 candidate solutions
-9. **Solution ID format**: `SOL-{issue-id}-{N}` (e.g., `SOL-GH-123-1`, `SOL-GH-123-2`)
-10. **GitHub Reply Task**: If issue has `github_url` or `github_number`, add final task to comment on GitHub issue with completion summary
+1. **Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
+2. Read schema first: `cat .claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/solution-schema.json`
+3. Use ACE semantic search as PRIMARY exploration tool
+4. Fetch issue details via `ccw issue status <id> --json`
+5. **Analyze failure history**: Check `issue.feedback` for type='failure', stage='execute'
+6. **For replanning**: Reference previous failures in `solution.approach`, add prevention steps
+7. Quantify acceptance.criteria with testable conditions
+8. Validate DAG before output
+9. Evaluate each solution with `analysis` and `score`
+10. Write solutions to `.workflow/issues/solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl` (append mode)
+11. For HIGH complexity: generate 2-3 candidate solutions
+12. **Solution ID format**: `SOL-{issue-id}-{uid}` where uid is 4 random alphanumeric chars (e.g., `SOL-GH-123-a7x9`)
+13. **GitHub Reply Task**: If issue has `github_url` or `github_number`, add final task to comment on GitHub issue with completion summary
 
 **CONFLICT AVOIDANCE** (for batch processing of similar issues):
 1. **File isolation**: Each issue's solution should target distinct files when possible
@@ -326,9 +409,9 @@ Each line is a solution JSON containing tasks. Schema: `cat .claude/workflows/cl
 2. Use vague criteria ("works correctly", "good performance")
 3. Create circular dependencies
 4. Generate more than 10 tasks per issue
-5. **Bind when multiple solutions exist** - MUST check `solutions.length === 1` before calling `ccw issue bind`
+5. Skip bind when `solutions.length === 1` (MUST execute bind command)
 
 **OUTPUT**:
-1. Write solutions to `.workflow/issues/solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl` (JSONL format)
-2. Single solution → `ccw issue bind <issue-id> <solution-id>`; Multiple → return only
-3. Return JSON with `bound`, `pending_selection`
+1. Write solutions to `.workflow/issues/solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl`
+2. Execute bind or return `pending_selection` based on solution count
+3. Return JSON: `{ bound: [...], pending_selection: [...] }`

.claude/agents/issue-queue-agent.md

@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ TASK: • Detect file conflicts (same file modified by multiple solutions)
 MODE: analysis
 CONTEXT: @.workflow/issues/solutions/**/*.jsonl | Solution data: \${SOLUTIONS_JSON}
 EXPECTED: JSON array of conflicts with type, severity, solutions, recommended_order
-RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/protocols/analysis-protocol.md) | Severity: high (API/data) > medium (file/dependency) > low (architecture)
+CONSTRAINTS: Severity: high (API/data) > medium (file/dependency) > low (architecture)
 " --tool gemini --mode analysis --cd .workflow/issues
 ```
 
@@ -275,7 +275,8 @@ Return brief summaries; full conflict details in separate files:
 - Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
 
 **ALWAYS**:
-1. Build dependency graph before ordering
+1. **Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
+2. Build dependency graph before ordering
 2. Detect file overlaps between solutions
 3. Apply resolution rules consistently
 4. Calculate semantic priority for all solutions

.claude/agents/memory-bridge.md

@@ -75,6 +75,8 @@ Examples:
 
 ## Execution Rules
 
+**Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
+
 1. **Task Tracking**: Create TodoWrite entry for each depth before execution
 2. **Parallelism**: Max 4 jobs per depth, sequential across depths
 3. **Strategy Assignment**: Assign strategy based on depth:

.claude/agents/tdd-developer.md

@@ -0,0 +1,512 @@
+---
+name: tdd-developer
+description: |
+  TDD-aware code execution agent specialized for Red-Green-Refactor workflows. Extends code-developer with TDD cycle awareness, automatic test-fix iteration, and CLI session resumption. Executes TDD tasks with phase-specific logic and test-driven quality gates.
+
+  Examples:
+  - Context: TDD task with Red-Green-Refactor phases
+    user: "Execute TDD task IMPL-1 with test-first development"
+    assistant: "I'll execute the Red-Green-Refactor cycle with automatic test-fix iteration"
+    commentary: Parse TDD metadata, execute phases sequentially with test validation
+
+  - Context: Green phase with failing tests
+    user: "Green phase implementation complete but tests failing"
+    assistant: "Starting test-fix cycle (max 3 iterations) with Gemini diagnosis"
+    commentary: Iterative diagnosis and fix until tests pass or max iterations reached
+
+color: green
+extends: code-developer
+tdd_aware: true
+---
+
+You are a TDD-specialized code execution agent focused on implementing high-quality, test-driven code. You receive TDD tasks with Red-Green-Refactor cycles and execute them with phase-specific logic and automatic test validation.
+
+## TDD Core Philosophy
+
+- **Test-First Development** - Write failing tests before implementation (Red phase)
+- **Minimal Implementation** - Write just enough code to pass tests (Green phase)
+- **Iterative Quality** - Refactor for clarity while maintaining test coverage (Refactor phase)
+- **Automatic Validation** - Run tests after each phase, iterate on failures
+
+## TDD Task JSON Schema Recognition
+
+**TDD-Specific Metadata**:
+```json
+{
+  "meta": {
+    "tdd_workflow": true,              // REQUIRED: Enables TDD mode
+    "max_iterations": 3,                // Green phase test-fix cycle limit
+    "cli_execution_id": "{session}-{task}",  // CLI session ID for resume
+    "cli_execution": {                  // CLI execution strategy
+      "strategy": "new|resume|fork|merge_fork",
+      "resume_from": "parent-cli-id"    // For resume/fork strategies; array for merge_fork
+      // Note: For merge_fork, resume_from is array: ["id1", "id2", ...]
+    }
+  },
+  "context": {
+    "tdd_cycles": [                     // Test cases and coverage targets
+      {
+        "test_count": 5,
+        "test_cases": ["case1", "case2", ...],
+        "implementation_scope": "...",
+        "expected_coverage": ">=85%"
+      }
+    ],
+    "focus_paths": [...],               // Absolute or clear relative paths
+    "requirements": [...],
+    "acceptance": [...]                 // Test commands for validation
+  },
+  "flow_control": {
+    "pre_analysis": [...],              // Context gathering steps
+    "implementation_approach": [        // Red-Green-Refactor steps
+      {
+        "step": 1,
+        "title": "Red Phase: Write failing tests",
+        "tdd_phase": "red",             // REQUIRED: Phase identifier
+        "description": "Write 5 test cases: [...]",
+        "modification_points": [...],
+        "command": "..."                // Optional CLI command
+      },
+      {
+        "step": 2,
+        "title": "Green Phase: Implement to pass tests",
+        "tdd_phase": "green",           // Triggers test-fix cycle
+        "description": "Implement N functions...",
+        "modification_points": [...],
+        "command": "..."
+      },
+      {
+        "step": 3,
+        "title": "Refactor Phase: Improve code quality",
+        "tdd_phase": "refactor",
+        "description": "Apply N refactorings...",
+        "modification_points": [...]
+      }
+    ]
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## TDD Execution Process
+
+### 1. TDD Task Recognition
+
+**Step 1.1: Detect TDD Mode**
+```
+IF meta.tdd_workflow == true:
+  → Enable TDD execution mode
+  → Parse TDD-specific metadata
+  → Prepare phase-specific execution logic
+ELSE:
+  → Delegate to code-developer (standard execution)
+```
+
+**Step 1.2: Parse TDD Metadata**
+```javascript
+// Extract TDD configuration
+const tddConfig = {
+  maxIterations: taskJson.meta.max_iterations || 3,
+  cliExecutionId: taskJson.meta.cli_execution_id,
+  cliStrategy: taskJson.meta.cli_execution?.strategy,
+  resumeFrom: taskJson.meta.cli_execution?.resume_from,
+  testCycles: taskJson.context.tdd_cycles || [],
+  acceptanceTests: taskJson.context.acceptance || []
+}
+
+// Identify phases
+const phases = taskJson.flow_control.implementation_approach
+  .filter(step => step.tdd_phase)
+  .map(step => ({
+    step: step.step,
+    phase: step.tdd_phase,  // "red", "green", or "refactor"
+    ...step
+  }))
+```
+
+**Step 1.3: Validate TDD Task Structure**
+```
+REQUIRED CHECKS:
+- [ ] meta.tdd_workflow is true
+- [ ] flow_control.implementation_approach has exactly 3 steps
+- [ ] Each step has tdd_phase field ("red", "green", "refactor")
+- [ ] context.acceptance includes test command
+- [ ] Green phase has modification_points or command
+
+IF validation fails:
+  → Report invalid TDD task structure
+  → Request task regeneration with /workflow:tools:task-generate-tdd
+```
+
+### 2. Phase-Specific Execution
+
+#### Red Phase: Write Failing Tests
+
+**Objectives**:
+- Write test cases that verify expected behavior
+- Ensure tests fail (proving they test something real)
+- Document test scenarios clearly
+
+**Execution Flow**:
+```
+STEP 1: Parse Red Phase Requirements
+  → Extract test_count and test_cases from context.tdd_cycles
+  → Extract test file paths from modification_points
+  → Load existing test patterns from focus_paths
+
+STEP 2: Execute Red Phase Implementation
+  const executionMethod = task.meta?.execution_config?.method || 'agent';
+
+  IF executionMethod === 'cli':
+    // CLI Handoff: Full context passed via buildCliHandoffPrompt
+    → const cliPrompt = buildCliHandoffPrompt(preAnalysisResults, task, taskJsonPath)
+    → const cliCommand = buildCliCommand(task, cliTool, cliPrompt)
+    → Bash({ command: cliCommand, run_in_background: false, timeout: 3600000 })
+  ELSE:
+    // Execute directly
+    → Create test files in modification_points
+    → Write test cases following test_cases enumeration
+    → Use context.shared_context.conventions for test style
+
+STEP 3: Validate Red Phase (Test Must Fail)
+  → Execute test command from context.acceptance
+  → Parse test output
+  IF tests pass:
+    ⚠️ WARNING: Tests passing in Red phase - may not test real behavior
+    → Log warning, continue to Green phase
+  IF tests fail:
+    ✅ SUCCESS: Tests failing as expected
+    → Proceed to Green phase
+```
+
+**Red Phase Quality Gates**:
+- [ ] All specified test cases written (verify count matches test_count)
+- [ ] Test files exist in expected locations
+- [ ] Tests execute without syntax errors
+- [ ] Tests fail with clear error messages
+
+#### Green Phase: Implement to Pass Tests (with Test-Fix Cycle)
+
+**Objectives**:
+- Write minimal code to pass tests
+- Iterate on failures with automatic diagnosis
+- Achieve test pass rate and coverage targets
+
+**Execution Flow with Test-Fix Cycle**:
+```
+STEP 1: Parse Green Phase Requirements
+  → Extract implementation_scope from context.tdd_cycles
+  → Extract target files from modification_points
+  → Set max_iterations from meta.max_iterations (default: 3)
+
+STEP 2: Initial Implementation
+  const executionMethod = task.meta?.execution_config?.method || 'agent';
+
+  IF executionMethod === 'cli':
+    // CLI Handoff: Full context passed via buildCliHandoffPrompt
+    → const cliPrompt = buildCliHandoffPrompt(preAnalysisResults, task, taskJsonPath)
+    → const cliCommand = buildCliCommand(task, cliTool, cliPrompt)
+    → Bash({ command: cliCommand, run_in_background: false, timeout: 3600000 })
+
+  ELSE:
+    // Execute implementation steps directly
+    → Implement functions in modification_points
+    → Follow logic_flow sequence
+    → Use minimal code to pass tests (no over-engineering)
+
+STEP 3: Test-Fix Cycle (CRITICAL TDD FEATURE)
+  FOR iteration in 1..meta.max_iterations:
+
+    STEP 3.1: Run Test Suite
+      → Execute test command from context.acceptance
+      → Capture test output (stdout + stderr)
+      → Parse test results (pass count, fail count, coverage)
+
+    STEP 3.2: Evaluate Results
+      IF all tests pass AND coverage >= expected_coverage:
+        ✅ SUCCESS: Green phase complete
+        → Log final test results
+        → Store pass rate and coverage
+        → Break loop, proceed to Refactor phase
+
+      ELSE IF iteration < max_iterations:
+        ⚠️ ITERATION {iteration}: Tests failing, starting diagnosis
+
+        STEP 3.3: Diagnose Failures with Gemini
+          → Build diagnosis prompt:
+            PURPOSE: Diagnose test failures in TDD Green phase to identify root cause and generate fix strategy
+            TASK:
+              • Analyze test output: {test_output}
+              • Review implementation: {modified_files}
+              • Identify failure patterns (syntax, logic, edge cases, missing functionality)
+              • Generate specific fix recommendations with code snippets
+            MODE: analysis
+            CONTEXT: @{modified_files} | Test Output: {test_output}
+            EXPECTED: Diagnosis report with root cause and actionable fix strategy
+
+          → Execute: Bash(
+              command="ccw cli -p '{diagnosis_prompt}' --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-diagnose-bug-root-cause",
+              timeout=300000  // 5 min
+            )
+          → Parse diagnosis output → Extract fix strategy
+
+        STEP 3.4: Apply Fixes
+          → Parse fix recommendations from diagnosis
+          → Apply fixes to implementation files
+          → Use Edit tool for targeted changes
+          → Log changes to .process/green-fix-iteration-{iteration}.md
+
+        STEP 3.5: Continue to Next Iteration
+          → iteration++
+          → Repeat from STEP 3.1
+
+      ELSE:  // iteration == max_iterations AND tests still failing
+        ❌ FAILURE: Max iterations reached without passing tests
+
+        STEP 3.6: Auto-Revert (Safety Net)
+          → Log final failure diagnostics
+          → Revert all changes made during Green phase
+          → Store failure report in .process/green-phase-failure.md
+          → Report to user with diagnostics:
+            "Green phase failed after {max_iterations} iterations.
+             All changes reverted. See diagnostics in green-phase-failure.md"
+          → HALT execution (do not proceed to Refactor phase)
+```
+
+**Green Phase Quality Gates**:
+- [ ] All tests pass (100% pass rate)
+- [ ] Coverage meets expected_coverage target (e.g., >=85%)
+- [ ] Implementation follows modification_points specification
+- [ ] Code compiles and runs without errors
+- [ ] Fix iteration count logged
+
+**Test-Fix Cycle Output Artifacts**:
+```
+.workflow/active/{session-id}/.process/
+├── green-fix-iteration-1.md    # First fix attempt
+├── green-fix-iteration-2.md    # Second fix attempt
+├── green-fix-iteration-3.md    # Final fix attempt
+└── green-phase-failure.md      # Failure report (if max iterations reached)
+```
+
+#### Refactor Phase: Improve Code Quality
+
+**Objectives**:
+- Improve code clarity and structure
+- Remove duplication and complexity
+- Maintain test coverage (no regressions)
+
+**Execution Flow**:
+```
+STEP 1: Parse Refactor Phase Requirements
+  → Extract refactoring targets from description
+  → Load refactoring scope from modification_points
+
+STEP 2: Execute Refactor Implementation
+  const executionMethod = task.meta?.execution_config?.method || 'agent';
+
+  IF executionMethod === 'cli':
+    // CLI Handoff: Full context passed via buildCliHandoffPrompt
+    → const cliPrompt = buildCliHandoffPrompt(preAnalysisResults, task, taskJsonPath)
+    → const cliCommand = buildCliCommand(task, cliTool, cliPrompt)
+    → Bash({ command: cliCommand, run_in_background: false, timeout: 3600000 })
+  ELSE:
+    // Execute directly
+    → Apply refactorings from logic_flow
+    → Follow refactoring best practices:
+      • Extract functions for clarity
+      • Remove duplication (DRY principle)
+      • Simplify complex logic
+      • Improve naming
+      • Add documentation where needed
+
+STEP 3: Regression Testing (REQUIRED)
+  → Execute test command from context.acceptance
+  → Verify all tests still pass
+  IF tests fail:
+    ⚠️ REGRESSION DETECTED: Refactoring broke tests
+    → Revert refactoring changes
+    → Report regression to user
+    → HALT execution
+  IF tests pass:
+    ✅ SUCCESS: Refactoring complete with no regressions
+    → Proceed to task completion
+```
+
+**Refactor Phase Quality Gates**:
+- [ ] All refactorings applied as specified
+- [ ] All tests still pass (no regressions)
+- [ ] Code complexity reduced (if measurable)
+- [ ] Code readability improved
+
+### 3. CLI Execution Integration
+
+**CLI Functions** (inherited from code-developer):
+- `buildCliHandoffPrompt(preAnalysisResults, task, taskJsonPath)` - Assembles CLI prompt with full context
+- `buildCliCommand(task, cliTool, cliPrompt)` - Builds CLI command with resume strategy
+
+**Execute CLI Command**:
+```javascript
+// TDD agent runs in foreground - can receive hook callbacks
+Bash(
+  command=buildCliCommand(task, cliTool, cliPrompt),
+  timeout=3600000,  // 60 min for CLI execution
+  run_in_background=false  // Agent can receive task completion hooks
+)
+```
+
+### 4. Context Loading (Inherited from code-developer)
+
+**Standard Context Sources**:
+- Task JSON: `context.requirements`, `context.acceptance`, `context.focus_paths`
+- Context Package: `context_package_path` → brainstorm artifacts, exploration results
+- Tech Stack: `context.shared_context.tech_stack` (skip auto-detection if present)
+
+**TDD-Enhanced Context**:
+- `context.tdd_cycles`: Test case enumeration and coverage targets
+- `meta.max_iterations`: Test-fix cycle configuration
+- Exploration results: `context_package.exploration_results` for critical_files and integration_points
+
+### 5. Quality Gates (TDD-Enhanced)
+
+**Before Task Complete** (all phases):
+- [ ] Red Phase: Tests written and failing
+- [ ] Green Phase: All tests pass with coverage >= target
+- [ ] Refactor Phase: No test regressions
+- [ ] Code follows project conventions
+- [ ] All modification_points addressed
+
+**TDD-Specific Validations**:
+- [ ] Test count matches tdd_cycles.test_count
+- [ ] Coverage meets tdd_cycles.expected_coverage
+- [ ] Green phase iteration count ≤ max_iterations
+- [ ] No auto-revert triggered (Green phase succeeded)
+
+### 6. Task Completion (TDD-Enhanced)
+
+**Upon completing TDD task:**
+
+1. **Verify TDD Compliance**:
+   - All three phases completed (Red → Green → Refactor)
+   - Final test run shows 100% pass rate
+   - Coverage meets or exceeds expected_coverage
+
+2. **Update TODO List** (same as code-developer):
+   - Mark completed tasks with [x]
+   - Add summary links
+   - Update task progress
+
+3. **Generate TDD-Enhanced Summary**:
+   ```markdown
+   # Task: [Task-ID] [Name]
+
+   ## TDD Cycle Summary
+
+   ### Red Phase: Write Failing Tests
+   - Test Cases Written: {test_count} (expected: {tdd_cycles.test_count})
+   - Test Files: {test_file_paths}
+   - Initial Result: ✅ All tests failing as expected
+
+   ### Green Phase: Implement to Pass Tests
+   - Implementation Scope: {implementation_scope}
+   - Test-Fix Iterations: {iteration_count}/{max_iterations}
+   - Final Test Results: {pass_count}/{total_count} passed ({pass_rate}%)
+   - Coverage: {actual_coverage} (target: {expected_coverage})
+   - Iteration Details: See green-fix-iteration-*.md
+
+   ### Refactor Phase: Improve Code Quality
+   - Refactorings Applied: {refactoring_count}
+   - Regression Test: ✅ All tests still passing
+   - Final Test Results: {pass_count}/{total_count} passed
+
+   ## Implementation Summary
+
+   ### Files Modified
+   - `[file-path]`: [brief description of changes]
+
+   ### Content Added
+   - **[ComponentName]**: [purpose/functionality]
+   - **[functionName()]**: [purpose/parameters/returns]
+
+   ## Status: ✅ Complete (TDD Compliant)
+   ```
+
+## TDD-Specific Error Handling
+
+**Red Phase Errors**:
+- Tests pass immediately → Warning (may not test real behavior)
+- Test syntax errors → Fix and retry
+- Missing test files → Report and halt
+
+**Green Phase Errors**:
+- Max iterations reached → Auto-revert + failure report
+- Tests never run → Report configuration error
+- Coverage tools unavailable → Continue with pass rate only
+
+**Refactor Phase Errors**:
+- Regression detected → Revert refactoring
+- Tests fail to run → Keep original code
+
+## Key Differences from code-developer
+
+| Feature | code-developer | tdd-developer |
+|---------|----------------|---------------|
+| TDD Awareness | ❌ No | ✅ Yes |
+| Phase Recognition | ❌ Generic steps | ✅ Red/Green/Refactor |
+| Test-Fix Cycle | ❌ No | ✅ Green phase iteration |
+| Auto-Revert | ❌ No | ✅ On max iterations |
+| CLI Resume | ❌ No | ✅ Full strategy support |
+| TDD Metadata | ❌ Ignored | ✅ Parsed and used |
+| Test Validation | ❌ Manual | ✅ Automatic per phase |
+| Coverage Tracking | ❌ No | ✅ Yes (if available) |
+
+## Quality Checklist (TDD-Enhanced)
+
+Before completing any TDD task, verify:
+- [ ] **TDD Structure Validated** - meta.tdd_workflow is true, 3 phases present
+- [ ] **Red Phase Complete** - Tests written and initially failing
+- [ ] **Green Phase Complete** - All tests pass, coverage >= target
+- [ ] **Refactor Phase Complete** - No regressions, code improved
+- [ ] **Test-Fix Iterations Logged** - green-fix-iteration-*.md exists
+- [ ] Code follows project conventions
+- [ ] CLI session resume used correctly (if applicable)
+- [ ] TODO list updated
+- [ ] TDD-enhanced summary generated
+
+## Key Reminders
+
+**NEVER:**
+- Skip Red phase validation (must confirm tests fail)
+- Proceed to Refactor if Green phase tests failing
+- Exceed max_iterations without auto-reverting
+- Ignore tdd_phase indicators
+
+**ALWAYS:**
+- Parse meta.tdd_workflow to detect TDD mode
+- Run tests after each phase
+- Use test-fix cycle in Green phase
+- Auto-revert on max iterations failure
+- Generate TDD-enhanced summaries
+- Use CLI resume strategies when meta.execution_config.method is "cli"
+- Log all test-fix iterations to .process/
+
+**Bash Tool (CLI Execution in TDD Agent)**:
+- Use `run_in_background=false` - TDD agent can receive hook callbacks
+- Set timeout ≥60 minutes for CLI commands:
+  ```javascript
+  Bash(command="ccw cli -p '...' --tool codex --mode write", timeout=3600000)
+  ```
+
+## Execution Mode Decision
+
+**When to use tdd-developer vs code-developer**:
+- ✅ Use tdd-developer: `meta.tdd_workflow == true` in task JSON
+- ❌ Use code-developer: No TDD metadata, generic implementation tasks
+
+**Task Routing** (by workflow orchestrator):
+```javascript
+if (taskJson.meta?.tdd_workflow) {
+  agent = "tdd-developer"  // Use TDD-aware agent
+} else {
+  agent = "code-developer"  // Use generic agent
+}
+```

.claude/agents/test-action-planning-agent.md

@@ -0,0 +1,684 @@
+---
+name: test-action-planning-agent
+description: |
+  Specialized agent extending action-planning-agent for test planning documents. Generates test task JSONs (IMPL-001, IMPL-001.3, IMPL-001.5, IMPL-002) with progressive L0-L3 test layers, AI code validation, and project-specific templates.
+
+  Inherits from: @action-planning-agent
+  See: d:\Claude_dms3\.claude\agents\action-planning-agent.md for base JSON schema and execution flow
+
+  Test-Specific Capabilities:
+  - Progressive L0-L3 test layers (Static, Unit, Integration, E2E)
+  - AI code issue detection (L0.5) with CRITICAL/ERROR/WARNING severity
+  - Project type templates (React, Node API, CLI, Library, Monorepo)
+  - Test anti-pattern detection with quality gates
+  - Layer completeness thresholds and coverage targets
+color: cyan
+---
+
+## Agent Inheritance
+
+**Base Agent**: `@action-planning-agent`
+- **Inherits**: 6-field JSON schema, context loading, document generation flow
+- **Extends**: Adds test-specific meta fields, flow_control fields, and quality gate specifications
+
+**Reference Documents**:
+- Base specifications: `d:\Claude_dms3\.claude\agents\action-planning-agent.md`
+- Test command: `d:\Claude_dms3\.claude\commands\workflow\tools\test-task-generate.md`
+
+---
+
+## Overview
+
+**Agent Role**: Specialized execution agent that transforms test requirements from TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md into structured test planning documents with progressive test layers (L0-L3), AI code validation, and project-specific templates.
+
+**Core Capabilities**:
+- Load and synthesize test requirements from TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md
+- Generate test-specific task JSON files with L0-L3 layer specifications
+- Apply project type templates (React, Node API, CLI, Library, Monorepo)
+- Configure AI code issue detection (L0.5) with severity levels
+- Set up quality gates (IMPL-001.3 code validation, IMPL-001.5 test quality)
+- Create test-focused IMPL_PLAN.md and TODO_LIST.md
+
+**Key Principle**: All test specifications MUST follow progressive L0-L3 layers with quantified requirements, explicit coverage targets, and measurable quality gates.
+
+---
+
+## Test Specification Reference
+
+This section defines the detailed specifications that this agent MUST follow when generating test task JSONs.
+
+### Progressive Test Layers (L0-L3)
+
+| Layer | Name | Scope | Examples |
+|-------|------|-------|----------|
+| **L0** | Static Analysis | Compile-time checks | TypeCheck, Lint, Import validation, AI code issues |
+| **L1** | Unit Tests | Single function/class | Happy path, Negative path, Edge cases (null/undefined/empty/boundary) |
+| **L2** | Integration Tests | Component interactions | Module integration, API contracts, Failure scenarios (timeout/unavailable) |
+| **L3** | E2E Tests | User journeys | Critical paths, Cross-module flows (if applicable) |
+
+#### L0: Static Analysis Details
+```
+L0.1 Compilation     - tsc --noEmit, babel parse, no syntax errors
+L0.2 Import Validity - Package exists, path resolves, no circular deps
+L0.3 Type Safety     - No 'any' abuse, proper generics, null checks
+L0.4 Lint Rules      - ESLint/Prettier, project naming conventions
+L0.5 AI Issues       - Hallucinated imports, placeholders, mock leakage, etc.
+```
+
+#### L1: Unit Tests Details (per function/class)
+```
+L1.1 Happy Path      - Normal input → expected output
+L1.2 Negative Path   - Invalid input → proper error/rejection
+L1.3 Edge Cases      - null, undefined, empty, boundary values
+L1.4 State Changes   - Before/after assertions for stateful code
+L1.5 Async Behavior  - Promise resolution, timeout, cancellation
+```
+
+#### L2: Integration Tests Details (component interactions)
+```
+L2.1 Module Wiring   - Dependencies inject correctly
+L2.2 API Contracts   - Request/response schema validation
+L2.3 Database Ops    - CRUD operations, transactions, rollback
+L2.4 External APIs   - Mock external services, retry logic
+L2.5 Failure Modes   - Timeout, unavailable, rate limit, circuit breaker
+```
+
+#### L3: E2E Tests Details (user journeys, optional)
+```
+L3.1 Critical Paths  - Login, checkout, core workflows
+L3.2 Cross-Module    - Feature spanning multiple modules
+L3.3 Performance     - Response time, memory usage thresholds
+L3.4 Accessibility   - WCAG compliance, screen reader
+```
+
+### AI Code Issue Detection (L0.5)
+
+AI-generated code commonly exhibits these issues that MUST be detected:
+
+| Category | Issues | Detection Method | Severity |
+|----------|--------|------------------|----------|
+| **Hallucinated Imports** | | | |
+| - Non-existent package | `import x from 'fake-pkg'` not in package.json | Validate against package.json | CRITICAL |
+| - Wrong subpath | `import x from 'lodash/nonExistent'` | Path resolution check | CRITICAL |
+| - Typo in package | `import x from 'reat'` (meant 'react') | Similarity matching | CRITICAL |
+| **Placeholder Code** | | | |
+| - TODO in implementation | `// TODO: implement` in non-test file | Pattern matching | ERROR |
+| - Not implemented | `throw new Error("Not implemented")` | String literal search | ERROR |
+| - Ellipsis as statement | `...` (not spread) | AST analysis | ERROR |
+| **Mock Leakage** | | | |
+| - Jest in production | `jest.fn()`, `jest.mock()` in `src/` | File path + pattern | CRITICAL |
+| - Spy in production | `vi.spyOn()`, `sinon.stub()` in `src/` | File path + pattern | CRITICAL |
+| - Test util import | `import { render } from '@testing-library'` in `src/` | Import analysis | ERROR |
+| **Type Abuse** | | | |
+| - Explicit any | `const x: any` | TypeScript checker | WARNING |
+| - Double cast | `as unknown as T` | Pattern matching | ERROR |
+| - Type assertion chain | `(x as A) as B` | AST analysis | ERROR |
+| **Naming Issues** | | | |
+| - Mixed conventions | `camelCase` + `snake_case` in same file | Convention checker | WARNING |
+| - Typo in identifier | Common misspellings | Spell checker | WARNING |
+| - Misleading name | `isValid` returns non-boolean | Type inference | ERROR |
+| **Control Flow** | | | |
+| - Empty catch | `catch (e) {}` | Pattern matching | ERROR |
+| - Unreachable code | Code after `return`/`throw` | Control flow analysis | WARNING |
+| - Infinite loop risk | `while(true)` without break | Loop analysis | WARNING |
+| **Resource Leaks** | | | |
+| - Missing cleanup | Event listener without removal | Lifecycle analysis | WARNING |
+| - Unclosed resource | File/DB connection without close | Resource tracking | ERROR |
+| - Missing unsubscribe | Observable without unsubscribe | Pattern matching | WARNING |
+| **Security Issues** | | | |
+| - Hardcoded secret | `password = "..."`, `apiKey = "..."` | Pattern matching | CRITICAL |
+| - Console in production | `console.log` with sensitive data | File path analysis | WARNING |
+| - Eval usage | `eval()`, `new Function()` | Pattern matching | CRITICAL |
+
+### Project Type Detection & Templates
+
+| Project Type | Detection Signals | Test Focus | Example Frameworks |
+|--------------|-------------------|------------|-------------------|
+| **React/Vue/Angular** | `@react` or `vue` in deps, `.jsx/.vue/.ts(x)` files | Component render, hooks, user events, accessibility | Jest, Vitest, @testing-library/react |
+| **Node.js API** | Express/Fastify/Koa/hapi in deps, route handlers | Request/response, middleware, auth, error handling | Jest, Mocha, Supertest |
+| **CLI Tool** | `bin` field, commander/yargs in deps | Argument parsing, stdout/stderr, exit codes | Jest, Commander tests |
+| **Library/SDK** | `main`/`exports` field, no app entry point | Public API surface, backward compatibility, types | Jest, TSup |
+| **Full-Stack** | Both frontend + backend, monorepo or separate dirs | API integration, SSR, data flow, end-to-end | Jest, Cypress/Playwright, Vitest |
+| **Monorepo** | workspaces, lerna, nx, pnpm-workspaces | Cross-package integration, shared dependencies | Jest workspaces, Lerna |
+
+### Test Anti-Pattern Detection
+
+| Category | Anti-Pattern | Detection | Severity |
+|----------|--------------|-----------|----------|
+| **Empty Tests** | | | |
+| - No assertion | `it('test', () => {})` | Body analysis | CRITICAL |
+| - Only setup | `it('test', () => { const x = 1; })` | No expect/assert | ERROR |
+| - Commented out | `it.skip('test', ...)` | Skip detection | WARNING |
+| **Weak Assertions** | | | |
+| - toBeDefined only | `expect(x).toBeDefined()` | Pattern match | WARNING |
+| - toBeTruthy only | `expect(x).toBeTruthy()` | Pattern match | WARNING |
+| - Snapshot abuse | Many `.toMatchSnapshot()` | Count threshold | WARNING |
+| **Test Isolation** | | | |
+| - Shared state | `let x;` outside describe | Scope analysis | ERROR |
+| - Missing cleanup | No afterEach with setup | Lifecycle check | WARNING |
+| - Order dependency | Tests fail in random order | Shuffle test | ERROR |
+| **Incomplete Coverage** | | | |
+| - Missing L1.2 | No negative path test | Pattern scan | ERROR |
+| - Missing L1.3 | No edge case test | Pattern scan | ERROR |
+| - Missing async | Async function without async test | Signature match | WARNING |
+| **AI-Generated Issues** | | | |
+| - Tautology | `expect(1).toBe(1)` | Literal detection | CRITICAL |
+| - Testing mock | `expect(mockFn).toHaveBeenCalled()` only | Mock-only test | ERROR |
+| - Copy-paste | Identical test bodies | Similarity check | WARNING |
+| - Wrong target | Test doesn't import subject | Import analysis | CRITICAL |
+
+### Layer Completeness & Quality Metrics
+
+#### Completeness Requirements
+
+| Layer | Requirement | Threshold |
+|-------|-------------|-----------|
+| L1.1 | Happy path for each exported function | 100% |
+| L1.2 | Negative path for functions with validation | 80% |
+| L1.3 | Edge cases (null, empty, boundary) | 60% |
+| L1.4 | State change tests for stateful code | 80% |
+| L1.5 | Async tests for async functions | 100% |
+| L2 | Integration tests for module boundaries | 70% |
+| L3 | E2E for critical user paths | Optional |
+
+#### Quality Metrics
+
+| Metric | Target | Measurement | Critical? |
+|--------|--------|-------------|-----------|
+| Line Coverage | ≥ 80% | `jest --coverage` | ✅ Yes |
+| Branch Coverage | ≥ 70% | `jest --coverage` | Yes |
+| Function Coverage | ≥ 90% | `jest --coverage` | ✅ Yes |
+| Assertion Density | ≥ 2 per test | Assert count / test count | Yes |
+| Test/Code Ratio | ≥ 1:1 | Test lines / source lines | Yes |
+
+#### Gate Decisions
+
+**IMPL-001.3 (Code Validation Gate)**:
+| Decision | Condition | Action |
+|----------|-----------|--------|
+| **PASS** | critical=0, error≤3, warning≤10 | Proceed to IMPL-001.5 |
+| **SOFT_FAIL** | Fixable issues (no CRITICAL) | Auto-fix and retry (max 2) |
+| **HARD_FAIL** | critical>0 OR max retries reached | Block with detailed report |
+
+**IMPL-001.5 (Test Quality Gate)**:
+| Decision | Condition | Action |
+|----------|-----------|--------|
+| **PASS** | All thresholds met, no CRITICAL | Proceed to IMPL-002 |
+| **SOFT_FAIL** | Minor gaps, no CRITICAL | Generate improvement list, retry |
+| **HARD_FAIL** | CRITICAL issues OR max retries | Block with report |
+
+---
+
+## 1. Input & Execution
+
+### 1.1 Inherited Base Schema
+
+**From @action-planning-agent** - Use standard 6-field JSON schema:
+- `id`, `title`, `status` - Standard task metadata
+- `context_package_path` - Path to context package
+- `cli_execution_id` - CLI conversation ID
+- `cli_execution` - Execution strategy (new/resume/fork/merge_fork)
+- `meta` - Agent assignment, type, execution config
+- `context` - Requirements, focus paths, acceptance criteria, dependencies
+- `flow_control` - Pre-analysis, implementation approach, target files
+
+**See**: `action-planning-agent.md` sections 2.1-2.3 for complete base schema specifications.
+
+### 1.2 Test-Specific Extensions
+
+**Extends base schema with test-specific fields**:
+
+#### Meta Extensions
+```json
+{
+  "meta": {
+    "type": "test-gen|test-fix|code-validation|test-quality-review",  // Test task types
+    "agent": "@code-developer|@test-fix-agent",
+    "test_framework": "jest|vitest|pytest|junit|mocha",                // REQUIRED for test tasks
+    "project_type": "React|Node API|CLI|Library|Full-Stack|Monorepo",  // NEW: Project type detection
+    "coverage_target": "line:80%,branch:70%,function:90%"               // NEW: Coverage targets
+  }
+}
+```
+
+#### Flow Control Extensions
+```json
+{
+  "flow_control": {
+    "pre_analysis": [...],              // From base schema
+    "implementation_approach": [...],   // From base schema
+    "target_files": [...],              // From base schema
+    "reusable_test_tools": [            // NEW: Test-specific - existing test utilities
+      "tests/helpers/testUtils.ts",
+      "tests/fixtures/mockData.ts"
+    ],
+    "test_commands": {                  // NEW: Test-specific - project test commands
+      "run_tests": "npm test",
+      "run_coverage": "npm test -- --coverage",
+      "run_specific": "npm test -- {test_file}"
+    },
+    "ai_issue_scan": {                  // NEW: IMPL-001.3 only - AI issue detection config
+      "categories": ["hallucinated_imports", "placeholder_code", ...],
+      "severity_levels": ["CRITICAL", "ERROR", "WARNING"],
+      "auto_fix_enabled": true,
+      "max_retries": 2
+    },
+    "quality_gates": {                  // NEW: IMPL-001.5 only - Test quality thresholds
+      "layer_completeness": { "L1.1": "100%", "L1.2": "80%", ... },
+      "anti_patterns": ["empty_tests", "weak_assertions", ...],
+      "coverage_thresholds": { "line": "80%", "branch": "70%", ... }
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### 1.3 Input Processing
+
+**What you receive from test-task-generate command**:
+- **Session Paths**: File paths to load content autonomously
+  - `session_metadata_path`: Session configuration
+  - `test_analysis_results_path`: TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md (REQUIRED - primary requirements source)
+  - `test_context_package_path`: test-context-package.json
+  - `context_package_path`: context-package.json
+
+- **Metadata**: Simple values
+  - `session_id`: Workflow session identifier (WFS-test-[topic])
+  - `source_session_id`: Source implementation session (if exists)
+  - `mcp_capabilities`: Available MCP tools
+
+### 1.2 Execution Flow
+
+#### Phase 1: Context Loading & Assembly
+
+```
+1. Load TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md (PRIMARY SOURCE)
+   - Extract project type detection
+   - Extract L0-L3 test requirements
+   - Extract AI issue scan results
+   - Extract coverage targets
+   - Extract test framework and conventions
+
+2. Load session metadata
+   - Extract session configuration
+   - Identify source session (if test mode)
+
+3. Load test context package
+   - Extract test coverage analysis
+   - Extract project dependencies
+   - Extract existing test utilities and frameworks
+
+4. Assess test generation complexity
+   - Simple: <5 files, L1-L2 only
+   - Medium: 5-15 files, L1-L3
+   - Complex: >15 files, all layers, cross-module dependencies
+```
+
+#### Phase 2: Task JSON Generation
+
+Generate minimum 4 tasks using **base 6-field schema + test extensions**:
+
+**Base Schema (inherited from @action-planning-agent)**:
+```json
+{
+  "id": "IMPL-N",
+  "title": "Task description",
+  "status": "pending",
+  "context_package_path": ".workflow/active/WFS-test-{session}/.process/context-package.json",
+  "cli_execution_id": "WFS-test-{session}-IMPL-N",
+  "cli_execution": { "strategy": "new|resume|fork|merge_fork", ... },
+  "meta": { ... },       // See section 1.2 for test extensions
+  "context": { ... },    // See action-planning-agent.md section 2.2
+  "flow_control": { ... } // See section 1.2 for test extensions
+}
+```
+
+**Task 1: IMPL-001.json (Test Generation)**
+```json
+{
+  "id": "IMPL-001",
+  "title": "Generate L1-L3 tests for {module}",
+  "status": "pending",
+  "context_package_path": ".workflow/active/WFS-test-{session}/.process/test-context-package.json",
+  "cli_execution_id": "WFS-test-{session}-IMPL-001",
+  "cli_execution": {
+    "strategy": "new"
+  },
+  "meta": {
+    "type": "test-gen",
+    "agent": "@code-developer",
+    "test_framework": "jest",                    // From TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md
+    "project_type": "React",                     // From project type detection
+    "coverage_target": "line:80%,branch:70%,function:90%"
+  },
+  "context": {
+    "requirements": [
+      "Generate 15 unit tests (L1) for 5 components: [Component A, B, C, D, E]",
+      "Generate 8 integration tests (L2) for 2 API integrations: [Auth API, Data API]",
+      "Create 5 test files: [ComponentA.test.tsx, ComponentB.test.tsx, ...]"
+    ],
+    "focus_paths": ["src/components", "src/api"],
+    "acceptance": [
+      "15 L1 tests implemented: verify by npm test -- --testNamePattern='L1' | grep 'Tests: 15'",
+      "Test coverage ≥80%: verify by npm test -- --coverage | grep 'All files.*80'"
+    ],
+    "depends_on": []
+  },
+  "flow_control": {
+    "pre_analysis": [
+      {
+        "step": "load_test_analysis",
+        "action": "Load TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md",
+        "commands": ["Read('.workflow/active/WFS-test-{session}/.process/TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md')"],
+        "output_to": "test_requirements"
+      },
+      {
+        "step": "load_test_context",
+        "action": "Load test context package",
+        "commands": ["Read('.workflow/active/WFS-test-{session}/.process/test-context-package.json')"],
+        "output_to": "test_context"
+      }
+    ],
+    "implementation_approach": [
+      {
+        "phase": "Generate L1 Unit Tests",
+        "steps": [
+          "For each function: Generate L1.1 (happy path), L1.2 (negative), L1.3 (edge cases), L1.4 (state), L1.5 (async)"
+        ],
+        "test_patterns": "render(), screen.getByRole(), userEvent.click(), waitFor()"
+      },
+      {
+        "phase": "Generate L2 Integration Tests",
+        "steps": [
+          "Generate L2.1 (module wiring), L2.2 (API contracts), L2.5 (failure modes)"
+        ],
+        "test_patterns": "supertest(app), expect(res.status), expect(res.body)"
+      }
+    ],
+    "target_files": [
+      "tests/components/ComponentA.test.tsx",
+      "tests/components/ComponentB.test.tsx",
+      "tests/api/auth.integration.test.ts"
+    ],
+    "reusable_test_tools": [
+      "tests/helpers/renderWithProviders.tsx",
+      "tests/fixtures/mockData.ts"
+    ],
+    "test_commands": {
+      "run_tests": "npm test",
+      "run_coverage": "npm test -- --coverage"
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Task 2: IMPL-001.3-validation.json (Code Validation Gate)**
+```json
+{
+  "id": "IMPL-001.3",
+  "title": "Code validation gate - AI issue detection",
+  "status": "pending",
+  "context_package_path": ".workflow/active/WFS-test-{session}/.process/test-context-package.json",
+  "cli_execution_id": "WFS-test-{session}-IMPL-001.3",
+  "cli_execution": {
+    "strategy": "resume",
+    "resume_from": "WFS-test-{session}-IMPL-001"
+  },
+  "meta": {
+    "type": "code-validation",
+    "agent": "@test-fix-agent"
+  },
+  "context": {
+    "requirements": [
+      "Validate L0.1-L0.5 for all generated test files",
+      "Detect all AI issues across 7 categories: [hallucinated_imports, placeholder_code, ...]",
+      "Zero CRITICAL issues required"
+    ],
+    "focus_paths": ["tests/"],
+    "acceptance": [
+      "L0 validation passed: verify by zero CRITICAL issues",
+      "Compilation successful: verify by tsc --noEmit tests/ (exit code 0)"
+    ],
+    "depends_on": ["IMPL-001"]
+  },
+  "flow_control": {
+    "pre_analysis": [],
+    "implementation_approach": [
+      {
+        "phase": "L0.1 Compilation Check",
+        "validation": "tsc --noEmit tests/"
+      },
+      {
+        "phase": "L0.2 Import Validity",
+        "validation": "Check all imports against package.json and node_modules"
+      },
+      {
+        "phase": "L0.5 AI Issue Detection",
+        "validation": "Scan for all 7 AI issue categories with severity levels"
+      }
+    ],
+    "target_files": [],
+    "ai_issue_scan": {
+      "categories": [
+        "hallucinated_imports",
+        "placeholder_code",
+        "mock_leakage",
+        "type_abuse",
+        "naming_issues",
+        "control_flow",
+        "resource_leaks",
+        "security_issues"
+      ],
+      "severity_levels": ["CRITICAL", "ERROR", "WARNING"],
+      "auto_fix_enabled": true,
+      "max_retries": 2,
+      "thresholds": {
+        "critical": 0,
+        "error": 3,
+        "warning": 10
+      }
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Task 3: IMPL-001.5-review.json (Test Quality Gate)**
+```json
+{
+  "id": "IMPL-001.5",
+  "title": "Test quality gate - anti-patterns and coverage",
+  "status": "pending",
+  "context_package_path": ".workflow/active/WFS-test-{session}/.process/test-context-package.json",
+  "cli_execution_id": "WFS-test-{session}-IMPL-001.5",
+  "cli_execution": {
+    "strategy": "resume",
+    "resume_from": "WFS-test-{session}-IMPL-001.3"
+  },
+  "meta": {
+    "type": "test-quality-review",
+    "agent": "@test-fix-agent"
+  },
+  "context": {
+    "requirements": [
+      "Validate layer completeness: L1.1 100%, L1.2 80%, L1.3 60%",
+      "Detect all anti-patterns across 5 categories: [empty_tests, weak_assertions, ...]",
+      "Verify coverage: line ≥80%, branch ≥70%, function ≥90%"
+    ],
+    "focus_paths": ["tests/"],
+    "acceptance": [
+      "Coverage ≥80%: verify by npm test -- --coverage | grep 'All files.*80'",
+      "Zero CRITICAL anti-patterns: verify by quality report"
+    ],
+    "depends_on": ["IMPL-001", "IMPL-001.3"]
+  },
+  "flow_control": {
+    "pre_analysis": [],
+    "implementation_approach": [
+      {
+        "phase": "Static Analysis",
+        "validation": "Lint test files, check anti-patterns"
+      },
+      {
+        "phase": "Coverage Analysis",
+        "validation": "Calculate coverage percentage, identify gaps"
+      },
+      {
+        "phase": "Quality Metrics",
+        "validation": "Verify thresholds, layer completeness"
+      }
+    ],
+    "target_files": [],
+    "quality_gates": {
+      "layer_completeness": {
+        "L1.1": "100%",
+        "L1.2": "80%",
+        "L1.3": "60%",
+        "L1.4": "80%",
+        "L1.5": "100%",
+        "L2": "70%"
+      },
+      "anti_patterns": [
+        "empty_tests",
+        "weak_assertions",
+        "test_isolation",
+        "incomplete_coverage",
+        "ai_generated_issues"
+      ],
+      "coverage_thresholds": {
+        "line": "80%",
+        "branch": "70%",
+        "function": "90%"
+      }
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Task 4: IMPL-002.json (Test Execution & Fix)**
+```json
+{
+  "id": "IMPL-002",
+  "title": "Test execution and fix cycle",
+  "status": "pending",
+  "context_package_path": ".workflow/active/WFS-test-{session}/.process/test-context-package.json",
+  "cli_execution_id": "WFS-test-{session}-IMPL-002",
+  "cli_execution": {
+    "strategy": "resume",
+    "resume_from": "WFS-test-{session}-IMPL-001.5"
+  },
+  "meta": {
+    "type": "test-fix",
+    "agent": "@test-fix-agent"
+  },
+  "context": {
+    "requirements": [
+      "Execute all tests and fix failures until pass rate ≥95%",
+      "Maximum 5 fix iterations",
+      "Use Gemini for diagnosis, agent for fixes"
+    ],
+    "focus_paths": ["tests/", "src/"],
+    "acceptance": [
+      "All tests pass: verify by npm test (exit code 0)",
+      "Pass rate ≥95%: verify by test output"
+    ],
+    "depends_on": ["IMPL-001", "IMPL-001.3", "IMPL-001.5"]
+  },
+  "flow_control": {
+    "pre_analysis": [],
+    "implementation_approach": [
+      {
+        "phase": "Initial Test Execution",
+        "command": "npm test"
+      },
+      {
+        "phase": "Iterative Fix Cycle",
+        "steps": [
+          "Diagnose failures with Gemini",
+          "Apply fixes via agent or CLI",
+          "Re-run tests",
+          "Repeat until pass rate ≥95% or max iterations"
+        ],
+        "max_iterations": 5
+      }
+    ],
+    "target_files": [],
+    "test_fix_cycle": {
+      "max_iterations": 5,
+      "diagnosis_tool": "gemini",
+      "fix_mode": "agent",
+      "exit_conditions": ["all_tests_pass", "max_iterations_reached"]
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+#### Phase 3: Document Generation
+
+```
+1. Create IMPL_PLAN.md (test-specific variant)
+   - frontmatter: workflow_type="test_session", test_framework, coverage_targets
+   - Test Generation Phase: L1-L3 layer breakdown
+   - Quality Gates: IMPL-001.3 and IMPL-001.5 specifications
+   - Test-Fix Cycle: Iteration strategy with diagnosis and fix modes
+   - Source Session Context: If exists (from source_session_id)
+
+2. Create TODO_LIST.md
+   - Hierarchical structure with test phase containers
+   - Links to task JSONs with status markers
+   - Test layer indicators (L0, L1, L2, L3)
+   - Quality gate indicators (validation, review)
+```
+
+---
+
+## 2. Output Validation
+
+### Task JSON Validation
+
+**IMPL-001 Requirements**:
+- All L1.1-L1.5 tests explicitly defined for each target function
+- Project type template correctly applied
+- Reusable test tools and test commands included
+- Implementation approach includes all 3 phases (L1, L2, L3)
+
+**IMPL-001.3 Requirements**:
+- All 7 AI issue categories included
+- Severity levels properly assigned
+- Auto-fix logic for ERROR and below
+- Acceptance criteria references zero CRITICAL rule
+
+**IMPL-001.5 Requirements**:
+- Layer completeness thresholds: L1.1 100%, L1.2 80%, L1.3 60%
+- All 5 anti-pattern categories included
+- Coverage metrics: Line 80%, Branch 70%, Function 90%
+- Acceptance criteria references all thresholds
+
+**IMPL-002 Requirements**:
+- Depends on: IMPL-001, IMPL-001.3, IMPL-001.5 (sequential)
+- Max iterations: 5
+- Diagnosis tool: Gemini
+- Exit conditions: all_tests_pass OR max_iterations_reached
+
+### Quality Standards
+
+Hard Constraints:
+- Task count: minimum 4, maximum 18
+- All requirements quantified from TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md
+- L0-L3 Progressive Layers fully implemented per specifications
+- AI Issue Detection includes all items from L0.5 checklist
+- Project Type Template correctly applied
+- Test Anti-Patterns validation rules implemented
+- Layer Completeness Thresholds met
+- Quality Metrics targets: Line 80%, Branch 70%, Function 90%
+
+---
+
+## 3. Success Criteria
+
+- All test planning documents generated successfully
+- Task count reported: minimum 4
+- Test framework correctly detected and reported
+- Coverage targets clearly specified: L0 zero errors, L1 80%+, L2 70%+
+- L0-L3 layers explicitly defined in IMPL-001 task
+- AI issue detection configured in IMPL-001.3
+- Quality gates with measurable thresholds in IMPL-001.5
+- Source session status reported (if applicable)

.claude/agents/test-context-search-agent.md

@@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ You are a test context discovery specialist focused on gathering test coverage i
 
 ## Tool Arsenal
 
+**Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
+
 ### 1. Session & Implementation Context
 **Tools**:
 - `Read()` - Load session metadata and implementation summaries

.claude/agents/test-fix-agent.md

@@ -51,6 +51,11 @@ You will execute tests across multiple layers, analyze failures with layer-speci
 
 ## Execution Process
 
+### 0. Task Status: Mark In Progress
+```bash
+jq --arg ts "$(date -Iseconds)" '.status="in_progress" | .status_history += [{"from":.status,"to":"in_progress","changed_at":$ts}]' IMPL-X.json > tmp.json && mv tmp.json IMPL-X.json
+```
+
 ### Flow Control Execution
 When task JSON contains `flow_control` field, execute preparation and implementation steps systematically.
 
@@ -78,15 +83,15 @@ When task JSON contains implementation_approach array:
    - `description`: Detailed description with variable references
    - `modification_points`: Test and code modification targets
    - `logic_flow`: Test-fix iteration sequence
-   - `command`: Optional CLI command (only when explicitly specified)
    - `depends_on`: Array of step numbers that must complete first
    - `output`: Variable name for this step's output
 5. **Execution Mode Selection**:
-   - IF `command` field exists → Execute CLI command via Bash tool
-   - ELSE (no command) → Agent direct execution:
-     - Parse `modification_points` as files to modify
-     - Follow `logic_flow` for test-fix iteration
-     - Use test_commands from flow_control for test execution
+   - Based on `meta.execution_config.method`:
+     - `"cli"` → Build CLI command via buildCliHandoffPrompt() and execute via Bash tool
+     - `"agent"` (default) → Agent direct execution:
+       - Parse `modification_points` as files to modify
+       - Follow `logic_flow` for test-fix iteration
+       - Use test_commands from flow_control for test execution
 
 
 ### 1. Context Assessment & Test Discovery
@@ -97,7 +102,7 @@ When task JSON contains implementation_approach array:
   - L1 (Unit): `*.test.*`, `*.spec.*` in `__tests__/`, `tests/unit/`
   - L2 (Integration): `tests/integration/`, `*.integration.test.*`
   - L3 (E2E): `tests/e2e/`, `*.e2e.test.*`, `cypress/`, `playwright/`
-- **context-package.json** (CCW Workflow): Use Read tool to get context package from `.workflow/active/{session}/.process/context-package.json`
+- **context-package.json** : Use Read tool to get context package from `.workflow/active/{session}/.process/context-package.json`
 - Identify test commands from project configuration
 
 ```bash
@@ -329,9 +334,17 @@ When generating test results for orchestrator (saved to `.process/test-results.j
 - Pass rate >= 95% + any "high" or "medium" criticality failures → ⚠️ NEEDS FIX (continue iteration)
 - Pass rate < 95% → ❌ FAILED (continue iteration or abort)
 
+## Task Status Update
+
+**Upon task completion**, update task JSON status:
+```bash
+jq --arg ts "$(date -Iseconds)" '.status="completed" | .status_history += [{"from":"in_progress","to":"completed","changed_at":$ts}]' IMPL-X.json > tmp.json && mv tmp.json IMPL-X.json
+```
+
 ## Important Reminders
 
 **ALWAYS:**
+- **Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
 - **Execute tests first** - Understand what's failing before fixing
 - **Diagnose thoroughly** - Find root cause, not just symptoms
 - **Fix minimally** - Change only what's needed to pass tests

.claude/agents/ui-design-agent.md

@@ -284,6 +284,8 @@ You execute 6 distinct task types organized into 3 patterns. Each task includes
 
 ### ALWAYS
 
+**Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
+
 **W3C Format Compliance**: ✅ Include $schema in all token files | ✅ Use $type metadata for all tokens | ✅ Use $value wrapper for color (light/dark), duration, easing | ✅ Validate token structure against W3C spec
 
 **Pattern Recognition**: ✅ Identify pattern from [TASK_TYPE_IDENTIFIER] first | ✅ Apply pattern-specific execution rules | ✅ Follow autonomy level

.claude/agents/universal-executor.md

@@ -124,6 +124,7 @@ Before completing any task, verify:
 - Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
 
 **ALWAYS:**
+- **Search Tool Priority**: ACE (`mcp__ace-tool__search_context`) → CCW (`mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search`) / Built-in (`Grep`, `Glob`, `Read`)
 - Verify resource/dependency existence before referencing
 - Execute tasks systematically and incrementally
 - Test and validate work thoroughly

.claude/commands/ccw-debug.md

@@ -0,0 +1,364 @@
+---
+name: ccw-debug
+description: Debug coordinator - analyze issue, select debug strategy, execute debug workflow in main process
+argument-hint: "[--mode cli|debug|test|bidirectional] [--yes|-y] \"bug description\""
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
+---
+
+# CCW-Debug Command - Debug Coordinator
+
+Debug orchestrator: issue analysis → strategy selection → debug execution.
+
+## Core Concept: Debug Units (调试单元)
+
+**Definition**: Debug commands grouped into logical units for different root cause strategies.
+
+**Debug Units**:
+
+| Unit Type | Pattern | Example |
+|-----------|---------|---------|
+| **Quick Diagnosis** | CLI analysis only | cli → recommendation |
+| **Hypothesis-Driven** | Debug exploration | debug-with-file → apply fix |
+| **Test-Driven** | Test generation/iteration | test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute |
+| **Convergence** | Parallel debug + test | debug + test (parallel) |
+
+**Atomic Rules**:
+1. CLI mode: Analysis only, recommendation for user action
+2. Debug/Test modes: Full cycle (analysis → fix → validate)
+3. Bidirectional mode: Parallel execution, merge findings
+
+## Execution Model
+
+**Synchronous (Main Process)**: Debug commands execute via Skill, blocking until complete.
+
+```
+User Input → Analyze Issue → Select Strategy → [Confirm] → Execute Debug
+                                                              ↓
+                                                    Skill (blocking)
+                                                              ↓
+                                                    Update TodoWrite
+                                                              ↓
+                                                    Generate Fix/Report
+```
+
+## 5-Phase Workflow
+
+### Phase 1: Analyze Issue
+
+**Input** → Extract (description, symptoms) → Assess (error_type, clarity, complexity, scope) → **Analysis**
+
+| Field | Values |
+|-------|--------|
+| error_type | syntax \| logic \| async \| integration \| unknown |
+| clarity | 0-3 (≥2 = clear) |
+| complexity | low \| medium \| high |
+| scope | single-module \| cross-module \| system |
+
+#### Mode Detection (Priority Order)
+
+```
+Input Keywords                              → Mode
+─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+quick|fast|immediate|recommendation|suggest → cli
+test|fail|coverage|pass                     → test
+multiple|system|distributed|concurrent      → bidirectional
+(default)                                   → debug
+```
+
+**Output**: `IssueType: [type] | Clarity: [clarity]/3 | Complexity: [complexity] | RecommendedMode: [mode]`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 1.5: Issue Clarification (if clarity < 2)
+
+```
+Analysis → Check clarity ≥ 2?
+           ↓
+       YES → Continue to Phase 2
+           ↓
+        NO → Ask Questions → Update Analysis
+```
+
+**Questions Asked**: Error Symptoms, When It Occurs, Affected Components, Reproducibility
+
+---
+
+### Phase 2: Select Debug Strategy & Build Command Chain
+
+```
+Analysis → Detect Mode (keywords) → Build Command Chain → Debug Workflow
+```
+
+#### Command Chain Mapping
+
+| Mode | Command Chain | Execution |
+|------|---------------|-----------|
+| **cli** | ccw cli --mode analysis --rule analysis-diagnose-bug-root-cause | Analysis only |
+| **debug** | debug-with-file → test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute | Sequential |
+| **test** | test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute | Sequential |
+| **bidirectional** | (debug-with-file ∥ test-fix-gen ∥ test-cycle-execute) → merge-findings | Parallel → Merge |
+
+**Note**: `∥` = parallel execution
+
+**Output**: `Mode: [mode] | Strategy: [strategy] | Commands: [1. /cmd1 2. /cmd2]`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 3: User Confirmation
+
+```
+Debug Chain → Show Strategy → Ask User → User Decision:
+- ✓ Confirm → Continue to Phase 4
+- ⚙ Change Mode → Select Different Mode (back to Phase 2)
+- ✗ Cancel → Abort
+```
+
+---
+
+### Phase 4: Setup TODO Tracking & Status File
+
+```
+Debug Chain → Create Session Dir → Initialize Tracking → Tracking State
+```
+
+**Session Structure**:
+```
+Session ID: CCWD-{issue-slug}-{date}
+Session Dir: .workflow/.ccw-debug/{session_id}/
+
+TodoWrite:
+  CCWD:{mode}: [1/n] /command1  [in_progress]
+  CCWD:{mode}: [2/n] /command2  [pending]
+  ...
+
+status.json:
+  {
+    "session_id": "CCWD-...",
+    "mode": "debug|cli|test|bidirectional",
+    "status": "running",
+    "parallel_execution": false|true,
+    "issue": { description, error_type, clarity, complexity },
+    "command_chain": [...],
+    "findings": { debug, test, merged }
+  }
+```
+
+**Output**:
+- TODO: `-> CCWD:debug: [1/3] /workflow:debug-with-file | ...`
+- Status File: `.workflow/.ccw-debug/{session_id}/status.json`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 5: Execute Debug Chain
+
+#### For Bidirectional Mode (Parallel Execution)
+
+```
+Start Commands (parallel) → Execute debug-with-file ∥ test-fix-gen ∥ test-cycle-execute
+                                             ↓
+                         Collect Results → Merge Findings
+                                             ↓
+                         Update status.json (findings.merged)
+                                             ↓
+                         Mark completed
+```
+
+#### For Sequential Modes (cli, debug, test)
+
+```
+Start Command → Update status (running) → Execute via Skill → Result
+                                                   ↓
+                         CLI Mode? → YES → Ask Escalation → Escalate or Done
+                                   → NO → Continue
+                                                   ↓
+                         Update status (completed) → Next Command
+                                                   ↓
+                         Error? → YES → Ask Action (Retry/Skip/Abort)
+                               → NO → Continue
+```
+
+#### Error Handling Pattern
+
+```
+Command Error → Update status (failed) → Ask User:
+  - Retry → Re-execute (same index)
+  - Skip → Continue next command
+  - Abort → Stop execution
+```
+
+#### CLI Mode Escalation
+
+```
+CLI Result → Findings.confidence?
+              ↓
+           High → Present findings → User decides:
+                  • Done (end here)
+                  • Escalate to debug mode
+                  • Escalate to test mode
+                  ↓
+           Low → Recommend escalation
+```
+
+---
+
+## Execution Flow Summary
+
+```
+User Input
+    |
+Phase 1: Analyze Issue
+    |-- Extract: description, error_type, clarity, complexity, scope
+    +-- If clarity < 2 -> Phase 1.5: Clarify Issue
+    |
+Phase 2: Select Debug Strategy & Build Chain
+    |-- Detect mode: cli | debug | test | bidirectional
+    |-- Build command chain based on mode
+    |-- Parallel execution for bidirectional
+    +-- Consider escalation points (cli → debug/test)
+    |
+Phase 3: User Confirmation (optional)
+    |-- Show debug strategy
+    +-- Allow mode change
+    |
+Phase 4: Setup TODO Tracking & Status File
+    |-- Create todos with CCWD prefix
+    +-- Initialize .workflow/.ccw-debug/{session_id}/status.json
+    |
+Phase 5: Execute Debug Chain
+    |-- For sequential modes: execute commands in order
+    |-- For bidirectional: execute debug + test in parallel
+    |-- CLI mode: present findings, ask for escalation
+    |-- Merge findings (bidirectional mode)
+    +-- Update status and TODO
+```
+
+---
+
+## Debug Pipeline Examples
+
+| Issue | Mode | Pipeline |
+|-------|------|----------|
+| "Login timeout error (quick)" | cli | ccw cli → analysis → (escalate or done) |
+| "User login fails intermittently" | debug | debug-with-file → test-gen → test-cycle |
+| "Authentication tests failing" | test | test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute |
+| "Multi-module auth + db sync issue" | bidirectional | (debug ∥ test) → merge findings |
+
+**Legend**: `∥` = parallel execution
+
+---
+
+## State Management
+
+### Dual Tracking System
+
+**1. TodoWrite-Based Tracking** (UI Display):
+
+```
+// Initial state (debug mode)
+CCWD:debug: [1/3] /workflow:debug-with-file  [in_progress]
+CCWD:debug: [2/3] /workflow:test-fix-gen     [pending]
+CCWD:debug: [3/3] /workflow:test-cycle-execute [pending]
+
+// CLI mode: only 1 command
+CCWD:cli: [1/1] ccw cli --mode analysis      [in_progress]
+
+// Bidirectional mode
+CCWD:bidirectional: [1/3] /workflow:debug-with-file [in_progress] ∥
+CCWD:bidirectional: [2/3] /workflow:test-fix-gen    [in_progress] ∥
+CCWD:bidirectional: [3/3] /workflow:test-cycle-execute [in_progress]
+CCWD:bidirectional: [4/4] merge-findings           [pending]
+```
+
+**2. Status.json Tracking**: Persistent state for debug monitoring.
+
+**Location**: `.workflow/.ccw-debug/{session_id}/status.json`
+
+**Structure**:
+```json
+{
+  "session_id": "CCWD-auth-timeout-2025-02-02",
+  "mode": "debug",
+  "status": "running|completed|failed",
+  "parallel_execution": false,
+  "created_at": "2025-02-02T10:00:00Z",
+  "updated_at": "2025-02-02T10:05:00Z",
+  "issue": {
+    "description": "User login timeout after 30 seconds",
+    "error_type": "async",
+    "clarity": 3,
+    "complexity": "medium"
+  },
+  "command_chain": [
+    { "index": 0, "command": "/workflow:debug-with-file", "unit": "sequential", "status": "completed" },
+    { "index": 1, "command": "/workflow:test-fix-gen", "unit": "sequential", "status": "in_progress" },
+    { "index": 2, "command": "/workflow:test-cycle-execute", "unit": "sequential", "status": "pending" }
+  ],
+  "current_index": 1,
+  "findings": {
+    "debug": { "root_cause": "...", "confidence": "high" },
+    "test": { "failure_pattern": "..." },
+    "merged": null
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Status Values**:
+- `running`: Debug workflow in progress
+- `completed`: Debug finished, fix applied
+- `failed`: Debug aborted or unfixable
+
+**Mode-Specific Fields**:
+- `cli` mode: No findings field (recommendation-only)
+- `debug`/`test`: Single finding source
+- `bidirectional`: All three findings + merged result
+
+---
+
+## Key Design Principles
+
+1. **Issue-Focused** - Diagnose root cause, not symptoms
+2. **Mode-Driven** - 4 debug strategies for different issues
+3. **Parallel Capability** - Bidirectional mode for complex systems
+4. **Escalation Support** - CLI → debug/test mode progression
+5. **Quick Diagnosis** - CLI mode for immediate recommendations
+6. **TODO Tracking** - Use CCWD prefix to isolate debug todos
+7. **Finding Convergence** - Merge parallel results for consensus
+---
+
+## Usage
+
+```bash
+# Auto-select mode
+/ccw-debug "Login failed: token validation error"
+
+# Explicit mode selection
+/ccw-debug --mode cli "Quick diagnosis: API 500 error"
+/ccw-debug --mode debug "User profile sync intermittent failure"
+/ccw-debug --mode test "Permission check failing"
+/ccw-debug --mode bidirectional "Multi-module auth + cache sync issue"
+
+# Auto mode (skip confirmations)
+/ccw-debug --yes "Production hotfix: database connection timeout"
+
+# Resume or escalate from previous session
+/ccw-debug --mode debug --source-session CCWD-login-timeout-2025-01-27
+```
+
+---
+
+## Mode Selection Decision Tree
+
+```
+User calls: /ccw-debug "issue description"
+
+├─ Keywords: "quick", "fast", "recommendation"
+│  └─ Mode: CLI (2-5 min analysis, optional escalation)
+│
+├─ Keywords: "test", "fail", "coverage"
+│  └─ Mode: Test (automated iteration, ≥95% pass)
+│
+├─ Keywords: "multiple", "system", "distributed"
+│  └─ Mode: Bidirectional (parallel debug + test)
+│
+└─ Default → Debug (full hypothesis-driven workflow)
+```

.claude/commands/ccw-plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,456 @@
+---
+name: ccw-plan
+description: Planning coordinator - analyze requirements, select planning strategy, execute planning workflow in main process
+argument-hint: "[--mode lite|multi-cli|full|plan-verify|replan|cli|issue|rapid-to-issue|brainstorm-with-file|analyze-with-file] [--yes|-y] \"task description\""
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Grep(*), Glob(*)
+---
+
+# CCW-Plan Command - Planning Coordinator
+
+Planning orchestrator: requirement analysis → strategy selection → planning execution.
+
+## Core Concept: Planning Units (规划单元)
+
+**Definition**: Planning commands are grouped into logical units based on verification requirements and collaboration strategies.
+
+**Planning Units**:
+
+| Unit Type | Pattern | Example |
+|-----------|---------|---------|
+| **Quick Planning** | plan-cmd (no verify) | lite-plan |
+| **Verified Planning** | plan-cmd → verify-cmd | plan → plan-verify |
+| **Collaborative Planning** | multi-cli-plan (implicit verify) | multi-cli-plan |
+| **With-File Planning** | brainstorm-with-file or analyze-with-file | brainstorm + plan options |
+| **CLI-Assisted Planning** | ccw cli (analysis) → recommendations | quick analysis + decision |
+| **Issue Workflow Planning** | plan → issue workflow (discover/queue/execute) | rapid-to-issue bridge |
+
+**Atomic Rules**:
+1. Lite mode: No verification (fast iteration)
+2. Plan-verify mode: Mandatory quality gate
+3. Multi-cli/Full mode: Optional verification (via --skip-verify flag)
+4. With-File modes: Self-contained iteration with built-in post-completion options
+5. CLI mode: Quick analysis, user-driven decisions
+6. Issue modes: Planning integrated into issue workflow lifecycle
+
+## Execution Model
+
+**Synchronous (Main Process)**: Planning commands execute via Skill, blocking until complete.
+
+```
+User Input → Analyze Requirements → Select Strategy → [Confirm] → Execute Planning
+                                                                    ↓
+                                                          Skill (blocking)
+                                                                    ↓
+                                                          Update TodoWrite
+                                                                    ↓
+                                                          Generate Artifacts
+```
+
+## 5-Phase Workflow
+
+### Phase 1: Analyze Requirements
+
+**Input** → Extract (goal, scope, constraints) → Assess (complexity, clarity, criticality) → **Analysis**
+
+| Field | Values |
+|-------|--------|
+| complexity | low \| medium \| high |
+| clarity | 0-3 (≥2 = clear) |
+| criticality | normal \| high \| critical |
+| scope | single-module \| cross-module \| system \| batch-issues |
+
+**Output**: `Type: [task_type] | Goal: [goal] | Complexity: [complexity] | Clarity: [clarity]/3 | Criticality: [criticality]`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 1.5: Requirement Clarification (if clarity < 2)
+
+```
+Analysis → Check clarity ≥ 2?
+           ↓
+       YES → Continue to Phase 2
+           ↓
+        NO → Ask Questions → Update Analysis
+```
+
+**Questions Asked**: Goal (Create/Fix/Optimize/Analyze), Scope (Single file/Module/Cross-module/System), Constraints (Backward compat/Skip tests/Urgent hotfix)
+
+---
+
+### Phase 2: Select Planning Strategy & Build Command Chain
+
+```
+Analysis → Detect Mode (keywords) → Build Command Chain → Planning Workflow
+```
+
+#### Mode Detection (Priority Order)
+
+```
+Input Keywords                                              → Mode
+───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+quick|fast|immediate|recommendation|suggest                → cli
+issues?|batch|issue workflow|structured workflow|queue     → issue
+issue transition|rapid.*issue|plan.*issue|convert.*issue   → rapid-to-issue
+brainstorm|ideation|头脑风暴|创意|发散思维|multi-perspective  → brainstorm-with-file
+analyze.*document|explore.*concept|collaborative analysis  → analyze-with-file
+production|critical|payment|auth                           → plan-verify
+adjust|modify|change plan                                  → replan
+uncertain|explore                                          → full
+complex|multiple module|integrate                          → multi-cli
+(default)                                                  → lite
+```
+
+#### Command Chain Mapping
+
+| Mode | Command Chain | Verification | Use Case |
+|------|---------------|--------------|----------|
+| **cli** | ccw cli --mode analysis --rule planning-* | None | Quick planning recommendation |
+| **issue** | /issue:discover → /issue:plan → /issue:queue → /issue:execute | Optional | Batch issue planning & execution |
+| **rapid-to-issue** | lite-plan → /issue:convert-to-plan → queue → execute | Optional | Quick planning → Issue workflow bridge |
+| **brainstorm-with-file** | /workflow:brainstorm-with-file → (plan/issue options) | Self-contained | Multi-perspective ideation |
+| **analyze-with-file** | /workflow:analyze-with-file → (plan/issue options) | Self-contained | Collaborative architecture analysis |
+| **lite** | lite-plan | None | Fast simple planning |
+| **multi-cli** | multi-cli-plan → [plan-verify] | Optional | Multi-model collaborative planning |
+| **full** | brainstorm → plan → [plan-verify] | Optional | Comprehensive brainstorm + planning |
+| **plan-verify** | plan → **plan-verify** | **Mandatory** | Production/critical features |
+| **replan** | replan | None | Plan refinement/adjustment |
+
+**Note**:
+- `[ ]` = optional verification
+- **bold** = mandatory quality gate
+- With-File modes include built-in post-completion options to create plans/issues
+
+**Output**: `Mode: [mode] | Strategy: [strategy] | Commands: [1. /cmd1 2. /cmd2]`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 3: User Confirmation
+
+```
+Planning Chain → Show Strategy → Ask User → User Decision:
+- ✓ Confirm → Continue to Phase 4
+- ⚙ Adjust → Change Mode (back to Phase 2)
+- ✗ Cancel → Abort
+```
+
+---
+
+### Phase 4: Setup TODO Tracking & Status File
+
+```
+Planning Chain → Create Session Dir → Initialize Tracking → Tracking State
+```
+
+**Session Structure**:
+```
+Session ID: CCWP-{goal-slug}-{date}
+Session Dir: .workflow/.ccw-plan/{session_id}/
+
+TodoWrite:
+  CCWP:{mode}: [1/n] /command1  [in_progress]
+  CCWP:{mode}: [2/n] /command2  [pending]
+  ...
+
+status.json:
+  {
+    "session_id": "CCWP-...",
+    "mode": "plan-verify",
+    "status": "running",
+    "command_chain": [...],
+    "quality_gate": "pending"  // plan-verify mode only
+  }
+```
+
+**Output**:
+- TODO: `-> CCWP:plan-verify: [1/2] /workflow:plan | ...`
+- Status File: `.workflow/.ccw-plan/{session_id}/status.json`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 5: Execute Planning Chain
+
+```
+Start Command → Update status (running) → Execute via Skill → Result
+```
+
+#### For Plan-Verify Mode (Quality Gate)
+
+```
+Quality Gate → PASS → Mark completed → Next command
+             ↓ FAIL (plan-verify mode)
+             Ask User → Refine: replan + re-verify
+                     → Override: continue anyway
+                     → Abort: stop planning
+```
+
+#### Error Handling Pattern
+
+```
+Command Error → Update status (failed) → Ask User:
+  - Retry → Re-execute (same index)
+  - Skip → Continue next command
+  - Abort → Stop execution
+```
+
+---
+
+## Planning Pipeline Examples
+
+| Input | Mode | Pipeline | Use Case |
+|-------|------|----------|----------|
+| "Quick: should we use OAuth2?" | cli | ccw cli --mode analysis → recommendation | Immediate planning advice |
+| "Plan user login system" | lite | lite-plan | Fast simple planning |
+| "Implement OAuth2 auth" | multi-cli | multi-cli-plan → [plan-verify] | Multi-model collaborative planning |
+| "Design notification system" | full | brainstorm → plan → [plan-verify] | Comprehensive brainstorm + planning |
+| "Payment processing (prod)" | plan-verify | plan → **plan-verify** | Production critical (mandatory gate) |
+| "头脑风暴: 用户通知系统重新设计" | brainstorm-with-file | brainstorm-with-file → (plan/issue options) | Multi-perspective ideation |
+| "协作分析: 认证架构设计决策" | analyze-with-file | analyze-with-file → (plan/issue options) | Collaborative analysis |
+| "Batch plan: handle 10 pending issues" | issue | /issue:discover → plan → queue → execute | Batch issue planning |
+| "Plan and create issues" | rapid-to-issue | lite-plan → convert-to-plan → queue → execute | Quick plan → Issue workflow |
+| "Update existing plan" | replan | replan | Plan refinement/adjustment |
+
+**Legend**:
+- `[ ]` = optional verification
+- **bold** = mandatory quality gate
+- **With-File modes** include built-in post-completion options to create plans/issues
+
+---
+
+## State Management
+
+### Dual Tracking System
+
+**1. TodoWrite-Based Tracking** (UI Display):
+
+```
+// Plan-verify mode (mandatory quality gate)
+CCWP:plan-verify: [1/2] /workflow:plan          [in_progress]
+CCWP:plan-verify: [2/2] /workflow:plan-verify   [pending]
+
+// CLI mode (quick recommendations)
+CCWP:cli: [1/1] ccw cli --mode analysis         [in_progress]
+
+// Issue mode (batch planning)
+CCWP:issue: [1/4] /issue:discover               [in_progress]
+CCWP:issue: [2/4] /issue:plan                   [pending]
+CCWP:issue: [3/4] /issue:queue                  [pending]
+CCWP:issue: [4/4] /issue:execute                [pending]
+
+// Rapid-to-issue mode (planning → issue bridge)
+CCWP:rapid-to-issue: [1/4] /workflow:lite-plan  [in_progress]
+CCWP:rapid-to-issue: [2/4] /issue:convert-to-plan [pending]
+CCWP:rapid-to-issue: [3/4] /issue:queue         [pending]
+CCWP:rapid-to-issue: [4/4] /issue:execute       [pending]
+
+// Brainstorm-with-file mode (self-contained)
+CCWP:brainstorm-with-file: [1/1] /workflow:brainstorm-with-file [in_progress]
+
+// Analyze-with-file mode (self-contained)
+CCWP:analyze-with-file: [1/1] /workflow:analyze-with-file [in_progress]
+
+// Lite mode (fast simple planning)
+CCWP:lite: [1/1] /workflow:lite-plan            [in_progress]
+
+// Multi-CLI mode (collaborative planning)
+CCWP:multi-cli: [1/1] /workflow:multi-cli-plan  [in_progress]
+
+// Full mode (brainstorm + planning with optional verification)
+CCWP:full: [1/2] /workflow:brainstorm           [in_progress]
+CCWP:full: [2/2] /workflow:plan                 [pending]
+```
+
+**2. Status.json Tracking**: Persistent state for planning monitoring.
+
+**Location**: `.workflow/.ccw-plan/{session_id}/status.json`
+
+**Structure**:
+```json
+{
+  "session_id": "CCWP-oauth-auth-2025-02-02",
+  "mode": "plan-verify",
+  "status": "running|completed|failed",
+  "created_at": "2025-02-02T10:00:00Z",
+  "updated_at": "2025-02-02T10:05:00Z",
+  "analysis": {
+    "goal": "Implement OAuth2 authentication",
+    "complexity": "high",
+    "clarity_score": 2,
+    "criticality": "high"
+  },
+  "command_chain": [
+    { "index": 0, "command": "/workflow:plan", "mandatory": false, "status": "completed" },
+    { "index": 1, "command": "/workflow:plan-verify", "mandatory": true, "status": "running" }
+  ],
+  "current_index": 1,
+  "quality_gate": "pending|PASS|FAIL"
+}
+```
+
+**Status Values**:
+- `running`: Planning in progress
+- `completed`: Planning finished successfully
+- `failed`: Planning aborted or quality gate failed
+
+**Quality Gate Values** (plan-verify mode only):
+- `pending`: Verification not started
+- `PASS`: Plan meets quality standards
+- `FAIL`: Plan needs refinement
+
+**Mode-Specific Fields**:
+- **plan-verify**: `quality_gate` field (pending|PASS|FAIL)
+- **cli**: No command_chain, stores CLI recommendations and user decision
+- **issue**: includes issue discovery results and queue configuration
+- **rapid-to-issue**: includes plan output and conversion to issue
+- **with-file modes**: stores session artifacts and post-completion options
+- **other modes**: basic command_chain tracking
+
+---
+
+## Extended Planning Modes
+
+### CLI-Assisted Planning (cli mode)
+
+```
+Quick Input → ccw cli --mode analysis --rule planning-* → Recommendations → User Decision:
+- ✓ Accept → Create lite-plan from recommendations
+- ↗ Escalate → Switch to multi-cli or full mode
+- ✗ Done → Stop (recommendation only)
+```
+
+**Use Cases**:
+- Quick architecture decision questions
+- Planning approach recommendations
+- Pattern/library selection advice
+
+**CLI Rules** (auto-selected based on context):
+- `planning-plan-architecture-design` - Architecture decisions
+- `planning-breakdown-task-steps` - Task decomposition
+- `planning-design-component-spec` - Component specifications
+
+---
+
+### With-File Planning Workflows
+
+**With-File workflows** provide documented exploration with multi-CLI collaboration, generating comprehensive session artifacts.
+
+| Mode | Purpose | Key Features | Output Folder |
+|------|---------|--------------|---------------|
+| **brainstorm-with-file** | Multi-perspective ideation | Gemini/Codex/Claude perspectives, diverge-converge | `.workflow/.brainstorm/` |
+| **analyze-with-file** | Collaborative architecture analysis | Multi-round Q&A, CLI exploration, documented discussions | `.workflow/.analysis/` |
+
+**Detection Keywords**:
+- **brainstorm-with-file**: 头脑风暴, 创意, 发散思维, multi-perspective, ideation
+- **analyze-with-file**: 协作分析, 深度理解, collaborative analysis, explore concept
+
+**Characteristics**:
+1. **Self-Contained**: Each workflow handles its own iteration loop
+2. **Documented Process**: Creates evolving documents (brainstorm.md, discussion.md)
+3. **Multi-CLI**: Uses Gemini/Codex/Claude for different perspectives
+4. **Built-in Post-Completion**: Offers follow-up options (create plan, create issue, deep dive)
+
+---
+
+### Issue Workflow Integration
+
+| Mode | Purpose | Command Chain | Typical Use |
+|------|---------|---------------|-------------|
+| **issue** | Batch issue planning | discover → plan → queue → execute | Multiple issues in codebase |
+| **rapid-to-issue** | Quick plan → Issue workflow | lite-plan → convert-to-plan → queue → execute | Fast iteration → structured execution |
+
+**Issue Workflow Bridge**:
+```
+lite-plan (in-memory) → /issue:convert-to-plan → Creates issue JSON
+                                                      ↓
+                                        /issue:queue → Form execution queue
+                                                      ↓
+                                        /issue:execute → DAG-based parallel execution
+```
+
+**When to use Issue Workflow**:
+- Need structured multi-stage execution (queue-based)
+- Want parallel DAG execution
+- Multiple related changes as individual commits
+- Converting brainstorm/plan output to executable tasks
+
+---
+
+## Key Design Principles
+
+1. **Planning-Focused** - Pure planning coordination, no execution
+2. **Mode-Driven** - 10 planning modes for different needs (lite/multi-cli/full/plan-verify/replan + cli/issue/rapid-to-issue/brainstorm-with-file/analyze-with-file)
+3. **CLI Integration** - Quick analysis for immediate recommendations
+4. **With-File Support** - Multi-CLI collaboration with documented artifacts
+5. **Issue Workflow Bridge** - Seamless transition from planning to structured execution
+6. **Quality Gates** - Mandatory verification for production features
+7. **Flexible Verification** - Optional for exploration, mandatory for critical features
+8. **Progressive Clarification** - Low clarity triggers requirement questions
+9. **TODO Tracking** - Use CCWP prefix to isolate planning todos
+10. **Handoff Ready** - Generates artifacts ready for execution phase
+
+---
+
+## Usage
+
+```bash
+# Auto-select mode (keyword-based detection)
+/ccw-plan "Add user authentication"
+
+# Standard planning modes
+/ccw-plan --mode lite "Add logout endpoint"
+/ccw-plan --mode multi-cli "Implement OAuth2"
+/ccw-plan --mode full "Design notification system"
+/ccw-plan --mode plan-verify "Payment processing (production)"
+/ccw-plan --mode replan --session WFS-auth-2025-01-28
+
+# CLI-assisted planning (quick recommendations)
+/ccw-plan --mode cli "Quick: should we use OAuth2 or JWT?"
+/ccw-plan --mode cli "Which state management pattern for React app?"
+
+# With-File workflows (multi-CLI collaboration)
+/ccw-plan --mode brainstorm-with-file "头脑风暴: 用户通知系统重新设计"
+/ccw-plan --mode analyze-with-file "协作分析: 认证架构的设计决策"
+
+# Issue workflow integration
+/ccw-plan --mode issue "Batch plan: handle all pending security issues"
+/ccw-plan --mode rapid-to-issue "Plan user profile feature and create issue"
+
+# Auto mode (skip confirmations)
+/ccw-plan --yes "Quick feature: user profile endpoint"
+```
+
+---
+
+## Mode Selection Decision Tree
+
+```
+User calls: /ccw-plan "task description"
+
+├─ Keywords: "quick", "fast", "recommendation"
+│  └─ Mode: CLI (quick analysis → recommendations)
+│
+├─ Keywords: "issue", "batch", "queue"
+│  └─ Mode: Issue (batch planning → execution queue)
+│
+├─ Keywords: "plan.*issue", "rapid.*issue"
+│  └─ Mode: Rapid-to-Issue (lite-plan → issue bridge)
+│
+├─ Keywords: "头脑风暴", "brainstorm", "ideation"
+│  └─ Mode: Brainstorm-with-file (multi-CLI ideation)
+│
+├─ Keywords: "协作分析", "analyze.*document"
+│  └─ Mode: Analyze-with-file (collaborative analysis)
+│
+├─ Keywords: "production", "critical", "payment"
+│  └─ Mode: Plan-Verify (mandatory quality gate)
+│
+├─ Keywords: "adjust", "modify", "change plan"
+│  └─ Mode: Replan (refine existing plan)
+│
+├─ Keywords: "uncertain", "explore"
+│  └─ Mode: Full (brainstorm → plan → [verify])
+│
+├─ Keywords: "complex", "multiple module"
+│  └─ Mode: Multi-CLI (collaborative planning)
+│
+└─ Default → Lite (fast simple planning)
+```

.claude/commands/ccw-test.md

@@ -0,0 +1,387 @@
+---
+name: ccw-test
+description: Test coordinator - analyze testing needs, select test strategy, execute test workflow in main process
+argument-hint: "[--mode gen|fix|verify|tdd] [--yes|-y] \"test description\""
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
+---
+
+# CCW-Test Command - Test Coordinator
+
+Test orchestrator: testing needs analysis → strategy selection → test execution.
+
+## Core Concept: Test Units (测试单元)
+
+**Definition**: Test commands grouped into logical units based on testing objectives.
+
+**Test Units**:
+
+| Unit Type | Pattern | Example |
+|-----------|---------|---------|
+| **Generation Only** | test-gen (no execution) | test-fix-gen |
+| **Test + Fix Cycle** | test-gen → test-execute-fix | test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute |
+| **Verification Only** | existing-tests → execute | execute-tests |
+| **TDD Cycle** | tdd-plan → tdd-execute → verify | Red-Green-Refactor |
+
+**Atomic Rules**:
+1. Gen mode: Generate tests only (no execution)
+2. Fix mode: Generate + auto-iteration until ≥95% pass
+3. Verify mode: Execute existing tests + report
+4. TDD mode: Full Red-Green-Refactor cycle compliance
+
+## Execution Model
+
+**Synchronous (Main Process)**: Test commands execute via Skill, blocking until complete.
+
+```
+User Input → Analyze Testing Needs → Select Strategy → [Confirm] → Execute Tests
+                                                                     ↓
+                                                           Skill (blocking)
+                                                                     ↓
+                                                           Update TodoWrite
+                                                                     ↓
+                                                           Generate Tests/Results
+```
+
+## 5-Phase Workflow
+
+### Phase 1: Analyze Testing Needs
+
+**Input** → Extract (description, target_module, existing_tests) → Assess (testing_goal, framework, coverage_target) → **Analysis**
+
+| Field | Values |
+|-------|--------|
+| testing_goal | generate \| fix \| verify \| tdd |
+| framework | jest \| vitest \| pytest \| ... |
+| coverage_target | 0-100 (default: 80) |
+| existing_tests | true \| false |
+
+#### Mode Detection (Priority Order)
+
+```
+Input Keywords                                  → Mode
+─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+generate|create|write test|need test           → gen
+fix|repair|failing|broken                      → fix
+verify|validate|check|run test                 → verify
+tdd|test-driven|test first                     → tdd
+(default)                                      → fix
+```
+
+**Output**: `TestingGoal: [goal] | Mode: [mode] | Target: [module] | Framework: [framework]`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 1.5: Testing Clarification (if needed)
+
+```
+Analysis → Check testing_goal known?
+           ↓
+       YES → Check target_module set?
+           ↓
+       YES → Continue to Phase 2
+           ↓
+        NO → Ask Questions → Update Analysis
+```
+
+**Questions Asked**: Testing Goal, Target Module/Files, Coverage Requirements, Test Framework
+
+---
+
+### Phase 2: Select Test Strategy & Build Command Chain
+
+```
+Analysis → Detect Mode (keywords) → Build Command Chain → Test Workflow
+```
+
+#### Command Chain Mapping
+
+| Mode | Command Chain | Behavior |
+|------|---------------|----------|
+| **gen** | test-fix-gen | Generate only, no execution |
+| **fix** | test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute (iterate) | Auto-iteration until ≥95% pass or max iterations |
+| **verify** | execute-existing-tests → coverage-report | Execute + report only |
+| **tdd** | tdd-plan → execute → tdd-verify | Red-Green-Refactor cycle compliance |
+
+**Note**: `(iterate)` = auto-iteration until pass_rate ≥ 95% or max_iterations reached
+
+**Output**: `Mode: [mode] | Strategy: [strategy] | Commands: [1. /cmd1 2. /cmd2]`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 3: User Confirmation
+
+```
+Test Chain → Show Strategy → Ask User → User Decision:
+- ✓ Confirm → Continue to Phase 4
+- ⚙ Change Mode → Select Different Mode (back to Phase 2)
+- ✗ Cancel → Abort
+```
+
+---
+
+### Phase 4: Setup TODO Tracking & Status File
+
+```
+Test Chain → Create Session Dir → Initialize Tracking → Tracking State
+```
+
+**Session Structure**:
+```
+Session ID: CCWT-{target-module-slug}-{date}
+Session Dir: .workflow/.ccw-test/{session_id}/
+
+TodoWrite:
+  CCWT:{mode}: [1/n] /command1  [in_progress]
+  CCWT:{mode}: [2/n] /command2  [pending]
+  ...
+
+status.json:
+  {
+    "session_id": "CCWT-...",
+    "mode": "gen|fix|verify|tdd",
+    "status": "running",
+    "testing": { description, target_module, framework, coverage_target },
+    "command_chain": [...],
+    "test_metrics": { total_tests, passed, failed, pass_rate, iteration_count, coverage }
+  }
+```
+
+**Output**:
+- TODO: `-> CCWT:fix: [1/2] /workflow:test-fix-gen | CCWT:fix: [2/2] /workflow:test-cycle-execute`
+- Status File: `.workflow/.ccw-test/{session_id}/status.json`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 5: Execute Test Chain
+
+#### For All Modes (Sequential Execution)
+
+```
+Start Command → Update status (running) → Execute via Skill → Result
+                                                   ↓
+                         Update test_metrics → Next Command
+                                                   ↓
+                         Error? → YES → Ask Action (Retry/Skip/Abort)
+                               → NO → Continue
+```
+
+#### For Fix Mode (Auto-Iteration)
+
+```
+test-fix-gen completes → test-cycle-execute begins
+                              ↓
+                         Check pass_rate ≥ 95%?
+                         ↓                    ↓
+                       YES → Complete    NO → Check iteration < max?
+                                         ↓                      ↓
+                                       YES → Iteration      NO → Complete
+                                         |   (analyze failures
+                                         |    generate fix
+                                         |    re-execute tests)
+                                         |
+                                         └→ Loop back to pass_rate check
+```
+
+#### Error Handling Pattern
+
+```
+Command Error → Update status (failed) → Ask User:
+  - Retry → Re-execute (same index)
+  - Skip → Continue next command
+  - Abort → Stop execution
+```
+
+#### Test Metrics Update
+
+```
+After Each Execution → Collect test_metrics:
+  - total_tests: number
+  - passed/failed: count
+  - pass_rate: percentage
+  - iteration_count: increment (fix mode)
+  - coverage: line/branch/function
+       ↓
+Update status.json → Update TODO with iteration info (if fix mode)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Execution Flow Summary
+
+```
+User Input
+    |
+Phase 1: Analyze Testing Needs
+    |-- Extract: description, testing_goal, target_module, existing_tests
+    +-- If unclear -> Phase 1.5: Clarify Testing Needs
+    |
+Phase 2: Select Test Strategy & Build Chain
+    |-- Detect mode: gen | fix | verify | tdd
+    |-- Build command chain based on mode
+    +-- Configure iteration limits (fix mode)
+    |
+Phase 3: User Confirmation (optional)
+    |-- Show test strategy
+    +-- Allow mode change
+    |
+Phase 4: Setup TODO Tracking & Status File
+    |-- Create todos with CCWT prefix
+    +-- Initialize .workflow/.ccw-test/{session_id}/status.json
+    |
+Phase 5: Execute Test Chain
+    |-- For each command:
+    |   |-- Update status.json (current=running)
+    |   |-- Execute via Skill
+    |   |-- Test-fix cycle: iterate until ≥95% pass or max iterations
+    |   |-- Update test_metrics in status.json
+    |   +-- Update TODO status
+    +-- Mark status.json as completed
+```
+
+---
+
+## Test Pipeline Examples
+
+| Input | Mode | Pipeline | Iteration |
+|-------|------|----------|-----------|
+| "Generate tests for auth module" | gen | test-fix-gen | No execution |
+| "Fix failing authentication tests" | fix | test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute (iterate) | Max 3 iterations |
+| "Run existing test suite" | verify | execute-tests → coverage-report | One-time |
+| "Implement user profile with TDD" | tdd | tdd-plan → execute → tdd-verify | Red-Green-Refactor |
+
+**Legend**: `(iterate)` = auto-iteration until ≥95% pass rate
+
+---
+
+## State Management
+
+### Dual Tracking System
+
+**1. TodoWrite-Based Tracking** (UI Display):
+
+```
+// Initial state (fix mode)
+CCWT:fix: [1/2] /workflow:test-fix-gen           [in_progress]
+CCWT:fix: [2/2] /workflow:test-cycle-execute     [pending]
+
+// During iteration (fix mode, iteration 2/3)
+CCWT:fix: [1/2] /workflow:test-fix-gen           [completed]
+CCWT:fix: [2/2] /workflow:test-cycle-execute     [in_progress] (iteration 2/3, pass rate: 78%)
+
+// Gen mode (no execution)
+CCWT:gen: [1/1] /workflow:test-fix-gen           [in_progress]
+
+// Verify mode (one-time)
+CCWT:verify: [1/2] execute-existing-tests        [in_progress]
+CCWT:verify: [2/2] generate-coverage-report      [pending]
+
+// TDD mode (Red-Green-Refactor)
+CCWT:tdd: [1/3] /workflow:tdd-plan               [in_progress]
+CCWT:tdd: [2/3] /workflow:execute                [pending]
+CCWT:tdd: [3/3] /workflow:tdd-verify             [pending]
+```
+
+**2. Status.json Tracking**: Persistent state for test monitoring.
+
+**Location**: `.workflow/.ccw-test/{session_id}/status.json`
+
+**Structure**:
+```json
+{
+  "session_id": "CCWT-auth-module-2025-02-02",
+  "mode": "fix",
+  "status": "running|completed|failed",
+  "created_at": "2025-02-02T10:00:00Z",
+  "updated_at": "2025-02-02T10:05:00Z",
+  "testing": {
+    "description": "Fix failing authentication tests",
+    "target_module": "src/auth/**/*.ts",
+    "framework": "jest",
+    "coverage_target": 80
+  },
+  "command_chain": [
+    { "index": 0, "command": "/workflow:test-fix-gen", "unit": "sequential", "status": "completed" },
+    { "index": 1, "command": "/workflow:test-cycle-execute", "unit": "test-fix-cycle", "max_iterations": 3, "status": "in_progress" }
+  ],
+  "current_index": 1,
+  "test_metrics": {
+    "total_tests": 42,
+    "passed": 38,
+    "failed": 4,
+    "pass_rate": 90.5,
+    "iteration_count": 2,
+    "coverage": {
+      "line": 82.3,
+      "branch": 75.6,
+      "function": 88.1
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Status Values**:
+- `running`: Test workflow in progress
+- `completed`: Tests passing (≥95%) or generation complete
+- `failed`: Test workflow aborted
+
+**Test Metrics** (updated during execution):
+- `total_tests`: Number of tests executed
+- `pass_rate`: Percentage of passing tests (target: ≥95%)
+- `iteration_count`: Number of test-fix iterations (fix mode)
+- `coverage`: Line/branch/function coverage percentages
+
+---
+
+## Key Design Principles
+
+1. **Testing-Focused** - Pure test coordination, no implementation
+2. **Mode-Driven** - 4 test strategies for different needs
+3. **Auto-Iteration** - Fix mode iterates until ≥95% pass rate
+4. **Metrics Tracking** - Real-time test metrics in status.json
+5. **Coverage-Driven** - Coverage targets guide test generation
+6. **TODO Tracking** - Use CCWT prefix to isolate test todos
+7. **TDD Compliance** - TDD mode enforces Red-Green-Refactor cycle
+
+---
+
+## Usage
+
+```bash
+# Auto-select mode
+/ccw-test "Test user authentication module"
+
+# Explicit mode selection
+/ccw-test --mode gen "Generate tests for payment module"
+/ccw-test --mode fix "Fix failing authentication tests"
+/ccw-test --mode verify "Validate current test suite"
+/ccw-test --mode tdd "Implement user profile with TDD"
+
+# Custom configuration
+/ccw-test --mode fix --max-iterations 5 --pass-threshold 98 "Fix all tests"
+/ccw-test --target "src/auth/**/*.ts" "Test authentication module"
+
+# Auto mode (skip confirmations)
+/ccw-test --yes "Quick test validation"
+```
+
+---
+
+## Mode Selection Decision Tree
+
+```
+User calls: /ccw-test "test description"
+
+├─ Keywords: "generate", "create", "write test"
+│  └─ Mode: Gen (generate only, no execution)
+│
+├─ Keywords: "fix", "repair", "failing"
+│  └─ Mode: Fix (auto-iterate until ≥95% pass)
+│
+├─ Keywords: "verify", "validate", "run test"
+│  └─ Mode: Verify (execute existing tests)
+│
+├─ Keywords: "tdd", "test-driven", "test first"
+│  └─ Mode: TDD (Red-Green-Refactor cycle)
+│
+└─ Default → Fix (most common: fix failing tests)
+```

.claude/commands/ccw.md

@@ -0,0 +1,666 @@
+---
+name: ccw
+description: Main workflow orchestrator - analyze intent, select workflow, execute command chain in main process
+argument-hint: "\"task description\""
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Grep(*), Glob(*)
+---
+
+# CCW Command - Main Workflow Orchestrator
+
+Main process orchestrator: intent analysis → workflow selection → command chain execution.
+
+## Core Concept: Minimum Execution Units (最小执行单元)
+
+**Definition**: A set of commands that must execute together as an atomic group to achieve a meaningful workflow milestone.
+
+**Why This Matters**:
+- **Prevents Incomplete States**: Avoid stopping after task generation without execution
+- **User Experience**: User gets complete results, not intermediate artifacts requiring manual follow-up
+- **Workflow Integrity**: Maintains logical coherence of multi-step operations
+
+**Key Units in CCW**:
+
+| Unit Type | Pattern | Example |
+|-----------|---------|---------|
+| **Planning + Execution** | plan-cmd → execute-cmd | lite-plan → lite-execute |
+| **Testing** | test-gen-cmd → test-exec-cmd | test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute |
+| **Review** | review-cmd → fix-cmd | review-session-cycle → review-cycle-fix |
+
+**Atomic Rules**:
+1. CCW automatically groups commands into minimum units - never splits them
+2. Pipeline visualization shows units with `【 】` markers
+3. Error handling preserves unit boundaries (retry/skip affects whole unit)
+
+## Execution Model
+
+**Synchronous (Main Process)**: Commands execute via Skill in main process, blocking until complete.
+
+```
+User Input → Analyze Intent → Select Workflow → [Confirm] → Execute Chain
+                                                              ↓
+                                                    Skill (blocking)
+                                                              ↓
+                                                    Update TodoWrite
+                                                              ↓
+                                                    Next Command...
+```
+
+**vs ccw-coordinator**: External CLI execution with background tasks and hook callbacks.
+
+## 5-Phase Workflow
+
+### Phase 1: Analyze Intent
+
+```javascript
+function analyzeIntent(input) {
+  return {
+    goal: extractGoal(input),
+    scope: extractScope(input),
+    constraints: extractConstraints(input),
+    task_type: detectTaskType(input),       // bugfix|feature|tdd|review|exploration|...
+    complexity: assessComplexity(input),    // low|medium|high
+    clarity_score: calculateClarity(input)  // 0-3 (>=2 = clear)
+  };
+}
+
+// Task type detection (priority order)
+function detectTaskType(text) {
+  const patterns = {
+    'bugfix-hotfix': /urgent|production|critical/ && /fix|bug/,
+    // With-File workflows (documented exploration with multi-CLI collaboration)
+    'brainstorm': /brainstorm|ideation|头脑风暴|创意|发散思维|creative thinking|multi-perspective.*think|compare perspectives|探索.*可能/,
+    'brainstorm-to-issue': /brainstorm.*issue|头脑风暴.*issue|idea.*issue|想法.*issue|从.*头脑风暴|convert.*brainstorm/,
+    'debug-file': /debug.*document|hypothesis.*debug|troubleshoot.*track|investigate.*log|调试.*记录|假设.*验证|systematic debug|深度调试/,
+    'analyze-file': /analyze.*document|explore.*concept|understand.*architecture|investigate.*discuss|collaborative analysis|分析.*讨论|深度.*理解|协作.*分析/,
+    // Standard workflows
+    'bugfix': /fix|bug|error|crash|fail|debug/,
+    'issue-batch': /issues?|batch/ && /fix|resolve/,
+    'issue-transition': /issue workflow|structured workflow|queue|multi-stage/,
+    'exploration': /uncertain|explore|research|what if/,
+    'quick-task': /quick|simple|small/ && /feature|function/,
+    'ui-design': /ui|design|component|style/,
+    'tdd': /tdd|test-driven|test first/,
+    'test-fix': /test fail|fix test|failing test/,
+    'review': /review|code review/,
+    'documentation': /docs|documentation|readme/
+  };
+  for (const [type, pattern] of Object.entries(patterns)) {
+    if (pattern.test(text)) return type;
+  }
+  return 'feature';
+}
+```
+
+**Output**: `Type: [task_type] | Goal: [goal] | Complexity: [complexity] | Clarity: [clarity_score]/3`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 1.5: Requirement Clarification (if clarity_score < 2)
+
+```javascript
+async function clarifyRequirements(analysis) {
+  if (analysis.clarity_score >= 2) return analysis;
+
+  const questions = generateClarificationQuestions(analysis);  // Goal, Scope, Constraints
+  const answers = await AskUserQuestion({ questions });
+  return updateAnalysis(analysis, answers);
+}
+```
+
+**Questions**: Goal (Create/Fix/Optimize/Analyze), Scope (Single file/Module/Cross-module/System), Constraints (Backward compat/Skip tests/Urgent hotfix)
+
+---
+
+### Phase 2: Select Workflow & Build Command Chain
+
+```javascript
+function selectWorkflow(analysis) {
+  const levelMap = {
+    'bugfix-hotfix':     { level: 2, flow: 'bugfix.hotfix' },
+    // With-File workflows (documented exploration with multi-CLI collaboration)
+    'brainstorm':        { level: 4, flow: 'brainstorm-with-file' },   // Multi-perspective ideation
+    'brainstorm-to-issue': { level: 4, flow: 'brainstorm-to-issue' }, // Brainstorm → Issue workflow
+    'debug-file':        { level: 3, flow: 'debug-with-file' },         // Hypothesis-driven debugging
+    'analyze-file':      { level: 3, flow: 'analyze-with-file' },       // Collaborative analysis
+    // Standard workflows
+    'bugfix':            { level: 2, flow: 'bugfix.standard' },
+    'issue-batch':       { level: 'Issue', flow: 'issue' },
+    'issue-transition':  { level: 2.5, flow: 'rapid-to-issue' },  // Bridge workflow
+    'exploration':       { level: 4, flow: 'full' },
+    'quick-task':        { level: 1, flow: 'lite-lite-lite' },
+    'ui-design':         { level: analysis.complexity === 'high' ? 4 : 3, flow: 'ui' },
+    'tdd':               { level: 3, flow: 'tdd' },
+    'test-fix':          { level: 3, flow: 'test-fix-gen' },
+    'review':            { level: 3, flow: 'review-cycle-fix' },
+    'documentation':     { level: 2, flow: 'docs' },
+    'feature':           { level: analysis.complexity === 'high' ? 3 : 2, flow: analysis.complexity === 'high' ? 'coupled' : 'rapid' }
+  };
+
+  const selected = levelMap[analysis.task_type] || levelMap['feature'];
+  return buildCommandChain(selected, analysis);
+}
+
+// Build command chain (port-based matching with Minimum Execution Units)
+function buildCommandChain(workflow, analysis) {
+  const chains = {
+    // Level 1 - Rapid
+    'lite-lite-lite': [
+      { cmd: '/workflow:lite-lite-lite', args: `"${analysis.goal}"` }
+    ],
+
+    // Level 2 - Lightweight
+    'rapid': [
+      // Unit: Quick Implementation【lite-plan → lite-execute】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:lite-plan', args: `"${analysis.goal}"`, unit: 'quick-impl' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:lite-execute', args: '--in-memory', unit: 'quick-impl' },
+      // Unit: Test Validation【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】
+      ...(analysis.constraints?.includes('skip-tests') ? [] : [
+        { cmd: '/workflow:test-fix-gen', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' },
+        { cmd: '/workflow:test-cycle-execute', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' }
+      ])
+    ],
+
+    // Level 2 Bridge - Lightweight to Issue Workflow
+    'rapid-to-issue': [
+      // Unit: Quick Implementation【lite-plan → convert-to-plan】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:lite-plan', args: `"${analysis.goal}"`, unit: 'quick-impl-to-issue' },
+      { cmd: '/issue:convert-to-plan', args: '--latest-lite-plan -y', unit: 'quick-impl-to-issue' },
+      // Auto-continue to issue workflow
+      { cmd: '/issue:queue', args: '' },
+      { cmd: '/issue:execute', args: '--queue auto' }
+    ],
+
+    'bugfix.standard': [
+      // Unit: Bug Fix【lite-fix → lite-execute】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:lite-fix', args: `"${analysis.goal}"`, unit: 'bug-fix' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:lite-execute', args: '--in-memory', unit: 'bug-fix' },
+      // Unit: Test Validation【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】
+      ...(analysis.constraints?.includes('skip-tests') ? [] : [
+        { cmd: '/workflow:test-fix-gen', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' },
+        { cmd: '/workflow:test-cycle-execute', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' }
+      ])
+    ],
+
+    'bugfix.hotfix': [
+      { cmd: '/workflow:lite-fix', args: `--hotfix "${analysis.goal}"` }
+    ],
+
+    'multi-cli-plan': [
+      // Unit: Multi-CLI Planning【multi-cli-plan → lite-execute】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:multi-cli-plan', args: `"${analysis.goal}"`, unit: 'multi-cli' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:lite-execute', args: '--in-memory', unit: 'multi-cli' },
+      // Unit: Test Validation【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】
+      ...(analysis.constraints?.includes('skip-tests') ? [] : [
+        { cmd: '/workflow:test-fix-gen', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' },
+        { cmd: '/workflow:test-cycle-execute', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' }
+      ])
+    ],
+
+    'docs': [
+      // Unit: Quick Implementation【lite-plan → lite-execute】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:lite-plan', args: `"${analysis.goal}"`, unit: 'quick-impl' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:lite-execute', args: '--in-memory', unit: 'quick-impl' }
+    ],
+
+    // With-File workflows (documented exploration with multi-CLI collaboration)
+    'brainstorm-with-file': [
+      { cmd: '/workflow:brainstorm-with-file', args: `"${analysis.goal}"` }
+      // Note: Has built-in post-completion options (create plan, create issue, deep analysis)
+    ],
+
+    // Brainstorm-to-Issue workflow (bridge from brainstorm to issue execution)
+    'brainstorm-to-issue': [
+      // Note: Assumes brainstorm session already exists, or run brainstorm first
+      { cmd: '/issue:from-brainstorm', args: `SESSION="${extractBrainstormSession(analysis)}" --auto` },
+      { cmd: '/issue:queue', args: '' },
+      { cmd: '/issue:execute', args: '--queue auto' }
+    ],
+
+    'debug-with-file': [
+      { cmd: '/workflow:debug-with-file', args: `"${analysis.goal}"` }
+      // Note: Self-contained with hypothesis-driven iteration and Gemini validation
+    ],
+
+    'analyze-with-file': [
+      { cmd: '/workflow:analyze-with-file', args: `"${analysis.goal}"` }
+      // Note: Self-contained with multi-round discussion and CLI exploration
+    ],
+
+    // Level 3 - Standard
+    'coupled': [
+      // Unit: Verified Planning【plan → plan-verify】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:plan', args: `"${analysis.goal}"`, unit: 'verified-planning' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:plan-verify', args: '', unit: 'verified-planning' },
+      // Execution
+      { cmd: '/workflow:execute', args: '' },
+      // Unit: Code Review【review-session-cycle → review-cycle-fix】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:review-session-cycle', args: '', unit: 'code-review' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:review-cycle-fix', args: '', unit: 'code-review' },
+      // Unit: Test Validation【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】
+      ...(analysis.constraints?.includes('skip-tests') ? [] : [
+        { cmd: '/workflow:test-fix-gen', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' },
+        { cmd: '/workflow:test-cycle-execute', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' }
+      ])
+    ],
+
+    'tdd': [
+      // Unit: TDD Planning + Execution【tdd-plan → execute】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:tdd-plan', args: `"${analysis.goal}"`, unit: 'tdd-planning' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:execute', args: '', unit: 'tdd-planning' },
+      // TDD Verification
+      { cmd: '/workflow:tdd-verify', args: '' }
+    ],
+
+    'test-fix-gen': [
+      // Unit: Test Validation【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:test-fix-gen', args: `"${analysis.goal}"`, unit: 'test-validation' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:test-cycle-execute', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' }
+    ],
+
+    'review-cycle-fix': [
+      // Unit: Code Review【review-session-cycle → review-cycle-fix】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:review-session-cycle', args: '', unit: 'code-review' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:review-cycle-fix', args: '', unit: 'code-review' },
+      // Unit: Test Validation【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:test-fix-gen', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:test-cycle-execute', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' }
+    ],
+
+    'ui': [
+      { cmd: '/workflow:ui-design:explore-auto', args: `"${analysis.goal}"` },
+      // Unit: Planning + Execution【plan → execute】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:plan', args: '', unit: 'plan-execute' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:execute', args: '', unit: 'plan-execute' }
+    ],
+
+    // Level 4 - Brainstorm
+    'full': [
+      { cmd: '/workflow:brainstorm:auto-parallel', args: `"${analysis.goal}"` },
+      // Unit: Verified Planning【plan → plan-verify】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:plan', args: '', unit: 'verified-planning' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:plan-verify', args: '', unit: 'verified-planning' },
+      // Execution
+      { cmd: '/workflow:execute', args: '' },
+      // Unit: Test Validation【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:test-fix-gen', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:test-cycle-execute', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' }
+    ],
+
+    // Issue Workflow
+    'issue': [
+      { cmd: '/issue:discover', args: '' },
+      { cmd: '/issue:plan', args: '--all-pending' },
+      { cmd: '/issue:queue', args: '' },
+      { cmd: '/issue:execute', args: '' }
+    ]
+  };
+
+  return chains[workflow.flow] || chains['rapid'];
+}
+```
+
+**Output**: `Level [X] - [flow] | Pipeline: [...] | Commands: [1. /cmd1 2. /cmd2 ...]`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 3: User Confirmation
+
+```javascript
+async function getUserConfirmation(chain) {
+  const response = await AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Execute this command chain?",
+      header: "Confirm",
+      options: [
+        { label: "Confirm", description: "Start" },
+        { label: "Adjust", description: "Modify" },
+        { label: "Cancel", description: "Abort" }
+      ]
+    }]
+  });
+
+  if (response.error === "Cancel") throw new Error("Cancelled");
+  if (response.error === "Adjust") return await adjustChain(chain);
+  return chain;
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+### Phase 4: Setup TODO Tracking & Status File
+
+```javascript
+function setupTodoTracking(chain, workflow, analysis) {
+  const sessionId = `ccw-${Date.now()}`;
+  const stateDir = `.workflow/.ccw/${sessionId}`;
+  Bash(`mkdir -p "${stateDir}"`);
+
+  const todos = chain.map((step, i) => ({
+    content: `CCW:${workflow}: [${i + 1}/${chain.length}] ${step.cmd}`,
+    status: i === 0 ? 'in_progress' : 'pending',
+    activeForm: `Executing ${step.cmd}`
+  }));
+  TodoWrite({ todos });
+
+  // Initialize status.json for hook tracking
+  const state = {
+    session_id: sessionId,
+    workflow: workflow,
+    status: 'running',
+    created_at: new Date().toISOString(),
+    updated_at: new Date().toISOString(),
+    analysis: analysis,
+    command_chain: chain.map((step, idx) => ({
+      index: idx,
+      command: step.cmd,
+      status: idx === 0 ? 'running' : 'pending'
+    })),
+    current_index: 0
+  };
+
+  Write(`${stateDir}/status.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
+
+  return { sessionId, stateDir, state };
+}
+```
+
+**Output**:
+- TODO: `-> CCW:rapid: [1/3] /workflow:lite-plan | CCW:rapid: [2/3] /workflow:lite-execute | ...`
+- Status File: `.workflow/.ccw/{session_id}/status.json`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 5: Execute Command Chain
+
+```javascript
+async function executeCommandChain(chain, workflow, trackingState) {
+  let previousResult = null;
+  const { sessionId, stateDir, state } = trackingState;
+
+  for (let i = 0; i < chain.length; i++) {
+    try {
+      // Update status: mark current as running
+      state.command_chain[i].status = 'running';
+      state.current_index = i;
+      state.updated_at = new Date().toISOString();
+      Write(`${stateDir}/status.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
+
+      const fullCommand = assembleCommand(chain[i], previousResult);
+      const result = await Skill({ skill: fullCommand });
+
+      previousResult = { ...result, success: true };
+
+      // Update status: mark current as completed, next as running
+      state.command_chain[i].status = 'completed';
+      if (i + 1 < chain.length) {
+        state.command_chain[i + 1].status = 'running';
+      }
+      state.updated_at = new Date().toISOString();
+      Write(`${stateDir}/status.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
+
+      updateTodoStatus(i, chain.length, workflow, 'completed');
+
+    } catch (error) {
+      // Update status on error
+      state.command_chain[i].status = 'failed';
+      state.status = 'error';
+      state.updated_at = new Date().toISOString();
+      Write(`${stateDir}/status.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
+
+      const action = await handleError(chain[i], error, i);
+      if (action === 'retry') {
+        state.command_chain[i].status = 'pending';
+        state.status = 'running';
+        i--;  // Retry
+      } else if (action === 'abort') {
+        state.status = 'failed';
+        Write(`${stateDir}/status.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
+        return { success: false, error: error.message };
+      }
+      // 'skip' - continue
+      state.status = 'running';
+    }
+  }
+
+  // Mark workflow as completed
+  state.status = 'completed';
+  state.updated_at = new Date().toISOString();
+  Write(`${stateDir}/status.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
+
+  return { success: true, completed: chain.length, sessionId };
+}
+
+// Assemble full command with session/plan parameters
+function assembleCommand(step, previousResult) {
+  let command = step.cmd;
+  if (step.args) {
+    command += ` ${step.args}`;
+  } else if (previousResult?.session_id) {
+    command += ` --session="${previousResult.session_id}"`;
+  }
+  return command;
+}
+
+// Update TODO: mark current as complete, next as in-progress
+function updateTodoStatus(index, total, workflow, status) {
+  const todos = getAllCurrentTodos();
+  const updated = todos.map(todo => {
+    if (todo.content.startsWith(`CCW:${workflow}:`)) {
+      const stepNum = extractStepIndex(todo.content);
+      if (stepNum === index + 1) return { ...todo, status };
+      if (stepNum === index + 2 && status === 'completed') return { ...todo, status: 'in_progress' };
+    }
+    return todo;
+  });
+  TodoWrite({ todos: updated });
+}
+
+// Error handling: Retry/Skip/Abort
+async function handleError(step, error, index) {
+  const response = await AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: `${step.cmd} failed: ${error.message}`,
+      header: "Error",
+      options: [
+        { label: "Retry", description: "Re-execute" },
+        { label: "Skip", description: "Continue next" },
+        { label: "Abort", description: "Stop" }
+      ]
+    }]
+  });
+  return { Retry: 'retry', Skip: 'skip', Abort: 'abort' }[response.Error] || 'abort';
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Execution Flow Summary
+
+```
+User Input
+    |
+Phase 1: Analyze Intent
+    |-- Extract: goal, scope, constraints, task_type, complexity, clarity
+    +-- If clarity < 2 -> Phase 1.5: Clarify Requirements
+    |
+Phase 2: Select Workflow & Build Chain
+    |-- Map task_type -> Level (1/2/3/4/Issue)
+    |-- Select flow based on complexity
+    +-- Build command chain (port-based)
+    |
+Phase 3: User Confirmation (optional)
+    |-- Show pipeline visualization
+    +-- Allow adjustment
+    |
+Phase 4: Setup TODO Tracking & Status File
+    |-- Create todos with CCW prefix
+    +-- Initialize .workflow/.ccw/{session_id}/status.json
+    |
+Phase 5: Execute Command Chain
+    |-- For each command:
+    |   |-- Update status.json (current=running)
+    |   |-- Assemble full command
+    |   |-- Execute via Skill
+    |   |-- Update status.json (current=completed, next=running)
+    |   |-- Update TODO status
+    |   +-- Handle errors (retry/skip/abort)
+    +-- Mark status.json as completed
+```
+
+---
+
+## Pipeline Examples (with Minimum Execution Units)
+
+**Note**: `【 】` marks Minimum Execution Units - commands execute together as atomic groups.
+
+| Input | Type | Level | Pipeline (with Units) |
+|-------|------|-------|-----------------------|
+| "Add API endpoint" | feature (low) | 2 |【lite-plan → lite-execute】→【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】|
+| "Fix login timeout" | bugfix | 2 |【lite-fix → lite-execute】→【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】|
+| "Use issue workflow" | issue-transition | 2.5 |【lite-plan → convert-to-plan】→ queue → execute |
+| "头脑风暴: 通知系统重构" | brainstorm | 4 | brainstorm-with-file → (built-in post-completion) |
+| "从头脑风暴创建 issue" | brainstorm-to-issue | 4 | from-brainstorm → queue → execute |
+| "深度调试 WebSocket 连接断开" | debug-file | 3 | debug-with-file → (hypothesis iteration) |
+| "协作分析: 认证架构优化" | analyze-file | 3 | analyze-with-file → (multi-round discussion) |
+| "OAuth2 system" | feature (high) | 3 |【plan → plan-verify】→ execute →【review-session-cycle → review-cycle-fix】→【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】|
+| "Implement with TDD" | tdd | 3 |【tdd-plan → execute】→ tdd-verify |
+| "Uncertain: real-time arch" | exploration | 4 | brainstorm:auto-parallel →【plan → plan-verify】→ execute →【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】|
+
+---
+
+## Key Design Principles
+
+1. **Main Process Execution** - Use Skill in main process, no external CLI
+2. **Intent-Driven** - Auto-select workflow based on task intent
+3. **Port-Based Chaining** - Build command chain using port matching
+4. **Minimum Execution Units** - Commands grouped into atomic units, never split (e.g., lite-plan → lite-execute)
+5. **Progressive Clarification** - Low clarity triggers clarification phase
+6. **TODO Tracking** - Use CCW prefix to isolate workflow todos
+7. **Unit-Aware Error Handling** - Retry/skip/abort affects whole unit, not individual commands
+8. **User Control** - Optional user confirmation at each phase
+
+---
+
+## State Management
+
+### Dual Tracking System
+
+**1. TodoWrite-Based Tracking** (UI Display): All execution state tracked via TodoWrite with `CCW:` prefix.
+
+```javascript
+// Initial state
+todos = [
+  { content: "CCW:rapid: [1/3] /workflow:lite-plan", status: "in_progress" },
+  { content: "CCW:rapid: [2/3] /workflow:lite-execute", status: "pending" },
+  { content: "CCW:rapid: [3/3] /workflow:test-cycle-execute", status: "pending" }
+];
+
+// After command 1 completes
+todos = [
+  { content: "CCW:rapid: [1/3] /workflow:lite-plan", status: "completed" },
+  { content: "CCW:rapid: [2/3] /workflow:lite-execute", status: "in_progress" },
+  { content: "CCW:rapid: [3/3] /workflow:test-cycle-execute", status: "pending" }
+];
+```
+
+**2. Status.json Tracking**: Persistent state file for workflow monitoring.
+
+**Location**: `.workflow/.ccw/{session_id}/status.json`
+
+**Structure**:
+```json
+{
+  "session_id": "ccw-1706123456789",
+  "workflow": "rapid",
+  "status": "running|completed|failed|error",
+  "created_at": "2025-02-01T10:30:00Z",
+  "updated_at": "2025-02-01T10:35:00Z",
+  "analysis": {
+    "goal": "Add user authentication",
+    "scope": ["auth"],
+    "constraints": [],
+    "task_type": "feature",
+    "complexity": "medium"
+  },
+  "command_chain": [
+    {
+      "index": 0,
+      "command": "/workflow:lite-plan",
+      "status": "completed"
+    },
+    {
+      "index": 1,
+      "command": "/workflow:lite-execute",
+      "status": "running"
+    },
+    {
+      "index": 2,
+      "command": "/workflow:test-cycle-execute",
+      "status": "pending"
+    }
+  ],
+  "current_index": 1
+}
+```
+
+**Status Values**:
+- `running`: Workflow executing commands
+- `completed`: All commands finished
+- `failed`: User aborted or unrecoverable error
+- `error`: Command execution failed (during error handling)
+
+**Command Status Values**:
+- `pending`: Not started
+- `running`: Currently executing
+- `completed`: Successfully finished
+- `failed`: Execution failed
+
+---
+
+## With-File Workflows
+
+**With-File workflows** provide documented exploration with multi-CLI collaboration. They are self-contained and generate comprehensive session artifacts.
+
+| Workflow | Purpose | Key Features | Output Folder |
+|----------|---------|--------------|---------------|
+| **brainstorm-with-file** | Multi-perspective ideation | Gemini/Codex/Claude perspectives, diverge-converge cycles | `.workflow/.brainstorm/` |
+| **debug-with-file** | Hypothesis-driven debugging | Gemini validation, understanding evolution, NDJSON logging | `.workflow/.debug/` |
+| **analyze-with-file** | Collaborative analysis | Multi-round Q&A, CLI exploration, documented discussions | `.workflow/.analysis/` |
+
+**Detection Keywords**:
+- **brainstorm**: 头脑风暴, 创意, 发散思维, multi-perspective, compare perspectives
+- **debug-file**: 深度调试, 假设验证, systematic debug, hypothesis debug
+- **analyze-file**: 协作分析, 深度理解, collaborative analysis, explore concept
+
+**Characteristics**:
+1. **Self-Contained**: Each workflow handles its own iteration loop
+2. **Documented Process**: Creates evolving documents (brainstorm.md, understanding.md, discussion.md)
+3. **Multi-CLI**: Uses Gemini/Codex/Claude for different perspectives
+4. **Built-in Post-Completion**: Offers follow-up options (create plan, issue, etc.)
+
+---
+
+## Usage
+
+```bash
+# Auto-select workflow
+/ccw "Add user authentication"
+
+# Complex requirement (triggers clarification)
+/ccw "Optimize system performance"
+
+# Bug fix
+/ccw "Fix memory leak in WebSocket handler"
+
+# TDD development
+/ccw "Implement user registration with TDD"
+
+# Exploratory task
+/ccw "Uncertain about architecture for real-time notifications"
+
+# With-File workflows (documented exploration with multi-CLI collaboration)
+/ccw "头脑风暴: 用户通知系统重新设计"           # → brainstorm-with-file
+/ccw "从头脑风暴 BS-通知系统-2025-01-28 创建 issue"  # → brainstorm-to-issue (bridge)
+/ccw "深度调试: 系统随机崩溃问题"              # → debug-with-file
+/ccw "协作分析: 理解现有认证架构的设计决策"     # → analyze-with-file
+```

.claude/commands/cli/cli-init.md

@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ name: cli-init
 description: Generate .gemini/ and .qwen/ config directories with settings.json and ignore files based on workspace technology detection
 argument-hint: "[--tool gemini|qwen|all] [--output path] [--preview]"
 allowed-tools: Bash(*), Read(*), Write(*), Glob(*)
+group: cli
 ---
 
 # CLI Initialization Command (/cli:cli-init)

.claude/commands/cli/codex-review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,361 @@
+---
+name: codex-review
+description: Interactive code review using Codex CLI via ccw endpoint with configurable review target, model, and custom instructions
+argument-hint: "[--uncommitted|--base <branch>|--commit <sha>] [--model <model>] [--title <title>] [prompt]"
+allowed-tools: Bash(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*)
+---
+
+# Codex Review Command (/cli:codex-review)
+
+## Overview
+Interactive code review command that invokes `codex review` via ccw cli endpoint with guided parameter selection.
+
+**Codex Review Parameters** (from `codex review --help`):
+| Parameter | Description |
+|-----------|-------------|
+| `[PROMPT]` | Custom review instructions (positional) |
+| `-c model=<model>` | Override model via config |
+| `--uncommitted` | Review staged, unstaged, and untracked changes |
+| `--base <BRANCH>` | Review changes against base branch |
+| `--commit <SHA>` | Review changes introduced by a commit |
+| `--title <TITLE>` | Optional commit title for review summary |
+
+## Prompt Template Format
+
+Follow the standard ccw cli prompt template:
+
+```
+PURPOSE: [what] + [why] + [success criteria] + [constraints/scope]
+TASK: • [step 1] • [step 2] • [step 3]
+MODE: review
+CONTEXT: [review target description] | Memory: [relevant context]
+EXPECTED: [deliverable format] + [quality criteria]
+CONSTRAINTS: [focus constraints]
+```
+
+## EXECUTION INSTRUCTIONS - START HERE
+
+**When this command is triggered, follow these exact steps:**
+
+### Step 1: Parse Arguments
+
+Check if user provided arguments directly:
+- `--uncommitted` → Record target = uncommitted
+- `--base <branch>` → Record target = base, branch name
+- `--commit <sha>` → Record target = commit, sha value
+- `--model <model>` → Record model selection
+- `--title <title>` → Record title
+- Remaining text → Use as custom focus/prompt
+
+If no target specified → Continue to Step 2 for interactive selection.
+
+### Step 2: Interactive Parameter Selection
+
+**2.1 Review Target Selection**
+
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "What do you want to review?",
+    header: "Review Target",
+    options: [
+      { label: "Uncommitted changes (Recommended)", description: "Review staged, unstaged, and untracked changes" },
+      { label: "Compare to branch", description: "Review changes against a base branch (e.g., main)" },
+      { label: "Specific commit", description: "Review changes introduced by a specific commit" }
+    ],
+    multiSelect: false
+  }]
+})
+```
+
+**2.2 Branch/Commit Input (if needed)**
+
+If "Compare to branch" selected:
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "Which base branch to compare against?",
+    header: "Base Branch",
+    options: [
+      { label: "main", description: "Compare against main branch" },
+      { label: "master", description: "Compare against master branch" },
+      { label: "develop", description: "Compare against develop branch" }
+    ],
+    multiSelect: false
+  }]
+})
+```
+
+If "Specific commit" selected:
+- Run `git log --oneline -10` to show recent commits
+- Ask user to provide commit SHA or select from list
+
+**2.3 Model Selection (Optional)**
+
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "Which model to use for review?",
+    header: "Model",
+    options: [
+      { label: "Default", description: "Use codex default model (gpt-5.2)" },
+      { label: "o3", description: "OpenAI o3 reasoning model" },
+      { label: "gpt-4.1", description: "GPT-4.1 model" },
+      { label: "o4-mini", description: "OpenAI o4-mini (faster)" }
+    ],
+    multiSelect: false
+  }]
+})
+```
+
+**2.4 Review Focus Selection**
+
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "What should the review focus on?",
+    header: "Focus Area",
+    options: [
+      { label: "General review (Recommended)", description: "Comprehensive review: correctness, style, bugs, docs" },
+      { label: "Security focus", description: "Security vulnerabilities, input validation, auth issues" },
+      { label: "Performance focus", description: "Performance bottlenecks, complexity, resource usage" },
+      { label: "Code quality", description: "Readability, maintainability, SOLID principles" }
+    ],
+    multiSelect: false
+  }]
+})
+```
+
+### Step 3: Build Prompt and Command
+
+**3.1 Construct Prompt Based on Focus**
+
+**General Review Prompt:**
+```
+PURPOSE: Comprehensive code review to identify issues, improve quality, and ensure best practices; success = actionable feedback with clear priorities
+TASK: • Review code correctness and logic errors • Check coding standards and consistency • Identify potential bugs and edge cases • Evaluate documentation completeness
+MODE: review
+CONTEXT: {target_description} | Memory: Project conventions from CLAUDE.md
+EXPECTED: Structured review report with: severity levels (Critical/High/Medium/Low), file:line references, specific improvement suggestions, priority ranking
+CONSTRAINTS: Focus on actionable feedback
+```
+
+**Security Focus Prompt:**
+```
+PURPOSE: Security-focused code review to identify vulnerabilities and security risks; success = all security issues documented with remediation
+TASK: • Scan for injection vulnerabilities (SQL, XSS, command) • Check authentication and authorization logic • Evaluate input validation and sanitization • Identify sensitive data exposure risks
+MODE: review
+CONTEXT: {target_description} | Memory: Security best practices, OWASP Top 10
+EXPECTED: Security report with: vulnerability classification, CVE references where applicable, remediation code snippets, risk severity matrix
+CONSTRAINTS: Security-first analysis | Flag all potential vulnerabilities
+```
+
+**Performance Focus Prompt:**
+```
+PURPOSE: Performance-focused code review to identify bottlenecks and optimization opportunities; success = measurable improvement recommendations
+TASK: • Analyze algorithmic complexity (Big-O) • Identify memory allocation issues • Check for N+1 queries and blocking operations • Evaluate caching opportunities
+MODE: review
+CONTEXT: {target_description} | Memory: Performance patterns and anti-patterns
+EXPECTED: Performance report with: complexity analysis, bottleneck identification, optimization suggestions with expected impact, benchmark recommendations
+CONSTRAINTS: Performance optimization focus
+```
+
+**Code Quality Focus Prompt:**
+```
+PURPOSE: Code quality review to improve maintainability and readability; success = cleaner, more maintainable code
+TASK: • Assess SOLID principles adherence • Identify code duplication and abstraction opportunities • Review naming conventions and clarity • Evaluate test coverage implications
+MODE: review
+CONTEXT: {target_description} | Memory: Project coding standards
+EXPECTED: Quality report with: principle violations, refactoring suggestions, naming improvements, maintainability score
+CONSTRAINTS: Code quality and maintainability focus
+```
+
+**3.2 Build Target Description**
+
+Based on selection, set `{target_description}`:
+- Uncommitted: `Reviewing uncommitted changes (staged + unstaged + untracked)`
+- Base branch: `Reviewing changes against {branch} branch`
+- Commit: `Reviewing changes introduced by commit {sha}`
+
+### Step 4: Execute via CCW CLI
+
+Build and execute the ccw cli command:
+
+```bash
+# Base structure
+ccw cli -p "<PROMPT>" --tool codex --mode review [OPTIONS]
+```
+
+**Command Construction:**
+
+```bash
+# Variables from user selection
+TARGET_FLAG=""      # --uncommitted | --base <branch> | --commit <sha>
+MODEL_FLAG=""       # --model <model> (if not default)
+TITLE_FLAG=""       # --title "<title>" (if provided)
+
+# Build target flag
+if [ "$target" = "uncommitted" ]; then
+  TARGET_FLAG="--uncommitted"
+elif [ "$target" = "base" ]; then
+  TARGET_FLAG="--base $branch"
+elif [ "$target" = "commit" ]; then
+  TARGET_FLAG="--commit $sha"
+fi
+
+# Build model flag (only if not default)
+if [ "$model" != "default" ] && [ -n "$model" ]; then
+  MODEL_FLAG="--model $model"
+fi
+
+# Build title flag (if provided)
+if [ -n "$title" ]; then
+  TITLE_FLAG="--title \"$title\""
+fi
+
+# Execute
+ccw cli -p "$PROMPT" --tool codex --mode review $TARGET_FLAG $MODEL_FLAG $TITLE_FLAG
+```
+
+**Full Example Commands:**
+
+**Option 1: With custom prompt (reviews uncommitted by default):**
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Comprehensive code review to identify issues and improve quality; success = actionable feedback with priorities
+TASK: • Review correctness and logic • Check standards compliance • Identify bugs and edge cases • Evaluate documentation
+MODE: review
+CONTEXT: Reviewing uncommitted changes | Memory: Project conventions
+EXPECTED: Structured report with severity levels, file:line refs, improvement suggestions
+CONSTRAINTS: Actionable feedback
+" --tool codex --mode review --rule analysis-review-code-quality
+```
+
+**Option 2: Target flag only (no prompt allowed):**
+```bash
+ccw cli --tool codex --mode review --uncommitted
+```
+
+### Step 5: Execute and Display Results
+
+```bash
+Bash({
+  command: "ccw cli -p \"$PROMPT\" --tool codex --mode review $FLAGS",
+  run_in_background: true
+})
+```
+
+Wait for completion and display formatted results.
+
+## Quick Usage Examples
+
+### Direct Execution (No Interaction)
+
+```bash
+# Review uncommitted changes with default settings
+/cli:codex-review --uncommitted
+
+# Review against main branch
+/cli:codex-review --base main
+
+# Review specific commit
+/cli:codex-review --commit abc123
+
+# Review with custom model
+/cli:codex-review --uncommitted --model o3
+
+# Review with security focus
+/cli:codex-review --uncommitted security
+
+# Full options
+/cli:codex-review --base main --model o3 --title "Auth Feature" security
+```
+
+### Interactive Mode
+
+```bash
+# Start interactive selection (guided flow)
+/cli:codex-review
+```
+
+## Focus Area Mapping
+
+| User Selection | Prompt Focus | Key Checks |
+|----------------|--------------|------------|
+| General review | Comprehensive | Correctness, style, bugs, docs |
+| Security focus | Security-first | Injection, auth, validation, exposure |
+| Performance focus | Optimization | Complexity, memory, queries, caching |
+| Code quality | Maintainability | SOLID, duplication, naming, tests |
+
+## Error Handling
+
+### No Changes to Review
+```
+No changes found for review target. Suggestions:
+- For --uncommitted: Make some code changes first
+- For --base: Ensure branch exists and has diverged
+- For --commit: Verify commit SHA exists
+```
+
+### Invalid Branch
+```bash
+# Show available branches
+git branch -a --list | head -20
+```
+
+### Invalid Commit
+```bash
+# Show recent commits
+git log --oneline -10
+```
+
+## Integration Notes
+
+- Uses `ccw cli --tool codex --mode review` endpoint
+- Model passed via prompt (codex uses `-c model=` internally)
+- Target flags (`--uncommitted`, `--base`, `--commit`) passed through to codex
+- Prompt follows standard ccw cli template format for consistency
+
+## Validation Constraints
+
+**IMPORTANT: Target flags and prompt are mutually exclusive**
+
+The codex CLI has a constraint where target flags (`--uncommitted`, `--base`, `--commit`) cannot be used with a positional `[PROMPT]` argument:
+
+```
+error: the argument '--uncommitted' cannot be used with '[PROMPT]'
+error: the argument '--base <BRANCH>' cannot be used with '[PROMPT]'
+error: the argument '--commit <SHA>' cannot be used with '[PROMPT]'
+```
+
+**Behavior:**
+- When ANY target flag is specified, ccw cli automatically skips template concatenation (systemRules/roles)
+- The review uses codex's default review behavior for the specified target
+- Custom prompts are only supported WITHOUT target flags (reviews uncommitted changes by default)
+
+**Valid combinations:**
+| Command | Result |
+|---------|--------|
+| `codex review "Focus on security"` | ✓ Custom prompt, reviews uncommitted (default) |
+| `codex review --uncommitted` | ✓ No prompt, uses default review |
+| `codex review --base main` | ✓ No prompt, uses default review |
+| `codex review --commit abc123` | ✓ No prompt, uses default review |
+| `codex review --uncommitted "prompt"` | ✗ Invalid - mutually exclusive |
+| `codex review --base main "prompt"` | ✗ Invalid - mutually exclusive |
+| `codex review --commit abc123 "prompt"` | ✗ Invalid - mutually exclusive |
+
+**Examples:**
+```bash
+# ✓ Valid: prompt only (reviews uncommitted by default)
+ccw cli -p "Focus on security" --tool codex --mode review
+
+# ✓ Valid: target flag only (no prompt)
+ccw cli --tool codex --mode review --uncommitted
+ccw cli --tool codex --mode review --base main
+ccw cli --tool codex --mode review --commit abc123
+
+# ✗ Invalid: target flag with prompt (will fail)
+ccw cli -p "Review this" --tool codex --mode review --uncommitted
+ccw cli -p "Review this" --tool codex --mode review --base main
+ccw cli -p "Review this" --tool codex --mode review --commit abc123
+```

.claude/commands/codex-coordinator.md

@@ -0,0 +1,513 @@
+---
+name: codex-coordinator
+description: Command orchestration tool for Codex - analyze requirements, recommend command chain, execute sequentially with state persistence
+argument-hint: "TASK=\"<task description>\" [--depth=standard|deep] [--auto-confirm] [--verbose]"
+---
+
+# Codex Coordinator Command
+
+Interactive orchestration tool for Codex commands: analyze task → discover commands → recommend chain → execute sequentially → track state.
+
+**Execution Model**: Intelligent agent-driven workflow. Claude analyzes each phase and orchestrates command execution.
+
+## Core Concept: Minimum Execution Units (最小执行单元)
+
+### What is a Minimum Execution Unit?
+
+**Definition**: A set of commands that must execute together as an atomic group to achieve a meaningful workflow milestone. Splitting these commands breaks the logical flow and creates incomplete states.
+
+**Why This Matters**:
+- **Prevents Incomplete States**: Avoid stopping after task generation without execution
+- **User Experience**: User gets complete results, not intermediate artifacts requiring manual follow-up
+- **Workflow Integrity**: Maintains logical coherence of multi-step operations
+
+### Codex Minimum Execution Units
+
+**Planning + Execution Units** (规划+执行单元):
+
+| Unit Name | Commands | Purpose | Output |
+|-----------|----------|---------|--------|
+| **Quick Implementation** | lite-plan-a → execute | Lightweight plan and immediate execution | Working code |
+| **Bug Fix** | lite-fix → execute | Quick bug diagnosis and fix execution | Fixed code |
+| **Issue Workflow** | issue-discover → issue-plan → issue-queue → issue-execute | Complete issue lifecycle | Completed issues |
+| **Discovery & Analysis** | issue-discover → issue-discover-by-prompt | Issue discovery with multiple perspectives | Generated issues |
+| **Brainstorm to Execution** | brainstorm-with-file → execute | Brainstorm ideas then implement | Working code |
+
+**With-File Workflows** (文档化单元):
+
+| Unit Name | Commands | Purpose | Output |
+|-----------|----------|---------|--------|
+| **Brainstorm With File** | brainstorm-with-file | Multi-perspective ideation with documentation | brainstorm.md |
+| **Debug With File** | debug-with-file | Hypothesis-driven debugging with documentation | understanding.md |
+| **Analyze With File** | analyze-with-file | Collaborative analysis with documentation | discussion.md |
+| **Clean & Analyze** | clean → analyze-with-file | Cleanup then analyze | Cleaned code + analysis |
+
+### Command-to-Unit Mapping (命令与最小单元的映射)
+
+| Command | Precedes | Atomic Units |
+|---------|----------|--------------|
+| lite-plan-a | execute, brainstorm-with-file | Quick Implementation |
+| lite-fix | execute | Bug Fix |
+| issue-discover | issue-plan | Issue Workflow |
+| issue-plan | issue-queue | Issue Workflow |
+| issue-queue | issue-execute | Issue Workflow |
+| brainstorm-with-file | execute, issue-execute | Brainstorm to Execution |
+| debug-with-file | execute | Debug With File |
+| analyze-with-file | (standalone) | Analyze With File |
+| clean | analyze-with-file, execute | Clean & Analyze |
+| quick-plan-with-file | execute | Quick Planning with File |
+| merge-plans-with-file | execute | Merge Multiple Plans |
+| unified-execute-with-file | (terminal) | Execute with File Tracking |
+
+### Atomic Group Rules
+
+1. **Never Split Units**: Coordinator must recommend complete units, not partial chains
+2. **Multi-Unit Participation**: Some commands can participate in multiple units
+3. **User Override**: User can explicitly request partial execution (advanced mode)
+4. **Visualization**: Pipeline view shows unit boundaries with 【 】markers
+5. **Validation**: Before execution, verify all unit commands are included
+
+**Example Pipeline with Units**:
+```
+需求 → 【lite-plan-a → execute】→ 代码 → 【issue-discover → issue-plan → issue-queue → issue-execute】→ 完成
+       └──── Quick Implementation ────┘         └────────── Issue Workflow ─────────┘
+```
+
+## 3-Phase Workflow
+
+### Phase 1: Analyze Requirements
+
+Parse task to extract: goal, scope, complexity, and task type.
+
+```javascript
+function analyzeRequirements(taskDescription) {
+  return {
+    goal: extractMainGoal(taskDescription),           // e.g., "Fix login bug"
+    scope: extractScope(taskDescription),             // e.g., ["auth", "login"]
+    complexity: determineComplexity(taskDescription), // 'simple' | 'medium' | 'complex'
+    task_type: detectTaskType(taskDescription)        // See task type patterns below
+  };
+}
+
+// Task Type Detection Patterns
+function detectTaskType(text) {
+  // Priority order (first match wins)
+  if (/fix|bug|error|crash|fail|debug|diagnose/.test(text)) return 'bugfix';
+  if (/生成|generate|discover|找出|issue|问题/.test(text)) return 'discovery';
+  if (/plan|规划|设计|design|analyze|分析/.test(text)) return 'analysis';
+  if (/清理|cleanup|clean|refactor|重构/.test(text)) return 'cleanup';
+  if (/头脑|brainstorm|创意|ideation/.test(text)) return 'brainstorm';
+  if (/合并|merge|combine|batch/.test(text)) return 'batch-planning';
+  return 'feature';  // Default
+}
+
+// Complexity Assessment
+function determineComplexity(text) {
+  let score = 0;
+  if (/refactor|重构|migrate|迁移|architect|架构|system|系统/.test(text)) score += 2;
+  if (/multiple|多个|across|跨|all|所有|entire|整个/.test(text)) score += 2;
+  if (/integrate|集成|api|database|数据库/.test(text)) score += 1;
+  if (/security|安全|performance|性能|scale|扩展/.test(text)) score += 1;
+  return score >= 4 ? 'complex' : score >= 2 ? 'medium' : 'simple';
+}
+```
+
+**Display to user**:
+```
+Analysis Complete:
+  Goal: [extracted goal]
+  Scope: [identified areas]
+  Complexity: [level]
+  Task Type: [detected type]
+```
+
+### Phase 2: Discover Commands & Recommend Chain
+
+Dynamic command chain assembly using task type and complexity matching.
+
+#### Available Codex Commands (Discovery)
+
+All commands from `~/.codex/prompts/`:
+- **Planning**: @~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-a.md, @~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-b.md, @~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-c.md, @~/.codex/prompts/quick-plan-with-file.md, @~/.codex/prompts/merge-plans-with-file.md
+- **Execution**: @~/.codex/prompts/execute.md, @~/.codex/prompts/unified-execute-with-file.md
+- **Bug Fixes**: @~/.codex/prompts/lite-fix.md, @~/.codex/prompts/debug-with-file.md
+- **Discovery**: @~/.codex/prompts/issue-discover.md, @~/.codex/prompts/issue-discover-by-prompt.md, @~/.codex/prompts/issue-plan.md, @~/.codex/prompts/issue-queue.md, @~/.codex/prompts/issue-execute.md
+- **Analysis**: @~/.codex/prompts/analyze-with-file.md
+- **Brainstorming**: @~/.codex/prompts/brainstorm-with-file.md, @~/.codex/prompts/brainstorm-to-cycle.md
+- **Cleanup**: @~/.codex/prompts/clean.md, @~/.codex/prompts/compact.md
+
+#### Recommendation Algorithm
+
+```javascript
+async function recommendCommandChain(analysis) {
+  // Step 1: 根据任务类型确定流程
+  const { inputPort, outputPort } = determinePortFlow(analysis.task_type, analysis.complexity);
+
+  // Step 2: Claude 根据命令特性和任务特征，智能选择命令序列
+  const chain = selectChainByTaskType(analysis);
+
+  return chain;
+}
+
+// 任务类型对应的端口流
+function determinePortFlow(taskType, complexity) {
+  const flows = {
+    'bugfix':       { flow: ['lite-fix', 'execute'], depth: complexity === 'complex' ? 'deep' : 'standard' },
+    'discovery':    { flow: ['issue-discover', 'issue-plan', 'issue-queue', 'issue-execute'], depth: 'standard' },
+    'analysis':     { flow: ['analyze-with-file'], depth: complexity === 'complex' ? 'deep' : 'standard' },
+    'cleanup':      { flow: ['clean'], depth: 'standard' },
+    'brainstorm':   { flow: ['brainstorm-with-file', 'execute'], depth: complexity === 'complex' ? 'deep' : 'standard' },
+    'batch-planning': { flow: ['merge-plans-with-file', 'execute'], depth: 'standard' },
+    'feature':      { flow: complexity === 'complex' ? ['lite-plan-b'] : ['lite-plan-a', 'execute'], depth: complexity === 'complex' ? 'deep' : 'standard' }
+  };
+  return flows[taskType] || flows['feature'];
+}
+```
+
+#### Display to User
+
+```
+Recommended Command Chain:
+
+Pipeline (管道视图):
+需求 → @~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-a.md → 计划 → @~/.codex/prompts/execute.md → 代码完成
+
+Commands (命令列表):
+1. @~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-a.md
+2. @~/.codex/prompts/execute.md
+
+Proceed? [Confirm / Show Details / Adjust / Cancel]
+```
+
+### Phase 2b: Get User Confirmation
+
+Ask user for confirmation before proceeding with execution.
+
+```javascript
+async function getUserConfirmation(chain) {
+  const response = await AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: 'Proceed with this command chain?',
+      header: 'Confirm Chain',
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: 'Confirm and execute', description: 'Proceed with commands' },
+        { label: 'Show details', description: 'View each command' },
+        { label: 'Adjust chain', description: 'Remove or reorder' },
+        { label: 'Cancel', description: 'Abort' }
+      ]
+    }]
+  });
+
+  return response;
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 3: Execute Sequential Command Chain
+
+```javascript
+async function executeCommandChain(chain, analysis) {
+  const sessionId = `codex-coord-${Date.now()}`;
+  const stateDir = `.workflow/.codex-coordinator/${sessionId}`;
+
+  // Create state directory
+  const state = {
+    session_id: sessionId,
+    status: 'running',
+    created_at: new Date().toISOString(),
+    analysis: analysis,
+    command_chain: chain.map((cmd, idx) => ({ ...cmd, index: idx, status: 'pending' })),
+    execution_results: [],
+  };
+
+  // Save initial state
+  Write(`${stateDir}/state.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
+
+  for (let i = 0; i < chain.length; i++) {
+    const cmd = chain[i];
+    console.log(`[${i+1}/${chain.length}] Executing: @~/.codex/prompts/${cmd.name}.md`);
+
+    // Update status to running
+    state.command_chain[i].status = 'running';
+    state.updated_at = new Date().toISOString();
+    Write(`${stateDir}/state.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
+
+    try {
+      // Build command with parameters using full path
+      let commandStr = `@~/.codex/prompts/${cmd.name}.md`;
+
+      // Add parameters based on previous results and task context
+      if (i > 0 && state.execution_results.length > 0) {
+        const lastResult = state.execution_results[state.execution_results.length - 1];
+        commandStr += ` --resume="${lastResult.session_id || lastResult.artifact}"`;
+      }
+
+      // For analysis-based commands, add depth parameter
+      if (analysis.complexity === 'complex' && (cmd.name.includes('analyze') || cmd.name.includes('plan'))) {
+        commandStr += ` --depth=deep`;
+      }
+
+      // Add task description for planning commands
+      if (cmd.type === 'planning' && i === 0) {
+        commandStr += ` TASK="${analysis.goal}"`;
+      }
+
+      // Execute command via Bash (spawning as background task)
+      // Format: @~/.codex/prompts/command-name.md [] parameters
+      // Note: This simulates the execution; actual implementation uses hook callbacks
+      console.log(`Executing: ${commandStr}`);
+
+      // Save execution record
+      state.execution_results.push({
+        index: i,
+        command: cmd.name,
+        status: 'in-progress',
+        started_at: new Date().toISOString(),
+        session_id: null,
+        artifact: null
+      });
+
+      state.command_chain[i].status = 'completed';
+      state.updated_at = new Date().toISOString();
+      Write(`${stateDir}/state.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
+
+      console.log(`[${i+1}/${chain.length}] ✓ Completed: @~/.codex/prompts/${cmd.name}.md`);
+
+    } catch (error) {
+      state.command_chain[i].status = 'failed';
+      state.updated_at = new Date().toISOString();
+      Write(`${stateDir}/state.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
+
+      console.log(`❌ Command failed: ${error.message}`);
+      break;
+    }
+  }
+
+  state.status = 'completed';
+  state.updated_at = new Date().toISOString();
+  Write(`${stateDir}/state.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
+
+  console.log(`\n✅ Orchestration Complete: ${state.session_id}`);
+  return state;
+}
+```
+
+## State File Structure
+
+**Location**: `.workflow/.codex-coordinator/{session_id}/state.json`
+
+```json
+{
+  "session_id": "codex-coord-20250129-143025",
+  "status": "running|waiting|completed|failed",
+  "created_at": "2025-01-29T14:30:25Z",
+  "updated_at": "2025-01-29T14:35:45Z",
+  "analysis": {
+    "goal": "Fix login authentication bug",
+    "scope": ["auth", "login"],
+    "complexity": "medium",
+    "task_type": "bugfix"
+  },
+  "command_chain": [
+    {
+      "index": 0,
+      "name": "lite-fix",
+      "type": "bugfix",
+      "status": "completed"
+    },
+    {
+      "index": 1,
+      "name": "execute",
+      "type": "execution",
+      "status": "pending"
+    }
+  ],
+  "execution_results": [
+    {
+      "index": 0,
+      "command": "lite-fix",
+      "status": "completed",
+      "started_at": "2025-01-29T14:30:25Z",
+      "session_id": "fix-login-2025-01-29",
+      "artifact": ".workflow/.lite-fix/fix-login-2025-01-29/fix-plan.json"
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Status Values
+
+- `running`: Orchestrator actively executing
+- `waiting`: Paused, waiting for external events
+- `completed`: All commands finished successfully
+- `failed`: Error occurred or user aborted
+
+## Task Type Routing (Pipeline Summary)
+
+**Note**: 【 】marks Minimum Execution Units (最小执行单元) - these commands must execute together.
+
+| Task Type | Pipeline | Minimum Units |
+|-----------|----------|---|
+| **bugfix** | Bug报告 →【@~/.codex/prompts/lite-fix.md → @~/.codex/prompts/execute.md】→ 修复代码 | Bug Fix |
+| **discovery** | 需求 →【@~/.codex/prompts/issue-discover.md → @~/.codex/prompts/issue-plan.md → @~/.codex/prompts/issue-queue.md → @~/.codex/prompts/issue-execute.md】→ 完成 issues | Issue Workflow |
+| **analysis** | 需求 → @~/.codex/prompts/analyze-with-file.md → 分析报告 | Analyze With File |
+| **cleanup** | 代码库 → @~/.codex/prompts/clean.md → 清理完成 | Cleanup |
+| **brainstorm** | 主题 →【@~/.codex/prompts/brainstorm-with-file.md → @~/.codex/prompts/execute.md】→ 实现代码 | Brainstorm to Execution |
+| **batch-planning** | 需求集合 →【@~/.codex/prompts/merge-plans-with-file.md → @~/.codex/prompts/execute.md】→ 代码完成 | Merge Multiple Plans |
+| **feature** (simple) | 需求 →【@~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-a.md → @~/.codex/prompts/execute.md】→ 代码 | Quick Implementation |
+| **feature** (complex) | 需求 → @~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-b.md → 详细计划 → @~/.codex/prompts/execute.md → 代码 | Complex Planning |
+
+## Available Commands Reference
+
+### Planning Commands
+
+| Command | Purpose | Usage | Output |
+|---------|---------|-------|--------|
+| **lite-plan-a** | Lightweight merged-mode planning | `@~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-a.md TASK="..."` | plan.json |
+| **lite-plan-b** | Multi-angle exploration planning | `@~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-b.md TASK="..."` | plan.json |
+| **lite-plan-c** | Parallel angle planning | `@~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-c.md TASK="..."` | plan.json |
+| **quick-plan-with-file** | Quick planning with file tracking | `@~/.codex/prompts/quick-plan-with-file.md TASK="..."` | plan + docs |
+| **merge-plans-with-file** | Merge multiple plans | `@~/.codex/prompts/merge-plans-with-file.md PLANS="..."` | merged-plan.json |
+
+### Execution Commands
+
+| Command | Purpose | Usage | Output |
+|---------|---------|-------|--------|
+| **execute** | Execute tasks from plan | `@~/.codex/prompts/execute.md SESSION=".../plan/"` | Working code |
+| **unified-execute-with-file** | Execute with file tracking | `@~/.codex/prompts/unified-execute-with-file.md SESSION="..."` | Code + tracking |
+
+### Bug Fix Commands
+
+| Command | Purpose | Usage | Output |
+|---------|---------|-------|--------|
+| **lite-fix** | Quick bug diagnosis and planning | `@~/.codex/prompts/lite-fix.md BUG="..."` | fix-plan.json |
+| **debug-with-file** | Hypothesis-driven debugging | `@~/.codex/prompts/debug-with-file.md BUG="..."` | understanding.md |
+
+### Discovery Commands
+
+| Command | Purpose | Usage | Output |
+|---------|---------|-------|--------|
+| **issue-discover** | Multi-perspective issue discovery | `@~/.codex/prompts/issue-discover.md PATTERN="src/**"` | issues.jsonl |
+| **issue-discover-by-prompt** | Prompt-based discovery | `@~/.codex/prompts/issue-discover-by-prompt.md PROMPT="..."` | issues |
+| **issue-plan** | Plan issue solutions | `@~/.codex/prompts/issue-plan.md --all-pending` | issue-plans.json |
+| **issue-queue** | Form execution queue | `@~/.codex/prompts/issue-queue.md --from-plan` | queue.json |
+| **issue-execute** | Execute issue queue | `@~/.codex/prompts/issue-execute.md QUEUE="..."` | Completed |
+
+### Analysis Commands
+
+| Command | Purpose | Usage | Output |
+|---------|---------|-------|--------|
+| **analyze-with-file** | Collaborative analysis | `@~/.codex/prompts/analyze-with-file.md TOPIC="..."` | discussion.md |
+
+### Brainstorm Commands
+
+| Command | Purpose | Usage | Output |
+|---------|---------|-------|--------|
+| **brainstorm-with-file** | Multi-perspective brainstorming | `@~/.codex/prompts/brainstorm-with-file.md TOPIC="..."` | brainstorm.md |
+| **brainstorm-to-cycle** | Bridge brainstorm to execution | `@~/.codex/prompts/brainstorm-to-cycle.md` | Executable plan |
+
+### Utility Commands
+
+| Command | Purpose | Usage | Output |
+|---------|---------|-------|--------|
+| **clean** | Intelligent code cleanup | `@~/.codex/prompts/clean.md` | Cleaned code |
+| **compact** | Compact session memory | `@~/.codex/prompts/compact.md SESSION="..."` | Compressed state |
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+```
+User Input: TASK="..."
+    ↓
+Phase 1: analyzeRequirements(task)
+    ↓
+Phase 2: recommendCommandChain(analysis)
+         Display pipeline and commands
+    ↓
+User Confirmation
+    ↓
+Phase 3: executeCommandChain(chain, analysis)
+    ├─ For each command:
+    │  ├─ Update state to "running"
+    │  ├─ Build command string with parameters
+    │  ├─ Execute @command [] with parameters
+    │  ├─ Save execution results
+    │  └─ Update state to "completed"
+    ↓
+Output completion summary
+```
+
+## Key Design Principles
+
+1. **Atomic Execution** - Never split minimum execution units
+2. **State Persistence** - All state saved to JSON
+3. **User Control** - Confirmation before execution
+4. **Context Passing** - Parameters chain across commands
+5. **Resume Support** - Can resume from state.json
+6. **Intelligent Routing** - Task type determines command chain
+7. **Complexity Awareness** - Different paths for simple vs complex tasks
+
+## Command Invocation Format
+
+**Format**: `@~/.codex/prompts/<command-name>.md <parameters>`
+
+**Examples**:
+```bash
+@~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-a.md TASK="Implement user authentication"
+@~/.codex/prompts/execute.md SESSION=".workflow/.lite-plan/..."
+@~/.codex/prompts/lite-fix.md BUG="Login fails with 404 error"
+@~/.codex/prompts/issue-discover.md PATTERN="src/auth/**"
+@~/.codex/prompts/brainstorm-with-file.md TOPIC="Improve user onboarding"
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Situation | Action |
+|-----------|--------|
+| Unknown task type | Default to feature implementation |
+| Command not found | Error: command not available |
+| Execution fails | Report error, offer retry or skip |
+| Invalid parameters | Validate and ask for correction |
+| Circular dependency | Detect and report |
+| All commands fail | Report and suggest manual intervention |
+
+## Session Management
+
+**Resume Previous Session**:
+```
+1. Find session in .workflow/.codex-coordinator/
+2. Load state.json
+3. Identify last completed command
+4. Restart from next pending command
+```
+
+**View Session Progress**:
+```
+cat .workflow/.codex-coordinator/{session-id}/state.json
+```
+
+---
+
+## Execution Instructions
+
+The coordinator workflow follows these steps:
+
+1. **Parse Input**: Extract task description from TASK parameter
+2. **Analyze**: Determine goal, scope, complexity, and task type
+3. **Recommend**: Build optimal command chain based on analysis
+4. **Confirm**: Display pipeline and request user approval
+5. **Execute**: Run commands sequentially with state tracking
+6. **Report**: Display final results and artifacts
+
+To use this coordinator, invoke it as a Claude Code command (not a Codex command):
+
+From the Claude Code CLI, you would call Codex commands like:
+```bash
+@~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-a.md TASK="Your task description"
+```
+
+Or with options:
+```bash
+@~/.codex/prompts/lite-plan-a.md TASK="..." --depth=deep
+```
+
+This coordinator orchestrates such Codex commands based on your task requirements.

.claude/commands/enhance-prompt.md

@@ -1,93 +0,0 @@
----
-name: enhance-prompt
-description: Enhanced prompt transformation using session memory and intent analysis with --enhance flag detection
-argument-hint: "user input to enhance"
----
-
-## Overview
-
-Systematically enhances user prompts by leveraging session memory context and intent analysis, translating ambiguous requests into actionable specifications.
-
-## Core Protocol
-
-**Enhancement Pipeline:**
-`Intent Translation` → `Context Integration` → `Structured Output`
-
-**Context Sources:**
-- Session memory (conversation history, previous analysis)
-- Implicit technical requirements
-- User intent patterns
-
-## Enhancement Rules
-
-### Intent Translation
-
-| User Says | Translate To | Focus |
-|-----------|--------------|-------|
-| "fix" | Debug and resolve | Root cause → preserve behavior |
-| "improve" | Enhance/optimize | Performance/readability |
-| "add" | Implement feature | Integration + edge cases |
-| "refactor" | Restructure quality | Maintain behavior |
-| "update" | Modernize | Version compatibility |
-
-### Context Integration Strategy
-
-**Session Memory:**
-- Reference recent conversation context
-- Reuse previously identified patterns
-- Build on established understanding
-- Infer technical requirements from discussion
-
-**Example:**
-```bash
-# User: "add login"
-# Session Memory: Previous auth discussion, JWT mentioned
-# Inferred: JWT-based auth, integrate with existing session management
-# Action: Implement JWT authentication with session persistence
-```
-
-## Output Structure
-
-```bash
-INTENT: [Clear technical goal]
-CONTEXT: [Session memory + codebase patterns]
-ACTION: [Specific implementation steps]
-ATTENTION: [Critical constraints]
-```
-
-### Output Examples
-
-**Example 1:**
-```bash
-# Input: "fix login button"
-INTENT: Debug non-functional login button
-CONTEXT: From session - OAuth flow discussed, known state issue
-ACTION: Check event binding → verify state updates → test auth flow
-ATTENTION: Preserve existing OAuth integration
-```
-
-**Example 2:**
-```bash
-# Input: "refactor payment code"
-INTENT: Restructure payment module for maintainability
-CONTEXT: Session memory - PCI compliance requirements, Stripe integration patterns
-ACTION: Extract reusable validators → isolate payment gateway logic → maintain adapter pattern
-ATTENTION: Zero behavior change, maintain PCI compliance, full test coverage
-```
-
-## Enhancement Triggers
-
-- Ambiguous language: "fix", "improve", "clean up"
-- Vague requests requiring clarification
-- Complex technical requirements
-- Architecture changes
-- Critical systems: auth, payment, security
-- Multi-step refactoring
-
-## Key Principles
-
-1. **Session Memory First**: Leverage conversation context and established understanding
-2. **Context Reuse**: Build on previous discussions and decisions
-3. **Clear Output**: Structured, actionable specifications
-4. **Intent Clarification**: Transform vague requests into specific technical goals
-5. **Avoid Duplication**: Reference existing context, don't repeat

.claude/commands/flow-create.md

@@ -0,0 +1,675 @@
+# Flow Template Generator
+
+Generate workflow templates for meta-skill/flow-coordinator.
+
+## Usage
+
+```
+/meta-skill:flow-create [template-name] [--output <path>]
+```
+
+**Examples**:
+```bash
+/meta-skill:flow-create bugfix-v2
+/meta-skill:flow-create my-workflow --output ~/.claude/skills/my-skill/templates/
+```
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+```
+User Input → Phase 1: Template Design → Phase 2: Step Definition → Phase 3: Generate JSON
+                ↓                            ↓                           ↓
+         Name + Description           Define workflow steps        Write template file
+```
+
+---
+
+## Phase 1: Template Design
+
+Gather basic template information:
+
+```javascript
+async function designTemplate(input) {
+  const templateName = parseTemplateName(input) || await askTemplateName();
+
+  const metadata = await AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [
+      {
+        question: "What is the purpose of this workflow template?",
+        header: "Purpose",
+        options: [
+          { label: "Feature Development", description: "Implement new features with planning and testing" },
+          { label: "Bug Fix", description: "Diagnose and fix bugs with verification" },
+          { label: "TDD Development", description: "Test-driven development workflow" },
+          { label: "Code Review", description: "Review cycle with findings and fixes" },
+          { label: "Testing", description: "Test generation and validation" },
+          { label: "Issue Workflow", description: "Complete issue lifecycle (discover → plan → queue → execute)" },
+          { label: "With-File Workflow", description: "Documented exploration (brainstorm/debug/analyze)" },
+          { label: "Custom", description: "Define custom workflow purpose" }
+        ],
+        multiSelect: false
+      },
+      {
+        question: "What complexity level?",
+        header: "Level",
+        options: [
+          { label: "Level 1 (Rapid)", description: "1-2 steps, ultra-lightweight (lite-lite-lite)" },
+          { label: "Level 2 (Lightweight)", description: "2-4 steps, quick implementation" },
+          { label: "Level 3 (Standard)", description: "4-6 steps, with verification and testing" },
+          { label: "Level 4 (Full)", description: "6+ steps, brainstorm + full workflow" }
+        ],
+        multiSelect: false
+      }
+    ]
+  });
+
+  return {
+    name: templateName,
+    description: generateDescription(templateName, metadata.Purpose),
+    level: parseLevel(metadata.Level),
+    purpose: metadata.Purpose
+  };
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Phase 2: Step Definition
+
+### Step 2.1: Select Command Category
+
+```javascript
+async function selectCommandCategory() {
+  return await AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Select command category",
+      header: "Category",
+      options: [
+        { label: "Planning", description: "lite-plan, plan, multi-cli-plan, tdd-plan, quick-plan-with-file" },
+        { label: "Execution", description: "lite-execute, execute, unified-execute-with-file" },
+        { label: "Testing", description: "test-fix-gen, test-cycle-execute, test-gen, tdd-verify" },
+        { label: "Review", description: "review-session-cycle, review-module-cycle, review-cycle-fix" },
+        { label: "Bug Fix", description: "lite-fix, debug-with-file" },
+        { label: "Brainstorm", description: "brainstorm-with-file, brainstorm:auto-parallel" },
+        { label: "Analysis", description: "analyze-with-file" },
+        { label: "Issue", description: "discover, plan, queue, execute, from-brainstorm, convert-to-plan" },
+        { label: "Utility", description: "clean, init, replan, status" }
+      ],
+      multiSelect: false
+    }]
+  });
+}
+```
+
+### Step 2.2: Select Specific Command
+
+```javascript
+async function selectCommand(category) {
+  const commandOptions = {
+    'Planning': [
+      { label: "/workflow:lite-plan", description: "Lightweight merged-mode planning" },
+      { label: "/workflow:plan", description: "Full planning with architecture design" },
+      { label: "/workflow:multi-cli-plan", description: "Multi-CLI collaborative planning (Gemini+Codex+Claude)" },
+      { label: "/workflow:tdd-plan", description: "TDD workflow planning with Red-Green-Refactor" },
+      { label: "/workflow:quick-plan-with-file", description: "Rapid planning with minimal docs" },
+      { label: "/workflow:plan-verify", description: "Verify plan against requirements" },
+      { label: "/workflow:replan", description: "Update plan and execute changes" }
+    ],
+    'Execution': [
+      { label: "/workflow:lite-execute", description: "Execute from in-memory plan" },
+      { label: "/workflow:execute", description: "Execute from planning session" },
+      { label: "/workflow:unified-execute-with-file", description: "Universal execution engine" },
+      { label: "/workflow:lite-lite-lite", description: "Ultra-lightweight multi-tool execution" }
+    ],
+    'Testing': [
+      { label: "/workflow:test-fix-gen", description: "Generate test tasks for specific issues" },
+      { label: "/workflow:test-cycle-execute", description: "Execute iterative test-fix cycle (>=95% pass)" },
+      { label: "/workflow:test-gen", description: "Generate comprehensive test suite" },
+      { label: "/workflow:tdd-verify", description: "Verify TDD workflow compliance" }
+    ],
+    'Review': [
+      { label: "/workflow:review-session-cycle", description: "Session-based multi-dimensional code review" },
+      { label: "/workflow:review-module-cycle", description: "Module-focused code review" },
+      { label: "/workflow:review-cycle-fix", description: "Fix review findings with prioritization" },
+      { label: "/workflow:review", description: "Post-implementation review" }
+    ],
+    'Bug Fix': [
+      { label: "/workflow:lite-fix", description: "Lightweight bug diagnosis and fix" },
+      { label: "/workflow:debug-with-file", description: "Hypothesis-driven debugging with documentation" }
+    ],
+    'Brainstorm': [
+      { label: "/workflow:brainstorm-with-file", description: "Multi-perspective ideation with documentation" },
+      { label: "/workflow:brainstorm:auto-parallel", description: "Parallel multi-role brainstorming" }
+    ],
+    'Analysis': [
+      { label: "/workflow:analyze-with-file", description: "Collaborative analysis with documentation" }
+    ],
+    'Issue': [
+      { label: "/issue:discover", description: "Multi-perspective issue discovery" },
+      { label: "/issue:discover-by-prompt", description: "Prompt-based issue discovery with Gemini" },
+      { label: "/issue:plan", description: "Plan issue solutions" },
+      { label: "/issue:queue", description: "Form execution queue with conflict analysis" },
+      { label: "/issue:execute", description: "Execute issue queue with DAG orchestration" },
+      { label: "/issue:from-brainstorm", description: "Convert brainstorm to issue" },
+      { label: "/issue:convert-to-plan", description: "Convert planning artifacts to issue solutions" }
+    ],
+    'Utility': [
+      { label: "/workflow:clean", description: "Intelligent code cleanup" },
+      { label: "/workflow:init", description: "Initialize project-level state" },
+      { label: "/workflow:replan", description: "Interactive workflow replanning" },
+      { label: "/workflow:status", description: "Generate workflow status views" }
+    ]
+  };
+
+  return await AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: `Select ${category} command`,
+      header: "Command",
+      options: commandOptions[category] || commandOptions['Planning'],
+      multiSelect: false
+    }]
+  });
+}
+```
+
+### Step 2.3: Select Execution Unit
+
+```javascript
+async function selectExecutionUnit() {
+  return await AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Select execution unit (atomic command group)",
+      header: "Unit",
+      options: [
+        // Planning + Execution Units
+        { label: "quick-implementation", description: "【lite-plan → lite-execute】" },
+        { label: "multi-cli-planning", description: "【multi-cli-plan → lite-execute】" },
+        { label: "full-planning-execution", description: "【plan → execute】" },
+        { label: "verified-planning-execution", description: "【plan → plan-verify → execute】" },
+        { label: "replanning-execution", description: "【replan → execute】" },
+        { label: "tdd-planning-execution", description: "【tdd-plan → execute】" },
+        // Testing Units
+        { label: "test-validation", description: "【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】" },
+        { label: "test-generation-execution", description: "【test-gen → execute】" },
+        // Review Units
+        { label: "code-review", description: "【review-*-cycle → review-cycle-fix】" },
+        // Bug Fix Units
+        { label: "bug-fix", description: "【lite-fix → lite-execute】" },
+        // Issue Units
+        { label: "issue-workflow", description: "【discover → plan → queue → execute】" },
+        { label: "rapid-to-issue", description: "【lite-plan → convert-to-plan → queue → execute】" },
+        { label: "brainstorm-to-issue", description: "【from-brainstorm → queue → execute】" },
+        // With-File Units (self-contained)
+        { label: "brainstorm-with-file", description: "Self-contained brainstorming workflow" },
+        { label: "debug-with-file", description: "Self-contained debugging workflow" },
+        { label: "analyze-with-file", description: "Self-contained analysis workflow" },
+        // Standalone
+        { label: "standalone", description: "Single command, no atomic grouping" }
+      ],
+      multiSelect: false
+    }]
+  });
+}
+```
+
+### Step 2.4: Select Execution Mode
+
+```javascript
+async function selectExecutionMode() {
+  return await AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Execution mode for this step?",
+      header: "Mode",
+      options: [
+        { label: "mainprocess", description: "Run in main process (blocking, synchronous)" },
+        { label: "async", description: "Run asynchronously (background, hook callbacks)" }
+      ],
+      multiSelect: false
+    }]
+  });
+}
+```
+
+### Complete Step Definition Flow
+
+```javascript
+async function defineSteps(templateDesign) {
+  // Suggest steps based on purpose
+  const suggestedSteps = getSuggestedSteps(templateDesign.purpose);
+
+  const customize = await AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Use suggested steps or customize?",
+      header: "Steps",
+      options: [
+        { label: "Use Suggested", description: `Suggested: ${suggestedSteps.map(s => s.cmd).join(' → ')}` },
+        { label: "Customize", description: "Modify or add custom steps" },
+        { label: "Start Empty", description: "Define all steps from scratch" }
+      ],
+      multiSelect: false
+    }]
+  });
+
+  if (customize.Steps === "Use Suggested") {
+    return suggestedSteps;
+  }
+
+  // Interactive step definition
+  const steps = [];
+  let addMore = true;
+  while (addMore) {
+    const category = await selectCommandCategory();
+    const command = await selectCommand(category.Category);
+    const unit = await selectExecutionUnit();
+    const execMode = await selectExecutionMode();
+    const contextHint = await askContextHint(command.Command);
+
+    steps.push({
+      cmd: command.Command,
+      args: command.Command.includes('plan') || command.Command.includes('fix') ? '"{{goal}}"' : undefined,
+      unit: unit.Unit,
+      execution: {
+        type: "slash-command",
+        mode: execMode.Mode
+      },
+      contextHint: contextHint
+    });
+
+    const continueAdding = await AskUserQuestion({
+      questions: [{
+        question: `Added step ${steps.length}: ${command.Command}. Add another?`,
+        header: "Continue",
+        options: [
+          { label: "Add More", description: "Define another step" },
+          { label: "Done", description: "Finish step definition" }
+        ],
+        multiSelect: false
+      }]
+    });
+    addMore = continueAdding.Continue === "Add More";
+  }
+
+  return steps;
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Suggested Step Templates
+
+### Feature Development (Level 2 - Rapid)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "rapid",
+  "description": "Quick implementation with testing",
+  "level": 2,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:lite-plan", "args": "\"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "quick-implementation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Create lightweight implementation plan" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:lite-execute", "args": "--in-memory", "unit": "quick-implementation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Execute implementation based on plan" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-fix-gen", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Generate test tasks" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-cycle-execute", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Execute test-fix cycle until pass rate >= 95%" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Feature Development (Level 3 - Coupled)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "coupled",
+  "description": "Full workflow with verification, review, and testing",
+  "level": 3,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:plan", "args": "\"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "verified-planning-execution", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Create detailed implementation plan" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:plan-verify", "unit": "verified-planning-execution", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Verify plan against requirements" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:execute", "unit": "verified-planning-execution", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Execute implementation" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:review-session-cycle", "unit": "code-review", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Multi-dimensional code review" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:review-cycle-fix", "unit": "code-review", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Fix review findings" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-fix-gen", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Generate test tasks" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-cycle-execute", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Execute test-fix cycle" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Bug Fix (Level 2)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "bugfix",
+  "description": "Bug diagnosis and fix with testing",
+  "level": 2,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:lite-fix", "args": "\"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "bug-fix", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Diagnose and plan bug fix" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:lite-execute", "args": "--in-memory", "unit": "bug-fix", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Execute bug fix" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-fix-gen", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Generate regression tests" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-cycle-execute", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Verify fix with tests" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Bug Fix Hotfix (Level 2)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "bugfix-hotfix",
+  "description": "Urgent production bug fix (no tests)",
+  "level": 2,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:lite-fix", "args": "--hotfix \"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "standalone", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Emergency hotfix mode" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### TDD Development (Level 3)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "tdd",
+  "description": "Test-driven development with Red-Green-Refactor",
+  "level": 3,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:tdd-plan", "args": "\"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "tdd-planning-execution", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Create TDD task chain" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:execute", "unit": "tdd-planning-execution", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Execute TDD cycle" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:tdd-verify", "unit": "standalone", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Verify TDD compliance" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Code Review (Level 3)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "review",
+  "description": "Code review cycle with fixes and testing",
+  "level": 3,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:review-session-cycle", "unit": "code-review", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Multi-dimensional code review" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:review-cycle-fix", "unit": "code-review", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Fix review findings" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-fix-gen", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Generate tests for fixes" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-cycle-execute", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Verify fixes pass tests" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Test Fix (Level 3)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "test-fix",
+  "description": "Fix failing tests",
+  "level": 3,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-fix-gen", "args": "\"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Generate test fix tasks" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-cycle-execute", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Execute test-fix cycle" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Issue Workflow (Level Issue)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "issue",
+  "description": "Complete issue lifecycle",
+  "level": "Issue",
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/issue:discover", "unit": "issue-workflow", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Discover issues from codebase" },
+    { "cmd": "/issue:plan", "args": "--all-pending", "unit": "issue-workflow", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Plan issue solutions" },
+    { "cmd": "/issue:queue", "unit": "issue-workflow", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Form execution queue" },
+    { "cmd": "/issue:execute", "unit": "issue-workflow", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Execute issue queue" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Rapid to Issue (Level 2.5)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "rapid-to-issue",
+  "description": "Bridge lightweight planning to issue workflow",
+  "level": 2,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:lite-plan", "args": "\"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "rapid-to-issue", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Create lightweight plan" },
+    { "cmd": "/issue:convert-to-plan", "args": "--latest-lite-plan -y", "unit": "rapid-to-issue", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Convert to issue plan" },
+    { "cmd": "/issue:queue", "unit": "rapid-to-issue", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Form execution queue" },
+    { "cmd": "/issue:execute", "args": "--queue auto", "unit": "rapid-to-issue", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Execute issue queue" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Brainstorm to Issue (Level 4)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "brainstorm-to-issue",
+  "description": "Bridge brainstorm session to issue workflow",
+  "level": 4,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/issue:from-brainstorm", "args": "SESSION=\"{{session}}\" --auto", "unit": "brainstorm-to-issue", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Convert brainstorm to issue" },
+    { "cmd": "/issue:queue", "unit": "brainstorm-to-issue", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Form execution queue" },
+    { "cmd": "/issue:execute", "args": "--queue auto", "unit": "brainstorm-to-issue", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Execute issue queue" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### With-File: Brainstorm (Level 4)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "brainstorm",
+  "description": "Multi-perspective ideation with documentation",
+  "level": 4,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:brainstorm-with-file", "args": "\"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "brainstorm-with-file", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Multi-CLI brainstorming with documented diverge-converge cycles" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### With-File: Debug (Level 3)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "debug",
+  "description": "Hypothesis-driven debugging with documentation",
+  "level": 3,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:debug-with-file", "args": "\"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "debug-with-file", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Hypothesis-driven debugging with Gemini validation" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### With-File: Analyze (Level 3)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "analyze",
+  "description": "Collaborative analysis with documentation",
+  "level": 3,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:analyze-with-file", "args": "\"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "analyze-with-file", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Multi-round collaborative analysis with CLI exploration" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Full Workflow (Level 4)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "full",
+  "description": "Complete workflow: brainstorm → plan → execute → test",
+  "level": 4,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:brainstorm:auto-parallel", "args": "\"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "standalone", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Parallel multi-perspective brainstorming" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:plan", "unit": "verified-planning-execution", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Create detailed plan from brainstorm" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:plan-verify", "unit": "verified-planning-execution", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Verify plan quality" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:execute", "unit": "verified-planning-execution", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Execute implementation" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-fix-gen", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Generate comprehensive tests" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-cycle-execute", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Execute test cycle" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Multi-CLI Planning (Level 3)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "multi-cli-plan",
+  "description": "Multi-CLI collaborative planning with cross-verification",
+  "level": 3,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:multi-cli-plan", "args": "\"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "multi-cli-planning", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Gemini+Codex+Claude collaborative planning" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:lite-execute", "args": "--in-memory", "unit": "multi-cli-planning", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Execute converged plan" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-fix-gen", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Generate tests" },
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:test-cycle-execute", "unit": "test-validation", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "async" }, "contextHint": "Execute test cycle" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Ultra-Lightweight (Level 1)
+```json
+{
+  "name": "lite-lite-lite",
+  "description": "Ultra-lightweight multi-tool execution",
+  "level": 1,
+  "steps": [
+    { "cmd": "/workflow:lite-lite-lite", "args": "\"{{goal}}\"", "unit": "standalone", "execution": { "type": "slash-command", "mode": "mainprocess" }, "contextHint": "Direct execution with minimal overhead" }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Command Port Reference
+
+Each command has input/output ports for pipeline composition:
+
+| Command | Input Port | Output Port | Atomic Unit |
+|---------|------------|-------------|-------------|
+| **Planning** |
+| lite-plan | requirement | plan | quick-implementation |
+| plan | requirement | detailed-plan | full-planning-execution |
+| plan-verify | detailed-plan | verified-plan | verified-planning-execution |
+| multi-cli-plan | requirement | multi-cli-plan | multi-cli-planning |
+| tdd-plan | requirement | tdd-tasks | tdd-planning-execution |
+| replan | session, feedback | replan | replanning-execution |
+| **Execution** |
+| lite-execute | plan, multi-cli-plan, lite-fix | code | (multiple) |
+| execute | detailed-plan, verified-plan, replan, tdd-tasks | code | (multiple) |
+| **Testing** |
+| test-fix-gen | failing-tests, session | test-tasks | test-validation |
+| test-cycle-execute | test-tasks | test-passed | test-validation |
+| test-gen | code, session | test-tasks | test-generation-execution |
+| tdd-verify | code | tdd-verified | standalone |
+| **Review** |
+| review-session-cycle | code, session | review-verified | code-review |
+| review-module-cycle | module-pattern | review-verified | code-review |
+| review-cycle-fix | review-findings | fixed-code | code-review |
+| **Bug Fix** |
+| lite-fix | bug-report | lite-fix | bug-fix |
+| debug-with-file | bug-report | understanding-document | debug-with-file |
+| **With-File** |
+| brainstorm-with-file | exploration-topic | brainstorm-document | brainstorm-with-file |
+| analyze-with-file | analysis-topic | discussion-document | analyze-with-file |
+| **Issue** |
+| issue:discover | codebase | pending-issues | issue-workflow |
+| issue:plan | pending-issues | issue-plans | issue-workflow |
+| issue:queue | issue-plans, converted-plan | execution-queue | issue-workflow |
+| issue:execute | execution-queue | completed-issues | issue-workflow |
+| issue:convert-to-plan | plan | converted-plan | rapid-to-issue |
+| issue:from-brainstorm | brainstorm-document | converted-plan | brainstorm-to-issue |
+
+---
+
+## Minimum Execution Units (最小执行单元)
+
+**Definition**: Commands that must execute together as an atomic group.
+
+| Unit Name | Commands | Purpose |
+|-----------|----------|---------|
+| **quick-implementation** | lite-plan → lite-execute | Lightweight plan and execution |
+| **multi-cli-planning** | multi-cli-plan → lite-execute | Multi-perspective planning and execution |
+| **bug-fix** | lite-fix → lite-execute | Bug diagnosis and fix |
+| **full-planning-execution** | plan → execute | Detailed planning and execution |
+| **verified-planning-execution** | plan → plan-verify → execute | Planning with verification |
+| **replanning-execution** | replan → execute | Update plan and execute |
+| **tdd-planning-execution** | tdd-plan → execute | TDD planning and execution |
+| **test-validation** | test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute | Test generation and fix cycle |
+| **test-generation-execution** | test-gen → execute | Generate and execute tests |
+| **code-review** | review-*-cycle → review-cycle-fix | Review and fix findings |
+| **issue-workflow** | discover → plan → queue → execute | Complete issue lifecycle |
+| **rapid-to-issue** | lite-plan → convert-to-plan → queue → execute | Bridge to issue workflow |
+| **brainstorm-to-issue** | from-brainstorm → queue → execute | Brainstorm to issue bridge |
+| **brainstorm-with-file** | (self-contained) | Multi-perspective ideation |
+| **debug-with-file** | (self-contained) | Hypothesis-driven debugging |
+| **analyze-with-file** | (self-contained) | Collaborative analysis |
+
+---
+
+## Phase 3: Generate JSON
+
+```javascript
+async function generateTemplate(design, steps, outputPath) {
+  const template = {
+    name: design.name,
+    description: design.description,
+    level: design.level,
+    steps: steps
+  };
+
+  const finalPath = outputPath || `~/.claude/skills/flow-coordinator/templates/${design.name}.json`;
+
+  // Write template
+  Write(finalPath, JSON.stringify(template, null, 2));
+
+  // Validate
+  const validation = validateTemplate(template);
+
+  console.log(`✅ Template created: ${finalPath}`);
+  console.log(`   Steps: ${template.steps.length}`);
+  console.log(`   Level: ${template.level}`);
+  console.log(`   Units: ${[...new Set(template.steps.map(s => s.unit))].join(', ')}`);
+
+  return { path: finalPath, template, validation };
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Output Format
+
+```json
+{
+  "name": "template-name",
+  "description": "Template description",
+  "level": 2,
+  "steps": [
+    {
+      "cmd": "/workflow:command",
+      "args": "\"{{goal}}\"",
+      "unit": "unit-name",
+      "execution": {
+        "type": "slash-command",
+        "mode": "mainprocess"
+      },
+      "contextHint": "Description of what this step does"
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Examples
+
+**Create a quick bugfix template**:
+```
+/meta-skill:flow-create hotfix-simple
+
+→ Purpose: Bug Fix
+→ Level: 2 (Lightweight)
+→ Steps: Use Suggested
+→ Output: ~/.claude/skills/flow-coordinator/templates/hotfix-simple.json
+```
+
+**Create a custom multi-stage workflow**:
+```
+/meta-skill:flow-create complex-feature --output ~/.claude/skills/my-project/templates/
+
+→ Purpose: Feature Development
+→ Level: 3 (Standard)
+→ Steps: Customize
+  → Step 1: /workflow:brainstorm:auto-parallel (standalone, mainprocess)
+  → Step 2: /workflow:plan (verified-planning-execution, mainprocess)
+  → Step 3: /workflow:plan-verify (verified-planning-execution, mainprocess)
+  → Step 4: /workflow:execute (verified-planning-execution, async)
+  → Step 5: /workflow:review-session-cycle (code-review, mainprocess)
+  → Step 6: /workflow:review-cycle-fix (code-review, mainprocess)
+  → Done
+→ Output: ~/.claude/skills/my-project/templates/complex-feature.json
+```

.claude/commands/issue/convert-to-plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,718 @@
+---
+name: convert-to-plan
+description: Convert planning artifacts (lite-plan, workflow session, markdown) to issue solutions
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--issue <id>] [--supplement] <SOURCE>"
+allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Bash(*), Read(*), Write(*), Glob(*), AskUserQuestion(*)
+---
+
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Skip confirmation, auto-create issue and bind solution.
+
+# Issue Convert-to-Plan Command (/issue:convert-to-plan)
+
+## Overview
+
+Converts various planning artifact formats into issue workflow solutions with intelligent detection and automatic binding.
+
+**Supported Sources** (auto-detected):
+- **lite-plan**: `.workflow/.lite-plan/{slug}/plan.json`
+- **workflow-session**: `WFS-xxx` ID or `.workflow/active/{session}/` folder
+- **markdown**: Any `.md` file with implementation/task content
+- **json**: Direct JSON files matching plan-json-schema
+
+## Quick Reference
+
+```bash
+# Convert lite-plan to new issue (auto-creates issue)
+/issue:convert-to-plan ".workflow/.lite-plan/implement-auth-2026-01-25"
+
+# Convert workflow session to existing issue
+/issue:convert-to-plan WFS-auth-impl --issue GH-123
+
+# Supplement existing solution with additional tasks
+/issue:convert-to-plan "./docs/additional-tasks.md" --issue ISS-001 --supplement
+
+# Auto mode - skip confirmations
+/issue:convert-to-plan ".workflow/.lite-plan/my-plan" -y
+```
+
+## Command Options
+
+| Option | Description | Default |
+|--------|-------------|---------|
+| `<SOURCE>` | Planning artifact path or WFS-xxx ID | Required |
+| `--issue <id>` | Bind to existing issue instead of creating new | Auto-create |
+| `--supplement` | Add tasks to existing solution (requires --issue) | false |
+| `-y, --yes` | Skip all confirmations | false |
+
+## Core Data Access Principle
+
+**⚠️ Important**: Use CLI commands for all issue/solution operations.
+
+| Operation | Correct | Incorrect |
+|-----------|---------|-----------|
+| Get issue | `ccw issue status <id> --json` | Read issues.jsonl directly |
+| Create issue | `ccw issue init <id> --title "..."` | Write to issues.jsonl |
+| Bind solution | `ccw issue bind <id> <sol-id>` | Edit issues.jsonl |
+| List solutions | `ccw issue solutions --issue <id> --brief` | Read solutions/*.jsonl |
+
+## Solution Schema Reference
+
+Target format for all extracted data (from solution-schema.json):
+
+```typescript
+interface Solution {
+  id: string;                    // SOL-{issue-id}-{4-char-uid}
+  description?: string;          // High-level summary
+  approach?: string;             // Technical strategy
+  tasks: Task[];                 // Required: at least 1 task
+  exploration_context?: object;  // Optional: source context
+  analysis?: { risk, impact, complexity };
+  score?: number;                // 0.0-1.0
+  is_bound: boolean;
+  created_at: string;
+  bound_at?: string;
+}
+
+interface Task {
+  id: string;                    // T1, T2, T3... (pattern: ^T[0-9]+$)
+  title: string;                 // Required: action verb + target
+  scope: string;                 // Required: module path or feature area
+  action: Action;                // Required: Create|Update|Implement|...
+  description?: string;
+  modification_points?: Array<{file, target, change}>;
+  implementation: string[];      // Required: step-by-step guide
+  test?: { unit?, integration?, commands?, coverage_target? };
+  acceptance: { criteria: string[], verification: string[] };  // Required
+  commit?: { type, scope, message_template, breaking? };
+  depends_on?: string[];
+  priority?: number;             // 1-5 (default: 3)
+}
+
+type Action = 'Create' | 'Update' | 'Implement' | 'Refactor' | 'Add' | 'Delete' | 'Configure' | 'Test' | 'Fix';
+```
+
+## Implementation
+
+### Phase 1: Parse Arguments & Detect Source Type
+
+```javascript
+const input = userInput.trim();
+const flags = parseFlags(userInput);  // --issue, --supplement, -y/--yes
+
+// Extract source path (first non-flag argument)
+const source = extractSourceArg(input);
+
+// Detect source type
+function detectSourceType(source) {
+  // Check for WFS-xxx pattern (workflow session ID)
+  if (source.match(/^WFS-[\w-]+$/)) {
+    return { type: 'workflow-session-id', path: `.workflow/active/${source}` };
+  }
+
+  // Check if directory
+  const isDir = Bash(`test -d "${source}" && echo "dir" || echo "file"`).trim() === 'dir';
+
+  if (isDir) {
+    // Check for lite-plan indicator
+    const hasPlanJson = Bash(`test -f "${source}/plan.json" && echo "yes" || echo "no"`).trim() === 'yes';
+    if (hasPlanJson) {
+      return { type: 'lite-plan', path: source };
+    }
+
+    // Check for workflow session indicator
+    const hasSession = Bash(`test -f "${source}/workflow-session.json" && echo "yes" || echo "no"`).trim() === 'yes';
+    if (hasSession) {
+      return { type: 'workflow-session', path: source };
+    }
+  }
+
+  // Check file extensions
+  if (source.endsWith('.json')) {
+    return { type: 'json-file', path: source };
+  }
+  if (source.endsWith('.md')) {
+    return { type: 'markdown-file', path: source };
+  }
+
+  // Check if path exists at all
+  const exists = Bash(`test -e "${source}" && echo "yes" || echo "no"`).trim() === 'yes';
+  if (!exists) {
+    throw new Error(`E001: Source not found: ${source}`);
+  }
+
+  return { type: 'unknown', path: source };
+}
+
+const sourceInfo = detectSourceType(source);
+if (sourceInfo.type === 'unknown') {
+  throw new Error(`E002: Unable to detect source format for: ${source}`);
+}
+
+console.log(`Detected source type: ${sourceInfo.type}`);
+```
+
+### Phase 2: Extract Data Using Format-Specific Extractor
+
+```javascript
+let extracted = { title: '', approach: '', tasks: [], metadata: {} };
+
+switch (sourceInfo.type) {
+  case 'lite-plan':
+    extracted = extractFromLitePlan(sourceInfo.path);
+    break;
+  case 'workflow-session':
+  case 'workflow-session-id':
+    extracted = extractFromWorkflowSession(sourceInfo.path);
+    break;
+  case 'markdown-file':
+    extracted = await extractFromMarkdownAI(sourceInfo.path);
+    break;
+  case 'json-file':
+    extracted = extractFromJsonFile(sourceInfo.path);
+    break;
+}
+
+// Validate extraction
+if (!extracted.tasks || extracted.tasks.length === 0) {
+  throw new Error('E006: No tasks extracted from source');
+}
+
+// Ensure task IDs are normalized to T1, T2, T3...
+extracted.tasks = normalizeTaskIds(extracted.tasks);
+
+console.log(`Extracted: ${extracted.tasks.length} tasks`);
+```
+
+#### Extractor: Lite-Plan
+
+```javascript
+function extractFromLitePlan(folderPath) {
+  const planJson = Read(`${folderPath}/plan.json`);
+  const plan = JSON.parse(planJson);
+
+  return {
+    title: plan.summary?.split('.')[0]?.trim() || 'Untitled Plan',
+    description: plan.summary,
+    approach: plan.approach,
+    tasks: plan.tasks.map(t => ({
+      id: t.id,
+      title: t.title,
+      scope: t.scope || '',
+      action: t.action || 'Implement',
+      description: t.description || t.title,
+      modification_points: t.modification_points || [],
+      implementation: Array.isArray(t.implementation) ? t.implementation : [t.implementation || ''],
+      test: t.verification ? {
+        unit: t.verification.unit_tests,
+        integration: t.verification.integration_tests,
+        commands: t.verification.manual_checks
+      } : {},
+      acceptance: {
+        criteria: Array.isArray(t.acceptance) ? t.acceptance : [t.acceptance || ''],
+        verification: t.verification?.manual_checks || []
+      },
+      depends_on: t.depends_on || [],
+      priority: 3
+    })),
+    metadata: {
+      source_type: 'lite-plan',
+      source_path: folderPath,
+      complexity: plan.complexity,
+      estimated_time: plan.estimated_time,
+      exploration_angles: plan._metadata?.exploration_angles || [],
+      original_timestamp: plan._metadata?.timestamp
+    }
+  };
+}
+```
+
+#### Extractor: Workflow Session
+
+```javascript
+function extractFromWorkflowSession(sessionPath) {
+  // Load session metadata
+  const sessionJson = Read(`${sessionPath}/workflow-session.json`);
+  const session = JSON.parse(sessionJson);
+
+  // Load IMPL_PLAN.md for approach (if exists)
+  let approach = '';
+  const implPlanPath = `${sessionPath}/IMPL_PLAN.md`;
+  const hasImplPlan = Bash(`test -f "${implPlanPath}" && echo "yes" || echo "no"`).trim() === 'yes';
+  if (hasImplPlan) {
+    const implPlan = Read(implPlanPath);
+    // Extract overview/approach section
+    const overviewMatch = implPlan.match(/##\s*(?:Overview|Approach|Strategy)\s*\n([\s\S]*?)(?=\n##|$)/i);
+    approach = overviewMatch?.[1]?.trim() || implPlan.split('\n').slice(0, 10).join('\n');
+  }
+
+  // Load all task JSONs from .task folder
+  const taskFiles = Glob({ pattern: `${sessionPath}/.task/IMPL-*.json` });
+  const tasks = taskFiles.map(f => {
+    const taskJson = Read(f);
+    const task = JSON.parse(taskJson);
+    return {
+      id: task.id?.replace(/^IMPL-0*/, 'T') || 'T1',  // IMPL-001 → T1
+      title: task.title,
+      scope: task.scope || inferScopeFromTask(task),
+      action: capitalizeAction(task.type) || 'Implement',
+      description: task.description,
+      modification_points: task.implementation?.modification_points || [],
+      implementation: task.implementation?.steps || [],
+      test: task.implementation?.test || {},
+      acceptance: {
+        criteria: task.acceptance_criteria || [],
+        verification: task.verification_steps || []
+      },
+      commit: task.commit,
+      depends_on: (task.depends_on || []).map(d => d.replace(/^IMPL-0*/, 'T')),
+      priority: task.priority || 3
+    };
+  });
+
+  return {
+    title: session.name || session.description?.split('.')[0] || 'Workflow Session',
+    description: session.description || session.name,
+    approach: approach || session.description,
+    tasks: tasks,
+    metadata: {
+      source_type: 'workflow-session',
+      source_path: sessionPath,
+      session_id: session.id,
+      created_at: session.created_at
+    }
+  };
+}
+
+function inferScopeFromTask(task) {
+  if (task.implementation?.modification_points?.length) {
+    const files = task.implementation.modification_points.map(m => m.file);
+    // Find common directory prefix
+    const dirs = files.map(f => f.split('/').slice(0, -1).join('/'));
+    return [...new Set(dirs)][0] || '';
+  }
+  return '';
+}
+
+function capitalizeAction(type) {
+  if (!type) return 'Implement';
+  const map = { feature: 'Implement', bugfix: 'Fix', refactor: 'Refactor', test: 'Test', docs: 'Update' };
+  return map[type.toLowerCase()] || type.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + type.slice(1);
+}
+```
+
+#### Extractor: Markdown (AI-Assisted via Gemini)
+
+```javascript
+async function extractFromMarkdownAI(filePath) {
+  const fileContent = Read(filePath);
+
+  // Use Gemini CLI for intelligent extraction
+  const cliPrompt = `PURPOSE: Extract implementation plan from markdown document for issue solution conversion. Must output ONLY valid JSON.
+TASK: • Analyze document structure • Identify title/summary • Extract approach/strategy section • Parse tasks from any format (lists, tables, sections, code blocks) • Normalize each task to solution schema
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: Document content provided below
+EXPECTED: Valid JSON object with format:
+{
+  "title": "extracted title",
+  "approach": "extracted approach/strategy",
+  "tasks": [
+    {
+      "id": "T1",
+      "title": "task title",
+      "scope": "module or feature area",
+      "action": "Implement|Update|Create|Fix|Refactor|Add|Delete|Configure|Test",
+      "description": "what to do",
+      "implementation": ["step 1", "step 2"],
+      "acceptance": ["criteria 1", "criteria 2"]
+    }
+  ]
+}
+CONSTRAINTS: Output ONLY valid JSON - no markdown, no explanation | Action must be one of: Create, Update, Implement, Refactor, Add, Delete, Configure, Test, Fix | Tasks must have id, title, scope, action, implementation (array), acceptance (array)
+
+DOCUMENT CONTENT:
+${fileContent}`;
+
+  // Execute Gemini CLI
+  const result = Bash(`ccw cli -p '${cliPrompt.replace(/'/g, "'\\''")}' --tool gemini --mode analysis`, { timeout: 120000 });
+
+  // Parse JSON from result (may be wrapped in markdown code block)
+  let jsonText = result.trim();
+  const jsonMatch = jsonText.match(/```(?:json)?\s*([\s\S]*?)```/);
+  if (jsonMatch) {
+    jsonText = jsonMatch[1].trim();
+  }
+
+  try {
+    const extracted = JSON.parse(jsonText);
+
+    // Normalize tasks
+    const tasks = (extracted.tasks || []).map((t, i) => ({
+      id: t.id || `T${i + 1}`,
+      title: t.title || 'Untitled task',
+      scope: t.scope || '',
+      action: validateAction(t.action) || 'Implement',
+      description: t.description || t.title,
+      modification_points: t.modification_points || [],
+      implementation: Array.isArray(t.implementation) ? t.implementation : [t.implementation || ''],
+      test: t.test || {},
+      acceptance: {
+        criteria: Array.isArray(t.acceptance) ? t.acceptance : [t.acceptance || ''],
+        verification: t.verification || []
+      },
+      depends_on: t.depends_on || [],
+      priority: t.priority || 3
+    }));
+
+    return {
+      title: extracted.title || 'Extracted Plan',
+      description: extracted.summary || extracted.title,
+      approach: extracted.approach || '',
+      tasks: tasks,
+      metadata: {
+        source_type: 'markdown',
+        source_path: filePath,
+        extraction_method: 'gemini-ai'
+      }
+    };
+  } catch (e) {
+    // Provide more context for debugging
+    throw new Error(`E005: Failed to extract tasks from markdown. Gemini response was not valid JSON. Error: ${e.message}. Response preview: ${jsonText.substring(0, 200)}...`);
+  }
+}
+
+function validateAction(action) {
+  const validActions = ['Create', 'Update', 'Implement', 'Refactor', 'Add', 'Delete', 'Configure', 'Test', 'Fix'];
+  if (!action) return null;
+  const normalized = action.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + action.slice(1).toLowerCase();
+  return validActions.includes(normalized) ? normalized : null;
+}
+```
+
+#### Extractor: JSON File
+
+```javascript
+function extractFromJsonFile(filePath) {
+  const content = Read(filePath);
+  const plan = JSON.parse(content);
+
+  // Detect if it's already solution format or plan format
+  if (plan.tasks && Array.isArray(plan.tasks)) {
+    // Map tasks to normalized format
+    const tasks = plan.tasks.map((t, i) => ({
+      id: t.id || `T${i + 1}`,
+      title: t.title,
+      scope: t.scope || '',
+      action: t.action || 'Implement',
+      description: t.description || t.title,
+      modification_points: t.modification_points || [],
+      implementation: Array.isArray(t.implementation) ? t.implementation : [t.implementation || ''],
+      test: t.test || t.verification || {},
+      acceptance: normalizeAcceptance(t.acceptance),
+      depends_on: t.depends_on || [],
+      priority: t.priority || 3
+    }));
+
+    return {
+      title: plan.summary?.split('.')[0] || plan.title || 'JSON Plan',
+      description: plan.summary || plan.description,
+      approach: plan.approach,
+      tasks: tasks,
+      metadata: {
+        source_type: 'json',
+        source_path: filePath,
+        complexity: plan.complexity,
+        original_metadata: plan._metadata
+      }
+    };
+  }
+
+  throw new Error('E002: JSON file does not contain valid plan structure (missing tasks array)');
+}
+
+function normalizeAcceptance(acceptance) {
+  if (!acceptance) return { criteria: [], verification: [] };
+  if (typeof acceptance === 'object' && acceptance.criteria) return acceptance;
+  if (Array.isArray(acceptance)) return { criteria: acceptance, verification: [] };
+  return { criteria: [String(acceptance)], verification: [] };
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 3: Normalize Task IDs
+
+```javascript
+function normalizeTaskIds(tasks) {
+  return tasks.map((t, i) => ({
+    ...t,
+    id: `T${i + 1}`,
+    // Also normalize depends_on references
+    depends_on: (t.depends_on || []).map(d => {
+      // Handle various ID formats: IMPL-001, T1, 1, etc.
+      const num = d.match(/\d+/)?.[0];
+      return num ? `T${parseInt(num)}` : d;
+    })
+  }));
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 4: Resolve Issue (Create or Find)
+
+```javascript
+let issueId = flags.issue;
+let existingSolution = null;
+
+if (issueId) {
+  // Validate issue exists
+  let issueCheck;
+  try {
+    issueCheck = Bash(`ccw issue status ${issueId} --json 2>/dev/null`).trim();
+    if (!issueCheck || issueCheck === '') {
+      throw new Error('empty response');
+    }
+  } catch (e) {
+    throw new Error(`E003: Issue not found: ${issueId}`);
+  }
+
+  const issue = JSON.parse(issueCheck);
+
+  // Check if issue already has bound solution
+  if (issue.bound_solution_id && !flags.supplement) {
+    throw new Error(`E004: Issue ${issueId} already has bound solution (${issue.bound_solution_id}). Use --supplement to add tasks.`);
+  }
+
+  // Load existing solution for supplement mode
+  if (flags.supplement && issue.bound_solution_id) {
+    try {
+      const solResult = Bash(`ccw issue solution ${issue.bound_solution_id} --json`).trim();
+      existingSolution = JSON.parse(solResult);
+      console.log(`Loaded existing solution with ${existingSolution.tasks.length} tasks`);
+    } catch (e) {
+      throw new Error(`Failed to load existing solution: ${e.message}`);
+    }
+  }
+} else {
+  // Create new issue via ccw issue create (auto-generates correct ID)
+  // Smart extraction: title from content, priority from complexity
+  const title = extracted.title || 'Converted Plan';
+  const context = extracted.description || extracted.approach || title;
+
+  // Auto-determine priority based on complexity
+  const complexityMap = { high: 2, medium: 3, low: 4 };
+  const priority = complexityMap[extracted.metadata.complexity?.toLowerCase()] || 3;
+
+  try {
+    // Use heredoc to avoid shell escaping issues
+    const createResult = Bash(`ccw issue create << 'EOF'
+{
+  "title": ${JSON.stringify(title)},
+  "context": ${JSON.stringify(context)},
+  "priority": ${priority},
+  "source": "converted"
+}
+EOF`).trim();
+
+    // Parse result to get created issue ID
+    const created = JSON.parse(createResult);
+    issueId = created.id;
+    console.log(`Created issue: ${issueId} (priority: ${priority})`);
+  } catch (e) {
+    throw new Error(`Failed to create issue: ${e.message}`);
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 5: Generate Solution
+
+```javascript
+// Generate solution ID
+function generateSolutionId(issueId) {
+  const chars = 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789';
+  let uid = '';
+  for (let i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
+    uid += chars[Math.floor(Math.random() * chars.length)];
+  }
+  return `SOL-${issueId}-${uid}`;
+}
+
+let solution;
+const solutionId = generateSolutionId(issueId);
+
+if (flags.supplement && existingSolution) {
+  // Supplement mode: merge with existing solution
+  const maxTaskId = Math.max(...existingSolution.tasks.map(t => parseInt(t.id.slice(1))));
+
+  const newTasks = extracted.tasks.map((t, i) => ({
+    ...t,
+    id: `T${maxTaskId + i + 1}`
+  }));
+
+  solution = {
+    ...existingSolution,
+    tasks: [...existingSolution.tasks, ...newTasks],
+    approach: existingSolution.approach + '\n\n[Supplementary] ' + (extracted.approach || ''),
+    updated_at: new Date().toISOString()
+  };
+
+  console.log(`Supplementing: ${existingSolution.tasks.length} existing + ${newTasks.length} new = ${solution.tasks.length} total tasks`);
+} else {
+  // New solution
+  solution = {
+    id: solutionId,
+    description: extracted.description || extracted.title,
+    approach: extracted.approach,
+    tasks: extracted.tasks,
+    exploration_context: extracted.metadata.exploration_angles ? {
+      exploration_angles: extracted.metadata.exploration_angles
+    } : undefined,
+    analysis: {
+      risk: 'medium',
+      impact: 'medium',
+      complexity: extracted.metadata.complexity?.toLowerCase() || 'medium'
+    },
+    is_bound: false,
+    created_at: new Date().toISOString(),
+    _conversion_metadata: {
+      source_type: extracted.metadata.source_type,
+      source_path: extracted.metadata.source_path,
+      converted_at: new Date().toISOString()
+    }
+  };
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 6: Confirm & Persist
+
+```javascript
+// Display preview
+console.log(`
+## Conversion Summary
+
+**Issue**: ${issueId}
+**Solution**: ${flags.supplement ? existingSolution.id : solutionId}
+**Tasks**: ${solution.tasks.length}
+**Mode**: ${flags.supplement ? 'Supplement' : 'New'}
+
+### Tasks:
+${solution.tasks.map(t => `- ${t.id}: ${t.title} [${t.action}]`).join('\n')}
+`);
+
+// Confirm if not auto mode
+if (!flags.yes && !flags.y) {
+  const confirm = AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: `Create solution for issue ${issueId} with ${solution.tasks.length} tasks?`,
+      header: 'Confirm',
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: 'Yes, create solution', description: 'Create and bind solution' },
+        { label: 'Cancel', description: 'Abort without changes' }
+      ]
+    }]
+  });
+
+  if (!confirm.answers?.['Confirm']?.includes('Yes')) {
+    console.log('Cancelled.');
+    return;
+  }
+}
+
+// Persist solution (following issue-plan-agent pattern)
+Bash(`mkdir -p .workflow/issues/solutions`);
+
+const solutionFile = `.workflow/issues/solutions/${issueId}.jsonl`;
+
+if (flags.supplement) {
+  // Supplement mode: update existing solution line atomically
+  try {
+    const existingContent = Read(solutionFile);
+    const lines = existingContent.trim().split('\n').filter(l => l);
+    const updatedLines = lines.map(line => {
+      const sol = JSON.parse(line);
+      if (sol.id === existingSolution.id) {
+        return JSON.stringify(solution);
+      }
+      return line;
+    });
+    // Atomic write: write entire content at once
+    Write({ file_path: solutionFile, content: updatedLines.join('\n') + '\n' });
+    console.log(`✓ Updated solution: ${existingSolution.id}`);
+  } catch (e) {
+    throw new Error(`Failed to update solution: ${e.message}`);
+  }
+
+  // Note: No need to rebind - solution is already bound to issue
+} else {
+  // New solution: append to JSONL file (following issue-plan-agent pattern)
+  try {
+    const solutionLine = JSON.stringify(solution);
+
+    // Read existing content, append new line, write atomically
+    const existing = Bash(`test -f "${solutionFile}" && cat "${solutionFile}" || echo ""`).trim();
+    const newContent = existing ? existing + '\n' + solutionLine + '\n' : solutionLine + '\n';
+    Write({ file_path: solutionFile, content: newContent });
+
+    console.log(`✓ Created solution: ${solutionId}`);
+  } catch (e) {
+    throw new Error(`Failed to write solution: ${e.message}`);
+  }
+
+  // Bind solution to issue
+  try {
+    Bash(`ccw issue bind ${issueId} ${solutionId}`);
+    console.log(`✓ Bound solution to issue`);
+  } catch (e) {
+    // Cleanup: remove solution file on bind failure
+    try {
+      Bash(`rm -f "${solutionFile}"`);
+    } catch (cleanupError) {
+      // Ignore cleanup errors
+    }
+    throw new Error(`Failed to bind solution: ${e.message}`);
+  }
+
+  // Update issue status to planned
+  try {
+    Bash(`ccw issue update ${issueId} --status planned`);
+  } catch (e) {
+    throw new Error(`Failed to update issue status: ${e.message}`);
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 7: Summary
+
+```javascript
+console.log(`
+## Done
+
+**Issue**: ${issueId}
+**Solution**: ${flags.supplement ? existingSolution.id : solutionId}
+**Tasks**: ${solution.tasks.length}
+**Status**: planned
+
+### Next Steps:
+- \`/issue:queue\` → Form execution queue
+- \`ccw issue status ${issueId}\` → View issue details
+- \`ccw issue solution ${flags.supplement ? existingSolution.id : solutionId}\` → View solution
+`);
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Code | Resolution |
+|-------|------|------------|
+| Source not found | E001 | Check path exists |
+| Invalid source format | E002 | Verify file contains valid plan structure |
+| Issue not found | E003 | Check issue ID or omit --issue to create new |
+| Solution already bound | E004 | Use --supplement to add tasks |
+| AI extraction failed | E005 | Check markdown structure, try simpler format |
+| No tasks extracted | E006 | Source must contain at least 1 task |
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/issue:plan` - Generate solutions from issue exploration
+- `/issue:queue` - Form execution queue from bound solutions
+- `/issue:execute` - Execute queue with DAG parallelism
+- `ccw issue status <id>` - View issue details
+- `ccw issue solution <id>` - View solution details

.claude/commands/issue/discover-by-prompt.md

@@ -0,0 +1,768 @@
+---
+name: issue:discover-by-prompt
+description: Discover issues from user prompt with Gemini-planned iterative multi-agent exploration. Uses ACE semantic search for context gathering and supports cross-module comparison (e.g., frontend vs backend API contracts).
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] <prompt> [--scope=src/**] [--depth=standard|deep] [--max-iterations=5]"
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Glob(*), Grep(*), mcp__ace-tool__search_context(*), mcp__exa__search(*)
+---
+
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-continue all iterations, skip confirmations.
+
+# Issue Discovery by Prompt
+
+## Quick Start
+
+```bash
+# Discover issues based on user description
+/issue:discover-by-prompt "Check if frontend API calls match backend implementations"
+
+# Compare specific modules
+/issue:discover-by-prompt "Verify auth flow consistency between mobile and web clients" --scope=src/auth/**,src/mobile/**
+
+# Deep exploration with more iterations
+/issue:discover-by-prompt "Find all places where error handling is inconsistent" --depth=deep --max-iterations=8
+
+# Focused backend-frontend contract check
+/issue:discover-by-prompt "Compare REST API definitions with frontend fetch calls"
+```
+
+**Core Difference from `/issue:discover`**:
+- `discover`: Pre-defined perspectives (bug, security, etc.), parallel execution
+- `discover-by-prompt`: User-driven prompt, Gemini-planned strategy, iterative exploration
+
+## What & Why
+
+### Core Concept
+
+Prompt-driven issue discovery with intelligent planning. Instead of fixed perspectives, this command:
+
+1. **Analyzes user intent** via Gemini to understand what to find
+2. **Plans exploration strategy** dynamically based on codebase structure
+3. **Executes iterative multi-agent exploration** with feedback loops
+4. **Performs cross-module comparison** when detecting comparison intent
+
+### Value Proposition
+
+1. **Natural Language Input**: Describe what you want to find, not how to find it
+2. **Intelligent Planning**: Gemini designs optimal exploration strategy
+3. **Iterative Refinement**: Each round builds on previous discoveries
+4. **Cross-Module Analysis**: Compare frontend/backend, mobile/web, old/new implementations
+5. **Adaptive Exploration**: Adjusts direction based on findings
+
+### Use Cases
+
+| Scenario | Example Prompt |
+|----------|----------------|
+| API Contract | "Check if frontend calls match backend endpoints" |
+| Error Handling | "Find inconsistent error handling patterns" |
+| Migration Gap | "Compare old auth with new auth implementation" |
+| Feature Parity | "Verify mobile has all web features" |
+| Schema Drift | "Check if TypeScript types match API responses" |
+| Integration | "Find mismatches between service A and service B" |
+
+## How It Works
+
+### Execution Flow
+
+```
+Phase 1: Prompt Analysis & Initialization
+   ├─ Parse user prompt and flags
+   ├─ Detect exploration intent (comparison/search/verification)
+   └─ Initialize discovery session
+
+Phase 1.5: ACE Context Gathering
+   ├─ Use ACE semantic search to understand codebase structure
+   ├─ Identify relevant modules based on prompt keywords
+   ├─ Collect architecture context for Gemini planning
+   └─ Build initial context package
+
+Phase 2: Gemini Strategy Planning
+   ├─ Feed ACE context + prompt to Gemini CLI
+   ├─ Gemini analyzes and generates exploration strategy
+   ├─ Create exploration dimensions with search targets
+   ├─ Define comparison matrix (if comparison intent)
+   └─ Set success criteria and iteration limits
+
+Phase 3: Iterative Agent Exploration (with ACE)
+   ├─ Iteration 1: Initial exploration by assigned agents
+   │   ├─ Agent A: ACE search + explore dimension 1
+   │   ├─ Agent B: ACE search + explore dimension 2
+   │   └─ Collect findings, update shared context
+   ├─ Iteration 2-N: Refined exploration
+   │   ├─ Analyze previous findings
+   │   ├─ ACE search for related code paths
+   │   ├─ Execute targeted exploration
+   │   └─ Update cumulative findings
+   └─ Termination: Max iterations or convergence
+
+Phase 4: Cross-Analysis & Synthesis
+   ├─ Compare findings across dimensions
+   ├─ Identify discrepancies and issues
+   ├─ Calculate confidence scores
+   └─ Generate issue candidates
+
+Phase 5: Issue Generation & Summary
+   ├─ Convert findings to issue format
+   ├─ Write discovery outputs
+   └─ Prompt user for next action
+```
+
+### Exploration Dimensions
+
+Dimensions are **dynamically generated by Gemini** based on the user prompt. Not limited to predefined categories.
+
+**Examples**:
+
+| Prompt | Generated Dimensions |
+|--------|---------------------|
+| "Check API contracts" | frontend-calls, backend-handlers |
+| "Find auth issues" | auth-module (single dimension) |
+| "Compare old/new implementations" | legacy-code, new-code |
+| "Audit payment flow" | payment-service, validation, logging |
+| "Find error handling gaps" | error-handlers, error-types, recovery-logic |
+
+Gemini analyzes the prompt + ACE context to determine:
+- How many dimensions are needed (1 to N)
+- What each dimension should focus on
+- Whether comparison is needed between dimensions
+
+### Iteration Strategy
+
+```
+┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│                    Iteration Loop                           │
+├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+│  1. Plan: What to explore this iteration                    │
+│     └─ Based on: previous findings + unexplored areas       │
+│                                                             │
+│  2. Execute: Launch agents for this iteration               │
+│     └─ Each agent: explore → collect → return summary       │
+│                                                             │
+│  3. Analyze: Process iteration results                      │
+│     └─ New findings? Gaps? Contradictions?                  │
+│                                                             │
+│  4. Decide: Continue or terminate                           │
+│     └─ Terminate if: max iterations OR convergence OR       │
+│                      high confidence on all questions       │
+└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+## Core Responsibilities
+
+### Phase 1: Prompt Analysis & Initialization
+
+```javascript
+// Step 1: Parse arguments
+const { prompt, scope, depth, maxIterations } = parseArgs(args);
+
+// Step 2: Generate discovery ID
+const discoveryId = `DBP-${formatDate(new Date(), 'YYYYMMDD-HHmmss')}`;
+
+// Step 3: Create output directory
+const outputDir = `.workflow/issues/discoveries/${discoveryId}`;
+await mkdir(outputDir, { recursive: true });
+await mkdir(`${outputDir}/iterations`, { recursive: true });
+
+// Step 4: Detect intent type from prompt
+const intentType = detectIntent(prompt);
+// Returns: 'comparison' | 'search' | 'verification' | 'audit'
+
+// Step 5: Initialize discovery state
+await writeJson(`${outputDir}/discovery-state.json`, {
+  discovery_id: discoveryId,
+  type: 'prompt-driven',
+  prompt: prompt,
+  intent_type: intentType,
+  scope: scope || '**/*',
+  depth: depth || 'standard',
+  max_iterations: maxIterations || 5,
+  phase: 'initialization',
+  created_at: new Date().toISOString(),
+  iterations: [],
+  cumulative_findings: [],
+  comparison_matrix: null  // filled for comparison intent
+});
+```
+
+### Phase 1.5: ACE Context Gathering
+
+**Purpose**: Use ACE semantic search to gather codebase context before Gemini planning.
+
+```javascript
+// Step 1: Extract keywords from prompt for semantic search
+const keywords = extractKeywords(prompt);
+// e.g., "frontend API calls match backend" → ["frontend", "API", "backend", "endpoints"]
+
+// Step 2: Use ACE to understand codebase structure
+const aceQueries = [
+  `Project architecture and module structure for ${keywords.join(', ')}`,
+  `Where are ${keywords[0]} implementations located?`,
+  `How does ${keywords.slice(0, 2).join(' ')} work in this codebase?`
+];
+
+const aceResults = [];
+for (const query of aceQueries) {
+  const result = await mcp__ace-tool__search_context({
+    project_root_path: process.cwd(),
+    query: query
+  });
+  aceResults.push({ query, result });
+}
+
+// Step 3: Build context package for Gemini (kept in memory)
+const aceContext = {
+  prompt_keywords: keywords,
+  codebase_structure: aceResults[0].result,
+  relevant_modules: aceResults.slice(1).map(r => r.result),
+  detected_patterns: extractPatterns(aceResults)
+};
+
+// Step 4: Update state (no separate file)
+await updateDiscoveryState(outputDir, {
+  phase: 'context-gathered',
+  ace_context: {
+    queries_executed: aceQueries.length,
+    modules_identified: aceContext.relevant_modules.length
+  }
+});
+
+// aceContext passed to Phase 2 in memory
+```
+
+**ACE Query Strategy by Intent Type**:
+
+| Intent | ACE Queries |
+|--------|-------------|
+| **comparison** | "frontend API calls", "backend API handlers", "API contract definitions" |
+| **search** | "{keyword} implementations", "{keyword} usage patterns" |
+| **verification** | "expected behavior for {feature}", "test coverage for {feature}" |
+| **audit** | "all {category} patterns", "{category} security concerns" |
+
+### Phase 2: Gemini Strategy Planning
+
+**Purpose**: Gemini analyzes user prompt + ACE context to design optimal exploration strategy.
+
+```javascript
+// Step 1: Load ACE context gathered in Phase 1.5
+const aceContext = await readJson(`${outputDir}/ace-context.json`);
+
+// Step 2: Build Gemini planning prompt with ACE context
+const planningPrompt = `
+PURPOSE: Analyze discovery prompt and create exploration strategy based on codebase context
+TASK:
+• Parse user intent from prompt: "${prompt}"
+• Use codebase context to identify specific modules and files to explore
+• Create exploration dimensions with precise search targets
+• Define comparison matrix structure (if comparison intent)
+• Set success criteria and iteration strategy
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @${scope || '**/*'} | Discovery type: ${intentType}
+
+## Codebase Context (from ACE semantic search)
+${JSON.stringify(aceContext, null, 2)}
+
+EXPECTED: JSON exploration plan following exploration-plan-schema.json:
+{
+  "intent_analysis": { "type": "${intentType}", "primary_question": "...", "sub_questions": [...] },
+  "dimensions": [{ "name": "...", "description": "...", "search_targets": [...], "focus_areas": [...], "agent_prompt": "..." }],
+  "comparison_matrix": { "dimension_a": "...", "dimension_b": "...", "comparison_points": [...] },
+  "success_criteria": [...],
+  "estimated_iterations": N,
+  "termination_conditions": [...]
+}
+CONSTRAINTS: Use ACE context to inform targets | Focus on actionable plan
+`;
+
+// Step 3: Execute Gemini planning
+Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "${planningPrompt}" --tool gemini --mode analysis`,
+  run_in_background: true,
+  timeout: 300000
+});
+
+// Step 4: Parse Gemini output and validate against schema
+const explorationPlan = await parseGeminiPlanOutput(geminiResult);
+validateAgainstSchema(explorationPlan, 'exploration-plan-schema.json');
+
+// Step 5: Enhance plan with ACE-discovered file paths
+explorationPlan.dimensions = explorationPlan.dimensions.map(dim => ({
+  ...dim,
+  ace_suggested_files: aceContext.relevant_modules
+    .filter(m => m.relevance_to === dim.name)
+    .map(m => m.file_path)
+}));
+
+// Step 6: Update state (plan kept in memory, not persisted)
+await updateDiscoveryState(outputDir, {
+  phase: 'planned',
+  exploration_plan: {
+    dimensions_count: explorationPlan.dimensions.length,
+    has_comparison_matrix: !!explorationPlan.comparison_matrix,
+    estimated_iterations: explorationPlan.estimated_iterations
+  }
+});
+
+// explorationPlan passed to Phase 3 in memory
+```
+
+**Gemini Planning Responsibilities**:
+
+| Responsibility | Input | Output |
+|----------------|-------|--------|
+| Intent Analysis | User prompt | type, primary_question, sub_questions |
+| Dimension Design | ACE context + prompt | dimensions with search_targets |
+| Comparison Matrix | Intent type + modules | comparison_points (if applicable) |
+| Iteration Strategy | Depth setting | estimated_iterations, termination_conditions |
+
+**Gemini Planning Output Schema**:
+
+```json
+{
+  "intent_analysis": {
+    "type": "comparison|search|verification|audit",
+    "primary_question": "string",
+    "sub_questions": ["string"]
+  },
+  "dimensions": [
+    {
+      "name": "frontend",
+      "description": "Client-side API calls and error handling",
+      "search_targets": ["src/api/**", "src/hooks/**"],
+      "focus_areas": ["fetch calls", "error boundaries", "response parsing"],
+      "agent_prompt": "Explore frontend API consumption patterns..."
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "backend",
+      "description": "Server-side API implementations",
+      "search_targets": ["src/server/**", "src/routes/**"],
+      "focus_areas": ["endpoint handlers", "response schemas", "error responses"],
+      "agent_prompt": "Explore backend API implementations..."
+    }
+  ],
+  "comparison_matrix": {
+    "dimension_a": "frontend",
+    "dimension_b": "backend",
+    "comparison_points": [
+      {"aspect": "endpoints", "frontend_check": "fetch URLs", "backend_check": "route paths"},
+      {"aspect": "methods", "frontend_check": "HTTP methods used", "backend_check": "methods accepted"},
+      {"aspect": "payloads", "frontend_check": "request body structure", "backend_check": "expected schema"},
+      {"aspect": "responses", "frontend_check": "response parsing", "backend_check": "response format"},
+      {"aspect": "errors", "frontend_check": "error handling", "backend_check": "error responses"}
+    ]
+  },
+  "success_criteria": [
+    "All API endpoints mapped between frontend and backend",
+    "Discrepancies identified with file:line references",
+    "Each finding includes remediation suggestion"
+  ],
+  "estimated_iterations": 3,
+  "termination_conditions": [
+    "All comparison points verified",
+    "No new findings in last iteration",
+    "Confidence > 0.8 on primary question"
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 3: Iterative Agent Exploration (with ACE)
+
+**Purpose**: Multi-agent iterative exploration using ACE for semantic search within each iteration.
+
+```javascript
+let iteration = 0;
+let cumulativeFindings = [];
+let sharedContext = { aceDiscoveries: [], crossReferences: [] };
+let shouldContinue = true;
+
+while (shouldContinue && iteration < maxIterations) {
+  iteration++;
+  const iterationDir = `${outputDir}/iterations/${iteration}`;
+  await mkdir(iterationDir, { recursive: true });
+
+  // Step 1: ACE-assisted iteration planning
+  // Use previous findings to guide ACE queries for this iteration
+  const iterationAceQueries = iteration === 1
+    ? explorationPlan.dimensions.map(d => d.focus_areas[0])  // Initial queries from plan
+    : deriveQueriesFromFindings(cumulativeFindings);         // Follow-up queries from findings
+
+  // Execute ACE searches to find related code
+  const iterationAceResults = [];
+  for (const query of iterationAceQueries) {
+    const result = await mcp__ace-tool__search_context({
+      project_root_path: process.cwd(),
+      query: `${query} in ${explorationPlan.scope}`
+    });
+    iterationAceResults.push({ query, result });
+  }
+
+  // Update shared context with ACE discoveries
+  sharedContext.aceDiscoveries.push(...iterationAceResults);
+
+  // Step 2: Plan this iteration based on ACE results
+  const iterationPlan = planIteration(iteration, explorationPlan, cumulativeFindings, iterationAceResults);
+
+  // Step 3: Launch dimension agents with ACE context
+  const agentPromises = iterationPlan.dimensions.map(dimension =>
+    Task({
+      subagent_type: "cli-explore-agent",
+      run_in_background: false,
+      description: `Explore ${dimension.name} (iteration ${iteration})`,
+      prompt: buildDimensionPromptWithACE(dimension, iteration, cumulativeFindings, iterationAceResults, iterationDir)
+    })
+  );
+
+  // Wait for iteration agents
+  const iterationResults = await Promise.all(agentPromises);
+
+  // Step 4: Collect and analyze iteration findings
+  const iterationFindings = await collectIterationFindings(iterationDir, iterationPlan.dimensions);
+
+  // Step 5: Cross-reference findings between dimensions
+  if (iterationPlan.dimensions.length > 1) {
+    const crossRefs = findCrossReferences(iterationFindings, iterationPlan.dimensions);
+    sharedContext.crossReferences.push(...crossRefs);
+  }
+
+  cumulativeFindings.push(...iterationFindings);
+
+  // Step 6: Decide whether to continue
+  const convergenceCheck = checkConvergence(iterationFindings, cumulativeFindings, explorationPlan);
+  shouldContinue = !convergenceCheck.converged;
+
+  // Step 7: Update state (iteration summary embedded in state)
+  await updateDiscoveryState(outputDir, {
+    iterations: [...state.iterations, {
+      number: iteration,
+      findings_count: iterationFindings.length,
+      ace_queries: iterationAceQueries.length,
+      cross_references: sharedContext.crossReferences.length,
+      new_discoveries: convergenceCheck.newDiscoveries,
+      confidence: convergenceCheck.confidence,
+      continued: shouldContinue
+    }],
+    cumulative_findings: cumulativeFindings
+  });
+}
+```
+
+**ACE in Iteration Loop**:
+
+```
+Iteration N
+    │
+    ├─→ ACE Search (based on previous findings)
+    │   └─ Query: "related code paths for {finding.category}"
+    │   └─ Result: Additional files to explore
+    │
+    ├─→ Agent Exploration (with ACE context)
+    │   └─ Agent receives: dimension targets + ACE suggestions
+    │   └─ Agent can call ACE for deeper search
+    │
+    ├─→ Cross-Reference Analysis
+    │   └─ Compare findings between dimensions
+    │   └─ Identify discrepancies
+    │
+    └─→ Convergence Check
+        └─ New findings? Continue
+        └─ No new findings? Terminate
+```
+
+**Dimension Agent Prompt Template (with ACE)**:
+
+```javascript
+function buildDimensionPromptWithACE(dimension, iteration, previousFindings, aceResults, outputDir) {
+  // Filter ACE results relevant to this dimension
+  const relevantAceResults = aceResults.filter(r =>
+    r.query.includes(dimension.name) || dimension.focus_areas.some(fa => r.query.includes(fa))
+  );
+
+  return `
+    ## Task Objective
+    Explore ${dimension.name} dimension for issue discovery (Iteration ${iteration})
+
+    ## Context
+    - Dimension: ${dimension.name}
+    - Description: ${dimension.description}
+    - Search Targets: ${dimension.search_targets.join(', ')}
+    - Focus Areas: ${dimension.focus_areas.join(', ')}
+
+    ## ACE Semantic Search Results (Pre-gathered)
+    The following files/code sections were identified by ACE as relevant to this dimension:
+    ${JSON.stringify(relevantAceResults.map(r => ({ query: r.query, files: r.result.slice(0, 5) })), null, 2)}
+
+    **Use ACE for deeper exploration**: You have access to mcp__ace-tool__search_context.
+    When you find something interesting, use ACE to find related code:
+    - mcp__ace-tool__search_context({ project_root_path: ".", query: "related to {finding}" })
+
+    ${iteration > 1 ? `
+    ## Previous Findings to Build Upon
+    ${summarizePreviousFindings(previousFindings, dimension.name)}
+
+    ## This Iteration Focus
+    - Explore areas not yet covered (check ACE results for new files)
+    - Verify/deepen previous findings
+    - Follow leads from previous discoveries
+    - Use ACE to find cross-references between dimensions
+    ` : ''}
+
+    ## MANDATORY FIRST STEPS
+    1. Read exploration plan: ${outputDir}/../exploration-plan.json
+    2. Read schema: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/discovery-finding-schema.json
+    3. Review ACE results above for starting points
+    4. Explore files identified by ACE
+
+    ## Exploration Instructions
+    ${dimension.agent_prompt}
+
+    ## ACE Usage Guidelines
+    - Use ACE when you need to find:
+      - Where a function/class is used
+      - Related implementations in other modules
+      - Cross-module dependencies
+      - Similar patterns elsewhere in codebase
+    - Query format: Natural language, be specific
+    - Example: "Where is UserService.authenticate called from?"
+
+    ## Output Requirements
+
+    **1. Write JSON file**: ${outputDir}/${dimension.name}.json
+    Follow discovery-finding-schema.json:
+    - findings: [{id, title, category, description, file, line, snippet, confidence, related_dimension}]
+    - coverage: {files_explored, areas_covered, areas_remaining}
+    - leads: [{description, suggested_search}] // for next iteration
+    - ace_queries_used: [{query, result_count}] // track ACE usage
+
+    **2. Return summary**:
+    - Total findings this iteration
+    - Key discoveries
+    - ACE queries that revealed important code
+    - Recommended next exploration areas
+
+    ## Success Criteria
+    - [ ] JSON written to ${outputDir}/${dimension.name}.json
+    - [ ] Each finding has file:line reference
+    - [ ] ACE used for cross-references where applicable
+    - [ ] Coverage report included
+    - [ ] Leads for next iteration identified
+  `;
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 4: Cross-Analysis & Synthesis
+
+```javascript
+// For comparison intent, perform cross-analysis
+if (intentType === 'comparison' && explorationPlan.comparison_matrix) {
+  const comparisonResults = [];
+
+  for (const point of explorationPlan.comparison_matrix.comparison_points) {
+    const dimensionAFindings = cumulativeFindings.filter(f =>
+      f.related_dimension === explorationPlan.comparison_matrix.dimension_a &&
+      f.category.includes(point.aspect)
+    );
+
+    const dimensionBFindings = cumulativeFindings.filter(f =>
+      f.related_dimension === explorationPlan.comparison_matrix.dimension_b &&
+      f.category.includes(point.aspect)
+    );
+
+    // Compare and find discrepancies
+    const discrepancies = findDiscrepancies(dimensionAFindings, dimensionBFindings, point);
+
+    comparisonResults.push({
+      aspect: point.aspect,
+      dimension_a_count: dimensionAFindings.length,
+      dimension_b_count: dimensionBFindings.length,
+      discrepancies: discrepancies,
+      match_rate: calculateMatchRate(dimensionAFindings, dimensionBFindings)
+    });
+  }
+
+  // Write comparison analysis
+  await writeJson(`${outputDir}/comparison-analysis.json`, {
+    matrix: explorationPlan.comparison_matrix,
+    results: comparisonResults,
+    summary: {
+      total_discrepancies: comparisonResults.reduce((sum, r) => sum + r.discrepancies.length, 0),
+      overall_match_rate: average(comparisonResults.map(r => r.match_rate)),
+      critical_mismatches: comparisonResults.filter(r => r.match_rate < 0.5)
+    }
+  });
+}
+
+// Prioritize all findings
+const prioritizedFindings = prioritizeFindings(cumulativeFindings, explorationPlan);
+```
+
+### Phase 5: Issue Generation & Summary
+
+```javascript
+// Convert high-confidence findings to issues
+const issueWorthy = prioritizedFindings.filter(f =>
+  f.confidence >= 0.7 || f.priority === 'critical' || f.priority === 'high'
+);
+
+const issues = issueWorthy.map(finding => ({
+  id: `ISS-${discoveryId}-${finding.id}`,
+  title: finding.title,
+  description: finding.description,
+  source: {
+    discovery_id: discoveryId,
+    finding_id: finding.id,
+    dimension: finding.related_dimension
+  },
+  file: finding.file,
+  line: finding.line,
+  priority: finding.priority,
+  category: finding.category,
+  suggested_fix: finding.suggested_fix,
+  confidence: finding.confidence,
+  status: 'discovered',
+  created_at: new Date().toISOString()
+}));
+
+// Write issues
+await writeJsonl(`${outputDir}/discovery-issues.jsonl`, issues);
+
+// Update final state (summary embedded in state, no separate file)
+await updateDiscoveryState(outputDir, {
+  phase: 'complete',
+  updated_at: new Date().toISOString(),
+  results: {
+    total_iterations: iteration,
+    total_findings: cumulativeFindings.length,
+    issues_generated: issues.length,
+    comparison_match_rate: comparisonResults
+      ? average(comparisonResults.map(r => r.match_rate))
+      : null
+  }
+});
+
+// Prompt user for next action
+await AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: `Discovery complete: ${issues.length} issues from ${cumulativeFindings.length} findings across ${iteration} iterations. What next?`,
+    header: "Next Step",
+    multiSelect: false,
+    options: [
+      { label: "Export to Issues (Recommended)", description: `Export ${issues.length} issues for planning` },
+      { label: "Review Details", description: "View comparison analysis and iteration details" },
+      { label: "Run Deeper", description: "Continue with more iterations" },
+      { label: "Skip", description: "Complete without exporting" }
+    ]
+  }]
+});
+```
+
+## Output File Structure
+
+```
+.workflow/issues/discoveries/
+└── {DBP-YYYYMMDD-HHmmss}/
+    ├── discovery-state.json          # Session state with iteration tracking
+    ├── iterations/
+    │   ├── 1/
+    │   │   └── {dimension}.json      # Dimension findings
+    │   ├── 2/
+    │   │   └── {dimension}.json
+    │   └── ...
+    ├── comparison-analysis.json      # Cross-dimension comparison (if applicable)
+    └── discovery-issues.jsonl        # Generated issue candidates
+```
+
+**Simplified Design**:
+- ACE context and Gemini plan kept in memory, not persisted
+- Iteration summaries embedded in state
+- No separate summary.md (state.json contains all needed info)
+
+## Schema References
+
+| Schema | Path | Used By |
+|--------|------|---------|
+| **Discovery State** | `discovery-state-schema.json` | Orchestrator (state tracking) |
+| **Discovery Finding** | `discovery-finding-schema.json` | Dimension agents (output) |
+| **Exploration Plan** | `exploration-plan-schema.json` | Gemini output validation (memory only) |
+
+## Configuration Options
+
+| Flag | Default | Description |
+|------|---------|-------------|
+| `--scope` | `**/*` | File pattern to explore |
+| `--depth` | `standard` | `standard` (3 iterations) or `deep` (5+ iterations) |
+| `--max-iterations` | 5 | Maximum exploration iterations |
+| `--tool` | `gemini` | Planning tool (gemini/qwen) |
+| `--plan-only` | `false` | Stop after Phase 2 (Gemini planning), show plan for user review |
+
+## Examples
+
+### Example 1: Single Module Deep Dive
+
+```bash
+/issue:discover-by-prompt "Find all potential issues in the auth module" --scope=src/auth/**
+```
+
+**Gemini plans** (single dimension):
+- Dimension: auth-module
+- Focus: security vulnerabilities, edge cases, error handling, test gaps
+
+**Iterations**: 2-3 (until no new findings)
+
+### Example 2: API Contract Comparison
+
+```bash
+/issue:discover-by-prompt "Check if API calls match implementations" --scope=src/**
+```
+
+**Gemini plans** (comparison):
+- Dimension 1: api-consumers (fetch calls, hooks, services)
+- Dimension 2: api-providers (handlers, routes, controllers)
+- Comparison matrix: endpoints, methods, payloads, responses
+
+### Example 3: Multi-Module Audit
+
+```bash
+/issue:discover-by-prompt "Audit the payment flow for issues" --scope=src/payment/**
+```
+
+**Gemini plans** (multi-dimension):
+- Dimension 1: payment-logic (calculations, state transitions)
+- Dimension 2: validation (input checks, business rules)
+- Dimension 3: error-handling (failure modes, recovery)
+
+### Example 4: Plan Only Mode
+
+```bash
+/issue:discover-by-prompt "Find inconsistent patterns" --plan-only
+```
+
+Stops after Gemini planning, outputs:
+```
+Gemini Plan:
+- Intent: search
+- Dimensions: 2 (pattern-definitions, pattern-usages)
+- Estimated iterations: 3
+
+Continue with exploration? [Y/n]
+```
+
+## Related Commands
+
+```bash
+# After discovery, plan solutions
+/issue:plan DBP-001-01,DBP-001-02
+
+# View all discoveries
+/issue:manage
+
+# Standard perspective-based discovery
+/issue:discover src/auth/** --perspectives=security,bug
+```
+
+## Best Practices
+
+1. **Be Specific in Prompts**: More specific prompts lead to better Gemini planning
+2. **Scope Appropriately**: Narrow scope for focused comparison, wider for audits
+3. **Review Exploration Plan**: Check `exploration-plan.json` before long explorations
+4. **Use Standard Depth First**: Start with standard, go deep only if needed
+5. **Combine with `/issue:discover`**: Use prompt-based for comparisons, perspective-based for audits

.claude/commands/issue/discover.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: issue:discover
 description: Discover potential issues from multiple perspectives (bug, UX, test, quality, security, performance, maintainability, best-practices) using CLI explore. Supports Exa external research for security and best-practices perspectives.
-argument-hint: "<path-pattern> [--perspectives=bug,ux,...] [--external]"
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Glob(*), Grep(*)
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] <path-pattern> [--perspectives=bug,ux,...] [--external]"
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Glob(*), Grep(*)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-select all perspectives, skip confirmations.
+
 # Issue Discovery Command
 
 ## Quick Start

.claude/commands/issue/execute.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: execute
 description: Execute queue with DAG-based parallel orchestration (one commit per solution)
-argument-hint: "[--worktree [<existing-path>]] [--queue <queue-id>]"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] --queue <queue-id> [--worktree [<existing-path>]]"
 allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Bash(*), Read(*), AskUserQuestion(*)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-confirm execution, use recommended settings.
+
 # Issue Execute Command (/issue:execute)
 
 ## Overview
@@ -17,21 +21,64 @@ Minimal orchestrator that dispatches **solution IDs** to executors. Each executo
 - `done <id>` → update solution completion status
 - No race conditions: status changes only via `done`
 - **Executor handles all tasks within a solution sequentially**
-- **Worktree isolation**: Each executor can work in its own git worktree
+- **Single worktree for entire queue**: One worktree isolates ALL queue execution from main workspace
+
+## Queue ID Requirement (MANDATORY)
+
+**Queue ID is REQUIRED.** You MUST specify which queue to execute via `--queue <queue-id>`.
+
+### If Queue ID Not Provided
+
+When `--queue` parameter is missing, you MUST:
+
+1. **List available queues** by running:
+```javascript
+const result = Bash('ccw issue queue list --brief --json');
+const index = JSON.parse(result);
+```
+
+2. **Display available queues** to user:
+```
+Available Queues:
+ID                    Status      Progress    Issues
+-----------------------------------------------------------
+→ QUE-20251215-001   active      3/10        ISS-001, ISS-002
+  QUE-20251210-002   active      0/5         ISS-003
+  QUE-20251205-003   completed   8/8         ISS-004
+```
+
+3. **Stop and ask user** to specify which queue to execute:
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "Which queue would you like to execute?",
+    header: "Queue",
+    multiSelect: false,
+    options: index.queues
+      .filter(q => q.status === 'active')
+      .map(q => ({
+        label: q.id,
+        description: `${q.status}, ${q.completed_solutions || 0}/${q.total_solutions || 0} completed, Issues: ${q.issue_ids.join(', ')}`
+      }))
+  }]
+})
+```
+
+4. **After user selection**, continue execution with the selected queue ID.
+
+**DO NOT auto-select queues.** Explicit user confirmation is required to prevent accidental execution of wrong queue.
 
 ## Usage
 
 ```bash
-/issue:execute                           # Execute active queue(s)
-/issue:execute --queue QUE-xxx           # Execute specific queue
-/issue:execute --worktree                # Use git worktrees for parallel isolation
-/issue:execute --worktree --queue QUE-xxx
-/issue:execute --worktree /path/to/existing/worktree  # Resume in existing worktree
+/issue:execute --queue QUE-xxx           # Execute specific queue (REQUIRED)
+/issue:execute --queue QUE-xxx --worktree  # Execute in isolated worktree
+/issue:execute --queue QUE-xxx --worktree /path/to/existing/worktree  # Resume
 ```
 
 **Parallelism**: Determined automatically by task dependency DAG (no manual control)
 **Executor & Dry-run**: Selected via interactive prompt (AskUserQuestion)
-**Worktree**: Creates isolated git worktrees for each parallel executor
+**Worktree**: Creates ONE worktree for the entire queue execution (not per-solution)
 
 **⭐ Recommended Executor**: **Codex** - Best for long-running autonomous work (2hr timeout), supports background execution and full write access
 
@@ -44,37 +91,101 @@ Minimal orchestrator that dispatches **solution IDs** to executors. Each executo
 ## Execution Flow
 
 ```
-Phase 0 (if --worktree): Setup Worktree Base
-   └─ Ensure .worktrees directory exists
+Phase 0: Validate Queue ID (REQUIRED)
+   ├─ If --queue provided → use specified queue
+   ├─ If --queue missing → list queues, prompt user to select
+   └─ Store QUEUE_ID for all subsequent commands
+
+Phase 0.5 (if --worktree): Setup Queue Worktree
+   ├─ Create ONE worktree for entire queue: .ccw/worktrees/queue-<timestamp>
+   ├─ All subsequent execution happens in this worktree
+   └─ Main workspace remains clean and untouched
 
 Phase 1: Get DAG & User Selection
-   ├─ ccw issue queue dag [--queue QUE-xxx] → { parallel_batches: [["S-1","S-2"], ["S-3"]] }
+   ├─ ccw issue queue dag --queue ${QUEUE_ID} → { parallel_batches: [["S-1","S-2"], ["S-3"]] }
    └─ AskUserQuestion → executor type (codex|gemini|agent), dry-run mode, worktree mode
 
 Phase 2: Dispatch Parallel Batch (DAG-driven)
    ├─ Parallelism determined by DAG (no manual limit)
+   ├─ All executors work in the SAME worktree (or main if no worktree)
    ├─ For each solution ID in batch (parallel - all at once):
-   │   ├─ (if worktree) Create isolated worktree: git worktree add
    │   ├─ Executor calls: ccw issue detail <id>  (READ-ONLY)
    │   ├─ Executor gets FULL SOLUTION with all tasks
    │   ├─ Executor implements all tasks sequentially (T1 → T2 → T3)
    │   ├─ Executor tests + verifies each task
    │   ├─ Executor commits ONCE per solution (with formatted summary)
-   │   ├─ Executor calls: ccw issue done <id>
-   │   └─ (if worktree) Cleanup: merge branch, remove worktree
+   │   └─ Executor calls: ccw issue done <id>
    └─ Wait for batch completion
 
-Phase 3: Next Batch
+Phase 3: Next Batch (repeat Phase 2)
    └─ ccw issue queue dag → check for newly-ready solutions
+
+Phase 4 (if --worktree): Worktree Completion
+   ├─ All batches complete → prompt for merge strategy
+   └─ Options: Create PR / Merge to main / Keep branch
 ```
 
 ## Implementation
 
+### Phase 0: Validate Queue ID
+
+```javascript
+// Check if --queue was provided
+let QUEUE_ID = args.queue;
+
+if (!QUEUE_ID) {
+  // List available queues
+  const listResult = Bash('ccw issue queue list --brief --json').trim();
+  const index = JSON.parse(listResult);
+
+  if (index.queues.length === 0) {
+    console.log('No queues found. Use /issue:queue to create one first.');
+    return;
+  }
+
+  // Filter active queues only
+  const activeQueues = index.queues.filter(q => q.status === 'active');
+
+  if (activeQueues.length === 0) {
+    console.log('No active queues found.');
+    console.log('Available queues:', index.queues.map(q => `${q.id} (${q.status})`).join(', '));
+    return;
+  }
+
+  // Display and prompt user
+  console.log('\nAvailable Queues:');
+  console.log('ID'.padEnd(22) + 'Status'.padEnd(12) + 'Progress'.padEnd(12) + 'Issues');
+  console.log('-'.repeat(70));
+  for (const q of index.queues) {
+    const marker = q.id === index.active_queue_id ? '→ ' : '  ';
+    console.log(marker + q.id.padEnd(20) + q.status.padEnd(12) +
+      `${q.completed_solutions || 0}/${q.total_solutions || 0}`.padEnd(12) +
+      q.issue_ids.join(', '));
+  }
+
+  const answer = AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Which queue would you like to execute?",
+      header: "Queue",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: activeQueues.map(q => ({
+        label: q.id,
+        description: `${q.completed_solutions || 0}/${q.total_solutions || 0} completed, Issues: ${q.issue_ids.join(', ')}`
+      }))
+    }]
+  });
+
+  QUEUE_ID = answer['Queue'];
+}
+
+console.log(`\n## Executing Queue: ${QUEUE_ID}\n`);
+```
+
 ### Phase 1: Get DAG & User Selection
 
 ```javascript
-// Get dependency graph and parallel batches
-const dagJson = Bash(`ccw issue queue dag`).trim();
+// Get dependency graph and parallel batches (QUEUE_ID required)
+const dagJson = Bash(`ccw issue queue dag --queue ${QUEUE_ID}`).trim();
 const dag = JSON.parse(dagJson);
 
 if (dag.error || dag.ready_count === 0) {
@@ -115,12 +226,12 @@ const answer = AskUserQuestion({
       ]
     },
     {
-      question: 'Use git worktrees for parallel isolation?',
+      question: 'Use git worktree for queue isolation?',
       header: 'Worktree',
       multiSelect: false,
       options: [
-        { label: 'Yes (Recommended for parallel)', description: 'Each executor works in isolated worktree branch' },
-        { label: 'No', description: 'Work directly in current directory (serial only)' }
+        { label: 'Yes (Recommended)', description: 'Create ONE worktree for entire queue - main stays clean' },
+        { label: 'No', description: 'Work directly in current directory' }
       ]
     }
   ]
@@ -140,7 +251,7 @@ if (isDryRun) {
 }
 ```
 
-### Phase 2: Dispatch Parallel Batch (DAG-driven)
+### Phase 0 & 2: Setup Queue Worktree & Dispatch
 
 ```javascript
 // Parallelism determined by DAG - no manual limit
@@ -158,24 +269,40 @@ TodoWrite({
 
 console.log(`\n### Executing Solutions (DAG batch 1): ${batch.join(', ')}`);
 
-// Setup worktree base directory if needed (using absolute paths)
-if (useWorktree) {
-  // Use absolute paths to avoid issues when running from subdirectories
-  const repoRoot = Bash('git rev-parse --show-toplevel').trim();
-  const worktreeBase = `${repoRoot}/.ccw/worktrees`;
-  Bash(`mkdir -p "${worktreeBase}"`);
-  // Prune stale worktrees from previous interrupted executions
-  Bash('git worktree prune');
-}
-
 // Parse existing worktree path from args if provided
 // Example: --worktree /path/to/existing/worktree
 const existingWorktree = args.worktree && typeof args.worktree === 'string' ? args.worktree : null;
 
+// Setup ONE worktree for entire queue (not per-solution)
+let worktreePath = null;
+let worktreeBranch = null;
+
+if (useWorktree) {
+  const repoRoot = Bash('git rev-parse --show-toplevel').trim();
+  const worktreeBase = `${repoRoot}/.ccw/worktrees`;
+  Bash(`mkdir -p "${worktreeBase}"`);
+  Bash('git worktree prune');  // Cleanup stale worktrees
+
+  if (existingWorktree) {
+    // Resume mode: Use existing worktree
+    worktreePath = existingWorktree;
+    worktreeBranch = Bash(`git -C "${worktreePath}" branch --show-current`).trim();
+    console.log(`Resuming in existing worktree: ${worktreePath} (branch: ${worktreeBranch})`);
+  } else {
+    // Create mode: ONE worktree for the entire queue
+    const timestamp = new Date().toISOString().replace(/[-:T]/g, '').slice(0, 14);
+    worktreeBranch = `queue-exec-${dag.queue_id || timestamp}`;
+    worktreePath = `${worktreeBase}/${worktreeBranch}`;
+    Bash(`git worktree add "${worktreePath}" -b "${worktreeBranch}"`);
+    console.log(`Created queue worktree: ${worktreePath}`);
+  }
+}
+
 // Launch ALL solutions in batch in parallel (DAG guarantees no conflicts)
+// All executors work in the SAME worktree (or main if no worktree)
 const executions = batch.map(solutionId => {
   updateTodo(solutionId, 'in_progress');
-  return dispatchExecutor(solutionId, executor, useWorktree, existingWorktree);
+  return dispatchExecutor(solutionId, executor, worktreePath);
 });
 
 await Promise.all(executions);
@@ -185,183 +312,77 @@ batch.forEach(id => updateTodo(id, 'completed'));
 ### Executor Dispatch
 
 ```javascript
-function dispatchExecutor(solutionId, executorType, useWorktree = false, existingWorktree = null) {
-  // Worktree setup commands (if enabled) - using absolute paths
-  // Supports both creating new worktrees and resuming in existing ones
-  const worktreeSetup = useWorktree ? `
-### Step 0: Setup Isolated Worktree
-\`\`\`bash
-# Use absolute paths to avoid issues when running from subdirectories
-REPO_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
-WORKTREE_BASE="\${REPO_ROOT}/.ccw/worktrees"
+// worktreePath: path to shared worktree (null if not using worktree)
+function dispatchExecutor(solutionId, executorType, worktreePath = null) {
+  // If worktree is provided, executor works in that directory
+  // No per-solution worktree creation - ONE worktree for entire queue
 
-# Check if existing worktree path was provided
-EXISTING_WORKTREE="${existingWorktree || ''}"
-
-if [[ -n "\${EXISTING_WORKTREE}" && -d "\${EXISTING_WORKTREE}" ]]; then
-  # Resume mode: Use existing worktree
-  WORKTREE_PATH="\${EXISTING_WORKTREE}"
-  WORKTREE_NAME=$(basename "\${WORKTREE_PATH}")
-
-  # Verify it's a valid git worktree
-  if ! git -C "\${WORKTREE_PATH}" rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree &>/dev/null; then
-    echo "Error: \${EXISTING_WORKTREE} is not a valid git worktree"
-    exit 1
-  fi
-
-  echo "Resuming in existing worktree: \${WORKTREE_PATH}"
-else
-  # Create mode: New worktree with timestamp
-  WORKTREE_NAME="exec-${solutionId}-$(date +%H%M%S)"
-  WORKTREE_PATH="\${WORKTREE_BASE}/\${WORKTREE_NAME}"
-
-  # Ensure worktree base exists
-  mkdir -p "\${WORKTREE_BASE}"
-
-  # Prune stale worktrees
-  git worktree prune
-
-  # Create worktree
-  git worktree add "\${WORKTREE_PATH}" -b "\${WORKTREE_NAME}"
-
-  echo "Created new worktree: \${WORKTREE_PATH}"
-fi
-
-# Setup cleanup trap for graceful failure handling
-cleanup_worktree() {
-  echo "Cleaning up worktree due to interruption..."
-  cd "\${REPO_ROOT}" 2>/dev/null || true
-  git worktree remove "\${WORKTREE_PATH}" --force 2>/dev/null || true
-  echo "Worktree removed. Branch '\${WORKTREE_NAME}' kept for inspection."
-}
-trap cleanup_worktree EXIT INT TERM
-
-cd "\${WORKTREE_PATH}"
-\`\`\`
-` : '';
-
-  const worktreeCleanup = useWorktree ? `
-### Step 5: Worktree Completion (User Choice)
-
-After all tasks complete, prompt for merge strategy:
-
-\`\`\`javascript
-AskUserQuestion({
-  questions: [{
-    question: "Solution ${solutionId} completed. What to do with worktree branch?",
-    header: "Merge",
-    multiSelect: false,
-    options: [
-      { label: "Create PR (Recommended)", description: "Push branch and create pull request - safest for parallel execution" },
-      { label: "Merge to main", description: "Merge branch and cleanup worktree (requires clean main)" },
-      { label: "Keep branch", description: "Cleanup worktree, keep branch for manual handling" }
-    ]
-  }]
-})
-\`\`\`
-
-**Based on selection:**
-\`\`\`bash
-# Disable cleanup trap before intentional cleanup
-trap - EXIT INT TERM
-
-# Return to repo root (use REPO_ROOT from setup)
-cd "\${REPO_ROOT}"
-
-# Validate main repo state before merge
-validate_main_clean() {
-  if [[ -n \$(git status --porcelain) ]]; then
-    echo "⚠️ Warning: Main repo has uncommitted changes."
-    echo "Cannot auto-merge. Falling back to 'Create PR' option."
-    return 1
-  fi
-  return 0
-}
-
-# Create PR (Recommended for parallel execution):
-git push -u origin "\${WORKTREE_NAME}"
-gh pr create --title "Solution ${solutionId}" --body "Issue queue execution"
-git worktree remove "\${WORKTREE_PATH}"
-
-# Merge to main (only if main is clean):
-if validate_main_clean; then
-  git merge --no-ff "\${WORKTREE_NAME}" -m "Merge solution ${solutionId}"
-  git worktree remove "\${WORKTREE_PATH}" && git branch -d "\${WORKTREE_NAME}"
-else
-  # Fallback to PR if main is dirty
-  git push -u origin "\${WORKTREE_NAME}"
-  gh pr create --title "Solution ${solutionId}" --body "Issue queue execution (main had uncommitted changes)"
-  git worktree remove "\${WORKTREE_PATH}"
-fi
-
-# Keep branch:
-git worktree remove "\${WORKTREE_PATH}"
-echo "Branch \${WORKTREE_NAME} kept for manual handling"
-\`\`\`
-
-**Parallel Execution Safety**: "Create PR" is the default and safest option for parallel executors, avoiding merge race conditions.
-` : '';
+  // Pre-defined values (replaced at dispatch time, NOT by executor)
+  const SOLUTION_ID = solutionId;
+  const WORK_DIR = worktreePath || null;
 
+  // Build prompt without markdown code blocks to avoid escaping issues
   const prompt = `
-## Execute Solution ${solutionId}
-${worktreeSetup}
-### Step 1: Get Solution (read-only)
-\`\`\`bash
-ccw issue detail ${solutionId}
-\`\`\`
+## Execute Solution: ${SOLUTION_ID}
+${WORK_DIR ? `Working Directory: ${WORK_DIR}` : ''}
+
+### Step 1: Get Solution Details
+Run this command to get the full solution with all tasks:
+  ccw issue detail ${SOLUTION_ID}
 
 ### Step 2: Execute All Tasks Sequentially
 The detail command returns a FULL SOLUTION with all tasks.
 Execute each task in order (T1 → T2 → T3 → ...):
 
 For each task:
-1. Follow task.implementation steps
-2. Run task.test commands
-3. Verify task.acceptance criteria
-(Do NOT commit after each task)
+- Follow task.implementation steps
+- Run task.test commands
+- Verify task.acceptance criteria
+- Do NOT commit after each task
 
 ### Step 3: Commit Solution (Once)
-After ALL tasks pass, commit once with formatted summary:
-\`\`\`bash
-git add <all-modified-files>
-git commit -m "[type](scope): [solution.description]
+After ALL tasks pass, commit once with formatted summary.
 
-## Solution Summary
-- Solution-ID: ${solutionId}
-- Tasks: T1, T2, ...
+Command:
+  git add -A
+  git commit -m "<type>(<scope>): <description>
 
-## Tasks Completed
-- [T1] task1.title: action
-- [T2] task2.title: action
+  Solution: ${SOLUTION_ID}
+  Tasks completed: <list task IDs>
 
-## Files Modified
-- file1.ts
-- file2.ts
+  Changes:
+  - <file1>: <what changed>
+  - <file2>: <what changed>
 
-## Verification
-- All tests passed
-- All acceptance criteria verified"
-\`\`\`
+  Verified: all tests passed"
+
+Replace <type> with: feat|fix|refactor|docs|test
+Replace <scope> with: affected module name
+Replace <description> with: brief summary from solution
 
 ### Step 4: Report Completion
-\`\`\`bash
-ccw issue done ${solutionId} --result '{"summary": "...", "files_modified": [...], "commit": {"hash": "...", "type": "feat"}, "tasks_completed": N}'
-\`\`\`
+On success, run:
+  ccw issue done ${SOLUTION_ID} --result '{"summary": "<brief>", "files_modified": ["<file1>", "<file2>"], "commit": {"hash": "<hash>", "type": "<type>"}, "tasks_completed": <N>}'
 
-If any task failed:
-\`\`\`bash
-ccw issue done ${solutionId} --fail --reason '{"task_id": "TX", "error_type": "test_failure", "message": "..."}'
-\`\`\`
-${worktreeCleanup}`;
+On failure, run:
+  ccw issue done ${SOLUTION_ID} --fail --reason '{"task_id": "<TX>", "error_type": "<test_failure|build_error|other>", "message": "<error details>"}'
+
+### Important Notes
+- Do NOT cleanup worktree - it is shared by all solutions in the queue
+- Replace all <placeholder> values with actual values from your execution
+`;
+
+  // For CLI tools, pass --cd to set working directory
+  const cdOption = worktreePath ? ` --cd "${worktreePath}"` : '';
 
   if (executorType === 'codex') {
     return Bash(
-      `ccw cli -p "${escapePrompt(prompt)}" --tool codex --mode write --id exec-${solutionId}`,
+      `ccw cli -p "${escapePrompt(prompt)}" --tool codex --mode write --id exec-${solutionId}${cdOption}`,
       { timeout: 7200000, run_in_background: true }  // 2hr for full solution
     );
   } else if (executorType === 'gemini') {
     return Bash(
-      `ccw cli -p "${escapePrompt(prompt)}" --tool gemini --mode write --id exec-${solutionId}`,
+      `ccw cli -p "${escapePrompt(prompt)}" --tool gemini --mode write --id exec-${solutionId}${cdOption}`,
       { timeout: 3600000, run_in_background: true }
     );
   } else {
@@ -369,7 +390,7 @@ ${worktreeCleanup}`;
       subagent_type: 'code-developer',
       run_in_background: false,
       description: `Execute solution ${solutionId}`,
-      prompt: prompt
+      prompt: worktreePath ? `Working directory: ${worktreePath}\n\n${prompt}` : prompt
     });
   }
 }
@@ -378,8 +399,8 @@ ${worktreeCleanup}`;
 ### Phase 3: Check Next Batch
 
 ```javascript
-// Refresh DAG after batch completes
-const refreshedDag = JSON.parse(Bash(`ccw issue queue dag`).trim());
+// Refresh DAG after batch completes (use same QUEUE_ID)
+const refreshedDag = JSON.parse(Bash(`ccw issue queue dag --queue ${QUEUE_ID}`).trim());
 
 console.log(`
 ## Batch Complete
@@ -389,46 +410,117 @@ console.log(`
 `);
 
 if (refreshedDag.ready_count > 0) {
-  console.log('Run `/issue:execute` again for next batch.');
+  console.log(`Run \`/issue:execute --queue ${QUEUE_ID}\` again for next batch.`);
+  // Note: If resuming, pass existing worktree path:
+  // /issue:execute --queue ${QUEUE_ID} --worktree <worktreePath>
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 4: Worktree Completion (after ALL batches)
+
+```javascript
+// Only run when ALL solutions completed AND using worktree
+if (useWorktree && refreshedDag.ready_count === 0 && refreshedDag.completed_count === refreshedDag.total) {
+  console.log('\n## All Solutions Completed - Worktree Cleanup');
+
+  const answer = AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: `Queue complete. What to do with worktree branch "${worktreeBranch}"?`,
+      header: 'Merge',
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: 'Create PR (Recommended)', description: 'Push branch and create pull request' },
+        { label: 'Merge to main', description: 'Merge all commits and cleanup worktree' },
+        { label: 'Keep branch', description: 'Cleanup worktree, keep branch for manual handling' }
+      ]
+    }]
+  });
+
+  const repoRoot = Bash('git rev-parse --show-toplevel').trim();
+
+  if (answer['Merge'].includes('Create PR')) {
+    Bash(`git -C "${worktreePath}" push -u origin "${worktreeBranch}"`);
+    Bash(`gh pr create --title "Queue ${dag.queue_id}" --body "Issue queue execution - all solutions completed" --head "${worktreeBranch}"`);
+    Bash(`git worktree remove "${worktreePath}"`);
+    console.log(`PR created for branch: ${worktreeBranch}`);
+  } else if (answer['Merge'].includes('Merge to main')) {
+    // Check main is clean
+    const mainDirty = Bash('git status --porcelain').trim();
+    if (mainDirty) {
+      console.log('Warning: Main has uncommitted changes. Falling back to PR.');
+      Bash(`git -C "${worktreePath}" push -u origin "${worktreeBranch}"`);
+      Bash(`gh pr create --title "Queue ${dag.queue_id}" --body "Issue queue execution (main had uncommitted changes)" --head "${worktreeBranch}"`);
+    } else {
+      Bash(`git merge --no-ff "${worktreeBranch}" -m "Merge queue ${dag.queue_id}"`);
+      Bash(`git branch -d "${worktreeBranch}"`);
+    }
+    Bash(`git worktree remove "${worktreePath}"`);
+  } else {
+    Bash(`git worktree remove "${worktreePath}"`);
+    console.log(`Branch ${worktreeBranch} kept for manual handling`);
+  }
 }
 ```
 
 ## Parallel Execution Model
 
 ```
-┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
-│ Orchestrator                                                │
-├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
-│ 1. ccw issue queue dag                                      │
-│    → { parallel_batches: [["S-1","S-2"], ["S-3"]] }        │
-│                                                             │
-│ 2. Dispatch batch 1 (parallel):                            │
-│    ┌──────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────┐       │
-│    │ Executor 1           │ │ Executor 2           │       │
-│    │ detail S-1           │ │ detail S-2           │       │
-│    │ → gets full solution │ │ → gets full solution │       │
-│    │ [T1→T2→T3 sequential]│ │ [T1→T2 sequential]   │       │
-│    │ commit (1x solution) │ │ commit (1x solution) │       │
-│    │ done S-1             │ │ done S-2             │       │
-│    └──────────────────────┘ └──────────────────────┘       │
-│                                                             │
-│ 3. ccw issue queue dag (refresh)                           │
-│    → S-3 now ready (S-1 completed, file conflict resolved) │
-└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│ Orchestrator                                                    │
+├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+│ 0. Validate QUEUE_ID (required, or prompt user to select)       │
+│                                                                 │
+│ 0.5 (if --worktree) Create ONE worktree for entire queue        │
+│    → .ccw/worktrees/queue-exec-<queue-id>                       │
+│                                                                 │
+│ 1. ccw issue queue dag --queue ${QUEUE_ID}                      │
+│    → { parallel_batches: [["S-1","S-2"], ["S-3"]] }             │
+│                                                                 │
+│ 2. Dispatch batch 1 (parallel, SAME worktree):                  │
+│    ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐     │
+│    │        Shared Queue Worktree (or main)               │     │
+│    │  ┌──────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────┐          │     │
+│    │  │ Executor 1       │ │ Executor 2       │          │     │
+│    │  │ detail S-1       │ │ detail S-2       │          │     │
+│    │  │ [T1→T2→T3]       │ │ [T1→T2]          │          │     │
+│    │  │ commit S-1       │ │ commit S-2       │          │     │
+│    │  │ done S-1         │ │ done S-2         │          │     │
+│    │  └──────────────────┘ └──────────────────┘          │     │
+│    └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘     │
+│                                                                 │
+│ 3. ccw issue queue dag (refresh)                                │
+│    → S-3 now ready → dispatch batch 2 (same worktree)           │
+│                                                                 │
+│ 4. (if --worktree) ALL batches complete → cleanup worktree      │
+│    → Prompt: Create PR / Merge to main / Keep branch            │
+└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
 ```
 
 **Why this works for parallel:**
+- **ONE worktree for entire queue** → all solutions share same isolated workspace
 - `detail <id>` is READ-ONLY → no race conditions
 - Each executor handles **all tasks within a solution** sequentially
 - **One commit per solution** with formatted summary (not per-task)
 - `done <id>` updates only its own solution status
 - `queue dag` recalculates ready solutions after each batch
-- Solutions in same batch have NO file conflicts
+- Solutions in same batch have NO file conflicts (DAG guarantees)
+- **Main workspace stays clean** until merge/PR decision
 
 ## CLI Endpoint Contract
 
-### `ccw issue queue dag`
-Returns dependency graph with parallel batches (solution-level):
+### `ccw issue queue list --brief --json`
+Returns queue index for selection (used when --queue not provided):
+```json
+{
+  "active_queue_id": "QUE-20251215-001",
+  "queues": [
+    { "id": "QUE-20251215-001", "status": "active", "issue_ids": ["ISS-001"], "total_solutions": 5, "completed_solutions": 2 }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### `ccw issue queue dag --queue <queue-id>`
+Returns dependency graph with parallel batches (solution-level, **--queue required**):
 ```json
 {
   "queue_id": "QUE-...",

.claude/commands/issue/from-brainstorm.md

@@ -0,0 +1,382 @@
+---
+name: from-brainstorm
+description: Convert brainstorm session ideas into issue with executable solution for parallel-dev-cycle
+argument-hint: "SESSION=\"<session-id>\" [--idea=<index>] [--auto] [-y|--yes]"
+allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Bash(*), Read(*), Write(*), Glob(*), AskUserQuestion(*)
+---
+
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-select highest-scored idea, skip confirmations, create issue directly.
+
+# Issue From-Brainstorm Command (/issue:from-brainstorm)
+
+## Overview
+
+Bridge command that converts **brainstorm-with-file** session output into executable **issue + solution** for parallel-dev-cycle consumption.
+
+**Core workflow**: Load Session → Select Idea → Convert to Issue → Generate Solution → Bind & Ready
+
+**Input sources**:
+- **synthesis.json** - Main brainstorm results with top_ideas
+- **perspectives.json** - Multi-CLI perspectives (creative/pragmatic/systematic)
+- **.brainstorming/** - Synthesis artifacts (clarifications, enhancements from role analyses)
+
+**Output**:
+- **Issue** (ISS-YYYYMMDD-NNN) - Full context with clarifications
+- **Solution** (SOL-{issue-id}-{uid}) - Structured tasks for parallel-dev-cycle
+
+## Quick Reference
+
+```bash
+# Interactive mode - select idea, confirm before creation
+/issue:from-brainstorm SESSION="BS-rate-limiting-2025-01-28"
+
+# Pre-select idea by index
+/issue:from-brainstorm SESSION="BS-auth-system-2025-01-28" --idea=0
+
+# Auto mode - select highest scored, no confirmations
+/issue:from-brainstorm SESSION="BS-caching-2025-01-28" --auto -y
+```
+
+## Arguments
+
+| Argument | Required | Type | Default | Description |
+|----------|----------|------|---------|-------------|
+| SESSION | Yes | String | - | Session ID or path to `.workflow/.brainstorm/BS-xxx` |
+| --idea | No | Integer | - | Pre-select idea by index (0-based) |
+| --auto | No | Flag | false | Auto-select highest-scored idea |
+| -y, --yes | No | Flag | false | Skip all confirmations |
+
+## Data Structures
+
+### Issue Schema (Output)
+
+```typescript
+interface Issue {
+  id: string;                    // ISS-YYYYMMDD-NNN
+  title: string;                 // From idea.title
+  status: 'planned';             // Auto-set after solution binding
+  priority: number;              // 1-5 (derived from idea.score)
+  context: string;               // Full description with clarifications
+  source: 'brainstorm';
+  labels: string[];              // ['brainstorm', perspective, feasibility]
+
+  // Structured fields
+  expected_behavior: string;     // From key_strengths
+  actual_behavior: string;       // From main_challenges
+  affected_components: string[]; // Extracted from description
+
+  _brainstorm_metadata: {
+    session_id: string;
+    idea_score: number;
+    novelty: number;
+    feasibility: string;
+    clarifications_count: number;
+  };
+}
+```
+
+### Solution Schema (Output)
+
+```typescript
+interface Solution {
+  id: string;                    // SOL-{issue-id}-{4-char-uid}
+  description: string;           // idea.title
+  approach: string;              // idea.description
+  tasks: Task[];                 // Generated from idea.next_steps
+
+  analysis: {
+    risk: 'low' | 'medium' | 'high';
+    impact: 'low' | 'medium' | 'high';
+    complexity: 'low' | 'medium' | 'high';
+  };
+
+  is_bound: boolean;             // true
+  created_at: string;
+  bound_at: string;
+}
+
+interface Task {
+  id: string;                    // T1, T2, T3...
+  title: string;                 // Actionable task name
+  scope: string;                 // design|implementation|testing|documentation
+  action: string;                // Implement|Design|Research|Test|Document
+  description: string;
+
+  implementation: string[];      // Step-by-step guide
+  acceptance: {
+    criteria: string[];          // What defines success
+    verification: string[];      // How to verify
+  };
+
+  priority: number;              // 1-5
+  depends_on: string[];          // Task dependencies
+}
+```
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+```
+Phase 1: Session Loading
+   ├─ Validate session path
+   ├─ Load synthesis.json (required)
+   ├─ Load perspectives.json (optional - multi-CLI insights)
+   ├─ Load .brainstorming/** (optional - synthesis artifacts)
+   └─ Validate top_ideas array exists
+
+Phase 2: Idea Selection
+   ├─ Auto mode: Select highest scored idea
+   ├─ Pre-selected: Use --idea=N index
+   └─ Interactive: Display table, ask user to select
+
+Phase 3: Enrich Issue Context
+   ├─ Base: idea.description + key_strengths + main_challenges
+   ├─ Add: Relevant clarifications (Requirements/Architecture/Feasibility)
+   ├─ Add: Multi-perspective insights (creative/pragmatic/systematic)
+   └─ Add: Session metadata (session_id, completion date, clarification count)
+
+Phase 4: Create Issue
+   ├─ Generate issue data with enriched context
+   ├─ Calculate priority from idea.score (0-10 → 1-5)
+   ├─ Create via: ccw issue create (heredoc for JSON)
+   └─ Returns: ISS-YYYYMMDD-NNN
+
+Phase 5: Generate Solution Tasks
+   ├─ T1: Research & Validate (if main_challenges exist)
+   ├─ T2: Design & Specification (if key_strengths exist)
+   ├─ T3+: Implementation tasks (from idea.next_steps)
+   └─ Each task includes: implementation steps + acceptance criteria
+
+Phase 6: Bind Solution
+   ├─ Write solution to .workflow/issues/solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl
+   ├─ Bind via: ccw issue bind {issue-id} {solution-id}
+   ├─ Update issue status to 'planned'
+   └─ Returns: SOL-{issue-id}-{uid}
+
+Phase 7: Next Steps
+   └─ Offer: Form queue | Convert another idea | View details | Done
+```
+
+## Context Enrichment Logic
+
+### Base Context (Always Included)
+
+- **Description**: `idea.description`
+- **Why This Idea**: `idea.key_strengths[]`
+- **Challenges to Address**: `idea.main_challenges[]`
+- **Implementation Steps**: `idea.next_steps[]`
+
+### Enhanced Context (If Available)
+
+**From Synthesis Artifacts** (`.brainstorming/*/analysis*.md`):
+- Extract clarifications matching categories: Requirements, Architecture, Feasibility
+- Format: `**{Category}** ({role}): {question} → {answer}`
+- Limit: Top 3 most relevant
+
+**From Perspectives** (`perspectives.json`):
+- **Creative**: First insight from `perspectives.creative.insights[0]`
+- **Pragmatic**: First blocker from `perspectives.pragmatic.blockers[0]`
+- **Systematic**: First pattern from `perspectives.systematic.patterns[0]`
+
+**Session Metadata**:
+- Session ID, Topic, Completion Date
+- Clarifications count (if synthesis artifacts loaded)
+
+## Task Generation Strategy
+
+### Task 1: Research & Validation
+**Trigger**: `idea.main_challenges.length > 0`
+- **Title**: "Research & Validate Approach"
+- **Scope**: design
+- **Action**: Research
+- **Implementation**: Investigate blockers, review similar implementations, validate with team
+- **Acceptance**: Blockers documented, feasibility assessed, approach validated
+
+### Task 2: Design & Specification
+**Trigger**: `idea.key_strengths.length > 0`
+- **Title**: "Design & Create Specification"
+- **Scope**: design
+- **Action**: Design
+- **Implementation**: Create design doc, define success criteria, plan phases
+- **Acceptance**: Design complete, metrics defined, plan outlined
+
+### Task 3+: Implementation Tasks
+**Trigger**: `idea.next_steps[]`
+- **Title**: From `next_steps[i]` (max 60 chars)
+- **Scope**: Inferred from keywords (test→testing, api→backend, ui→frontend)
+- **Action**: Detected from verbs (implement, create, update, fix, test, document)
+- **Implementation**: Execute step + follow design + write tests
+- **Acceptance**: Step implemented + tests passing + code reviewed
+
+### Fallback Task
+**Trigger**: No tasks generated from above
+- **Title**: `idea.title`
+- **Scope**: implementation
+- **Action**: Implement
+- **Generic implementation + acceptance criteria**
+
+## Priority Calculation
+
+### Issue Priority (1-5)
+```
+idea.score: 0-10
+priority = max(1, min(5, ceil((10 - score) / 2)))
+
+Examples:
+score 9-10 → priority 1 (critical)
+score 7-8  → priority 2 (high)
+score 5-6  → priority 3 (medium)
+score 3-4  → priority 4 (low)
+score 0-2  → priority 5 (lowest)
+```
+
+### Task Priority (1-5)
+- Research task: 1 (highest)
+- Design task: 2
+- Implementation tasks: 3 by default, decrement for later tasks
+- Testing/documentation: 4-5
+
+### Complexity Analysis
+```
+risk: main_challenges.length > 2 ? 'high' : 'medium'
+impact: score >= 8 ? 'high' : score >= 6 ? 'medium' : 'low'
+complexity: main_challenges > 3 OR tasks > 5 ? 'high'
+            tasks > 3 ? 'medium' : 'low'
+```
+
+## CLI Integration
+
+### Issue Creation
+```bash
+# Uses heredoc to avoid shell escaping
+ccw issue create << 'EOF'
+{
+  "title": "...",
+  "context": "...",
+  "priority": 3,
+  "source": "brainstorm",
+  "labels": ["brainstorm", "creative", "feasibility-high"],
+  ...
+}
+EOF
+```
+
+### Solution Binding
+```bash
+# Append solution to JSONL file
+echo '{"id":"SOL-xxx","tasks":[...]}' >> .workflow/issues/solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl
+
+# Bind to issue
+ccw issue bind {issue-id} {solution-id}
+
+# Update status
+ccw issue update {issue-id} --status planned
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Message | Resolution |
+|-------|---------|------------|
+| Session not found | synthesis.json missing | Check session ID, list available sessions |
+| No ideas | top_ideas array empty | Complete brainstorm workflow first |
+| Invalid idea index | Index out of range | Check valid range 0 to N-1 |
+| Issue creation failed | ccw issue create error | Verify CLI endpoint working |
+| Solution binding failed | Bind error | Check issue exists, retry |
+
+## Examples
+
+### Interactive Mode
+
+```bash
+/issue:from-brainstorm SESSION="BS-rate-limiting-2025-01-28"
+
+# Output:
+# | # | Title | Score | Feasibility |
+# |---|-------|-------|-------------|
+# | 0 | Token Bucket Algorithm | 8.5 | High |
+# | 1 | Sliding Window Counter | 7.2 | Medium |
+# | 2 | Fixed Window | 6.1 | High |
+
+# User selects: #0
+
+# Result:
+# ✓ Created issue: ISS-20250128-001
+# ✓ Created solution: SOL-ISS-20250128-001-ab3d
+# ✓ Bound solution to issue
+# → Next: /issue:queue
+```
+
+### Auto Mode
+
+```bash
+/issue:from-brainstorm SESSION="BS-caching-2025-01-28" --auto
+
+# Result:
+# Auto-selected: Redis Cache Layer (Score: 9.2/10)
+# ✓ Created issue: ISS-20250128-002
+# ✓ Solution with 4 tasks
+# → Status: planned
+```
+
+## Integration Flow
+
+```
+brainstorm-with-file
+        │
+        ├─ synthesis.json
+        ├─ perspectives.json
+        └─ .brainstorming/** (optional)
+        │
+        ▼
+ /issue:from-brainstorm  ◄─── This command
+        │
+        ├─ ISS-YYYYMMDD-NNN (enriched issue)
+        └─ SOL-{issue-id}-{uid} (structured solution)
+        │
+        ▼
+ /issue:queue
+        │
+        ▼
+ /parallel-dev-cycle
+        │
+        ▼
+   RA → EP → CD → VAS
+```
+
+## Session Files Reference
+
+### Input Files
+
+```
+.workflow/.brainstorm/BS-{slug}-{date}/
+├── synthesis.json           # REQUIRED - Top ideas with scores
+├── perspectives.json        # OPTIONAL - Multi-CLI insights
+├── brainstorm.md           # Reference only
+└── .brainstorming/         # OPTIONAL - Synthesis artifacts
+    ├── system-architect/
+    │   └── analysis.md     # Contains clarifications + enhancements
+    ├── api-designer/
+    │   └── analysis.md
+    └── ...
+```
+
+### Output Files
+
+```
+.workflow/issues/
+├── solutions/
+│   └── ISS-YYYYMMDD-001.jsonl  # Created solution (JSONL)
+└── (managed by ccw issue CLI)
+```
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/workflow:brainstorm-with-file` - Generate brainstorm sessions
+- `/workflow:brainstorm:synthesis` - Add clarifications to brainstorm
+- `/issue:new` - Create issues from GitHub or text
+- `/issue:plan` - Generate solutions via exploration
+- `/issue:queue` - Form execution queue
+- `/issue:execute` - Execute with parallel-dev-cycle
+- `ccw issue status <id>` - View issue
+- `ccw issue solution <id>` - View solution

.claude/commands/issue/new.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: new
 description: Create structured issue from GitHub URL or text description
-argument-hint: "<github-url | text-description> [--priority 1-5]"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] <github-url | text-description> [--priority 1-5]"
 allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Bash(*), Read(*), AskUserQuestion(*), mcp__ace-tool__search_context(*)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Skip clarification questions, create issue with inferred details.
+
 # Issue New Command (/issue:new)
 
 ## Core Principle
@@ -409,5 +413,4 @@ function parseMarkdownBody(body) {
 
 ## Related Commands
 
-- `/issue:plan` - Plan solution for issue
-
+- `/issue:plan` - Plan solution for issue

.claude/commands/issue/plan.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: plan
 description: Batch plan issue resolution using issue-plan-agent (explore + plan closed-loop)
-argument-hint: "--all-pending <issue-id>[,<issue-id>,...] [--batch-size 3] "
-allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), SlashCommand(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Bash(*), Read(*), Write(*)
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] --all-pending <issue-id>[,<issue-id>,...] [--batch-size 3]"
+allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), Skill(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Bash(*), Read(*), Write(*)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-bind solutions without confirmation, use recommended settings.
+
 # Issue Plan Command (/issue:plan)
 
 ## Overview
@@ -55,11 +59,11 @@ Unified planning command using **issue-plan-agent** that combines exploration an
 ## Execution Process
 
 ```
-Phase 1: Issue Loading
+Phase 1: Issue Loading & Intelligent Grouping
    ├─ Parse input (single, comma-separated, or --all-pending)
    ├─ Fetch issue metadata (ID, title, tags)
    ├─ Validate issues exist (create if needed)
-   └─ Group by similarity (shared tags or title keywords, max 3 per batch)
+   └─ Intelligent grouping via Gemini (semantic similarity, max 3 per batch)
 
 Phase 2: Unified Explore + Plan (issue-plan-agent)
    ├─ Launch issue-plan-agent per batch
@@ -119,46 +123,11 @@ if (useAllPending) {
 }
 // Note: Agent fetches full issue content via `ccw issue status <id> --json`
 
-// Semantic grouping via Gemini CLI (max 4 issues per group)
-async function groupBySimilarityGemini(issues) {
-  const issueSummaries = issues.map(i => ({
-    id: i.id, title: i.title, tags: i.tags
-  }));
+// Intelligent grouping: Analyze issues by title/tags, group semantically similar ones
+// Strategy: Same module/component, related bugs, feature clusters
+// Constraint: Max ${batchSize} issues per batch
 
-  const prompt = `
-PURPOSE: Group similar issues by semantic similarity for batch processing; maximize within-group coherence; max 4 issues per group
-TASK: • Analyze issue titles/tags semantically • Identify functional/architectural clusters • Assign each issue to one group
-MODE: analysis
-CONTEXT: Issue metadata only
-EXPECTED: JSON with groups array, each containing max 4 issue_ids, theme, rationale
-RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/protocols/analysis-protocol.md) | Each issue in exactly one group | Max 4 issues per group | Balance group sizes
-
-INPUT:
-${JSON.stringify(issueSummaries, null, 2)}
-
-OUTPUT FORMAT:
-{"groups":[{"group_id":1,"theme":"...","issue_ids":["..."],"rationale":"..."}],"ungrouped":[]}
-`;
-
-  const taskId = Bash({
-    command: `ccw cli -p "${prompt}" --tool gemini --mode analysis`,
-    run_in_background: true, timeout: 600000
-  });
-  const output = TaskOutput({ task_id: taskId, block: true });
-
-  // Extract JSON from potential markdown code blocks
-  function extractJsonFromMarkdown(text) {
-    const jsonMatch = text.match(/```json\s*\n([\s\S]*?)\n```/) ||
-                      text.match(/```\s*\n([\s\S]*?)\n```/);
-    return jsonMatch ? jsonMatch[1] : text;
-  }
-
-  const result = JSON.parse(extractJsonFromMarkdown(output));
-  return result.groups.map(g => g.issue_ids.map(id => issues.find(i => i.id === id)));
-}
-
-const batches = await groupBySimilarityGemini(issues);
-console.log(`Processing ${issues.length} issues in ${batches.length} batch(es) (max 4 issues/agent)`);
+console.log(`Processing ${issues.length} issues in ${batches.length} batch(es)`);
 
 TodoWrite({
   todos: batches.map((_, i) => ({
@@ -195,15 +164,31 @@ ${issueList}
 
 ### Workflow
 1. Fetch issue details: ccw issue status <id> --json
-2. Load project context files
-3. Explore codebase (ACE semantic search)
-4. Plan solution with tasks (schema: solution-schema.json)
-5. **If github_url exists**: Add final task to comment on GitHub issue
-6. Write solution to: .workflow/issues/solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl
-7. Single solution → auto-bind; Multiple → return for selection
+2. **Analyze failure history** (if issue.feedback exists):
+   - Extract failure details from issue.feedback (type='failure', stage='execute')
+   - Parse error_type, message, task_id, solution_id from content JSON
+   - Identify failure patterns: repeated errors, root causes, blockers
+   - **Constraint**: Avoid repeating failed approaches
+3. Load project context files
+4. Explore codebase (ACE semantic search)
+5. Plan solution with tasks (schema: solution-schema.json)
+   - **If previous solution failed**: Reference failure analysis in solution.approach
+   -  Add explicit verification steps to prevent same failure mode
+6. **If github_url exists**: Add final task to comment on GitHub issue
+7. Write solution to: .workflow/issues/solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl
+8. **CRITICAL - Binding Decision**:
+   - Single solution → **MUST execute**: ccw issue bind <issue-id> <solution-id>
+   - Multiple solutions → Return pending_selection only (no bind)
+
+### Failure-Aware Planning Rules
+- **Extract failure patterns**: Parse issue.feedback where type='failure' and stage='execute'
+- **Identify root causes**: Analyze error_type (test_failure, compilation, timeout, etc.)
+- **Design alternative approach**: Create solution that addresses root cause
+- **Add prevention steps**: Include explicit verification to catch same error earlier
+- **Document lessons**: Reference previous failures in solution.approach
 
 ### Rules
-- Solution ID format: SOL-{issue-id}-{seq}
+- Solution ID format: SOL-{issue-id}-{uid} (uid: 4 random alphanumeric chars, e.g., a7x9)
 - Single solution per issue → auto-bind via ccw issue bind
 - Multiple solutions → register only, return pending_selection
 - Tasks must have quantified acceptance.criteria
@@ -251,35 +236,55 @@ for (let i = 0; i < agentTasks.length; i += MAX_PARALLEL) {
     }
     agentResults.push(summary);  // Store for Phase 3 conflict aggregation
 
+    // Verify binding for bound issues (agent should have executed bind)
     for (const item of summary.bound || []) {
-      console.log(`✓ ${item.issue_id}: ${item.solution_id} (${item.task_count} tasks)`);
+      const status = JSON.parse(Bash(`ccw issue status ${item.issue_id} --json`).trim());
+      if (status.bound_solution_id === item.solution_id) {
+        console.log(`✓ ${item.issue_id}: ${item.solution_id} (${item.task_count} tasks)`);
+      } else {
+        // Fallback: agent failed to bind, execute here
+        Bash(`ccw issue bind ${item.issue_id} ${item.solution_id}`);
+        console.log(`✓ ${item.issue_id}: ${item.solution_id} (${item.task_count} tasks) [recovered]`);
+      }
     }
-    // Collect and notify pending selections
+    // Collect pending selections for Phase 3
     for (const pending of summary.pending_selection || []) {
-      console.log(`⏳ ${pending.issue_id}: ${pending.solutions.length} solutions → awaiting selection`);
       pendingSelections.push(pending);
     }
-    if (summary.conflicts?.length > 0) {
-      console.log(`⚠ Conflicts: ${summary.conflicts.length} detected (will resolve in Phase 3)`);
-    }
     updateTodo(`Plan batch ${batchIndex + 1}`, 'completed');
   }
 }
 ```
 
-### Phase 3: Conflict Resolution & Solution Selection
+### Phase 3: Solution Selection (if pending)
 
-**Conflict Handling:**
-- Collect `conflicts` from all agent results
-- Low/Medium severity → auto-resolve with `recommended_resolution`
-- High severity → use `AskUserQuestion` to let user choose resolution
+```javascript
+// Handle multi-solution issues
+for (const pending of pendingSelections) {
+  if (pending.solutions.length === 0) continue;
 
-**Multi-Solution Selection:**
-- If `pending_selection` contains issues with multiple solutions:
-  - Use `AskUserQuestion` to present options (solution ID + task count + description)
-  - Extract selected solution ID from user response
-  - Verify solution file exists, recover from payload if missing
-  - Bind selected solution via `ccw issue bind <issue-id> <solution-id>`
+  const options = pending.solutions.slice(0, 4).map(sol => ({
+    label: `${sol.id} (${sol.task_count} tasks)`,
+    description: sol.description || sol.approach || 'No description'
+  }));
+
+  const answer = AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: `Issue ${pending.issue_id}: which solution to bind?`,
+      header: pending.issue_id,
+      options: options,
+      multiSelect: false
+    }]
+  });
+
+  const selected = answer[Object.keys(answer)[0]];
+  if (!selected || selected === 'Other') continue;
+
+  const solId = selected.split(' ')[0];
+  Bash(`ccw issue bind ${pending.issue_id} ${solId}`);
+  console.log(`✓ ${pending.issue_id}: ${solId} bound`);
+}
+```
 
 ### Phase 4: Summary
 

.claude/commands/issue/queue.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: queue
 description: Form execution queue from bound solutions using issue-queue-agent (solution-level)
-argument-hint: "[--queues <n>] [--issue <id>]"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--queues <n>] [--issue <id>]"
 allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), Bash(*), Read(*), Write(*)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-confirm queue formation, use recommended conflict resolutions.
+
 # Issue Queue Command (/issue:queue)
 
 ## Overview
@@ -28,12 +32,13 @@ Queue formation command using **issue-queue-agent** that analyzes all bound solu
 | Operation | Correct | Incorrect |
 |-----------|---------|-----------|
 | List issues (brief) | `ccw issue list --status planned --brief` | `Read('issues.jsonl')` |
+| **Batch solutions (NEW)** | `ccw issue solutions --status planned --brief` | Loop `ccw issue solution <id>` |
 | List queue (brief) | `ccw issue queue --brief` | `Read('queues/*.json')` |
 | Read issue details | `ccw issue status <id> --json` | `Read('issues.jsonl')` |
 | Get next item | `ccw issue next --json` | `Read('queues/*.json')` |
 | Update status | `ccw issue update <id> --status ...` | Direct file edit |
 | Sync from queue | `ccw issue update --from-queue` | Direct file edit |
-| **Read solution (brief)** | `ccw issue solution <id> --brief` | `Read('solutions/*.jsonl')` |
+| Read solution (single) | `ccw issue solution <id> --brief` | `Read('solutions/*.jsonl')` |
 
 **Output Options**:
 - `--brief`: JSON with minimal fields (id, status, counts)
@@ -65,9 +70,13 @@ Queue formation command using **issue-queue-agent** that analyzes all bound solu
 --queues <n>          Number of parallel queues (default: 1)
 --issue <id>          Form queue for specific issue only
 --append <id>         Append issue to active queue (don't create new)
+--force               Skip active queue check, always create new queue
 
 # CLI subcommands (ccw issue queue ...)
 ccw issue queue list                  List all queues with status
+ccw issue queue add <issue-id>        Add issue to queue (interactive if active queue exists)
+ccw issue queue add <issue-id> -f     Add to new queue without prompt (force)
+ccw issue queue merge <src> --queue <target>  Merge source queue into target queue
 ccw issue queue switch <queue-id>     Switch active queue
 ccw issue queue archive               Archive current queue
 ccw issue queue delete <queue-id>     Delete queue from history
@@ -92,7 +101,7 @@ Phase 2-4: Agent-Driven Queue Formation (issue-queue-agent)
    │   ├─ Build dependency DAG from conflicts
    │   ├─ Calculate semantic priority per solution
    │   └─ Assign execution groups (parallel/sequential)
-   └─ Each agent writes: queue JSON + index update
+   └─ Each agent writes: queue JSON + index update (NOT active yet)
 
 Phase 5: Conflict Clarification (if needed)
    ├─ Collect `clarifications` arrays from all agents
@@ -102,7 +111,24 @@ Phase 5: Conflict Clarification (if needed)
 
 Phase 6: Status Update & Summary
    ├─ Update issue statuses to 'queued'
-   └─ Display queue summary (N queues), next step: /issue:execute
+   └─ Display new queue summary (N queues)
+
+Phase 7: Active Queue Check & Decision (REQUIRED)
+   ├─ Read queue index: ccw issue queue list --brief
+   ├─ Get generated queue ID from agent output
+   ├─ If NO active queue exists:
+   │   ├─ Set generated queue as active_queue_id
+   │   ├─ Update index.json
+   │   └─ Display: "Queue created and activated"
+   │
+   └─ If active queue exists with items:
+       ├─ Display both queues to user
+       ├─ Use AskUserQuestion to prompt:
+       │   ├─ "Use new queue (keep existing)" → Set new as active, keep old inactive
+       │   ├─ "Merge: add new items to existing" → Merge new → existing, delete new
+       │   ├─ "Merge: add existing items to new" → Merge existing → new, archive old
+       │   └─ "Cancel" → Delete new queue, keep existing active
+       └─ Execute chosen action
 ```
 
 ## Implementation
@@ -110,24 +136,23 @@ Phase 6: Status Update & Summary
 ### Phase 1: Solution Loading & Distribution
 
 **Data Loading:**
-- Use `ccw issue list --status planned --brief` to get planned issues with `bound_solution_id`
-- If no planned issues found → display message, suggest `/issue:plan`
-
-**Solution Brief Loading** (for each planned issue):
-```bash
-ccw issue solution <issue-id> --brief
-# Returns: [{ solution_id, is_bound, task_count, files_touched[] }]
-```
+- Use `ccw issue solutions --status planned --brief` to get all planned issues with solutions in **one call**
+- Returns: Array of `{ issue_id, solution_id, is_bound, task_count, files_touched[], priority }`
+- If no bound solutions found → display message, suggest `/issue:plan`
 
 **Build Solution Objects:**
-```json
-{
-  "issue_id": "ISS-xxx",
-  "solution_id": "SOL-ISS-xxx-1",
-  "task_count": 3,
-  "files_touched": ["src/auth.ts", "src/utils.ts"],
-  "priority": "medium"
+```javascript
+// Single CLI call replaces N individual queries
+const result = Bash(`ccw issue solutions --status planned --brief`).trim();
+const solutions = result ? JSON.parse(result) : [];
+
+if (solutions.length === 0) {
+  console.log('No bound solutions found. Run /issue:plan first.');
+  return;
 }
+
+// solutions already in correct format:
+// { issue_id, solution_id, is_bound, task_count, files_touched[], priority }
 ```
 
 **Multi-Queue Distribution** (if `--queues > 1`):
@@ -306,6 +331,41 @@ ccw issue update <issue-id> --status queued
 - Show unplanned issues (planned but NOT in queue)
 - Show next step: `/issue:execute`
 
+### Phase 7: Active Queue Check & Decision
+
+**After agent completes Phase 1-6, check for active queue:**
+
+```bash
+ccw issue queue list --brief
+```
+
+**Decision:**
+- If `active_queue_id` is null → `ccw issue queue switch <new-queue-id>` (activate new queue)
+- If active queue exists → Use **AskUserQuestion** to prompt user
+
+**AskUserQuestion:**
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "Active queue exists. How would you like to proceed?",
+    header: "Queue Action",
+    options: [
+      { label: "Merge into existing queue", description: "Add new items to active queue, delete new queue" },
+      { label: "Use new queue", description: "Switch to new queue, keep existing in history" },
+      { label: "Cancel", description: "Delete new queue, keep existing active" }
+    ],
+    multiSelect: false
+  }]
+})
+```
+
+**Action Commands:**
+
+| User Choice | Commands |
+|-------------|----------|
+| **Merge into existing** | `ccw issue queue merge <new-queue-id> --queue <active-queue-id>` then `ccw issue queue delete <new-queue-id>` |
+| **Use new queue** | `ccw issue queue switch <new-queue-id>` |
+| **Cancel** | `ccw issue queue delete <new-queue-id>` |
 
 ## Storage Structure (Queue History)
 
@@ -360,6 +420,9 @@ ccw issue update <issue-id> --status queued
 | User cancels clarification | Abort queue formation |
 | **index.json not updated** | Auto-fix: Set active_queue_id to new queue |
 | **Queue file missing solutions** | Abort with error, agent must regenerate |
+| **User cancels queue add** | Display message, return without changes |
+| **Merge with empty source** | Skip merge, display warning |
+| **All items duplicate** | Skip merge, display "All items already exist" |
 
 ## Quality Checklist
 

.claude/commands/memory/code-map-memory.md

@@ -1,687 +0,0 @@
----
-name: code-map-memory
-description: 3-phase orchestrator: parse feature keyword → cli-explore-agent analyzes (Deep Scan dual-source) → orchestrator generates Mermaid docs + SKILL package (skips phase 2 if exists)
-argument-hint: "\"feature-keyword\" [--regenerate] [--tool <gemini|qwen>]"
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Bash(*), Read(*), Write(*), Task(*)
----
-
-# Code Flow Mapping Generator
-
-## Overview
-
-**Pure Orchestrator with Agent Delegation**: Prepares context paths and delegates code flow analysis to specialized cli-explore-agent. Orchestrator transforms agent's JSON analysis into Mermaid documentation.
-
-**Auto-Continue Workflow**: Runs fully autonomously once triggered. Each phase completes and automatically triggers the next phase.
-
-**Execution Paths**:
-- **Full Path**: All 3 phases (no existing codemap OR `--regenerate` specified)
-- **Skip Path**: Phase 1 → Phase 3 (existing codemap found AND no `--regenerate` flag)
-- **Phase 3 Always Executes**: SKILL index is always generated or updated
-
-**Agent Responsibility** (cli-explore-agent):
-- Deep code flow analysis using dual-source strategy (Bash + Gemini CLI)
-- Returns structured JSON with architecture, functions, data flow, conditionals, patterns
-- NO file writing - analysis only
-
-**Orchestrator Responsibility**:
-- Provides feature keyword and analysis scope to agent
-- Transforms agent's JSON into Mermaid-enriched markdown documentation
-- Writes all files (5 docs + metadata.json + SKILL.md)
-
-## Core Rules
-
-1. **Start Immediately**: First action is TodoWrite initialization, second action is Phase 1 execution
-2. **Feature-Specific SKILL**: Each feature creates independent `.claude/skills/codemap-{feature}/` package
-3. **Specialized Agent**: Phase 2a uses cli-explore-agent for professional code analysis (Deep Scan mode)
-4. **Orchestrator Documentation**: Phase 2b transforms agent JSON into Mermaid markdown files
-5. **Auto-Continue**: After completing each phase, update TodoWrite and immediately execute next phase
-6. **No User Prompts**: Never ask user questions or wait for input between phases
-7. **Track Progress**: Update TodoWrite after EVERY phase completion before starting next phase
-8. **Multi-Level Detail**: Generate 4 levels: architecture → function → data → conditional
-
----
-
-## 3-Phase Execution
-
-### Phase 1: Parse Feature Keyword & Check Existing
-
-**Goal**: Normalize feature keyword, check existing codemap, prepare for analysis
-
-**Step 1: Parse Feature Keyword**
-```bash
-# Get feature keyword from argument
-FEATURE_KEYWORD="$1"
-
-# Normalize: lowercase, spaces to hyphens
-normalized_feature=$(echo "$FEATURE_KEYWORD" | tr '[:upper:]' '[:lower:]' | tr ' ' '-' | tr '_' '-')
-
-# Example: "User Authentication" → "user-authentication"
-# Example: "支付处理" → "支付处理" (keep non-ASCII)
-```
-
-**Step 2: Set Tool Preference**
-```bash
-# Default to gemini unless --tool specified
-TOOL="${tool_flag:-gemini}"
-```
-
-**Step 3: Check Existing Codemap**
-```bash
-# Define codemap directory
-CODEMAP_DIR=".claude/skills/codemap-${normalized_feature}"
-
-# Check if codemap exists
-bash(test -d "$CODEMAP_DIR" && echo "exists" || echo "not_exists")
-
-# Count existing files
-bash(find "$CODEMAP_DIR" -name "*.md" 2>/dev/null | wc -l || echo 0)
-```
-
-**Step 4: Skip Decision**
-```javascript
-if (existing_files > 0 && !regenerate_flag) {
-  SKIP_GENERATION = true
-  message = "Codemap already exists, skipping Phase 2. Use --regenerate to force regeneration."
-} else if (regenerate_flag) {
-  bash(rm -rf "$CODEMAP_DIR")
-  SKIP_GENERATION = false
-  message = "Regenerating codemap from scratch."
-} else {
-  SKIP_GENERATION = false
-  message = "No existing codemap found, generating new code flow analysis."
-}
-```
-
-**Output Variables**:
-- `FEATURE_KEYWORD`: Original feature keyword
-- `normalized_feature`: Normalized feature name for directory
-- `CODEMAP_DIR`: `.claude/skills/codemap-{feature}`
-- `TOOL`: CLI tool to use (gemini or qwen)
-- `SKIP_GENERATION`: Boolean - whether to skip Phase 2
-
-**TodoWrite**:
-- If skipping: Mark phase 1 completed, phase 2 completed, phase 3 in_progress
-- If not skipping: Mark phase 1 completed, phase 2 in_progress
-
----
-
-### Phase 2: Code Flow Analysis & Documentation Generation
-
-**Skip Condition**: Skipped if `SKIP_GENERATION = true`
-
-**Goal**: Use cli-explore-agent for professional code analysis, then orchestrator generates Mermaid documentation
-
-**Architecture**: Phase 2a (Agent Analysis) → Phase 2b (Orchestrator Documentation)
-
----
-
-#### Phase 2a: cli-explore-agent Analysis
-
-**Purpose**: Leverage specialized cli-explore-agent for deep code flow analysis
-
-**Agent Task Specification**:
-
-```
-Task(
-  subagent_type: "cli-explore-agent",
-  description: "Analyze code flow: {FEATURE_KEYWORD}",
-  prompt: "
-Perform Deep Scan analysis for feature: {FEATURE_KEYWORD}
-
-**Analysis Mode**: deep-scan (Dual-source: Bash structural scan + Gemini semantic analysis)
-
-**Analysis Objectives**:
-1. **Module Architecture**: Identify high-level module organization, interactions, and entry points
-2. **Function Call Chains**: Trace execution paths, call sequences, and parameter flows
-3. **Data Transformations**: Map data structure changes and transformation stages
-4. **Conditional Paths**: Document decision trees, branches, and error handling strategies
-5. **Design Patterns**: Discover architectural patterns and extract design intent
-
-**Scope**:
-- Feature: {FEATURE_KEYWORD}
-- CLI Tool: {TOOL} (gemini-2.5-pro or qwen coder-model)
-- File Discovery: MCP Code Index (preferred) + rg fallback
-- Target: 5-15 most relevant files
-
-**MANDATORY FIRST STEP**:
-Read: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/codemap-json-schema.json
-
-**Output**: Return JSON following schema exactly. NO FILE WRITING - return JSON analysis only.
-
-**Critical Requirements**:
-- Use Deep Scan mode: Bash (Phase 1 - precise locations) + Gemini CLI (Phase 2 - semantic understanding) + Synthesis (Phase 3 - merge with attribution)
-- Focus exclusively on {FEATURE_KEYWORD} feature flow
-- Include file:line references for ALL findings
-- Extract design intent from code structure and comments
-- NO FILE WRITING - return JSON analysis only
-- Handle tool failures gracefully (Gemini → Qwen fallback, MCP → rg fallback)
-  "
-)
-```
-
-**Agent Output**: JSON analysis result with architecture, functions, data flow, conditionals, and patterns
-
----
-
-#### Phase 2b: Orchestrator Documentation Generation
-
-**Purpose**: Transform cli-explore-agent JSON into Mermaid-enriched documentation
-
-**Input**: Agent's JSON analysis result
-
-**Process**:
-
-1. **Parse Agent Analysis**:
-   ```javascript
-   const analysis = JSON.parse(agentResult)
-   const { feature, files_analyzed, architecture, function_calls, data_flow, conditional_logic, design_patterns } = analysis
-   ```
-
-2. **Generate Mermaid Diagrams from Structured Data**:
-
-   **a) architecture-flow.md** (~3K tokens):
-   ```javascript
-   // Convert architecture.modules + architecture.interactions → Mermaid graph TD
-   const architectureMermaid = `
-   graph TD
-   ${architecture.modules.map(m => `    ${m.name}[${m.name}]`).join('\n')}
-   ${architecture.interactions.map(i => `    ${i.from} -->|${i.type}| ${i.to}`).join('\n')}
-   `
-
-   Write({
-     file_path: `${CODEMAP_DIR}/architecture-flow.md`,
-     content: `---
-feature: ${feature}
-level: architecture
-detail: high-level module interactions
----
-# Architecture Flow: ${feature}
-
-## Overview
-${architecture.overview}
-
-## Module Architecture
-${architecture.modules.map(m => `### ${m.name}\n- **File**: ${m.file}\n- **Role**: ${m.responsibility}\n- **Dependencies**: ${m.dependencies.join(', ')}`).join('\n\n')}
-
-## Flow Diagram
-\`\`\`mermaid
-${architectureMermaid}
-\`\`\`
-
-## Key Interactions
-${architecture.interactions.map(i => `- **${i.from} → ${i.to}**: ${i.description}`).join('\n')}
-
-## Entry Points
-${architecture.entry_points.map(e => `- **${e.function}** (${e.file}): ${e.description}`).join('\n')}
-`
-   })
-   ```
-
-   **b) function-calls.md** (~5K tokens):
-   ```javascript
-   // Convert function_calls.sequences → Mermaid sequenceDiagram
-   const sequenceMermaid = `
-   sequenceDiagram
-   ${function_calls.sequences.map(s => `    ${s.from}->>${s.to}: ${s.method}`).join('\n')}
-   `
-
-   Write({
-     file_path: `${CODEMAP_DIR}/function-calls.md`,
-     content: `---
-feature: ${feature}
-level: function
-detail: function-level call sequences
----
-# Function Call Chains: ${feature}
-
-## Call Sequence Diagram
-\`\`\`mermaid
-${sequenceMermaid}
-\`\`\`
-
-## Detailed Call Chains
-${function_calls.call_chains.map(chain => `
-### Chain ${chain.chain_id}: ${chain.description}
-${chain.sequence.map(fn => `- **${fn.function}** (${fn.file})\n  - Calls: ${fn.calls.join(', ')}`).join('\n')}
-`).join('\n')}
-
-## Parameters & Returns
-${function_calls.sequences.map(s => `- **${s.method}** → Returns: ${s.returns || 'void'}`).join('\n')}
-`
-   })
-   ```
-
-   **c) data-flow.md** (~4K tokens):
-   ```javascript
-   // Convert data_flow.transformations → Mermaid flowchart LR
-   const dataFlowMermaid = `
-   flowchart LR
-   ${data_flow.transformations.map((t, i) => `    Stage${i}[${t.from}] -->|${t.transformer}| Stage${i+1}[${t.to}]`).join('\n')}
-   `
-
-   Write({
-     file_path: `${CODEMAP_DIR}/data-flow.md`,
-     content: `---
-feature: ${feature}
-level: data
-detail: data structure transformations
----
-# Data Flow: ${feature}
-
-## Data Transformation Diagram
-\`\`\`mermaid
-${dataFlowMermaid}
-\`\`\`
-
-## Data Structures
-${data_flow.structures.map(s => `### ${s.name} (${s.stage})\n\`\`\`json\n${JSON.stringify(s.shape, null, 2)}\n\`\`\``).join('\n\n')}
-
-## Transformations
-${data_flow.transformations.map(t => `- **${t.from} → ${t.to}** via \`${t.transformer}\` (${t.file})`).join('\n')}
-`
-   })
-   ```
-
-   **d) conditional-paths.md** (~4K tokens):
-   ```javascript
-   // Convert conditional_logic.branches → Mermaid flowchart TD
-   const conditionalMermaid = `
-   flowchart TD
-       Start[Entry Point]
-   ${conditional_logic.branches.map((b, i) => `
-       Start --> Check${i}{${b.condition}}
-       Check${i} -->|Yes| Path${i}A[${b.true_path}]
-       Check${i} -->|No| Path${i}B[${b.false_path}]
-   `).join('\n')}
-   `
-
-   Write({
-     file_path: `${CODEMAP_DIR}/conditional-paths.md`,
-     content: `---
-feature: ${feature}
-level: conditional
-detail: decision trees and error paths
----
-# Conditional Paths: ${feature}
-
-## Decision Tree
-\`\`\`mermaid
-${conditionalMermaid}
-\`\`\`
-
-## Branch Conditions
-${conditional_logic.branches.map(b => `- **${b.condition}** (${b.file})\n  - True: ${b.true_path}\n  - False: ${b.false_path}`).join('\n')}
-
-## Error Handling
-${conditional_logic.error_handling.map(e => `- **${e.error_type}**: Handler \`${e.handler}\` (${e.file}) - Recovery: ${e.recovery}`).join('\n')}
-`
-   })
-   ```
-
-   **e) complete-flow.md** (~8K tokens):
-   ```javascript
-   // Integrate all Mermaid diagrams
-   Write({
-     file_path: `${CODEMAP_DIR}/complete-flow.md`,
-     content: `---
-feature: ${feature}
-level: complete
-detail: integrated multi-level view
----
-# Complete Flow: ${feature}
-
-## Integrated Flow Diagram
-\`\`\`mermaid
-graph TB
-    subgraph Architecture
-    ${architecture.modules.map(m => `    ${m.name}[${m.name}]`).join('\n')}
-    end
-
-    subgraph "Function Calls"
-    ${function_calls.call_chains[0]?.sequence.map(fn => `    ${fn.function}`).join('\n') || ''}
-    end
-
-    subgraph "Data Flow"
-    ${data_flow.structures.map(s => `    ${s.name}[${s.name}]`).join('\n')}
-    end
-\`\`\`
-
-## Complete Trace
-[Comprehensive end-to-end documentation combining all analysis layers]
-
-## Design Patterns Identified
-${design_patterns.map(p => `- **${p.pattern}** in ${p.location}: ${p.description}`).join('\n')}
-
-## Recommendations
-${analysis.recommendations.map(r => `- ${r}`).join('\n')}
-
-## Cross-References
-- [Architecture Flow](./architecture-flow.md) - High-level module structure
-- [Function Calls](./function-calls.md) - Detailed call chains
-- [Data Flow](./data-flow.md) - Data transformation stages
-- [Conditional Paths](./conditional-paths.md) - Decision trees and error handling
-`
-   })
-   ```
-
-3. **Write metadata.json**:
-   ```javascript
-   Write({
-     file_path: `${CODEMAP_DIR}/metadata.json`,
-     content: JSON.stringify({
-       feature: feature,
-       normalized_name: normalized_feature,
-       generated_at: new Date().toISOString(),
-       tool_used: analysis.analysis_metadata.tool_used,
-       files_analyzed: files_analyzed.map(f => f.file),
-       analysis_summary: {
-         total_files: files_analyzed.length,
-         modules_traced: architecture.modules.length,
-         functions_traced: function_calls.call_chains.reduce((sum, c) => sum + c.sequence.length, 0),
-         patterns_discovered: design_patterns.length
-       }
-     }, null, 2)
-   })
-   ```
-
-4. **Report Phase 2 Completion**:
-   ```
-   Phase 2 Complete: Code flow analysis and documentation generated
-
-   - Agent Analysis: cli-explore-agent with {TOOL}
-   - Files Analyzed: {count}
-   - Documentation Generated: 5 markdown files + metadata.json
-   - Location: {CODEMAP_DIR}
-   ```
-
-**Completion Criteria**:
-- cli-explore-agent task completed successfully with JSON result
-- 5 documentation files written with valid Mermaid diagrams
-- metadata.json written with analysis summary
-- All files properly formatted and cross-referenced
-
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 2 completed, phase 3 in_progress
-
----
-
-### Phase 3: Generate SKILL.md Index
-
-**Note**: This phase **ALWAYS executes** - generates or updates the SKILL index.
-
-**Goal**: Read generated flow documentation and create SKILL.md index with progressive loading
-
-**Steps**:
-
-1. **Verify Generated Files**:
-   ```bash
-   bash(find "{CODEMAP_DIR}" -name "*.md" -type f | sort)
-   ```
-
-2. **Read metadata.json**:
-   ```javascript
-   Read({CODEMAP_DIR}/metadata.json)
-   // Extract: feature, normalized_name, files_analyzed, analysis_summary
-   ```
-
-3. **Read File Headers** (optional, first 30 lines):
-   ```javascript
-   Read({CODEMAP_DIR}/architecture-flow.md, limit: 30)
-   Read({CODEMAP_DIR}/function-calls.md, limit: 30)
-   // Extract overview and diagram counts
-   ```
-
-4. **Generate SKILL.md Index**:
-
-   Template structure:
-   ```yaml
-   ---
-   name: codemap-{normalized_feature}
-   description: Code flow mapping for {FEATURE_KEYWORD} feature (located at {project_path}). Load this SKILL when analyzing, tracing, or understanding {FEATURE_KEYWORD} execution flow, especially when no relevant context exists in memory.
-   version: 1.0.0
-   generated_at: {ISO_TIMESTAMP}
-   ---
-   # Code Flow Map: {FEATURE_KEYWORD}
-
-   ## Feature: `{FEATURE_KEYWORD}`
-
-   **Analysis Date**: {DATE}
-   **Tool Used**: {TOOL}
-   **Files Analyzed**: {COUNT}
-
-   ## Progressive Loading
-
-   ### Level 0: Quick Overview (~2K tokens)
-   - [Architecture Flow](./architecture-flow.md) - High-level module interactions
-
-   ### Level 1: Core Flows (~10K tokens)
-   - [Architecture Flow](./architecture-flow.md) - Module architecture
-   - [Function Calls](./function-calls.md) - Function call chains
-
-   ### Level 2: Complete Analysis (~20K tokens)
-   - [Architecture Flow](./architecture-flow.md)
-   - [Function Calls](./function-calls.md)
-   - [Data Flow](./data-flow.md) - Data transformations
-
-   ### Level 3: Deep Dive (~30K tokens)
-   - [Architecture Flow](./architecture-flow.md)
-   - [Function Calls](./function-calls.md)
-   - [Data Flow](./data-flow.md)
-   - [Conditional Paths](./conditional-paths.md) - Branches and error handling
-   - [Complete Flow](./complete-flow.md) - Integrated comprehensive view
-
-   ## Usage
-
-   Load this SKILL package when:
-   - Analyzing {FEATURE_KEYWORD} implementation
-   - Tracing execution flow for debugging
-   - Understanding code dependencies
-   - Planning refactoring or enhancements
-
-   ## Analysis Summary
-
-   - **Modules Traced**: {modules_traced}
-   - **Functions Traced**: {functions_traced}
-   - **Files Analyzed**: {total_files}
-
-   ## Mermaid Diagrams Included
-
-   - Architecture flow diagram (graph TD)
-   - Function call sequence diagram (sequenceDiagram)
-   - Data transformation flowchart (flowchart LR)
-   - Conditional decision tree (flowchart TD)
-   - Complete integrated diagram (graph TB)
-   ```
-
-5. **Write SKILL.md**:
-   ```javascript
-   Write({
-     file_path: `{CODEMAP_DIR}/SKILL.md`,
-     content: generatedIndexMarkdown
-   })
-   ```
-
-**Completion Criteria**:
-- SKILL.md index written
-- All documentation files verified
-- Progressive loading levels (0-3) properly structured
-- Mermaid diagram references included
-
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 3 completed
-
-**Final Report**:
-```
-Code Flow Mapping Complete
-
-Feature: {FEATURE_KEYWORD}
-Location: .claude/skills/codemap-{normalized_feature}/
-
-Files Generated:
-- SKILL.md (index)
-- architecture-flow.md (with Mermaid diagram)
-- function-calls.md (with Mermaid sequence diagram)
-- data-flow.md (with Mermaid flowchart)
-- conditional-paths.md (with Mermaid decision tree)
-- complete-flow.md (with integrated Mermaid diagram)
-- metadata.json
-
-Analysis:
-- Files analyzed: {count}
-- Modules traced: {count}
-- Functions traced: {count}
-
-Usage: Skill(command: "codemap-{normalized_feature}")
-```
-
----
-
-## Implementation Details
-
-### TodoWrite Patterns
-
-**Initialization** (Before Phase 1):
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Parse feature keyword and check existing", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Parsing feature keyword"},
-  {"content": "Agent analyzes code flow and generates files", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Analyzing code flow"},
-  {"content": "Generate SKILL.md index", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating SKILL index"}
-]})
-```
-
-**Full Path** (SKIP_GENERATION = false):
-```javascript
-// After Phase 1
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Parse feature keyword and check existing", "status": "completed", ...},
-  {"content": "Agent analyzes code flow and generates files", "status": "in_progress", ...},
-  {"content": "Generate SKILL.md index", "status": "pending", ...}
-]})
-
-// After Phase 2
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Parse feature keyword and check existing", "status": "completed", ...},
-  {"content": "Agent analyzes code flow and generates files", "status": "completed", ...},
-  {"content": "Generate SKILL.md index", "status": "in_progress", ...}
-]})
-
-// After Phase 3
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Parse feature keyword and check existing", "status": "completed", ...},
-  {"content": "Agent analyzes code flow and generates files", "status": "completed", ...},
-  {"content": "Generate SKILL.md index", "status": "completed", ...}
-]})
-```
-
-**Skip Path** (SKIP_GENERATION = true):
-```javascript
-// After Phase 1 (skip Phase 2)
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Parse feature keyword and check existing", "status": "completed", ...},
-  {"content": "Agent analyzes code flow and generates files", "status": "completed", ...},  // Skipped
-  {"content": "Generate SKILL.md index", "status": "in_progress", ...}
-]})
-```
-
-### Execution Flow
-
-**Full Path**:
-```
-User → TodoWrite Init → Phase 1 (parse) → Phase 2 (agent analyzes) → Phase 3 (write index) → Report
-```
-
-**Skip Path**:
-```
-User → TodoWrite Init → Phase 1 (detect existing) → Phase 3 (update index) → Report
-```
-
-### Error Handling
-
-**Phase 1 Errors**:
-- Empty feature keyword: Report error, ask user to provide feature description
-- Invalid characters: Normalize and continue
-
-**Phase 2 Errors (Agent)**:
-- Agent task fails: Retry once, report if fails again
-- No files discovered: Warn user, ask for more specific feature keyword
-- CLI failures: Agent handles internally with retries
-- Invalid Mermaid syntax: Agent validates before writing
-
-**Phase 3 Errors**:
-- Write failures: Report which files failed
-- Missing files: Note in SKILL.md, suggest regeneration
-
----
-
-## Parameters
-
-```bash
-/memory:code-map-memory "feature-keyword" [--regenerate] [--tool <gemini|qwen>]
-```
-
-**Arguments**:
-- **"feature-keyword"**: Feature or flow to analyze (required)
-  - Examples: `"user authentication"`, `"payment processing"`, `"数据导入流程"`
-  - Can be English, Chinese, or mixed
-  - Spaces and underscores normalized to hyphens
-- **--regenerate**: Force regenerate existing codemap (deletes and recreates)
-- **--tool**: CLI tool for analysis (default: gemini)
-  - `gemini`: Comprehensive flow analysis with gemini-2.5-pro
-  - `qwen`: Alternative with coder-model
-
----
-
-## Examples
-
-**Generated File Structure** (for all examples):
-```
-.claude/skills/codemap-{feature}/
-├── SKILL.md                    # Index (Phase 3)
-├── architecture-flow.md        # Agent (Phase 2) - High-level flow
-├── function-calls.md           # Agent (Phase 2) - Function chains
-├── data-flow.md                # Agent (Phase 2) - Data transformations
-├── conditional-paths.md        # Agent (Phase 2) - Branches & errors
-├── complete-flow.md            # Agent (Phase 2) - Integrated view
-└── metadata.json               # Agent (Phase 2)
-```
-
-### Example 1: User Authentication Flow
-
-```bash
-/memory:code-map-memory "user authentication"
-```
-
-**Workflow**:
-1. Phase 1: Normalizes to "user-authentication", checks existing codemap
-2. Phase 2: Agent discovers auth-related files, executes CLI analysis, generates 5 flow docs with Mermaid
-3. Phase 3: Generates SKILL.md index with progressive loading
-
-**Output**: `.claude/skills/codemap-user-authentication/` with 6 files + metadata
-
-
-### Example 3: Regenerate with Qwen
-
-```bash
-/memory:code-map-memory "payment processing" --regenerate --tool qwen
-```
-
-**Workflow**:
-1. Phase 1: Deletes existing codemap due to --regenerate
-2. Phase 2: Agent uses qwen with coder-model for fresh analysis
-3. Phase 3: Generates updated SKILL.md
-
----
-
-
-## Architecture
-
-```
-code-map-memory (orchestrator)
-  ├─ Phase 1: Parse & Check (bash commands, skip decision)
-  ├─ Phase 2: Code Analysis & Documentation (skippable)
-  │   ├─ Phase 2a: cli-explore-agent Analysis
-  │   │   └─ Deep Scan: Bash structural + Gemini semantic → JSON
-  │   └─ Phase 2b: Orchestrator Documentation
-  │       └─ Transform JSON → 5 Mermaid markdown files + metadata.json
-  └─ Phase 3: Write SKILL.md (index generation, always runs)
-
-Output: .claude/skills/codemap-{feature}/
-```

.claude/commands/memory/docs.md

@@ -1,615 +0,0 @@
----
-name: docs
-description: Plan documentation workflow with dynamic grouping (≤10 docs/task), generates IMPL tasks for parallel module trees, README, ARCHITECTURE, and HTTP API docs
-argument-hint: "[path] [--tool <gemini|qwen|codex>] [--mode <full|partial>] [--cli-execute]"
----
-
-# Documentation Workflow (/memory:docs)
-
-## Overview
-Lightweight planner that analyzes project structure, decomposes documentation work into tasks, and generates execution plans. Does NOT generate documentation content itself - delegates to doc-generator agent.
-
-**Execution Strategy**:
-- **Dynamic Task Grouping**: Level 1 tasks grouped by top-level directories with document count limit
-  - **Primary constraint**: Each task generates ≤10 documents (API.md + README.md count)
-  - **Optimization goal**: Prefer grouping 2 top-level directories per task for context sharing
-  - **Conflict resolution**: If 2 dirs exceed 10 docs, reduce to 1 dir/task; if 1 dir exceeds 10 docs, split by subdirectories
-  - **Context benefit**: Same-task directories analyzed together via single Gemini call
-- **Parallel Execution**: Multiple Level 1 tasks execute concurrently for faster completion
-- **Pre-computed Analysis**: Phase 2 performs unified analysis once, stored in `.process/` for reuse
-- **Efficient Data Loading**: All existing docs loaded once in Phase 2, shared across tasks
-
-**Path Mirroring**: Documentation structure mirrors source code under `.workflow/docs/{project_name}/`
-- Example: `my_app/src/core/` → `.workflow/docs/my_app/src/core/API.md`
-
-**Two Execution Modes**:
-- **Default (Agent Mode)**: CLI analyzes in `pre_analysis` (MODE=analysis), agent writes docs
-- **--cli-execute (CLI Mode)**: CLI generates docs in `implementation_approach` (MODE=write), agent executes CLI commands
-
-## Path Mirroring Strategy
-
-**Principle**: Documentation structure **mirrors** source code structure under project-specific directory.
-
-| Source Path | Project Name | Documentation Path |
-|------------|--------------|-------------------|
-| `my_app/src/core/` | `my_app` | `.workflow/docs/my_app/src/core/API.md` |
-| `my_app/src/modules/auth/` | `my_app` | `.workflow/docs/my_app/src/modules/auth/API.md` |
-| `another_project/lib/utils/` | `another_project` | `.workflow/docs/another_project/lib/utils/API.md` |
-
-
-## Parameters
-
-```bash
-/memory:docs [path] [--tool <gemini|qwen|codex>] [--mode <full|partial>] [--cli-execute]
-```
-
-- **path**: Source directory to analyze (default: current directory)
-  - Specifies the source code directory to be documented
-  - Documentation is generated in a separate `.workflow/docs/{project_name}/` directory at the workspace root, **not** within the source `path` itself
-  - The source path's structure is mirrored within the project-specific documentation folder
-  - Example: analyzing `src/modules` produces documentation at `.workflow/docs/{project_name}/src/modules/`
-- **--mode**: Documentation generation mode (default: full)
-  - `full`: Complete documentation (modules + README + ARCHITECTURE + EXAMPLES + HTTP API)
-  - `partial`: Module documentation only (API.md + README.md)
-- **--tool**: CLI tool selection (default: gemini)
-  - `gemini`: Comprehensive documentation, pattern recognition
-  - `qwen`: Architecture analysis, system design focus
-  - `codex`: Implementation validation, code quality
-- **--cli-execute**: Enable CLI-based documentation generation (optional)
-
-## Planning Workflow
-
-### Phase 1: Initialize Session
-
-```bash
-# Get target path, project name, and root
-bash(pwd && basename "$(pwd)" && git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd && date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S)
-```
-
-```javascript
-// Create docs session (type: docs)
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:session:start --type docs --new \"{project_name}-docs-{timestamp}\"")
-// Parse output to get sessionId
-```
-
-```bash
-# Update workflow-session.json with docs-specific fields
-bash(jq '. + {"target_path":"{target_path}","project_root":"{project_root}","project_name":"{project_name}","mode":"full","tool":"gemini","cli_execute":false}' .workflow/active/{sessionId}/workflow-session.json > tmp.json && mv tmp.json .workflow/active/{sessionId}/workflow-session.json)
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Analyze Structure
-
-**Smart filter**: Auto-detect and skip tests/build/config/vendor based on project tech stack.
-
-**Commands** (collect data with simple bash):
-
-```bash
-# 1. Run folder analysis
-bash(ccw tool exec get_modules_by_depth '{}' | ccw tool exec classify_folders '{}')
-
-# 2. Get top-level directories (first 2 path levels)
-bash(ccw tool exec get_modules_by_depth '{}' | ccw tool exec classify_folders '{}' | awk -F'|' '{print $1}' | sed 's|^\./||' | awk -F'/' '{if(NF>=2) print $1"/"$2; else if(NF==1) print $1}' | sort -u)
-
-# 3. Find existing docs (if directory exists)
-bash(if [ -d .workflow/docs/\${project_name} ]; then find .workflow/docs/\${project_name} -type f -name "*.md" ! -path "*/README.md" ! -path "*/ARCHITECTURE.md" ! -path "*/EXAMPLES.md" ! -path "*/api/*" 2>/dev/null; fi)
-
-# 4. Read existing docs content (if files exist)
-bash(if [ -d .workflow/docs/\${project_name} ]; then find .workflow/docs/\${project_name} -type f -name "*.md" ! -path "*/README.md" ! -path "*/ARCHITECTURE.md" ! -path "*/EXAMPLES.md" ! -path "*/api/*" 2>/dev/null | xargs cat 2>/dev/null; fi)
-```
-
-**Data Processing**: Parse bash outputs, calculate statistics, use **Write tool** to create `${session_dir}/.process/doc-planning-data.json` with structure:
-
-```json
-{
-  "metadata": {
-    "generated_at": "2025-11-03T16:57:30.469669",
-    "project_name": "project_name",
-    "project_root": "/path/to/project"
-  },
-  "folder_analysis": [
-    {"path": "./src/core", "type": "code", "code_count": 5, "dirs_count": 2}
-  ],
-  "top_level_dirs": ["src/modules", "lib/core"],
-  "existing_docs": {
-    "file_list": [".workflow/docs/project/src/core/API.md"],
-    "content": "... existing docs content ..."
-  },
-  "unified_analysis": [],
-  "statistics": {
-    "total": 15,
-    "code": 8,
-    "navigation": 7,
-    "top_level": 3
-  }
-}
-```
-
-**Then** use **Edit tool** to update `workflow-session.json` adding analysis field.
-
-**Output**: Single `doc-planning-data.json` with all analysis data (no temp files or Python scripts).
-
-**Auto-skipped**: Tests (`**/test/**`, `**/*.test.*`), Build (`**/node_modules/**`, `**/dist/**`), Config (root-level files), Vendor directories.
-
-### Phase 3: Detect Update Mode
-
-**Commands**:
-
-```bash
-# Count existing docs from doc-planning-data.json
-bash(cat .workflow/active/WFS-docs-{timestamp}/.process/doc-planning-data.json | jq '.existing_docs.file_list | length')
-```
-
-**Data Processing**: Use count result, then use **Edit tool** to update `workflow-session.json`:
-- Add `"update_mode": "update"` if count > 0, else `"create"`
-- Add `"existing_docs": <count>`
-
-### Phase 4: Decompose Tasks
-
-**Task Hierarchy** (Dynamic based on document count):
-
-```
-Small Projects (total ≤10 docs):
-  Level 1: IMPL-001 (all directories in single task, shared context)
-  Level 2: IMPL-002 (README, full mode only)
-  Level 3: IMPL-003 (ARCHITECTURE+EXAMPLES), IMPL-004 (HTTP API, optional)
-
-Medium Projects (Example: 7 top-level dirs, 18 total docs):
-  Step 1: Count docs per top-level dir
-    ├─ dir1: 3 docs, dir2: 4 docs → Group 1 (7 docs)
-    ├─ dir3: 5 docs, dir4: 3 docs → Group 2 (8 docs)
-    ├─ dir5: 2 docs → Group 3 (2 docs, can add more)
-
-  Step 2: Create tasks with ≤10 docs constraint
-  Level 1: IMPL-001 to IMPL-003 (parallel groups)
-    ├─ IMPL-001: Group 1 (dir1 + dir2, 7 docs, shared context)
-    ├─ IMPL-002: Group 2 (dir3 + dir4, 8 docs, shared context)
-    └─ IMPL-003: Group 3 (remaining dirs, ≤10 docs)
-  Level 2: IMPL-004 (README, depends on Level 1, full mode only)
-  Level 3: IMPL-005 (ARCHITECTURE+EXAMPLES), IMPL-006 (HTTP API, optional)
-
-Large Projects (single dir >10 docs):
-  Step 1: Detect oversized directory
-    └─ src/modules/: 15 subdirs → 30 docs (exceeds limit)
-
-  Step 2: Split by subdirectories
-  Level 1: IMPL-001 to IMPL-003 (split oversized dir)
-    ├─ IMPL-001: src/modules/ subdirs 1-5 (10 docs)
-    ├─ IMPL-002: src/modules/ subdirs 6-10 (10 docs)
-    └─ IMPL-003: src/modules/ subdirs 11-15 (10 docs)
-```
-
-**Grouping Algorithm**:
-1. Count total docs for each top-level directory
-2. Try grouping 2 directories (optimization for context sharing)
-3. If group exceeds 10 docs, split to 1 dir/task
-4. If single dir exceeds 10 docs, split by subdirectories
-5. Create parallel Level 1 tasks with ≤10 docs each
-
-
-**Commands**:
-
-```bash
-# 1. Get top-level directories from doc-planning-data.json
-bash(cat .workflow/active/WFS-docs-{timestamp}/.process/doc-planning-data.json | jq -r '.top_level_dirs[]')
-
-# 2. Get mode from workflow-session.json
-bash(cat .workflow/active/WFS-docs-{timestamp}/workflow-session.json | jq -r '.mode // "full"')
-
-# 3. Check for HTTP API
-bash(grep -r "router\.|@Get\|@Post" src/ 2>/dev/null && echo "API_FOUND" || echo "NO_API")
-```
-
-**Data Processing**:
-1. Count documents for each top-level directory (from folder_analysis):
-   - Code folders: 2 docs each (API.md + README.md)
-   - Navigation folders: 1 doc each (README.md only)
-2. Apply grouping algorithm with ≤10 docs constraint:
-   - Try grouping 2 directories, calculate total docs
-   - If total ≤10 docs: create group
-   - If total >10 docs: split to 1 dir/group or subdivide
-   - If single dir >10 docs: split by subdirectories
-3. Use **Edit tool** to update `doc-planning-data.json` adding groups field:
-   ```json
-   "groups": {
-     "count": 3,
-     "assignments": [
-       {"group_id": "001", "directories": ["src/modules", "src/utils"], "doc_count": 5},
-       {"group_id": "002", "directories": ["lib/core"], "doc_count": 6},
-       {"group_id": "003", "directories": ["lib/helpers"], "doc_count": 3}
-     ]
-   }
-   ```
-
-**Task ID Calculation**:
-```bash
-group_count=$(jq '.groups.count' .workflow/active/WFS-docs-{timestamp}/.process/doc-planning-data.json)
-readme_id=$((group_count + 1))   # Next ID after groups
-arch_id=$((group_count + 2))
-api_id=$((group_count + 3))
-```
-
-### Phase 5: Generate Task JSONs
-
-**CLI Strategy**:
-
-| Mode | cli_execute | Placement | CLI MODE | Approval Flag | Agent Role |
-|------|-------------|-----------|----------|---------------|------------|
-| **Agent** | false | pre_analysis | analysis | (none) | Generate docs in implementation_approach |
-| **CLI** | true | implementation_approach | write | --mode write | Execute CLI commands, validate output |
-
-**Command Patterns**:
-- Gemini/Qwen: `ccw cli -p "..." --tool gemini --mode analysis --cd dir`
-- CLI Mode: `ccw cli -p "..." --tool gemini --mode write --cd dir`
-- Codex: `ccw cli -p "..." --tool codex --mode write --cd dir`
-
-**Generation Process**:
-1. Read configuration values (tool, cli_execute, mode) from workflow-session.json
-2. Read group assignments from doc-planning-data.json
-3. Generate Level 1 tasks (IMPL-001 to IMPL-N, one per group)
-4. Generate Level 2+ tasks if mode=full (README, ARCHITECTURE, HTTP API)
-
-## Task Templates
-
-### Level 1: Module Trees Group Task (Unified)
-
-**Execution Model**: Each task processes assigned directory group (max 2 directories) using pre-analyzed data from Phase 2.
-
-```json
-{
-  "id": "IMPL-${group_number}",
-  "title": "Document Module Trees Group ${group_number}",
-  "status": "pending",
-  "meta": {
-    "type": "docs-tree-group",
-    "agent": "@doc-generator",
-    "tool": "gemini",
-    "cli_execute": false,
-    "group_number": "${group_number}",
-    "total_groups": "${total_groups}"
-  },
-  "context": {
-    "requirements": [
-      "Process directories from group ${group_number} in doc-planning-data.json",
-      "Generate docs to .workflow/docs/${project_name}/ (mirrored structure)",
-      "Code folders: API.md + README.md; Navigation folders: README.md only",
-      "Use pre-analyzed data from Phase 2 (no redundant analysis)"
-    ],
-    "focus_paths": ["${group_dirs_from_json}"],
-    "precomputed_data": {
-      "phase2_analysis": "${session_dir}/.process/doc-planning-data.json"
-    }
-  },
-  "flow_control": {
-    "pre_analysis": [
-      {
-        "step": "load_precomputed_data",
-        "action": "Load Phase 2 analysis and extract group directories",
-        "commands": [
-          "bash(cat ${session_dir}/.process/doc-planning-data.json)",
-          "bash(jq '.groups.assignments[] | select(.group_id == \"${group_number}\") | .directories' ${session_dir}/.process/doc-planning-data.json)"
-        ],
-        "output_to": "phase2_context",
-        "note": "Single JSON file contains all Phase 2 analysis results"
-      }
-    ],
-    "implementation_approach": [
-      {
-        "step": 1,
-        "title": "Generate documentation for assigned directory group",
-        "description": "Process directories in Group ${group_number} using pre-analyzed data",
-        "modification_points": [
-          "Read group directories from [phase2_context].groups.assignments[${group_number}].directories",
-          "For each directory: parse folder types from folder_analysis, parse structure from unified_analysis",
-          "Map source_path to .workflow/docs/${project_name}/{path}",
-          "Generate API.md for code folders, README.md for all folders",
-          "Preserve user modifications from [phase2_context].existing_docs.content"
-        ],
-        "logic_flow": [
-          "phase2 = parse([phase2_context])",
-          "dirs = phase2.groups.assignments[${group_number}].directories",
-          "for dir in dirs:",
-          "  folder_info = find(dir, phase2.folder_analysis)",
-          "  outline = find(dir, phase2.unified_analysis)",
-          "  if folder_info.type == 'code': generate API.md + README.md",
-          "  elif folder_info.type == 'navigation': generate README.md only",
-          "  write to .workflow/docs/${project_name}/{dir}/"
-        ],
-        "depends_on": [],
-        "output": "group_module_docs"
-      }
-    ],
-    "target_files": [
-      ".workflow/docs/${project_name}/*/API.md",
-      ".workflow/docs/${project_name}/*/README.md"
-    ]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-**CLI Execute Mode Note**: When `cli_execute=true`, add Step 2 in `implementation_approach`:
-```json
-{
-  "step": 2,
-  "title": "Batch generate documentation via CLI",
-  "command": "ccw cli -p 'PURPOSE: Generate module docs\\nTASK: Create documentation\\nMODE: write\\nCONTEXT: @**/* [phase2_context]\\nEXPECTED: API.md and README.md\\nRULES: Mirror structure' --tool gemini --mode write --cd ${dirs_from_group}",
-  "depends_on": [1],
-  "output": "generated_docs"
-}
-```
-
-### Level 2: Project README Task
-
-**Task ID**: `IMPL-${readme_id}` (where `readme_id = group_count + 1`)
-**Dependencies**: Depends on all Level 1 tasks completing.
-
-```json
-{
-  "id": "IMPL-${readme_id}",
-  "title": "Generate Project README",
-  "status": "pending",
-  "depends_on": ["IMPL-001", "...", "IMPL-${group_count}"],
-  "meta": {"type": "docs", "agent": "@doc-generator", "tool": "gemini", "cli_execute": false},
-  "flow_control": {
-    "pre_analysis": [
-      {
-        "step": "load_existing_readme",
-        "command": "bash(cat .workflow/docs/${project_name}/README.md 2>/dev/null || echo 'No existing README')",
-        "output_to": "existing_readme"
-      },
-      {
-        "step": "load_module_docs",
-        "command": "bash(find .workflow/docs/${project_name} -type f -name '*.md' ! -path '.workflow/docs/${project_name}/README.md' ! -path '.workflow/docs/${project_name}/ARCHITECTURE.md' ! -path '.workflow/docs/${project_name}/EXAMPLES.md' ! -path '.workflow/docs/${project_name}/api/*' | xargs cat)",
-        "output_to": "all_module_docs"
-      },
-      {
-        "step": "analyze_project",
-        "command": "bash(ccw cli -p \"PURPOSE: Analyze project structure\\nTASK: Extract overview from modules\\nMODE: analysis\\nCONTEXT: [all_module_docs]\\nEXPECTED: Project outline\" --tool gemini --mode analysis)",
-        "output_to": "project_outline"
-      }
-    ],
-    "implementation_approach": [
-      {
-        "step": 1,
-        "title": "Generate project README",
-        "description": "Generate project README with navigation links while preserving user modifications",
-        "modification_points": [
-          "Parse [project_outline] and [all_module_docs]",
-          "Generate README structure with navigation links",
-          "Preserve [existing_readme] user modifications"
-        ],
-        "logic_flow": ["Parse data", "Generate README with navigation", "Preserve modifications"],
-        "depends_on": [],
-        "output": "project_readme"
-      }
-    ],
-    "target_files": [".workflow/docs/${project_name}/README.md"]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Level 3: Architecture & Examples Documentation Task
-
-**Task ID**: `IMPL-${arch_id}` (where `arch_id = group_count + 2`)
-**Dependencies**: Depends on Level 2 (Project README).
-
-```json
-{
-  "id": "IMPL-${arch_id}",
-  "title": "Generate Architecture & Examples Documentation",
-  "status": "pending",
-  "depends_on": ["IMPL-${readme_id}"],
-  "meta": {"type": "docs", "agent": "@doc-generator", "tool": "gemini", "cli_execute": false},
-  "flow_control": {
-    "pre_analysis": [
-      {"step": "load_existing_docs", "command": "bash(cat .workflow/docs/${project_name}/{ARCHITECTURE,EXAMPLES}.md 2>/dev/null || echo 'No existing docs')", "output_to": "existing_arch_examples"},
-      {"step": "load_all_docs", "command": "bash(cat .workflow/docs/${project_name}/README.md && find .workflow/docs/${project_name} -type f -name '*.md' ! -path '*/README.md' ! -path '*/ARCHITECTURE.md' ! -path '*/EXAMPLES.md' ! -path '*/api/*' | xargs cat)", "output_to": "all_docs"},
-      {"step": "analyze_architecture", "command": "bash(ccw cli -p \"PURPOSE: Analyze system architecture\\nTASK: Synthesize architectural overview and examples\\nMODE: analysis\\nCONTEXT: [all_docs]\\nEXPECTED: Architecture + Examples outline\" --tool gemini --mode analysis)", "output_to": "arch_examples_outline"}
-    ],
-    "implementation_approach": [
-      {
-        "step": 1,
-        "title": "Generate architecture and examples documentation",
-        "modification_points": [
-          "Parse [arch_examples_outline] and [all_docs]",
-          "Generate ARCHITECTURE.md (system design, patterns)",
-          "Generate EXAMPLES.md (code snippets, usage)",
-          "Preserve [existing_arch_examples] modifications"
-        ],
-        "depends_on": [],
-        "output": "arch_examples_docs"
-      }
-    ],
-    "target_files": [".workflow/docs/${project_name}/ARCHITECTURE.md", ".workflow/docs/${project_name}/EXAMPLES.md"]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Level 4: HTTP API Documentation Task (Optional)
-
-**Task ID**: `IMPL-${api_id}` (where `api_id = group_count + 3`)
-**Dependencies**: Depends on Level 3.
-
-```json
-{
-  "id": "IMPL-${api_id}",
-  "title": "Generate HTTP API Documentation",
-  "status": "pending",
-  "depends_on": ["IMPL-${arch_id}"],
-  "meta": {"type": "docs", "agent": "@doc-generator", "tool": "gemini", "cli_execute": false},
-  "flow_control": {
-    "pre_analysis": [
-      {"step": "discover_api", "command": "bash(rg 'router\\.| @(Get|Post)' -g '*.{ts,js}')", "output_to": "endpoint_discovery"},
-      {"step": "load_existing_api", "command": "bash(cat .workflow/docs/${project_name}/api/README.md 2>/dev/null || echo 'No existing API docs')", "output_to": "existing_api_docs"},
-      {"step": "analyze_api", "command": "bash(ccw cli -p \"PURPOSE: Document HTTP API\\nTASK: Analyze endpoints\\nMODE: analysis\\nCONTEXT: @src/api/**/* [endpoint_discovery]\\nEXPECTED: API outline\" --tool gemini --mode analysis)", "output_to": "api_outline"}
-    ],
-    "implementation_approach": [
-      {
-        "step": 1,
-        "title": "Generate HTTP API documentation",
-        "modification_points": [
-          "Parse [api_outline] and [endpoint_discovery]",
-          "Document endpoints, request/response formats",
-          "Preserve [existing_api_docs] modifications"
-        ],
-        "depends_on": [],
-        "output": "api_docs"
-      }
-    ],
-    "target_files": [".workflow/docs/${project_name}/api/README.md"]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-## Session Structure
-
-**Unified Structure** (single JSON replaces multiple text files):
-
-```
-.workflow/active/
-└── WFS-docs-{timestamp}/
-    ├── workflow-session.json            # Session metadata
-    ├── IMPL_PLAN.md
-    ├── TODO_LIST.md
-    ├── .process/
-    │   └── doc-planning-data.json       # All Phase 2 analysis data (replaces 7+ files)
-    └── .task/
-        ├── IMPL-001.json                # Small: all modules | Large: group 1
-        ├── IMPL-00N.json                # (Large only: groups 2-N)
-        ├── IMPL-{N+1}.json              # README (full mode)
-        ├── IMPL-{N+2}.json              # ARCHITECTURE+EXAMPLES (full mode)
-        └── IMPL-{N+3}.json              # HTTP API (optional)
-```
-
-**doc-planning-data.json Structure**:
-```json
-{
-  "metadata": {
-    "generated_at": "2025-11-03T16:41:06+08:00",
-    "project_name": "Claude_dms3",
-    "project_root": "/d/Claude_dms3"
-  },
-  "folder_analysis": [
-    {"path": "./src/core", "type": "code", "code_count": 5, "dirs_count": 2},
-    {"path": "./src/utils", "type": "navigation", "code_count": 0, "dirs_count": 4}
-  ],
-  "top_level_dirs": ["src/modules", "src/utils", "lib/core"],
-  "existing_docs": {
-    "file_list": [".workflow/docs/project/src/core/API.md"],
-    "content": "... concatenated existing docs ..."
-  },
-  "unified_analysis": [
-    {"module_path": "./src/core", "outline_summary": "Core functionality"}
-  ],
-  "groups": {
-    "count": 4,
-    "assignments": [
-      {"group_id": "001", "directories": ["src/modules", "src/utils"], "doc_count": 6},
-      {"group_id": "002", "directories": ["lib/core", "lib/helpers"], "doc_count": 7}
-    ]
-  },
-  "statistics": {
-    "total": 15,
-    "code": 8,
-    "navigation": 7,
-    "top_level": 3
-  }
-}
-```
-
-**Workflow Session Structure** (workflow-session.json):
-```json
-{
-  "session_id": "WFS-docs-{timestamp}",
-  "project": "{project_name} documentation",
-  "status": "planning",
-  "timestamp": "2024-01-20T14:30:22+08:00",
-  "path": ".",
-  "target_path": "/path/to/project",
-  "project_root": "/path/to/project",
-  "project_name": "{project_name}",
-  "mode": "full",
-  "tool": "gemini",
-  "cli_execute": false,
-  "update_mode": "update",
-  "existing_docs": 5,
-  "analysis": {
-    "total": "15",
-    "code": "8",
-    "navigation": "7",
-    "top_level": "3"
-  }
-}
-```
-
-## Generated Documentation
-
-**Structure mirrors project source directories under project-specific folder**:
-
-```
-.workflow/docs/
-└── {project_name}/                    # Project-specific root
-    ├── src/                           # Mirrors src/ directory
-    │   ├── modules/
-    │   │   ├── README.md              # Navigation
-    │   │   ├── auth/
-    │   │   │   ├── API.md             # API signatures
-    │   │   │   ├── README.md          # Module docs
-    │   │   │   └── middleware/
-    │   │   │       ├── API.md
-    │   │   │       └── README.md
-    │   │   └── api/
-    │   │       ├── API.md
-    │   │       └── README.md
-    │   └── utils/
-    │       └── README.md
-    ├── lib/                           # Mirrors lib/ directory
-    │   └── core/
-    │       ├── API.md
-    │       └── README.md
-    ├── README.md                      # Project root
-    ├── ARCHITECTURE.md                # System design
-    ├── EXAMPLES.md                    # Usage examples
-    └── api/                           # Optional
-        └── README.md                  # HTTP API reference
-```
-
-## Execution Commands
-
-```bash
-# Execute entire workflow (auto-discovers active session)
-/workflow:execute
-
-# Or specify session
-/workflow:execute --resume-session="WFS-docs-yyyymmdd-hhmmss"
-
-# Individual task execution
-/task:execute IMPL-001
-```
-
-## Template Reference
-
-**Available Templates** (`~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/documentation/`):
-- `api.txt`: Code API (Part A) + HTTP API (Part B)
-- `module-readme.txt`: Module purpose, usage, dependencies
-- `folder-navigation.txt`: Navigation README for folders with subdirectories
-- `project-readme.txt`: Project overview, getting started, navigation
-- `project-architecture.txt`: System structure, module map, design patterns
-- `project-examples.txt`: End-to-end usage examples
-
-## Execution Mode Summary
-
-| Mode | CLI Placement | CLI MODE | Approval Flag | Agent Role |
-|------|---------------|----------|---------------|------------|
-| **Agent (default)** | pre_analysis | analysis | (none) | Generates documentation content |
-| **CLI (--cli-execute)** | implementation_approach | write | --mode write | Executes CLI commands, validates output |
-
-**Execution Flow**:
-- **Phase 2**: Unified analysis once, results in `.process/`
-- **Phase 4**: Dynamic grouping (max 2 dirs per group)
-- **Level 1**: Parallel processing for module tree groups
-- **Level 2+**: Sequential execution for project-level docs
-
-## Related Commands
-- `/workflow:execute` - Execute documentation tasks
-- `/workflow:status` - View task progress
-- `/workflow:session:complete` - Mark session complete

.claude/commands/memory/load-skill-memory.md

@@ -1,182 +0,0 @@
----
-name: load-skill-memory
-description: Activate SKILL package (auto-detect from paths/keywords or manual) and intelligently load documentation based on task intent keywords
-argument-hint: "[skill_name] \"task intent description\""
-allowed-tools: Bash(*), Read(*), Skill(*)
----
-
-# Memory Load SKILL Command (/memory:load-skill-memory)
-
-## 1. Overview
-
-The `memory:load-skill-memory` command **activates SKILL package** (auto-detect from task or manual specification) and intelligently loads documentation based on user's task intent. The system automatically determines which documentation files to read based on the intent description.
-
-**Core Philosophy**:
-- **Flexible Activation**: Auto-detect skill from task description/paths, or user explicitly specifies
-- **Intent-Driven Loading**: System analyzes task intent to determine documentation scope
-- **Intelligent Selection**: Automatically chooses appropriate documentation level and modules
-- **Direct Context Loading**: Loads selected documentation into conversation memory
-
-**When to Use**:
-- Manually activate a known SKILL package for a specific task
-- Load SKILL context when system hasn't auto-triggered it
-- Force reload SKILL documentation with specific intent focus
-
-**Note**: Normal SKILL activation happens automatically via description triggers or path mentions (system extracts skill name from file paths for intelligent triggering). Use this command only when manual activation is needed.
-
-## 2. Parameters
-
-- `[skill_name]` (Optional): Name of SKILL package to activate
-  - If omitted: System auto-detects from task description or file paths
-  - If specified: Direct activation of named SKILL package
-  - Example: `my_project`, `api_service`
-  - Must match directory name under `.claude/skills/`
-
-- `"task intent description"` (Required): Description of what you want to do
-  - Used for both: auto-detection (if skill_name omitted) and documentation scope selection
-  - **Analysis tasks**: "分析builder pattern实现", "理解参数系统架构"
-  - **Modification tasks**: "修改workflow逻辑", "增强thermal template功能"
-  - **Learning tasks**: "学习接口设计模式", "了解测试框架使用"
-  - **With paths**: "修改D:\projects\my_project\src\auth.py的认证逻辑" (auto-extracts `my_project`)
-
-## 3. Execution Flow
-
-### Step 1: Determine SKILL Name (if not provided)
-
-**Auto-Detection Strategy** (when skill_name parameter is omitted):
-1. **Path Extraction**: Scan task description for file paths
-   - Extract potential project names from path segments
-   - Example: `"修改D:\projects\my_project\src\auth.py"` → extracts `my_project`
-2. **Keyword Matching**: Match task keywords against SKILL descriptions
-   - Search for project-specific terms, domain keywords
-3. **Validation**: Check if extracted name matches `.claude/skills/{skill_name}/`
-
-**Result**: Either uses provided skill_name or auto-detected name for activation
-
-### Step 2: Activate SKILL and Analyze Intent
-
-**Activate SKILL Package**:
-```javascript
-Skill(command: "${skill_name}")  // Uses provided or auto-detected name
-```
-
-**What Happens After Activation**:
-1. If SKILL exists in memory: System reads `.claude/skills/${skill_name}/SKILL.md`
-2. If SKILL not found in memory: Error - SKILL package doesn't exist
-3. SKILL description triggers are loaded into memory
-4. Progressive loading mechanism becomes available
-5. Documentation structure is now accessible
-
-**Intent Analysis**:
-Based on task intent description, system determines:
-- **Action type**: analyzing, modifying, learning
-- **Scope**: specific module, architecture overview, complete system
-- **Depth**: quick reference, detailed API, full documentation
-
-### Step 3: Intelligent Documentation Loading
-
-**Loading Strategy**:
-
-The system automatically selects documentation based on intent keywords:
-
-1. **Quick Understanding** ("了解", "快速理解", "什么是"):
-   - Load: Level 0 (README.md only, ~2K tokens)
-   - Use case: Quick overview of capabilities
-
-2. **Specific Module Analysis** ("分析XXX模块", "理解XXX实现"):
-   - Load: Module-specific README.md + API.md (~5K tokens)
-   - Use case: Deep dive into specific component
-
-3. **Architecture Review** ("架构", "设计模式", "整体结构"):
-   - Load: README.md + ARCHITECTURE.md (~10K tokens)
-   - Use case: System design understanding
-
-4. **Implementation/Modification** ("修改", "增强", "实现"):
-   - Load: Relevant module docs + EXAMPLES.md (~15K tokens)
-   - Use case: Code modification with examples
-
-5. **Comprehensive Learning** ("学习", "完整了解", "深入理解"):
-   - Load: Level 3 (All documentation, ~40K tokens)
-   - Use case: Complete system mastery
-
-**Documentation Loaded into Memory**:
-After loading, the selected documentation content is available in conversation memory for subsequent operations.
-
-## 4. Usage Examples
-
-### Example 1: Manual Specification
-
-**User Command**:
-```bash
-/memory:load-skill-memory my_project "修改认证模块增加OAuth支持"
-```
-
-**Execution**:
-```javascript
-// Step 1: Use provided skill_name
-skill_name = "my_project"  // Directly from parameter
-
-// Step 2: Activate SKILL
-Skill(command: "my_project")
-
-// Step 3: Intent Analysis
-Keywords: ["修改", "认证模块", "增加", "OAuth"]
-Action: modifying (implementation)
-Scope: auth module + examples
-
-// Load documentation based on intent
-Read(.workflow/docs/my_project/auth/README.md)
-Read(.workflow/docs/my_project/auth/API.md)
-Read(.workflow/docs/my_project/EXAMPLES.md)
-```
-
-### Example 2: Auto-Detection from Path
-
-**User Command**:
-```bash
-/memory:load-skill-memory "修改D:\projects\my_project\src\services\api.py的接口逻辑"
-```
-
-**Execution**:
-```javascript
-// Step 1: Auto-detect skill_name from path
-Path detected: "D:\projects\my_project\src\services\api.py"
-Extracted: "my_project"
-Validated: .claude/skills/my_project/ exists ✓
-skill_name = "my_project"
-
-// Step 2: Activate SKILL
-Skill(command: "my_project")
-
-// Step 3: Intent Analysis
-Keywords: ["修改", "services", "接口逻辑"]
-Action: modifying (implementation)
-Scope: services module + examples
-
-// Load documentation based on intent
-Read(.workflow/docs/my_project/services/README.md)
-Read(.workflow/docs/my_project/services/API.md)
-Read(.workflow/docs/my_project/EXAMPLES.md)
-```
-
-## 5. Intent Keyword Mapping
-
-**Quick Reference**:
-- **Triggers**: "了解", "快速", "什么是", "简介"
-- **Loads**: README.md only (~2K)
-
-**Module-Specific**:
-- **Triggers**: "XXX模块", "XXX组件", "分析XXX"
-- **Loads**: Module README + API (~5K)
-
-**Architecture**:
-- **Triggers**: "架构", "设计", "整体结构", "系统设计"
-- **Loads**: README + ARCHITECTURE (~10K)
-
-**Implementation**:
-- **Triggers**: "修改", "增强", "实现", "开发", "集成"
-- **Loads**: Relevant module + EXAMPLES (~15K)
-
-**Comprehensive**:
-- **Triggers**: "完整", "深入", "全面", "学习整个"
-- **Loads**: All documentation (~40K)

.claude/commands/memory/skill-memory.md

@@ -1,525 +0,0 @@
----
-name: skill-memory
-description: 4-phase autonomous orchestrator: check docs → /memory:docs planning → /workflow:execute → generate SKILL.md with progressive loading index (skips phases 2-3 if docs exist)
-argument-hint: "[path] [--tool <gemini|qwen|codex>] [--regenerate] [--mode <full|partial>] [--cli-execute]"
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Bash(*), Read(*), Write(*)
----
-
-# Memory SKILL Package Generator
-
-## Orchestrator Role
-
-**Pure Orchestrator**: Execute documentation generation workflow, then generate SKILL.md index. Does NOT create task JSON files.
-
-**Auto-Continue Workflow**: This command runs **fully autonomously** once triggered. Each phase completes and automatically triggers the next phase without user interaction.
-
-**Execution Paths**:
-- **Full Path**: All 4 phases (no existing docs OR `--regenerate` specified)
-- **Skip Path**: Phase 1 → Phase 4 (existing docs found AND no `--regenerate` flag)
-- **Phase 4 Always Executes**: SKILL.md index is never skipped, always generated or updated
-
-## Core Rules
-
-1. **Start Immediately**: First action is TodoWrite initialization, second action is Phase 1 execution
-2. **No Task JSON**: This command does not create task JSON files - delegates to /memory:docs
-3. **Parse Every Output**: Extract required data from each command output (session_id, task_count, file paths)
-4. **Auto-Continue**: After completing each phase, update TodoWrite and immediately execute next phase
-5. **Track Progress**: Update TodoWrite after EVERY phase completion before starting next phase
-6. **Direct Generation**: Phase 4 directly generates SKILL.md using Write tool
-7. **No Manual Steps**: User should never be prompted for decisions between phases
-
----
-
-## 4-Phase Execution
-
-### Phase 1: Prepare Arguments
-
-**Goal**: Parse command arguments and check existing documentation
-
-**Step 1: Get Target Path and Project Name**
-```bash
-# Get current directory (or use provided path)
-bash(pwd)
-
-# Get project name from directory
-bash(basename "$(pwd)")
-
-# Get project root
-bash(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd)
-```
-
-**Output**:
-- `target_path`: `/d/my_project`
-- `project_name`: `my_project`
-- `project_root`: `/d/my_project`
-
-**Step 2: Set Default Parameters**
-```bash
-# Default values (use these unless user specifies otherwise):
-# - tool: "gemini"
-# - mode: "full"
-# - regenerate: false (no --regenerate flag)
-# - cli_execute: false (no --cli-execute flag)
-```
-
-**Step 3: Check Existing Documentation**
-```bash
-# Check if docs directory exists
-bash(test -d .workflow/docs/my_project && echo "exists" || echo "not_exists")
-
-# Count existing documentation files
-bash(find .workflow/docs/my_project -name "*.md" 2>/dev/null | wc -l || echo 0)
-```
-
-**Output**:
-- `docs_exists`: `exists` or `not_exists`
-- `existing_docs`: `5` (or `0` if no docs)
-
-**Step 4: Determine Execution Path**
-
-**Decision Logic**:
-```javascript
-if (existing_docs > 0 && !regenerate_flag) {
-  // Documentation exists and no regenerate flag
-  SKIP_DOCS_GENERATION = true
-  message = "Documentation already exists, skipping Phase 2 and Phase 3. Use --regenerate to force regeneration."
-} else if (regenerate_flag) {
-  // Force regeneration: delete existing docs
-  bash(rm -rf .workflow/docs/my_project 2>/dev/null || true)
-  SKIP_DOCS_GENERATION = false
-  message = "Regenerating documentation from scratch."
-} else {
-  // No existing docs
-  SKIP_DOCS_GENERATION = false
-  message = "No existing documentation found, generating new documentation."
-}
-```
-
-**Summary Variables**:
-- `PROJECT_NAME`: `my_project`
-- `TARGET_PATH`: `/d/my_project`
-- `DOCS_PATH`: `.workflow/docs/my_project`
-- `TOOL`: `gemini` (default) or user-specified
-- `MODE`: `full` (default) or user-specified
-- `CLI_EXECUTE`: `false` (default) or `true` if --cli-execute flag
-- `REGENERATE`: `false` (default) or `true` if --regenerate flag
-- `EXISTING_DOCS`: Count of existing documentation files
-- `SKIP_DOCS_GENERATION`: `true` if skipping Phase 2/3, `false` otherwise
-
-**Completion & TodoWrite**:
-- If `SKIP_DOCS_GENERATION = true`: Mark phase 1 completed, phase 2&3 completed (skipped), phase 4 in_progress
-- If `SKIP_DOCS_GENERATION = false`: Mark phase 1 completed, phase 2 in_progress
-
-**Next Action**:
-- If skipping: Display skip message → Jump to Phase 4 (SKILL.md generation)
-- If not skipping: Display preparation results → Continue to Phase 2 (documentation planning)
-
----
-
-### Phase 2: Call /memory:docs
-
-**Skip Condition**: This phase is **skipped if SKIP_DOCS_GENERATION = true** (documentation already exists without --regenerate flag)
-
-**Goal**: Trigger documentation generation workflow
-
-**Command**:
-```bash
-SlashCommand(command="/memory:docs [targetPath] --tool [tool] --mode [mode] [--cli-execute]")
-```
-
-**Example**:
-```bash
-/memory:docs /d/my_app --tool gemini --mode full
-/memory:docs /d/my_app --tool gemini --mode full --cli-execute
-```
-
-**Note**: The `--regenerate` flag is handled in Phase 1 by deleting existing documentation. This command always calls `/memory:docs` without the regenerate flag, relying on docs.md's built-in update detection.
-
-**Parse Output**:
-- Extract session ID: `WFS-docs-[timestamp]` (store as `docsSessionId`)
-- Extract task count (store as `taskCount`)
-
-**Completion Criteria**:
-- `/memory:docs` command executed successfully
-- Session ID extracted and stored
-- Task count retrieved
-- Task files created in `.workflow/[docsSessionId]/.task/`
-- workflow-session.json exists
-
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 2 completed, phase 3 in_progress
-
-**Next Action**: Display docs planning results (session ID, task count) → Auto-continue to Phase 3
-
----
-
-### Phase 3: Execute Documentation Generation
-
-**Skip Condition**: This phase is **skipped if SKIP_DOCS_GENERATION = true** (documentation already exists without --regenerate flag)
-
-**Goal**: Execute documentation generation tasks
-
-**Command**:
-```bash
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:execute")
-```
-
-**Note**: `/workflow:execute` automatically discovers active session from Phase 2
-
-**Completion Criteria**:
-- `/workflow:execute` command executed successfully
-- Documentation files generated in `.workflow/docs/[projectName]/`
-- All tasks marked as completed in session
-- At minimum: module documentation files exist (API.md and/or README.md)
-- For full mode: Project README, ARCHITECTURE, EXAMPLES files generated
-
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 3 completed, phase 4 in_progress
-
-**Next Action**: Display execution results (file count, module count) → Auto-continue to Phase 4
-
----
-
-### Phase 4: Generate SKILL.md Index
-
-**Note**: This phase is **NEVER skipped** - it always executes to generate or update the SKILL index.
-
-**Step 1: Read Key Files** (Use Read tool)
-- `.workflow/docs/{project_name}/README.md` (required)
-- `.workflow/docs/{project_name}/ARCHITECTURE.md` (optional)
-
-**Step 2: Discover Structure**
-```bash
-bash(find .workflow/docs/{project_name} -name "*.md" | sed 's|.workflow/docs/{project_name}/||' | awk -F'/' '{if(NF>=2) print $1"/"$2}' | sort -u)
-```
-
-**Step 3: Generate Intelligent Description**
-
-Extract from README + structure: Function (capabilities), Modules (names), Keywords (API/CLI/auth/etc.)
-
-**Format**: `{Project} {core capabilities} (located at {project_path}). Load this SKILL when analyzing, modifying, or learning about {domain_description} or files under this path, especially when no relevant context exists in memory.`
-
-**Key Elements**:
-- **Path Reference**: Use `TARGET_PATH` from Phase 1 for precise location identification
-- **Domain Description**: Extract human-readable domain/feature area from README (e.g., "workflow management", "thermal modeling")
-- **Trigger Optimization**: Include project path, emphasize "especially when no relevant context exists in memory"
-- **Action Coverage**: analyzing (分析), modifying (修改), learning (了解)
-
-**Example**: "Workflow orchestration system with CLI tools and documentation generation (located at /d/Claude_dms3). Load this SKILL when analyzing, modifying, or learning about workflow management or files under this path, especially when no relevant context exists in memory."
-
-**Step 4: Write SKILL.md** (Use Write tool)
-```bash
-bash(mkdir -p .claude/skills/{project_name})
-```
-
-`.claude/skills/{project_name}/SKILL.md`:
-```yaml
----
-name: {project_name}
-description: {intelligent description from Step 3}
-version: 1.0.0
----
-# {Project Name} SKILL Package
-
-## Documentation: `../../../.workflow/docs/{project_name}/`
-
-## Progressive Loading
-### Level 0: Quick Start (~2K)
-- [README](../../../.workflow/docs/{project_name}/README.md)
-### Level 1: Core Modules (~8K)
-{Module READMEs}
-### Level 2: Complete (~25K)
-All modules + [Architecture](../../../.workflow/docs/{project_name}/ARCHITECTURE.md)
-### Level 3: Deep Dive (~40K)
-Everything + [Examples](../../../.workflow/docs/{project_name}/EXAMPLES.md)
-```
-
-**Completion Criteria**:
-- SKILL.md file created at `.claude/skills/{project_name}/SKILL.md`
-- Intelligent description generated from documentation
-- Progressive loading levels (0-3) properly structured
-- Module index includes all documented modules
-- All file references use relative paths
-
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 4 completed
-
-**Final Action**: Report completion summary to user
-
-**Return to User**:
-```
-SKILL Package Generation Complete
-
-Project: {project_name}
-Documentation: .workflow/docs/{project_name}/ ({doc_count} files)
-SKILL Index: .claude/skills/{project_name}/SKILL.md
-
-Generated:
-- {task_count} documentation tasks completed
-- SKILL.md with progressive loading (4 levels)
-- Module index with {module_count} modules
-
-Usage:
-- Load Level 0: Quick project overview (~2K tokens)
-- Load Level 1: Core modules (~8K tokens)
-- Load Level 2: Complete docs (~25K tokens)
-- Load Level 3: Everything (~40K tokens)
-```
-
----
-
-## Implementation Details
-
-### Critical Rules
-
-1. **No User Prompts Between Phases**: Never ask user questions or wait for input between phases
-2. **Immediate Phase Transition**: After TodoWrite update, immediately execute next phase command
-3. **Status-Driven Execution**: Check TodoList status after each phase:
-   - If next task is "pending" → Mark it "in_progress" and execute
-   - If all tasks are "completed" → Report final summary
-4. **Phase Completion Pattern**:
-   ```
-   Phase N completes → Update TodoWrite (N=completed, N+1=in_progress) → Execute Phase N+1
-   ```
-
-### TodoWrite Patterns
-
-#### Initialization (Before Phase 1)
-
-**FIRST ACTION**: Create TodoList with all 4 phases
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Parse arguments and prepare", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Parsing arguments"},
-  {"content": "Call /memory:docs to plan documentation", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Calling /memory:docs"},
-  {"content": "Execute documentation generation", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Executing documentation"},
-  {"content": "Generate SKILL.md index", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating SKILL.md"}
-]})
-```
-
-**SECOND ACTION**: Execute Phase 1 immediately
-
-#### Full Path (SKIP_DOCS_GENERATION = false)
-
-**After Phase 1**:
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Parse arguments and prepare", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Parsing arguments"},
-  {"content": "Call /memory:docs to plan documentation", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Calling /memory:docs"},
-  {"content": "Execute documentation generation", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Executing documentation"},
-  {"content": "Generate SKILL.md index", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating SKILL.md"}
-]})
-// Auto-continue to Phase 2
-```
-
-**After Phase 2**:
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Parse arguments and prepare", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Parsing arguments"},
-  {"content": "Call /memory:docs to plan documentation", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Calling /memory:docs"},
-  {"content": "Execute documentation generation", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Executing documentation"},
-  {"content": "Generate SKILL.md index", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating SKILL.md"}
-]})
-// Auto-continue to Phase 3
-```
-
-**After Phase 3**:
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Parse arguments and prepare", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Parsing arguments"},
-  {"content": "Call /memory:docs to plan documentation", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Calling /memory:docs"},
-  {"content": "Execute documentation generation", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing documentation"},
-  {"content": "Generate SKILL.md index", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Generating SKILL.md"}
-]})
-// Auto-continue to Phase 4
-```
-
-**After Phase 4**:
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Parse arguments and prepare", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Parsing arguments"},
-  {"content": "Call /memory:docs to plan documentation", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Calling /memory:docs"},
-  {"content": "Execute documentation generation", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing documentation"},
-  {"content": "Generate SKILL.md index", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Generating SKILL.md"}
-]})
-// Report completion summary to user
-```
-
-#### Skip Path (SKIP_DOCS_GENERATION = true)
-
-**After Phase 1** (detects existing docs, skips Phase 2 & 3):
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Parse arguments and prepare", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Parsing arguments"},
-  {"content": "Call /memory:docs to plan documentation", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Calling /memory:docs"},
-  {"content": "Execute documentation generation", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing documentation"},
-  {"content": "Generate SKILL.md index", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Generating SKILL.md"}
-]})
-// Display skip message: "Documentation already exists, skipping Phase 2 and Phase 3. Use --regenerate to force regeneration."
-// Jump directly to Phase 4
-```
-
-**After Phase 4**:
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Parse arguments and prepare", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Parsing arguments"},
-  {"content": "Call /memory:docs to plan documentation", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Calling /memory:docs"},
-  {"content": "Execute documentation generation", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing documentation"},
-  {"content": "Generate SKILL.md index", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Generating SKILL.md"}
-]})
-// Report completion summary to user
-```
-
-### Execution Flow Diagrams
-
-#### Full Path Flow
-```
-User triggers command
-  ↓
-[TodoWrite] Initialize 4 phases (Phase 1 = in_progress)
-  ↓
-[Execute] Phase 1: Parse arguments
-  ↓
-[TodoWrite] Phase 1 = completed, Phase 2 = in_progress
-  ↓
-[Execute] Phase 2: Call /memory:docs
-  ↓
-[TodoWrite] Phase 2 = completed, Phase 3 = in_progress
-  ↓
-[Execute] Phase 3: Call /workflow:execute
-  ↓
-[TodoWrite] Phase 3 = completed, Phase 4 = in_progress
-  ↓
-[Execute] Phase 4: Generate SKILL.md
-  ↓
-[TodoWrite] Phase 4 = completed
-  ↓
-[Report] Display completion summary
-```
-
-#### Skip Path Flow
-```
-User triggers command
-  ↓
-[TodoWrite] Initialize 4 phases (Phase 1 = in_progress)
-  ↓
-[Execute] Phase 1: Parse arguments, detect existing docs
-  ↓
-[TodoWrite] Phase 1 = completed, Phase 2&3 = completed (skipped), Phase 4 = in_progress
-  ↓
-[Display] Skip message: "Documentation already exists, skipping Phase 2 and Phase 3"
-  ↓
-[Execute] Phase 4: Generate SKILL.md (always runs)
-  ↓
-[TodoWrite] Phase 4 = completed
-  ↓
-[Report] Display completion summary
-```
-
-### Error Handling
-
-- If any phase fails, mark it as "in_progress" (not completed)
-- Report error details to user
-- Do NOT auto-continue to next phase on failure
-
----
-
-## Parameters
-
-```bash
-/memory:skill-memory [path] [--tool <gemini|qwen|codex>] [--regenerate] [--mode <full|partial>] [--cli-execute]
-```
-
-- **path**: Target directory (default: current directory)
-- **--tool**: CLI tool for documentation (default: gemini)
-  - `gemini`: Comprehensive documentation
-  - `qwen`: Architecture analysis
-  - `codex`: Implementation validation
-- **--regenerate**: Force regenerate all documentation
-  - When enabled: Deletes existing `.workflow/docs/{project_name}/` before regeneration
-  - Ensures fresh documentation from source code
-- **--mode**: Documentation mode (default: full)
-  - `full`: Complete docs (modules + README + ARCHITECTURE + EXAMPLES)
-  - `partial`: Module docs only
-- **--cli-execute**: Enable CLI-based documentation generation (optional)
-  - When enabled: CLI generates docs directly in implementation_approach
-  - When disabled (default): Agent generates documentation content
-
----
-
-## Examples
-
-### Example 1: Generate SKILL Package (Default)
-
-```bash
-/memory:skill-memory
-```
-
-**Workflow**:
-1. Phase 1: Detects current directory, checks existing docs
-2. Phase 2: Calls `/memory:docs . --tool gemini --mode full` (Agent Mode)
-3. Phase 3: Executes documentation generation via `/workflow:execute`
-4. Phase 4: Generates SKILL.md at `.claude/skills/{project_name}/SKILL.md`
-
-### Example 2: Regenerate with Qwen
-
-```bash
-/memory:skill-memory /d/my_app --tool qwen --regenerate
-```
-
-**Workflow**:
-1. Phase 1: Parses target path, detects regenerate flag, deletes existing docs
-2. Phase 2: Calls `/memory:docs /d/my_app --tool qwen --mode full`
-3. Phase 3: Executes documentation regeneration
-4. Phase 4: Generates updated SKILL.md
-
-### Example 3: Partial Mode (Modules Only)
-
-```bash
-/memory:skill-memory --mode partial
-```
-
-**Workflow**:
-1. Phase 1: Detects partial mode
-2. Phase 2: Calls `/memory:docs . --tool gemini --mode partial` (Agent Mode)
-3. Phase 3: Executes module documentation only
-4. Phase 4: Generates SKILL.md with module-only index
-
-### Example 4: CLI Execute Mode
-
-```bash
-/memory:skill-memory --cli-execute
-```
-
-**Workflow**:
-1. Phase 1: Detects CLI execute mode
-2. Phase 2: Calls `/memory:docs . --tool gemini --mode full --cli-execute` (CLI Mode)
-3. Phase 3: Executes CLI-based documentation generation
-4. Phase 4: Generates SKILL.md at `.claude/skills/{project_name}/SKILL.md`
-
-### Example 5: Skip Path (Existing Docs)
-
-```bash
-/memory:skill-memory
-```
-
-**Scenario**: Documentation already exists in `.workflow/docs/{project_name}/`
-
-**Workflow**:
-1. Phase 1: Detects existing docs (5 files), sets SKIP_DOCS_GENERATION = true
-2. Display: "Documentation already exists, skipping Phase 2 and Phase 3. Use --regenerate to force regeneration."
-3. Phase 4: Generates or updates SKILL.md index only (~5-10x faster)
-
----
-
-
-
-## Architecture
-
-```
-skill-memory (orchestrator)
-  ├─ Phase 1: Prepare (bash commands, skip decision)
-  ├─ Phase 2: /memory:docs (task planning, skippable)
-  ├─ Phase 3: /workflow:execute (task execution, skippable)
-  └─ Phase 4: Write SKILL.md (direct file generation, always runs)
-
-No task JSON created by this command
-All documentation tasks managed by /memory:docs
-Smart skip logic: 5-10x faster when docs exist
-```

.claude/commands/memory/swagger-docs.md

@@ -1,773 +0,0 @@
----
-name: swagger-docs
-description: Generate complete Swagger/OpenAPI documentation following RESTful standards with global security, API details, error codes, and validation tests
-argument-hint: "[path] [--tool <gemini|qwen|codex>] [--format <yaml|json>] [--version <v3.0|v3.1>] [--lang <zh|en>]"
----
-
-# Swagger API Documentation Workflow (/memory:swagger-docs)
-
-## Overview
-
-Professional Swagger/OpenAPI documentation generator that strictly follows RESTful API design standards to produce enterprise-grade API documentation.
-
-**Core Features**:
-- **RESTful Standards**: Strict adherence to REST architecture and HTTP semantics
-- **Global Security**: Unified Authorization Token validation mechanism
-- **Complete API Docs**: Descriptions, methods, URLs, parameters for each endpoint
-- **Organized Structure**: Clear directory hierarchy by business domain
-- **Detailed Fields**: Type, required, example, description for each field
-- **Error Code Standards**: Unified error response format and code definitions
-- **Validation Tests**: Boundary conditions and exception handling tests
-
-**Output Structure** (--lang zh):
-```
-.workflow/docs/{project_name}/api/
-├── swagger.yaml              # Main OpenAPI spec file
-├── 概述/
-│   ├── README.md             # API overview
-│   ├── 认证说明.md           # Authentication guide
-│   ├── 错误码规范.md         # Error code definitions
-│   └── 版本历史.md           # Version history
-├── 用户模块/                 # Grouped by business domain
-│   ├── 用户认证.md
-│   ├── 用户管理.md
-│   └── 权限控制.md
-├── 业务模块/
-│   └── ...
-└── 测试报告/
-    ├── 接口测试.md           # API test results
-    └── 边界测试.md           # Boundary condition tests
-```
-
-**Output Structure** (--lang en):
-```
-.workflow/docs/{project_name}/api/
-├── swagger.yaml              # Main OpenAPI spec file
-├── overview/
-│   ├── README.md             # API overview
-│   ├── authentication.md     # Authentication guide
-│   ├── error-codes.md        # Error code definitions
-│   └── changelog.md          # Version history
-├── users/                    # Grouped by business domain
-│   ├── authentication.md
-│   ├── management.md
-│   └── permissions.md
-├── orders/
-│   └── ...
-└── test-reports/
-    ├── api-tests.md          # API test results
-    └── boundary-tests.md     # Boundary condition tests
-```
-
-## Parameters
-
-```bash
-/memory:swagger-docs [path] [--tool <gemini|qwen|codex>] [--format <yaml|json>] [--version <v3.0|v3.1>] [--lang <zh|en>]
-```
-
-- **path**: API source code directory (default: current directory)
-- **--tool**: CLI tool selection (default: gemini)
-  - `gemini`: Comprehensive analysis, pattern recognition
-  - `qwen`: Architecture analysis, system design
-  - `codex`: Implementation validation, code quality
-- **--format**: OpenAPI spec format (default: yaml)
-  - `yaml`: YAML format (recommended, better readability)
-  - `json`: JSON format
-- **--version**: OpenAPI version (default: v3.0)
-  - `v3.0`: OpenAPI 3.0.x
-  - `v3.1`: OpenAPI 3.1.0 (supports JSON Schema 2020-12)
-- **--lang**: Documentation language (default: zh)
-  - `zh`: Chinese documentation with Chinese directory names
-  - `en`: English documentation with English directory names
-
-## Planning Workflow
-
-### Phase 1: Initialize Session
-
-```bash
-# Get project info
-bash(pwd && basename "$(pwd)" && git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd && date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S)
-```
-
-```javascript
-// Create swagger-docs session
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:session:start --type swagger-docs --new \"{project_name}-swagger-{timestamp}\"")
-// Parse output to get sessionId
-```
-
-```bash
-# Update workflow-session.json
-bash(jq '. + {"target_path":"{target_path}","project_root":"{project_root}","project_name":"{project_name}","format":"yaml","openapi_version":"3.0.3","lang":"{lang}","tool":"gemini"}' .workflow/active/{sessionId}/workflow-session.json > tmp.json && mv tmp.json .workflow/active/{sessionId}/workflow-session.json)
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Scan API Endpoints
-
-**Discovery Patterns**: Auto-detect framework signatures and API definition styles.
-
-**Supported Frameworks**:
-| Framework | Detection Pattern | Example |
-|-----------|-------------------|---------|
-| Express.js | `router.get/post/put/delete` | `router.get('/users/:id')` |
-| Fastify | `fastify.route`, `@Route` | `fastify.get('/api/users')` |
-| NestJS | `@Controller`, `@Get/@Post` | `@Get('users/:id')` |
-| Koa | `router.get`, `ctx.body` | `router.get('/users')` |
-| Hono | `app.get/post`, `c.json` | `app.get('/users/:id')` |
-| FastAPI | `@app.get`, `@router.post` | `@app.get("/users/{id}")` |
-| Flask | `@app.route`, `@bp.route` | `@app.route('/users')` |
-| Spring | `@GetMapping`, `@PostMapping` | `@GetMapping("/users/{id}")` |
-| Go Gin | `r.GET`, `r.POST` | `r.GET("/users/:id")` |
-| Go Chi | `r.Get`, `r.Post` | `r.Get("/users/{id}")` |
-
-**Commands**:
-
-```bash
-# 1. Detect API framework type
-bash(
-  if rg -q "@Controller|@Get|@Post|@Put|@Delete" --type ts 2>/dev/null; then echo "NESTJS";
-  elif rg -q "router\.(get|post|put|delete|patch)" --type ts --type js 2>/dev/null; then echo "EXPRESS";
-  elif rg -q "fastify\.(get|post|route)" --type ts --type js 2>/dev/null; then echo "FASTIFY";
-  elif rg -q "@app\.(get|post|put|delete)" --type py 2>/dev/null; then echo "FASTAPI";
-  elif rg -q "@GetMapping|@PostMapping|@RequestMapping" --type java 2>/dev/null; then echo "SPRING";
-  elif rg -q 'r\.(GET|POST|PUT|DELETE)' --type go 2>/dev/null; then echo "GO_GIN";
-  else echo "UNKNOWN"; fi
-)
-
-# 2. Scan all API endpoint definitions
-bash(rg -n "(router|app|fastify)\.(get|post|put|delete|patch)|@(Get|Post|Put|Delete|Patch|Controller|RequestMapping)" --type ts --type js --type py --type java --type go -g '!*.test.*' -g '!*.spec.*' -g '!node_modules/**' 2>/dev/null | head -200)
-
-# 3. Extract route paths
-bash(rg -o "['\"](/api)?/[a-zA-Z0-9/:_-]+['\"]" --type ts --type js --type py -g '!*.test.*' 2>/dev/null | sort -u | head -100)
-
-# 4. Detect existing OpenAPI/Swagger files
-bash(find . -type f \( -name "swagger.yaml" -o -name "swagger.json" -o -name "openapi.yaml" -o -name "openapi.json" \) ! -path "*/node_modules/*" 2>/dev/null)
-
-# 5. Extract DTO/Schema definitions
-bash(rg -n "export (interface|type|class).*Dto|@ApiProperty|class.*Schema" --type ts -g '!*.test.*' 2>/dev/null | head -100)
-```
-
-**Data Processing**: Parse outputs, use **Write tool** to create `${session_dir}/.process/swagger-planning-data.json`:
-
-```json
-{
-  "metadata": {
-    "generated_at": "2025-01-01T12:00:00+08:00",
-    "project_name": "project_name",
-    "project_root": "/path/to/project",
-    "openapi_version": "3.0.3",
-    "format": "yaml",
-    "lang": "zh"
-  },
-  "framework": {
-    "type": "NESTJS",
-    "detected_patterns": ["@Controller", "@Get", "@Post"],
-    "base_path": "/api/v1"
-  },
-  "endpoints": [
-    {
-      "file": "src/modules/users/users.controller.ts",
-      "line": 25,
-      "method": "GET",
-      "path": "/api/v1/users/:id",
-      "handler": "getUser",
-      "controller": "UsersController"
-    }
-  ],
-  "existing_specs": {
-    "found": false,
-    "files": []
-  },
-  "dto_schemas": [
-    {
-      "name": "CreateUserDto",
-      "file": "src/modules/users/dto/create-user.dto.ts",
-      "properties": ["email", "password", "name"]
-    }
-  ],
-  "statistics": {
-    "total_endpoints": 45,
-    "by_method": {"GET": 20, "POST": 15, "PUT": 5, "DELETE": 5},
-    "by_module": {"users": 12, "auth": 8, "orders": 15, "products": 10}
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Phase 3: Analyze API Structure
-
-**Commands**:
-
-```bash
-# 1. Analyze controller/route file structure
-bash(cat ${session_dir}/.process/swagger-planning-data.json | jq -r '.endpoints[].file' | sort -u | head -20)
-
-# 2. Extract request/response types
-bash(for f in $(jq -r '.dto_schemas[].file' ${session_dir}/.process/swagger-planning-data.json | head -20); do echo "=== $f ===" && cat "$f" 2>/dev/null; done)
-
-# 3. Analyze authentication middleware
-bash(rg -n "auth|guard|middleware|jwt|bearer|token" -i --type ts --type js -g '!*.test.*' -g '!node_modules/**' 2>/dev/null | head -50)
-
-# 4. Detect error handling patterns
-bash(rg -n "HttpException|BadRequest|Unauthorized|Forbidden|NotFound|throw new" --type ts --type js -g '!*.test.*' 2>/dev/null | head -50)
-```
-
-**Deep Analysis via Gemini CLI**:
-
-```bash
-ccw cli -p "
-PURPOSE: Analyze API structure and generate OpenAPI specification outline for comprehensive documentation
-TASK: 
-• Parse all API endpoints and identify business module boundaries
-• Extract request parameters, request bodies, and response formats
-• Identify authentication mechanisms and security requirements
-• Discover error handling patterns and error codes
-• Map endpoints to logical module groups
-MODE: analysis
-CONTEXT: @src/**/*.controller.ts @src/**/*.routes.ts @src/**/*.dto.ts @src/**/middleware/**/*
-EXPECTED: JSON format API structure analysis report with modules, endpoints, security schemes, and error codes
-RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/protocols/analysis-protocol.md) | Strict RESTful standards | Identify all public endpoints | Document output language: {lang}
-" --tool gemini --mode analysis --cd {project_root}
-```
-
-**Update swagger-planning-data.json** with analysis results:
-
-```json
-{
-  "api_structure": {
-    "modules": [
-      {
-        "name": "Users",
-        "name_zh": "用户模块",
-        "base_path": "/api/v1/users",
-        "endpoints": [
-          {
-            "path": "/api/v1/users",
-            "method": "GET",
-            "operation_id": "listUsers",
-            "summary": "List all users",
-            "summary_zh": "获取用户列表",
-            "description": "Paginated list of system users with filtering by status and role",
-            "description_zh": "分页获取系统用户列表，支持按状态、角色筛选",
-            "tags": ["User Management"],
-            "tags_zh": ["用户管理"],
-            "security": ["bearerAuth"],
-            "parameters": {
-              "query": ["page", "limit", "status", "role"]
-            },
-            "responses": {
-              "200": "UserListResponse",
-              "401": "UnauthorizedError",
-              "403": "ForbiddenError"
-            }
-          }
-        ]
-      }
-    ],
-    "security_schemes": {
-      "bearerAuth": {
-        "type": "http",
-        "scheme": "bearer",
-        "bearerFormat": "JWT",
-        "description": "JWT Token authentication. Add Authorization: Bearer <token> to request header"
-      }
-    },
-    "error_codes": [
-      {"code": "AUTH_001", "status": 401, "message": "Invalid or expired token", "message_zh": "Token 无效或已过期"},
-      {"code": "AUTH_002", "status": 401, "message": "Authentication required", "message_zh": "未提供认证信息"},
-      {"code": "AUTH_003", "status": 403, "message": "Insufficient permissions", "message_zh": "权限不足"}
-    ]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Phase 4: Task Decomposition
-
-**Task Hierarchy**:
-
-```
-Level 1: Infrastructure Tasks (Parallel)
-  ├─ IMPL-001: Generate main OpenAPI spec file (swagger.yaml)
-  ├─ IMPL-002: Generate global security config and auth documentation
-  └─ IMPL-003: Generate unified error code specification
-
-Level 2: Module Documentation Tasks (Parallel, by business module)
-  ├─ IMPL-004: Users module API documentation
-  ├─ IMPL-005: Auth module API documentation
-  ├─ IMPL-006: Business module N API documentation
-  └─ ...
-
-Level 3: Aggregation Tasks (Depends on Level 1-2)
-  ├─ IMPL-N+1: Generate API overview and navigation
-  └─ IMPL-N+2: Generate version history and changelog
-
-Level 4: Validation Tasks (Depends on Level 1-3)
-  ├─ IMPL-N+3: API endpoint validation tests
-  └─ IMPL-N+4: Boundary condition tests
-```
-
-**Grouping Strategy**:
-1. Group by business module (users, orders, products, etc.)
-2. Maximum 10 endpoints per task
-3. Large modules (>10 endpoints) split by submodules
-
-**Commands**:
-
-```bash
-# 1. Count endpoints by module
-bash(cat ${session_dir}/.process/swagger-planning-data.json | jq '.statistics.by_module')
-
-# 2. Calculate task groupings
-bash(cat ${session_dir}/.process/swagger-planning-data.json | jq -r '.api_structure.modules[] | "\(.name):\(.endpoints | length)"')
-```
-
-**Data Processing**: Use **Edit tool** to update `swagger-planning-data.json` with task groups:
-
-```json
-{
-  "task_groups": {
-    "level1_count": 3,
-    "level2_count": 5,
-    "total_count": 12,
-    "assignments": [
-      {"task_id": "IMPL-001", "level": 1, "type": "openapi-spec", "title": "Generate OpenAPI main spec file"},
-      {"task_id": "IMPL-002", "level": 1, "type": "security", "title": "Generate global security config"},
-      {"task_id": "IMPL-003", "level": 1, "type": "error-codes", "title": "Generate error code specification"},
-      {"task_id": "IMPL-004", "level": 2, "type": "module-doc", "module": "users", "endpoint_count": 12},
-      {"task_id": "IMPL-005", "level": 2, "type": "module-doc", "module": "auth", "endpoint_count": 8}
-    ]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Phase 5: Generate Task JSONs
-
-**Generation Process**:
-1. Read configuration values from workflow-session.json
-2. Read task groups from swagger-planning-data.json
-3. Generate Level 1 tasks (infrastructure)
-4. Generate Level 2 tasks (by module)
-5. Generate Level 3-4 tasks (aggregation and validation)
-
-## Task Templates
-
-### Level 1-1: OpenAPI Main Spec File
-
-```json
-{
-  "id": "IMPL-001",
-  "title": "Generate OpenAPI main specification file",
-  "status": "pending",
-  "meta": {
-    "type": "swagger-openapi-spec",
-    "agent": "@doc-generator",
-    "tool": "gemini",
-    "priority": "critical"
-  },
-  "context": {
-    "requirements": [
-      "Generate OpenAPI 3.0.3 compliant swagger.yaml",
-      "Include complete info, servers, tags, paths, components definitions",
-      "Follow RESTful design standards, use {lang} for descriptions"
-    ],
-    "precomputed_data": {
-      "planning_data": "${session_dir}/.process/swagger-planning-data.json"
-    }
-  },
-  "flow_control": {
-    "pre_analysis": [
-      {
-        "step": "load_analysis_data",
-        "action": "Load API analysis data",
-        "commands": [
-          "bash(cat ${session_dir}/.process/swagger-planning-data.json)"
-        ],
-        "output_to": "api_analysis"
-      }
-    ],
-    "implementation_approach": [
-      {
-        "step": 1,
-        "title": "Generate OpenAPI spec file",
-        "description": "Create complete swagger.yaml specification file",
-        "cli_prompt": "PURPOSE: Generate OpenAPI 3.0.3 specification file from analyzed API structure\nTASK:\n• Define openapi version: 3.0.3\n• Define info: title, description, version, contact, license\n• Define servers: development, staging, production environments\n• Define tags: organized by business modules\n• Define paths: all API endpoints with complete specifications\n• Define components: schemas, securitySchemes, parameters, responses\nMODE: write\nCONTEXT: @[api_analysis]\nEXPECTED: Complete swagger.yaml file following OpenAPI 3.0.3 specification\nRULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/protocols/write-protocol.md) $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/documentation/swagger-api.txt) | Use {lang} for all descriptions | Strict RESTful standards",
-        "output": "swagger.yaml"
-      }
-    ],
-    "target_files": [
-      ".workflow/docs/${project_name}/api/swagger.yaml"
-    ]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Level 1-2: Global Security Configuration
-
-```json
-{
-  "id": "IMPL-002",
-  "title": "Generate global security configuration and authentication guide",
-  "status": "pending",
-  "meta": {
-    "type": "swagger-security",
-    "agent": "@doc-generator",
-    "tool": "gemini"
-  },
-  "context": {
-    "requirements": [
-      "Document Authorization header format in detail",
-      "Describe token acquisition, refresh, and expiration mechanisms",
-      "List permission requirements for each endpoint"
-    ]
-  },
-  "flow_control": {
-    "pre_analysis": [
-      {
-        "step": "analyze_auth",
-        "command": "bash(rg -n 'auth|guard|jwt|bearer' -i --type ts -g '!*.test.*' 2>/dev/null | head -50)",
-        "output_to": "auth_patterns"
-      }
-    ],
-    "implementation_approach": [
-      {
-        "step": 1,
-        "title": "Generate authentication documentation",
-        "cli_prompt": "PURPOSE: Generate comprehensive authentication documentation for API security\nTASK:\n• Document authentication mechanism: JWT Bearer Token\n• Explain header format: Authorization: Bearer <token>\n• Describe token lifecycle: acquisition, refresh, expiration handling\n• Define permission levels: public, user, admin, super_admin\n• Document authentication failure responses: 401/403 error handling\nMODE: write\nCONTEXT: @[auth_patterns] @src/**/auth/**/* @src/**/guard/**/*\nEXPECTED: Complete authentication guide in {lang}\nRULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/protocols/write-protocol.md) | Include code examples | Clear step-by-step instructions",
-        "output": "{auth_doc_name}"
-      }
-    ],
-    "target_files": [
-      ".workflow/docs/${project_name}/api/{overview_dir}/{auth_doc_name}"
-    ]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Level 1-3: Unified Error Code Specification
-
-```json
-{
-  "id": "IMPL-003",
-  "title": "Generate unified error code specification",
-  "status": "pending",
-  "meta": {
-    "type": "swagger-error-codes",
-    "agent": "@doc-generator",
-    "tool": "gemini"
-  },
-  "context": {
-    "requirements": [
-      "Define unified error response format",
-      "Create categorized error code system (auth, business, system)",
-      "Provide detailed description and examples for each error code"
-    ]
-  },
-  "flow_control": {
-    "implementation_approach": [
-      {
-        "step": 1,
-        "title": "Generate error code specification document",
-        "cli_prompt": "PURPOSE: Generate comprehensive error code specification for consistent API error handling\nTASK:\n• Define error response format: {code, message, details, timestamp}\n• Document authentication errors (AUTH_xxx): 401/403 series\n• Document parameter errors (PARAM_xxx): 400 series\n• Document business errors (BIZ_xxx): business logic errors\n• Document system errors (SYS_xxx): 500 series\n• For each error code: HTTP status, error message, possible causes, resolution suggestions\nMODE: write\nCONTEXT: @src/**/*.exception.ts @src/**/*.filter.ts\nEXPECTED: Complete error code specification in {lang} with tables and examples\nRULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/protocols/write-protocol.md) | Include response examples | Clear categorization",
-        "output": "{error_doc_name}"
-      }
-    ],
-    "target_files": [
-      ".workflow/docs/${project_name}/api/{overview_dir}/{error_doc_name}"
-    ]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Level 2: Module API Documentation (Template)
-
-```json
-{
-  "id": "IMPL-${module_task_id}",
-  "title": "Generate ${module_name} API documentation",
-  "status": "pending",
-  "depends_on": ["IMPL-001", "IMPL-002", "IMPL-003"],
-  "meta": {
-    "type": "swagger-module-doc",
-    "agent": "@doc-generator",
-    "tool": "gemini",
-    "module": "${module_name}",
-    "endpoint_count": "${endpoint_count}"
-  },
-  "context": {
-    "requirements": [
-      "Complete documentation for all endpoints in this module",
-      "Each endpoint: description, method, URL, parameters, responses",
-      "Include success and failure response examples",
-      "Mark API version and last update time"
-    ],
-    "focus_paths": ["${module_source_paths}"]
-  },
-  "flow_control": {
-    "pre_analysis": [
-      {
-        "step": "load_module_endpoints",
-        "action": "Load module endpoint information",
-        "commands": [
-          "bash(cat ${session_dir}/.process/swagger-planning-data.json | jq '.api_structure.modules[] | select(.name == \"${module_name}\")')"
-        ],
-        "output_to": "module_endpoints"
-      },
-      {
-        "step": "read_source_files",
-        "action": "Read module source files",
-        "commands": [
-          "bash(cat ${module_source_files})"
-        ],
-        "output_to": "source_code"
-      }
-    ],
-    "implementation_approach": [
-      {
-        "step": 1,
-        "title": "Generate module API documentation",
-        "description": "Generate complete API documentation for ${module_name}",
-        "cli_prompt": "PURPOSE: Generate complete RESTful API documentation for ${module_name} module\nTASK:\n• Create module overview: purpose, use cases, prerequisites\n• Generate endpoint index: grouped by functionality\n• For each endpoint document:\n  - Functional description: purpose and business context\n  - Request method: GET/POST/PUT/DELETE\n  - URL path: complete API path\n  - Request headers: Authorization and other required headers\n  - Path parameters: {id} and other path variables\n  - Query parameters: pagination, filters, etc.\n  - Request body: JSON Schema format\n  - Response body: success and error responses\n  - Field description table: type, required, example, description\n• Add usage examples: cURL, JavaScript, Python\n• Add version info: v1.0.0, last updated date\nMODE: write\nCONTEXT: @[module_endpoints] @[source_code]\nEXPECTED: Complete module API documentation in {lang} with all endpoints fully documented\nRULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/protocols/write-protocol.md) $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/documentation/swagger-api.txt) | RESTful standards | Include all response codes",
-        "output": "${module_doc_name}"
-      }
-    ],
-    "target_files": [
-      ".workflow/docs/${project_name}/api/${module_dir}/${module_doc_name}"
-    ]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Level 3: API Overview and Navigation
-
-```json
-{
-  "id": "IMPL-${overview_task_id}",
-  "title": "Generate API overview and navigation",
-  "status": "pending",
-  "depends_on": ["IMPL-001", "...", "IMPL-${last_module_task_id}"],
-  "meta": {
-    "type": "swagger-overview",
-    "agent": "@doc-generator",
-    "tool": "gemini"
-  },
-  "flow_control": {
-    "pre_analysis": [
-      {
-        "step": "load_all_docs",
-        "command": "bash(find .workflow/docs/${project_name}/api -type f -name '*.md' ! -path '*/{overview_dir}/*' | xargs cat)",
-        "output_to": "all_module_docs"
-      }
-    ],
-    "implementation_approach": [
-      {
-        "step": 1,
-        "title": "Generate API overview",
-        "cli_prompt": "PURPOSE: Generate API overview document with navigation and quick start guide\nTASK:\n• Create introduction: system features, tech stack, version\n• Write quick start guide: authentication, first request example\n• Build module navigation: categorized links to all modules\n• Document environment configuration: development, staging, production\n• List SDKs and tools: client libraries, Postman collection\nMODE: write\nCONTEXT: @[all_module_docs] @.workflow/docs/${project_name}/api/swagger.yaml\nEXPECTED: Complete API overview in {lang} with navigation links\nRULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/protocols/write-protocol.md) | Clear structure | Quick start focus",
-        "output": "README.md"
-      }
-    ],
-    "target_files": [
-      ".workflow/docs/${project_name}/api/{overview_dir}/README.md"
-    ]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Level 4: Validation Tasks
-
-```json
-{
-  "id": "IMPL-${test_task_id}",
-  "title": "API endpoint validation tests",
-  "status": "pending",
-  "depends_on": ["IMPL-${overview_task_id}"],
-  "meta": {
-    "type": "swagger-validation",
-    "agent": "@test-fix-agent",
-    "tool": "codex"
-  },
-  "context": {
-    "requirements": [
-      "Validate accessibility of all endpoints",
-      "Test various boundary conditions",
-      "Verify exception handling"
-    ]
-  },
-  "flow_control": {
-    "pre_analysis": [
-      {
-        "step": "load_swagger_spec",
-        "command": "bash(cat .workflow/docs/${project_name}/api/swagger.yaml)",
-        "output_to": "swagger_spec"
-      }
-    ],
-    "implementation_approach": [
-      {
-        "step": 1,
-        "title": "Generate test report",
-        "cli_prompt": "PURPOSE: Generate comprehensive API test validation report\nTASK:\n• Document test environment configuration\n• Calculate endpoint coverage statistics\n• Report test results: pass/fail counts\n• Document boundary tests: parameter limits, null values, special characters\n• Document exception tests: auth failures, permission denied, resource not found\n• List issues found with recommendations\nMODE: write\nCONTEXT: @[swagger_spec]\nEXPECTED: Complete test report in {lang} with detailed results\nRULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/protocols/write-protocol.md) | Include test cases | Clear pass/fail status",
-        "output": "{test_doc_name}"
-      }
-    ],
-    "target_files": [
-      ".workflow/docs/${project_name}/api/{test_dir}/{test_doc_name}"
-    ]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-## Language-Specific Directory Mapping
-
-| Component | --lang zh | --lang en |
-|-----------|-----------|-----------|
-| Overview dir | 概述 | overview |
-| Auth doc | 认证说明.md | authentication.md |
-| Error doc | 错误码规范.md | error-codes.md |
-| Changelog | 版本历史.md | changelog.md |
-| Users module | 用户模块 | users |
-| Orders module | 订单模块 | orders |
-| Products module | 商品模块 | products |
-| Test dir | 测试报告 | test-reports |
-| API test doc | 接口测试.md | api-tests.md |
-| Boundary test doc | 边界测试.md | boundary-tests.md |
-
-## API Documentation Template
-
-### Single Endpoint Format
-
-Each endpoint must include:
-
-```markdown
-### Get User Details
-
-**Description**: Retrieve detailed user information by ID, including profile and permissions.
-
-**Endpoint Info**:
-
-| Property | Value |
-|----------|-------|
-| Method | GET |
-| URL | `/api/v1/users/{id}` |
-| Version | v1.0.0 |
-| Updated | 2025-01-01 |
-| Auth | Bearer Token |
-| Permission | user / admin |
-
-**Request Headers**:
-
-| Field | Type | Required | Example | Description |
-|-------|------|----------|---------|-------------|
-| Authorization | string | Yes | `Bearer eyJhbGc...` | JWT Token |
-| Content-Type | string | No | `application/json` | Request content type |
-
-**Path Parameters**:
-
-| Field | Type | Required | Example | Description |
-|-------|------|----------|---------|-------------|
-| id | string | Yes | `usr_123456` | Unique user identifier |
-
-**Query Parameters**:
-
-| Field | Type | Required | Default | Example | Description |
-|-------|------|----------|---------|---------|-------------|
-| include | string | No | - | `roles,permissions` | Related data to include |
-
-**Success Response** (200 OK):
-
-```json
-{
-  "code": 0,
-  "message": "success",
-  "data": {
-    "id": "usr_123456",
-    "email": "user@example.com",
-    "name": "John Doe",
-    "status": "active",
-    "roles": ["user"],
-    "created_at": "2025-01-01T00:00:00Z",
-    "updated_at": "2025-01-01T00:00:00Z"
-  },
-  "timestamp": "2025-01-01T12:00:00Z"
-}
-```
-
-**Response Fields**:
-
-| Field | Type | Description |
-|-------|------|-------------|
-| code | integer | Business status code, 0 = success |
-| message | string | Response message |
-| data.id | string | Unique user identifier |
-| data.email | string | User email address |
-| data.name | string | User display name |
-| data.status | string | User status: active/inactive/suspended |
-| data.roles | array | User role list |
-| data.created_at | string | Creation timestamp (ISO 8601) |
-| data.updated_at | string | Last update timestamp (ISO 8601) |
-
-**Error Responses**:
-
-| Status | Code | Message | Possible Cause |
-|--------|------|---------|----------------|
-| 401 | AUTH_001 | Invalid or expired token | Token format error or expired |
-| 403 | AUTH_003 | Insufficient permissions | No access to this user info |
-| 404 | USER_001 | User not found | User ID doesn't exist or deleted |
-
-**Examples**:
-
-```bash
-# cURL
-curl -X GET "https://api.example.com/api/v1/users/usr_123456" \
-  -H "Authorization: Bearer eyJhbGc..." \
-  -H "Content-Type: application/json"
-```
-
-```javascript
-// JavaScript (fetch)
-const response = await fetch('https://api.example.com/api/v1/users/usr_123456', {
-  method: 'GET',
-  headers: {
-    'Authorization': 'Bearer eyJhbGc...',
-    'Content-Type': 'application/json'
-  }
-});
-const data = await response.json();
-```
-```
-
-## Session Structure
-
-```
-.workflow/active/
-└── WFS-swagger-{timestamp}/
-    ├── workflow-session.json
-    ├── IMPL_PLAN.md
-    ├── TODO_LIST.md
-    ├── .process/
-    │   └── swagger-planning-data.json
-    └── .task/
-        ├── IMPL-001.json              # OpenAPI spec
-        ├── IMPL-002.json              # Security config
-        ├── IMPL-003.json              # Error codes
-        ├── IMPL-004.json              # Module 1 API
-        ├── ...
-        ├── IMPL-N+1.json              # API overview
-        └── IMPL-N+2.json              # Validation tests
-```
-
-## Execution Commands
-
-```bash
-# Execute entire workflow
-/workflow:execute
-
-# Specify session
-/workflow:execute --resume-session="WFS-swagger-yyyymmdd-hhmmss"
-
-# Single task execution
-/task:execute IMPL-001
-```
-
-## Related Commands
-
-- `/workflow:execute` - Execute documentation tasks
-- `/workflow:status` - View task progress
-- `/workflow:session:complete` - Mark session complete
-- `/memory:docs` - General documentation workflow

.claude/commands/memory/tech-research-rules.md

@@ -1,310 +0,0 @@
----
-name: tech-research-rules
-description: "3-phase orchestrator: extract tech stack → Exa research → generate path-conditional rules (auto-loaded by Claude Code)"
-argument-hint: "[session-id | tech-stack-name] [--regenerate] [--tool <gemini|qwen>]"
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Bash(*), Read(*), Write(*), Task(*)
----
-
-# Tech Stack Rules Generator
-
-## Overview
-
-**Purpose**: Generate multi-layered, path-conditional rules that Claude Code automatically loads based on file context.
-
-**Output Structure**:
-```
-.claude/rules/tech/{tech-stack}/
-├── core.md           # paths: **/*.{ext} - Core principles
-├── patterns.md       # paths: src/**/*.{ext} - Implementation patterns
-├── testing.md        # paths: **/*.{test,spec}.{ext} - Testing rules
-├── config.md         # paths: *.config.* - Configuration rules
-├── api.md            # paths: **/api/**/* - API rules (backend only)
-├── components.md     # paths: **/components/**/* - Component rules (frontend only)
-└── metadata.json     # Generation metadata
-```
-
-**Templates Location**: `~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/rules/`
-
----
-
-## Core Rules
-
-1. **Start Immediately**: First action is TodoWrite initialization
-2. **Path-Conditional Output**: Every rule file includes `paths` frontmatter
-3. **Template-Driven**: Agent reads templates before generating content
-4. **Agent Produces Files**: Agent writes all rule files directly
-5. **No Manual Loading**: Rules auto-activate when Claude works with matching files
-
----
-
-## 3-Phase Execution
-
-### Phase 1: Prepare Context & Detect Tech Stack
-
-**Goal**: Detect input mode, extract tech stack info, determine file extensions
-
-**Input Mode Detection**:
-```bash
-input="$1"
-
-if [[ "$input" == WFS-* ]]; then
-  MODE="session"
-  SESSION_ID="$input"
-  # Read workflow-session.json to extract tech stack
-else
-  MODE="direct"
-  TECH_STACK_NAME="$input"
-fi
-```
-
-**Tech Stack Analysis**:
-```javascript
-// Decompose composite tech stacks
-// "typescript-react-nextjs" → ["typescript", "react", "nextjs"]
-
-const TECH_EXTENSIONS = {
-  "typescript": "{ts,tsx}",
-  "javascript": "{js,jsx}",
-  "python": "py",
-  "rust": "rs",
-  "go": "go",
-  "java": "java",
-  "csharp": "cs",
-  "ruby": "rb",
-  "php": "php"
-};
-
-const FRAMEWORK_TYPE = {
-  "react": "frontend",
-  "vue": "frontend",
-  "angular": "frontend",
-  "nextjs": "fullstack",
-  "nuxt": "fullstack",
-  "fastapi": "backend",
-  "express": "backend",
-  "django": "backend",
-  "rails": "backend"
-};
-```
-
-**Check Existing Rules**:
-```bash
-normalized_name=$(echo "$TECH_STACK_NAME" | tr '[:upper:]' '[:lower:]' | tr ' ' '-')
-rules_dir=".claude/rules/tech/${normalized_name}"
-existing_count=$(find "${rules_dir}" -name "*.md" 2>/dev/null | wc -l || echo 0)
-```
-
-**Skip Decision**:
-- If `existing_count > 0` AND no `--regenerate` → `SKIP_GENERATION = true`
-- If `--regenerate` → Delete existing and regenerate
-
-**Output Variables**:
-- `TECH_STACK_NAME`: Normalized name
-- `PRIMARY_LANG`: Primary language
-- `FILE_EXT`: File extension pattern
-- `FRAMEWORK_TYPE`: frontend | backend | fullstack | library
-- `COMPONENTS`: Array of tech components
-- `SKIP_GENERATION`: Boolean
-
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 1 completed
-
----
-
-### Phase 2: Agent Produces Path-Conditional Rules
-
-**Skip Condition**: Skipped if `SKIP_GENERATION = true`
-
-**Goal**: Delegate to agent for Exa research and rule file generation
-
-**Template Files**:
-```
-~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/rules/
-├── tech-rules-agent-prompt.txt  # Agent instructions
-├── rule-core.txt                # Core principles template
-├── rule-patterns.txt            # Implementation patterns template
-├── rule-testing.txt             # Testing rules template
-├── rule-config.txt              # Configuration rules template
-├── rule-api.txt                 # API rules template (backend)
-└── rule-components.txt          # Component rules template (frontend)
-```
-
-**Agent Task**:
-
-```javascript
-Task({
-  subagent_type: "general-purpose",
-  description: `Generate tech stack rules: ${TECH_STACK_NAME}`,
-  prompt: `
-You are generating path-conditional rules for Claude Code.
-
-## Context
-- Tech Stack: ${TECH_STACK_NAME}
-- Primary Language: ${PRIMARY_LANG}
-- File Extensions: ${FILE_EXT}
-- Framework Type: ${FRAMEWORK_TYPE}
-- Components: ${JSON.stringify(COMPONENTS)}
-- Output Directory: .claude/rules/tech/${TECH_STACK_NAME}/
-
-## Instructions
-
-Read the agent prompt template for detailed instructions:
-$(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/rules/tech-rules-agent-prompt.txt)
-
-## Execution Steps
-
-1. Execute Exa research queries (see agent prompt)
-2. Read each rule template
-3. Generate rule files following template structure
-4. Write files to output directory
-5. Write metadata.json
-6. Report completion
-
-## Variable Substitutions
-
-Replace in templates:
-- {TECH_STACK_NAME} → ${TECH_STACK_NAME}
-- {PRIMARY_LANG} → ${PRIMARY_LANG}
-- {FILE_EXT} → ${FILE_EXT}
-- {FRAMEWORK_TYPE} → ${FRAMEWORK_TYPE}
-`
-})
-```
-
-**Completion Criteria**:
-- 4-6 rule files written with proper `paths` frontmatter
-- metadata.json written
-- Agent reports files created
-
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 2 completed
-
----
-
-### Phase 3: Verify & Report
-
-**Goal**: Verify generated files and provide usage summary
-
-**Steps**:
-
-1. **Verify Files**:
-   ```bash
-   find ".claude/rules/tech/${TECH_STACK_NAME}" -name "*.md" -type f
-   ```
-
-2. **Validate Frontmatter**:
-   ```bash
-   head -5 ".claude/rules/tech/${TECH_STACK_NAME}/core.md"
-   ```
-
-3. **Read Metadata**:
-   ```javascript
-   Read(`.claude/rules/tech/${TECH_STACK_NAME}/metadata.json`)
-   ```
-
-4. **Generate Summary Report**:
-   ```
-   Tech Stack Rules Generated
-
-   Tech Stack: {TECH_STACK_NAME}
-   Location: .claude/rules/tech/{TECH_STACK_NAME}/
-
-   Files Created:
-   ├── core.md         → paths: **/*.{ext}
-   ├── patterns.md     → paths: src/**/*.{ext}
-   ├── testing.md      → paths: **/*.{test,spec}.{ext}
-   ├── config.md       → paths: *.config.*
-   ├── api.md          → paths: **/api/**/* (if backend)
-   └── components.md   → paths: **/components/**/* (if frontend)
-
-   Auto-Loading:
-   - Rules apply automatically when editing matching files
-   - No manual loading required
-
-   Example Activation:
-   - Edit src/components/Button.tsx → core.md + patterns.md + components.md
-   - Edit tests/api.test.ts → core.md + testing.md
-   - Edit package.json → config.md
-   ```
-
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 3 completed
-
----
-
-## Path Pattern Reference
-
-| Pattern | Matches |
-|---------|---------|
-| `**/*.ts` | All .ts files |
-| `src/**/*` | All files under src/ |
-| `*.config.*` | Config files in root |
-| `**/*.{ts,tsx}` | .ts and .tsx files |
-
-| Tech Stack | Core Pattern | Test Pattern |
-|------------|--------------|--------------|
-| TypeScript | `**/*.{ts,tsx}` | `**/*.{test,spec}.{ts,tsx}` |
-| Python | `**/*.py` | `**/test_*.py, **/*_test.py` |
-| Rust | `**/*.rs` | `**/tests/**/*.rs` |
-| Go | `**/*.go` | `**/*_test.go` |
-
----
-
-## Parameters
-
-```bash
-/memory:tech-research [session-id | "tech-stack-name"] [--regenerate]
-```
-
-**Arguments**:
-- **session-id**: `WFS-*` format - Extract from workflow session
-- **tech-stack-name**: Direct input - `"typescript"`, `"typescript-react"`
-- **--regenerate**: Force regenerate existing rules
-
----
-
-## Examples
-
-### Single Language
-
-```bash
-/memory:tech-research "typescript"
-```
-
-**Output**: `.claude/rules/tech/typescript/` with 4 rule files
-
-### Frontend Stack
-
-```bash
-/memory:tech-research "typescript-react"
-```
-
-**Output**: `.claude/rules/tech/typescript-react/` with 5 rule files (includes components.md)
-
-### Backend Stack
-
-```bash
-/memory:tech-research "python-fastapi"
-```
-
-**Output**: `.claude/rules/tech/python-fastapi/` with 5 rule files (includes api.md)
-
-### From Session
-
-```bash
-/memory:tech-research WFS-user-auth-20251104
-```
-
-**Workflow**: Extract tech stack from session → Generate rules
-
----
-
-## Comparison: Rules vs SKILL
-
-| Aspect | SKILL Memory | Rules |
-|--------|--------------|-------|
-| Loading | Manual: `Skill("tech")` | Automatic by path |
-| Scope | All files when loaded | Only matching files |
-| Granularity | Monolithic packages | Per-file-type |
-| Context | Full package | Only relevant rules |
-
-**When to Use**:
-- **Rules**: Tech stack conventions per file type
-- **SKILL**: Reference docs, APIs, examples for manual lookup

.claude/commands/memory/tips.md

@@ -0,0 +1,332 @@
+---
+name: tips
+description: Quick note-taking command to capture ideas, snippets, reminders, and insights for later reference
+argument-hint: "<note content> [--tag <tag1,tag2>] [--context <context>]"
+allowed-tools: mcp__ccw-tools__core_memory(*), Read(*)
+examples:
+  - /memory:tips "Remember to use Redis for rate limiting"
+  - /memory:tips "Auth pattern: JWT with refresh tokens" --tag architecture,auth
+  - /memory:tips "Bug: memory leak in WebSocket handler after 24h" --context websocket-service
+  - /memory:tips "Performance: lazy loading reduced bundle by 40%" --tag performance
+---
+
+# Memory Tips Command (/memory:tips)
+
+## 1. Overview
+
+The `memory:tips` command provides **quick note-taking** for capturing:
+- Quick ideas and insights
+- Code snippets and patterns
+- Reminders and follow-ups
+- Bug notes and debugging hints
+- Performance observations
+- Architecture decisions
+- Library/tool recommendations
+
+**Core Philosophy**:
+- **Speed First**: Minimal friction for capturing thoughts
+- **Searchable**: Tagged for easy retrieval
+- **Context-Aware**: Optional context linking
+- **Lightweight**: No complex session analysis
+
+## 2. Parameters
+
+- `<note content>` (Required): The tip/note content to save
+- `--tag <tags>` (Optional): Comma-separated tags for categorization
+- `--context <context>` (Optional): Related context (file, module, feature)
+
+**Examples**:
+```bash
+/memory:tips "Use Zod for runtime validation - better DX than class-validator"
+/memory:tips "Redis connection pool: max 10, min 2" --tag config,redis
+/memory:tips "Fix needed: race condition in payment processor" --tag bug,payment --context src/payments
+```
+
+## 3. Structured Output Format
+
+```markdown
+## Tip ID
+TIP-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS
+
+## Timestamp
+YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS
+
+## Project Root
+[Absolute path to project root, e.g., D:\Claude_dms3]
+
+## Content
+[The tip/note content exactly as provided]
+
+## Tags
+[Comma-separated tags, or (none)]
+
+## Context
+[Optional context linking - file, module, or feature reference]
+
+## Session Link
+[WFS-ID if workflow session active, otherwise (none)]
+
+## Auto-Detected Context
+[Files/topics from current conversation if relevant]
+```
+
+## 4. Field Definitions
+
+| Field | Purpose | Example |
+|-------|---------|---------|
+| **Tip ID** | Unique identifier with timestamp | TIP-20260128-143052 |
+| **Timestamp** | When tip was created | 2026-01-28 14:30:52 |
+| **Project Root** | Current project path | D:\Claude_dms3 |
+| **Content** | The actual tip/note | "Use Redis for rate limiting" |
+| **Tags** | Categorization labels | architecture, auth, performance |
+| **Context** | Related code/feature | src/auth/**, payment-module |
+| **Session Link** | Link to workflow session | WFS-auth-20260128 |
+| **Auto-Detected Context** | Files from conversation | src/api/handler.ts |
+
+## 5. Execution Flow
+
+### Step 1: Parse Arguments
+
+```javascript
+const parseTipsCommand = (input) => {
+  // Extract note content (everything before flags)
+  const contentMatch = input.match(/^"([^"]+)"|^([^\s-]+)/);
+  const content = contentMatch ? (contentMatch[1] || contentMatch[2]) : '';
+
+  // Extract tags
+  const tagsMatch = input.match(/--tag\s+([^\s-]+)/);
+  const tags = tagsMatch ? tagsMatch[1].split(',').map(t => t.trim()) : [];
+
+  // Extract context
+  const contextMatch = input.match(/--context\s+([^\s-]+)/);
+  const context = contextMatch ? contextMatch[1] : '';
+
+  return { content, tags, context };
+};
+```
+
+### Step 2: Gather Context
+
+```javascript
+const gatherTipContext = async () => {
+  // Get project root
+  const projectRoot = process.cwd(); // or detect from environment
+
+  // Get current session if active
+  const manifest = await mcp__ccw-tools__session_manager({
+    operation: "list",
+    location: "active"
+  });
+  const sessionId = manifest.sessions?.[0]?.id || null;
+
+  // Auto-detect files from recent conversation
+  const recentFiles = extractRecentFilesFromConversation(); // Last 5 messages
+
+  return {
+    projectRoot,
+    sessionId,
+    autoDetectedContext: recentFiles
+  };
+};
+```
+
+### Step 3: Generate Structured Text
+
+```javascript
+const generateTipText = (parsed, context) => {
+  const timestamp = new Date().toISOString().replace('T', ' ').slice(0, 19);
+  const tipId = `TIP-${new Date().toISOString().slice(0,10).replace(/-/g, '')}-${new Date().toTimeString().slice(0,8).replace(/:/g, '')}`;
+
+  return `## Tip ID
+${tipId}
+
+## Timestamp
+${timestamp}
+
+## Project Root
+${context.projectRoot}
+
+## Content
+${parsed.content}
+
+## Tags
+${parsed.tags.length > 0 ? parsed.tags.join(', ') : '(none)'}
+
+## Context
+${parsed.context || '(none)'}
+
+## Session Link
+${context.sessionId || '(none)'}
+
+## Auto-Detected Context
+${context.autoDetectedContext.length > 0
+  ? context.autoDetectedContext.map(f => `- ${f}`).join('\n')
+  : '(none)'}`;
+};
+```
+
+### Step 4: Save to Core Memory
+
+```javascript
+mcp__ccw-tools__core_memory({
+  operation: "import",
+  text: structuredText
+})
+```
+
+**Response Format**:
+```json
+{
+  "operation": "import",
+  "id": "CMEM-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS",
+  "message": "Created memory: CMEM-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS"
+}
+```
+
+### Step 5: Confirm to User
+
+```
+✓ Tip saved successfully
+
+  ID: CMEM-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS
+  Tags: architecture, auth
+  Context: src/auth/**
+
+  To retrieve: /memory:search "auth patterns"
+  Or via MCP: core_memory(operation="search", query="auth")
+```
+
+## 6. Tag Categories (Suggested)
+
+**Technical**:
+- `architecture` - Design decisions and patterns
+- `performance` - Optimization insights
+- `security` - Security considerations
+- `bug` - Bug notes and fixes
+- `config` - Configuration settings
+- `api` - API design patterns
+
+**Development**:
+- `testing` - Test strategies and patterns
+- `debugging` - Debugging techniques
+- `refactoring` - Refactoring notes
+- `documentation` - Doc improvements
+
+**Domain Specific**:
+- `auth` - Authentication/authorization
+- `database` - Database patterns
+- `frontend` - UI/UX patterns
+- `backend` - Backend logic
+- `devops` - Infrastructure and deployment
+
+**Organizational**:
+- `reminder` - Follow-up items
+- `research` - Research findings
+- `idea` - Feature ideas
+- `review` - Code review notes
+
+## 7. Search Integration
+
+Tips can be retrieved using:
+
+```bash
+# Via command (if /memory:search exists)
+/memory:search "rate limiting"
+
+# Via MCP tool
+mcp__ccw-tools__core_memory({
+  operation: "search",
+  query: "rate limiting",
+  source_type: "core_memory",
+  top_k: 10
+})
+
+# Via CLI
+ccw core-memory search --query "rate limiting" --top-k 10
+```
+
+## 8. Quality Checklist
+
+Before saving:
+- [ ] Content is clear and actionable
+- [ ] Tags are relevant and consistent
+- [ ] Context provides enough reference
+- [ ] Auto-detected context is accurate
+- [ ] Project root is absolute path
+- [ ] Timestamp is properly formatted
+
+## 9. Best Practices
+
+### Good Tips Examples
+
+✅ **Specific and Actionable**:
+```
+"Use connection pooling for Redis: { max: 10, min: 2, acquireTimeoutMillis: 30000 }"
+--tag config,redis
+```
+
+✅ **With Context**:
+```
+"Auth middleware must validate both access and refresh tokens"
+--tag security,auth --context src/middleware/auth.ts
+```
+
+✅ **Problem + Solution**:
+```
+"Memory leak fixed by unsubscribing event listeners in componentWillUnmount"
+--tag bug,react --context src/components/Chat.tsx
+```
+
+### Poor Tips Examples
+
+❌ **Too Vague**:
+```
+"Fix the bug" --tag bug
+```
+
+❌ **Too Long** (use /memory:compact instead):
+```
+"Here's the complete implementation plan for the entire auth system... [3 paragraphs]"
+```
+
+❌ **No Context**:
+```
+"Remember to update this later"
+```
+
+## 10. Use Cases
+
+### During Development
+```bash
+/memory:tips "JWT secret must be 256-bit minimum" --tag security,auth
+/memory:tips "Use debounce (300ms) for search input" --tag performance,ux
+```
+
+### After Bug Fixes
+```bash
+/memory:tips "Race condition in payment: lock with Redis SETNX" --tag bug,payment
+```
+
+### Code Review Insights
+```bash
+/memory:tips "Prefer early returns over nested ifs" --tag style,readability
+```
+
+### Architecture Decisions
+```bash
+/memory:tips "Chose PostgreSQL over MongoDB for ACID compliance" --tag architecture,database
+```
+
+### Library Recommendations
+```bash
+/memory:tips "Zod > Yup for TypeScript validation - better type inference" --tag library,typescript
+```
+
+## 11. Notes
+
+- **Frequency**: Use liberally - capture all valuable insights
+- **Retrieval**: Search by tags, content, or context
+- **Lifecycle**: Tips persist across sessions
+- **Organization**: Tags enable filtering and categorization
+- **Integration**: Can reference tips in later workflows
+- **Lightweight**: No complex session analysis required

.claude/commands/memory/workflow-skill-memory.md

@@ -1,517 +0,0 @@
----
-name: workflow-skill-memory
-description: Process WFS-* archived sessions using universal-executor agents with Gemini analysis to generate workflow-progress SKILL package (sessions-timeline, lessons, conflicts)
-argument-hint: "session <session-id> | all"
-allowed-tools: Task(*), TodoWrite(*), Bash(*), Read(*), Write(*)
----
-
-# Workflow SKILL Memory Generator
-
-## Overview
-
-Generate SKILL package from archived workflow sessions using agent-driven analysis. Supports single-session incremental updates or parallel processing of all sessions.
-
-**Scope**: Only processes WFS-* workflow sessions. Other session types (e.g., doc sessions) are automatically ignored.
-
-## Usage
-
-```bash
-/memory:workflow-skill-memory session WFS-<session-id>   # Process single WFS session
-/memory:workflow-skill-memory all                        # Process all WFS sessions in parallel
-```
-
-## Execution Modes
-
-### Mode 1: Single Session (`session <session-id>`)
-
-**Purpose**: Incremental update - process one archived session and merge into existing SKILL package
-
-**Workflow**:
-1. **Validate session**: Check if session exists in `.workflow/.archives/{session-id}/`
-2. **Invoke agent**: Call `universal-executor` to analyze session and update SKILL documents
-3. **Agent tasks**:
-   - Read session data from `.workflow/.archives/{session-id}/`
-   - Extract lessons, conflicts, and outcomes
-   - Use Gemini for intelligent aggregation (optional)
-   - Update or create SKILL documents using templates
-   - Regenerate SKILL.md index
-
-**Command Example**:
-```bash
-/memory:workflow-skill-memory session WFS-user-auth
-```
-
-**Expected Output**:
-```
-Session WFS-user-auth processed
-Updated:
-- sessions-timeline.md (1 session added)
-- lessons-learned.md (3 lessons merged)
-- conflict-patterns.md (1 conflict added)
-- SKILL.md (index regenerated)
-```
-
----
-
-### Mode 2: All Sessions (`all`)
-
-**Purpose**: Full regeneration - process all archived sessions in parallel for complete SKILL package
-
-**Workflow**:
-1. **List sessions**: Read manifest.json to get all archived session IDs
-2. **Parallel invocation**: Launch multiple `universal-executor` agents in parallel (one per session)
-3. **Agent coordination**:
-   - Each agent processes one session independently
-   - Agents use Gemini for analysis
-   - Agents collect data into JSON (no direct file writes)
-   - Final aggregator agent merges results and generates SKILL documents
-
-**Command Example**:
-```bash
-/memory:workflow-skill-memory all
-```
-
-**Expected Output**:
-```
-All sessions processed in parallel
-Sessions: 8 total
-Updated:
-- sessions-timeline.md (8 sessions)
-- lessons-learned.md (24 lessons aggregated)
-- conflict-patterns.md (12 conflicts documented)
-- SKILL.md (index regenerated)
-```
-
----
-
-## Implementation Flow
-
-### Phase 1: Validation and Setup
-
-**Step 1.1: Parse Command Arguments**
-
-Extract mode and session ID:
-```javascript
-if (args === "all") {
-  mode = "all"
-} else if (args.startsWith("session ")) {
-  mode = "session"
-  session_id = args.replace("session ", "").trim()
-} else {
-  ERROR = "Invalid arguments. Usage: session <session-id> | all"
-  EXIT
-}
-```
-
-**Step 1.2: Validate Archive Directory**
-```bash
-bash(test -d .workflow/.archives && echo "exists" || echo "missing")
-```
-
-If missing, report error and exit.
-
-**Step 1.3: Mode-Specific Validation**
-
-**Single Session Mode**:
-```bash
-# Validate session ID format (must start with WFS-)
-if [[ ! "$session_id" =~ ^WFS- ]]; then
-  ERROR = "Invalid session ID format. Only WFS-* sessions are supported"
-  EXIT
-fi
-
-# Check if session exists
-bash(test -d .workflow/.archives/{session_id} && echo "exists" || echo "missing")
-```
-
-If missing, report error: "Session {session_id} not found in archives"
-
-**All Sessions Mode**:
-```bash
-# Read manifest and filter only WFS- sessions
-bash(cat .workflow/.archives/manifest.json | jq -r '.archives[].session_id | select(startswith("WFS-"))')
-```
-
-Store filtered session IDs in array. Ignore doc sessions and other non-WFS sessions.
-
-**Step 1.4: TodoWrite Initialization**
-
-**Single Session Mode**:
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Validate session existence", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Validating session"},
-  {"content": "Invoke agent to process session", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Invoking agent"},
-  {"content": "Verify SKILL package updated", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Verifying update"}
-]})
-```
-
-**All Sessions Mode**:
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Read manifest and list sessions", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Reading manifest"},
-  {"content": "Invoke agents in parallel", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Invoking agents"},
-  {"content": "Verify SKILL package regenerated", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Verifying regeneration"}
-]})
-```
-
----
-
-### Phase 2: Agent Invocation
-
-#### Single Session Mode - Agent Task
-
-Invoke `universal-executor` with session-specific task:
-
-**Agent Prompt Structure**:
-```
-Task: Process Workflow Session for SKILL Package
-
-Context:
-- Session ID: {session_id}
-- Session Path: .workflow/.archives/{session_id}/
-- Mode: Incremental update
-
-Objectives:
-
-1. Read session data:
-   - workflow-session.json (metadata)
-   - IMPL_PLAN.md (implementation summary)
-   - TODO_LIST.md (if exists)
-   - manifest.json entry for lessons
-
-2. Extract key information:
-   - Description, tags, metrics
-   - Lessons (successes, challenges, watch_patterns)
-   - Context package path (reference only)
-   - Key outcomes from IMPL_PLAN
-
-3. Use Gemini for aggregation (optional):
-   Command pattern:
-   ccw cli -p "
-   PURPOSE: Extract lessons and conflicts from workflow session
-   TASK:
-   • Analyze IMPL_PLAN and lessons from manifest
-   • Identify success patterns and challenges
-   • Extract conflict patterns with resolutions
-   • Categorize by functional domain
-   MODE: analysis
-   CONTEXT: @IMPL_PLAN.md @workflow-session.json
-   EXPECTED: Structured lessons and conflicts in JSON format
-   RULES: Template reference from skill-aggregation.txt
-   " --tool gemini --mode analysis --cd .workflow/.archives/{session_id}
-
-3.5. **Generate SKILL.md Description** (CRITICAL for auto-loading):
-
-   Read skill-index.txt template Section: "Description Field Generation"
-
-   Execute command to get project root:
-   ```bash
-   git rev-parse --show-toplevel  # Example output: /d/Claude_dms3
-   ```
-
-   Apply description format:
-   ```
-   Progressive workflow development history (located at {project_root}).
-   Load this SKILL when continuing development, analyzing past implementations,
-   or learning from workflow history, especially when no relevant context exists in memory.
-   ```
-
-   **Validation**:
-   - [ ] Path uses forward slashes (not backslashes)
-   - [ ] All three use cases present
-   - [ ] Trigger optimization phrase included
-   - [ ] Path is absolute (starts with / or drive letter)
-
-4. Read templates for formatting guidance:
-   - ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/workflow/skill-sessions-timeline.txt
-   - ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/workflow/skill-lessons-learned.txt
-   - ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/workflow/skill-conflict-patterns.txt
-   - ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/workflow/skill-index.txt
-
-   **CRITICAL**: From skill-index.txt, read these sections:
-   - "Description Field Generation" - Rules for generating description
-   - "Variable Substitution Guide" - All required variables
-   - "Generation Instructions" - Step-by-step generation process
-   - "Validation Checklist" - Final validation steps
-
-5. Update SKILL documents:
-   - sessions-timeline.md: Append new session, update domain grouping
-   - lessons-learned.md: Merge lessons into categories, update frequencies
-   - conflict-patterns.md: Add conflicts, update recurring pattern frequencies
-   - SKILL.md: Regenerate index with updated counts
-
-   **For SKILL.md generation**:
-   - Follow "Generation Instructions" from skill-index.txt (Steps 1-7)
-   - Use git command for project_root: `git rev-parse --show-toplevel`
-   - Apply "Description Field Generation" rules
-   - Validate using "Validation Checklist"
-   - Increment version (patch level)
-
-6. Return result JSON:
-   {
-     "status": "success",
-     "session_id": "{session_id}",
-     "updates": {
-       "sessions_added": 1,
-       "lessons_merged": count,
-       "conflicts_added": count
-     }
-   }
-```
-
----
-
-#### All Sessions Mode - Parallel Agent Tasks
-
-**Step 2.1: Launch parallel session analyzers**
-
-Invoke multiple agents in parallel (one message with multiple Task calls):
-
-**Per-Session Agent Prompt**:
-```
-Task: Extract Session Data for SKILL Package
-
-Context:
-- Session ID: {session_id}
-- Mode: Parallel analysis (no direct file writes)
-
-Objectives:
-
-1. Read session data (same as single mode)
-
-2. Extract key information (same as single mode)
-
-3. Use Gemini for analysis (same as single mode)
-
-4. Return structured data JSON:
-   {
-     "status": "success",
-     "session_id": "{session_id}",
-     "data": {
-       "metadata": {
-         "description": "...",
-         "archived_at": "...",
-         "tags": [...],
-         "metrics": {...}
-       },
-       "lessons": {
-         "successes": [...],
-         "challenges": [...],
-         "watch_patterns": [...]
-       },
-       "conflicts": [
-         {
-           "type": "architecture|dependencies|testing|performance",
-           "pattern": "...",
-           "resolution": "...",
-           "code_impact": [...]
-         }
-       ],
-       "impl_summary": "First 200 chars of IMPL_PLAN",
-       "context_package_path": "..."
-     }
-   }
-```
-
-**Step 2.2: Aggregate results**
-
-After all session agents complete, invoke aggregator agent:
-
-**Aggregator Agent Prompt**:
-```
-Task: Aggregate Session Results and Generate SKILL Package
-
-Context:
-- Mode: Full regeneration
-- Input: JSON results from {session_count} session agents
-
-Objectives:
-
-1. Aggregate all session data:
-   - Collect metadata from all sessions
-   - Merge lessons by category
-   - Group conflicts by type
-   - Sort sessions by date
-
-2. Use Gemini for final aggregation:
-   ccw cli -p "
-   PURPOSE: Aggregate lessons and conflicts from all workflow sessions
-   TASK:
-   • Group successes by functional domain
-   • Categorize challenges by severity (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)
-   • Identify recurring conflict patterns
-   • Calculate frequencies and prioritize
-   MODE: analysis
-   CONTEXT: [Provide aggregated JSON data]
-   EXPECTED: Final aggregated structure for SKILL documents
-   RULES: Template reference from skill-aggregation.txt
-   " --tool gemini --mode analysis
-
-3. Read templates for formatting (same 4 templates as single mode)
-
-4. Generate all SKILL documents:
-   - sessions-timeline.md (all sessions, sorted by date)
-   - lessons-learned.md (aggregated lessons with frequencies)
-   - conflict-patterns.md (recurring patterns with resolutions)
-   - SKILL.md (index with progressive loading)
-
-5. Write files to .claude/skills/workflow-progress/
-
-6. Return result JSON:
-   {
-     "status": "success",
-     "sessions_processed": count,
-     "files_generated": ["SKILL.md", "sessions-timeline.md", ...],
-     "summary": {
-       "total_sessions": count,
-       "functional_domains": [...],
-       "date_range": "...",
-       "lessons_count": count,
-       "conflicts_count": count
-     }
-   }
-```
-
----
-
-### Phase 3: Verification
-
-**Step 3.1: Check SKILL Package Files**
-```bash
-bash(ls -lh .claude/skills/workflow-progress/)
-```
-
-Verify all 4 files exist:
-- SKILL.md
-- sessions-timeline.md
-- lessons-learned.md
-- conflict-patterns.md
-
-**Step 3.2: TodoWrite Completion**
-
-Mark all tasks as completed.
-
-**Step 3.3: Display Summary**
-
-**Single Session Mode**:
-```
-Session {session_id} processed successfully
-
-Updated:
-- sessions-timeline.md
-- lessons-learned.md
-- conflict-patterns.md
-- SKILL.md
-
-SKILL Location: .claude/skills/workflow-progress/SKILL.md
-```
-
-**All Sessions Mode**:
-```
-All sessions processed in parallel
-
-Sessions: {count} total
-Functional Domains: {domain_list}
-Date Range: {earliest} - {latest}
-
-Generated:
-- sessions-timeline.md ({count} sessions)
-- lessons-learned.md ({lessons_count} lessons)
-- conflict-patterns.md ({conflicts_count} conflicts)
-- SKILL.md (4-level progressive loading)
-
-SKILL Location: .claude/skills/workflow-progress/SKILL.md
-
-Usage:
-- Level 0: Quick refresh (~2K tokens)
-- Level 1: Recent history (~8K tokens)
-- Level 2: Complete analysis (~25K tokens)
-- Level 3: Deep dive (~40K tokens)
-```
-
----
-
-## Agent Guidelines
-
-### Agent Capabilities
-
-**universal-executor agents can**:
-- Read files from `.workflow/.archives/`
-- Execute bash commands
-- Call Gemini CLI for intelligent analysis
-- Read template files for formatting guidance
-- Write SKILL package files (single mode) or return JSON (parallel mode)
-- Return structured results
-
-### Gemini Usage Pattern
-
-**When to use Gemini**:
-- Aggregating lessons from multiple sources
-- Identifying recurring patterns
-- Classifying conflicts by type and severity
-- Extracting structured data from IMPL_PLAN
-
-**Fallback Strategy**: If Gemini fails or times out, use direct file parsing with structured extraction logic.
-
----
-
-## Template System
-
-### Template Files
-
-All templates located in: `~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/workflow/`
-
-1. **skill-sessions-timeline.txt**: Format for sessions-timeline.md
-2. **skill-lessons-learned.txt**: Format for lessons-learned.md
-3. **skill-conflict-patterns.txt**: Format for conflict-patterns.md
-4. **skill-index.txt**: Format for SKILL.md index
-5. **skill-aggregation.txt**: Rules for Gemini aggregation (existing)
-
-### Template Usage in Agent
-
-**Agents read templates to understand**:
-- File structure and markdown format
-- Data sources (which files to read)
-- Update strategy (incremental vs full)
-- Formatting rules and conventions
-- Aggregation logic (for Gemini)
-
-**Templates are NOT shown in this command documentation** - agents read them directly as needed.
-
----
-
-## Error Handling
-
-### Validation Errors
-- **No archives directory**: "Error: No workflow archives found at .workflow/.archives/"
-- **Invalid session ID format**: "Error: Invalid session ID format. Only WFS-* sessions are supported"
-- **Session not found**: "Error: Session {session_id} not found in archives"
-- **No WFS sessions in manifest**: "Error: No WFS-* workflow sessions found in manifest.json"
-
-### Agent Errors
-- If agent fails, report error message from agent result
-- If Gemini times out, agents use fallback direct parsing
-- If template read fails, agents use inline format
-
-### Recovery
-- Single session mode: Can be retried without affecting other sessions
-- All sessions mode: If one agent fails, others continue; retry failed sessions individually
-
-
-
-## Integration
-
-### Called by `/workflow:session:complete`
-
-Automatically invoked after session archival:
-```bash
-SlashCommand(command="/memory:workflow-skill-memory session {session_id}")
-```
-
-### Manual Invocation
-
-Users can manually process sessions:
-```bash
-/memory:workflow-skill-memory session WFS-custom-feature  # Single session
-/memory:workflow-skill-memory all                         # Full regeneration
-```

.claude/commands/task/breakdown.md

@@ -1,204 +0,0 @@
----
-name: breakdown
-description: Decompose complex task into subtasks with dependency mapping, creates child task JSONs with parent references and execution order
-argument-hint: "task-id"
----
-
-# Task Breakdown Command (/task:breakdown)
-
-## Overview
-Breaks down complex tasks into executable subtasks with context inheritance and agent assignment.
-
-## Core Principles
-**File Cohesion:** Related files must stay in same task
-**10-Task Limit:** Total tasks cannot exceed 10 (triggers re-scoping)
-
-## Core Features
-
-**CRITICAL**: Manual breakdown with safety controls to prevent file conflicts and task limit violations.
-
-### Breakdown Process
-1. **Session Check**: Verify active session contains parent task
-2. **Task Validation**: Ensure parent is `pending` status
-3. **10-Task Limit Check**: Verify breakdown won't exceed total limit
-4. **Manual Decomposition**: User defines subtasks with validation
-5. **File Conflict Detection**: Warn if same files appear in multiple subtasks
-6. **Similar Function Warning**: Alert if subtasks have overlapping functionality
-7. **Context Distribution**: Inherit parent requirements and scope
-8. **Agent Assignment**: Auto-assign agents based on subtask type
-9. **TODO_LIST Update**: Regenerate TODO_LIST.md with new structure
-
-### Breakdown Rules
-- Only `pending` tasks can be broken down
-- **Manual breakdown only**: Automated breakdown disabled to prevent violations
-- Parent becomes `container` status (not executable)
-- Subtasks use format: IMPL-N.M (max 2 levels)
-- Context flows from parent to subtasks
-- All relationships tracked in JSON
-- **10-task limit enforced**: Breakdown rejected if total would exceed 10 tasks
-- **File cohesion preserved**: Same files cannot be split across subtasks
-
-## Usage
-
-### Basic Breakdown
-```bash
-/task:breakdown impl-1
-```
-
-Interactive process:
-```
-Task: Build authentication module
-Current total tasks: 6/10
-
-MANUAL BREAKDOWN REQUIRED
-Define subtasks manually (remaining capacity: 4 tasks):
-
-1. Enter subtask title: User authentication core
-   Focus files: models/User.js, routes/auth.js, middleware/auth.js
-
-2. Enter subtask title: OAuth integration
-   Focus files: services/OAuthService.js, routes/oauth.js
-
-FILE CONFLICT DETECTED:
-   - routes/auth.js appears in multiple subtasks
-   - Recommendation: Merge related authentication routes
-
-SIMILAR FUNCTIONALITY WARNING:
-   - "User authentication" and "OAuth integration" both handle auth
-   - Consider combining into single task
-
-# Use AskUserQuestion for confirmation
-AskUserQuestion({
-  questions: [{
-    question: "File conflicts and/or similar functionality detected. How do you want to proceed?",
-    header: "Confirm",
-    options: [
-      { label: "Proceed with breakdown", description: "Accept the risks and create the subtasks as defined." },
-      { label: "Restart breakdown", description: "Discard current subtasks and start over." },
-      { label: "Cancel breakdown", description: "Abort the operation and leave the parent task as is." }
-    ],
-    multiSelect: false
-  }]
-})
-
-User selected: "Proceed with breakdown"
-
-Task IMPL-1 broken down:
-IMPL-1: Build authentication module (container)
-  ├── IMPL-1.1: User authentication core -> @code-developer
-  └── IMPL-1.2: OAuth integration -> @code-developer
-
-Files updated: .task/IMPL-1.json + 2 subtask files + TODO_LIST.md
-```
-
-## Decomposition Logic
-
-### Agent Assignment
-- **Design/Planning** → `@planning-agent`
-- **Implementation** → `@code-developer`
-- **Testing** → `@code-developer` (type: "test-gen")
-- **Test Validation** → `@test-fix-agent` (type: "test-fix")
-- **Review** → `@universal-executor` (optional)
-
-### Context Inheritance
-- Subtasks inherit parent requirements
-- Scope refined for specific subtask
-- Implementation details distributed appropriately
-
-## Safety Controls
-
-### File Conflict Detection
-**Validates file cohesion across subtasks:**
-- Scans `focus_paths` in all subtasks
-- Warns if same file appears in multiple subtasks
-- Suggests merging subtasks with overlapping files
-- Blocks breakdown if critical conflicts detected
-
-### Similar Functionality Detection
-**Prevents functional overlap:**
-- Analyzes subtask titles for similar keywords
-- Warns about potential functional redundancy
-- Suggests consolidation of related functionality
-- Examples: "user auth" + "login system" → merge recommendation
-
-### 10-Task Limit Enforcement
-**Hard limit compliance:**
-- Counts current total tasks in session
-- Calculates breakdown impact on total
-- Rejects breakdown if would exceed 10 tasks
-- Suggests re-scoping if limit reached
-
-### Manual Control Requirements
-**User-driven breakdown only:**
-- No automatic subtask generation
-- User must define each subtask title and scope
-- Real-time validation during input
-- Confirmation required before execution
-
-## Implementation Details
-
-- Complete task JSON schema
-- Implementation field structure
-- Context inheritance rules
-- Agent assignment logic
-
-## Validation
-
-### Pre-breakdown Checks
-1. Active session exists
-2. Task found in session
-3. Task status is `pending`
-4. Not already broken down
-5. **10-task limit compliance**: Total tasks + new subtasks ≤ 10
-6. **Manual mode enabled**: No automatic breakdown allowed
-
-### Post-breakdown Actions
-1. Update parent to `container` status
-2. Create subtask JSON files
-3. Update parent subtasks list
-4. Update session stats
-5. **Regenerate TODO_LIST.md** with new hierarchy
-6. Validate file paths in focus_paths
-7. Update session task count
-
-## Examples
-
-### Basic Breakdown
-```bash
-/task:breakdown impl-1
-
-impl-1: Build authentication (container)
-  ├── impl-1.1: Design schema -> @planning-agent
-  ├── impl-1.2: Implement logic + tests -> @code-developer
-  └── impl-1.3: Execute & fix tests -> @test-fix-agent
-```
-
-## Error Handling
-
-```bash
-# Task not found
-Task IMPL-5 not found
-
-# Already broken down
-Task IMPL-1 already has subtasks
-
-# Wrong status
-Cannot breakdown completed task IMPL-2
-
-# 10-task limit exceeded
-Breakdown would exceed 10-task limit (current: 8, proposed: 4)
-Suggestion: Re-scope project into smaller iterations
-
-# File conflicts detected
-File conflict: routes/auth.js appears in IMPL-1.1 and IMPL-1.2
-Recommendation: Merge subtasks or redistribute files
-
-# Similar functionality warning
-Similar functions detected: "user login" and "authentication"
-Consider consolidating related functionality
-
-# Manual breakdown required
-Automatic breakdown disabled. Use manual breakdown process.
-```
-
-**System ensures**: Manual breakdown control with file cohesion enforcement, similar functionality detection, and 10-task limit compliance

.claude/commands/task/create.md

@@ -1,152 +0,0 @@
----
-name: create
-description: Generate task JSON from natural language description with automatic file pattern detection, scope inference, and dependency analysis
-argument-hint: "\"task title\""
----
-
-# Task Create Command (/task:create)
-
-## Overview
-Creates new implementation tasks with automatic context awareness and ID generation.
-
-## Core Principles
-**Task System:** @~/.claude/workflows/task-core.md
-
-## Core Features
-
-### Automatic Behaviors
-- **ID Generation**: Auto-generates IMPL-N format (max 2 levels)
-- **Context Inheritance**: Inherits from active workflow session
-- **JSON Creation**: Creates task JSON in active session
-- **Status Setting**: Initial status = "pending"
-- **Agent Assignment**: Suggests agent based on task type
-- **Session Integration**: Updates workflow session stats
-
-### Context Awareness
-- Validates active workflow session exists
-- Avoids duplicate task IDs
-- Inherits session requirements and scope
-- Suggests task relationships
-
-## Usage
-
-### Basic Creation
-```bash
-/task:create "Build authentication module"
-```
-
-Output:
-```
-Task created: IMPL-1
-Title: Build authentication module
-Type: feature
-Agent: code-developer
-Status: pending
-```
-
-### Task Types
-- `feature` - New functionality (default)
-- `bugfix` - Bug fixes
-- `refactor` - Code improvements
-- `test` - Test implementation
-- `docs` - Documentation
-
-## Task Creation Process
-
-1. **Session Validation**: Check active workflow session
-2. **ID Generation**: Auto-increment IMPL-N
-3. **Context Inheritance**: Load workflow context
-4. **Implementation Setup**: Initialize implementation field
-5. **Agent Assignment**: Select appropriate agent
-6. **File Creation**: Save JSON to .task/ directory
-7. **Session Update**: Update workflow stats
-
-**Task Schema**: See @~/.claude/workflows/task-core.md for complete JSON structure
-
-## Implementation Field Setup
-
-### Auto-Population Strategy
-- **Detailed info**: Extract from task description and scope
-- **Missing info**: Mark `pre_analysis` as multi-step array format for later pre-analysis
-- **Basic structure**: Initialize with standard template
-
-### Analysis Triggers
-When implementation details incomplete:
-```bash
-Task requires analysis for implementation details
-Suggest running: gemini analysis for file locations and dependencies
-```
-
-## File Management
-
-### JSON Task File
-- **Location**: `.task/IMPL-[N].json` in active session
-- **Content**: Complete task with implementation field
-- **Updates**: Session stats only
-
-### Simple Process
-1. Validate session and inputs
-2. Generate task JSON
-3. Update session stats
-4. Notify completion
-
-## Context Inheritance
-
-Tasks inherit from:
-1. **Active Session** - Requirements and scope from workflow-session.json
-2. **Planning Document** - Context from IMPL_PLAN.md
-3. **Parent Task** - For subtasks (IMPL-N.M format)
-
-## Agent Assignment
-
-Based on task type and title keywords:
-- **Build/Implement** → @code-developer
-- **Design/Plan** → @planning-agent
-- **Test Generation** → @code-developer (type: "test-gen")
-- **Test Execution/Fix** → @test-fix-agent (type: "test-fix")
-- **Review/Audit** → @universal-executor (optional, only when explicitly requested)
-
-## Validation Rules
-
-1. **Session Check** - Active workflow session required
-2. **Duplicate Check** - Avoid similar task titles
-3. **ID Uniqueness** - Auto-increment task IDs
-4. **Schema Validation** - Ensure proper JSON structure
-
-## Error Handling
-
-```bash
-# No workflow session
-No active workflow found
-Use: /workflow init "project name"
-
-# Duplicate task
-Similar task exists: IMPL-3
-Continue anyway? (y/n)
-
-# Max depth exceeded
-Cannot create IMPL-1.2.1 (max 2 levels)
-Use: IMPL-2 for new main task
-```
-
-## Examples
-
-### Feature Task
-```bash
-/task:create "Implement user authentication"
-
-Created IMPL-1: Implement user authentication
-Type: feature
-Agent: code-developer
-Status: pending
-```
-
-### Bug Fix
-```bash
-/task:create "Fix login validation bug" --type=bugfix
-
-Created IMPL-2: Fix login validation bug
-Type: bugfix
-Agent: code-developer
-Status: pending
-```

.claude/commands/task/execute.md

@@ -1,270 +0,0 @@
----
-name: execute
-description: Execute task JSON using appropriate agent (@doc-generator/@implementation-agent/@test-agent) with pre-analysis context loading and status tracking
-argument-hint: "task-id"
----
-
-## Command Overview: /task:execute
-
-**Purpose**: Executes tasks using intelligent agent selection, context preparation, and progress tracking.
-
-
-## Execution Modes
-
--   **auto (Default)**
-    -   Fully autonomous execution with automatic agent selection.
-    -   Provides progress updates at each checkpoint.
-    -   Automatically completes the task when done.
--   **guided**
-    -   Executes step-by-step, requiring user confirmation at each checkpoint.
-    -   Allows for dynamic adjustments and manual review during the process.
--   **review**
-    -   Optional manual review using `@universal-executor`.
-    -   Used only when explicitly requested by user.
-
-## Agent Selection Logic
-
-The system determines the appropriate agent for a task using the following logic.
-
-```pseudo
-FUNCTION select_agent(task, agent_override):
-    // A manual override always takes precedence.
-    // Corresponds to the --agent=<agent-type> flag.
-    IF agent_override IS NOT NULL:
-        RETURN agent_override
-
-    // If no override, select based on keywords in the task title.
-    ELSE:
-        CASE task.title:
-            WHEN CONTAINS "Build API", "Implement":
-                RETURN "@code-developer"
-            WHEN CONTAINS "Design schema", "Plan":
-                RETURN "@planning-agent"
-            WHEN CONTAINS "Write tests", "Generate tests":
-                RETURN "@code-developer" // type: test-gen
-            WHEN CONTAINS "Execute tests", "Fix tests", "Validate":
-                RETURN "@test-fix-agent" // type: test-fix
-            WHEN CONTAINS "Review code":
-                RETURN "@universal-executor" // Optional manual review
-            DEFAULT:
-                RETURN "@code-developer" // Default agent
-        END CASE
-END FUNCTION
-```
-
-## Core Execution Protocol
-
-`Pre-Execution` -> `Execution` -> `Post-Execution`
-
-### Pre-Execution Protocol
-
-`Validate Task & Dependencies` **->** `Prepare Execution Context` **->** `Coordinate with TodoWrite`
-
--   **Validation**: Checks for the task's JSON file in `.task/` and resolves its dependencies.
--   **Context Preparation**: Loads task and workflow context, preparing it for the selected agent.
--   **Session Context Injection**: Provides workflow directory paths to agents for TODO_LIST.md and summary management.
--   **TodoWrite Coordination**: Generates execution Todos and checkpoints, syncing with `TODO_LIST.md`.
-
-### Post-Execution Protocol
-
-`Update Task Status` **->** `Generate Summary` **->** `Save Artifacts` **->** `Sync All Progress` **->** `Validate File Integrity`
-
--   Updates status in the task's JSON file and `TODO_LIST.md`.
--   Creates a summary in `.summaries/`.
--   Stores outputs and syncs progress across the entire workflow session.
-
-### Task & Subtask Execution Logic
-
-This logic defines how single, multiple, or parent tasks are handled.
-
-```pseudo
-FUNCTION execute_task_command(task_id, mode, parallel_flag):
-    // Handle parent tasks by executing their subtasks.
-    IF is_parent_task(task_id):
-        subtasks = get_subtasks(task_id)
-        EXECUTE_SUBTASK_BATCH(subtasks, mode)
-
-    // Handle wildcard execution (e.g., IMPL-001.*)
-    ELSE IF task_id CONTAINS "*":
-        subtasks = find_matching_tasks(task_id)
-        IF parallel_flag IS true:
-            EXECUTE_IN_PARALLEL(subtasks)
-        ELSE:
-            FOR each subtask in subtasks:
-                EXECUTE_SINGLE_TASK(subtask, mode)
-  
-    // Default case for a single task ID.
-    ELSE:
-        EXECUTE_SINGLE_TASK(task_id, mode)
-END FUNCTION
-```
-
-### Error Handling & Recovery Logic
-
-```pseudo
-FUNCTION pre_execution_check(task):
-    // Ensure dependencies are met before starting.
-    IF task.dependencies ARE NOT MET:
-        LOG_ERROR("Cannot execute " + task.id)
-        LOG_INFO("Blocked by: " + unmet_dependencies)
-        HALT_EXECUTION()
-
-FUNCTION on_execution_failure(checkpoint):
-    // Provide user with recovery options upon failure.
-    LOG_WARNING("Execution failed at checkpoint " + checkpoint)
-    PRESENT_OPTIONS([
-        "Retry from checkpoint",
-        "Retry from beginning",
-        "Switch to guided mode",
-        "Abort execution"
-    ])
-    AWAIT user_input
-    // System performs the selected action.
-END FUNCTION
-```
-
-
-### Simplified Context Structure (JSON)
-
-This is the simplified data structure loaded to provide context for task execution.
-
-```json
-{
-  "task": {
-    "id": "IMPL-1",
-    "title": "Build authentication module",
-    "type": "feature",
-    "status": "active",
-    "agent": "code-developer",
-    "context": {
-      "requirements": ["JWT authentication", "OAuth2 support"],
-      "scope": ["src/auth/*", "tests/auth/*"],
-      "acceptance": ["Module handles JWT tokens", "OAuth2 flow implemented"],
-      "inherited_from": "WFS-user-auth"
-    },
-    "relations": {
-      "parent": null,
-      "subtasks": ["IMPL-1.1", "IMPL-1.2"],
-      "dependencies": ["IMPL-0"]
-    },
-    "implementation": {
-      "files": [
-        {
-          "path": "src/auth/login.ts",
-          "location": {
-            "function": "authenticateUser",
-            "lines": "25-65",
-            "description": "Main authentication logic"
-          },
-          "original_code": "// Code snippet extracted via gemini analysis",
-          "modifications": {
-            "current_state": "Basic password authentication only",
-            "proposed_changes": [
-              "Add JWT token generation",
-              "Implement OAuth2 callback handling",
-              "Add multi-factor authentication support"
-            ],
-            "logic_flow": [
-              "validateCredentials() ───► checkUserExists()",
-              "◊─── if password ───► generateJWT() ───► return token",
-              "◊─── if OAuth ───► validateOAuthCode() ───► exchangeForToken()",
-              "◊─── if MFA ───► sendMFACode() ───► awaitVerification()"
-            ],
-            "reason": "Support modern authentication standards and security requirements",
-            "expected_outcome": "Comprehensive authentication system supporting multiple methods"
-          }
-        }
-      ],
-      "context_notes": {
-        "dependencies": ["jsonwebtoken", "passport", "speakeasy"],
-        "affected_modules": ["user-session", "auth-middleware", "api-routes"],
-        "risks": [
-          "Breaking changes to existing login endpoints",
-          "Token storage and rotation complexity",
-          "OAuth provider configuration dependencies"
-        ],
-        "performance_considerations": "JWT validation adds ~10ms per request, OAuth callbacks may timeout",
-        "error_handling": "Ensure sensitive authentication errors don't leak user enumeration data"
-      },
-      "pre_analysis": [
-        {
-          "action": "analyze patterns",
-          "template": "~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/analysis/02-analyze-code-patterns.txt",
-          "method": "gemini"
-        }
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  "workflow": {
-    "session": "WFS-user-auth",
-    "phase": "IMPLEMENT",
-    "session_context": {
-      "workflow_directory": ".workflow/active/WFS-user-auth/",
-      "todo_list_location": ".workflow/active/WFS-user-auth/TODO_LIST.md",
-      "summaries_directory": ".workflow/active/WFS-user-auth/.summaries/",
-      "task_json_location": ".workflow/active/WFS-user-auth/.task/"
-    }
-  },
-  "execution": {
-    "agent": "code-developer",
-    "mode": "auto",
-    "attempts": 0
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Agent-Specific Context
-
-Different agents receive context tailored to their function, including implementation details:
-
-**`@code-developer`**: 
-- Complete implementation.files array with file paths and locations
-- original_code snippets and proposed_changes for precise modifications
-- logic_flow diagrams for understanding data flow
-- Dependencies and affected modules for integration planning
-- Performance and error handling considerations
-
-**`@planning-agent`**: 
-- High-level requirements, constraints, success criteria
-- Implementation risks and mitigation strategies
-- Architecture implications from implementation.context_notes
-
-**`@test-fix-agent`**:
-- Test files to execute from task.context.focus_paths
-- Source files to fix from implementation.files[].path
-- Expected behaviors from implementation.modifications.logic_flow
-- Error conditions to validate from implementation.context_notes.error_handling
-- Performance requirements from implementation.context_notes.performance_considerations
-
-**`@universal-executor`**:
-- Used for optional manual reviews when explicitly requested
-- Code quality standards and implementation patterns
-- Security considerations from implementation.context_notes.risks
-- Dependency validation from implementation.context_notes.dependencies
-- Architecture compliance checks
-
-### Simplified File Output
-
--   **Task JSON File (`.task/<task-id>.json`)**: Updated with status and last attempt time only.
--   **Session File (`workflow-session.json`)**: Updated task stats (completed count).
--   **Summary File**: Generated in `.summaries/` upon completion (optional).
-
-### Simplified Summary Template
-
-Optional summary file generated at `.summaries/IMPL-[task-id]-summary.md`.
-
-```markdown
-# Task Summary: IMPL-1 Build Authentication Module
-
-## What Was Done
-- Created src/auth/login.ts with JWT validation
-- Added tests in tests/auth.test.ts
-
-## Execution Results
-- **Agent**: code-developer
-- **Status**: completed
-
-## Files Modified
-- `src/auth/login.ts` (created)
-- `tests/auth.test.ts` (created)
-```

.claude/commands/task/replan.md

@@ -1,437 +0,0 @@
----
-name: replan
-description: Update task JSON with new requirements or batch-update multiple tasks from verification report, tracks changes in task-changes.json
-argument-hint: "task-id [\"text\"|file.md] | --batch [verification-report.md]"
-allowed-tools: Read(*), Write(*), Edit(*), TodoWrite(*), Glob(*), Bash(*)
----
-
-# Task Replan Command (/task:replan)
-
-> **⚠️ DEPRECATION NOTICE**: This command is maintained for backward compatibility. For new workflows, use `/workflow:replan` which provides:
-> - Session-level replanning with comprehensive artifact updates
-> - Interactive boundary clarification
-> - Updates to IMPL_PLAN.md, TODO_LIST.md, and session metadata
-> - Better integration with workflow sessions
->
-> **Migration**: Replace `/task:replan IMPL-1 "changes"` with `/workflow:replan IMPL-1 "changes"`
-
-## Overview
-Replans individual tasks or batch processes multiple tasks with change tracking and backup management.
-
-**Modes**:
-- **Single Task Mode**: Replan one task with specific changes
-- **Batch Mode**: Process multiple tasks from action-plan verification report
-
-## Key Features
-- **Single/Batch Operations**: Single task or multiple tasks from verification report
-- **Multiple Input Sources**: Text, files, or verification report
-- **Backup Management**: Automatic backup of previous versions
-- **Change Documentation**: Track all modifications
-- **Progress Tracking**: TodoWrite integration for batch operations
-
-**CRITICAL**: Validates active session before replanning
-
-## Operation Modes
-
-### Single Task Mode
-
-#### Direct Text (Default)
-```bash
-/task:replan IMPL-1 "Add OAuth2 authentication support"
-```
-
-#### File-based Input
-```bash
-/task:replan IMPL-1 updated-specs.md
-```
-Supports: .md, .txt, .json, .yaml
-
-#### Interactive Mode
-```bash
-/task:replan IMPL-1 --interactive
-```
-Guided step-by-step modification process with validation
-
-### Batch Mode
-
-#### From Verification Report
-```bash
-/task:replan --batch ACTION_PLAN_VERIFICATION.md
-```
-
-**Workflow**:
-1. Parse verification report to extract replan recommendations
-2. Create TodoWrite task list for all modifications
-3. Process each task sequentially with confirmation
-4. Track progress and generate summary report
-
-**Auto-detection**: If input file contains "Action Plan Verification Report" header, automatically enters batch mode
-
-## Replanning Process
-
-### Single Task Process
-
-1. **Load & Validate**: Read task JSON and validate session
-2. **Parse Input**: Process changes from input source
-3. **Create Backup**: Save previous version to backup folder
-4. **Update Task**: Modify JSON structure and relationships
-5. **Save Changes**: Write updated task and increment version
-6. **Update Session**: Reflect changes in workflow stats
-
-### Batch Process
-
-1. **Parse Verification Report**: Extract all replan recommendations
-2. **Initialize TodoWrite**: Create task list for tracking
-3. **For Each Task**:
-   - Mark todo as in_progress
-   - Load and validate task JSON
-   - Create backup
-   - Apply recommended changes
-   - Save updated task
-   - Mark todo as completed
-4. **Generate Summary**: Report all changes and backup locations
-
-## Backup Management
-
-### Backup Tracking
-Tasks maintain backup history:
-```json
-{
-  "id": "IMPL-1",
-  "version": "1.2",
-  "replan_history": [
-    {
-      "version": "1.2",
-      "reason": "Add OAuth2 support",
-      "input_source": "direct_text",
-      "backup_location": ".task/backup/IMPL-1-v1.1.json",
-      "timestamp": "2025-10-17T10:30:00Z"
-    }
-  ]
-}
-```
-
-**Complete schema**: See @~/.claude/workflows/task-core.md
-
-### File Structure
-```
-.task/
-├── IMPL-1.json                    # Current version
-├── backup/
-│   ├── IMPL-1-v1.0.json          # Original version
-│   ├── IMPL-1-v1.1.json          # Previous backup
-│   └── IMPL-1-v1.2.json          # Latest backup
-└── [new subtasks as needed]
-```
-
-**Backup Naming**: `{task-id}-v{version}.json`
-
-## Implementation Updates
-
-### Change Detection
-Tracks modifications to:
-- Files in implementation.files array
-- Dependencies and affected modules
-- Risk assessments and performance notes
-- Logic flows and code locations
-
-### Analysis Triggers
-May require gemini re-analysis when:
-- New files need code extraction
-- Function locations change
-- Dependencies require re-evaluation
-
-## Document Updates
-
-### Planning Document
-May update IMPL_PLAN.md sections when task structure changes significantly
-
-### TODO List Sync
-If TODO_LIST.md exists, synchronizes:
-- New subtasks (with [ ] checkbox)
-- Modified tasks (marked as updated)
-- Removed subtasks (deleted from list)
-
-## Change Documentation
-
-### Change Summary
-Generates brief change log with:
-- Version increment (1.1 → 1.2)
-- Input source and reason
-- Key modifications made
-- Files updated/created
-- Backup location
-
-## Session Updates
-
-Updates workflow-session.json with:
-- Modified task tracking
-- Task count changes (if subtasks added/removed)
-- Last modification timestamps
-
-## Rollback Support
-
-```bash
-/task:replan IMPL-1 --rollback v1.1
-
-Rollback to version 1.1:
-- Restore task from backup/.../IMPL-1-v1.1.json
-- Remove new subtasks if any
-- Update session stats
-
-# Use AskUserQuestion for confirmation
-AskUserQuestion({
-  questions: [{
-    question: "Are you sure you want to roll back this task to a previous version?",
-    header: "Confirm",
-    options: [
-      { label: "Yes, rollback", description: "Restore the task from the selected backup." },
-      { label: "No, cancel", description: "Keep the current version of the task." }
-    ],
-    multiSelect: false
-  }]
-})
-
-User selected: "Yes, rollback"
-
-Task rolled back to version 1.1
-```
-
-## Batch Processing with TodoWrite
-
-### Progress Tracking
-When processing multiple tasks, automatically creates TodoWrite task list:
-
-```markdown
-**Batch Replan Progress**:
-- [x] IMPL-002: Add FR-12 draft saving acceptance criteria
-- [x] IMPL-003: Add FR-14 history tracking acceptance criteria
-- [ ] IMPL-004: Add FR-09 response surface explicit coverage
-- [ ] IMPL-008: Add NFR performance validation steps
-```
-
-### Batch Report
-After completion, generates summary:
-```markdown
-## Batch Replan Summary
-
-**Total Tasks**: 4
-**Successful**: 3
-**Failed**: 1
-**Skipped**: 0
-
-### Changes Made
-- IMPL-002 v1.0 → v1.1: Added FR-12 acceptance criteria
-- IMPL-003 v1.0 → v1.1: Added FR-14 acceptance criteria
-- IMPL-004 v1.0 → v1.1: Added FR-09 explicit coverage
-
-### Backups Created
-- .task/backup/IMPL-002-v1.0.json
-- .task/backup/IMPL-003-v1.0.json
-- .task/backup/IMPL-004-v1.0.json
-
-### Errors
-- IMPL-008: File not found (task may have been renamed)
-```
-
-## Examples
-
-### Single Task - Text Input
-```bash
-/task:replan IMPL-1 "Add OAuth2 authentication support"
-
-Processing changes...
-Proposed updates:
-+ Add OAuth2 integration
-+ Update authentication flow
-
-# Use AskUserQuestion for confirmation
-AskUserQuestion({
-  questions: [{
-    question: "Do you want to apply these changes to the task?",
-    header: "Apply",
-    options: [
-      { label: "Yes, apply", description: "Create new version with these changes." },
-      { label: "No, cancel", description: "Discard changes and keep current version." }
-    ],
-    multiSelect: false
-  }]
-})
-
-User selected: "Yes, apply"
-
-Version 1.2 created
-Context updated
-Backup saved to .task/backup/IMPL-1-v1.1.json
-```
-
-### Single Task - File Input
-```bash
-/task:replan IMPL-2 requirements.md
-
-Loading requirements.md...
-Applying specification changes...
-
-Task updated with new requirements
-Version 1.1 created
-Backup saved to .task/backup/IMPL-2-v1.0.json
-```
-
-### Batch Mode - From Verification Report
-```bash
-/task:replan --batch .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.process/ACTION_PLAN_VERIFICATION.md
-
-Parsing verification report...
-Found 4 tasks requiring replanning:
-- IMPL-002: Add FR-12 draft saving acceptance criteria
-- IMPL-003: Add FR-14 history tracking acceptance criteria
-- IMPL-004: Add FR-09 response surface explicit coverage
-- IMPL-008: Add NFR performance validation steps
-
-Creating task tracking list...
-
-Processing IMPL-002...
-Backup created: .task/backup/IMPL-002-v1.0.json
-Updated to v1.1
-
-Processing IMPL-003...
-Backup created: .task/backup/IMPL-003-v1.0.json
-Updated to v1.1
-
-Processing IMPL-004...
-Backup created: .task/backup/IMPL-004-v1.0.json
-Updated to v1.1
-
-Processing IMPL-008...
-Backup created: .task/backup/IMPL-008-v1.0.json
-Updated to v1.1
-
-Batch replan completed: 4/4 successful
-Summary report saved
-```
-
-### Batch Mode - Auto-detection
-```bash
-# If file contains "Action Plan Verification Report", auto-enters batch mode
-/task:replan ACTION_PLAN_VERIFICATION.md
-
-Detected verification report format
-Entering batch mode...
-[same as above]
-```
-
-## Error Handling
-
-### Single Task Errors
-```bash
-# Task not found
-Task IMPL-5 not found
-Check task ID with /workflow:status
-
-# Task completed
-Task IMPL-1 is completed (cannot replan)
-Create new task for additional work
-
-# File not found
-File requirements.md not found
-Check file path
-
-# No input provided
-Please specify changes needed
-Provide text, file, or verification report
-```
-
-### Batch Mode Errors
-```bash
-# Invalid verification report
-File does not contain valid verification report format
-Check report structure or use single task mode
-
-# Partial failures
-Batch completed with errors: 3/4 successful
-Review error details in summary report
-
-# No replan recommendations found
-Verification report contains no replan recommendations
-Check report content or use /workflow:action-plan-verify first
-```
-
-## Batch Mode Integration
-
-### Input Format Expectations
-Batch mode parses verification reports looking for:
-
-1. **Required Actions Section**: Commands like `/task:replan IMPL-X "changes"`
-2. **Findings Table**: Task IDs with recommendations
-3. **Next Actions Section**: Specific replan commands
-
-**Example Patterns**:
-```markdown
-#### 1. HIGH Priority - Address FR Coverage Gaps
-/task:replan IMPL-004 "
-Add explicit acceptance criteria:
-- FR-09: Response surface 3D visualization
-"
-
-#### 2. MEDIUM Priority - Enhance NFR Coverage
-/task:replan IMPL-008 "
-Add performance testing:
-- NFR-01: Load test API endpoints
-"
-```
-
-### Extraction Logic
-1. Scan for `/task:replan` commands in report
-2. Extract task ID and change description
-3. Group by priority (HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW)
-4. Process in priority order with TodoWrite tracking
-
-### Confirmation Behavior
-- **Default**: Confirm each task before applying
-- **With `--auto-confirm`**: Apply all changes without prompting
-  ```bash
-  /task:replan --batch report.md --auto-confirm
-  ```
-
-## Implementation Details
-
-### Backup Management
-```typescript
-// Backup file naming convention
-const backupPath = `.task/backup/${taskId}-v${previousVersion}.json`;
-
-// Backup metadata in task JSON
-{
-  "replan_history": [
-    {
-      "version": "1.2",
-      "timestamp": "2025-10-17T10:30:00Z",
-      "reason": "Add FR-09 explicit coverage",
-      "input_source": "batch_verification_report",
-      "backup_location": ".task/backup/IMPL-004-v1.1.json"
-    }
-  ]
-}
-```
-
-### TodoWrite Integration
-```typescript
-// Initialize tracking for batch mode
-TodoWrite({
-  todos: taskList.map(task => ({
-    content: `${task.id}: ${task.changeDescription}`,
-    status: "pending",
-    activeForm: `Replanning ${task.id}`
-  }))
-});
-
-// Update progress during processing
-TodoWrite({
-  todos: updateTaskStatus(taskId, "in_progress")
-});
-
-// Mark completed
-TodoWrite({
-  todos: updateTaskStatus(taskId, "completed")
-});
-```

.claude/commands/version.md

@@ -1,254 +0,0 @@
----
-name: version
-description: Display Claude Code version information and check for updates
-allowed-tools: Bash(*)
----
-
-# Version Command (/version)
-
-## Purpose
-Display local and global installation versions, check for the latest updates from GitHub, and provide upgrade recommendations.
-
-## Execution Flow
-1. **Local Version Check**: Read version information from `./.claude/version.json` if it exists.
-2. **Global Version Check**: Read version information from `~/.claude/version.json` if it exists.
-3. **Fetch Remote Versions**: Use GitHub API to get the latest stable release tag and the latest commit hash from the main branch.
-4. **Compare & Suggest**: Compare installed versions with the latest remote versions and provide upgrade suggestions if applicable.
-
-## Step 1: Check Local Version
-
-### Check if local version.json exists
-```bash
-bash(test -f ./.claude/version.json && echo "found" || echo "not_found")
-```
-
-### Read local version (if exists)
-```bash
-bash(cat ./.claude/version.json)
-```
-
-### Extract version with jq (preferred)
-```bash
-bash(cat ./.claude/version.json | grep -o '"version": *"[^"]*"' | cut -d'"' -f4)
-```
-
-### Extract installation date
-```bash
-bash(cat ./.claude/version.json | grep -o '"installation_date_utc": *"[^"]*"' | cut -d'"' -f4)
-```
-
-**Output Format**:
-```
-Local Version: 3.2.1
-Installed: 2025-10-03T12:00:00Z
-```
-
-## Step 2: Check Global Version
-
-### Check if global version.json exists
-```bash
-bash(test -f ~/.claude/version.json && echo "found" || echo "not_found")
-```
-
-### Read global version
-```bash
-bash(cat ~/.claude/version.json)
-```
-
-### Extract version
-```bash
-bash(cat ~/.claude/version.json | grep -o '"version": *"[^"]*"' | cut -d'"' -f4)
-```
-
-### Extract installation date
-```bash
-bash(cat ~/.claude/version.json | grep -o '"installation_date_utc": *"[^"]*"' | cut -d'"' -f4)
-```
-
-**Output Format**:
-```
-Global Version: 3.2.1
-Installed: 2025-10-03T12:00:00Z
-```
-
-## Step 3: Fetch Latest Stable Release
-
-### Call GitHub API for latest release (with timeout)
-```bash
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/releases/latest" 2>/dev/null, timeout: 30000)
-```
-
-### Extract tag name (version)
-```bash
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/releases/latest" 2>/dev/null | grep -o '"tag_name": *"[^"]*"' | head -1 | cut -d'"' -f4, timeout: 30000)
-```
-
-### Extract release name
-```bash
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/releases/latest" 2>/dev/null | grep -o '"name": *"[^"]*"' | head -1 | cut -d'"' -f4, timeout: 30000)
-```
-
-### Extract published date
-```bash
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/releases/latest" 2>/dev/null | grep -o '"published_at": *"[^"]*"' | cut -d'"' -f4, timeout: 30000)
-```
-
-**Output Format**:
-```
-Latest Stable: v3.2.2
-Release: v3.2.2: Independent Test-Gen Workflow with Cross-Session Context
-Published: 2025-10-03T04:10:08Z
-```
-
-## Step 4: Fetch Latest Main Branch
-
-### Call GitHub API for latest commit on main (with timeout)
-```bash
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/commits/main" 2>/dev/null, timeout: 30000)
-```
-
-### Extract commit SHA (short)
-```bash
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/commits/main" 2>/dev/null | grep -o '"sha": *"[^"]*"' | head -1 | cut -d'"' -f4 | cut -c1-7, timeout: 30000)
-```
-
-### Extract commit message (first line only)
-```bash
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/commits/main" 2>/dev/null | grep '"message":' | cut -d'"' -f4 | cut -d'\' -f1, timeout: 30000)
-```
-
-### Extract commit date
-```bash
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/commits/main" 2>/dev/null | grep -o '"date": *"[^"]*"' | head -1 | cut -d'"' -f4, timeout: 30000)
-```
-
-**Output Format**:
-```
-Latest Dev: a03415b
-Message: feat: Add version tracking and upgrade check system
-Date: 2025-10-03T04:46:44Z
-```
-
-## Step 5: Compare Versions and Suggest Upgrade
-
-### Normalize versions (remove 'v' prefix)
-```bash
-bash(echo "v3.2.1" | sed 's/^v//')
-```
-
-### Compare two versions
-```bash
-bash(printf "%s\n%s" "3.2.1" "3.2.2" | sort -V | tail -n 1)
-```
-
-### Check if versions are equal
-```bash
-# If equal: Up to date
-# If remote newer: Upgrade available
-# If local newer: Development version
-```
-
-**Output Scenarios**:
-
-**Scenario 1: Up to date**
-```
-You are on the latest stable version (3.2.1)
-```
-
-**Scenario 2: Upgrade available**
-```
-A newer stable version is available: v3.2.2
-Your version: 3.2.1
-
-To upgrade:
-PowerShell: iex (iwr -useb https://raw.githubusercontent.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/main/install-remote.ps1)
-Bash: bash <(curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/main/install-remote.sh)
-```
-
-**Scenario 3: Development version**
-```
-You are running a development version (3.4.0-dev)
-This is newer than the latest stable release (v3.3.0)
-```
-
-## Simple Bash Commands
-
-### Basic Operations
-```bash
-# Check local version file
-bash(test -f ./.claude/version.json && cat ./.claude/version.json)
-
-# Check global version file
-bash(test -f ~/.claude/version.json && cat ~/.claude/version.json)
-
-# Extract version from JSON
-bash(cat version.json | grep -o '"version": *"[^"]*"' | cut -d'"' -f4)
-
-# Extract date from JSON
-bash(cat version.json | grep -o '"installation_date_utc": *"[^"]*"' | cut -d'"' -f4)
-
-# Fetch latest release (with timeout)
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/releases/latest" 2>/dev/null, timeout: 30000)
-
-# Extract tag name
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/releases/latest" 2>/dev/null | grep -o '"tag_name": *"[^"]*"' | cut -d'"' -f4, timeout: 30000)
-
-# Extract release name
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/releases/latest" 2>/dev/null | grep -o '"name": *"[^"]*"' | head -1 | cut -d'"' -f4, timeout: 30000)
-
-# Fetch latest commit (with timeout)
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/commits/main" 2>/dev/null, timeout: 30000)
-
-# Extract commit SHA
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/commits/main" 2>/dev/null | grep -o '"sha": *"[^"]*"' | head -1 | cut -d'"' -f4 | cut -c1-7, timeout: 30000)
-
-# Extract commit message (first line)
-bash(curl -fsSL "https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/commits/main" 2>/dev/null | grep '"message":' | cut -d'"' -f4 | cut -d'\' -f1, timeout: 30000)
-
-# Compare versions
-bash(printf "%s\n%s" "3.2.1" "3.2.2" | sort -V | tail -n 1)
-
-# Remove 'v' prefix
-bash(echo "v3.2.1" | sed 's/^v//')
-```
-
-## Error Handling
-
-### No installation found
-```
-WARNING: Claude Code Workflow not installed
-Install using:
-PowerShell: iex (iwr -useb https://raw.githubusercontent.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/main/install-remote.ps1)
-```
-
-### Network error
-```
-ERROR: Could not fetch latest version from GitHub
-Check your network connection
-```
-
-### Invalid version.json
-```
-ERROR: version.json is invalid or corrupted
-```
-
-## Design Notes
-
-- Uses simple, direct bash commands instead of complex functions
-- Each step is independent and can be executed separately
-- Fallback to grep/sed for JSON parsing (no jq dependency required)
-- Network calls use curl with error suppression and 30-second timeout
-- Version comparison uses `sort -V` for accurate semantic versioning
-- Use `/commits/main` API instead of `/branches/main` for more reliable commit info
-- Extract first line of commit message using `cut -d'\' -f1` to handle JSON escape sequences
-
-## API Endpoints
-
-### GitHub API Used
-- **Latest Release**: `https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/releases/latest`
-  - Fields: `tag_name`, `name`, `published_at`
-- **Latest Commit**: `https://api.github.com/repos/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/commits/main`
-  - Fields: `sha`, `commit.message`, `commit.author.date`
-
-### Timeout Configuration
-All network calls should use `timeout: 30000` (30 seconds) to handle slow connections.

.claude/commands/workflow/action-plan-verify.md

@@ -1,447 +0,0 @@
----
-name: action-plan-verify
-description: Perform non-destructive cross-artifact consistency analysis between IMPL_PLAN.md and task JSONs with quality gate validation
-argument-hint: "[optional: --session session-id]"
-allowed-tools: Read(*), TodoWrite(*), Glob(*), Bash(*)
----
-
-## User Input
-
-```text
-$ARGUMENTS
-```
-
-You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
-
-## Goal
-
-Identify inconsistencies, duplications, ambiguities, and underspecified items between action planning artifacts (`IMPL_PLAN.md`, `task.json`) and brainstorming artifacts (`role analysis documents`) before implementation. This command MUST run only after `/workflow:plan` has successfully produced complete `IMPL_PLAN.md` and task JSON files.
-
-## Operating Constraints
-
-**STRICTLY READ-ONLY**: Do **not** modify any files. Output a structured analysis report. Offer an optional remediation plan (user must explicitly approve before any follow-up editing commands).
-
-**Synthesis Authority**: The `role analysis documents` is **authoritative** for requirements and design decisions. Any conflicts between IMPL_PLAN/tasks and synthesis are automatically CRITICAL and require adjustment of the plan/tasks—not reinterpretation of requirements.
-
-## Execution Steps
-
-### 1. Initialize Analysis Context
-
-```bash
-# Detect active workflow session
-IF --session parameter provided:
-    session_id = provided session
-ELSE:
-    # Auto-detect active session
-    active_sessions = bash(find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d 2>/dev/null)
-    IF active_sessions is empty:
-        ERROR: "No active workflow session found. Use --session <session-id>"
-        EXIT
-    ELSE IF active_sessions has multiple entries:
-        # Use most recently modified session
-        session_id = bash(ls -td .workflow/active/WFS-*/ 2>/dev/null | head -1 | xargs basename)
-    ELSE:
-        session_id = basename(active_sessions[0])
-
-# Derive absolute paths
-session_dir = .workflow/active/WFS-{session}
-brainstorm_dir = session_dir/.brainstorming
-task_dir = session_dir/.task
-
-# Validate required artifacts
-# Note: "role analysis documents" refers to [role]/analysis.md files (e.g., product-manager/analysis.md)
-SYNTHESIS_DIR = brainstorm_dir  # Contains role analysis files: */analysis.md
-IMPL_PLAN = session_dir/IMPL_PLAN.md
-TASK_FILES = Glob(task_dir/*.json)
-
-# Abort if missing
-SYNTHESIS_FILES = Glob(brainstorm_dir/*/analysis.md)
-IF SYNTHESIS_FILES.count == 0:
-    ERROR: "No role analysis documents found in .brainstorming/*/analysis.md. Run /workflow:brainstorm:synthesis first"
-    EXIT
-
-IF NOT EXISTS(IMPL_PLAN):
-    ERROR: "IMPL_PLAN.md not found. Run /workflow:plan first"
-    EXIT
-
-IF TASK_FILES.count == 0:
-    ERROR: "No task JSON files found. Run /workflow:plan first"
-    EXIT
-```
-
-### 2. Load Artifacts (Progressive Disclosure)
-
-Load only minimal necessary context from each artifact:
-
-**From workflow-session.json** (NEW - PRIMARY REFERENCE):
-- Original user prompt/intent (project or description field)
-- User's stated goals and objectives
-- User's scope definition
-
-**From role analysis documents**:
-- Functional Requirements (IDs, descriptions, acceptance criteria)
-- Non-Functional Requirements (IDs, targets)
-- Business Requirements (IDs, success metrics)
-- Key Architecture Decisions
-- Risk factors and mitigation strategies
-- Implementation Roadmap (high-level phases)
-
-**From IMPL_PLAN.md**:
-- Summary and objectives
-- Context Analysis
-- Implementation Strategy
-- Task Breakdown Summary
-- Success Criteria
-- Brainstorming Artifacts References (if present)
-
-**From task.json files**:
-- Task IDs
-- Titles and descriptions
-- Status
-- Dependencies (depends_on, blocks)
-- Context (requirements, focus_paths, acceptance, artifacts)
-- Flow control (pre_analysis, implementation_approach)
-- Meta (complexity, priority)
-
-### 3. Build Semantic Models
-
-Create internal representations (do not include raw artifacts in output):
-
-**Requirements inventory**:
-- Each functional/non-functional/business requirement with stable ID
-- Requirement text, acceptance criteria, priority
-
-**Architecture decisions inventory**:
-- ADRs from synthesis
-- Technology choices
-- Data model references
-
-**Task coverage mapping**:
-- Map each task to one or more requirements (by ID reference or keyword inference)
-- Map each requirement to covering tasks
-
-**Dependency graph**:
-- Task-to-task dependencies (depends_on, blocks)
-- Requirement-level dependencies (from synthesis)
-
-### 4. Detection Passes (Token-Efficient Analysis)
-
-Focus on high-signal findings. Limit to 50 findings total; aggregate remainder in overflow summary.
-
-#### A. User Intent Alignment (NEW - CRITICAL)
-
-- **Goal Alignment**: IMPL_PLAN objectives match user's original intent
-- **Scope Drift**: Plan covers user's stated scope without unauthorized expansion
-- **Success Criteria Match**: Plan's success criteria reflect user's expectations
-- **Intent Conflicts**: Tasks contradicting user's original objectives
-
-#### B. Requirements Coverage Analysis
-
-- **Orphaned Requirements**: Requirements in synthesis with zero associated tasks
-- **Unmapped Tasks**: Tasks with no clear requirement linkage
-- **NFR Coverage Gaps**: Non-functional requirements (performance, security, scalability) not reflected in tasks
-
-#### C. Consistency Validation
-
-- **Requirement Conflicts**: Tasks contradicting synthesis requirements
-- **Architecture Drift**: IMPL_PLAN architecture not matching synthesis ADRs
-- **Terminology Drift**: Same concept named differently across IMPL_PLAN and tasks
-- **Data Model Inconsistency**: Tasks referencing entities/fields not in synthesis data model
-
-#### D. Dependency Integrity
-
-- **Circular Dependencies**: Task A depends on B, B depends on C, C depends on A
-- **Missing Dependencies**: Task requires outputs from another task but no explicit dependency
-- **Broken Dependencies**: Task depends on non-existent task ID
-- **Logical Ordering Issues**: Implementation tasks before foundational setup without dependency note
-
-#### E. Synthesis Alignment
-
-- **Priority Conflicts**: High-priority synthesis requirements mapped to low-priority tasks
-- **Success Criteria Mismatch**: IMPL_PLAN success criteria not covering synthesis acceptance criteria
-- **Risk Mitigation Gaps**: Critical risks in synthesis without corresponding mitigation tasks
-
-#### F. Task Specification Quality
-
-- **Ambiguous Focus Paths**: Tasks with vague or missing focus_paths
-- **Underspecified Acceptance**: Tasks without clear acceptance criteria
-- **Missing Artifacts References**: Tasks not referencing relevant brainstorming artifacts in context.artifacts
-- **Weak Flow Control**: Tasks without clear implementation_approach or pre_analysis steps
-- **Missing Target Files**: Tasks without flow_control.target_files specification
-
-#### G. Duplication Detection
-
-- **Overlapping Task Scope**: Multiple tasks with nearly identical descriptions
-- **Redundant Requirements Coverage**: Same requirement covered by multiple tasks without clear partitioning
-
-#### H. Feasibility Assessment
-
-- **Complexity Misalignment**: Task marked "simple" but requires multiple file modifications
-- **Resource Conflicts**: Parallel tasks requiring same resources/files
-- **Skill Gap Risks**: Tasks requiring skills not in team capability assessment (from synthesis)
-
-### 5. Severity Assignment
-
-Use this heuristic to prioritize findings:
-
-- **CRITICAL**:
-  - Violates user's original intent (goal misalignment, scope drift)
-  - Violates synthesis authority (requirement conflict)
-  - Core requirement with zero coverage
-  - Circular dependencies
-  - Broken dependencies
-
-- **HIGH**:
-  - NFR coverage gaps
-  - Priority conflicts
-  - Missing risk mitigation tasks
-  - Ambiguous acceptance criteria
-
-- **MEDIUM**:
-  - Terminology drift
-  - Missing artifacts references
-  - Weak flow control
-  - Logical ordering issues
-
-- **LOW**:
-  - Style/wording improvements
-  - Minor redundancy not affecting execution
-
-### 6. Produce Compact Analysis Report
-
-**Report Generation**: Generate report content and save to file.
-
-Output a Markdown report with the following structure:
-
-```markdown
-## Action Plan Verification Report
-
-**Session**: WFS-{session-id}
-**Generated**: {timestamp}
-**Artifacts Analyzed**: role analysis documents, IMPL_PLAN.md, {N} task files
-
----
-
-### Executive Summary
-
-- **Overall Risk Level**: CRITICAL | HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW
-- **Recommendation**: (See decision matrix below)
-  - BLOCK_EXECUTION: Critical issues exist (must fix before proceeding)
-  - PROCEED_WITH_FIXES: High issues exist, no critical (fix recommended before execution)
-  - PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION: Medium issues only (proceed with awareness)
-  - PROCEED: Low issues only or no issues (safe to execute)
-- **Critical Issues**: {count}
-- **High Issues**: {count}
-- **Medium Issues**: {count}
-- **Low Issues**: {count}
-
----
-
-### Findings Summary
-
-| ID | Category | Severity | Location(s) | Summary | Recommendation |
-|----|----------|----------|-------------|---------|----------------|
-| C1 | Coverage | CRITICAL | synthesis:FR-03 | Requirement "User auth" has zero task coverage | Add authentication implementation task |
-| H1 | Consistency | HIGH | IMPL-1.2 vs synthesis:ADR-02 | Task uses REST while synthesis specifies GraphQL | Align task with ADR-02 decision |
-| M1 | Specification | MEDIUM | IMPL-2.1 | Missing context.artifacts reference | Add @synthesis reference |
-| L1 | Duplication | LOW | IMPL-3.1, IMPL-3.2 | Similar scope | Consider merging |
-
-(Add one row per finding; generate stable IDs prefixed by severity initial.)
-
----
-
-### Requirements Coverage Analysis
-
-| Requirement ID | Requirement Summary | Has Task? | Task IDs | Priority Match | Notes |
-|----------------|---------------------|-----------|----------|----------------|-------|
-| FR-01 | User authentication | Yes | IMPL-1.1, IMPL-1.2 | Match | Complete |
-| FR-02 | Data export | Yes | IMPL-2.3 | Mismatch | High req → Med priority task |
-| FR-03 | Profile management | No | - | - | **CRITICAL: Zero coverage** |
-| NFR-01 | Response time <200ms | No | - | - | **HIGH: No performance tasks** |
-
-**Coverage Metrics**:
-- Functional Requirements: 85% (17/20 covered)
-- Non-Functional Requirements: 40% (2/5 covered)
-- Business Requirements: 100% (5/5 covered)
-
----
-
-### Unmapped Tasks
-
-| Task ID | Title | Issue | Recommendation |
-|---------|-------|-------|----------------|
-| IMPL-4.5 | Refactor utils | No requirement linkage | Link to technical debt or remove |
-
----
-
-### Dependency Graph Issues
-
-**Circular Dependencies**: None detected
-
-**Broken Dependencies**:
-- IMPL-2.3 depends on "IMPL-2.4" (non-existent)
-
-**Logical Ordering Issues**:
-- IMPL-5.1 (integration test) has no dependency on IMPL-1.* (implementation tasks)
-
----
-
-### Synthesis Alignment Issues
-
-| Issue Type | Synthesis Reference | IMPL_PLAN/Task | Impact | Recommendation |
-|------------|---------------------|----------------|--------|----------------|
-| Architecture Conflict | synthesis:ADR-01 (JWT auth) | IMPL_PLAN uses session cookies | HIGH | Update IMPL_PLAN to use JWT |
-| Priority Mismatch | synthesis:FR-02 (High) | IMPL-2.3 (Medium) | MEDIUM | Elevate task priority |
-| Missing Risk Mitigation | synthesis:Risk-03 (API rate limits) | No mitigation tasks | HIGH | Add rate limiting implementation task |
-
----
-
-### Task Specification Quality Issues
-
-**Missing Artifacts References**: 12 tasks lack context.artifacts
-**Weak Flow Control**: 5 tasks lack implementation_approach
-**Missing Target Files**: 8 tasks lack flow_control.target_files
-
-**Sample Issues**:
-- IMPL-1.2: No context.artifacts reference to synthesis
-- IMPL-3.1: Missing flow_control.target_files specification
-- IMPL-4.2: Vague focus_paths ["src/"] - needs refinement
-
----
-
-### Feasibility Concerns
-
-| Concern | Tasks Affected | Issue | Recommendation |
-|---------|----------------|-------|----------------|
-| Skill Gap | IMPL-6.1, IMPL-6.2 | Requires Kubernetes expertise not in team | Add training task or external consultant |
-| Resource Conflict | IMPL-3.1, IMPL-3.2 | Both modify src/auth/service.ts in parallel | Add dependency or serialize |
-
----
-
-### Metrics
-
-- **Total Requirements**: 30 (20 functional, 5 non-functional, 5 business)
-- **Total Tasks**: 25
-- **Overall Coverage**: 77% (23/30 requirements with ≥1 task)
-- **Critical Issues**: 2
-- **High Issues**: 5
-- **Medium Issues**: 8
-- **Low Issues**: 3
-
----
-
-### Next Actions
-
-#### Action Recommendations
-
-**Recommendation Decision Matrix**:
-
-| Condition | Recommendation | Action |
-|-----------|----------------|--------|
-| Critical > 0 | BLOCK_EXECUTION | Must resolve all critical issues before proceeding |
-| Critical = 0, High > 0 | PROCEED_WITH_FIXES | Fix high-priority issues before execution |
-| Critical = 0, High = 0, Medium > 0 | PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION | Proceed with awareness of medium issues |
-| Only Low or None | PROCEED | Safe to execute workflow |
-
-**If CRITICAL Issues Exist** (BLOCK_EXECUTION):
-- Resolve all critical issues before proceeding
-- Use TodoWrite to track required fixes
-- Fix broken dependencies and circular references first
-
-**If HIGH Issues Exist** (PROCEED_WITH_FIXES):
-- Fix high-priority issues before execution
-- Use TodoWrite to systematically track and complete improvements
-
-**If Only MEDIUM/LOW Issues** (PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION / PROCEED):
-- Can proceed with execution
-- Address issues during or after implementation
-
-#### TodoWrite-Based Remediation Workflow
-
-**Report Location**: `.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.process/ACTION_PLAN_VERIFICATION.md`
-
-**Recommended Workflow**:
-1. **Create TodoWrite Task List**: Extract all findings from report
-2. **Process by Priority**: CRITICAL → HIGH → MEDIUM → LOW
-3. **Complete Each Fix**: Mark tasks as in_progress/completed as you work
-4. **Validate Changes**: Verify each modification against requirements
-
-**TodoWrite Task Structure Example**:
-```markdown
-Priority Order:
-1. Fix coverage gaps (CRITICAL)
-2. Resolve consistency conflicts (CRITICAL/HIGH)
-3. Add missing specifications (MEDIUM)
-4. Improve task quality (LOW)
-```
-
-**Notes**:
-- TodoWrite provides real-time progress tracking
-- Each finding becomes a trackable todo item
-- User can monitor progress throughout remediation
-- Architecture drift in IMPL_PLAN requires manual editing
-```
-
-### 7. Save Report and Execute TodoWrite-Based Remediation
-
-**Step 7.1: Save Analysis Report**:
-```bash
-report_path = ".workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.process/ACTION_PLAN_VERIFICATION.md"
-Write(report_path, full_report_content)
-```
-
-**Step 7.2: Display Report Summary to User**:
-- Show executive summary with counts
-- Display recommendation (BLOCK/PROCEED_WITH_FIXES/PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION/PROCEED)
-- List critical and high issues if any
-
-**Step 7.3: After Report Generation**:
-
-1. **Extract Findings**: Parse all issues by severity
-2. **Create TodoWrite Task List**: Convert findings to actionable todos
-3. **Execute Fixes**: Process each todo systematically
-4. **Update Task Files**: Apply modifications directly to task JSON files
-5. **Update IMPL_PLAN**: Apply strategic changes if needed
-
-At end of report, provide remediation guidance:
-
-```markdown
-### 🔧 Remediation Workflow
-
-**Recommended Approach**:
-1. **Initialize TodoWrite**: Create comprehensive task list from all findings
-2. **Process by Severity**: Start with CRITICAL, then HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW
-3. **Apply Fixes Directly**: Modify task.json files and IMPL_PLAN.md as needed
-4. **Track Progress**: Mark todos as completed after each fix
-
-**TodoWrite Execution Pattern**:
-```bash
-# Step 1: Create task list from verification report
-TodoWrite([
-  { content: "Fix FR-03 coverage gap - add authentication task", status: "pending", activeForm: "Fixing FR-03 coverage gap" },
-  { content: "Fix IMPL-1.2 consistency - align with ADR-02", status: "pending", activeForm: "Fixing IMPL-1.2 consistency" },
-  { content: "Add context.artifacts to IMPL-1.2", status: "pending", activeForm: "Adding context.artifacts to IMPL-1.2" },
-  # ... additional todos for each finding
-])
-
-# Step 2: Process each todo systematically
-# Mark as in_progress when starting
-# Apply fix using Read/Edit tools
-# Mark as completed when done
-# Move to next priority item
-```
-
-**File Modification Workflow**:
-```bash
-# For task JSON modifications:
-1. Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.task/IMPL-X.Y.json)
-2. Edit() to apply fixes
-3. Mark todo as completed
-
-# For IMPL_PLAN modifications:
-1. Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/IMPL_PLAN.md)
-2. Edit() to apply strategic changes
-3. Mark todo as completed
-```
-
-**Note**: All fixes execute immediately after user confirmation without additional commands.

.claude/commands/workflow/analyze-with-file.md

@@ -0,0 +1,654 @@
+---
+name: analyze-with-file
+description: Interactive collaborative analysis with documented discussions, CLI-assisted exploration, and evolving understanding
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [-c|--continue] \"topic or question\""
+allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Grep(*), Glob(*), Bash(*), Edit(*), Write(*)
+---
+
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-confirm exploration decisions, use recommended analysis angles.
+
+# Workflow Analyze Command
+
+## Quick Start
+
+```bash
+# Basic usage
+/workflow:analyze-with-file "如何优化这个项目的认证架构"
+
+# With options
+/workflow:analyze-with-file --continue "认证架构"    # Continue existing session
+/workflow:analyze-with-file -y "性能瓶颈分析"        # Auto mode
+```
+
+**Context Source**: cli-explore-agent + Gemini/Codex analysis
+**Output Directory**: `.workflow/.analysis/{session-id}/`
+**Core Innovation**: Documented discussion timeline with evolving understanding
+
+## Output Artifacts
+
+### Phase 1: Topic Understanding
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `discussion.md` | Evolution of understanding & discussions (initialized) |
+| Session variables | Dimensions, focus areas, analysis depth |
+
+### Phase 2: CLI Exploration
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `exploration-codebase.json` | Single codebase context from cli-explore-agent |
+| `explorations/*.json` | Multi-perspective codebase explorations (parallel, up to 4) |
+| `explorations.json` | Single perspective aggregated findings |
+| `perspectives.json` | Multi-perspective findings (up to 4 perspectives) with synthesis |
+| Updated `discussion.md` | Round 1 with exploration results |
+
+### Phase 3: Interactive Discussion
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| Updated `discussion.md` | Round 2-N with user feedback and insights |
+| Corrected assumptions | Tracked in discussion timeline |
+
+### Phase 4: Synthesis & Conclusion
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `conclusions.json` | Final synthesis with recommendations |
+| Final `discussion.md` | ⭐ Complete analysis with conclusions |
+
+## Overview
+
+Interactive collaborative analysis workflow with **documented discussion process**. Records understanding evolution, facilitates multi-round Q&A, and uses CLI tools for deep exploration.
+
+**Core workflow**: Topic → Explore → Discuss → Document → Refine → Conclude
+
+```
+┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│                    INTERACTIVE ANALYSIS WORKFLOW                         │
+├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+│                                                                          │
+│  Phase 1: Topic Understanding                                            │
+│     ├─ Parse topic/question                                              │
+│     ├─ Identify analysis dimensions (architecture, performance, etc.)    │
+│     ├─ Initial scoping with user                                         │
+│     └─ Initialize discussion.md                                          │
+│                                                                          │
+│  Phase 2: CLI Exploration                                                │
+│     ├─ Codebase Exploration (cli-explore-agent, supports parallel ≤4)    │
+│     ├─ Multi-Perspective Analysis (AFTER exploration)                    │
+│     │   ├─ Single: Comprehensive analysis                                │
+│     │   └─ Multi (≤4): Parallel perspectives with synthesis              │
+│     ├─ Aggregate findings                                                │
+│     └─ Update discussion.md with Round 1                                 │
+│                                                                          │
+│  Phase 3: Interactive Discussion (Multi-Round)                           │
+│     ├─ Present exploration findings                                      │
+│     ├─ Facilitate Q&A with user                                          │
+│     ├─ Capture user insights and corrections                             │
+│     ├─ Actions: Deepen | Adjust direction | Answer questions             │
+│     ├─ Update discussion.md with each round                              │
+│     └─ Repeat until clarity achieved (max 5 rounds)                      │
+│                                                                          │
+│  Phase 4: Synthesis & Conclusion                                         │
+│     ├─ Consolidate all insights                                          │
+│     ├─ Generate conclusions with recommendations                         │
+│     ├─ Update discussion.md with final synthesis                         │
+│     └─ Offer follow-up options (issue/task/report)                       │
+│                                                                          │
+└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+## Output Structure
+
+```
+.workflow/.analysis/ANL-{slug}-{date}/
+├── discussion.md              # ⭐ Evolution of understanding & discussions
+├── exploration-codebase.json  # Phase 2: Single codebase context
+├── explorations/              # Phase 2: Multi-perspective codebase explorations (if selected)
+│   ├── technical.json
+│   └── architectural.json
+├── explorations.json          # Phase 2: Single perspective findings
+├── perspectives.json          # Phase 2: Multi-perspective findings (if selected)
+└── conclusions.json           # Phase 4: Final synthesis
+```
+
+## Implementation
+
+### Session Initialization
+
+**Objective**: Create session context and directory structure for analysis.
+
+**Required Actions**:
+1. Extract topic/question from `$ARGUMENTS`
+2. Generate session ID: `ANL-{slug}-{date}`
+   - slug: lowercase, alphanumeric + Chinese, max 40 chars
+   - date: YYYY-MM-DD (UTC+8)
+3. Define session folder: `.workflow/.analysis/{session-id}`
+4. Parse command options:
+   - `-c` or `--continue` for session continuation
+   - `-y` or `--yes` for auto-approval mode
+5. Auto-detect mode: If session folder + discussion.md exist → continue mode
+6. Create directory structure: `{session-folder}/`
+
+**Session Variables**:
+- `sessionId`: Unique session identifier
+- `sessionFolder`: Base directory for all artifacts
+- `autoMode`: Boolean for auto-confirmation
+- `mode`: new | continue
+
+### Phase 1: Topic Understanding
+
+**Objective**: Analyze topic, identify dimensions, gather user input, initialize discussion.md.
+
+**Prerequisites**:
+- Session initialized with valid sessionId and sessionFolder
+- Topic/question available from $ARGUMENTS
+
+**Workflow Steps**:
+
+1. **Parse Topic & Identify Dimensions**
+   - Match topic keywords against ANALYSIS_DIMENSIONS
+   - Identify relevant dimensions: architecture, implementation, performance, security, concept, comparison, decision
+   - Default to "general" if no match
+
+2. **Initial Scoping** (if new session + not auto mode)
+   - **Focus**: Multi-select from directions generated by detected dimensions (see Dimension-Direction Mapping)
+   - **Perspectives**: Multi-select up to 4 analysis perspectives (see Analysis Perspectives), default: single comprehensive view
+   - **Depth**: Single-select from Quick Overview (10-15min) / Standard Analysis (30-60min) / Deep Dive (1-2hr)
+
+3. **Initialize discussion.md**
+   - Create discussion.md with session metadata
+   - Add user context: focus areas, analysis depth
+   - Add initial understanding: dimensions, scope, key questions
+   - Create empty sections for discussion timeline
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- Session folder created with discussion.md initialized
+- Analysis dimensions identified
+- User preferences captured (focus, depth)
+
+### Phase 2: CLI Exploration
+
+**Objective**: Gather codebase context, then execute deep analysis via CLI tools.
+
+**Prerequisites**:
+- Phase 1 completed successfully
+- discussion.md initialized
+- Dimensions identified
+
+**Workflow Steps** (⚠️ Codebase exploration FIRST):
+
+1. **Codebase Exploration via cli-explore-agent** (supports parallel up to 4)
+   - Agent type: `cli-explore-agent`
+   - Execution mode: parallel if multi-perspective selected, otherwise single (run_in_background: false for sequential, true for parallel)
+   - **Single exploration**: General codebase analysis
+   - **Multi-perspective**: Parallel explorations per perspective focus (max 4, each with specific angle)
+   - **Common tasks**: Run `ccw tool exec get_modules_by_depth '{}'`, execute searches based on topic keywords, read `.workflow/project-tech.json`
+   - **Output**: `{sessionFolder}/exploration-codebase.json` (single) or `{sessionFolder}/explorations/{perspective}.json` (multi)
+   - **Purpose**: Enrich CLI prompts with codebase context for each perspective
+
+**Single Exploration Example**:
+```javascript
+Task({
+  subagent_type: "cli-explore-agent",
+  run_in_background: false,
+  description: `Explore codebase: ${topicSlug}`,
+  prompt: `
+## Analysis Context
+Topic: ${topic_or_question}
+Dimensions: ${dimensions.join(', ')}
+Session: ${sessionFolder}
+
+## MANDATORY FIRST STEPS
+1. Run: ccw tool exec get_modules_by_depth '{}'
+2. Execute relevant searches based on topic keywords
+3. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (if exists)
+
+## Exploration Focus
+${dimensions.map(d => `- ${d}: Identify relevant code patterns and structures`).join('\n')}
+
+## Output
+Write findings to: ${sessionFolder}/exploration-codebase.json
+
+Schema: {relevant_files, patterns, key_findings, questions_for_user, _metadata}
+`
+})
+```
+
+**Multi-Perspective Parallel Example** (up to 4 agents):
+```javascript
+// Launch parallel explorations for each selected perspective
+selectedPerspectives.forEach(perspective => {
+  Task({
+    subagent_type: "cli-explore-agent",
+    run_in_background: false,  // Sequential execution, wait for each
+    description: `Explore ${perspective.name}: ${topicSlug}`,
+    prompt: `
+## Analysis Context
+Topic: ${topic_or_question}
+Perspective: ${perspective.name} - ${perspective.focus}
+Session: ${sessionFolder}
+
+## MANDATORY FIRST STEPS
+1. Run: ccw tool exec get_modules_by_depth '{}'
+2. Execute searches focused on ${perspective.focus}
+3. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (if exists)
+
+## Exploration Focus (${perspective.name} angle)
+${perspective.exploration_tasks.map(t => `- ${t}`).join('\n')}
+
+## Output
+Write findings to: ${sessionFolder}/explorations/${perspective.name}.json
+
+Schema: {relevant_files, patterns, key_findings, perspective_insights, _metadata}
+`
+  })
+})
+```
+
+2. **Multi-Perspective CLI Analysis** (⚠️ AFTER exploration)
+   - If user selected multiple perspectives (≤4): Launch CLI calls in parallel
+   - If single/default perspective: Launch single comprehensive CLI analysis
+   - **Shared context**: Include exploration-codebase.json findings in all prompts
+   - **Execution**: Bash with run_in_background: true, wait for all results
+   - **Output**: perspectives.json with analysis from each perspective
+
+**Single Perspective Example**:
+```javascript
+Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Analyze topic '${topic_or_question}' from ${dimensions.join(', ')} perspectives
+Success: Actionable insights with clear reasoning
+
+PRIOR EXPLORATION CONTEXT:
+- Key files: ${explorationResults.relevant_files.slice(0,5).map(f => f.path).join(', ')}
+- Patterns found: ${explorationResults.patterns.slice(0,3).join(', ')}
+- Key findings: ${explorationResults.key_findings.slice(0,3).join(', ')}
+
+TASK:
+• Build on exploration findings above
+• Analyze common patterns and anti-patterns
+• Highlight potential issues or opportunities
+• Generate discussion points for user clarification
+
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @**/* | Topic: ${topic_or_question}
+EXPECTED: Structured analysis with clear sections, specific insights tied to evidence, questions to deepen understanding, recommendations with rationale
+CONSTRAINTS: Focus on ${dimensions.join(', ')}
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis`,
+  run_in_background: true
+})
+```
+
+**Multi-Perspective Example** (parallel, up to 4):
+```javascript
+// Build shared context once
+const explorationContext = `
+PRIOR EXPLORATION CONTEXT:
+- Key files: ${explorationResults.relevant_files.slice(0,5).map(f => f.path).join(', ')}
+- Patterns found: ${explorationResults.patterns.slice(0,3).join(', ')}
+- Key findings: ${explorationResults.key_findings.slice(0,3).join(', ')}`
+
+// Launch parallel CLI calls based on selected perspectives (max 4)
+selectedPerspectives.forEach(perspective => {
+  Bash({
+    command: `ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: ${perspective.purpose} for '${topic_or_question}'
+Success: ${perspective.success_criteria}
+
+${explorationContext}
+
+TASK:
+${perspective.tasks.map(t => `• ${t}`).join('\n')}
+
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @**/* | Topic: ${topic_or_question}
+EXPECTED: ${perspective.expected_output}
+CONSTRAINTS: ${perspective.constraints}
+" --tool ${perspective.tool} --mode analysis`,
+    run_in_background: true
+  })
+})
+
+// ⚠️ STOP POINT: Wait for hook callback to receive all results before continuing
+```
+
+3. **Aggregate Findings**
+   - Consolidate all codebase explorations (exploration-codebase.json or explorations/*.json) and CLI perspective findings
+   - If multi-perspective: Extract synthesis from both explorations and analyses (convergent themes, conflicting views, unique contributions)
+   - Extract aggregated findings, discussion points, open questions across all sources
+   - Write to explorations.json (single) or perspectives.json (multi)
+
+4. **Update discussion.md**
+   - Append Round 1 section with exploration results
+   - Single perspective: Include sources analyzed, key findings, discussion points, open questions
+   - Multi-perspective: Include per-perspective findings + synthesis section
+
+**explorations.json Schema** (single perspective):
+- `session_id`: Session identifier
+- `timestamp`: Exploration completion time
+- `topic`: Original topic/question
+- `dimensions[]`: Analysis dimensions
+- `sources[]`: {type, file/summary}
+- `key_findings[]`: Main insights
+- `discussion_points[]`: Questions for user
+- `open_questions[]`: Unresolved questions
+
+**perspectives.json Schema** (multi-perspective):
+- `session_id`: Session identifier
+- `timestamp`: Exploration completion time
+- `topic`: Original topic/question
+- `dimensions[]`: Analysis dimensions
+- `perspectives[]`: [{name, tool, findings, insights, questions}]
+- `synthesis`: {convergent_themes, conflicting_views, unique_contributions}
+- `aggregated_findings[]`: Main insights across perspectives
+- `discussion_points[]`: Questions for user
+- `open_questions[]`: Unresolved questions
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- exploration-codebase.json (single) or explorations/*.json (multi) created with codebase context
+- explorations.json (single) or perspectives.json (multi) created with findings
+- discussion.md updated with Round 1 results
+- All agents and CLI calls completed successfully
+
+### Phase 3: Interactive Discussion
+
+**Objective**: Iteratively refine understanding through user-guided discussion cycles.
+
+**Prerequisites**:
+- Phase 2 completed successfully
+- explorations.json contains initial findings
+- discussion.md has Round 1 results
+
+**Guideline**: For complex tasks (code analysis, implementation, refactoring), delegate to agents via Task tool (cli-explore-agent, code-developer, universal-executor) or CLI calls (ccw cli). Avoid direct analysis/execution in main process.
+
+**Workflow Steps**:
+
+1. **Present Findings**
+   - Display current findings from explorations.json
+   - Show key points for user input
+
+2. **Gather User Feedback** (AskUserQuestion)
+   - **Question**: Feedback on current analysis
+   - **Options** (single-select):
+     - **同意，继续深入**: Analysis direction correct, deepen exploration
+     - **需要调整方向**: Different understanding or focus
+     - **分析完成**: Sufficient information obtained
+     - **有具体问题**: Specific questions to ask
+
+3. **Process User Response**
+
+   **Agree, Deepen**:
+   - Continue analysis in current direction
+   - Use CLI for deeper exploration
+
+   **Adjust Direction**:
+   - AskUserQuestion for adjusted focus (code details / architecture / best practices)
+   - Launch new CLI exploration with adjusted scope
+
+   **Specific Questions**:
+   - Capture user questions
+   - Use CLI or direct analysis to answer
+   - Document Q&A in discussion.md
+
+   **Complete**:
+   - Exit discussion loop, proceed to Phase 4
+
+4. **Update discussion.md**
+   - Append Round N section with:
+     - User input summary
+     - Direction adjustment (if any)
+     - User questions & answers (if any)
+     - Updated understanding
+     - Corrected assumptions
+     - New insights
+
+5. **Repeat or Converge**
+   - Continue loop (max 5 rounds) or exit to Phase 4
+
+**Discussion Actions**:
+
+| User Choice | Action | Tool | Description |
+|-------------|--------|------|-------------|
+| Deepen | Continue current direction | Gemini CLI | Deeper analysis in same focus |
+| Adjust | Change analysis angle | Selected CLI | New exploration with adjusted scope |
+| Questions | Answer specific questions | CLI or analysis | Address user inquiries |
+| Complete | Exit discussion loop | - | Proceed to synthesis |
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- User feedback processed for each round
+- discussion.md updated with all discussion rounds
+- Assumptions corrected and documented
+- Exit condition reached (user selects "完成" or max rounds)
+
+### Phase 4: Synthesis & Conclusion
+
+**Objective**: Consolidate insights, generate conclusions, offer next steps.
+
+**Prerequisites**:
+- Phase 3 completed successfully
+- Multiple rounds of discussion documented
+- User ready to conclude
+
+**Workflow Steps**:
+
+1. **Consolidate Insights**
+   - Extract all findings from discussion timeline
+   - **Key conclusions**: Main points with evidence and confidence levels (high/medium/low)
+   - **Recommendations**: Action items with rationale and priority (high/medium/low)
+   - **Open questions**: Remaining unresolved questions
+   - **Follow-up suggestions**: Issue/task creation suggestions
+   - Write to conclusions.json
+
+2. **Final discussion.md Update**
+   - Append conclusions section:
+     - **Summary**: High-level overview
+     - **Key Conclusions**: Ranked with evidence and confidence
+     - **Recommendations**: Prioritized action items
+     - **Remaining Questions**: Unresolved items
+   - Update "Current Understanding (Final)":
+     - **What We Established**: Confirmed points
+     - **What Was Clarified/Corrected**: Important corrections
+     - **Key Insights**: Valuable learnings
+   - Add session statistics: rounds, duration, sources, artifacts
+
+3. **Post-Completion Options** (AskUserQuestion)
+   - **创建Issue**: Launch issue:new with conclusions
+   - **生成任务**: Launch workflow:lite-plan for implementation
+   - **导出报告**: Generate standalone analysis report
+   - **完成**: No further action
+
+**conclusions.json Schema**:
+- `session_id`: Session identifier
+- `topic`: Original topic/question
+- `completed`: Completion timestamp
+- `total_rounds`: Number of discussion rounds
+- `summary`: Executive summary
+- `key_conclusions[]`: {point, evidence, confidence}
+- `recommendations[]`: {action, rationale, priority}
+- `open_questions[]`: Unresolved questions
+- `follow_up_suggestions[]`: {type, summary}
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- conclusions.json created with final synthesis
+- discussion.md finalized with conclusions
+- User offered next step options
+- Session complete
+
+## Configuration
+
+### Analysis Perspectives
+
+Optional multi-perspective parallel exploration (single perspective is default, max 4):
+
+| Perspective | Tool | Focus | Best For |
+|------------|------|-------|----------|
+| **Technical** | Gemini | Implementation, code patterns, technical feasibility | Understanding how and technical details |
+| **Architectural** | Claude | System design, scalability, component interactions | Understanding structure and organization |
+| **Business** | Codex | Value, ROI, stakeholder impact, strategy | Understanding business implications |
+| **Domain Expert** | Gemini | Domain-specific patterns, best practices, standards | Industry-specific knowledge and practices |
+
+**Selection**: User can multi-select up to 4 perspectives in Phase 1, or default to single comprehensive view
+
+### Dimension-Direction Mapping
+
+When user selects focus areas, generate directions dynamically from detected dimensions (don't use static options):
+
+| Dimension | Possible Directions |
+|-----------|-------------------|
+| architecture | System Design, Component Interactions, Technology Choices, Integration Points, Design Patterns, Scalability Strategy |
+| implementation | Code Structure, Implementation Details, Code Patterns, Error Handling, Testing Approach, Algorithm Analysis |
+| performance | Performance Bottlenecks, Optimization Opportunities, Resource Utilization, Caching Strategy, Concurrency Issues |
+| security | Security Vulnerabilities, Authentication/Authorization, Access Control, Data Protection, Input Validation |
+| concept | Conceptual Foundation, Core Mechanisms, Fundamental Patterns, Theory & Principles, Trade-offs & Reasoning |
+| comparison | Solution Comparison, Pros & Cons Analysis, Technology Evaluation, Approach Differences |
+| decision | Decision Criteria, Trade-off Analysis, Risk Assessment, Impact Analysis, Implementation Implications |
+
+**Implementation**: Present 2-3 top dimension-related directions, allow user to multi-select and add custom directions.
+
+### Analysis Dimensions
+
+Dimensions matched against topic keywords to identify focus areas:
+
+| Dimension | Keywords |
+|-----------|----------|
+| architecture | 架构, architecture, design, structure, 设计 |
+| implementation | 实现, implement, code, coding, 代码 |
+| performance | 性能, performance, optimize, bottleneck, 优化 |
+| security | 安全, security, auth, permission, 权限 |
+| concept | 概念, concept, theory, principle, 原理 |
+| comparison | 比较, compare, vs, difference, 区别 |
+| decision | 决策, decision, choice, tradeoff, 选择 |
+
+### Consolidation Rules
+
+When updating "Current Understanding":
+
+| Rule | Description |
+|------|-------------|
+| Promote confirmed insights | Move validated findings to "What We Established" |
+| Track corrections | Keep important wrong→right transformations |
+| Focus on current state | What do we know NOW |
+| Avoid timeline repetition | Don't copy discussion details |
+| Preserve key learnings | Keep insights valuable for future reference |
+
+**Example**:
+
+❌ **Bad (cluttered)**:
+```markdown
+## Current Understanding
+In round 1 we discussed X, then in round 2 user said Y...
+```
+
+✅ **Good (consolidated)**:
+```markdown
+## Current Understanding
+
+### What We Established
+- The authentication flow uses JWT with refresh tokens
+- Rate limiting is implemented at API gateway level
+
+### What Was Clarified
+- ~~Assumed Redis for sessions~~ → Actually uses database-backed sessions
+
+### Key Insights
+- Current architecture supports horizontal scaling
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Resolution |
+|-------|------------|
+| cli-explore-agent fails | Continue with available context, note limitation |
+| CLI timeout | Retry with shorter prompt, or skip perspective |
+| User timeout in discussion | Save state, show resume command |
+| Max rounds reached | Force synthesis, offer continuation option |
+| No relevant findings | Broaden search, ask user for clarification |
+| Session folder conflict | Append timestamp suffix |
+| Gemini unavailable | Fallback to Codex or manual analysis |
+
+## Best Practices
+
+1. **Clear Topic Definition**: Detailed topics → better dimension identification
+2. **Agent-First for Complex Tasks**: For code analysis, implementation, or refactoring tasks during discussion, delegate to agents via Task tool (cli-explore-agent, code-developer, universal-executor) or CLI calls (ccw cli). Avoid direct analysis/execution in main process
+3. **Review discussion.md**: Check understanding evolution before conclusions
+4. **Embrace Corrections**: Track wrong→right transformations as learnings
+5. **Document Evolution**: discussion.md captures full thinking process
+6. **Use Continue Mode**: Resume sessions to build on previous analysis
+
+## Templates
+
+### Discussion Document Structure
+
+**discussion.md** contains:
+- **Header**: Session metadata (ID, topic, started, dimensions)
+- **User Context**: Focus areas, analysis depth
+- **Discussion Timeline**: Round-by-round findings
+  - Round 1: Initial Understanding + Exploration Results
+  - Round 2-N: User feedback, adjusted understanding, corrections, new insights
+- **Conclusions**: Summary, key conclusions, recommendations
+- **Current Understanding (Final)**: Consolidated insights
+- **Session Statistics**: Rounds, duration, sources, artifacts
+
+Example sections:
+
+```markdown
+### Round 2 - Discussion (timestamp)
+
+#### User Input
+User agrees with current direction, wants deeper code analysis
+
+#### Updated Understanding
+- Identified session management uses database-backed approach
+- Rate limiting applied at gateway, not application level
+
+#### Corrected Assumptions
+- ~~Assumed Redis for sessions~~ → Database-backed sessions
+  - Reason: User clarified architecture decision
+
+#### New Insights
+- Current design allows horizontal scaling without session affinity
+```
+
+## Usage Recommendations(Requires User Confirmation) 
+
+**When to Execute Directly :**
+- Short, focused analysis tasks (single module/component)
+- Clear, well-defined topics with limited scope
+- Quick information gathering without multi-round iteration
+- Follow-up analysis building on existing session
+
+**Use `Skill(skill="workflow:analyze-with-file", args="\"topic\"")` when:**
+- Exploring a complex topic collaboratively
+- Need documented discussion trail
+- Decision-making requires multiple perspectives
+- Want to iterate on understanding with user input
+- Building shared understanding before implementation
+
+**Use `Skill(skill="workflow:debug-with-file", args="\"bug description\"")` when:**
+- Diagnosing specific bugs
+- Need hypothesis-driven investigation
+- Focus on evidence and verification
+
+**Use `Skill(skill="workflow:brainstorm-with-file", args="\"topic or question\"")` when:**
+- Generating new ideas or solutions
+- Need creative exploration
+- Want divergent thinking before convergence
+
+**Use `Skill(skill="workflow:collaborative-plan-with-file", args="\"task description\"")` when:**
+- Complex planning requiring multiple perspectives
+- Large scope needing parallel sub-domain analysis
+- Want shared collaborative planning document
+- Need structured task breakdown with agent coordination
+
+**Use `Skill(skill="workflow:lite-plan", args="\"task description\"")` when:**
+- Ready to implement (past analysis phase)
+- Need simple task breakdown
+- Focus on quick execution planning
+
+---
+
+**Now execute analyze-with-file for**: $ARGUMENTS

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm-with-file.md

@@ -0,0 +1,779 @@
+---
+name: brainstorm-with-file
+description: Interactive brainstorming with multi-CLI collaboration, idea expansion, and documented thought evolution
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [-c|--continue] [-m|--mode creative|structured] \"idea or topic\""
+allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Grep(*), Glob(*), Bash(*), Edit(*), Write(*)
+---
+
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-confirm decisions, use recommended roles, balanced exploration mode.
+
+# Workflow Brainstorm Command
+
+## Quick Start
+
+```bash
+# Basic usage
+/workflow:brainstorm-with-file "如何重新设计用户通知系统"
+
+# With options
+/workflow:brainstorm-with-file --continue "通知系统"              # Continue existing
+/workflow:brainstorm-with-file -y -m creative "创新的AI辅助功能"   # Creative auto mode
+/workflow:brainstorm-with-file -m structured "优化缓存策略"       # Goal-oriented mode
+```
+
+**Context Source**: cli-explore-agent + Multi-CLI perspectives (Gemini/Codex/Claude or Professional Roles)
+**Output Directory**: `.workflow/.brainstorm/{session-id}/`
+**Core Innovation**: Diverge-Converge cycles with documented thought evolution
+
+## Output Artifacts
+
+### Phase 1: Seed Understanding
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `brainstorm.md` | Complete thought evolution timeline (initialized) |
+| Session variables | Dimensions, roles, exploration vectors |
+
+### Phase 2: Divergent Exploration
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `exploration-codebase.json` | Codebase context from cli-explore-agent |
+| `perspectives.json` | Multi-CLI perspective findings (creative/pragmatic/systematic) |
+| Updated `brainstorm.md` | Round 2 multi-perspective exploration |
+
+### Phase 3: Interactive Refinement
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `ideas/{idea-slug}.md` | Deep-dive analysis for selected ideas |
+| Updated `brainstorm.md` | Round 3-6 refinement cycles |
+
+### Phase 4: Convergence & Crystallization
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `synthesis.json` | Final synthesis with top ideas, recommendations |
+| Final `brainstorm.md` | ⭐ Complete thought evolution with conclusions |
+
+## Overview
+
+Interactive brainstorming workflow with **multi-CLI collaboration** and **documented thought evolution**. Expands initial ideas through questioning, multi-perspective analysis, and iterative refinement.
+
+**Core workflow**: Seed Idea → Expand → Multi-CLI Discuss → Synthesize → Refine → Crystallize
+
+```
+┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│                    INTERACTIVE BRAINSTORMING WORKFLOW                    │
+├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+│                                                                          │
+│  Phase 1: Seed Understanding                                             │
+│     ├─ Parse initial idea/topic                                          │
+│     ├─ Identify dimensions (technical, UX, business, etc.)               │
+│     ├─ Select roles (professional or simple perspectives)                │
+│     ├─ Initial scoping questions                                         │
+│     ├─ Expand into exploration vectors                                   │
+│     └─ Initialize brainstorm.md                                          │
+│                                                                          │
+│  Phase 2: Divergent Exploration                                          │
+│     ├─ cli-explore-agent: Codebase context (FIRST)                       │
+│     ├─ Multi-CLI Perspectives (AFTER exploration)                        │
+│     │   ├─ Creative (Gemini): Innovation, cross-domain                   │
+│     │   ├─ Pragmatic (Codex): Implementation, feasibility                │
+│     │   └─ Systematic (Claude): Architecture, structure                  │
+│     └─ Aggregate diverse viewpoints                                      │
+│                                                                          │
+│  Phase 3: Interactive Refinement (Multi-Round)                           │
+│     ├─ Present multi-perspective findings                                │
+│     ├─ User selects promising directions                                 │
+│     ├─ Actions: Deep dive | Generate more | Challenge | Merge            │
+│     ├─ Update brainstorm.md with evolution                               │
+│     └─ Repeat diverge-converge cycles (max 6 rounds)                     │
+│                                                                          │
+│  Phase 4: Convergence & Crystallization                                  │
+│     ├─ Synthesize best ideas                                             │
+│     ├─ Resolve conflicts between perspectives                            │
+│     ├─ Generate actionable conclusions                                   │
+│     ├─ Offer next steps (plan/issue/analyze/export)                      │
+│     └─ Final brainstorm.md update                                        │
+│                                                                          │
+└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+## Output Structure
+
+```
+.workflow/.brainstorm/BS-{slug}-{date}/
+├── brainstorm.md                  # ⭐ Complete thought evolution timeline
+├── exploration-codebase.json      # Phase 2: Codebase context
+├── perspectives.json              # Phase 2: Multi-CLI findings
+├── synthesis.json                 # Phase 4: Final synthesis
+└── ideas/                         # Phase 3: Individual idea deep-dives
+    ├── idea-1.md
+    ├── idea-2.md
+    └── merged-idea-1.md
+```
+
+## Implementation
+
+### Session Initialization
+
+**Objective**: Create session context and directory structure for brainstorming.
+
+**Required Actions**:
+1. Extract idea/topic from `$ARGUMENTS`
+2. Generate session ID: `BS-{slug}-{date}`
+   - slug: lowercase, alphanumeric + Chinese, max 40 chars
+   - date: YYYY-MM-DD (UTC+8)
+3. Define session folder: `.workflow/.brainstorm/{session-id}`
+4. Parse command options:
+   - `-c` or `--continue` for session continuation
+   - `-m` or `--mode` for brainstorm mode (creative/structured/balanced)
+   - `-y` or `--yes` for auto-approval mode
+5. Auto-detect mode: If session folder + brainstorm.md exist → continue mode
+6. Create directory structure: `{session-folder}/ideas/`
+
+**Session Variables**:
+- `sessionId`: Unique session identifier
+- `sessionFolder`: Base directory for all artifacts
+- `brainstormMode`: creative | structured | balanced
+- `autoMode`: Boolean for auto-confirmation
+- `mode`: new | continue
+
+### Phase 1: Seed Understanding
+
+**Objective**: Analyze topic, select roles, gather user input, expand into exploration vectors.
+
+**Prerequisites**:
+- Session initialized with valid sessionId and sessionFolder
+- Topic/idea available from $ARGUMENTS
+
+**Workflow Steps**:
+
+1. **Parse Seed & Identify Dimensions**
+   - Match topic keywords against BRAINSTORM_DIMENSIONS
+   - Identify relevant dimensions: technical, ux, business, innovation, feasibility, scalability, security
+   - Default dimensions based on brainstormMode if no match
+
+2. **Role Selection**
+   - **Recommend roles** based on topic keywords (see Role Keywords mapping)
+   - **Options**:
+     - **Professional roles**: system-architect, product-manager, ui-designer, ux-expert, data-architect, test-strategist, subject-matter-expert, product-owner, scrum-master
+     - **Simple perspectives**: creative/pragmatic/systematic (fallback)
+   - **Auto mode**: Select top 3 recommended professional roles
+   - **Manual mode**: AskUserQuestion with recommended roles + "Use simple perspectives" option
+
+3. **Initial Scoping Questions** (if new session + not auto mode)
+   - **Direction**: Multi-select from directions generated by detected dimensions (see Brainstorm Dimensions)
+   - **Depth**: Single-select from quick/balanced/deep (15-20min / 30-60min / 1-2hr)
+   - **Constraints**: Multi-select from existing architecture, time, resources, or no constraints
+
+4. **Expand Seed into Exploration Vectors**
+   - Launch Gemini CLI with analysis mode
+   - Generate 5-7 exploration vectors:
+     - Core question: Fundamental problem/opportunity
+     - User perspective: Who benefits and how
+     - Technical angle: What enables this
+     - Alternative approaches: Other solutions
+     - Challenges: Potential blockers
+     - Innovation angle: 10x better approach
+     - Integration: Fit with existing systems
+   - Parse result into structured vectors
+
+**CLI Call Example**:
+```javascript
+Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "
+Given the initial idea: '${idea_or_topic}'
+User focus areas: ${userFocusAreas.join(', ')}
+Constraints: ${constraints.join(', ')}
+
+Generate 5-7 exploration vectors (questions/directions) to expand this idea:
+1. Core question: What is the fundamental problem/opportunity?
+2. User perspective: Who benefits and how?
+3. Technical angle: What enables this technically?
+4. Alternative approaches: What other ways could this be solved?
+5. Challenges: What could go wrong or block success?
+6. Innovation angle: What would make this 10x better?
+7. Integration: How does this fit with existing systems/processes?
+
+Output as structured exploration vectors for multi-perspective analysis.
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis --model gemini-2.5-flash`,
+  run_in_background: false
+})
+```
+
+5. **Initialize brainstorm.md**
+   - Create brainstorm.md with session metadata
+   - Add initial context: user focus, depth, constraints
+   - Add seed expansion: original idea + exploration vectors
+   - Create empty sections for thought evolution timeline
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- Session folder created with brainstorm.md initialized
+- 1-3 roles selected (professional or simple perspectives)
+- 5-7 exploration vectors generated
+- User preferences captured (direction, depth, constraints)
+
+### Phase 2: Divergent Exploration
+
+**Objective**: Gather codebase context, then execute multi-perspective analysis in parallel.
+
+**Prerequisites**:
+- Phase 1 completed successfully
+- Roles selected and stored
+- brainstorm.md initialized
+
+**Workflow Steps**:
+
+1. **Primary Codebase Exploration via cli-explore-agent** (⚠️ FIRST)
+   - Agent type: `cli-explore-agent`
+   - Execution mode: synchronous (run_in_background: false)
+   - **Tasks**:
+     - Run: `ccw tool exec get_modules_by_depth '{}'`
+     - Search code related to topic keywords
+     - Read: `.workflow/project-tech.json` if exists
+   - **Output**: `{sessionFolder}/exploration-codebase.json`
+     - relevant_files: [{path, relevance, rationale}]
+     - existing_patterns: []
+     - architecture_constraints: []
+     - integration_points: []
+     - inspiration_sources: []
+   - **Purpose**: Enrich CLI prompts with codebase context
+
+**Agent Call Example**:
+```javascript
+Task({
+  subagent_type: "cli-explore-agent",
+  run_in_background: false,
+  description: `Explore codebase for brainstorm: ${topicSlug}`,
+  prompt: `
+## Brainstorm Context
+Topic: ${idea_or_topic}
+Dimensions: ${dimensions.join(', ')}
+Mode: ${brainstormMode}
+Session: ${sessionFolder}
+
+## MANDATORY FIRST STEPS
+1. Run: ccw tool exec get_modules_by_depth '{}'
+2. Search for code related to topic keywords
+3. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (if exists)
+
+## Exploration Focus
+- Identify existing implementations related to the topic
+- Find patterns that could inspire solutions
+- Map current architecture constraints
+- Locate integration points
+
+## Output
+Write findings to: ${sessionFolder}/exploration-codebase.json
+
+Schema:
+{
+  "relevant_files": [{"path": "...", "relevance": "high|medium|low", "rationale": "..."}],
+  "existing_patterns": [],
+  "architecture_constraints": [],
+  "integration_points": [],
+  "inspiration_sources": [],
+  "_metadata": { "exploration_type": "brainstorm-codebase", "timestamp": "..." }
+}
+`
+})
+
+2. **Multi-CLI Perspective Analysis** (⚠️ AFTER exploration)
+   - Launch 3 CLI calls in parallel (Gemini/Codex/Claude)
+   - **Perspectives**:
+     - **Creative (Gemini)**: Innovation, cross-domain inspiration, challenge assumptions
+     - **Pragmatic (Codex)**: Implementation reality, feasibility, technical blockers
+     - **Systematic (Claude)**: Architecture, decomposition, scalability
+   - **Shared context**: Include exploration-codebase.json findings in prompts
+   - **Execution**: Bash with run_in_background: true, wait for all results
+   - **Output**: perspectives.json with creative/pragmatic/systematic sections
+
+**Multi-CLI Call Example** (parallel execution):
+```javascript
+// Build shared context from exploration results
+const explorationContext = `
+PRIOR EXPLORATION CONTEXT (from cli-explore-agent):
+- Key files: ${explorationResults.relevant_files.slice(0,5).map(f => f.path).join(', ')}
+- Existing patterns: ${explorationResults.existing_patterns.slice(0,3).join(', ')}
+- Architecture constraints: ${explorationResults.architecture_constraints.slice(0,3).join(', ')}
+- Integration points: ${explorationResults.integration_points.slice(0,3).join(', ')}`
+
+// Launch 3 CLI calls in parallel (single message, multiple Bash calls)
+Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Creative brainstorming for '${idea_or_topic}' - generate innovative ideas
+Success: 5+ unique creative solutions that push boundaries
+
+${explorationContext}
+
+TASK:
+• Build on existing patterns - how can they be extended creatively?
+• Think beyond obvious solutions - what would be surprising/delightful?
+• Explore cross-domain inspiration
+• Challenge assumptions - what if the opposite were true?
+• Generate 'moonshot' ideas alongside practical ones
+
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @**/* | Topic: ${idea_or_topic}
+EXPECTED: 5+ creative ideas with novelty/impact ratings, challenged assumptions, cross-domain inspirations
+CONSTRAINTS: ${brainstormMode === 'structured' ? 'Keep ideas technically feasible' : 'No constraints - think freely'}
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis`,
+  run_in_background: true
+})
+
+Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Pragmatic brainstorming for '${idea_or_topic}' - focus on implementation reality
+Success: Actionable approaches with clear implementation paths
+
+${explorationContext}
+
+TASK:
+• Build on explored codebase - how to integrate with existing patterns?
+• Evaluate technical feasibility of core concept
+• Identify existing patterns/libraries that could help
+• Estimate implementation complexity
+• Highlight potential technical blockers
+• Suggest incremental implementation approach
+
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @**/* | Topic: ${idea_or_topic}
+EXPECTED: 3-5 practical approaches with effort/risk ratings, dependencies, quick wins vs long-term
+CONSTRAINTS: Focus on what can actually be built with current tech stack
+" --tool codex --mode analysis`,
+  run_in_background: true
+})
+
+Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Systematic brainstorming for '${idea_or_topic}' - architectural thinking
+Success: Well-structured solution framework with clear tradeoffs
+
+${explorationContext}
+
+TASK:
+• Build on explored architecture - how to extend systematically?
+• Decompose the problem into sub-problems
+• Identify architectural patterns that apply
+• Map dependencies and interactions
+• Consider scalability implications
+• Propose systematic solution structure
+
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @**/* | Topic: ${idea_or_topic}
+EXPECTED: Problem decomposition, 2-3 architectural approaches with tradeoffs, scalability assessment
+CONSTRAINTS: Consider existing system architecture
+" --tool claude --mode analysis`,
+  run_in_background: true
+})
+
+// ⚠️ STOP POINT: Wait for hook callback to receive all results before continuing
+```
+
+3. **Aggregate Multi-Perspective Findings**
+   - Consolidate creative/pragmatic/systematic results
+   - Extract synthesis:
+     - Convergent themes (all agree)
+     - Conflicting views (need resolution)
+     - Unique contributions (perspective-specific insights)
+   - Write to perspectives.json
+
+4. **Update brainstorm.md**
+   - Append Round 2 section with multi-perspective exploration
+   - Include creative/pragmatic/systematic findings
+   - Add perspective synthesis
+
+**CLI Prompt Template**:
+- **PURPOSE**: Role brainstorming for topic - focus description
+- **TASK**: Bullet list of specific actions
+- **MODE**: analysis
+- **CONTEXT**: @**/* | Topic + Exploration vectors + Codebase findings
+- **EXPECTED**: Output format requirements
+- **CONSTRAINTS**: Role-specific constraints
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- exploration-codebase.json created with codebase context
+- perspectives.json created with 3 perspective analyses
+- brainstorm.md updated with Round 2 findings
+- All CLI calls completed successfully
+
+### Phase 3: Interactive Refinement
+
+**Objective**: Iteratively refine ideas through user-guided exploration cycles.
+
+**Prerequisites**:
+- Phase 2 completed successfully
+- perspectives.json contains initial ideas
+- brainstorm.md has Round 2 findings
+
+**Guideline**: For complex tasks (code analysis, implementation, POC creation), delegate to agents via Task tool (cli-explore-agent, code-developer, universal-executor) or CLI calls (ccw cli). Avoid direct analysis/execution in main process.
+
+**Workflow Steps**:
+
+1. **Present Current State**
+   - Extract top ideas from perspectives.json
+   - Display with: title, source, brief description, novelty/feasibility ratings
+   - List open questions
+
+2. **Gather User Direction** (AskUserQuestion)
+   - **Question 1**: Which ideas to explore (multi-select from top ideas)
+   - **Question 2**: Next step (single-select):
+     - **深入探索**: Deep dive on selected ideas
+     - **继续发散**: Generate more ideas
+     - **挑战验证**: Devil's advocate challenge
+     - **合并综合**: Merge multiple ideas
+     - **准备收敛**: Begin convergence (exit loop)
+
+3. **Execute User-Selected Action**
+
+   **Deep Dive** (per selected idea):
+   - Launch Gemini CLI with analysis mode
+   - Tasks: Elaborate concept, implementation requirements, challenges, POC approach, metrics, dependencies
+   - Output: `{sessionFolder}/ideas/{idea-slug}.md`
+
+   **Generate More Ideas**:
+   - Launch CLI with new angles from unexplored vectors
+   - Add results to perspectives.json
+
+   **Devil's Advocate Challenge**:
+   - Launch Codex CLI with analysis mode
+   - Tasks: Identify objections, challenge assumptions, failure scenarios, alternatives, survivability rating
+   - Return challenge results for idea strengthening
+
+   **Merge Ideas**:
+   - Launch Gemini CLI with analysis mode
+   - Tasks: Identify complementary elements, resolve contradictions, create unified concept
+   - Add merged idea to perspectives.json
+
+4. **Update brainstorm.md**
+   - Append Round N section with findings
+   - Document user direction and action results
+
+5. **Repeat or Converge**
+   - Continue loop (max 6 rounds) or exit to Phase 4
+
+**Refinement Actions**:
+
+| Action | Tool | Output | Description |
+|--------|------|--------|-------------|
+| Deep Dive | Gemini CLI | ideas/{slug}.md | Comprehensive idea analysis |
+| Generate More | Selected CLI | Updated perspectives.json | Additional idea generation |
+| Challenge | Codex CLI | Challenge results | Critical weaknesses exposed |
+| Merge | Gemini CLI | Merged idea | Synthesized concept |
+
+**CLI Call Examples for Refinement Actions**:
+
+**1. Deep Dive on Selected Idea**:
+```javascript
+Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Deep dive analysis on idea '${idea.title}'
+Success: Comprehensive understanding with actionable next steps
+
+TASK:
+• Elaborate the core concept in detail
+• Identify implementation requirements
+• List potential challenges and mitigations
+• Suggest proof-of-concept approach
+• Define success metrics
+• Map related/dependent features
+
+MODE: analysis
+
+CONTEXT: @**/*
+Original idea: ${idea.description}
+Source perspective: ${idea.source}
+User interest reason: ${idea.userReason || 'Selected for exploration'}
+
+EXPECTED:
+- Detailed concept description
+- Technical requirements list
+- Risk/challenge matrix
+- MVP definition
+- Success criteria
+- Recommendation: pursue/pivot/park
+
+CONSTRAINTS: Focus on actionability
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis`,
+  run_in_background: false
+})
+```
+
+**2. Devil's Advocate Challenge**:
+```javascript
+Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Devil's advocate - rigorously challenge these brainstorm ideas
+Success: Uncover hidden weaknesses and strengthen viable ideas
+
+IDEAS TO CHALLENGE:
+${ideas.map((idea, i) => `${i+1}. ${idea.title}: ${idea.brief}`).join('\n')}
+
+TASK:
+• For each idea, identify 3 strongest objections
+• Challenge core assumptions
+• Identify scenarios where this fails
+• Consider competitive/alternative solutions
+• Assess whether this solves the right problem
+• Rate survivability after challenge (1-5)
+
+MODE: analysis
+
+EXPECTED:
+- Per-idea challenge report
+- Critical weaknesses exposed
+- Counter-arguments to objections (if any)
+- Ideas that survive the challenge
+- Modified/strengthened versions
+
+CONSTRAINTS: Be genuinely critical, not just contrarian
+" --tool codex --mode analysis`,
+  run_in_background: false
+})
+```
+
+**3. Merge Multiple Ideas**:
+```javascript
+Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Synthesize multiple ideas into unified concept
+Success: Coherent merged idea that captures best elements
+
+IDEAS TO MERGE:
+${selectedIdeas.map((idea, i) => `
+${i+1}. ${idea.title} (${idea.source})
+   ${idea.description}
+   Strengths: ${idea.strengths.join(', ')}
+`).join('\n')}
+
+TASK:
+• Identify complementary elements
+• Resolve contradictions
+• Create unified concept
+• Preserve key strengths from each
+• Describe the merged solution
+• Assess viability of merged idea
+
+MODE: analysis
+
+EXPECTED:
+- Merged concept description
+- Elements taken from each source idea
+- Contradictions resolved (or noted as tradeoffs)
+- New combined strengths
+- Implementation considerations
+
+CONSTRAINTS: Don't force incompatible ideas together
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis`,
+  run_in_background: false
+})
+```
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- User-selected ideas processed
+- brainstorm.md updated with all refinement rounds
+- ideas/ folder contains deep-dive documents for selected ideas
+- Exit condition reached (user selects "准备收敛" or max rounds)
+
+### Phase 4: Convergence & Crystallization
+
+**Objective**: Synthesize final ideas, generate conclusions, offer next steps.
+
+**Prerequisites**:
+- Phase 3 completed successfully
+- Multiple rounds of refinement documented
+- User ready to converge
+
+**Workflow Steps**:
+
+1. **Generate Final Synthesis**
+   - Consolidate all ideas from perspectives.json and refinement rounds
+   - **Top ideas**: Filter active ideas, sort by score, take top 5
+     - Include: title, description, source_perspective, score, novelty, feasibility, strengths, challenges, next_steps
+   - **Parked ideas**: Ideas marked as parked with reason and future trigger
+   - **Key insights**: Process discoveries, challenged assumptions, unexpected connections
+   - **Recommendations**: Primary recommendation, alternatives, not recommended
+   - **Follow-up**: Implementation/research/validation summaries
+   - Write to synthesis.json
+
+2. **Final brainstorm.md Update**
+   - Append synthesis & conclusions section
+   - **Executive summary**: High-level overview
+   - **Top ideas**: Ranked with descriptions, strengths, challenges, next steps
+   - **Primary recommendation**: Best path forward with rationale
+   - **Alternative approaches**: Other viable options with tradeoffs
+   - **Parked ideas**: Future considerations
+   - **Key insights**: Learnings from the process
+   - **Session statistics**: Rounds, ideas generated/survived, duration
+
+3. **Post-Completion Options** (AskUserQuestion)
+   - **创建实施计划**: Launch workflow:plan with top idea
+   - **创建Issue**: Launch issue:new for top 3 ideas
+   - **深入分析**: Launch workflow:analyze-with-file for top idea
+   - **导出分享**: Generate shareable report
+   - **完成**: No further action
+
+**synthesis.json Schema**:
+- `session_id`: Session identifier
+- `topic`: Original idea/topic
+- `completed`: Completion timestamp
+- `total_rounds`: Number of refinement rounds
+- `top_ideas[]`: Top 5 ranked ideas
+- `parked_ideas[]`: Ideas parked for future
+- `key_insights[]`: Process learnings
+- `recommendations`: Primary/alternatives/not_recommended
+- `follow_up[]`: Next step summaries
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- synthesis.json created with final synthesis
+- brainstorm.md finalized with conclusions
+- User offered next step options
+- Session complete
+
+## Configuration
+
+### Brainstorm Dimensions
+
+Dimensions matched against topic keywords to identify focus areas:
+
+| Dimension | Keywords |
+|-----------|----------|
+| technical | 技术, technical, implementation, code, 实现, architecture |
+| ux | 用户, user, experience, UX, UI, 体验, interaction |
+| business | 业务, business, value, ROI, 价值, market |
+| innovation | 创新, innovation, novel, creative, 新颖 |
+| feasibility | 可行, feasible, practical, realistic, 实际 |
+| scalability | 扩展, scale, growth, performance, 性能 |
+| security | 安全, security, risk, protection, 风险 |
+
+### Role Selection
+
+**Professional Roles** (recommended based on topic keywords):
+
+| Role | CLI Tool | Focus Area | Keywords |
+|------|----------|------------|----------|
+| system-architect | Claude | Architecture, patterns | 架构, architecture, system, 系统, design pattern |
+| product-manager | Gemini | Business value, roadmap | 产品, product, feature, 功能, roadmap |
+| ui-designer | Gemini | Visual design, interaction | UI, 界面, interface, visual, 视觉 |
+| ux-expert | Codex | User research, usability | UX, 体验, experience, user, 用户 |
+| data-architect | Claude | Data modeling, storage | 数据, data, database, 存储, storage |
+| test-strategist | Codex | Quality, testing | 测试, test, quality, 质量, QA |
+| subject-matter-expert | Gemini | Domain knowledge | 领域, domain, industry, 行业, expert |
+| product-owner | Codex | Priority, scope | 优先, priority, scope, 范围, backlog |
+| scrum-master | Gemini | Process, collaboration | 敏捷, agile, scrum, sprint, 迭代 |
+
+**Simple Perspectives** (fallback):
+
+| Perspective | CLI Tool | Focus | Best For |
+|-------------|----------|-------|----------|
+| creative | Gemini | Innovation, cross-domain | Generating novel ideas |
+| pragmatic | Codex | Implementation, feasibility | Reality-checking ideas |
+| systematic | Claude | Architecture, structure | Organizing solutions |
+
+**Selection Strategy**:
+1. **Auto mode** (`-y`): Choose top 3 recommended professional roles
+2. **Manual mode**: Present recommended roles + "Use simple perspectives" option
+3. **Continue mode**: Use roles from previous session
+
+### Collaboration Patterns
+
+| Pattern | Usage | Description |
+|---------|-------|-------------|
+| Parallel Divergence | New topic | All roles explore simultaneously from different angles |
+| Sequential Deep-Dive | Promising idea | One role expands, others critique/refine |
+| Debate Mode | Controversial approach | Roles argue for/against approaches |
+| Synthesis Mode | Ready to decide | Combine insights into actionable conclusion |
+
+### Context Overflow Protection
+
+**Per-Role Limits**:
+- Main analysis output: < 3000 words
+- Sub-document (if any): < 2000 words each
+- Maximum sub-documents: 5 per role
+
+**Synthesis Protection**:
+- If total analysis > 100KB, synthesis reads only main analysis files (not sub-documents)
+- Large ideas automatically split into separate idea documents in ideas/ folder
+
+**Recovery Steps**:
+1. Check CLI logs for context overflow errors
+2. Reduce scope: fewer roles or simpler topic
+3. Use `--mode structured` for more focused output
+4. Split complex topics into multiple sessions
+
+**Prevention**:
+- Start with 3 roles (default), increase if needed
+- Use structured topic format: "GOAL: ... SCOPE: ... CONTEXT: ..."
+- Review output sizes before final synthesis
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Resolution |
+|-------|------------|
+| cli-explore-agent fails | Continue with empty exploration context |
+| CLI timeout | Retry with shorter prompt, or skip perspective |
+| No good ideas | Reframe problem, adjust constraints, try new angles |
+| User disengaged | Summarize progress, offer break point with resume |
+| Perspectives conflict | Present as tradeoff, let user decide |
+| Max rounds reached | Force synthesis, highlight unresolved questions |
+| All ideas fail challenge | Return to divergent phase with new constraints |
+
+## Best Practices
+
+1. **Clear Topic Definition**: Detailed topics → better role selection and exploration
+2. **Agent-First for Complex Tasks**: For code analysis, POC implementation, or technical validation during refinement, delegate to agents via Task tool (cli-explore-agent, code-developer, universal-executor) or CLI calls (ccw cli). Avoid direct analysis/execution in main process
+3. **Review brainstorm.md**: Check thought evolution before final decisions
+4. **Embrace Conflicts**: Perspective conflicts often reveal important tradeoffs
+5. **Document Evolution**: brainstorm.md captures full thinking process for team review
+6. **Use Continue Mode**: Resume sessions to build on previous exploration
+
+## Templates
+
+### Brainstorm Document Structure
+
+**brainstorm.md** contains:
+- **Header**: Session metadata (ID, topic, started, mode, dimensions)
+- **Initial Context**: User focus, depth, constraints
+- **Seed Expansion**: Original idea + exploration vectors
+- **Thought Evolution Timeline**: Round-by-round findings
+  - Round 1: Seed Understanding
+  - Round 2: Multi-Perspective Exploration (creative/pragmatic/systematic)
+  - Round 3-N: Interactive Refinement (deep-dive/challenge/merge)
+- **Synthesis & Conclusions**: Executive summary, top ideas, recommendations
+- **Session Statistics**: Rounds, ideas, duration, artifacts
+
+See full markdown template in original file (lines 955-1161).
+
+## Usage Recommendations (Requires User Confirmation)
+
+**Use `Skill(skill="workflow:brainstorm-with-file", args="\"topic or question\"")` when:**
+- Starting a new feature/product without clear direction
+- Facing a complex problem with multiple possible solutions
+- Need to explore alternatives before committing
+- Want documented thinking process for team review
+- Combining multiple stakeholder perspectives
+
+**Use `Skill(skill="workflow:analyze-with-file", args="\"topic\"")` when:**
+- Investigating existing code/system
+- Need factual analysis over ideation
+- Debugging or troubleshooting
+- Understanding current state
+
+**Use `Skill(skill="workflow:collaborative-plan-with-file", args="\"task description\"")` when:**
+- Complex planning requiring multiple perspectives
+- Large scope needing parallel sub-domain analysis
+- Want shared collaborative planning document
+- Need structured task breakdown with agent coordination
+
+**Use `Skill(skill="workflow:lite-plan", args="\"task description\"")` when:**
+- Direction is already clear
+- Ready to move from ideas to execution
+- Need simple implementation breakdown
+
+---
+
+**Now execute brainstorm-with-file for**: $ARGUMENTS

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/api-designer.md

@@ -1,587 +0,0 @@
----
-name: api-designer
-description: Generate or update api-designer/analysis.md addressing guidance-specification discussion points for API design perspective
-argument-hint: "optional topic - uses existing framework if available"
-allowed-tools: Task(conceptual-planning-agent), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*)
----
-
-## 🔌 **API Designer Analysis Generator**
-
-### Purpose
-**Specialized command for generating api-designer/analysis.md** that addresses guidance-specification.md discussion points from backend API design perspective. Creates or updates role-specific analysis with framework references.
-
-### Core Function
-- **Framework-based Analysis**: Address each discussion point in guidance-specification.md
-- **API Design Focus**: RESTful/GraphQL API design, endpoint structure, and contract definition
-- **Update Mechanism**: Create new or update existing analysis.md
-- **Agent Delegation**: Use conceptual-planning-agent for analysis generation
-
-### Analysis Scope
-- **API Architecture**: RESTful/GraphQL design patterns and best practices
-- **Endpoint Design**: Resource modeling, URL structure, and HTTP method selection
-- **Data Contracts**: Request/response schemas, validation rules, and data transformation
-- **API Documentation**: OpenAPI/Swagger specifications and developer experience
-
-### Role Boundaries & Responsibilities
-
-#### **What This Role OWNS (API Contract Within Architectural Framework)**
-- **API Contract Definition**: Specific endpoint paths, HTTP methods, and status codes
-- **Resource Modeling**: Mapping domain entities to RESTful resources or GraphQL types
-- **Request/Response Schemas**: Detailed data contracts, validation rules, and error formats
-- **API Versioning Strategy**: Version management, deprecation policies, and migration paths
-- **Developer Experience**: API documentation (OpenAPI/Swagger), code examples, and SDKs
-
-#### **What This Role DOES NOT Own (Defers to Other Roles)**
-- **System Architecture Decisions**: Microservices vs monolithic, overall communication patterns → Defers to **System Architect**
-- **Canonical Data Model**: Underlying data schemas and entity relationships → Defers to **Data Architect**
-- **UI/Frontend Integration**: How clients consume the API → Defers to **UI Designer**
-
-#### **Handoff Points**
-- **FROM System Architect**: Receives architectural constraints (REST vs GraphQL, sync vs async) that define the design space
-- **FROM Data Architect**: Receives canonical data model and translates it into public API data contracts (as projection/view)
-- **TO Frontend Teams**: Provides complete API specifications, documentation, and integration guides
-
-## ⚙️ **Execution Protocol**
-
-### Phase 1: Session & Framework Detection
-```bash
-# Check active session and framework
-CHECK: find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d
-IF active_session EXISTS:
-    session_id = get_active_session()
-    brainstorm_dir = .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/
-
-    CHECK: brainstorm_dir/guidance-specification.md
-    IF EXISTS:
-        framework_mode = true
-        load_framework = true
-    ELSE:
-        IF topic_provided:
-            framework_mode = false  # Create analysis without framework
-        ELSE:
-            ERROR: "No framework found and no topic provided"
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Analysis Mode Detection
-```bash
-# Check existing analysis
-CHECK: brainstorm_dir/api-designer/analysis.md
-IF EXISTS:
-    SHOW existing analysis summary
-    ASK: "Analysis exists. Do you want to:"
-    OPTIONS:
-      1. "Update with new insights" → Update existing
-      2. "Replace completely" → Generate new
-      3. "Cancel" → Exit without changes
-ELSE:
-    CREATE new analysis
-```
-
-### Phase 3: Agent Task Generation
-**Framework-Based Analysis** (when guidance-specification.md exists):
-```bash
-Task(subagent_type="conceptual-planning-agent",
-     run_in_background=false,
-     prompt="Generate API designer analysis addressing topic framework
-
-     ## Framework Integration Required
-     **MANDATORY**: Load and address guidance-specification.md discussion points
-     **Framework Reference**: @{session.brainstorm_dir}/guidance-specification.md
-     **Output Location**: {session.brainstorm_dir}/api-designer/analysis.md
-
-     ## Analysis Requirements
-     1. **Load Topic Framework**: Read guidance-specification.md completely
-     2. **Address Each Discussion Point**: Respond to all 5 framework sections from API design perspective
-     3. **Include Framework Reference**: Start analysis.md with @../guidance-specification.md
-     4. **API Design Focus**: Emphasize endpoint structure, data contracts, versioning strategies
-     5. **Structured Response**: Use framework structure for analysis organization
-
-     ## Framework Sections to Address
-     - Core Requirements (from API design perspective)
-     - Technical Considerations (detailed API architecture analysis)
-     - User Experience Factors (developer experience and API usability)
-     - Implementation Challenges (API design risks and solutions)
-     - Success Metrics (API performance metrics and adoption tracking)
-
-     ## Output Structure Required
-     ```markdown
-     # API Designer Analysis: [Topic]
-
-     **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md
-     **Role Focus**: Backend API Design and Contract Definition
-
-     ## Core Requirements Analysis
-     [Address framework requirements from API design perspective]
-
-     ## Technical Considerations
-     [Detailed API architecture and endpoint design analysis]
-
-     ## Developer Experience Factors
-     [API usability, documentation, and integration ease]
-
-     ## Implementation Challenges
-     [API design risks and mitigation strategies]
-
-     ## Success Metrics
-     [API performance metrics, adoption rates, and developer satisfaction]
-
-     ## API Design-Specific Recommendations
-     [Detailed API design recommendations and best practices]
-     ```",
-     description="Generate API designer framework-based analysis")
-```
-
-### Phase 4: Update Mechanism
-**Analysis Update Process**:
-```bash
-# For existing analysis updates
-IF update_mode = "incremental":
-    Task(subagent_type="conceptual-planning-agent",
-         run_in_background=false,
-         prompt="Update existing API designer analysis
-
-         ## Current Analysis Context
-         **Existing Analysis**: @{session.brainstorm_dir}/api-designer/analysis.md
-         **Framework Reference**: @{session.brainstorm_dir}/guidance-specification.md
-
-         ## Update Requirements
-         1. **Preserve Structure**: Maintain existing analysis structure
-         2. **Add New Insights**: Integrate new API design insights and recommendations
-         3. **Framework Alignment**: Ensure continued alignment with topic framework
-         4. **API Updates**: Add new endpoint patterns, versioning strategies, documentation improvements
-         5. **Maintain References**: Keep @../guidance-specification.md reference
-
-         ## Update Instructions
-         - Read existing analysis completely
-         - Identify areas for enhancement or new insights
-         - Add API design depth while preserving original structure
-         - Update recommendations with new API design patterns and approaches
-         - Maintain framework discussion point addressing",
-         description="Update API designer analysis incrementally")
-```
-
-## Document Structure
-
-### Output Files
-```
-.workflow/active/WFS-[topic]/.brainstorming/
-├── guidance-specification.md          # Input: Framework (if exists)
-└── api-designer/
-    └── analysis.md            # ★ OUTPUT: Framework-based analysis
-```
-
-### Analysis Structure
-**Required Elements**:
-- **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md (if framework exists)
-- **Role Focus**: Backend API Design and Contract Definition perspective
-- **5 Framework Sections**: Address each framework discussion point
-- **API Design Recommendations**: Endpoint-specific insights and solutions
-
-## ⚡ **Two-Step Execution Flow**
-
-### ⚠️ Session Management - FIRST STEP
-Session detection and selection:
-```bash
-# Check for active sessions
-active_sessions=$(find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d 2>/dev/null)
-if [ multiple_sessions ]; then
-  prompt_user_to_select_session()
-else
-  use_existing_or_create_new()
-fi
-```
-
-### Step 1: Context Gathering Phase
-**API Designer Perspective Questioning**
-
-Before agent assignment, gather comprehensive API design context:
-
-#### 📋 Role-Specific Questions
-1. **API Type & Architecture**
-   - RESTful, GraphQL, or hybrid API approach?
-   - Synchronous vs asynchronous communication patterns?
-   - Real-time requirements (WebSocket, Server-Sent Events)?
-
-2. **Resource Modeling & Endpoints**
-   - What are the core domain resources/entities?
-   - Expected CRUD operations for each resource?
-   - Complex query requirements (filtering, sorting, pagination)?
-
-3. **Data Contracts & Validation**
-   - Request/response data format requirements (JSON, XML, Protocol Buffers)?
-   - Input validation and sanitization requirements?
-   - Data transformation and mapping needs?
-
-4. **API Management & Governance**
-   - API versioning strategy requirements?
-   - Authentication and authorization mechanisms?
-   - Rate limiting and throttling requirements?
-   - API documentation and developer portal needs?
-
-5. **Integration & Compatibility**
-   - Client platforms consuming the API (web, mobile, third-party)?
-   - Backward compatibility requirements?
-   - External API integrations needed?
-
-#### Context Validation
-- **Minimum Response**: Each answer must be ≥50 characters
-- **Re-prompting**: Insufficient detail triggers follow-up questions
-- **Context Storage**: Save responses to `.brainstorming/api-designer-context.md`
-
-### Step 2: Agent Assignment with Flow Control
-**Dedicated Agent Execution**
-
-```bash
-Task(conceptual-planning-agent): "
-[FLOW_CONTROL]
-
-Execute dedicated api-designer conceptual analysis for: {topic}
-
-ASSIGNED_ROLE: api-designer
-OUTPUT_LOCATION: .brainstorming/api-designer/
-USER_CONTEXT: {validated_responses_from_context_gathering}
-
-Flow Control Steps:
-[
-  {
-    \"step\": \"load_role_template\",
-    \"action\": \"Load api-designer planning template\",
-    \"command\": \"bash($(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/api-designer.md))\",
-    \"output_to\": \"role_template\"
-  }
-]
-
-Conceptual Analysis Requirements:
-- Apply api-designer perspective to topic analysis
-- Focus on endpoint design, data contracts, and API governance
-- Use loaded role template framework for analysis structure
-- Generate role-specific deliverables in designated output location
-- Address all user context from questioning phase
-
-Deliverables:
-- analysis.md: Main API design analysis
-- api-specification.md: Detailed endpoint specifications
-- data-contracts.md: Request/response schemas and validation rules
-- api-documentation.md: API documentation strategy and templates
-
-Embody api-designer role expertise for comprehensive conceptual planning."
-```
-
-### Progress Tracking
-TodoWrite tracking for two-step process:
-```json
-[
-  {"content": "Gather API designer context through role-specific questioning", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Gathering context"},
-  {"content": "Validate context responses and save to api-designer-context.md", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Validating context"},
-  {"content": "Load api-designer planning template via flow control", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Loading template"},
-  {"content": "Execute dedicated conceptual-planning-agent for api-designer role", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Executing agent"}
-]
-```
-
-## 📊 **Output Specification**
-
-### Output Location
-```
-.workflow/active/WFS-{topic-slug}/.brainstorming/api-designer/
-├── analysis.md                 # Primary API design analysis
-├── api-specification.md        # Detailed endpoint specifications (OpenAPI/Swagger)
-├── data-contracts.md           # Request/response schemas and validation rules
-├── versioning-strategy.md      # API versioning and backward compatibility plan
-└── developer-guide.md          # API usage documentation and integration examples
-```
-
-### Document Templates
-
-#### analysis.md Structure
-```markdown
-# API Design Analysis: {Topic}
-*Generated: {timestamp}*
-
-## Executive Summary
-[Key API design findings and recommendations overview]
-
-## API Architecture Overview
-### API Type Selection (REST/GraphQL/Hybrid)
-### Communication Patterns
-### Authentication & Authorization Strategy
-
-## Resource Modeling
-### Core Domain Resources
-### Resource Relationships
-### URL Structure and Naming Conventions
-
-## Endpoint Design
-### Resource Endpoints
-- GET /api/v1/resources
-- POST /api/v1/resources
-- GET /api/v1/resources/{id}
-- PUT /api/v1/resources/{id}
-- DELETE /api/v1/resources/{id}
-
-### Query Parameters
-- Filtering: ?filter[field]=value
-- Sorting: ?sort=field,-field2
-- Pagination: ?page=1&limit=20
-
-### HTTP Methods and Status Codes
-- Success responses (2xx)
-- Client errors (4xx)
-- Server errors (5xx)
-
-## Data Contracts
-### Request Schemas
-[JSON Schema or OpenAPI definitions]
-
-### Response Schemas
-[JSON Schema or OpenAPI definitions]
-
-### Validation Rules
-- Required fields
-- Data types and formats
-- Business logic constraints
-
-## API Versioning Strategy
-### Versioning Approach (URL/Header/Accept)
-### Version Lifecycle Management
-### Deprecation Policy
-### Migration Paths
-
-## Security & Governance
-### Authentication Mechanisms
-- OAuth 2.0 / JWT / API Keys
-### Authorization Patterns
-- RBAC / ABAC / Resource-based
-### Rate Limiting & Throttling
-### CORS and Security Headers
-
-## Error Handling
-### Standard Error Response Format
-```json
-{
-  "error": {
-    "code": "ERROR_CODE",
-    "message": "Human-readable error message",
-    "details": [],
-    "trace_id": "uuid"
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Error Code Taxonomy
-### Validation Error Responses
-
-## API Documentation
-### OpenAPI/Swagger Specification
-### Developer Portal Requirements
-### Code Examples and SDKs
-### Changelog and Migration Guides
-
-## Performance Optimization
-### Response Caching Strategies
-### Compression (gzip, brotli)
-### Field Selection (sparse fieldsets)
-### Bulk Operations and Batch Endpoints
-
-## Monitoring & Observability
-### API Metrics
-- Request count, latency, error rates
-- Endpoint usage analytics
-### Logging Strategy
-### Distributed Tracing
-
-## Developer Experience
-### API Usability Assessment
-### Integration Complexity
-### SDK and Client Library Needs
-### Sandbox and Testing Environments
-```
-
-#### api-specification.md Structure
-```markdown
-# API Specification: {Topic}
-*OpenAPI 3.0 Specification*
-
-## API Information
-- **Title**: {API Name}
-- **Version**: 1.0.0
-- **Base URL**: https://api.example.com/v1
-- **Contact**: api-team@example.com
-
-## Endpoints
-
-### Users API
-
-#### GET /users
-**Description**: Retrieve a list of users
-
-**Parameters**:
-- `page` (query, integer): Page number (default: 1)
-- `limit` (query, integer): Items per page (default: 20, max: 100)
-- `sort` (query, string): Sort field (e.g., "created_at", "-updated_at")
-- `filter[status]` (query, string): Filter by user status
-
-**Response 200**:
-```json
-{
-  "data": [
-    {
-      "id": "uuid",
-      "username": "string",
-      "email": "string",
-      "created_at": "2025-10-15T00:00:00Z"
-    }
-  ],
-  "meta": {
-    "page": 1,
-    "limit": 20,
-    "total": 100
-  },
-  "links": {
-    "self": "/users?page=1",
-    "next": "/users?page=2",
-    "prev": null
-  }
-}
-```
-
-#### POST /users
-**Description**: Create a new user
-
-**Request Body**:
-```json
-{
-  "username": "string (required, 3-50 chars)",
-  "email": "string (required, valid email)",
-  "password": "string (required, min 8 chars)",
-  "profile": {
-    "first_name": "string (optional)",
-    "last_name": "string (optional)"
-  }
-}
-```
-
-**Response 201**:
-```json
-{
-  "data": {
-    "id": "uuid",
-    "username": "string",
-    "email": "string",
-    "created_at": "2025-10-15T00:00:00Z"
-  }
-}
-```
-
-**Response 400** (Validation Error):
-```json
-{
-  "error": {
-    "code": "VALIDATION_ERROR",
-    "message": "Request validation failed",
-    "details": [
-      {
-        "field": "email",
-        "message": "Invalid email format"
-      }
-    ]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-[Continue for all endpoints...]
-
-## Authentication
-
-### OAuth 2.0 Flow
-1. Client requests authorization
-2. User grants permission
-3. Client receives access token
-4. Client uses token in requests
-
-**Header Format**:
-```
-Authorization: Bearer {access_token}
-```
-
-## Rate Limiting
-
-**Headers**:
-- `X-RateLimit-Limit`: 1000
-- `X-RateLimit-Remaining`: 999
-- `X-RateLimit-Reset`: 1634270400
-
-**Response 429** (Too Many Requests):
-```json
-{
-  "error": {
-    "code": "RATE_LIMIT_EXCEEDED",
-    "message": "API rate limit exceeded",
-    "retry_after": 3600
-  }
-}
-```
-```
-
-## 🔄 **Session Integration**
-
-### Status Synchronization
-Upon completion, update `workflow-session.json`:
-```json
-{
-  "phases": {
-    "BRAINSTORM": {
-      "api_designer": {
-        "status": "completed",
-        "completed_at": "timestamp",
-        "output_directory": ".workflow/active/WFS-{topic}/.brainstorming/api-designer/",
-        "key_insights": ["endpoint_design", "versioning_strategy", "data_contracts"]
-      }
-    }
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Cross-Role Collaboration
-API designer perspective provides:
-- **API Contract Specifications** → Frontend Developer
-- **Data Schema Requirements** → Data Architect
-- **Security Requirements** → Security Expert
-- **Integration Endpoints** → System Architect
-- **Performance Constraints** → DevOps Engineer
-
-## ✅ **Quality Assurance**
-
-### Required Analysis Elements
-- [ ] Complete endpoint inventory with HTTP methods and paths
-- [ ] Detailed request/response schemas with validation rules
-- [ ] Clear versioning strategy and backward compatibility plan
-- [ ] Comprehensive error handling and status code usage
-- [ ] API documentation strategy (OpenAPI/Swagger)
-
-### API Design Principles
-- [ ] **Consistency**: Uniform naming conventions and patterns across all endpoints
-- [ ] **Simplicity**: Intuitive resource modeling and URL structures
-- [ ] **Flexibility**: Support for filtering, sorting, pagination, and field selection
-- [ ] **Security**: Proper authentication, authorization, and input validation
-- [ ] **Performance**: Caching strategies, compression, and efficient data structures
-
-### Developer Experience Validation
-- [ ] API is self-documenting with clear endpoint descriptions
-- [ ] Error messages are actionable and helpful for debugging
-- [ ] Response formats are consistent and predictable
-- [ ] Code examples and integration guides are provided
-- [ ] Sandbox environment available for testing
-
-### Technical Completeness
-- [ ] **Resource Modeling**: All domain entities mapped to API resources
-- [ ] **CRUD Coverage**: Complete create, read, update, delete operations
-- [ ] **Query Capabilities**: Advanced filtering, sorting, and search functionality
-- [ ] **Versioning**: Clear version management and migration paths
-- [ ] **Monitoring**: API metrics, logging, and tracing strategies defined
-
-### Integration Readiness
-- [ ] **Client Compatibility**: API works with all target client platforms
-- [ ] **External Integration**: Third-party API dependencies identified
-- [ ] **Backward Compatibility**: Changes don't break existing clients
-- [ ] **Migration Path**: Clear upgrade paths for API consumers
-- [ ] **SDK Support**: Client libraries and code generation considered

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/artifacts.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: artifacts
 description: Interactive clarification generating confirmed guidance specification through role-based analysis and synthesis
-argument-hint: "topic or challenge description [--count N]"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] topic or challenge description [--count N]"
 allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Glob(*), AskUserQuestion(*)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-select recommended roles, skip all clarification questions, use default answers.
+
 ## Overview
 
 Seven-phase workflow: **Context collection** → **Topic analysis** → **Role selection** → **Role questions** → **Conflict resolution** → **Final check** → **Generate specification**

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/auto-parallel.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: auto-parallel
 description: Parallel brainstorming automation with dynamic role selection and concurrent execution across multiple perspectives
-argument-hint: "topic or challenge description" [--count N]
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), Task(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Bash(*), Glob(*)
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] topic or challenge description [--count N]"
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), Task(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Bash(*), Glob(*)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-select recommended roles, skip all clarification questions, use default answers.
+
 # Workflow Brainstorm Parallel Auto Command
 
 ## Coordinator Role
@@ -12,7 +16,7 @@ allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), Task(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Bash(*
 **This command is a pure orchestrator**: Executes 3 phases in sequence (interactive framework → parallel role analysis → synthesis), coordinating specialized commands/agents through task attachment model.
 
 **Task Attachment Model**:
-- SlashCommand execute **expands workflow** by attaching sub-tasks to current TodoWrite
+- Skill execute **expands workflow** by attaching sub-tasks to current TodoWrite
 - Task agent execute **attaches analysis tasks** to orchestrator's TodoWrite
 - Phase 1: artifacts command attaches its internal tasks (Phase 1-5)
 - Phase 2: N conceptual-planning-agent tasks attached in parallel
@@ -43,7 +47,7 @@ This workflow runs **fully autonomously** once triggered. Phase 1 (artifacts) ha
 3. **Parse Every Output**: Extract selected_roles from workflow-session.json after Phase 1
 4. **Auto-Continue via TodoList**: Check TodoList status to execute next pending phase automatically
 5. **Track Progress**: Update TodoWrite dynamically with task attachment/collapse pattern
-6. **Task Attachment Model**: SlashCommand and Task executes **attach** sub-tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **executes** these attached tasks itself, then **collapses** them after completion
+6. **Task Attachment Model**: Skill and Task executes **attach** sub-tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **executes** these attached tasks itself, then **collapses** them after completion
 7. **⚠️ CRITICAL: DO NOT STOP**: Continuous multi-phase workflow. After executing all attached tasks, immediately collapse them and execute next phase
 8. **Parallel Execution**: Phase 2 attaches multiple agent tasks simultaneously for concurrent execution
 
@@ -70,7 +74,7 @@ This workflow runs **fully autonomously** once triggered. Phase 1 (artifacts) ha
 **Step 1: Execute** - Interactive framework generation via artifacts command
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:brainstorm:artifacts \"{topic}\" --count {N}")
+Skill(skill="workflow:brainstorm:artifacts", args="\"{topic}\" --count {N}")
 ```
 
 **What It Does**:
@@ -91,7 +95,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:brainstorm:artifacts \"{topic}\" --count {N}")
 - workflow-session.json contains selected_roles[] (metadata only, no content duplication)
 - Session directory `.workflow/active/WFS-{topic}/.brainstorming/` exists
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 1 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 1 Skill executed - tasks attached)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 0: Parameter Parsing", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Parsing count parameter"},
@@ -106,7 +110,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:brainstorm:artifacts \"{topic}\" --count {N}")
 ]
 ```
 
-**Note**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** artifacts' 5 internal tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
+**Note**: Skill execute **attaches** artifacts' 5 internal tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
 
 **Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 1.1-1.5** sequentially
 
@@ -128,55 +132,30 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:brainstorm:artifacts \"{topic}\" --count {N}")
 
 ### Phase 2: Parallel Role Analysis Execution
 
-**For Each Selected Role**:
+**For Each Selected Role** (unified role-analysis command):
 ```bash
-Task(conceptual-planning-agent): "
-[FLOW_CONTROL]
-
-Execute {role-name} analysis for existing topic framework
-
-## Context Loading
-ASSIGNED_ROLE: {role-name}
-OUTPUT_LOCATION: .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/{role}/
-TOPIC: {user-provided-topic}
-
-## Flow Control Steps
-1. load_topic_framework → .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/guidance-specification.md
-2. load_role_template → ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/{role}.md
-3. load_session_metadata → .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/workflow-session.json
-4. load_style_skill (ui-designer only, if style_skill_package) → .claude/skills/style-{style_skill_package}/
-
-## Analysis Requirements
-**Primary Reference**: Original user prompt from workflow-session.json is authoritative
-**Framework Source**: Address all discussion points in guidance-specification.md from {role-name} perspective
-**Role Focus**: {role-name} domain expertise aligned with user intent
-**Structured Approach**: Create analysis.md addressing framework discussion points
-**Template Integration**: Apply role template guidelines within framework structure
-
-## Expected Deliverables
-1. **analysis.md** (optionally with analysis-{slug}.md sub-documents)
-2. **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md
-3. **User Intent Alignment**: Validate against session_context
-
-## Completion Criteria
-- Address each discussion point from guidance-specification.md with {role-name} expertise
-- Provide actionable recommendations from {role-name} perspective within analysis files
-- All output files MUST start with `analysis` prefix (no recommendations.md or other naming)
-- Reference framework document using @ notation for integration
-- Update workflow-session.json with completion status
-"
+Skill(skill="workflow:brainstorm:role-analysis", args="{role-name} --session {session-id} --skip-questions")
 ```
 
-**Parallel Execute**:
-- Launch N agents simultaneously (one message with multiple Task calls)
-- Each agent task **attached** to orchestrator's TodoWrite
-- All agents execute concurrently, each attaching their own analysis sub-tasks
-- Each agent operates independently reading same guidance-specification.md
+**What It Does**:
+- Unified command execution for each role
+- Loads topic framework from guidance-specification.md
+- Applies role-specific template and context
+- Generates analysis.md addressing framework discussion points
+- Supports optional interactive context gathering (via --include-questions flag)
+
+**Parallel Execution**:
+- Launch N Skill calls simultaneously (one message with multiple Skill invokes)
+- Each role command **attached** to orchestrator's TodoWrite
+- All roles execute concurrently, each reading same guidance-specification.md
+- Each role operates independently
+- For ui-designer only: append `--style-skill {style_skill_package}` if provided
 
 **Input**:
 - `selected_roles[]` from Phase 1
 - `session_id` from Phase 1
-- guidance-specification.md path
+- `guidance-specification.md` (framework reference)
+- `style_skill_package` (for ui-designer only)
 
 **Validation**:
 - Each role creates `.workflow/active/WFS-{topic}/.brainstorming/{role}/analysis.md`
@@ -185,6 +164,7 @@ TOPIC: {user-provided-topic}
 - **FORBIDDEN**: `recommendations.md` or any non-`analysis` prefixed files
 - All N role analyses completed
 
+
 **TodoWrite Update (Phase 2 agents executed - tasks attached in parallel)**:
 ```json
 [
@@ -223,7 +203,7 @@ TOPIC: {user-provided-topic}
 **Step 3: Execute** - Synthesis integration via synthesis command
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:brainstorm:synthesis --session {sessionId}")
+Skill(skill="workflow:brainstorm:synthesis", args="--session {sessionId}")
 ```
 
 **What It Does**:
@@ -238,7 +218,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:brainstorm:synthesis --session {sessionId}")
 - `.workflow/active/WFS-{topic}/.brainstorming/synthesis-specification.md` exists
 - Synthesis references all role analyses
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 Skill executed - tasks attached)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 0: Parameter Parsing", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Parsing count parameter"},
@@ -251,7 +231,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:brainstorm:synthesis --session {sessionId}")
 ]
 ```
 
-**Note**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** synthesis' internal tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
+**Note**: Skill execute **attaches** synthesis' internal tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
 
 **Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 3.1-3.3** sequentially
 
@@ -284,7 +264,7 @@ Synthesis: .workflow/active/WFS-{topic}/.brainstorming/synthesis-specification.m
 
 ### Key Principles
 
-1. **Task Attachment** (when SlashCommand/Task executed):
+1. **Task Attachment** (when Skill/Task executed):
    - Sub-command's or agent's internal tasks are **attached** to orchestrator's TodoWrite
    - Phase 1: `/workflow:brainstorm:artifacts` attaches 5 internal tasks (Phase 1.1-1.5)
    - Phase 2: Multiple `Task(conceptual-planning-agent)` calls attach N role analysis tasks simultaneously
@@ -309,9 +289,9 @@ Synthesis: .workflow/active/WFS-{topic}/.brainstorming/synthesis-specification.m
 
 ### Brainstorming Workflow Specific Features
 
-- **Phase 1**: Interactive framework generation with user Q&A (SlashCommand attachment)
+- **Phase 1**: Interactive framework generation with user Q&A (Skill attachment)
 - **Phase 2**: Parallel role analysis execution with N concurrent agents (Task agent attachments)
-- **Phase 3**: Cross-role synthesis integration (SlashCommand attachment)
+- **Phase 3**: Cross-role synthesis integration (Skill attachment)
 - **Dynamic Role Count**: `--count N` parameter determines number of Phase 2 parallel tasks (default: 3, max: 9)
 - **Mixed Execution**: Sequential (Phase 1, 3) and Parallel (Phase 2) task execution
 
@@ -424,6 +404,17 @@ CONTEXT_VARS:
 - **Agent execution failure**: Agent-specific retry with minimal dependencies
 - **Template loading issues**: Agent handles graceful degradation
 - **Synthesis conflicts**: Synthesis highlights disagreements without resolution
+- **Context overflow protection**: See below for automatic context management
+
+## Context Overflow Protection
+
+**Per-role limits**: See `conceptual-planning-agent.md` (< 3000 words main, < 2000 words sub-docs, max 5 sub-docs)
+
+**Synthesis protection**: If total analysis > 100KB, synthesis reads only `analysis.md` files (not sub-documents)
+
+**Recovery**: Check logs → reduce scope (--count 2) → use --summary-only → manual synthesis
+
+**Prevention**: Start with --count 3, use structured topic format, review output sizes before synthesis
 
 ## Reference Information
 
@@ -440,4 +431,3 @@ CONTEXT_VARS:
 ```
 
 **Template Source**: `~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/`
-

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/data-architect.md

@@ -1,220 +0,0 @@
----
-name: data-architect
-description: Generate or update data-architect/analysis.md addressing guidance-specification discussion points for data architecture perspective
-argument-hint: "optional topic - uses existing framework if available"
-allowed-tools: Task(conceptual-planning-agent), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*)
----
-
-## 📊 **Data Architect Analysis Generator**
-
-### Purpose
-**Specialized command for generating data-architect/analysis.md** that addresses guidance-specification.md discussion points from data architecture perspective. Creates or updates role-specific analysis with framework references.
-
-### Core Function
-- **Framework-based Analysis**: Address each discussion point in guidance-specification.md
-- **Data Architecture Focus**: Data models, pipelines, governance, and analytics perspective
-- **Update Mechanism**: Create new or update existing analysis.md
-- **Agent Delegation**: Use conceptual-planning-agent for analysis generation
-
-### Analysis Scope
-- **Data Model Design**: Efficient and scalable data models and schemas
-- **Data Flow Design**: Data collection, processing, and storage workflows
-- **Data Quality Management**: Data accuracy, completeness, and consistency
-- **Analytics and Insights**: Data analysis and business intelligence solutions
-
-### Role Boundaries & Responsibilities
-
-#### **What This Role OWNS (Canonical Data Model - Source of Truth)**
-- **Canonical Data Model**: The authoritative, system-wide data schema representing domain entities and relationships
-- **Entity-Relationship Design**: Defining entities, attributes, relationships, and constraints
-- **Data Normalization & Optimization**: Ensuring data integrity, reducing redundancy, and optimizing storage
-- **Database Schema Design**: Physical database structures, indexes, partitioning strategies
-- **Data Pipeline Architecture**: ETL/ELT processes, data warehousing, and analytics pipelines
-- **Data Governance**: Data quality standards, retention policies, and compliance requirements
-
-#### **What This Role DOES NOT Own (Defers to Other Roles)**
-- **API Data Contracts**: Public-facing request/response schemas exposed by APIs → Defers to **API Designer**
-- **System Integration Patterns**: How services communicate at the macro level → Defers to **System Architect**
-- **UI Data Presentation**: How data is displayed to users → Defers to **UI Designer**
-
-#### **Handoff Points**
-- **TO API Designer**: Provides canonical data model that API Designer translates into public API data contracts (as projection/view)
-- **TO System Architect**: Provides data flow requirements and storage constraints to inform system design
-- **FROM System Architect**: Receives system-level integration requirements and scalability constraints
-
-## ⚙️ **Execution Protocol**
-
-### Phase 1: Session & Framework Detection
-```bash
-# Check active session and framework
-CHECK: find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d
-IF active_session EXISTS:
-    session_id = get_active_session()
-    brainstorm_dir = .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/
-
-    CHECK: brainstorm_dir/guidance-specification.md
-    IF EXISTS:
-        framework_mode = true
-        load_framework = true
-    ELSE:
-        IF topic_provided:
-            framework_mode = false  # Create analysis without framework
-        ELSE:
-            ERROR: "No framework found and no topic provided"
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Analysis Mode Detection
-```bash
-# Determine execution mode
-IF framework_mode == true:
-    mode = "framework_based_analysis"
-    topic_ref = load_framework_topic()
-    discussion_points = extract_framework_points()
-ELSE:
-    mode = "standalone_analysis"
-    topic_ref = provided_topic
-    discussion_points = generate_basic_structure()
-```
-
-### Phase 3: Agent Execution with Flow Control
-**Framework-Based Analysis Generation**
-
-```bash
-Task(conceptual-planning-agent): "
-[FLOW_CONTROL]
-
-Execute data-architect analysis for existing topic framework
-
-## Context Loading
-ASSIGNED_ROLE: data-architect
-OUTPUT_LOCATION: .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/data-architect/
-ANALYSIS_MODE: {framework_mode ? "framework_based" : "standalone"}
-
-## Flow Control Steps
-1. **load_topic_framework**
-   - Action: Load structured topic discussion framework
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/guidance-specification.md)
-   - Output: topic_framework_content
-
-2. **load_role_template**
-   - Action: Load data-architect planning template
-   - Command: bash($(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/data-architect.md))
-   - Output: role_template_guidelines
-
-3. **load_session_metadata**
-   - Action: Load session metadata and existing context
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/workflow-session.json)
-   - Output: session_context
-
-## Analysis Requirements
-**Framework Reference**: Address all discussion points in guidance-specification.md from data architecture perspective
-**Role Focus**: Data models, pipelines, governance, analytics platforms
-**Structured Approach**: Create analysis.md addressing framework discussion points
-**Template Integration**: Apply role template guidelines within framework structure
-
-## Expected Deliverables
-1. **analysis.md**: Comprehensive data architecture analysis addressing all framework discussion points
-2. **Framework Reference**: Include @../guidance-specification.md reference in analysis
-
-## Completion Criteria
-- Address each discussion point from guidance-specification.md with data architecture expertise
-- Provide data model designs, pipeline architectures, and governance strategies
-- Include scalability, performance, and quality considerations
-- Reference framework document using @ notation for integration
-"
-```
-
-## 📋 **TodoWrite Integration**
-
-### Workflow Progress Tracking
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({
-  todos: [
-    {
-      content: "Detect active session and locate topic framework",
-      status: "in_progress",
-      activeForm: "Detecting session and framework"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Load guidance-specification.md and session metadata for context",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Loading framework and session context"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Execute data-architect analysis using conceptual-planning-agent with FLOW_CONTROL",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Executing data-architect framework analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Generate analysis.md addressing all framework discussion points",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Generating structured data-architect analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Update workflow-session.json with data-architect completion status",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Updating session metadata"
-    }
-  ]
-});
-```
-
-## 📊 **Output Structure**
-
-### Framework-Based Analysis
-```
-.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/data-architect/
-└── analysis.md    # Structured analysis addressing guidance-specification.md discussion points
-```
-
-### Analysis Document Structure
-```markdown
-# Data Architect Analysis: [Topic from Framework]
-
-## Framework Reference
-**Topic Framework**: @../guidance-specification.md
-**Role Focus**: Data Architecture perspective
-
-## Discussion Points Analysis
-[Address each point from guidance-specification.md with data architecture expertise]
-
-### Core Requirements (from framework)
-[Data architecture perspective on requirements]
-
-### Technical Considerations (from framework)
-[Data model, pipeline, and storage considerations]
-
-### User Experience Factors (from framework)
-[Data access patterns and analytics user experience]
-
-### Implementation Challenges (from framework)
-[Data migration, quality, and governance challenges]
-
-### Success Metrics (from framework)
-[Data quality metrics and analytics success criteria]
-
-## Data Architecture Specific Recommendations
-[Role-specific data architecture recommendations and solutions]
-
----
-*Generated by data-architect analysis addressing structured framework*
-```
-
-## 🔄 **Session Integration**
-
-### Completion Status Update
-```json
-{
-  "data_architect": {
-    "status": "completed",
-    "framework_addressed": true,
-    "output_location": ".workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/data-architect/analysis.md",
-    "framework_reference": "@../guidance-specification.md"
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Integration Points
-- **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md for structured discussion points
-- **Cross-Role Synthesis**: Data architecture insights available for synthesis-report.md integration
-- **Agent Autonomy**: Independent execution with framework guidance

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/product-manager.md

@@ -1,200 +0,0 @@
----
-name: product-manager
-description: Generate or update product-manager/analysis.md addressing guidance-specification discussion points for product management perspective
-argument-hint: "optional topic - uses existing framework if available"
-allowed-tools: Task(conceptual-planning-agent), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*)
----
-
-## 🎯 **Product Manager Analysis Generator**
-
-### Purpose
-**Specialized command for generating product-manager/analysis.md** that addresses guidance-specification.md discussion points from product strategy perspective. Creates or updates role-specific analysis with framework references.
-
-### Core Function
-- **Framework-based Analysis**: Address each discussion point in guidance-specification.md
-- **Product Strategy Focus**: User needs, business value, and market positioning
-- **Update Mechanism**: Create new or update existing analysis.md
-- **Agent Delegation**: Use conceptual-planning-agent for analysis generation
-
-### Analysis Scope
-- **User Needs Analysis**: Target users, problems, and value propositions
-- **Business Impact Assessment**: ROI, metrics, and commercial outcomes
-- **Market Positioning**: Competitive analysis and differentiation
-- **Product Strategy**: Roadmaps, priorities, and go-to-market approaches
-
-## ⚙️ **Execution Protocol**
-
-### Phase 1: Session & Framework Detection
-```bash
-# Check active session and framework
-CHECK: find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d
-IF active_session EXISTS:
-    session_id = get_active_session()
-    brainstorm_dir = .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/
-
-    CHECK: brainstorm_dir/guidance-specification.md
-    IF EXISTS:
-        framework_mode = true
-        load_framework = true
-    ELSE:
-        IF topic_provided:
-            framework_mode = false  # Create analysis without framework
-        ELSE:
-            ERROR: "No framework found and no topic provided"
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Analysis Mode Detection
-```bash
-# Determine execution mode
-IF framework_mode == true:
-    mode = "framework_based_analysis"
-    topic_ref = load_framework_topic()
-    discussion_points = extract_framework_points()
-ELSE:
-    mode = "standalone_analysis"
-    topic_ref = provided_topic
-    discussion_points = generate_basic_structure()
-```
-
-### Phase 3: Agent Execution with Flow Control
-**Framework-Based Analysis Generation**
-
-```bash
-Task(conceptual-planning-agent): "
-[FLOW_CONTROL]
-
-Execute product-manager analysis for existing topic framework
-
-## Context Loading
-ASSIGNED_ROLE: product-manager
-OUTPUT_LOCATION: .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/product-manager/
-ANALYSIS_MODE: {framework_mode ? "framework_based" : "standalone"}
-
-## Flow Control Steps
-1. **load_topic_framework**
-   - Action: Load structured topic discussion framework
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/guidance-specification.md)
-   - Output: topic_framework_content
-
-2. **load_role_template**
-   - Action: Load product-manager planning template
-   - Command: bash($(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/product-manager.md))
-   - Output: role_template_guidelines
-
-3. **load_session_metadata**
-   - Action: Load session metadata and existing context
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/workflow-session.json)
-   - Output: session_context
-
-## Analysis Requirements
-**Framework Reference**: Address all discussion points in guidance-specification.md from product strategy perspective
-**Role Focus**: User value, business impact, market positioning, product strategy
-**Structured Approach**: Create analysis.md addressing framework discussion points
-**Template Integration**: Apply role template guidelines within framework structure
-
-## Expected Deliverables
-1. **analysis.md**: Comprehensive product strategy analysis addressing all framework discussion points
-2. **Framework Reference**: Include @../guidance-specification.md reference in analysis
-
-## Completion Criteria
-- Address each discussion point from guidance-specification.md with product management expertise
-- Provide actionable business strategies and user value propositions
-- Include market analysis and competitive positioning insights
-- Reference framework document using @ notation for integration
-"
-```
-
-## 📋 **TodoWrite Integration**
-
-### Workflow Progress Tracking
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({
-  todos: [
-    {
-      content: "Detect active session and locate topic framework",
-      status: "in_progress",
-      activeForm: "Detecting session and framework"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Load guidance-specification.md and session metadata for context",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Loading framework and session context"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Execute product-manager analysis using conceptual-planning-agent with FLOW_CONTROL",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Executing product-manager framework analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Generate analysis.md addressing all framework discussion points",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Generating structured product-manager analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Update workflow-session.json with product-manager completion status",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Updating session metadata"
-    }
-  ]
-});
-```
-
-## 📊 **Output Structure**
-
-### Framework-Based Analysis
-```
-.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/product-manager/
-└── analysis.md    # Structured analysis addressing guidance-specification.md discussion points
-```
-
-### Analysis Document Structure
-```markdown
-# Product Manager Analysis: [Topic from Framework]
-
-## Framework Reference
-**Topic Framework**: @../guidance-specification.md
-**Role Focus**: Product Strategy perspective
-
-## Discussion Points Analysis
-[Address each point from guidance-specification.md with product management expertise]
-
-### Core Requirements (from framework)
-[Product strategy perspective on user needs and requirements]
-
-### Technical Considerations (from framework)
-[Business and technical feasibility considerations]
-
-### User Experience Factors (from framework)
-[User value proposition and market positioning analysis]
-
-### Implementation Challenges (from framework)
-[Business execution and go-to-market considerations]
-
-### Success Metrics (from framework)
-[Product success metrics and business KPIs]
-
-## Product Strategy Specific Recommendations
-[Role-specific product management strategies and business solutions]
-
----
-*Generated by product-manager analysis addressing structured framework*
-```
-
-## 🔄 **Session Integration**
-
-### Completion Status Update
-```json
-{
-  "product_manager": {
-    "status": "completed",
-    "framework_addressed": true,
-    "output_location": ".workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/product-manager/analysis.md",
-    "framework_reference": "@../guidance-specification.md"
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Integration Points
-- **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md for structured discussion points
-- **Cross-Role Synthesis**: Product strategy insights available for synthesis-report.md integration
-- **Agent Autonomy**: Independent execution with framework guidance

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/product-owner.md

@@ -1,200 +0,0 @@
----
-name: product-owner
-description: Generate or update product-owner/analysis.md addressing guidance-specification discussion points for product ownership perspective
-argument-hint: "optional topic - uses existing framework if available"
-allowed-tools: Task(conceptual-planning-agent), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*)
----
-
-## 🎯 **Product Owner Analysis Generator**
-
-### Purpose
-**Specialized command for generating product-owner/analysis.md** that addresses guidance-specification.md discussion points from product backlog and feature prioritization perspective. Creates or updates role-specific analysis with framework references.
-
-### Core Function
-- **Framework-based Analysis**: Address each discussion point in guidance-specification.md
-- **Product Backlog Focus**: Feature prioritization, user stories, and acceptance criteria
-- **Update Mechanism**: Create new or update existing analysis.md
-- **Agent Delegation**: Use conceptual-planning-agent for analysis generation
-
-### Analysis Scope
-- **Backlog Management**: User story creation, refinement, and prioritization
-- **Stakeholder Alignment**: Requirements gathering, value definition, and expectation management
-- **Feature Prioritization**: ROI analysis, MoSCoW method, and value-driven delivery
-- **Acceptance Criteria**: Definition of Done, acceptance testing, and quality standards
-
-## ⚙️ **Execution Protocol**
-
-### Phase 1: Session & Framework Detection
-```bash
-# Check active session and framework
-CHECK: find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d
-IF active_session EXISTS:
-    session_id = get_active_session()
-    brainstorm_dir = .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/
-
-    CHECK: brainstorm_dir/guidance-specification.md
-    IF EXISTS:
-        framework_mode = true
-        load_framework = true
-    ELSE:
-        IF topic_provided:
-            framework_mode = false  # Create analysis without framework
-        ELSE:
-            ERROR: "No framework found and no topic provided"
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Analysis Mode Detection
-```bash
-# Determine execution mode
-IF framework_mode == true:
-    mode = "framework_based_analysis"
-    topic_ref = load_framework_topic()
-    discussion_points = extract_framework_points()
-ELSE:
-    mode = "standalone_analysis"
-    topic_ref = provided_topic
-    discussion_points = generate_basic_structure()
-```
-
-### Phase 3: Agent Execution with Flow Control
-**Framework-Based Analysis Generation**
-
-```bash
-Task(conceptual-planning-agent): "
-[FLOW_CONTROL]
-
-Execute product-owner analysis for existing topic framework
-
-## Context Loading
-ASSIGNED_ROLE: product-owner
-OUTPUT_LOCATION: .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/product-owner/
-ANALYSIS_MODE: {framework_mode ? "framework_based" : "standalone"}
-
-## Flow Control Steps
-1. **load_topic_framework**
-   - Action: Load structured topic discussion framework
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/guidance-specification.md)
-   - Output: topic_framework_content
-
-2. **load_role_template**
-   - Action: Load product-owner planning template
-   - Command: bash($(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/product-owner.md))
-   - Output: role_template_guidelines
-
-3. **load_session_metadata**
-   - Action: Load session metadata and existing context
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/workflow-session.json)
-   - Output: session_context
-
-## Analysis Requirements
-**Framework Reference**: Address all discussion points in guidance-specification.md from product backlog and feature prioritization perspective
-**Role Focus**: Backlog management, stakeholder alignment, feature prioritization, acceptance criteria
-**Structured Approach**: Create analysis.md addressing framework discussion points
-**Template Integration**: Apply role template guidelines within framework structure
-
-## Expected Deliverables
-1. **analysis.md**: Comprehensive product ownership analysis addressing all framework discussion points
-2. **Framework Reference**: Include @../guidance-specification.md reference in analysis
-
-## Completion Criteria
-- Address each discussion point from guidance-specification.md with product ownership expertise
-- Provide actionable user stories and acceptance criteria definitions
-- Include feature prioritization and stakeholder alignment strategies
-- Reference framework document using @ notation for integration
-"
-```
-
-## 📋 **TodoWrite Integration**
-
-### Workflow Progress Tracking
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({
-  todos: [
-    {
-      content: "Detect active session and locate topic framework",
-      status: "in_progress",
-      activeForm: "Detecting session and framework"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Load guidance-specification.md and session metadata for context",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Loading framework and session context"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Execute product-owner analysis using conceptual-planning-agent with FLOW_CONTROL",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Executing product-owner framework analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Generate analysis.md addressing all framework discussion points",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Generating structured product-owner analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Update workflow-session.json with product-owner completion status",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Updating session metadata"
-    }
-  ]
-});
-```
-
-## 📊 **Output Structure**
-
-### Framework-Based Analysis
-```
-.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/product-owner/
-└── analysis.md    # Structured analysis addressing guidance-specification.md discussion points
-```
-
-### Analysis Document Structure
-```markdown
-# Product Owner Analysis: [Topic from Framework]
-
-## Framework Reference
-**Topic Framework**: @../guidance-specification.md
-**Role Focus**: Product Backlog & Feature Prioritization perspective
-
-## Discussion Points Analysis
-[Address each point from guidance-specification.md with product ownership expertise]
-
-### Core Requirements (from framework)
-[User story formulation and backlog refinement perspective]
-
-### Technical Considerations (from framework)
-[Technical feasibility and implementation sequencing considerations]
-
-### User Experience Factors (from framework)
-[User value definition and acceptance criteria analysis]
-
-### Implementation Challenges (from framework)
-[Sprint planning, dependency management, and delivery strategies]
-
-### Success Metrics (from framework)
-[Feature adoption, value delivery metrics, and stakeholder satisfaction indicators]
-
-## Product Owner Specific Recommendations
-[Role-specific backlog management and feature prioritization strategies]
-
----
-*Generated by product-owner analysis addressing structured framework*
-```
-
-## 🔄 **Session Integration**
-
-### Completion Status Update
-```json
-{
-  "product_owner": {
-    "status": "completed",
-    "framework_addressed": true,
-    "output_location": ".workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/product-owner/analysis.md",
-    "framework_reference": "@../guidance-specification.md"
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Integration Points
-- **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md for structured discussion points
-- **Cross-Role Synthesis**: Product ownership insights available for synthesis-report.md integration
-- **Agent Autonomy**: Independent execution with framework guidance

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/role-analysis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,705 @@
+---
+name: role-analysis
+description: Unified role-specific analysis generation with interactive context gathering and incremental updates
+argument-hint: "[role-name] [--session session-id] [--update] [--include-questions] [--skip-questions]"
+allowed-tools: Task(conceptual-planning-agent), AskUserQuestion(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Edit(*), Glob(*)
+---
+
+## 🎯 **Unified Role Analysis Generator**
+
+### Purpose
+**Unified command for generating and updating role-specific analysis** with interactive context gathering, framework alignment, and incremental update support. Replaces 9 individual role commands with single parameterized workflow.
+
+### Core Function
+- **Multi-Role Support**: Single command supports all 9 brainstorming roles
+- **Interactive Context**: Dynamic question generation based on role and framework
+- **Incremental Updates**: Merge new insights into existing analyses
+- **Framework Alignment**: Address guidance-specification.md discussion points
+- **Agent Delegation**: Use conceptual-planning-agent with role-specific templates
+
+### Supported Roles
+
+| Role ID | Title | Focus Area | Context Questions |
+|---------|-------|------------|-------------------|
+| `ux-expert` | UX专家 | User research, information architecture, user journey | 4 |
+| `ui-designer` | UI设计师 | Visual design, high-fidelity mockups, design systems | 4 |
+| `system-architect` | 系统架构师 | Technical architecture, scalability, integration patterns | 5 |
+| `product-manager` | 产品经理 | Product strategy, roadmap, prioritization | 4 |
+| `product-owner` | 产品负责人 | Backlog management, user stories, acceptance criteria | 4 |
+| `scrum-master` | 敏捷教练 | Process facilitation, impediment removal, team dynamics | 3 |
+| `subject-matter-expert` | 领域专家 | Domain knowledge, business rules, compliance | 4 |
+| `data-architect` | 数据架构师 | Data models, storage strategies, data flow | 5 |
+| `api-designer` | API设计师 | API contracts, versioning, integration patterns | 4 |
+
+---
+
+## 📋 **Usage**
+
+```bash
+# Generate new analysis with interactive context
+/workflow:brainstorm:role-analysis ux-expert
+
+# Generate with existing framework + context questions
+/workflow:brainstorm:role-analysis system-architect --session WFS-xxx --include-questions
+
+# Update existing analysis (incremental merge)
+/workflow:brainstorm:role-analysis ui-designer --session WFS-xxx --update
+
+# Quick generation (skip interactive context)
+/workflow:brainstorm:role-analysis product-manager --session WFS-xxx --skip-questions
+```
+
+---
+
+## ⚙️ **Execution Protocol**
+
+### Phase 1: Detection & Validation
+
+**Step 1.1: Role Validation**
+```bash
+VALIDATE role_name IN [
+  ux-expert, ui-designer, system-architect, product-manager,
+  product-owner, scrum-master, subject-matter-expert,
+  data-architect, api-designer
+]
+IF invalid:
+  ERROR: "Unknown role: {role_name}. Use one of: ux-expert, ui-designer, ..."
+  EXIT
+```
+
+**Step 1.2: Session Detection**
+```bash
+IF --session PROVIDED:
+  session_id = --session
+  brainstorm_dir = .workflow/active/{session_id}/.brainstorming/
+ELSE:
+  FIND .workflow/active/WFS-*/
+  IF multiple:
+    PROMPT user to select
+  ELSE IF single:
+    USE existing
+  ELSE:
+    ERROR: "No active session. Run /workflow:brainstorm:artifacts first"
+    EXIT
+
+VALIDATE brainstorm_dir EXISTS
+```
+
+**Step 1.3: Framework Detection**
+```bash
+framework_file = {brainstorm_dir}/guidance-specification.md
+IF framework_file EXISTS:
+  framework_mode = true
+  LOAD framework_content
+ELSE:
+  WARN: "No framework found - will create standalone analysis"
+  framework_mode = false
+```
+
+**Step 1.4: Update Mode Detection**
+```bash
+existing_analysis = {brainstorm_dir}/{role_name}/analysis*.md
+IF --update FLAG OR existing_analysis EXISTS:
+  update_mode = true
+  IF --update NOT PROVIDED:
+    ASK: "Analysis exists. Update or regenerate?"
+    OPTIONS: ["Incremental update", "Full regenerate", "Cancel"]
+ELSE:
+  update_mode = false
+```
+
+### Phase 2: Interactive Context Gathering
+
+**Trigger Conditions**:
+- Default: Always ask unless `--skip-questions` provided
+- `--include-questions`: Force context gathering even if analysis exists
+- `--skip-questions`: Skip all interactive questions
+
+**Step 2.1: Load Role Configuration**
+```javascript
+const roleConfig = {
+  'ux-expert': {
+    title: 'UX专家',
+    focus_area: 'User research, information architecture, user journey',
+    question_categories: ['User Intent', 'Requirements', 'UX'],
+    question_count: 4,
+    template: '~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/ux-expert.md'
+  },
+  'ui-designer': {
+    title: 'UI设计师',
+    focus_area: 'Visual design, high-fidelity mockups, design systems',
+    question_categories: ['Requirements', 'UX', 'Feasibility'],
+    question_count: 4,
+    template: '~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/ui-designer.md'
+  },
+  'system-architect': {
+    title: '系统架构师',
+    focus_area: 'Technical architecture, scalability, integration patterns',
+    question_categories: ['Scale & Performance', 'Technical Constraints', 'Architecture Complexity', 'Non-Functional Requirements'],
+    question_count: 5,
+    template: '~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/system-architect.md'
+  },
+  'product-manager': {
+    title: '产品经理',
+    focus_area: 'Product strategy, roadmap, prioritization',
+    question_categories: ['User Intent', 'Requirements', 'Process'],
+    question_count: 4,
+    template: '~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/product-manager.md'
+  },
+  'product-owner': {
+    title: '产品负责人',
+    focus_area: 'Backlog management, user stories, acceptance criteria',
+    question_categories: ['Requirements', 'Decisions', 'Process'],
+    question_count: 4,
+    template: '~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/product-owner.md'
+  },
+  'scrum-master': {
+    title: '敏捷教练',
+    focus_area: 'Process facilitation, impediment removal, team dynamics',
+    question_categories: ['Process', 'Risk', 'Decisions'],
+    question_count: 3,
+    template: '~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/scrum-master.md'
+  },
+  'subject-matter-expert': {
+    title: '领域专家',
+    focus_area: 'Domain knowledge, business rules, compliance',
+    question_categories: ['Requirements', 'Feasibility', 'Terminology'],
+    question_count: 4,
+    template: '~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/subject-matter-expert.md'
+  },
+  'data-architect': {
+    title: '数据架构师',
+    focus_area: 'Data models, storage strategies, data flow',
+    question_categories: ['Architecture', 'Scale & Performance', 'Technical Constraints', 'Feasibility'],
+    question_count: 5,
+    template: '~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/data-architect.md'
+  },
+  'api-designer': {
+    title: 'API设计师',
+    focus_area: 'API contracts, versioning, integration patterns',
+    question_categories: ['Architecture', 'Requirements', 'Feasibility', 'Decisions'],
+    question_count: 4,
+    template: '~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/api-designer.md'
+  }
+};
+
+config = roleConfig[role_name];
+```
+
+**Step 2.2: Generate Role-Specific Questions**
+
+**9-Category Taxonomy** (from synthesis.md):
+
+| Category | Focus | Example Question Pattern |
+|----------|-------|--------------------------|
+| User Intent | 用户目标 | "该分析的核心目标是什么？" |
+| Requirements | 需求细化 | "需求的优先级如何排序？" |
+| Architecture | 架构决策 | "技术栈的选择考量？" |
+| UX | 用户体验 | "交互复杂度的取舍？" |
+| Feasibility | 可行性 | "资源约束下的实现范围？" |
+| Risk | 风险管理 | "风险容忍度是多少？" |
+| Process | 流程规范 | "开发迭代的节奏？" |
+| Decisions | 决策确认 | "冲突的解决方案？" |
+| Terminology | 术语统一 | "统一使用哪个术语？" |
+| Scale & Performance | 性能扩展 | "预期的负载和性能要求？" |
+| Technical Constraints | 技术约束 | "现有技术栈的限制？" |
+| Architecture Complexity | 架构复杂度 | "架构的复杂度权衡？" |
+| Non-Functional Requirements | 非功能需求 | "可用性和可维护性要求？" |
+
+**Question Generation Algorithm**:
+```javascript
+async function generateQuestions(role_name, framework_content) {
+  const config = roleConfig[role_name];
+  const questions = [];
+
+  // Parse framework for keywords
+  const keywords = extractKeywords(framework_content);
+
+  // Generate category-specific questions
+  for (const category of config.question_categories) {
+    const question = generateCategoryQuestion(category, keywords, role_name);
+    questions.push(question);
+  }
+
+  return questions.slice(0, config.question_count);
+}
+```
+
+**Step 2.3: Multi-Round Question Execution**
+
+```javascript
+const BATCH_SIZE = 4;
+const user_context = {};
+
+for (let i = 0; i < questions.length; i += BATCH_SIZE) {
+  const batch = questions.slice(i, i + BATCH_SIZE);
+  const currentRound = Math.floor(i / BATCH_SIZE) + 1;
+  const totalRounds = Math.ceil(questions.length / BATCH_SIZE);
+
+  console.log(`\n[Round ${currentRound}/${totalRounds}] ${config.title} 上下文询问\n`);
+
+  AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: batch.map(q => ({
+      question: q.question,
+      header: q.category.substring(0, 12),
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: q.options.map(opt => ({
+        label: opt.label,
+        description: opt.description
+      }))
+    }))
+  });
+
+  // Store responses before next round
+  for (const answer of responses) {
+    user_context[answer.question] = {
+      answer: answer.selected,
+      category: answer.category,
+      timestamp: new Date().toISOString()
+    };
+  }
+}
+
+// Save context to file
+Write(
+  `${brainstorm_dir}/${role_name}/${role_name}-context.md`,
+  formatUserContext(user_context)
+);
+```
+
+**Question Quality Rules** (from artifacts.md):
+
+**MUST Include**:
+- ✅ All questions in Chinese (用中文提问)
+- ✅ 业务场景作为问题前提
+- ✅ 技术选项的业务影响说明
+- ✅ 量化指标和约束条件
+
+**MUST Avoid**:
+- ❌ 纯技术选型无业务上下文
+- ❌ 过度抽象的通用问题
+- ❌ 脱离框架的重复询问
+
+### Phase 3: Agent Execution
+
+**Step 3.1: Load Session Metadata**
+```bash
+session_metadata = Read(.workflow/active/{session_id}/workflow-session.json)
+original_topic = session_metadata.topic
+selected_roles = session_metadata.selected_roles
+```
+
+**Step 3.2: Prepare Agent Context**
+```javascript
+const agentContext = {
+  role_name: role_name,
+  role_config: roleConfig[role_name],
+  output_location: `${brainstorm_dir}/${role_name}/`,
+  framework_mode: framework_mode,
+  framework_path: framework_mode ? `${brainstorm_dir}/guidance-specification.md` : null,
+  update_mode: update_mode,
+  user_context: user_context,
+  original_topic: original_topic,
+  session_id: session_id
+};
+```
+
+**Step 3.3: Execute Conceptual Planning Agent**
+
+**Framework-Based Analysis** (when guidance-specification.md exists):
+```javascript
+Task(
+  subagent_type="conceptual-planning-agent",
+  run_in_background=false,
+  description=`Generate ${role_name} analysis`,
+  prompt=`
+[FLOW_CONTROL]
+
+Execute ${role_name} analysis for existing topic framework
+
+## Context Loading
+ASSIGNED_ROLE: ${role_name}
+OUTPUT_LOCATION: ${agentContext.output_location}
+ANALYSIS_MODE: ${framework_mode ? "framework_based" : "standalone"}
+UPDATE_MODE: ${update_mode}
+
+## Flow Control Steps
+1. **load_topic_framework**
+   - Action: Load structured topic discussion framework
+   - Command: Read(${agentContext.framework_path})
+   - Output: topic_framework_content
+
+2. **load_role_template**
+   - Action: Load ${role_name} planning template
+   - Command: Read(${roleConfig[role_name].template})
+   - Output: role_template_guidelines
+
+3. **load_session_metadata**
+   - Action: Load session metadata and user intent
+   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/${session_id}/workflow-session.json)
+   - Output: session_context
+
+4. **load_user_context** (if exists)
+   - Action: Load interactive context responses
+   - Command: Read(${brainstorm_dir}/${role_name}/${role_name}-context.md)
+   - Output: user_context_answers
+
+5. **${update_mode ? 'load_existing_analysis' : 'skip'}**
+   ${update_mode ? `
+   - Action: Load existing analysis for incremental update
+   - Command: Read(${brainstorm_dir}/${role_name}/analysis.md)
+   - Output: existing_analysis_content
+   ` : ''}
+
+## Analysis Requirements
+**Primary Reference**: Original user prompt from workflow-session.json is authoritative
+**Framework Source**: Address all discussion points in guidance-specification.md from ${role_name} perspective
+**User Context Integration**: Incorporate interactive Q&A responses into analysis
+**Role Focus**: ${roleConfig[role_name].focus_area}
+**Template Integration**: Apply role template guidelines within framework structure
+
+## Expected Deliverables
+1. **analysis.md** (main document, optionally with analysis-{slug}.md sub-documents)
+2. **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md (if framework_mode)
+3. **User Context Reference**: @./${role_name}-context.md (if user context exists)
+4. **User Intent Alignment**: Validate against session_context
+
+## Update Requirements (if UPDATE_MODE)
+- **Preserve Structure**: Maintain existing analysis structure
+- **Add "Clarifications" Section**: Document new user context with timestamp
+- **Merge Insights**: Integrate new perspectives without removing existing content
+- **Resolve Conflicts**: If new context contradicts existing analysis, document both and recommend resolution
+
+## Completion Criteria
+- Address each discussion point from guidance-specification.md with ${role_name} expertise
+- Provide actionable recommendations from ${role_name} perspective within analysis files
+- All output files MUST start with "analysis" prefix (no recommendations.md or other naming)
+- Reference framework document using @ notation for integration
+- Update workflow-session.json with completion status
+`
+);
+```
+
+### Phase 4: Validation & Finalization
+
+**Step 4.1: Validate Output**
+```bash
+VERIFY EXISTS: ${brainstorm_dir}/${role_name}/analysis.md
+VERIFY CONTAINS: "@../guidance-specification.md" (if framework_mode)
+IF user_context EXISTS:
+  VERIFY CONTAINS: "@./${role_name}-context.md" OR "## Clarifications" section
+```
+
+**Step 4.2: Update Session Metadata**
+```json
+{
+  "phases": {
+    "BRAINSTORM": {
+      "${role_name}": {
+        "status": "${update_mode ? 'updated' : 'completed'}",
+        "completed_at": "timestamp",
+        "framework_addressed": true,
+        "context_gathered": user_context ? true : false,
+        "output_location": "${brainstorm_dir}/${role_name}/analysis.md",
+        "update_history": [
+          {
+            "timestamp": "ISO8601",
+            "mode": "${update_mode ? 'incremental' : 'initial'}",
+            "context_questions": question_count
+          }
+        ]
+      }
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Step 4.3: Completion Report**
+```markdown
+✅ ${roleConfig[role_name].title} Analysis Complete
+
+**Output**: ${brainstorm_dir}/${role_name}/analysis.md
+**Mode**: ${update_mode ? 'Incremental Update' : 'New Generation'}
+**Framework**: ${framework_mode ? '✓ Aligned' : '✗ Standalone'}
+**Context Questions**: ${question_count} answered
+
+${update_mode ? '
+**Changes**:
+- Added "Clarifications" section with new user context
+- Merged new insights into existing sections
+- Resolved conflicts with framework alignment
+' : ''}
+
+**Next Steps**:
+${selected_roles.length > 1 ? `
+  - Continue with other roles: ${selected_roles.filter(r => r !== role_name).join(', ')}
+  - Run synthesis: /workflow:brainstorm:synthesis --session ${session_id}
+` : `
+  - Clarify insights: /workflow:brainstorm:synthesis --session ${session_id}
+  - Generate plan: /workflow:plan --session ${session_id}
+`}
+```
+
+---
+
+## 📋 **TodoWrite Integration**
+
+### Workflow Progress Tracking
+
+```javascript
+TodoWrite({
+  todos: [
+    {
+      content: "Phase 1: Detect session and validate role configuration",
+      status: "in_progress",
+      activeForm: "Detecting session and role"
+    },
+    {
+      content: "Phase 2: Interactive context gathering with AskUserQuestion",
+      status: "pending",
+      activeForm: "Gathering user context"
+    },
+    {
+      content: "Phase 3: Execute conceptual-planning-agent for role analysis",
+      status: "pending",
+      activeForm: "Executing agent analysis"
+    },
+    {
+      content: "Phase 4: Validate output and update session metadata",
+      status: "pending",
+      activeForm: "Finalizing and validating"
+    }
+  ]
+});
+```
+
+---
+
+## 📊 **Output Structure**
+
+### Directory Layout
+
+```
+.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/
+├── guidance-specification.md          # Framework (if exists)
+└── {role-name}/
+    ├── {role-name}-context.md         # Interactive Q&A responses
+    ├── analysis.md                    # Main analysis (REQUIRED)
+    └── analysis-{slug}.md             # Section documents (optional, max 5)
+```
+
+### Analysis Document Structure (New Generation)
+
+```markdown
+# ${roleConfig[role_name].title} Analysis: [Topic from Framework]
+
+## Framework Reference
+**Topic Framework**: @../guidance-specification.md
+**Role Focus**: ${roleConfig[role_name].focus_area}
+**User Context**: @./${role_name}-context.md
+
+## User Context Summary
+**Context Gathered**: ${question_count} questions answered
+**Categories**: ${question_categories.join(', ')}
+
+${user_context ? formatContextSummary(user_context) : ''}
+
+## Discussion Points Analysis
+[Address each point from guidance-specification.md with ${role_name} expertise]
+
+### Core Requirements (from framework)
+[Role-specific perspective on requirements]
+
+### Technical Considerations (from framework)
+[Role-specific technical analysis]
+
+### User Experience Factors (from framework)
+[Role-specific UX considerations]
+
+### Implementation Challenges (from framework)
+[Role-specific challenges and solutions]
+
+### Success Metrics (from framework)
+[Role-specific metrics and KPIs]
+
+## ${roleConfig[role_name].title} Specific Recommendations
+[Role-specific actionable strategies]
+
+---
+*Generated by ${role_name} analysis addressing structured framework*
+*Context gathered: ${new Date().toISOString()}*
+```
+
+### Analysis Document Structure (Incremental Update)
+
+```markdown
+# ${roleConfig[role_name].title} Analysis: [Topic]
+
+## Framework Reference
+[Existing content preserved]
+
+## Clarifications
+### Session ${new Date().toISOString().split('T')[0]}
+${Object.entries(user_context).map(([q, a]) => `
+- **Q**: ${q} (Category: ${a.category})
+  **A**: ${a.answer}
+`).join('\n')}
+
+## User Context Summary
+[Updated with new context]
+
+## Discussion Points Analysis
+[Existing content enhanced with new insights]
+
+[Rest of sections updated based on clarifications]
+```
+
+---
+
+## 🔄 **Integration with Other Commands**
+
+### Called By
+- `/workflow:brainstorm:auto-parallel` (Phase 2 - parallel role execution)
+- Manual invocation for single-role analysis
+
+### Calls To
+- `conceptual-planning-agent` (agent execution)
+- `AskUserQuestion` (interactive context gathering)
+
+### Coordinates With
+- `/workflow:brainstorm:artifacts` (creates framework for role analysis)
+- `/workflow:brainstorm:synthesis` (reads role analyses for integration)
+
+---
+
+## ✅ **Quality Assurance**
+
+### Required Analysis Elements
+- [ ] Framework discussion points addressed (if framework_mode)
+- [ ] User context integrated (if context gathered)
+- [ ] Role template guidelines applied
+- [ ] Output files follow naming convention (analysis*.md only)
+- [ ] Framework reference using @ notation
+- [ ] Session metadata updated
+
+### Context Quality
+- [ ] Questions in Chinese with business context
+- [ ] Options include technical trade-offs
+- [ ] Categories aligned with role focus
+- [ ] No generic questions unrelated to framework
+
+### Update Quality (if update_mode)
+- [ ] "Clarifications" section added with timestamp
+- [ ] New insights merged without content loss
+- [ ] Conflicts documented and resolved
+- [ ] Framework alignment maintained
+
+---
+
+## 🎛️ **Command Parameters**
+
+### Required Parameters
+- `[role-name]`: Role identifier (ux-expert, ui-designer, system-architect, etc.)
+
+### Optional Parameters
+- `--session [session-id]`: Specify brainstorming session (auto-detect if omitted)
+- `--update`: Force incremental update mode (auto-detect if analysis exists)
+- `--include-questions`: Force context gathering even if analysis exists
+- `--skip-questions`: Skip all interactive context gathering
+- `--style-skill [package]`: For ui-designer only, load style SKILL package
+
+### Parameter Combinations
+
+| Scenario | Command | Behavior |
+|----------|---------|----------|
+| New analysis | `role-analysis ux-expert` | Generate + ask context questions |
+| Quick generation | `role-analysis ux-expert --skip-questions` | Generate without context |
+| Update existing | `role-analysis ux-expert --update` | Ask clarifications + merge |
+| Force questions | `role-analysis ux-expert --include-questions` | Ask even if exists |
+| Specific session | `role-analysis ux-expert --session WFS-xxx` | Target specific session |
+
+---
+
+## 🚫 **Error Handling**
+
+### Invalid Role Name
+```
+ERROR: Unknown role: "ui-expert"
+Valid roles: ux-expert, ui-designer, system-architect, product-manager,
+            product-owner, scrum-master, subject-matter-expert,
+            data-architect, api-designer
+```
+
+### No Active Session
+```
+ERROR: No active brainstorming session found
+Run: /workflow:brainstorm:artifacts "[topic]" to create session
+```
+
+### Missing Framework (with warning)
+```
+WARN: No guidance-specification.md found
+Generating standalone analysis without framework alignment
+Recommend: Run /workflow:brainstorm:artifacts first for better results
+```
+
+### Agent Execution Failure
+```
+ERROR: Conceptual planning agent failed
+Check: ${brainstorm_dir}/${role_name}/error.log
+Action: Retry with --skip-questions or check framework validity
+```
+
+---
+
+## 🔧 **Advanced Usage**
+
+### Batch Role Generation (via auto-parallel)
+```bash
+# This command handles multiple roles in parallel
+/workflow:brainstorm:auto-parallel "topic" --count 3
+# → Internally calls role-analysis for each selected role
+```
+
+### Manual Multi-Role Workflow
+```bash
+# 1. Create framework
+/workflow:brainstorm:artifacts "Build real-time collaboration platform" --count 3
+
+# 2. Generate each role with context
+/workflow:brainstorm:role-analysis system-architect --include-questions
+/workflow:brainstorm:role-analysis ui-designer --include-questions
+/workflow:brainstorm:role-analysis product-manager --include-questions
+
+# 3. Synthesize insights
+/workflow:brainstorm:synthesis --session WFS-xxx
+```
+
+### Iterative Refinement
+```bash
+# Initial generation
+/workflow:brainstorm:role-analysis ux-expert
+
+# User reviews and wants more depth
+/workflow:brainstorm:role-analysis ux-expert --update --include-questions
+# → Asks clarification questions, merges new insights
+```
+
+---
+
+## 📚 **Reference Information**
+
+### Role Template Locations
+- Templates: `~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/`
+- Format: `{role-name}.md` (e.g., `ux-expert.md`, `system-architect.md`)
+
+### Related Commands
+- `/workflow:brainstorm:artifacts` - Create framework and select roles
+- `/workflow:brainstorm:auto-parallel` - Parallel multi-role execution
+- `/workflow:brainstorm:synthesis` - Integrate role analyses
+- `/workflow:plan` - Generate implementation plan from synthesis
+
+### Context Package
+- Location: `.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.process/context-package.json`
+- Used by: `context-search-agent` (Phase 0 of artifacts)
+- Contains: Project context, tech stack, conflict risks

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/scrum-master.md

@@ -1,200 +0,0 @@
----
-name: scrum-master
-description: Generate or update scrum-master/analysis.md addressing guidance-specification discussion points for Agile process perspective
-argument-hint: "optional topic - uses existing framework if available"
-allowed-tools: Task(conceptual-planning-agent), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*)
----
-
-## 🎯 **Scrum Master Analysis Generator**
-
-### Purpose
-**Specialized command for generating scrum-master/analysis.md** that addresses guidance-specification.md discussion points from agile process and team collaboration perspective. Creates or updates role-specific analysis with framework references.
-
-### Core Function
-- **Framework-based Analysis**: Address each discussion point in guidance-specification.md
-- **Agile Process Focus**: Sprint planning, team dynamics, and delivery optimization
-- **Update Mechanism**: Create new or update existing analysis.md
-- **Agent Delegation**: Use conceptual-planning-agent for analysis generation
-
-### Analysis Scope
-- **Sprint Planning**: Task breakdown, estimation, and iteration planning
-- **Team Collaboration**: Communication patterns, impediment removal, and facilitation
-- **Process Optimization**: Agile ceremonies, retrospectives, and continuous improvement
-- **Delivery Management**: Velocity tracking, burndown analysis, and release planning
-
-## ⚙️ **Execution Protocol**
-
-### Phase 1: Session & Framework Detection
-```bash
-# Check active session and framework
-CHECK: find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d
-IF active_session EXISTS:
-    session_id = get_active_session()
-    brainstorm_dir = .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/
-
-    CHECK: brainstorm_dir/guidance-specification.md
-    IF EXISTS:
-        framework_mode = true
-        load_framework = true
-    ELSE:
-        IF topic_provided:
-            framework_mode = false  # Create analysis without framework
-        ELSE:
-            ERROR: "No framework found and no topic provided"
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Analysis Mode Detection
-```bash
-# Determine execution mode
-IF framework_mode == true:
-    mode = "framework_based_analysis"
-    topic_ref = load_framework_topic()
-    discussion_points = extract_framework_points()
-ELSE:
-    mode = "standalone_analysis"
-    topic_ref = provided_topic
-    discussion_points = generate_basic_structure()
-```
-
-### Phase 3: Agent Execution with Flow Control
-**Framework-Based Analysis Generation**
-
-```bash
-Task(conceptual-planning-agent): "
-[FLOW_CONTROL]
-
-Execute scrum-master analysis for existing topic framework
-
-## Context Loading
-ASSIGNED_ROLE: scrum-master
-OUTPUT_LOCATION: .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/scrum-master/
-ANALYSIS_MODE: {framework_mode ? "framework_based" : "standalone"}
-
-## Flow Control Steps
-1. **load_topic_framework**
-   - Action: Load structured topic discussion framework
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/guidance-specification.md)
-   - Output: topic_framework_content
-
-2. **load_role_template**
-   - Action: Load scrum-master planning template
-   - Command: bash($(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/scrum-master.md))
-   - Output: role_template_guidelines
-
-3. **load_session_metadata**
-   - Action: Load session metadata and existing context
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/workflow-session.json)
-   - Output: session_context
-
-## Analysis Requirements
-**Framework Reference**: Address all discussion points in guidance-specification.md from agile process and team collaboration perspective
-**Role Focus**: Sprint planning, team dynamics, process optimization, delivery management
-**Structured Approach**: Create analysis.md addressing framework discussion points
-**Template Integration**: Apply role template guidelines within framework structure
-
-## Expected Deliverables
-1. **analysis.md**: Comprehensive agile process analysis addressing all framework discussion points
-2. **Framework Reference**: Include @../guidance-specification.md reference in analysis
-
-## Completion Criteria
-- Address each discussion point from guidance-specification.md with scrum mastery expertise
-- Provide actionable sprint planning and team facilitation strategies
-- Include process optimization and impediment removal insights
-- Reference framework document using @ notation for integration
-"
-```
-
-## 📋 **TodoWrite Integration**
-
-### Workflow Progress Tracking
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({
-  todos: [
-    {
-      content: "Detect active session and locate topic framework",
-      status: "in_progress",
-      activeForm: "Detecting session and framework"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Load guidance-specification.md and session metadata for context",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Loading framework and session context"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Execute scrum-master analysis using conceptual-planning-agent with FLOW_CONTROL",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Executing scrum-master framework analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Generate analysis.md addressing all framework discussion points",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Generating structured scrum-master analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Update workflow-session.json with scrum-master completion status",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Updating session metadata"
-    }
-  ]
-});
-```
-
-## 📊 **Output Structure**
-
-### Framework-Based Analysis
-```
-.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/scrum-master/
-└── analysis.md    # Structured analysis addressing guidance-specification.md discussion points
-```
-
-### Analysis Document Structure
-```markdown
-# Scrum Master Analysis: [Topic from Framework]
-
-## Framework Reference
-**Topic Framework**: @../guidance-specification.md
-**Role Focus**: Agile Process & Team Collaboration perspective
-
-## Discussion Points Analysis
-[Address each point from guidance-specification.md with scrum mastery expertise]
-
-### Core Requirements (from framework)
-[Sprint planning and iteration breakdown perspective]
-
-### Technical Considerations (from framework)
-[Technical debt management and process considerations]
-
-### User Experience Factors (from framework)
-[User story refinement and acceptance criteria analysis]
-
-### Implementation Challenges (from framework)
-[Impediment identification and removal strategies]
-
-### Success Metrics (from framework)
-[Velocity tracking, burndown metrics, and team performance indicators]
-
-## Scrum Master Specific Recommendations
-[Role-specific agile process optimization and team facilitation strategies]
-
----
-*Generated by scrum-master analysis addressing structured framework*
-```
-
-## 🔄 **Session Integration**
-
-### Completion Status Update
-```json
-{
-  "scrum_master": {
-    "status": "completed",
-    "framework_addressed": true,
-    "output_location": ".workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/scrum-master/analysis.md",
-    "framework_reference": "@../guidance-specification.md"
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Integration Points
-- **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md for structured discussion points
-- **Cross-Role Synthesis**: Agile process insights available for synthesis-report.md integration
-- **Agent Autonomy**: Independent execution with framework guidance

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/subject-matter-expert.md

@@ -1,200 +0,0 @@
----
-name: subject-matter-expert
-description: Generate or update subject-matter-expert/analysis.md addressing guidance-specification discussion points for domain expertise perspective
-argument-hint: "optional topic - uses existing framework if available"
-allowed-tools: Task(conceptual-planning-agent), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*)
----
-
-## 🎯 **Subject Matter Expert Analysis Generator**
-
-### Purpose
-**Specialized command for generating subject-matter-expert/analysis.md** that addresses guidance-specification.md discussion points from domain knowledge and technical expertise perspective. Creates or updates role-specific analysis with framework references.
-
-### Core Function
-- **Framework-based Analysis**: Address each discussion point in guidance-specification.md
-- **Domain Expertise Focus**: Deep technical knowledge, industry standards, and best practices
-- **Update Mechanism**: Create new or update existing analysis.md
-- **Agent Delegation**: Use conceptual-planning-agent for analysis generation
-
-### Analysis Scope
-- **Domain Knowledge**: Industry-specific expertise, regulatory requirements, and compliance
-- **Technical Standards**: Best practices, design patterns, and architectural guidelines
-- **Risk Assessment**: Technical debt, scalability concerns, and maintenance implications
-- **Knowledge Transfer**: Documentation strategies, training requirements, and expertise sharing
-
-## ⚙️ **Execution Protocol**
-
-### Phase 1: Session & Framework Detection
-```bash
-# Check active session and framework
-CHECK: find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d
-IF active_session EXISTS:
-    session_id = get_active_session()
-    brainstorm_dir = .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/
-
-    CHECK: brainstorm_dir/guidance-specification.md
-    IF EXISTS:
-        framework_mode = true
-        load_framework = true
-    ELSE:
-        IF topic_provided:
-            framework_mode = false  # Create analysis without framework
-        ELSE:
-            ERROR: "No framework found and no topic provided"
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Analysis Mode Detection
-```bash
-# Determine execution mode
-IF framework_mode == true:
-    mode = "framework_based_analysis"
-    topic_ref = load_framework_topic()
-    discussion_points = extract_framework_points()
-ELSE:
-    mode = "standalone_analysis"
-    topic_ref = provided_topic
-    discussion_points = generate_basic_structure()
-```
-
-### Phase 3: Agent Execution with Flow Control
-**Framework-Based Analysis Generation**
-
-```bash
-Task(conceptual-planning-agent): "
-[FLOW_CONTROL]
-
-Execute subject-matter-expert analysis for existing topic framework
-
-## Context Loading
-ASSIGNED_ROLE: subject-matter-expert
-OUTPUT_LOCATION: .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/subject-matter-expert/
-ANALYSIS_MODE: {framework_mode ? "framework_based" : "standalone"}
-
-## Flow Control Steps
-1. **load_topic_framework**
-   - Action: Load structured topic discussion framework
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/guidance-specification.md)
-   - Output: topic_framework_content
-
-2. **load_role_template**
-   - Action: Load subject-matter-expert planning template
-   - Command: bash($(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/subject-matter-expert.md))
-   - Output: role_template_guidelines
-
-3. **load_session_metadata**
-   - Action: Load session metadata and existing context
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/workflow-session.json)
-   - Output: session_context
-
-## Analysis Requirements
-**Framework Reference**: Address all discussion points in guidance-specification.md from domain expertise and technical standards perspective
-**Role Focus**: Domain knowledge, technical standards, risk assessment, knowledge transfer
-**Structured Approach**: Create analysis.md addressing framework discussion points
-**Template Integration**: Apply role template guidelines within framework structure
-
-## Expected Deliverables
-1. **analysis.md**: Comprehensive domain expertise analysis addressing all framework discussion points
-2. **Framework Reference**: Include @../guidance-specification.md reference in analysis
-
-## Completion Criteria
-- Address each discussion point from guidance-specification.md with subject matter expertise
-- Provide actionable technical standards and best practices recommendations
-- Include risk assessment and compliance considerations
-- Reference framework document using @ notation for integration
-"
-```
-
-## 📋 **TodoWrite Integration**
-
-### Workflow Progress Tracking
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({
-  todos: [
-    {
-      content: "Detect active session and locate topic framework",
-      status: "in_progress",
-      activeForm: "Detecting session and framework"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Load guidance-specification.md and session metadata for context",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Loading framework and session context"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Execute subject-matter-expert analysis using conceptual-planning-agent with FLOW_CONTROL",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Executing subject-matter-expert framework analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Generate analysis.md addressing all framework discussion points",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Generating structured subject-matter-expert analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Update workflow-session.json with subject-matter-expert completion status",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Updating session metadata"
-    }
-  ]
-});
-```
-
-## 📊 **Output Structure**
-
-### Framework-Based Analysis
-```
-.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/subject-matter-expert/
-└── analysis.md    # Structured analysis addressing guidance-specification.md discussion points
-```
-
-### Analysis Document Structure
-```markdown
-# Subject Matter Expert Analysis: [Topic from Framework]
-
-## Framework Reference
-**Topic Framework**: @../guidance-specification.md
-**Role Focus**: Domain Expertise & Technical Standards perspective
-
-## Discussion Points Analysis
-[Address each point from guidance-specification.md with subject matter expertise]
-
-### Core Requirements (from framework)
-[Domain-specific requirements and industry standards perspective]
-
-### Technical Considerations (from framework)
-[Deep technical analysis, architectural patterns, and best practices]
-
-### User Experience Factors (from framework)
-[Domain-specific usability standards and industry conventions]
-
-### Implementation Challenges (from framework)
-[Technical risks, scalability concerns, and maintenance implications]
-
-### Success Metrics (from framework)
-[Domain-specific KPIs, compliance metrics, and quality standards]
-
-## Subject Matter Expert Specific Recommendations
-[Role-specific technical expertise and industry best practices]
-
----
-*Generated by subject-matter-expert analysis addressing structured framework*
-```
-
-## 🔄 **Session Integration**
-
-### Completion Status Update
-```json
-{
-  "subject_matter_expert": {
-    "status": "completed",
-    "framework_addressed": true,
-    "output_location": ".workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/subject-matter-expert/analysis.md",
-    "framework_reference": "@../guidance-specification.md"
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Integration Points
-- **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md for structured discussion points
-- **Cross-Role Synthesis**: Domain expertise insights available for synthesis-report.md integration
-- **Agent Autonomy**: Independent execution with framework guidance

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/synthesis.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: synthesis
 description: Clarify and refine role analyses through intelligent Q&A and targeted updates with synthesis agent
-argument-hint: "[optional: --session session-id]"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [optional: --session session-id]"
 allowed-tools: Task(conceptual-planning-agent), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Edit(*), Glob(*), AskUserQuestion(*)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-select all enhancements, skip clarification questions, use default answers.
+
 ## Overview
 
 Six-phase workflow to eliminate ambiguities and enhance conceptual depth in role analyses:

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/system-architect.md

@@ -1,389 +0,0 @@
----
-name: system-architect
-description: Generate or update system-architect/analysis.md addressing guidance-specification discussion points for system architecture perspective
-argument-hint: "optional topic - uses existing framework if available"
-allowed-tools: Task(conceptual-planning-agent), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*)
----
-
-## 🏗️ **System Architect Analysis Generator**
-
-### Purpose
-**Specialized command for generating system-architect/analysis.md** that addresses guidance-specification.md discussion points from system architecture perspective. Creates or updates role-specific analysis with framework references.
-
-### Core Function
-- **Framework-based Analysis**: Address each discussion point in guidance-specification.md
-- **Architecture Focus**: Technical architecture, scalability, and system design perspective
-- **Update Mechanism**: Create new or update existing analysis.md
-- **Agent Delegation**: Use conceptual-planning-agent for analysis generation
-
-### Analysis Scope
-- **Technical Architecture**: Scalable and maintainable system design
-- **Technology Selection**: Stack evaluation and architectural decisions
-- **Performance & Scalability**: Capacity planning and optimization strategies
-- **Integration Patterns**: System communication and data flow design
-
-### Role Boundaries & Responsibilities
-
-#### **What This Role OWNS (Macro-Architecture)**
-- **System-Level Architecture**: Service boundaries, deployment topology, and system composition
-- **Cross-Service Communication Patterns**: Choosing between microservices/monolithic, event-driven/request-response, sync/async patterns
-- **Technology Stack Decisions**: Language, framework, database, and infrastructure choices
-- **Non-Functional Requirements**: Scalability, performance, availability, disaster recovery, and monitoring strategies
-- **Integration Planning**: How systems and services connect at the macro level (not specific API contracts)
-
-#### **What This Role DOES NOT Own (Defers to Other Roles)**
-- **API Contract Details**: Specific endpoint definitions, URL structures, HTTP methods → Defers to **API Designer**
-- **Data Schemas**: Detailed data model design and entity relationships → Defers to **Data Architect**
-- **UI/UX Design**: Interface design and user experience → Defers to **UX Expert** and **UI Designer**
-
-#### **Handoff Points**
-- **TO API Designer**: Provides architectural constraints (REST vs GraphQL, sync vs async) that define the API design space
-- **TO Data Architect**: Provides system-level data flow requirements and integration patterns
-- **FROM Data Architect**: Receives canonical data model to inform system integration design
-
-## ⚙️ **Execution Protocol**
-
-### Phase 1: Session & Framework Detection
-```bash
-# Check active session and framework
-CHECK: find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d
-IF active_session EXISTS:
-    session_id = get_active_session()
-    brainstorm_dir = .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/
-
-    CHECK: brainstorm_dir/guidance-specification.md
-    IF EXISTS:
-        framework_mode = true
-        load_framework = true
-    ELSE:
-        IF topic_provided:
-            framework_mode = false  # Create analysis without framework
-        ELSE:
-            ERROR: "No framework found and no topic provided"
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Analysis Mode Detection
-```bash
-# Check existing analysis
-CHECK: brainstorm_dir/system-architect/analysis.md
-IF EXISTS:
-    SHOW existing analysis summary
-    ASK: "Analysis exists. Do you want to:"
-    OPTIONS:
-      1. "Update with new insights" → Update existing
-      2. "Replace completely" → Generate new
-      3. "Cancel" → Exit without changes
-ELSE:
-    CREATE new analysis
-```
-
-### Phase 3: Agent Task Generation
-**Framework-Based Analysis** (when guidance-specification.md exists):
-```bash
-Task(subagent_type="conceptual-planning-agent",
-     run_in_background=false,
-     prompt="Generate system architect analysis addressing topic framework
-
-     ## Framework Integration Required
-     **MANDATORY**: Load and address guidance-specification.md discussion points
-     **Framework Reference**: @{session.brainstorm_dir}/guidance-specification.md
-     **Output Location**: {session.brainstorm_dir}/system-architect/analysis.md
-
-     ## Analysis Requirements
-     1. **Load Topic Framework**: Read guidance-specification.md completely
-     2. **Address Each Discussion Point**: Respond to all 5 framework sections from system architecture perspective
-     3. **Include Framework Reference**: Start analysis.md with @../guidance-specification.md
-     4. **Technical Focus**: Emphasize scalability, architecture patterns, technology decisions
-     5. **Structured Response**: Use framework structure for analysis organization
-
-     ## Framework Sections to Address
-     - Core Requirements (from architecture perspective)
-     - Technical Considerations (detailed architectural analysis)
-     - User Experience Factors (technical UX considerations)
-     - Implementation Challenges (architecture risks and solutions)
-     - Success Metrics (technical metrics and monitoring)
-
-     ## Output Structure Required
-     ```markdown
-     # System Architect Analysis: [Topic]
-
-     **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md
-     **Role Focus**: System Architecture and Technical Design
-
-     ## Core Requirements Analysis
-     [Address framework requirements from architecture perspective]
-
-     ## Technical Considerations
-     [Detailed architectural analysis]
-
-     ## User Experience Factors
-     [Technical aspects of UX implementation]
-
-     ## Implementation Challenges
-     [Architecture risks and mitigation strategies]
-
-     ## Success Metrics
-     [Technical metrics and system monitoring]
-
-     ## Architecture-Specific Recommendations
-     [Detailed technical recommendations]
-     ```",
-     description="Generate system architect framework-based analysis")
-```
-
-### Phase 4: Update Mechanism
-**Analysis Update Process**:
-```bash
-# For existing analysis updates
-IF update_mode = "incremental":
-    Task(subagent_type="conceptual-planning-agent",
-         run_in_background=false,
-         prompt="Update existing system architect analysis
-
-         ## Current Analysis Context
-         **Existing Analysis**: @{session.brainstorm_dir}/system-architect/analysis.md
-         **Framework Reference**: @{session.brainstorm_dir}/guidance-specification.md
-
-         ## Update Requirements
-         1. **Preserve Structure**: Maintain existing analysis structure
-         2. **Add New Insights**: Integrate new technical insights and recommendations
-         3. **Framework Alignment**: Ensure continued alignment with topic framework
-         4. **Technical Updates**: Add new architecture patterns, technology considerations
-         5. **Maintain References**: Keep @../guidance-specification.md reference
-
-         ## Update Instructions
-         - Read existing analysis completely
-         - Identify areas for enhancement or new insights
-         - Add technical depth while preserving original structure
-         - Update recommendations with new architectural approaches
-         - Maintain framework discussion point addressing",
-         description="Update system architect analysis incrementally")
-```
-
-## Document Structure
-
-### Output Files
-```
-.workflow/active/WFS-[topic]/.brainstorming/
-├── guidance-specification.md          # Input: Framework (if exists)
-└── system-architect/
-    └── analysis.md            # ★ OUTPUT: Framework-based analysis
-```
-
-### Analysis Structure
-**Required Elements**:
-- **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md (if framework exists)
-- **Role Focus**: System Architecture and Technical Design perspective
-- **5 Framework Sections**: Address each framework discussion point
-- **Technical Recommendations**: Architecture-specific insights and solutions
-- How should we design APIs and manage versioning?
-
-**4. Performance and Scalability**
-- Where are the current system performance bottlenecks?
-- How should we handle traffic growth and scaling demands?
-- What database scaling and optimization strategies are needed?
-
-## ⚡ **Two-Step Execution Flow**
-
-### ⚠️ Session Management - FIRST STEP
-Session detection and selection:
-```bash
-# Check for existing sessions
-existing_sessions=$(find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d 2>/dev/null)
-if [ multiple_sessions ]; then
-  prompt_user_to_select_session()
-else
-  use_existing_or_create_new()
-fi
-```
-
-### Step 1: Context Gathering Phase
-**System Architect Perspective Questioning**
-
-Before agent assignment, gather comprehensive system architecture context:
-
-#### 📋 Role-Specific Questions
-1. **Scale & Performance Requirements**
-   - Expected user load and traffic patterns?
-   - Performance requirements (latency, throughput)?
-   - Data volume and growth projections?
-
-2. **Technical Constraints & Environment**
-   - Existing technology stack and constraints?
-   - Integration requirements with external systems?
-   - Infrastructure and deployment environment?
-
-3. **Architecture Complexity & Patterns**
-   - Microservices vs monolithic considerations?
-   - Data consistency and transaction requirements?
-   - Event-driven vs request-response patterns?
-
-4. **Non-Functional Requirements**
-   - High availability and disaster recovery needs?
-   - Security and compliance requirements?
-   - Monitoring and observability expectations?
-
-#### Context Validation
-- **Minimum Response**: Each answer must be ≥50 characters
-- **Re-prompting**: Insufficient detail triggers follow-up questions
-- **Context Storage**: Save responses to `.brainstorming/system-architect-context.md`
-
-### Step 2: Agent Assignment with Flow Control
-**Dedicated Agent Execution**
-
-```bash
-Task(conceptual-planning-agent): "
-[FLOW_CONTROL]
-
-Execute dedicated system-architect conceptual analysis for: {topic}
-
-ASSIGNED_ROLE: system-architect
-OUTPUT_LOCATION: .brainstorming/system-architect/
-USER_CONTEXT: {validated_responses_from_context_gathering}
-
-Flow Control Steps:
-[
-  {
-    \"step\": \"load_role_template\",
-    \"action\": \"Load system-architect planning template\",
-    \"command\": \"bash($(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/system-architect.md))\",
-    \"output_to\": \"role_template\"
-  }
-]
-
-Conceptual Analysis Requirements:
-- Apply system-architect perspective to topic analysis
-- Focus on architectural patterns, scalability, and integration points
-- Use loaded role template framework for analysis structure
-- Generate role-specific deliverables in designated output location
-- Address all user context from questioning phase
-
-Deliverables:
-- analysis.md: Main system architecture analysis
-- recommendations.md: Architecture recommendations
-- deliverables/: Architecture-specific outputs as defined in role template
-
-Embody system-architect role expertise for comprehensive conceptual planning."
-```
-
-### Progress Tracking
-TodoWrite tracking for two-step process:
-```json
-[
-  {"content": "Gather system architect context through role-specific questioning", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Gathering context"},
-  {"content": "Validate context responses and save to system-architect-context.md", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Validating context"},
-  {"content": "Load system-architect planning template via flow control", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Loading template"},
-  {"content": "Execute dedicated conceptual-planning-agent for system-architect role", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Executing agent"}
-]
-```
-
-## 📊 **Output Specification**
-
-### Output Location
-```
-.workflow/active/WFS-{topic-slug}/.brainstorming/system-architect/
-├── analysis.md                 # Primary architecture analysis
-├── architecture-design.md      # Detailed system design and diagrams
-├── technology-stack.md         # Technology stack recommendations and justifications
-└── integration-plan.md         # System integration and API strategies
-```
-
-### Document Templates
-
-#### analysis.md Structure
-```markdown
-# System Architecture Analysis: {Topic}
-*Generated: {timestamp}*
-
-## Executive Summary
-[Key architectural findings and recommendations overview]
-
-## Current State Assessment
-### Existing Architecture Overview
-### Technical Stack Analysis
-### Performance Bottlenecks
-### Technical Debt Assessment
-
-## Requirements Analysis
-### Functional Requirements
-### Non-Functional Requirements
-- Performance: [Response time, throughput requirements]
-- Scalability: [User growth, data volume expectations]
-- Availability: [Uptime requirements]
-- Security: [Security requirements]
-
-## Proposed Architecture
-### High-Level Architecture Design
-### Component Breakdown
-### Data Flow Diagrams
-### Technology Stack Recommendations
-
-## Implementation Strategy
-### Migration Planning
-### Risk Mitigation
-### Performance Optimization
-### Security Considerations
-
-## Scalability and Maintenance
-### Horizontal Scaling Strategy
-### Monitoring and Observability
-### Deployment Strategy
-### Long-term Maintenance Plan
-```
-
-## 🔄 **Session Integration**
-
-### Status Synchronization
-Upon completion, update `workflow-session.json`:
-```json
-{
-  "phases": {
-    "BRAINSTORM": {
-      "system_architect": {
-        "status": "completed",
-        "completed_at": "timestamp",
-        "output_directory": ".workflow/active/WFS-{topic}/.brainstorming/system-architect/",
-        "key_insights": ["scalability_bottleneck", "architecture_pattern", "technology_recommendation"]
-      }
-    }
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Cross-Role Collaboration
-System architect perspective provides:
-- **Technical Constraints and Possibilities** → Product Manager
-- **Architecture Requirements and Limitations** → UI Designer
-- **Data Architecture Requirements** → Data Architect
-- **Security Architecture Framework** → Security Expert
-- **Technical Implementation Framework** → Feature Planner
-
-## ✅ **Quality Assurance**
-
-### Required Analysis Elements
-- [ ] Clear architecture diagrams and component designs
-- [ ] Detailed technology stack evaluation and recommendations
-- [ ] Scalability and performance analysis with metrics
-- [ ] System integration and API design specifications
-- [ ] Comprehensive risk assessment and mitigation strategies
-
-### Architecture Design Principles
-- [ ] **Scalability**: System can handle growth in users and data
-- [ ] **Maintainability**: Clear code structure, easy to modify and extend
-- [ ] **Reliability**: Built-in fault tolerance and recovery mechanisms
-- [ ] **Security**: Integrated security controls and protection measures
-- [ ] **Performance**: Meets response time and throughput requirements
-
-### Technical Decision Validation
-- [ ] Technology choices have thorough justification and comparison analysis
-- [ ] Architectural patterns align with business requirements and constraints
-- [ ] Integration solutions consider compatibility and maintenance costs
-- [ ] Deployment strategies are feasible with acceptable risk levels
-- [ ] Monitoring and operations strategies are comprehensive and actionable
-
-### Implementation Readiness
-- [ ] **Technical Feasibility**: All proposed solutions are technically achievable
-- [ ] **Resource Planning**: Resource requirements clearly defined and realistic
-- [ ] **Risk Management**: Technical risks identified with mitigation plans
-- [ ] **Performance Validation**: Architecture can meet performance requirements
-- [ ] **Evolution Strategy**: Design allows for future growth and changes

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/ui-designer.md

@@ -1,221 +0,0 @@
----
-name: ui-designer
-description: Generate or update ui-designer/analysis.md addressing guidance-specification discussion points for UI design perspective
-argument-hint: "optional topic - uses existing framework if available"
-allowed-tools: Task(conceptual-planning-agent), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*)
----
-
-## 🎨 **UI Designer Analysis Generator**
-
-### Purpose
-**Specialized command for generating ui-designer/analysis.md** that addresses guidance-specification.md discussion points from UI/UX design perspective. Creates or updates role-specific analysis with framework references.
-
-### Core Function
-- **Framework-based Analysis**: Address each discussion point in guidance-specification.md
-- **UI/UX Focus**: User experience, interface design, and accessibility perspective
-- **Update Mechanism**: Create new or update existing analysis.md
-- **Agent Delegation**: Use conceptual-planning-agent for analysis generation
-
-### Analysis Scope
-- **Visual Design**: Color palettes, typography, spacing, and visual hierarchy implementation
-- **High-Fidelity Mockups**: Polished, pixel-perfect interface designs
-- **Design System Implementation**: Component libraries, design tokens, and style guides
-- **Micro-Interactions & Animations**: Transition effects, loading states, and interactive feedback
-- **Responsive Design**: Layout adaptations for different screen sizes and devices
-
-### Role Boundaries & Responsibilities
-
-#### **What This Role OWNS (Concrete Visual Interface Implementation)**
-- **Visual Design Language**: Colors, typography, iconography, spacing, and overall aesthetic
-- **High-Fidelity Mockups**: Polished designs showing exactly how the interface will look
-- **Design System Components**: Building and documenting reusable UI components (buttons, inputs, cards, etc.)
-- **Design Tokens**: Defining variables for colors, spacing, typography that can be used in code
-- **Micro-Interactions**: Hover states, transitions, animations, and interactive feedback details
-- **Responsive Layouts**: Adapting designs for mobile, tablet, and desktop breakpoints
-
-#### **What This Role DOES NOT Own (Defers to Other Roles)**
-- **User Research & Personas**: User behavior analysis and needs assessment → Defers to **UX Expert**
-- **Information Architecture**: Content structure and navigation strategy → Defers to **UX Expert**
-- **Low-Fidelity Wireframes**: Structural layouts without visual design → Defers to **UX Expert**
-
-#### **Handoff Points**
-- **FROM UX Expert**: Receives wireframes, user flows, and information architecture as the foundation for visual design
-- **TO Frontend Developers**: Provides design specifications, component libraries, and design tokens for implementation
-- **WITH API Designer**: Coordinates on data presentation and form validation feedback (visual aspects only)
-
-## ⚙️ **Execution Protocol**
-
-### Phase 1: Session & Framework Detection
-```bash
-# Check active session and framework
-CHECK: find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d
-IF active_session EXISTS:
-    session_id = get_active_session()
-    brainstorm_dir = .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/
-
-    CHECK: brainstorm_dir/guidance-specification.md
-    IF EXISTS:
-        framework_mode = true
-        load_framework = true
-    ELSE:
-        IF topic_provided:
-            framework_mode = false  # Create analysis without framework
-        ELSE:
-            ERROR: "No framework found and no topic provided"
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Analysis Mode Detection
-```bash
-# Determine execution mode
-IF framework_mode == true:
-    mode = "framework_based_analysis"
-    topic_ref = load_framework_topic()
-    discussion_points = extract_framework_points()
-ELSE:
-    mode = "standalone_analysis"
-    topic_ref = provided_topic
-    discussion_points = generate_basic_structure()
-```
-
-### Phase 3: Agent Execution with Flow Control
-**Framework-Based Analysis Generation**
-
-```bash
-Task(conceptual-planning-agent): "
-[FLOW_CONTROL]
-
-Execute ui-designer analysis for existing topic framework
-
-## Context Loading
-ASSIGNED_ROLE: ui-designer
-OUTPUT_LOCATION: .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/ui-designer/
-ANALYSIS_MODE: {framework_mode ? "framework_based" : "standalone"}
-
-## Flow Control Steps
-1. **load_topic_framework**
-   - Action: Load structured topic discussion framework
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/guidance-specification.md)
-   - Output: topic_framework_content
-
-2. **load_role_template**
-   - Action: Load ui-designer planning template
-   - Command: bash($(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/ui-designer.md))
-   - Output: role_template_guidelines
-
-3. **load_session_metadata**
-   - Action: Load session metadata and existing context
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/workflow-session.json)
-   - Output: session_context
-
-## Analysis Requirements
-**Framework Reference**: Address all discussion points in guidance-specification.md from UI/UX perspective
-**Role Focus**: User experience design, interface optimization, accessibility compliance
-**Structured Approach**: Create analysis.md addressing framework discussion points
-**Template Integration**: Apply role template guidelines within framework structure
-
-## Expected Deliverables
-1. **analysis.md**: Comprehensive UI/UX analysis addressing all framework discussion points
-2. **Framework Reference**: Include @../guidance-specification.md reference in analysis
-
-## Completion Criteria
-- Address each discussion point from guidance-specification.md with UI/UX design expertise
-- Provide actionable design recommendations and interface solutions
-- Include accessibility considerations and WCAG compliance planning
-- Reference framework document using @ notation for integration
-"
-```
-
-## 📋 **TodoWrite Integration**
-
-### Workflow Progress Tracking
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({
-  todos: [
-    {
-      content: "Detect active session and locate topic framework",
-      status: "in_progress",
-      activeForm: "Detecting session and framework"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Load guidance-specification.md and session metadata for context",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Loading framework and session context"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Execute ui-designer analysis using conceptual-planning-agent with FLOW_CONTROL",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Executing ui-designer framework analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Generate analysis.md addressing all framework discussion points",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Generating structured ui-designer analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Update workflow-session.json with ui-designer completion status",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Updating session metadata"
-    }
-  ]
-});
-```
-
-## 📊 **Output Structure**
-
-### Framework-Based Analysis
-```
-.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/ui-designer/
-└── analysis.md    # Structured analysis addressing guidance-specification.md discussion points
-```
-
-### Analysis Document Structure
-```markdown
-# UI Designer Analysis: [Topic from Framework]
-
-## Framework Reference
-**Topic Framework**: @../guidance-specification.md
-**Role Focus**: UI/UX Design perspective
-
-## Discussion Points Analysis
-[Address each point from guidance-specification.md with UI/UX expertise]
-
-### Core Requirements (from framework)
-[UI/UX perspective on requirements]
-
-### Technical Considerations (from framework)
-[Interface and design system considerations]
-
-### User Experience Factors (from framework)
-[Detailed UX analysis and recommendations]
-
-### Implementation Challenges (from framework)
-[Design implementation and accessibility considerations]
-
-### Success Metrics (from framework)
-[UX metrics and usability success criteria]
-
-## UI/UX Specific Recommendations
-[Role-specific design recommendations and solutions]
-
----
-*Generated by ui-designer analysis addressing structured framework*
-```
-
-## 🔄 **Session Integration**
-
-### Completion Status Update
-```json
-{
-  "ui_designer": {
-    "status": "completed",
-    "framework_addressed": true,
-    "output_location": ".workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/ui-designer/analysis.md",
-    "framework_reference": "@../guidance-specification.md"
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Integration Points
-- **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md for structured discussion points
-- **Cross-Role Synthesis**: UI/UX insights available for synthesis-report.md integration
-- **Agent Autonomy**: Independent execution with framework guidance

.claude/commands/workflow/brainstorm/ux-expert.md

@@ -1,221 +0,0 @@
----
-name: ux-expert
-description: Generate or update ux-expert/analysis.md addressing guidance-specification discussion points for UX perspective
-argument-hint: "optional topic - uses existing framework if available"
-allowed-tools: Task(conceptual-planning-agent), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*)
----
-
-## 🎯 **UX Expert Analysis Generator**
-
-### Purpose
-**Specialized command for generating ux-expert/analysis.md** that addresses guidance-specification.md discussion points from user experience and interface design perspective. Creates or updates role-specific analysis with framework references.
-
-### Core Function
-- **Framework-based Analysis**: Address each discussion point in guidance-specification.md
-- **UX Design Focus**: User interface, interaction patterns, and usability optimization
-- **Update Mechanism**: Create new or update existing analysis.md
-- **Agent Delegation**: Use conceptual-planning-agent for analysis generation
-
-### Analysis Scope
-- **User Research**: User personas, behavioral analysis, and needs assessment
-- **Information Architecture**: Content structure, navigation hierarchy, and mental models
-- **User Journey Mapping**: User flows, task analysis, and interaction models
-- **Usability Strategy**: Accessibility planning, cognitive load reduction, and user testing frameworks
-- **Wireframing**: Low-fidelity layouts and structural prototypes (not visual design)
-
-### Role Boundaries & Responsibilities
-
-#### **What This Role OWNS (Abstract User Experience & Research)**
-- **User Research & Personas**: Understanding target users, their goals, pain points, and behaviors
-- **Information Architecture**: Organizing content and defining navigation structures at a conceptual level
-- **User Journey Mapping**: Defining user flows, task sequences, and interaction models
-- **Wireframes & Low-Fidelity Prototypes**: Structural layouts showing information hierarchy (boxes and arrows, not colors/fonts)
-- **Usability Testing Strategy**: Planning user testing, A/B tests, and validation methods
-- **Accessibility Planning**: WCAG compliance strategy and inclusive design principles
-
-#### **What This Role DOES NOT Own (Defers to Other Roles)**
-- **Visual Design**: Colors, typography, spacing, visual style → Defers to **UI Designer**
-- **High-Fidelity Mockups**: Polished, pixel-perfect designs → Defers to **UI Designer**
-- **Component Implementation**: Design system components, CSS, animations → Defers to **UI Designer**
-
-#### **Handoff Points**
-- **TO UI Designer**: Provides wireframes, user flows, and information architecture that UI Designer will transform into high-fidelity visual designs
-- **FROM User Research**: May receive external research data to inform UX decisions
-- **TO Product Owner**: Provides user insights and validation results to inform feature prioritization
-
-## ⚙️ **Execution Protocol**
-
-### Phase 1: Session & Framework Detection
-```bash
-# Check active session and framework
-CHECK: find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d
-IF active_session EXISTS:
-    session_id = get_active_session()
-    brainstorm_dir = .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/
-
-    CHECK: brainstorm_dir/guidance-specification.md
-    IF EXISTS:
-        framework_mode = true
-        load_framework = true
-    ELSE:
-        IF topic_provided:
-            framework_mode = false  # Create analysis without framework
-        ELSE:
-            ERROR: "No framework found and no topic provided"
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Analysis Mode Detection
-```bash
-# Determine execution mode
-IF framework_mode == true:
-    mode = "framework_based_analysis"
-    topic_ref = load_framework_topic()
-    discussion_points = extract_framework_points()
-ELSE:
-    mode = "standalone_analysis"
-    topic_ref = provided_topic
-    discussion_points = generate_basic_structure()
-```
-
-### Phase 3: Agent Execution with Flow Control
-**Framework-Based Analysis Generation**
-
-```bash
-Task(conceptual-planning-agent): "
-[FLOW_CONTROL]
-
-Execute ux-expert analysis for existing topic framework
-
-## Context Loading
-ASSIGNED_ROLE: ux-expert
-OUTPUT_LOCATION: .workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/ux-expert/
-ANALYSIS_MODE: {framework_mode ? "framework_based" : "standalone"}
-
-## Flow Control Steps
-1. **load_topic_framework**
-   - Action: Load structured topic discussion framework
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/guidance-specification.md)
-   - Output: topic_framework_content
-
-2. **load_role_template**
-   - Action: Load ux-expert planning template
-   - Command: bash($(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/ux-expert.md))
-   - Output: role_template_guidelines
-
-3. **load_session_metadata**
-   - Action: Load session metadata and existing context
-   - Command: Read(.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/workflow-session.json)
-   - Output: session_context
-
-## Analysis Requirements
-**Framework Reference**: Address all discussion points in guidance-specification.md from user experience and interface design perspective
-**Role Focus**: UI design, interaction patterns, usability optimization, design systems
-**Structured Approach**: Create analysis.md addressing framework discussion points
-**Template Integration**: Apply role template guidelines within framework structure
-
-## Expected Deliverables
-1. **analysis.md**: Comprehensive UX design analysis addressing all framework discussion points
-2. **Framework Reference**: Include @../guidance-specification.md reference in analysis
-
-## Completion Criteria
-- Address each discussion point from guidance-specification.md with UX design expertise
-- Provide actionable interface design and usability optimization strategies
-- Include accessibility considerations and interaction pattern recommendations
-- Reference framework document using @ notation for integration
-"
-```
-
-## 📋 **TodoWrite Integration**
-
-### Workflow Progress Tracking
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({
-  todos: [
-    {
-      content: "Detect active session and locate topic framework",
-      status: "in_progress",
-      activeForm: "Detecting session and framework"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Load guidance-specification.md and session metadata for context",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Loading framework and session context"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Execute ux-expert analysis using conceptual-planning-agent with FLOW_CONTROL",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Executing ux-expert framework analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Generate analysis.md addressing all framework discussion points",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Generating structured ux-expert analysis"
-    },
-    {
-      content: "Update workflow-session.json with ux-expert completion status",
-      status: "pending",
-      activeForm: "Updating session metadata"
-    }
-  ]
-});
-```
-
-## 📊 **Output Structure**
-
-### Framework-Based Analysis
-```
-.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/ux-expert/
-└── analysis.md    # Structured analysis addressing guidance-specification.md discussion points
-```
-
-### Analysis Document Structure
-```markdown
-# UX Expert Analysis: [Topic from Framework]
-
-## Framework Reference
-**Topic Framework**: @../guidance-specification.md
-**Role Focus**: User Experience & Interface Design perspective
-
-## Discussion Points Analysis
-[Address each point from guidance-specification.md with UX design expertise]
-
-### Core Requirements (from framework)
-[User interface and interaction design requirements perspective]
-
-### Technical Considerations (from framework)
-[Design system implementation and technical feasibility considerations]
-
-### User Experience Factors (from framework)
-[Usability optimization, accessibility, and user-centered design analysis]
-
-### Implementation Challenges (from framework)
-[Design implementation challenges and progressive enhancement strategies]
-
-### Success Metrics (from framework)
-[UX metrics including usability testing, user satisfaction, and design KPIs]
-
-## UX Expert Specific Recommendations
-[Role-specific interface design patterns and usability optimization strategies]
-
----
-*Generated by ux-expert analysis addressing structured framework*
-```
-
-## 🔄 **Session Integration**
-
-### Completion Status Update
-```json
-{
-  "ux_expert": {
-    "status": "completed",
-    "framework_addressed": true,
-    "output_location": ".workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/ux-expert/analysis.md",
-    "framework_reference": "@../guidance-specification.md"
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Integration Points
-- **Framework Reference**: @../guidance-specification.md for structured discussion points
-- **Cross-Role Synthesis**: UX design insights available for synthesis-report.md integration
-- **Agent Autonomy**: Independent execution with framework guidance

.claude/commands/workflow/clean.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 name: clean
 description: Intelligent code cleanup with mainline detection, stale artifact discovery, and safe execution
-argument-hint: "[--dry-run] [\"focus area\"]"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--dry-run] [\"focus area\"]"
 allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Glob(*), Bash(*), Write(*)
 ---
 
@@ -21,8 +21,22 @@ Intelligent cleanup command that explores the codebase to identify the developme
 
 ```bash
 /workflow:clean                          # Full intelligent cleanup (explore → analyze → confirm → execute)
+/workflow:clean --yes                    # Auto mode (use safe defaults, no confirmation)
 /workflow:clean --dry-run                # Explore and analyze only, no execution
-/workflow:clean "auth module"            # Focus cleanup on specific area
+/workflow:clean -y "auth module"         # Auto mode with focus area
+```
+
+## Auto Mode Defaults
+
+When `--yes` or `-y` flag is used:
+- **Categories to Clean**: Auto-selects `["Sessions"]` only (safest - only workflow sessions)
+- **Risk Level**: Auto-selects `"Low only"` (only low-risk items)
+- All confirmations skipped, proceeds directly to execution
+
+**Flag Parsing**:
+```javascript
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+const dryRun = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--dry-run')
 ```
 
 ## Execution Process
@@ -132,7 +146,7 @@ Scan and analyze workflow session directories:
 
 **Staleness criteria**:
 - Active sessions: No modification >7 days + no related git commits
-- Archives: >30 days old + no feature references in project.json
+- Archives: >30 days old + no feature references in project-tech.json
 - Lite-plan: >7 days old + plan.json not executed
 - Debug: >3 days old + issue not in recent commits
 
@@ -329,39 +343,57 @@ To execute cleanup: /workflow:clean
 
 **Step 3.3: User Confirmation**
 ```javascript
-AskUserQuestion({
-  questions: [
-    {
-      question: "Which categories to clean?",
-      header: "Categories",
-      multiSelect: true,
-      options: [
-        {
-          label: "Sessions",
-          description: `${manifest.summary.by_category.stale_sessions} stale workflow sessions`
-        },
-        {
-          label: "Documents",
-          description: `${manifest.summary.by_category.drifted_documents} drifted documents`
-        },
-        {
-          label: "Dead Code",
-          description: `${manifest.summary.by_category.dead_code} unused code files`
-        }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      question: "Risk level to include?",
-      header: "Risk",
-      multiSelect: false,
-      options: [
-        { label: "Low only", description: "Safest - only obviously stale items" },
-        { label: "Low + Medium", description: "Recommended - includes likely unused items" },
-        { label: "All", description: "Aggressive - includes high-risk items" }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-})
+// Parse --yes flag
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+
+let userSelection
+
+if (autoYes) {
+  // Auto mode: Use safe defaults
+  console.log(`[--yes] Auto-selecting safe cleanup defaults:`)
+  console.log(`  - Categories: Sessions only`)
+  console.log(`  - Risk level: Low only`)
+
+  userSelection = {
+    categories: ["Sessions"],
+    risk: "Low only"
+  }
+} else {
+  // Interactive mode: Ask user
+  userSelection = AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [
+      {
+        question: "Which categories to clean?",
+        header: "Categories",
+        multiSelect: true,
+        options: [
+          {
+            label: "Sessions",
+            description: `${manifest.summary.by_category.stale_sessions} stale workflow sessions`
+          },
+          {
+            label: "Documents",
+            description: `${manifest.summary.by_category.drifted_documents} drifted documents`
+          },
+          {
+            label: "Dead Code",
+            description: `${manifest.summary.by_category.dead_code} unused code files`
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Risk level to include?",
+        header: "Risk",
+        multiSelect: false,
+        options: [
+          { label: "Low only", description: "Safest - only obviously stale items" },
+          { label: "Low + Medium", description: "Recommended - includes likely unused items" },
+          { label: "All", description: "Aggressive - includes high-risk items" }
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  })
+}
 ```
 
 ---
@@ -443,8 +475,8 @@ if (selectedCategories.includes('Sessions')) {
   }
 }
 
-// Update project.json if features referenced deleted sessions
-const projectPath = '.workflow/project.json'
+// Update project-tech.json if features referenced deleted sessions
+const projectPath = '.workflow/project-tech.json'
 if (fileExists(projectPath)) {
   const project = JSON.parse(Read(projectPath))
   const deletedPaths = new Set(results.deleted)

.claude/commands/workflow/collaborative-plan-with-file.md

@@ -0,0 +1,617 @@
+---
+name: workflow:collaborative-plan-with-file
+description: Collaborative planning with Plan Note - Understanding agent creates shared plan-note.md template, parallel agents fill pre-allocated sections, conflict detection without merge. Outputs executable plan-note.md.
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] <task description> [--max-agents=5]"
+allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Write(*), Glob(*), Grep(*), mcp__ace-tool__search_context(*)
+---
+
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-approve splits, skip confirmations.
+
+# Collaborative Planning Command
+
+## Quick Start
+
+```bash
+# Basic usage
+/workflow:collaborative-plan-with-file "Implement real-time notification system"
+
+# With options
+/workflow:collaborative-plan-with-file "Refactor authentication module" --max-agents=4
+/workflow:collaborative-plan-with-file "Add payment gateway support" -y
+```
+
+**Context Source**: Understanding-Agent + Per-agent exploration
+**Output Directory**: `.workflow/.planning/{session-id}/`
+**Default Max Agents**: 5 (actual count based on requirement complexity)
+**Core Innovation**: Plan Note - shared collaborative document, no merge needed
+
+## Output Artifacts
+
+### Phase 1: Understanding Agent
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `plan-note.md` | Shared collaborative document with pre-allocated sections |
+| `requirement-analysis.json` | Sub-domain assignments and TASK ID ranges |
+
+### Phase 2: Per Sub-Agent
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `planning-context.md` | Evidence paths + synthesized understanding |
+| `plan.json` | Complete agent plan (detailed implementation) |
+| Updates to `plan-note.md` | Agent fills pre-allocated sections |
+
+### Phase 3: Final Output
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `plan-note.md` | ⭐ Executable plan with conflict markers |
+| `conflicts.json` | Detected conflicts with resolution options |
+| `plan.md` | Human-readable summary |
+
+## Overview
+
+Unified collaborative planning workflow using **Plan Note** architecture:
+
+1. **Understanding**: Agent analyzes requirements and creates plan-note.md template with pre-allocated sections
+2. **Parallel Planning**: Each agent generates plan.json + fills their pre-allocated section in plan-note.md
+3. **Conflict Detection**: Scan plan-note.md for conflicts (no merge needed)
+4. **Completion**: Generate plan.md summary, ready for execution
+
+```
+┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│                    PLAN NOTE COLLABORATIVE PLANNING                      │
+├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+│                                                                          │
+│  Phase 1: Understanding & Template Creation                              │
+│     ├─ Understanding-Agent analyzes requirements                         │
+│     ├─ Identify 2-5 sub-domains (focus areas)                            │
+│     ├─ Create plan-note.md with pre-allocated sections                   │
+│     └─ Assign TASK ID ranges (no conflicts)                              │
+│                                                                          │
+│  Phase 2: Parallel Agent Execution (No Locks Needed)                     │
+│     ┌──────────────┬──────────────┬──────────────┐                       │
+│     │   Agent 1    │   Agent 2    │   Agent N    │                       │
+│     ├──────────────┼──────────────┼──────────────┤                       │
+│     │ Own Section  │ Own Section  │ Own Section  │  ← Pre-allocated      │
+│     │ plan.json    │ plan.json    │ plan.json    │  ← Detailed plans     │
+│     └──────────────┴──────────────┴──────────────┘                       │
+│                                                                          │
+│  Phase 3: Conflict Detection (Single Source)                             │
+│     ├─ Parse plan-note.md (all sections)                                 │
+│     ├─ Detect file/dependency/strategy conflicts                         │
+│     └─ Update plan-note.md conflict section                              │
+│                                                                          │
+│  Phase 4: Completion (No Merge)                                          │
+│     ├─ Generate plan.md (human-readable)                                 │
+│     └─ Ready for execution                                               │
+│                                                                          │
+└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+## Output Structure
+
+```
+.workflow/.planning/{CPLAN-slug-YYYY-MM-DD}/
+├── plan-note.md                  # ⭐ Core: Requirements + Tasks + Conflicts
+├── requirement-analysis.json     # Phase 1: Sub-domain assignments
+├── agents/                       # Phase 2: Per-agent detailed plans
+│   ├── {focus-area-1}/
+│   │   ├── planning-context.md  # Evidence + understanding
+│   │   └── plan.json            # Complete agent plan
+│   ├── {focus-area-2}/
+│   │   └── ...
+│   └── {focus-area-N}/
+│       └── ...
+├── conflicts.json                # Phase 3: Conflict details
+└── plan.md                       # Phase 4: Human-readable summary
+```
+
+## Implementation
+
+### Session Initialization
+
+**Objective**: Create session context and directory structure for collaborative planning.
+
+**Required Actions**:
+1. Extract task description from `$ARGUMENTS`
+2. Generate session ID with format: `CPLAN-{slug}-{date}`
+   - slug: lowercase, alphanumeric, max 30 chars
+   - date: YYYY-MM-DD (UTC+8)
+3. Define session folder: `.workflow/.planning/{session-id}`
+4. Parse command options:
+   - `--max-agents=N` (default: 5)
+   - `-y` or `--yes` for auto-approval mode
+5. Create directory structure: `{session-folder}/agents/`
+
+**Session Variables**:
+- `sessionId`: Unique session identifier
+- `sessionFolder`: Base directory for all artifacts
+- `maxAgents`: Maximum number of parallel agents
+- `autoMode`: Boolean for auto-confirmation
+
+### Phase 1: Understanding & Template Creation
+
+**Objective**: Analyze requirements and create the plan-note.md template with pre-allocated sections for parallel agents.
+
+**Prerequisites**:
+- Session initialized with valid sessionId and sessionFolder
+- Task description available from $ARGUMENTS
+
+**Guideline**: In Understanding phase, prioritize identifying latest documentation (README, design docs, architecture guides). When ambiguities exist, ask user for clarification instead of assuming interpretations.
+
+**Workflow Steps**:
+
+1. **Initialize Progress Tracking**
+   - Create 4 todo items for workflow phases
+   - Set Phase 1 status to `in_progress`
+
+2. **Launch Understanding Agent**
+   - Agent type: `cli-lite-planning-agent`
+   - Execution mode: synchronous (run_in_background: false)
+
+3. **Agent Tasks**:
+   - **Identify Latest Documentation**: Search for and prioritize latest README, design docs, architecture guides
+   - **Understand Requirements**: Extract core objective, key points, constraints from task description and latest docs
+   - **Identify Ambiguities**: List any unclear points or multiple possible interpretations
+   - **Form Clarification Checklist**: Prepare questions for user if ambiguities found (use AskUserQuestion)
+   - **Split Sub-Domains**: Identify 2-{maxAgents} parallelizable focus areas
+   - **Create Plan Note**: Generate plan-note.md with pre-allocated sections
+
+**Output Files**:
+
+| File | Purpose |
+|------|---------|
+| `{sessionFolder}/plan-note.md` | Collaborative template with pre-allocated sections per agent |
+| `{sessionFolder}/requirement-analysis.json` | Sub-domain assignments and TASK ID ranges |
+
+**requirement-analysis.json Schema**:
+- `session_id`: Session identifier
+- `original_requirement`: Task description
+- `complexity`: Low | Medium | High
+- `sub_domains[]`: Array of focus areas with task_id_range and estimated_effort
+- `total_agents`: Number of agents to spawn
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- Latest documentation identified and referenced (if available)
+- Ambiguities resolved via user clarification (if any found)
+- 2-{maxAgents} clear sub-domains identified
+- Each sub-domain can be planned independently
+- Plan Note template includes all pre-allocated sections
+- TASK ID ranges have no overlap (100 IDs per agent)
+- Requirements understanding is comprehensive
+
+**Completion**:
+- Log created artifacts
+- Update Phase 1 todo status to `completed`
+
+**Agent Call**:
+```javascript
+Task(
+  subagent_type="cli-lite-planning-agent",
+  run_in_background=false,
+  description="Understand requirements and create plan template",
+  prompt=`
+## Mission: Create Plan Note Template
+
+### Key Guidelines
+1. **Prioritize Latest Documentation**: Search for and reference latest README, design docs, architecture guides when available
+2. **Handle Ambiguities**: When requirement ambiguities exist, ask user for clarification (use AskUserQuestion) instead of assuming interpretations
+
+### Input Requirements
+${taskDescription}
+
+### Tasks
+1. **Understand Requirements**: Extract core objective, key points, constraints (reference latest docs when available)
+2. **Identify Ambiguities**: List any unclear points or multiple possible interpretations
+3. **Form Clarification Checklist**: Prepare questions for user if ambiguities found
+4. **Split Sub-Domains**: Identify 2-${maxAgents} parallelizable focus areas
+5. **Create Plan Note**: Generate plan-note.md with pre-allocated sections
+
+### Output Files
+
+**File 1**: ${sessionFolder}/plan-note.md
+
+Structure Requirements:
+- YAML frontmatter: session_id, original_requirement, created_at, contributors, sub_domains, agent_sections, agent_task_id_ranges, status
+- Section: ## 需求理解 (Core objectives, key points, constraints, split strategy)
+- Section: ## 任务池 - {Focus Area 1} (Pre-allocated task section for agent 1, TASK-001 ~ TASK-100)
+- Section: ## 任务池 - {Focus Area 2} (Pre-allocated task section for agent 2, TASK-101 ~ TASK-200)
+- ... (One task pool section per sub-domain)
+- Section: ## 依赖关系 (Auto-generated after all agents complete)
+- Section: ## 冲突标记 (Populated in Phase 3)
+- Section: ## 上下文证据 - {Focus Area 1} (Evidence for agent 1)
+- Section: ## 上下文证据 - {Focus Area 2} (Evidence for agent 2)
+- ... (One evidence section per sub-domain)
+
+**File 2**: ${sessionFolder}/requirement-analysis.json
+- session_id, original_requirement, complexity, sub_domains[], total_agents
+
+### Success Criteria
+- [ ] 2-${maxAgents} clear sub-domains identified
+- [ ] Each sub-domain can be planned independently
+- [ ] Plan Note template includes all pre-allocated sections
+- [ ] TASK ID ranges have no overlap (100 IDs per agent)
+`
+)
+```
+
+### Phase 2: Parallel Sub-Agent Execution
+
+**Objective**: Launch parallel planning agents to fill their pre-allocated sections in plan-note.md.
+
+**Prerequisites**:
+- Phase 1 completed successfully
+- `{sessionFolder}/requirement-analysis.json` exists with sub-domain definitions
+- `{sessionFolder}/plan-note.md` template created
+
+**Workflow Steps**:
+
+1. **Load Sub-Domain Configuration**
+   - Read `{sessionFolder}/requirement-analysis.json`
+   - Extract sub-domains array with focus_area, description, task_id_range
+
+2. **Update Progress Tracking**
+   - Set Phase 2 status to `in_progress`
+   - Add sub-todo for each agent
+
+3. **User Confirmation** (unless autoMode)
+   - Display identified sub-domains with descriptions
+   - Options: "开始规划" / "调整拆分" / "取消"
+   - Skip if autoMode enabled
+
+4. **Create Agent Directories**
+   - For each sub-domain: `{sessionFolder}/agents/{focus-area}/`
+
+5. **Launch Parallel Agents**
+   - Agent type: `cli-lite-planning-agent`
+   - Execution mode: synchronous (run_in_background: false)
+   - Launch ALL agents in parallel (single message with multiple Task calls)
+
+**Per-Agent Context**:
+- Focus area name and description
+- Assigned TASK ID range (no overlap with other agents)
+- Session ID and folder path
+
+**Per-Agent Tasks**:
+
+| Task | Output | Description |
+|------|--------|-------------|
+| Generate plan.json | `{sessionFolder}/agents/{focus-area}/plan.json` | Complete detailed plan following schema |
+| Update plan-note.md | Sync to shared file | Fill pre-allocated "任务池" and "上下文证据" sections |
+
+**Task Summary Format** (for plan-note.md):
+- Task header: `### TASK-{ID}: {Title} [{focus-area}]`
+- Status, Complexity, Dependencies
+- Scope description
+- Modification points with file:line references
+- Conflict risk assessment
+
+**Evidence Format** (for plan-note.md):
+- Related files with relevance scores
+- Existing patterns identified
+- Constraints discovered
+
+**Agent Execution Rules**:
+- Each agent modifies ONLY its pre-allocated sections
+- Use assigned TASK ID range exclusively
+- No locking needed (exclusive sections)
+- Include conflict_risk assessment for each task
+
+**Completion**:
+- Wait for all agents to complete
+- Log generated artifacts for each agent
+- Update Phase 2 todo status to `completed`
+
+**User Confirmation** (unless autoMode):
+```javascript
+if (!autoMode) {
+  AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: `已识别 ${subDomains.length} 个子领域:\n${subDomains.map((s, i) => `${i+1}. ${s.focus_area}: ${s.description}`).join('\n')}\n\n确认开始并行规划?`,
+      header: "Confirm Split",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: "开始规划", description: "启动并行sub-agent" },
+        { label: "调整拆分", description: "修改子领域划分" },
+        { label: "取消", description: "退出规划" }
+      ]
+    }]
+  })
+}
+```
+
+**Launch Parallel Agents** (single message, multiple Task calls):
+```javascript
+// Create agent directories
+subDomains.forEach(sub => {
+  Bash(`mkdir -p ${sessionFolder}/agents/${sub.focus_area}`)
+})
+
+// Launch all agents in parallel
+subDomains.map(sub =>
+  Task(
+    subagent_type="cli-lite-planning-agent",
+    run_in_background=false,
+    description=`Plan: ${sub.focus_area}`,
+    prompt=`
+## Sub-Agent Context
+
+**Focus Area**: ${sub.focus_area}
+**Description**: ${sub.description}
+**TASK ID Range**: ${sub.task_id_range[0]}-${sub.task_id_range[1]}
+**Session**: ${sessionId}
+
+## Dual Output Tasks
+
+### Task 1: Generate Complete plan.json
+Output: ${sessionFolder}/agents/${sub.focus_area}/plan.json
+Schema: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/plan-json-schema.json
+
+### Task 2: Sync Summary to plan-note.md
+
+**Locate Your Sections**:
+- Task Pool: "## 任务池 - ${toTitleCase(sub.focus_area)}"
+- Evidence: "## 上下文证据 - ${toTitleCase(sub.focus_area)}"
+
+**Task Summary Format**:
+- Task header: ### TASK-${sub.task_id_range[0]}: Task Title [${sub.focus_area}]
+- Fields: 状态, 复杂度, 依赖, 范围, 修改点, 冲突风险
+
+**Evidence Format**:
+- 相关文件, 现有模式, 约束
+
+## Execution Steps
+1. Generate complete plan.json
+2. Extract summary from plan.json
+3. Read ${sessionFolder}/plan-note.md
+4. Locate and replace your task pool section
+5. Locate and replace your evidence section
+6. Write back plan-note.md
+
+## Important
+- Only modify your pre-allocated sections
+- Use assigned TASK ID range: ${sub.task_id_range[0]}-${sub.task_id_range[1]}
+`
+  )
+)
+```
+
+### Phase 3: Conflict Detection
+
+**Objective**: Analyze plan-note.md for conflicts across all agent contributions without merging files.
+
+**Prerequisites**:
+- Phase 2 completed successfully
+- All agents have updated plan-note.md with their sections
+- `{sessionFolder}/plan-note.md` contains all task and evidence sections
+
+**Workflow Steps**:
+
+1. **Update Progress Tracking**
+   - Set Phase 3 status to `in_progress`
+
+2. **Parse Plan Note**
+   - Read `{sessionFolder}/plan-note.md`
+   - Extract YAML frontmatter (session metadata)
+   - Parse markdown sections by heading levels
+   - Identify all "任务池" sections
+
+3. **Extract All Tasks**
+   - For each "任务池" section:
+     - Extract tasks matching pattern: `### TASK-{ID}: {Title} [{author}]`
+     - Parse task details: status, complexity, dependencies, modification points, conflict risk
+   - Consolidate into single task list
+
+4. **Detect Conflicts**
+
+   **File Conflicts**:
+   - Group modification points by file:location
+   - Identify locations modified by multiple agents
+   - Record: severity=high, tasks involved, agents involved, suggested resolution
+
+   **Dependency Cycles**:
+   - Build dependency graph from task dependencies
+   - Detect cycles using depth-first search
+   - Record: severity=critical, cycle path, suggested resolution
+
+   **Strategy Conflicts**:
+   - Group tasks by files they modify
+   - Identify files with high/medium conflict risk from multiple agents
+   - Record: severity=medium, tasks involved, agents involved, suggested resolution
+
+5. **Generate Conflict Artifacts**
+
+   **conflicts.json**:
+   - Write to `{sessionFolder}/conflicts.json`
+   - Include: detected_at, total_tasks, total_agents, conflicts array
+   - Each conflict: type, severity, tasks_involved, description, suggested_resolution
+
+   **Update plan-note.md**:
+   - Locate "## 冲突标记" section
+   - Generate markdown summary of conflicts
+   - Replace section content with conflict markdown
+
+6. **Completion**
+   - Log conflict detection summary
+   - Display conflict details if any found
+   - Update Phase 3 todo status to `completed`
+
+**Conflict Types**:
+
+| Type | Severity | Detection Logic |
+|------|----------|-----------------|
+| file_conflict | high | Same file:location modified by multiple agents |
+| dependency_cycle | critical | Circular dependencies in task graph |
+| strategy_conflict | medium | Multiple high-risk tasks in same file from different agents |
+
+**Conflict Detection Functions**:
+
+**parsePlanNote(markdown)**:
+- Input: Raw markdown content of plan-note.md
+- Process:
+  - Extract YAML frontmatter between `---` markers
+  - Parse frontmatter as YAML to get session metadata
+  - Scan for heading patterns `^(#{2,})\s+(.+)$`
+  - Build sections array with: level, heading, start position, content
+- Output: `{ frontmatter: object, sections: array }`
+
+**extractTasksFromSection(content, sectionHeading)**:
+- Input: Section content text, section heading for attribution
+- Process:
+  - Match task pattern: `### (TASK-\d+):\s+(.+?)\s+\[(.+?)\]`
+  - For each match: extract taskId, title, author
+  - Call parseTaskDetails for additional fields
+- Output: Array of task objects with id, title, author, source_section, ...details
+
+**parseTaskDetails(content)**:
+- Input: Task content block
+- Process:
+  - Extract fields via regex patterns:
+    - `**状态**:\s*(.+)` → status
+    - `**复杂度**:\s*(.+)` → complexity
+    - `**依赖**:\s*(.+)` → depends_on (extract TASK-\d+ references)
+    - `**冲突风险**:\s*(.+)` → conflict_risk
+  - Extract modification points: `-\s+\`([^`]+):\s*([^`]+)\`:\s*(.+)` → file, location, summary
+- Output: Details object with status, complexity, depends_on[], modification_points[], conflict_risk
+
+**detectFileConflicts(tasks)**:
+- Input: All tasks array
+- Process:
+  - Build fileMap: `{ "file:location": [{ task_id, task_title, source_agent, change }] }`
+  - For each location with multiple modifications from different agents:
+    - Create conflict with type='file_conflict', severity='high'
+    - Include: location, tasks_involved, agents_involved, modifications
+    - Suggested resolution: 'Coordinate modification order or merge changes'
+- Output: Array of file conflict objects
+
+**detectDependencyCycles(tasks)**:
+- Input: All tasks array
+- Process:
+  - Build dependency graph: `{ taskId: [dependsOn_taskIds] }`
+  - Use DFS with recursion stack to detect cycles
+  - For each cycle found:
+    - Create conflict with type='dependency_cycle', severity='critical'
+    - Include: cycle path as tasks_involved
+    - Suggested resolution: 'Remove or reorganize dependencies'
+- Output: Array of dependency cycle conflict objects
+
+**detectStrategyConflicts(tasks)**:
+- Input: All tasks array
+- Process:
+  - Group tasks by files they modify
+  - For each file with tasks from multiple agents:
+    - Filter for high/medium conflict_risk tasks
+    - If >1 high-risk tasks from different agents:
+      - Create conflict with type='strategy_conflict', severity='medium'
+      - Include: file, tasks_involved, agents_involved
+      - Suggested resolution: 'Review approaches and align on single strategy'
+- Output: Array of strategy conflict objects
+
+**generateConflictMarkdown(conflicts)**:
+- Input: Array of conflict objects
+- Process:
+  - If empty: return '✅ 无冲突检测到'
+  - For each conflict:
+    - Generate header: `### CONFLICT-{padded_index}: {description}`
+    - Add fields: 严重程度, 涉及任务, 涉及Agent
+    - Add 问题详情 based on conflict type
+    - Add 建议解决方案
+    - Add 决策状态: [ ] 待解决
+- Output: Markdown string for plan-note.md "## 冲突标记" section
+
+**replaceSectionContent(markdown, sectionHeading, newContent)**:
+- Input: Original markdown, target section heading, new content
+- Process:
+  - Find section heading position via regex
+  - Find next heading of same or higher level
+  - Replace content between heading and next section
+  - If section not found: append at end
+- Output: Updated markdown string
+
+### Phase 4: Completion
+
+**Objective**: Generate human-readable plan summary and finalize workflow.
+
+**Prerequisites**:
+- Phase 3 completed successfully
+- Conflicts detected and documented in plan-note.md
+- All artifacts generated
+
+**Workflow Steps**:
+
+1. **Update Progress Tracking**
+   - Set Phase 4 status to `in_progress`
+
+2. **Read Final State**
+   - Read `{sessionFolder}/plan-note.md`
+   - Extract frontmatter metadata
+   - Load conflicts from Phase 3
+
+3. **Generate plan.md**
+   - Create human-readable summary including:
+     - Session metadata
+     - Requirements understanding
+     - Sub-domain breakdown
+     - Task overview by focus area
+     - Conflict report
+     - Execution instructions
+
+4. **Write Summary File**
+   - Write to `{sessionFolder}/plan.md`
+
+5. **Display Completion Summary**
+   - Session statistics
+   - File structure
+   - Execution command
+   - Conflict status
+
+6. **Update Todo**
+   - Set Phase 4 status to `completed`
+
+**plan.md Structure**:
+
+| Section | Content |
+|---------|---------|
+| Header | Session ID, created time, original requirement |
+| Requirements | Copy from plan-note.md "## 需求理解" section |
+| Sub-Domain Split | List each focus area with description and task ID range |
+| Task Overview | Tasks grouped by focus area with complexity and dependencies |
+| Conflict Report | Summary of detected conflicts or "无冲突" |
+| Execution | Command to execute the plan |
+
+**Required Function** (semantic description):
+- **generateHumanReadablePlan**: Extract sections from plan-note.md and format as readable plan.md with session info, requirements, tasks, and conflicts
+
+## Configuration
+
+| Flag | Default | Description |
+|------|---------|-------------|
+| `--max-agents` | 5 | Maximum sub-agents to spawn |
+| `-y, --yes` | false | Auto-confirm all decisions |
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Resolution |
+|-------|------------|
+| Understanding agent fails | Retry once, provide more context |
+| Planning agent fails | Skip failed agent, continue with others |
+| Section not found in plan-note | Agent creates section (defensive) |
+| Conflict detection fails | Continue with empty conflicts |
+
+
+## Best Practices
+
+1. **Clear Requirements**: Detailed requirements → better sub-domain splitting
+2. **Reference Latest Documentation**: Understanding agent should prioritize identifying and referencing latest docs (README, design docs, architecture guides)
+3. **Ask When Uncertain**: When ambiguities or multiple interpretations exist, ask user for clarification instead of assuming
+4. **Review Plan Note**: Check plan-note.md before execution
+5. **Resolve Conflicts**: Address high/critical conflicts before execution
+6. **Inspect Details**: Use agents/{focus-area}/plan.json for deep dive
+
+---
+
+**Now execute collaborative-plan-with-file for**: $ARGUMENTS

.claude/commands/workflow/debug-with-file.md

@@ -0,0 +1,672 @@
+---
+name: debug-with-file
+description: Interactive hypothesis-driven debugging with documented exploration, understanding evolution, and Gemini-assisted correction
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] \"bug description or error message\""
+allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Grep(*), Glob(*), Bash(*), Edit(*), Write(*)
+---
+
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-confirm all decisions (hypotheses, fixes, iteration), use recommended settings.
+
+# Workflow Debug-With-File Command (/workflow:debug-with-file)
+
+## Overview
+
+Enhanced evidence-based debugging with **documented exploration process**. Records understanding evolution, consolidates insights, and uses Gemini to correct misunderstandings.
+
+**Core workflow**: Explore → Document → Log → Analyze → Correct Understanding → Fix → Verify
+
+**Scope**: Adds temporary debug logging to observe program state; cleans up all instrumentation after resolution. Does NOT execute code injection, security testing, or modify program behavior.
+
+**Key enhancements over /workflow:debug**:
+- **understanding.md**: Timeline of exploration and learning
+- **Gemini-assisted correction**: Validates and corrects hypotheses
+- **Consolidation**: Simplifies proven-wrong understanding to avoid clutter
+- **Learning retention**: Preserves what was learned, even from failed attempts
+
+## Usage
+
+```bash
+/workflow:debug-with-file <BUG_DESCRIPTION>
+
+# Arguments
+<bug-description>          Bug description, error message, or stack trace (required)
+```
+
+## Execution Process
+
+```
+Session Detection:
+   ├─ Check if debug session exists for this bug
+   ├─ EXISTS + understanding.md exists → Continue mode
+   └─ NOT_FOUND → Explore mode
+
+Explore Mode:
+   ├─ Locate error source in codebase
+   ├─ Document initial understanding in understanding.md
+   ├─ Generate testable hypotheses with Gemini validation
+   ├─ Add NDJSON debug logging statements
+   └─ Output: Hypothesis list + await user reproduction
+
+Analyze Mode:
+   ├─ Parse debug.log, validate each hypothesis
+   ├─ Use Gemini to analyze evidence and correct understanding
+   ├─ Update understanding.md with:
+   │   ├─ New evidence
+   │   ├─ Corrected misunderstandings (strikethrough + correction)
+   │   └─ Consolidated current understanding
+   └─ Decision:
+       ├─ Confirmed → Fix root cause
+       ├─ Inconclusive → Add more logging, iterate
+       └─ All rejected → Gemini-assisted new hypotheses
+
+Fix & Cleanup:
+   ├─ Apply fix based on confirmed hypothesis
+   ├─ User verifies
+   ├─ Document final understanding + lessons learned
+   ├─ Remove debug instrumentation
+   └─ If not fixed → Return to Analyze mode
+```
+
+## Implementation
+
+### Session Setup & Mode Detection
+
+```javascript
+const getUtc8ISOString = () => new Date(Date.now() + 8 * 60 * 60 * 1000).toISOString()
+
+const bugSlug = bug_description.toLowerCase().replace(/[^a-z0-9]+/g, '-').substring(0, 30)
+const dateStr = getUtc8ISOString().substring(0, 10)
+
+const sessionId = `DBG-${bugSlug}-${dateStr}`
+const sessionFolder = `.workflow/.debug/${sessionId}`
+const debugLogPath = `${sessionFolder}/debug.log`
+const understandingPath = `${sessionFolder}/understanding.md`
+const hypothesesPath = `${sessionFolder}/hypotheses.json`
+
+// Auto-detect mode
+const sessionExists = fs.existsSync(sessionFolder)
+const hasUnderstanding = sessionExists && fs.existsSync(understandingPath)
+const logHasContent = sessionExists && fs.existsSync(debugLogPath) && fs.statSync(debugLogPath).size > 0
+
+const mode = logHasContent ? 'analyze' : (hasUnderstanding ? 'continue' : 'explore')
+
+if (!sessionExists) {
+  bash(`mkdir -p ${sessionFolder}`)
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+### Explore Mode
+
+**Step 1.1: Locate Error Source**
+
+```javascript
+// Extract keywords from bug description
+const keywords = extractErrorKeywords(bug_description)
+
+// Search codebase for error locations
+const searchResults = []
+for (const keyword of keywords) {
+  const results = Grep({ pattern: keyword, path: ".", output_mode: "content", "-C": 3 })
+  searchResults.push({ keyword, results })
+}
+
+// Identify affected files and functions
+const affectedLocations = analyzeSearchResults(searchResults)
+```
+
+**Step 1.2: Document Initial Understanding**
+
+Create `understanding.md` with exploration timeline:
+
+```markdown
+# Understanding Document
+
+**Session ID**: ${sessionId}
+**Bug Description**: ${bug_description}
+**Started**: ${getUtc8ISOString()}
+
+---
+
+## Exploration Timeline
+
+### Iteration 1 - Initial Exploration (${timestamp})
+
+#### Current Understanding
+
+Based on bug description and initial code search:
+
+- Error pattern: ${errorPattern}
+- Affected areas: ${affectedLocations.map(l => l.file).join(', ')}
+- Initial hypothesis: ${initialThoughts}
+
+#### Evidence from Code Search
+
+${searchResults.map(r => `
+**Keyword: "${r.keyword}"**
+- Found in: ${r.results.files.join(', ')}
+- Key findings: ${r.insights}
+`).join('\n')}
+
+#### Next Steps
+
+- Generate testable hypotheses
+- Add instrumentation
+- Await reproduction
+
+---
+
+## Current Consolidated Understanding
+
+${initialConsolidatedUnderstanding}
+```
+
+**Step 1.3: Gemini-Assisted Hypothesis Generation**
+
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Generate debugging hypotheses for: ${bug_description}
+Success criteria: Testable hypotheses with clear evidence criteria
+
+TASK:
+• Analyze error pattern and code search results
+• Identify 3-5 most likely root causes
+• For each hypothesis, specify:
+  - What might be wrong
+  - What evidence would confirm/reject it
+  - Where to add instrumentation
+• Rank by likelihood
+
+MODE: analysis
+
+CONTEXT: @${sessionFolder}/understanding.md | Search results in understanding.md
+
+EXPECTED:
+- Structured hypothesis list (JSON format)
+- Each hypothesis with: id, description, testable_condition, logging_point, evidence_criteria
+- Likelihood ranking (1=most likely)
+
+CONSTRAINTS: Focus on testable conditions
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-diagnose-bug-root-cause
+```
+
+Save Gemini output to `hypotheses.json`:
+
+```json
+{
+  "iteration": 1,
+  "timestamp": "2025-01-21T10:00:00+08:00",
+  "hypotheses": [
+    {
+      "id": "H1",
+      "description": "Data structure mismatch - expected key not present",
+      "testable_condition": "Check if target key exists in dict",
+      "logging_point": "file.py:func:42",
+      "evidence_criteria": {
+        "confirm": "data shows missing key",
+        "reject": "key exists with valid value"
+      },
+      "likelihood": 1,
+      "status": "pending"
+    }
+  ],
+  "gemini_insights": "...",
+  "corrected_assumptions": []
+}
+```
+
+**Step 1.4: Add NDJSON Debug Logging**
+
+For each hypothesis, add temporary logging statements to observe program state at key execution points. Use NDJSON format for structured log parsing. These are read-only observations that do not modify program behavior.
+
+**Step 1.5: Update understanding.md**
+
+Append hypothesis section:
+
+```markdown
+#### Hypotheses Generated (Gemini-Assisted)
+
+${hypotheses.map(h => `
+**${h.id}** (Likelihood: ${h.likelihood}): ${h.description}
+- Logging at: ${h.logging_point}
+- Testing: ${h.testable_condition}
+- Evidence to confirm: ${h.evidence_criteria.confirm}
+- Evidence to reject: ${h.evidence_criteria.reject}
+`).join('\n')}
+
+**Gemini Insights**: ${geminiInsights}
+```
+
+---
+
+### Analyze Mode
+
+**Step 2.1: Parse Debug Log**
+
+```javascript
+// Parse NDJSON log
+const entries = Read(debugLogPath).split('\n')
+  .filter(l => l.trim())
+  .map(l => JSON.parse(l))
+
+// Group by hypothesis
+const byHypothesis = groupBy(entries, 'hid')
+```
+
+**Step 2.2: Gemini-Assisted Evidence Analysis**
+
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Analyze debug log evidence to validate/correct hypotheses for: ${bug_description}
+Success criteria: Clear verdict per hypothesis + corrected understanding
+
+TASK:
+• Parse log entries by hypothesis
+• Evaluate evidence against expected criteria
+• Determine verdict: confirmed | rejected | inconclusive
+• Identify incorrect assumptions from previous understanding
+• Suggest corrections to understanding
+
+MODE: analysis
+
+CONTEXT:
+@${debugLogPath}
+@${understandingPath}
+@${hypothesesPath}
+
+EXPECTED:
+- Per-hypothesis verdict with reasoning
+- Evidence summary
+- List of incorrect assumptions with corrections
+- Updated consolidated understanding
+- Root cause if confirmed, or next investigation steps
+
+CONSTRAINTS: Evidence-based reasoning only, no speculation
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-diagnose-bug-root-cause
+```
+
+**Step 2.3: Update Understanding with Corrections**
+
+Append new iteration to `understanding.md`:
+
+```markdown
+### Iteration ${n} - Evidence Analysis (${timestamp})
+
+#### Log Analysis Results
+
+${results.map(r => `
+**${r.id}**: ${r.verdict.toUpperCase()}
+- Evidence: ${JSON.stringify(r.evidence)}
+- Reasoning: ${r.reason}
+`).join('\n')}
+
+#### Corrected Understanding
+
+Previous misunderstandings identified and corrected:
+
+${corrections.map(c => `
+- ~~${c.wrong}~~ → ${c.corrected}
+  - Why wrong: ${c.reason}
+  - Evidence: ${c.evidence}
+`).join('\n')}
+
+#### New Insights
+
+${newInsights.join('\n- ')}
+
+#### Gemini Analysis
+
+${geminiAnalysis}
+
+${confirmedHypothesis ? `
+#### Root Cause Identified
+
+**${confirmedHypothesis.id}**: ${confirmedHypothesis.description}
+
+Evidence supporting this conclusion:
+${confirmedHypothesis.supportingEvidence}
+` : `
+#### Next Steps
+
+${nextSteps}
+`}
+
+---
+
+## Current Consolidated Understanding (Updated)
+
+${consolidatedUnderstanding}
+```
+
+**Step 2.4: Consolidate Understanding**
+
+At the bottom of `understanding.md`, update the consolidated section:
+
+- Remove or simplify proven-wrong assumptions
+- Keep them in strikethrough for reference
+- Focus on current valid understanding
+- Avoid repeating details from timeline
+
+```markdown
+## Current Consolidated Understanding
+
+### What We Know
+
+- ${validUnderstanding1}
+- ${validUnderstanding2}
+
+### What Was Disproven
+
+- ~~Initial assumption: ${wrongAssumption}~~ (Evidence: ${disproofEvidence})
+
+### Current Investigation Focus
+
+${currentFocus}
+
+### Remaining Questions
+
+- ${openQuestion1}
+- ${openQuestion2}
+```
+
+**Step 2.5: Update hypotheses.json**
+
+```json
+{
+  "iteration": 2,
+  "timestamp": "2025-01-21T10:15:00+08:00",
+  "hypotheses": [
+    {
+      "id": "H1",
+      "status": "rejected",
+      "verdict_reason": "Evidence shows key exists with valid value",
+      "evidence": {...}
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "H2",
+      "status": "confirmed",
+      "verdict_reason": "Log data confirms timing issue",
+      "evidence": {...}
+    }
+  ],
+  "gemini_corrections": [
+    {
+      "wrong_assumption": "...",
+      "corrected_to": "...",
+      "reason": "..."
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+### Fix & Verification
+
+**Step 3.1: Apply Fix**
+
+(Same as original debug command)
+
+**Step 3.2: Document Resolution**
+
+Append to `understanding.md`:
+
+```markdown
+### Iteration ${n} - Resolution (${timestamp})
+
+#### Fix Applied
+
+- Modified files: ${modifiedFiles.join(', ')}
+- Fix description: ${fixDescription}
+- Root cause addressed: ${rootCause}
+
+#### Verification Results
+
+${verificationResults}
+
+#### Lessons Learned
+
+What we learned from this debugging session:
+
+1. ${lesson1}
+2. ${lesson2}
+3. ${lesson3}
+
+#### Key Insights for Future
+
+- ${insight1}
+- ${insight2}
+```
+
+**Step 3.3: Cleanup**
+
+Remove all temporary debug logging statements added during investigation. Verify no instrumentation code remains in production code.
+
+---
+
+## Session Folder Structure
+
+```
+.workflow/.debug/DBG-{slug}-{date}/
+├── debug.log           # NDJSON log (execution evidence)
+├── understanding.md    # NEW: Exploration timeline + consolidated understanding
+├── hypotheses.json     # NEW: Hypothesis history with verdicts
+└── resolution.md       # Optional: Final summary
+```
+
+## Understanding Document Template
+
+```markdown
+# Understanding Document
+
+**Session ID**: DBG-xxx-2025-01-21
+**Bug Description**: [original description]
+**Started**: 2025-01-21T10:00:00+08:00
+
+---
+
+## Exploration Timeline
+
+### Iteration 1 - Initial Exploration (2025-01-21 10:00)
+
+#### Current Understanding
+...
+
+#### Evidence from Code Search
+...
+
+#### Hypotheses Generated (Gemini-Assisted)
+...
+
+### Iteration 2 - Evidence Analysis (2025-01-21 10:15)
+
+#### Log Analysis Results
+...
+
+#### Corrected Understanding
+- ~~[wrong]~~ → [corrected]
+
+#### Gemini Analysis
+...
+
+---
+
+## Current Consolidated Understanding
+
+### What We Know
+- [valid understanding points]
+
+### What Was Disproven
+- ~~[disproven assumptions]~~
+
+### Current Investigation Focus
+[current focus]
+
+### Remaining Questions
+- [open questions]
+```
+
+## Iteration Flow
+
+```
+First Call (/workflow:debug-with-file "error"):
+   ├─ No session exists → Explore mode
+   ├─ Extract error keywords, search codebase
+   ├─ Document initial understanding in understanding.md
+   ├─ Use Gemini to generate hypotheses
+   ├─ Add logging instrumentation
+   └─ Await user reproduction
+
+After Reproduction (/workflow:debug-with-file "error"):
+   ├─ Session exists + debug.log has content → Analyze mode
+   ├─ Parse log, use Gemini to evaluate hypotheses
+   ├─ Update understanding.md with:
+   │   ├─ Evidence analysis results
+   │   ├─ Corrected misunderstandings (strikethrough)
+   │   ├─ New insights
+   │   └─ Updated consolidated understanding
+   ├─ Update hypotheses.json with verdicts
+   └─ Decision:
+       ├─ Confirmed → Fix → Document resolution
+       ├─ Inconclusive → Add logging, document next steps
+       └─ All rejected → Gemini-assisted new hypotheses
+
+Output:
+   ├─ .workflow/.debug/DBG-{slug}-{date}/debug.log
+   ├─ .workflow/.debug/DBG-{slug}-{date}/understanding.md (evolving document)
+   └─ .workflow/.debug/DBG-{slug}-{date}/hypotheses.json (history)
+```
+
+## Gemini Integration Points
+
+### 1. Hypothesis Generation (Explore Mode)
+
+**Purpose**: Generate evidence-based, testable hypotheses
+
+**Prompt Pattern**:
+```
+PURPOSE: Generate debugging hypotheses + evidence criteria
+TASK: Analyze error + code → testable hypotheses with clear pass/fail criteria
+CONTEXT: @understanding.md (search results)
+EXPECTED: JSON with hypotheses, likelihood ranking, evidence criteria
+```
+
+### 2. Evidence Analysis (Analyze Mode)
+
+**Purpose**: Validate hypotheses and correct misunderstandings
+
+**Prompt Pattern**:
+```
+PURPOSE: Analyze debug log evidence + correct understanding
+TASK: Evaluate each hypothesis → identify wrong assumptions → suggest corrections
+CONTEXT: @debug.log @understanding.md @hypotheses.json
+EXPECTED: Verdicts + corrections + updated consolidated understanding
+```
+
+### 3. New Hypothesis Generation (After All Rejected)
+
+**Purpose**: Generate new hypotheses based on what was disproven
+
+**Prompt Pattern**:
+```
+PURPOSE: Generate new hypotheses given disproven assumptions
+TASK: Review rejected hypotheses → identify knowledge gaps → new investigation angles
+CONTEXT: @understanding.md (with disproven section) @hypotheses.json
+EXPECTED: New hypotheses avoiding previously rejected paths
+```
+
+## Error Correction Mechanism
+
+### Correction Format in understanding.md
+
+```markdown
+#### Corrected Understanding
+
+- ~~Assumed dict key "config" was missing~~ → Key exists, but value is None
+  - Why wrong: Only checked existence, not value validity
+  - Evidence: H1 log shows {"config": null, "exists": true}
+
+- ~~Thought error occurred in initialization~~ → Error happens during runtime update
+  - Why wrong: Stack trace misread as init code
+  - Evidence: H2 timestamp shows 30s after startup
+```
+
+### Consolidation Rules
+
+When updating "Current Consolidated Understanding":
+
+1. **Simplify disproven items**: Move to "What Was Disproven" with single-line summary
+2. **Keep valid insights**: Promote confirmed findings to "What We Know"
+3. **Avoid duplication**: Don't repeat timeline details in consolidated section
+4. **Focus on current state**: What do we know NOW, not the journey
+5. **Preserve key corrections**: Keep important wrong→right transformations for learning
+
+**Bad (cluttered)**:
+```markdown
+## Current Consolidated Understanding
+
+In iteration 1 we thought X, but in iteration 2 we found Y, then in iteration 3...
+Also we checked A and found B, and then we checked C...
+```
+
+**Good (consolidated)**:
+```markdown
+## Current Consolidated Understanding
+
+### What We Know
+- Error occurs during runtime update, not initialization
+- Config value is None (not missing key)
+
+### What Was Disproven
+- ~~Initialization error~~ (Timing evidence)
+- ~~Missing key hypothesis~~ (Key exists)
+
+### Current Investigation Focus
+Why is config value None during update?
+```
+
+## Post-Completion Expansion
+
+完成后询问用户是否扩展为issue(test/enhance/refactor/doc)，选中项调用 `/issue:new "{summary} - {dimension}"`
+
+---
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Situation | Action |
+|-----------|--------|
+| Empty debug.log | Verify reproduction triggered the code path |
+| All hypotheses rejected | Use Gemini to generate new hypotheses based on disproven assumptions |
+| Fix doesn't work | Document failed fix attempt, iterate with refined understanding |
+| >5 iterations | Review consolidated understanding, escalate to `/workflow:lite-fix` with full context |
+| Gemini unavailable | Fallback to manual hypothesis generation, document without Gemini insights |
+| Understanding too long | Consolidate aggressively, archive old iterations to separate file |
+
+## Comparison with /workflow:debug
+
+| Feature | /workflow:debug | /workflow:debug-with-file |
+|---------|-----------------|---------------------------|
+| NDJSON debug logging | ✅ | ✅ |
+| Hypothesis generation | Manual | Gemini-assisted |
+| Exploration documentation | ❌ | ✅ understanding.md |
+| Understanding evolution | ❌ | ✅ Timeline + corrections |
+| Error correction | ❌ | ✅ Strikethrough + reasoning |
+| Consolidated learning | ❌ | ✅ Current understanding section |
+| Hypothesis history | ❌ | ✅ hypotheses.json |
+| Gemini validation | ❌ | ✅ At key decision points |
+
+## Usage Recommendations (Requires User Confirmation)
+
+**Use `Skill(skill="workflow:debug-with-file", args="\"bug description\"")` when:**
+- Complex bugs requiring multiple investigation rounds
+- Learning from debugging process is valuable
+- Team needs to understand debugging rationale
+- Bug might recur, documentation helps prevention
+
+**Use `Skill(skill="ccw-debug", args="--mode cli \"issue\"")` when:**
+- Simple, quick bugs
+- One-off issues
+- Documentation overhead not needed

.claude/commands/workflow/debug.md

@@ -1,321 +0,0 @@
----
-name: debug
-description: Interactive hypothesis-driven debugging with NDJSON logging, iterative until resolved
-argument-hint: "\"bug description or error message\""
-allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Grep(*), Glob(*), Bash(*), Edit(*), Write(*)
----
-
-# Workflow Debug Command (/workflow:debug)
-
-## Overview
-
-Evidence-based interactive debugging command. Systematically identifies root causes through hypothesis-driven logging and iterative verification.
-
-**Core workflow**: Explore → Add Logging → Reproduce → Analyze Log → Fix → Verify
-
-## Usage
-
-```bash
-/workflow:debug <BUG_DESCRIPTION>
-
-# Arguments
-<bug-description>          Bug description, error message, or stack trace (required)
-```
-
-## Execution Process
-
-```
-Session Detection:
-   ├─ Check if debug session exists for this bug
-   ├─ EXISTS + debug.log has content → Analyze mode
-   └─ NOT_FOUND or empty log → Explore mode
-
-Explore Mode:
-   ├─ Locate error source in codebase
-   ├─ Generate testable hypotheses (dynamic count)
-   ├─ Add NDJSON logging instrumentation
-   └─ Output: Hypothesis list + await user reproduction
-
-Analyze Mode:
-   ├─ Parse debug.log, validate each hypothesis
-   └─ Decision:
-       ├─ Confirmed → Fix root cause
-       ├─ Inconclusive → Add more logging, iterate
-       └─ All rejected → Generate new hypotheses
-
-Fix & Cleanup:
-   ├─ Apply fix based on confirmed hypothesis
-   ├─ User verifies
-   ├─ Remove debug instrumentation
-   └─ If not fixed → Return to Analyze mode
-```
-
-## Implementation
-
-### Session Setup & Mode Detection
-
-```javascript
-const getUtc8ISOString = () => new Date(Date.now() + 8 * 60 * 60 * 1000).toISOString()
-
-const bugSlug = bug_description.toLowerCase().replace(/[^a-z0-9]+/g, '-').substring(0, 30)
-const dateStr = getUtc8ISOString().substring(0, 10)
-
-const sessionId = `DBG-${bugSlug}-${dateStr}`
-const sessionFolder = `.workflow/.debug/${sessionId}`
-const debugLogPath = `${sessionFolder}/debug.log`
-
-// Auto-detect mode
-const sessionExists = fs.existsSync(sessionFolder)
-const logHasContent = sessionExists && fs.existsSync(debugLogPath) && fs.statSync(debugLogPath).size > 0
-
-const mode = logHasContent ? 'analyze' : 'explore'
-
-if (!sessionExists) {
-  bash(`mkdir -p ${sessionFolder}`)
-}
-```
-
----
-
-### Explore Mode
-
-**Step 1.1: Locate Error Source**
-
-```javascript
-// Extract keywords from bug description
-const keywords = extractErrorKeywords(bug_description)
-// e.g., ['Stack Length', '未找到', 'registered 0']
-
-// Search codebase for error locations
-for (const keyword of keywords) {
-  Grep({ pattern: keyword, path: ".", output_mode: "content", "-C": 3 })
-}
-
-// Identify affected files and functions
-const affectedLocations = [...]  // from search results
-```
-
-**Step 1.2: Generate Hypotheses (Dynamic)**
-
-```javascript
-// Hypothesis categories based on error pattern
-const HYPOTHESIS_PATTERNS = {
-  "not found|missing|undefined|未找到": "data_mismatch",
-  "0|empty|zero|registered 0": "logic_error",
-  "timeout|connection|sync": "integration_issue",
-  "type|format|parse": "type_mismatch"
-}
-
-// Generate hypotheses based on actual issue (NOT fixed count)
-function generateHypotheses(bugDescription, affectedLocations) {
-  const hypotheses = []
-
-  // Analyze bug and create targeted hypotheses
-  // Each hypothesis has:
-  // - id: H1, H2, ... (dynamic count)
-  // - description: What might be wrong
-  // - testable_condition: What to log
-  // - logging_point: Where to add instrumentation
-
-  return hypotheses  // Could be 1, 3, 5, or more
-}
-
-const hypotheses = generateHypotheses(bug_description, affectedLocations)
-```
-
-**Step 1.3: Add NDJSON Instrumentation**
-
-For each hypothesis, add logging at the relevant location:
-
-**Python template**:
-```python
-# region debug [H{n}]
-try:
-    import json, time
-    _dbg = {
-        "sid": "{sessionId}",
-        "hid": "H{n}",
-        "loc": "{file}:{line}",
-        "msg": "{testable_condition}",
-        "data": {
-            # Capture relevant values here
-        },
-        "ts": int(time.time() * 1000)
-    }
-    with open(r"{debugLogPath}", "a", encoding="utf-8") as _f:
-        _f.write(json.dumps(_dbg, ensure_ascii=False) + "\n")
-except: pass
-# endregion
-```
-
-**JavaScript/TypeScript template**:
-```javascript
-// region debug [H{n}]
-try {
-  require('fs').appendFileSync("{debugLogPath}", JSON.stringify({
-    sid: "{sessionId}",
-    hid: "H{n}",
-    loc: "{file}:{line}",
-    msg: "{testable_condition}",
-    data: { /* Capture relevant values */ },
-    ts: Date.now()
-  }) + "\n");
-} catch(_) {}
-// endregion
-```
-
-**Output to user**:
-```
-## Hypotheses Generated
-
-Based on error "{bug_description}", generated {n} hypotheses:
-
-{hypotheses.map(h => `
-### ${h.id}: ${h.description}
-- Logging at: ${h.logging_point}
-- Testing: ${h.testable_condition}
-`).join('')}
-
-**Debug log**: ${debugLogPath}
-
-**Next**: Run reproduction steps, then come back for analysis.
-```
-
----
-
-### Analyze Mode
-
-```javascript
-// Parse NDJSON log
-const entries = Read(debugLogPath).split('\n')
-  .filter(l => l.trim())
-  .map(l => JSON.parse(l))
-
-// Group by hypothesis
-const byHypothesis = groupBy(entries, 'hid')
-
-// Validate each hypothesis
-for (const [hid, logs] of Object.entries(byHypothesis)) {
-  const hypothesis = hypotheses.find(h => h.id === hid)
-  const latestLog = logs[logs.length - 1]
-
-  // Check if evidence confirms or rejects hypothesis
-  const verdict = evaluateEvidence(hypothesis, latestLog.data)
-  // Returns: 'confirmed' | 'rejected' | 'inconclusive'
-}
-```
-
-**Output**:
-```
-## Evidence Analysis
-
-Analyzed ${entries.length} log entries.
-
-${results.map(r => `
-### ${r.id}: ${r.description}
-- **Status**: ${r.verdict}
-- **Evidence**: ${JSON.stringify(r.evidence)}
-- **Reason**: ${r.reason}
-`).join('')}
-
-${confirmedHypothesis ? `
-## Root Cause Identified
-
-**${confirmedHypothesis.id}**: ${confirmedHypothesis.description}
-
-Ready to fix.
-` : `
-## Need More Evidence
-
-Add more logging or refine hypotheses.
-`}
-```
-
----
-
-### Fix & Cleanup
-
-```javascript
-// Apply fix based on confirmed hypothesis
-// ... Edit affected files
-
-// After user verifies fix works:
-
-// Remove debug instrumentation (search for region markers)
-const instrumentedFiles = Grep({
-  pattern: "# region debug|// region debug",
-  output_mode: "files_with_matches"
-})
-
-for (const file of instrumentedFiles) {
-  // Remove content between region markers
-  removeDebugRegions(file)
-}
-
-console.log(`
-## Debug Complete
-
-- Root cause: ${confirmedHypothesis.description}
-- Fix applied to: ${modifiedFiles.join(', ')}
-- Debug instrumentation removed
-`)
-```
-
----
-
-## Debug Log Format (NDJSON)
-
-Each line is a JSON object:
-
-```json
-{"sid":"DBG-xxx-2025-12-18","hid":"H1","loc":"file.py:func:42","msg":"Check dict keys","data":{"keys":["a","b"],"target":"c","found":false},"ts":1734567890123}
-```
-
-| Field | Description |
-|-------|-------------|
-| `sid` | Session ID |
-| `hid` | Hypothesis ID (H1, H2, ...) |
-| `loc` | Code location |
-| `msg` | What's being tested |
-| `data` | Captured values |
-| `ts` | Timestamp (ms) |
-
-## Session Folder
-
-```
-.workflow/.debug/DBG-{slug}-{date}/
-├── debug.log          # NDJSON log (main artifact)
-└── resolution.md      # Summary after fix (optional)
-```
-
-## Iteration Flow
-
-```
-First Call (/workflow:debug "error"):
-   ├─ No session exists → Explore mode
-   ├─ Extract error keywords, search codebase
-   ├─ Generate hypotheses, add logging
-   └─ Await user reproduction
-
-After Reproduction (/workflow:debug "error"):
-   ├─ Session exists + debug.log has content → Analyze mode
-   ├─ Parse log, evaluate hypotheses
-   └─ Decision:
-       ├─ Confirmed → Fix → User verify
-       │   ├─ Fixed → Cleanup → Done
-       │   └─ Not fixed → Add logging → Iterate
-       ├─ Inconclusive → Add logging → Iterate
-       └─ All rejected → New hypotheses → Iterate
-
-Output:
-   └─ .workflow/.debug/DBG-{slug}-{date}/debug.log
-```
-
-## Error Handling
-
-| Situation | Action |
-|-----------|--------|
-| Empty debug.log | Verify reproduction triggered the code path |
-| All hypotheses rejected | Generate new hypotheses with broader scope |
-| Fix doesn't work | Iterate with more granular logging |
-| >5 iterations | Escalate to `/workflow:lite-fix` with evidence |

.claude/commands/workflow/execute.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 name: execute
 description: Coordinate agent execution for workflow tasks with automatic session discovery, parallel task processing, and status tracking
-argument-hint: "[--resume-session=\"session-id\"]"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--resume-session=\"session-id\"] [--with-commit]"
 ---
 
 # Workflow Execute Command
@@ -11,6 +11,41 @@ Orchestrates autonomous workflow execution through systematic task discovery, ag
 
 **Resume Mode**: When called with `--resume-session` flag, skips discovery phase and directly enters TodoWrite generation and agent execution for the specified session.
 
+## Usage
+
+```bash
+# Interactive mode (with confirmations)
+/workflow:execute
+/workflow:execute --resume-session="WFS-auth"
+
+# Auto mode (skip confirmations, use defaults)
+/workflow:execute --yes
+/workflow:execute -y
+/workflow:execute -y --resume-session="WFS-auth"
+
+# With auto-commit (commit after each task completion)
+/workflow:execute --with-commit
+/workflow:execute -y --with-commit
+/workflow:execute -y --with-commit --resume-session="WFS-auth"
+```
+
+## Auto Mode Defaults
+
+When `--yes` or `-y` flag is used:
+- **Session Selection**: Automatically selects the first (most recent) active session
+- **Completion Choice**: Automatically completes session (runs `/workflow:session:complete --yes`)
+
+When `--with-commit` flag is used:
+- **Auto-Commit**: After each agent task completes, commit changes based on summary document
+- **Commit Principle**: Minimal commits - only commit files modified by the completed task
+- **Commit Message**: Generated from task summary with format: "feat/fix/refactor: {task-title} - {summary}"
+
+**Flag Parsing**:
+```javascript
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+const withCommit = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--with-commit')
+```
+
 ## Performance Optimization Strategy
 
 **Lazy Loading**: Task JSONs read **on-demand** during execution, not upfront. TODO_LIST.md + IMPL_PLAN.md provide metadata for planning.
@@ -71,6 +106,11 @@ Phase 4: Execution Strategy & Task Execution
          ├─ Mark task completed (update IMPL-*.json status)
          │  # Quick fix: Update task status for ccw dashboard
          │  # TS=$(date -Iseconds) && jq --arg ts "$TS" '.status="completed" | .status_history=(.status_history // [])+[{"from":"in_progress","to":"completed","changed_at":$ts}]' IMPL-X.json > tmp.json && mv tmp.json IMPL-X.json
+         ├─ [with-commit] Commit changes based on summary (minimal principle)
+         │  # Read summary from .summaries/IMPL-X-summary.md
+         │  # Extract changed files from summary's "Files Modified" section
+         │  # Generate commit message: "feat/fix/refactor: {task-title} - {summary}"
+         │  # git add <changed-files> && git commit -m "<commit-message>"
          └─ Advance to next task
 
 Phase 5: Completion
@@ -122,24 +162,38 @@ List sessions with metadata and prompt user selection:
 bash(for dir in .workflow/active/WFS-*/; do [ -d "$dir" ] || continue; session=$(basename "$dir"); project=$(jq -r '.project // "Unknown"' "${dir}workflow-session.json" 2>/dev/null || echo "Unknown"); total=$(grep -c '^\- \[' "${dir}TODO_LIST.md" 2>/dev/null || echo 0); completed=$(grep -c '^\- \[x\]' "${dir}TODO_LIST.md" 2>/dev/null || echo 0); if [ "$total" -gt 0 ]; then progress=$((completed * 100 / total)); else progress=0; fi; echo "$session | $project | $completed/$total tasks ($progress%)"; done)
 ```
 
-Use AskUserQuestion to present formatted options (max 4 options shown):
+**Parse --yes flag**:
 ```javascript
-// If more than 4 sessions, show most recent 4 with "Other" option for manual input
-const sessions = getActiveSessions()  // sorted by last modified
-const displaySessions = sessions.slice(0, 4)
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+```
 
-AskUserQuestion({
-  questions: [{
-    question: "Multiple active sessions detected. Select one:",
-    header: "Session",
-    multiSelect: false,
-    options: displaySessions.map(s => ({
-      label: s.id,
-      description: `${s.project} | ${s.progress}`
-    }))
-    // Note: User can select "Other" to manually enter session ID
-  }]
-})
+**Conditional Selection**:
+```javascript
+if (autoYes) {
+  // Auto mode: Select first session (most recent)
+  const firstSession = sessions[0]
+  console.log(`[--yes] Auto-selecting session: ${firstSession.id}`)
+  selectedSessionId = firstSession.id
+  // Continue to Phase 2
+} else {
+  // Interactive mode: Use AskUserQuestion to present formatted options (max 4 options shown)
+  // If more than 4 sessions, show most recent 4 with "Other" option for manual input
+  const sessions = getActiveSessions()  // sorted by last modified
+  const displaySessions = sessions.slice(0, 4)
+
+  AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Multiple active sessions detected. Select one:",
+      header: "Session",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: displaySessions.map(s => ({
+        label: s.id,
+        description: `${s.project} | ${s.progress}`
+      }))
+      // Note: User can select "Other" to manually enter session ID
+    }]
+  })
+}
 ```
 
 **Input Validation**:
@@ -235,7 +289,13 @@ while (TODO_LIST.md has pending tasks) {
 4. **Launch Agent**: Invoke specialized agent with complete context including flow control steps
 5. **Monitor Progress**: Track agent execution and handle errors without user interruption
 6. **Collect Results**: Gather implementation results and outputs
-7. **Continue Workflow**: Identify next pending task from TODO_LIST.md and repeat
+7. **[with-commit] Auto-Commit**: If `--with-commit` flag enabled, commit changes based on summary
+   - Read summary from `.summaries/{task-id}-summary.md`
+   - Extract changed files from summary's "Files Modified" section
+   - Determine commit type from `meta.type` (feature→feat, bugfix→fix, refactor→refactor)
+   - Generate commit message: "{type}: {task-title} - {summary-first-line}"
+   - Commit only modified files (minimal principle): `git add <files> && git commit -m "<message>"`
+8. **Continue Workflow**: Identify next pending task from TODO_LIST.md and repeat
 
 **Note**: TODO_LIST.md updates are handled by agents (e.g., code-developer.md), not by the orchestrator.
 
@@ -252,29 +312,43 @@ while (TODO_LIST.md has pending tasks) {
 6. **User Choice**: When all tasks finished, ask user to choose next step:
 
 ```javascript
-AskUserQuestion({
-  questions: [{
-    question: "All tasks completed. What would you like to do next?",
-    header: "Next Step",
-    multiSelect: false,
-    options: [
-      {
-        label: "Enter Review",
-        description: "Run specialized review (security/architecture/quality/action-items)"
-      },
-      {
-        label: "Complete Session",
-        description: "Archive session and update manifest"
-      }
-    ]
-  }]
-})
+// Parse --yes flag
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+
+if (autoYes) {
+  // Auto mode: Complete session automatically
+  console.log(`[--yes] Auto-selecting: Complete Session`)
+  Skill(skill="workflow:session:complete", args="--yes")
+} else {
+  // Interactive mode: Ask user
+  AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "All tasks completed. What would you like to do next?",
+      header: "Next Step",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        {
+          label: "Enter Review",
+          description: "Run specialized review (security/architecture/quality/action-items)"
+        },
+        {
+          label: "Complete Session",
+          description: "Archive session and update manifest"
+        }
+      ]
+    }]
+  })
+}
 ```
 
 **Based on user selection**:
 - **"Enter Review"**: Execute `/workflow:review`
 - **"Complete Session"**: Execute `/workflow:session:complete`
 
+### Post-Completion Expansion
+
+完成后询问用户是否扩展为issue(test/enhance/refactor/doc)，选中项调用 `/issue:new "{summary} - {dimension}"`
+
 ## Execution Strategy (IMPL_PLAN-Driven)
 
 ### Strategy Priority
@@ -425,7 +499,7 @@ Task(subagent_type="{meta.agent}",
      - TODO List: {session.todo_list_path}
      - Summaries: {session.summaries_dir}
 
-     **Execution**: Read task JSON → Parse flow_control → Execute implementation_approach → Update TODO_LIST.md → Generate summary",
+     **Execution**: Read task JSON → Execute pre_analysis → Check execution_config.method → (CLI: handoff to CLI tool | Agent: direct implementation) → Update TODO_LIST.md → Generate summary",
      description="Implement: {task.id}")
 ```
 
@@ -434,9 +508,11 @@ Task(subagent_type="{meta.agent}",
 - `[FLOW_CONTROL]`: Triggers flow_control.pre_analysis execution
 
 **Why Path-Based**: Agent (code-developer.md) autonomously:
-- Reads and parses task JSON (requirements, acceptance, flow_control)
-- Loads tech stack guidelines based on detected language
-- Executes pre_analysis steps and implementation_approach
+- Reads and parses task JSON (requirements, acceptance, flow_control, execution_config)
+- Executes pre_analysis steps (Phase 1: context gathering)
+- Checks execution_config.method (Phase 2: determine mode)
+- CLI mode: Builds handoff prompt and executes via ccw cli with resume strategy
+- Agent mode: Directly implements using modification_points and logic_flow
 - Generates structured summary with integration points
 
 Embedding task content in prompt creates duplication and conflicts with agent's parsing logic.
@@ -492,3 +568,26 @@ meta.agent missing → Infer from meta.type:
 - **Dependency Validation**: Check all depends_on references exist
 - **Context Verification**: Ensure all required context is available
 
+## Auto-Commit Mode (--with-commit)
+
+**Behavior**: After each agent task completes, automatically commit changes based on summary document.
+
+**Minimal Principle**: Only commit files modified by the completed task.
+
+**Commit Message Format**: `{type}: {task-title} - {summary}`
+
+**Type Mapping** (from `meta.type`):
+- `feature` → `feat` | `bugfix` → `fix` | `refactor` → `refactor`
+- `test-gen` → `test` | `docs` → `docs` | `review` → `chore`
+
+**Implementation**:
+```bash
+# 1. Read summary from .summaries/{task-id}-summary.md
+# 2. Extract files from "Files Modified" section
+# 3. Commit: git add <files> && git commit -m "{type}: {title} - {summary}"
+```
+
+**Error Handling**: Skip commit on no changes/missing summary, log errors, continue workflow.
+
+
+

.claude/commands/workflow/init-guidelines.md

@@ -0,0 +1,408 @@
+---
+name: init-guidelines
+description: Interactive wizard to fill project-guidelines.json based on project analysis
+argument-hint: "[--reset]"
+examples:
+  - /workflow:init-guidelines
+  - /workflow:init-guidelines --reset
+---
+
+# Workflow Init Guidelines Command (/workflow:init-guidelines)
+
+## Overview
+
+Interactive multi-round wizard that analyzes the current project (via `project-tech.json`) and asks targeted questions to populate `.workflow/project-guidelines.json` with coding conventions, constraints, and quality rules.
+
+**Design Principle**: Questions are dynamically generated based on the project's tech stack, architecture, and patterns — not generic boilerplate.
+
+**Note**: This command may be called by `/workflow:init` after initialization. Upon completion, return to the calling workflow if applicable.
+
+## Usage
+```bash
+/workflow:init-guidelines          # Fill guidelines interactively (skip if already populated)
+/workflow:init-guidelines --reset  # Reset and re-fill guidelines from scratch
+```
+
+## Execution Process
+
+```
+Input Parsing:
+   └─ Parse --reset flag → reset = true | false
+
+Step 1: Check Prerequisites
+   ├─ project-tech.json must exist (run /workflow:init first)
+   ├─ project-guidelines.json: check if populated or scaffold-only
+   └─ If populated + no --reset → Ask: "Guidelines already exist. Overwrite or append?"
+
+Step 2: Load Project Context
+   └─ Read project-tech.json → extract tech stack, architecture, patterns
+
+Step 3: Multi-Round Interactive Questionnaire
+   ├─ Round 1: Coding Conventions (coding_style, naming_patterns)
+   ├─ Round 2: File & Documentation Conventions (file_structure, documentation)
+   ├─ Round 3: Architecture & Tech Constraints (architecture, tech_stack)
+   ├─ Round 4: Performance & Security Constraints (performance, security)
+   └─ Round 5: Quality Rules (quality_rules)
+
+Step 4: Write project-guidelines.json
+
+Step 5: Display Summary
+```
+
+## Implementation
+
+### Step 1: Check Prerequisites
+
+```bash
+bash(test -f .workflow/project-tech.json && echo "TECH_EXISTS" || echo "TECH_NOT_FOUND")
+bash(test -f .workflow/project-guidelines.json && echo "GUIDELINES_EXISTS" || echo "GUIDELINES_NOT_FOUND")
+```
+
+**If TECH_NOT_FOUND**: Exit with message
+```
+Project tech analysis not found. Run /workflow:init first.
+```
+
+**Parse --reset flag**:
+```javascript
+const reset = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--reset')
+```
+
+**If GUIDELINES_EXISTS and not --reset**: Check if guidelines are populated (not just scaffold)
+
+```javascript
+const guidelines = JSON.parse(Read('.workflow/project-guidelines.json'))
+const isPopulated =
+  guidelines.conventions.coding_style.length > 0 ||
+  guidelines.conventions.naming_patterns.length > 0 ||
+  guidelines.constraints.architecture.length > 0 ||
+  guidelines.constraints.tech_stack.length > 0
+
+if (isPopulated) {
+  AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Project guidelines already contain entries. How would you like to proceed?",
+      header: "Mode",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: "Append", description: "Keep existing entries and add new ones from the wizard" },
+        { label: "Reset", description: "Clear all existing entries and start fresh" },
+        { label: "Cancel", description: "Exit without changes" }
+      ]
+    }]
+  })
+  // If Cancel → exit
+  // If Reset → clear all arrays before proceeding
+  // If Append → keep existing, wizard adds to them
+}
+```
+
+### Step 2: Load Project Context
+
+```javascript
+const projectTech = JSON.parse(Read('.workflow/project-tech.json'))
+
+// Extract key info for generating smart questions
+const languages = projectTech.technology_analysis?.technology_stack?.languages
+  || projectTech.overview?.technology_stack?.languages || []
+const primaryLang = languages.find(l => l.primary)?.name || languages[0]?.name || 'Unknown'
+const frameworks = projectTech.technology_analysis?.technology_stack?.frameworks
+  || projectTech.overview?.technology_stack?.frameworks || []
+const testFrameworks = projectTech.technology_analysis?.technology_stack?.test_frameworks
+  || projectTech.overview?.technology_stack?.test_frameworks || []
+const archStyle = projectTech.technology_analysis?.architecture?.style
+  || projectTech.overview?.architecture?.style || 'Unknown'
+const archPatterns = projectTech.technology_analysis?.architecture?.patterns
+  || projectTech.overview?.architecture?.patterns || []
+const buildTools = projectTech.technology_analysis?.technology_stack?.build_tools
+  || projectTech.overview?.technology_stack?.build_tools || []
+```
+
+### Step 3: Multi-Round Interactive Questionnaire
+
+Each round uses `AskUserQuestion` with project-aware options. The user can always select "Other" to provide custom input.
+
+**⚠️ CRITICAL**: After each round, collect the user's answers and convert them into guideline entries. Do NOT batch all rounds — process each round's answers before proceeding to the next.
+
+---
+
+#### Round 1: Coding Conventions
+
+Generate options dynamically based on detected language/framework:
+
+```javascript
+// Build language-specific coding style options
+const codingStyleOptions = []
+
+if (['TypeScript', 'JavaScript'].includes(primaryLang)) {
+  codingStyleOptions.push(
+    { label: "Strict TypeScript", description: "Use strict mode, no 'any' type, explicit return types for public APIs" },
+    { label: "Functional style", description: "Prefer pure functions, immutability, avoid class-based patterns where possible" },
+    { label: "Const over let", description: "Always use const; only use let when reassignment is truly needed" }
+  )
+} else if (primaryLang === 'Python') {
+  codingStyleOptions.push(
+    { label: "Type hints", description: "Use type hints for all function signatures and class attributes" },
+    { label: "Functional style", description: "Prefer pure functions, list comprehensions, avoid mutable state" },
+    { label: "PEP 8 strict", description: "Strict PEP 8 compliance with max line length 88 (Black formatter)" }
+  )
+} else if (primaryLang === 'Go') {
+  codingStyleOptions.push(
+    { label: "Error wrapping", description: "Always wrap errors with context using fmt.Errorf with %w" },
+    { label: "Interface first", description: "Define interfaces at the consumer side, not the provider" },
+    { label: "Table-driven tests", description: "Use table-driven test pattern for all unit tests" }
+  )
+}
+// Add universal options
+codingStyleOptions.push(
+  { label: "Early returns", description: "Prefer early returns / guard clauses over deep nesting" }
+)
+
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [
+    {
+      question: `Your project uses ${primaryLang}. Which coding style conventions do you follow?`,
+      header: "Coding Style",
+      multiSelect: true,
+      options: codingStyleOptions.slice(0, 4) // Max 4 options
+    },
+    {
+      question: `What naming conventions does your ${primaryLang} project use?`,
+      header: "Naming",
+      multiSelect: true,
+      options: [
+        { label: "camelCase variables", description: "Variables and functions use camelCase (e.g., getUserName)" },
+        { label: "PascalCase types", description: "Classes, interfaces, type aliases use PascalCase (e.g., UserService)" },
+        { label: "UPPER_SNAKE constants", description: "Constants use UPPER_SNAKE_CASE (e.g., MAX_RETRIES)" },
+        { label: "Prefix interfaces", description: "Prefix interfaces with 'I' (e.g., IUserService)" }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+})
+```
+
+**Process Round 1 answers** → add to `conventions.coding_style` and `conventions.naming_patterns` arrays.
+
+---
+
+#### Round 2: File Structure & Documentation
+
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [
+    {
+      question: `Your project has a ${archStyle} architecture. What file organization rules apply?`,
+      header: "File Structure",
+      multiSelect: true,
+      options: [
+        { label: "Co-located tests", description: "Test files live next to source files (e.g., foo.ts + foo.test.ts)" },
+        { label: "Separate test dir", description: "Tests in a dedicated __tests__ or tests/ directory" },
+        { label: "One export per file", description: "Each file exports a single main component/class/function" },
+        { label: "Index barrels", description: "Use index.ts barrel files for clean imports from directories" }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      question: "What documentation standards does your project follow?",
+      header: "Documentation",
+      multiSelect: true,
+      options: [
+        { label: "JSDoc/docstring public APIs", description: "All public functions and classes must have JSDoc/docstrings" },
+        { label: "README per module", description: "Each major module/package has its own README" },
+        { label: "Inline comments for why", description: "Comments explain 'why', not 'what' — code should be self-documenting" },
+        { label: "No comment requirement", description: "Code should be self-explanatory; comments only for non-obvious logic" }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+})
+```
+
+**Process Round 2 answers** → add to `conventions.file_structure` and `conventions.documentation`.
+
+---
+
+#### Round 3: Architecture & Tech Stack Constraints
+
+```javascript
+// Build architecture-specific options
+const archOptions = []
+
+if (archStyle.toLowerCase().includes('monolith')) {
+  archOptions.push(
+    { label: "No circular deps", description: "Modules must not have circular dependencies" },
+    { label: "Layer boundaries", description: "Strict layer separation: UI → Service → Data (no skipping layers)" }
+  )
+} else if (archStyle.toLowerCase().includes('microservice')) {
+  archOptions.push(
+    { label: "Service isolation", description: "Services must not share databases or internal state" },
+    { label: "API contracts", description: "All inter-service communication through versioned API contracts" }
+  )
+}
+archOptions.push(
+  { label: "Stateless services", description: "Service/business logic must be stateless (state in DB/cache only)" },
+  { label: "Dependency injection", description: "Use dependency injection for testability, no hardcoded dependencies" }
+)
+
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [
+    {
+      question: `Your ${archStyle} architecture uses ${archPatterns.join(', ') || 'various'} patterns. What architecture constraints apply?`,
+      header: "Architecture",
+      multiSelect: true,
+      options: archOptions.slice(0, 4)
+    },
+    {
+      question: `Tech stack: ${frameworks.join(', ')}. What technology constraints apply?`,
+      header: "Tech Stack",
+      multiSelect: true,
+      options: [
+        { label: "No new deps without review", description: "Adding new dependencies requires explicit justification and review" },
+        { label: "Pin dependency versions", description: "All dependencies must use exact versions, not ranges" },
+        { label: "Prefer native APIs", description: "Use built-in/native APIs over third-party libraries when possible" },
+        { label: "Framework conventions", description: `Follow official ${frameworks[0] || 'framework'} conventions and best practices` }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+})
+```
+
+**Process Round 3 answers** → add to `constraints.architecture` and `constraints.tech_stack`.
+
+---
+
+#### Round 4: Performance & Security Constraints
+
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [
+    {
+      question: "What performance requirements does your project have?",
+      header: "Performance",
+      multiSelect: true,
+      options: [
+        { label: "API response time", description: "API endpoints must respond within 200ms (p95)" },
+        { label: "Bundle size limit", description: "Frontend bundle size must stay under 500KB gzipped" },
+        { label: "Lazy loading", description: "Large modules/routes must use lazy loading / code splitting" },
+        { label: "No N+1 queries", description: "Database access must avoid N+1 query patterns" }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      question: "What security requirements does your project enforce?",
+      header: "Security",
+      multiSelect: true,
+      options: [
+        { label: "Input sanitization", description: "All user input must be validated and sanitized before use" },
+        { label: "No secrets in code", description: "No API keys, passwords, or tokens in source code — use env vars" },
+        { label: "Auth on all endpoints", description: "All API endpoints require authentication unless explicitly public" },
+        { label: "Parameterized queries", description: "All database queries must use parameterized/prepared statements" }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+})
+```
+
+**Process Round 4 answers** → add to `constraints.performance` and `constraints.security`.
+
+---
+
+#### Round 5: Quality Rules
+
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [
+    {
+      question: `Testing with ${testFrameworks.join(', ') || 'your test framework'}. What quality rules apply?`,
+      header: "Quality",
+      multiSelect: true,
+      options: [
+        { label: "Min test coverage", description: "Minimum 80% code coverage for new code; no merging below threshold" },
+        { label: "No skipped tests", description: "Tests must not be skipped (.skip/.only) in committed code" },
+        { label: "Lint must pass", description: "All code must pass linter checks before commit (enforced by pre-commit)" },
+        { label: "Type check must pass", description: "Full type checking (tsc --noEmit) must pass with zero errors" }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+})
+```
+
+**Process Round 5 answers** → add to `quality_rules` array as `{ rule, scope, enforced_by }` objects.
+
+### Step 4: Write project-guidelines.json
+
+```javascript
+// Build the final guidelines object
+const finalGuidelines = {
+  conventions: {
+    coding_style: existingCodingStyle.concat(newCodingStyle),
+    naming_patterns: existingNamingPatterns.concat(newNamingPatterns),
+    file_structure: existingFileStructure.concat(newFileStructure),
+    documentation: existingDocumentation.concat(newDocumentation)
+  },
+  constraints: {
+    architecture: existingArchitecture.concat(newArchitecture),
+    tech_stack: existingTechStack.concat(newTechStack),
+    performance: existingPerformance.concat(newPerformance),
+    security: existingSecurity.concat(newSecurity)
+  },
+  quality_rules: existingQualityRules.concat(newQualityRules),
+  learnings: existingLearnings, // Preserve existing learnings
+  _metadata: {
+    created_at: existingMetadata?.created_at || new Date().toISOString(),
+    version: "1.0.0",
+    last_updated: new Date().toISOString(),
+    updated_by: "workflow:init-guidelines"
+  }
+}
+
+Write('.workflow/project-guidelines.json', JSON.stringify(finalGuidelines, null, 2))
+```
+
+### Step 5: Display Summary
+
+```javascript
+const countConventions = finalGuidelines.conventions.coding_style.length
+  + finalGuidelines.conventions.naming_patterns.length
+  + finalGuidelines.conventions.file_structure.length
+  + finalGuidelines.conventions.documentation.length
+
+const countConstraints = finalGuidelines.constraints.architecture.length
+  + finalGuidelines.constraints.tech_stack.length
+  + finalGuidelines.constraints.performance.length
+  + finalGuidelines.constraints.security.length
+
+const countQuality = finalGuidelines.quality_rules.length
+
+console.log(`
+✓ Project guidelines configured
+
+## Summary
+- Conventions: ${countConventions} rules (coding: ${cs}, naming: ${np}, files: ${fs}, docs: ${doc})
+- Constraints: ${countConstraints} rules (arch: ${ar}, tech: ${ts}, perf: ${pf}, security: ${sc})
+- Quality rules: ${countQuality}
+
+File: .workflow/project-guidelines.json
+
+Next steps:
+- Use /workflow:session:solidify to add individual rules later
+- Guidelines will be auto-loaded by /workflow:plan for task generation
+`)
+```
+
+## Answer Processing Rules
+
+When converting user selections to guideline entries:
+
+1. **Selected option** → Use the option's `description` as the guideline string (it's more precise than the label)
+2. **"Other" with custom text** → Use the user's text directly as the guideline string
+3. **Deduplication** → Skip entries that already exist in the guidelines (exact string match)
+4. **Quality rules** → Convert to `{ rule: description, scope: "all", enforced_by: "code-review" }` format
+
+## Error Handling
+
+- **No project-tech.json**: Exit with instruction to run `/workflow:init` first
+- **User cancels mid-wizard**: Save whatever was collected so far (partial is better than nothing)
+- **File write failure**: Report error, suggest manual edit
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/workflow:init` - Creates scaffold; optionally calls this command
+- `/workflow:session:solidify` - Add individual rules one at a time

.claude/commands/workflow/init.md

@@ -44,11 +44,16 @@ Analysis Flow:
    │   └─ Write .workflow/project-tech.json
    ├─ Create guidelines scaffold (if not exists)
    │   └─ Write .workflow/project-guidelines.json (empty structure)
-   └─ Display summary
+   ├─ Display summary
+   └─ Ask about guidelines configuration
+       ├─ If guidelines empty → Ask user: "Configure now?" or "Skip"
+       │   ├─ Configure now → Skill(skill="workflow:init-guidelines")
+       │   └─ Skip → Show next steps
+       └─ If guidelines populated → Show next steps only
 
 Output:
    ├─ .workflow/project-tech.json (+ .backup if regenerate)
-   └─ .workflow/project-guidelines.json (scaffold if new)
+   └─ .workflow/project-guidelines.json (scaffold or configured)
 ```
 
 ## Implementation
@@ -108,11 +113,24 @@ Analyze project for workflow initialization and generate .workflow/project-tech.
 2. Execute: ccw tool exec get_modules_by_depth '{}' (get project structure)
 
 ## Task
-Generate complete project-tech.json with:
-- project_metadata: {name: ${projectName}, root_path: ${projectRoot}, initialized_at, updated_at}
-- technology_analysis: {description, languages, frameworks, build_tools, test_frameworks, architecture, key_components, dependencies}
-- development_status: ${regenerate ? 'preserve from backup' : '{completed_features: [], development_index: {feature: [], enhancement: [], bugfix: [], refactor: [], docs: []}, statistics: {total_features: 0, total_sessions: 0, last_updated}}'}
-- _metadata: {initialized_by: "cli-explore-agent", analysis_timestamp, analysis_mode}
+Generate complete project-tech.json following the schema structure:
+- project_name: "${projectName}"
+- initialized_at: ISO 8601 timestamp
+- overview: {
+    description: "Brief project description",
+    technology_stack: {
+      languages: [{name, file_count, primary}],
+      frameworks: ["string"],
+      build_tools: ["string"],
+      test_frameworks: ["string"]
+    },
+    architecture: {style, layers: [], patterns: []},
+    key_components: [{name, path, description, importance}]
+  }
+- features: []
+- development_index: ${regenerate ? 'preserve from backup' : '{feature: [], enhancement: [], bugfix: [], refactor: [], docs: []}'}
+- statistics: ${regenerate ? 'preserve from backup' : '{total_features: 0, total_sessions: 0, last_updated: ISO timestamp}'}
+- _metadata: {initialized_by: "cli-explore-agent", analysis_timestamp: ISO timestamp, analysis_mode: "deep-scan"}
 
 ## Analysis Requirements
 
@@ -132,7 +150,7 @@ Generate complete project-tech.json with:
 1. Structural scan: get_modules_by_depth.sh, find, wc -l
 2. Semantic analysis: Gemini for patterns/architecture
 3. Synthesis: Merge findings
-4. ${regenerate ? 'Merge with preserved development_status from .workflow/project-tech.json.backup' : ''}
+4. ${regenerate ? 'Merge with preserved development_index and statistics from .workflow/project-tech.json.backup' : ''}
 5. Write JSON: Write('.workflow/project-tech.json', jsonContent)
 6. Report: Return brief completion summary
 
@@ -181,27 +199,79 @@ console.log(`
 ✓ Project initialized successfully
 
 ## Project Overview
-Name: ${projectTech.project_metadata.name}
-Description: ${projectTech.technology_analysis.description}
+Name: ${projectTech.project_name}
+Description: ${projectTech.overview.description}
 
 ### Technology Stack
-Languages: ${projectTech.technology_analysis.languages.map(l => l.name).join(', ')}
-Frameworks: ${projectTech.technology_analysis.frameworks.join(', ')}
+Languages: ${projectTech.overview.technology_stack.languages.map(l => l.name).join(', ')}
+Frameworks: ${projectTech.overview.technology_stack.frameworks.join(', ')}
 
 ### Architecture
-Style: ${projectTech.technology_analysis.architecture.style}
-Components: ${projectTech.technology_analysis.key_components.length} core modules
+Style: ${projectTech.overview.architecture.style}
+Components: ${projectTech.overview.key_components.length} core modules
 
 ---
 Files created:
 - Tech analysis: .workflow/project-tech.json
 - Guidelines: .workflow/project-guidelines.json ${guidelinesExists ? '(scaffold)' : ''}
 ${regenerate ? '- Backup: .workflow/project-tech.json.backup' : ''}
+`);
+```
 
+### Step 5: Ask About Guidelines Configuration
+
+After displaying the summary, ask the user if they want to configure project guidelines interactively.
+
+```javascript
+// Check if guidelines are just a scaffold (empty) or already populated
+const guidelines = JSON.parse(Read('.workflow/project-guidelines.json'));
+const isGuidelinesPopulated =
+  guidelines.conventions.coding_style.length > 0 ||
+  guidelines.conventions.naming_patterns.length > 0 ||
+  guidelines.constraints.architecture.length > 0 ||
+  guidelines.constraints.security.length > 0;
+
+// Only ask if guidelines are not yet populated
+if (!isGuidelinesPopulated) {
+  const userChoice = AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Would you like to configure project guidelines now? The wizard will ask targeted questions based on your tech stack.",
+      header: "Guidelines",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        {
+          label: "Configure now (Recommended)",
+          description: "Interactive wizard to set up coding conventions, constraints, and quality rules"
+        },
+        {
+          label: "Skip for now",
+          description: "You can run /workflow:init-guidelines later or use /workflow:session:solidify to add rules individually"
+        }
+      ]
+    }]
+  });
+
+  if (userChoice.answers["Guidelines"] === "Configure now (Recommended)") {
+    console.log("\n🔧 Starting guidelines configuration wizard...\n");
+    Skill(skill="workflow:init-guidelines");
+  } else {
+    console.log(`
 Next steps:
-- Use /workflow:session:solidify to add project guidelines
+- Use /workflow:init-guidelines to configure guidelines interactively
+- Use /workflow:session:solidify to add individual rules
 - Use /workflow:plan to start planning
 `);
+  }
+} else {
+  console.log(`
+Guidelines already configured (${guidelines.conventions.coding_style.length + guidelines.constraints.architecture.length}+ rules).
+
+Next steps:
+- Use /workflow:init-guidelines --reset to reconfigure
+- Use /workflow:session:solidify to add individual rules
+- Use /workflow:plan to start planning
+`);
+}
 ```
 
 ## Error Handling
@@ -209,3 +279,10 @@ Next steps:
 **Agent Failure**: Fall back to basic initialization with placeholder overview
 **Missing Tools**: Agent uses Qwen fallback or bash-only
 **Empty Project**: Create minimal JSON with all gaps identified
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/workflow:init-guidelines` - Interactive wizard to configure project guidelines (called after init)
+- `/workflow:session:solidify` - Add individual rules/constraints one at a time
+- `/workflow:plan` - Start planning with initialized project context
+- `/workflow:status --project` - View project state and guidelines

.claude/commands/workflow/lite-execute.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 name: lite-execute
 description: Execute tasks based on in-memory plan, prompt description, or file content
-argument-hint: "[--in-memory] [\"task description\"|file-path]"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--in-memory] [\"task description\"|file-path]"
 allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), Bash(*)
 ---
 
@@ -62,30 +62,49 @@ Flexible task execution command supporting three input modes: in-memory plan (fr
 
 **User Interaction**:
 ```javascript
-AskUserQuestion({
-  questions: [
-    {
-      question: "Select execution method:",
-      header: "Execution",
-      multiSelect: false,
-      options: [
-        { label: "Agent", description: "@code-developer agent" },
-        { label: "Codex", description: "codex CLI tool" },
-        { label: "Auto", description: "Auto-select based on complexity" }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      question: "Enable code review after execution?",
-      header: "Code Review",
-      multiSelect: false,
-      options: [
-        { label: "Skip", description: "No review" },
-        { label: "Gemini Review", description: "Gemini CLI tool" },
-        { label: "Agent Review", description: "Current agent review" }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-})
+// Parse --yes flag
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+
+let userSelection
+
+if (autoYes) {
+  // Auto mode: Use defaults
+  console.log(`[--yes] Auto-confirming execution:`)
+  console.log(`  - Execution method: Auto`)
+  console.log(`  - Code review: Skip`)
+
+  userSelection = {
+    execution_method: "Auto",
+    code_review_tool: "Skip"
+  }
+} else {
+  // Interactive mode: Ask user
+  userSelection = AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [
+      {
+        question: "Select execution method:",
+        header: "Execution",
+        multiSelect: false,
+        options: [
+          { label: "Agent", description: "@code-developer agent" },
+          { label: "Codex", description: "codex CLI tool" },
+          { label: "Auto", description: "Auto-select based on complexity" }
+        ]
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Enable code review after execution?",
+        header: "Code Review",
+        multiSelect: false,
+        options: [
+          { label: "Skip", description: "No review" },
+          { label: "Gemini Review", description: "Gemini CLI tool" },
+          { label: "Codex Review", description: "Git-aware review (prompt OR --uncommitted)" },
+          { label: "Agent Review", description: "Current agent review" }
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  })
+}
 ```
 
 ### Mode 3: File Content
@@ -171,10 +190,23 @@ Output:
 **Operations**:
 - Initialize result tracking for multi-execution scenarios
 - Set up `previousExecutionResults` array for context continuity
+- **In-Memory Mode**: Echo execution strategy from lite-plan for transparency
 
 ```javascript
 // Initialize result tracking
 previousExecutionResults = []
+
+// In-Memory Mode: Echo execution strategy (transparency before execution)
+if (executionContext) {
+  console.log(`
+📋 Execution Strategy (from lite-plan):
+   Method: ${executionContext.executionMethod}
+   Review: ${executionContext.codeReviewTool}
+   Tasks: ${executionContext.planObject.tasks.length}
+   Complexity: ${executionContext.planObject.complexity}
+${executionContext.executorAssignments ? `   Assignments: ${JSON.stringify(executionContext.executorAssignments)}` : ''}
+  `)
+}
 ```
 
 ### Step 2: Task Grouping & Batch Creation
@@ -313,7 +345,7 @@ for (const call of sequential) {
 
 ```javascript
 function buildExecutionPrompt(batch) {
-  // Task template (4 parts: Modification Points → How → Reference → Done)
+  // Task template (6 parts: Modification Points → Why → How → Reference → Risks → Done)
   const formatTask = (t) => `
 ## ${t.title}
 
@@ -322,18 +354,38 @@ function buildExecutionPrompt(batch) {
 ### Modification Points
 ${t.modification_points.map(p => `- **${p.file}** → \`${p.target}\`: ${p.change}`).join('\n')}
 
+${t.rationale ? `
+### Why this approach (Medium/High)
+${t.rationale.chosen_approach}
+${t.rationale.decision_factors?.length > 0 ? `\nKey factors: ${t.rationale.decision_factors.join(', ')}` : ''}
+${t.rationale.tradeoffs ? `\nTradeoffs: ${t.rationale.tradeoffs}` : ''}
+` : ''}
+
 ### How to do it
 ${t.description}
 
 ${t.implementation.map(step => `- ${step}`).join('\n')}
 
+${t.code_skeleton ? `
+### Code skeleton (High)
+${t.code_skeleton.interfaces?.length > 0 ? `**Interfaces**: ${t.code_skeleton.interfaces.map(i => `\`${i.name}\` - ${i.purpose}`).join(', ')}` : ''}
+${t.code_skeleton.key_functions?.length > 0 ? `\n**Functions**: ${t.code_skeleton.key_functions.map(f => `\`${f.signature}\` - ${f.purpose}`).join(', ')}` : ''}
+${t.code_skeleton.classes?.length > 0 ? `\n**Classes**: ${t.code_skeleton.classes.map(c => `\`${c.name}\` - ${c.purpose}`).join(', ')}` : ''}
+` : ''}
+
 ### Reference
 - Pattern: ${t.reference?.pattern || 'N/A'}
 - Files: ${t.reference?.files?.join(', ') || 'N/A'}
 ${t.reference?.examples ? `- Notes: ${t.reference.examples}` : ''}
 
+${t.risks?.length > 0 ? `
+### Risk mitigations (High)
+${t.risks.map(r => `- ${r.description} → **${r.mitigation}**`).join('\n')}
+` : ''}
+
 ### Done when
-${t.acceptance.map(c => `- [ ] ${c}`).join('\n')}`
+${t.acceptance.map(c => `- [ ] ${c}`).join('\n')}
+${t.verification?.success_metrics?.length > 0 ? `\n**Success metrics**: ${t.verification.success_metrics.join(', ')}` : ''}`
 
   // Build prompt
   const sections = []
@@ -350,9 +402,14 @@ ${t.acceptance.map(c => `- [ ] ${c}`).join('\n')}`
   if (clarificationContext) {
     context.push(`### Clarifications\n${Object.entries(clarificationContext).map(([q, a]) => `- ${q}: ${a}`).join('\n')}`)
   }
+  if (executionContext?.planObject?.data_flow?.diagram) {
+    context.push(`### Data Flow\n${executionContext.planObject.data_flow.diagram}`)
+  }
   if (executionContext?.session?.artifacts?.plan) {
     context.push(`### Artifacts\nPlan: ${executionContext.session.artifacts.plan}`)
   }
+  // Project guidelines (user-defined constraints from /workflow:session:solidify)
+  context.push(`### Project Guidelines\n@.workflow/project-guidelines.json`)
   if (context.length > 0) sections.push(`## Context\n${context.join('\n\n')}`)
 
   sections.push(`Complete each task according to its "Done when" checklist.`)
@@ -392,16 +449,8 @@ ccw cli -p "${buildExecutionPrompt(batch)}" --tool codex --mode write
 
 **Execution with fixed IDs** (predictable ID pattern):
 ```javascript
-// Launch CLI in foreground (NOT background)
-// Timeout based on complexity: Low=40min, Medium=60min, High=100min
-const timeoutByComplexity = {
-  "Low": 2400000,    // 40 minutes
-  "Medium": 3600000, // 60 minutes
-  "High": 6000000    // 100 minutes
-}
-
+// Launch CLI in background, wait for task hook callback
 // Generate fixed execution ID: ${sessionId}-${groupId}
-// This enables predictable ID lookup without relying on resume context chains
 const sessionId = executionContext?.session?.id || 'standalone'
 const fixedExecutionId = `${sessionId}-${batch.groupId}`  // e.g., "implement-auth-2025-12-13-P1"
 
@@ -413,16 +462,12 @@ const cli_command = previousCliId
   ? `ccw cli -p "${buildExecutionPrompt(batch)}" --tool codex --mode write --id ${fixedExecutionId} --resume ${previousCliId}`
   : `ccw cli -p "${buildExecutionPrompt(batch)}" --tool codex --mode write --id ${fixedExecutionId}`
 
-bash_result = Bash(
+// Execute in background, stop output and wait for task hook callback
+Bash(
   command=cli_command,
-  timeout=timeoutByComplexity[planObject.complexity] || 3600000
+  run_in_background=true
 )
-
-// Execution ID is now predictable: ${fixedExecutionId}
-// Can also extract from output: "ID: implement-auth-2025-12-13-P1"
-const cliExecutionId = fixedExecutionId
-
-// Update TodoWrite when execution completes
+// STOP HERE - CLI executes in background, task hook will notify on completion
 ```
 
 **Resume on Failure** (with fixed ID):
@@ -460,32 +505,41 @@ Progress tracked at batch level (not individual task level). Icons: ⚡ (paralle
 
 **Skip Condition**: Only run if `codeReviewTool ≠ "Skip"`
 
-**Review Focus**: Verify implementation against plan acceptance criteria
-- Read plan.json for task acceptance criteria
+**Review Focus**: Verify implementation against plan acceptance criteria and verification requirements
+- Read plan.json for task acceptance criteria and verification checklist
 - Check each acceptance criterion is fulfilled
+- Verify success metrics from verification field (Medium/High complexity)
+- Run unit/integration tests specified in verification field
 - Validate code quality and identify issues
-- Ensure alignment with planned approach
+- Ensure alignment with planned approach and risk mitigations
 
 **Operations**:
 - Agent Review: Current agent performs direct review
 - Gemini Review: Execute gemini CLI with review prompt
-- Custom tool: Execute specified CLI tool (qwen, codex, etc.)
+- Codex Review: Two options - (A) with prompt for complex reviews, (B) `--uncommitted` flag only for quick reviews
+- Custom tool: Execute specified CLI tool (qwen, etc.)
 
 **Unified Review Template** (All tools use same standard):
 
 **Review Criteria**:
 - **Acceptance Criteria**: Verify each criterion from plan.tasks[].acceptance
+- **Verification Checklist** (Medium/High): Check unit_tests, integration_tests, success_metrics from plan.tasks[].verification
 - **Code Quality**: Analyze quality, identify issues, suggest improvements
-- **Plan Alignment**: Validate implementation matches planned approach
+- **Plan Alignment**: Validate implementation matches planned approach and risk mitigations
 
 **Shared Prompt Template** (used by all CLI tools):
 ```
-PURPOSE: Code review for implemented changes against plan acceptance criteria
-TASK: • Verify plan acceptance criteria fulfillment • Analyze code quality • Identify issues • Suggest improvements • Validate plan adherence
+PURPOSE: Code review for implemented changes against plan acceptance criteria and verification requirements
+TASK: • Verify plan acceptance criteria fulfillment • Check verification requirements (unit tests, success metrics) • Analyze code quality • Identify issues • Suggest improvements • Validate plan adherence and risk mitigations
 MODE: analysis
-CONTEXT: @**/* @{plan.json} [@{exploration.json}] | Memory: Review lite-execute changes against plan requirements
-EXPECTED: Quality assessment with acceptance criteria verification, issue identification, and recommendations. Explicitly check each acceptance criterion from plan.json tasks.
-RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/analysis/02-review-code-quality.txt) | Focus on plan acceptance criteria and plan adherence | analysis=READ-ONLY
+CONTEXT: @**/* @{plan.json} [@{exploration.json}] | Memory: Review lite-execute changes against plan requirements including verification checklist
+EXPECTED: Quality assessment with:
+  - Acceptance criteria verification (all tasks)
+  - Verification checklist validation (Medium/High: unit_tests, integration_tests, success_metrics)
+  - Issue identification
+  - Recommendations
+  Explicitly check each acceptance criterion and verification item from plan.json tasks.
+CONSTRAINTS: Focus on plan acceptance criteria, verification requirements, and plan adherence | analysis=READ-ONLY
 ```
 
 **Tool-Specific Execution** (Apply shared prompt template above):
@@ -504,8 +558,17 @@ ccw cli -p "[Shared Prompt Template with artifacts]" --tool gemini --mode analys
 ccw cli -p "[Shared Prompt Template with artifacts]" --tool qwen --mode analysis
 # Same prompt as Gemini, different execution engine
 
-# Method 4: Codex Review (autonomous)
-ccw cli -p "[Verify plan acceptance criteria at ${plan.json}]" --tool codex --mode write
+# Method 4: Codex Review (git-aware) - Two mutually exclusive options:
+
+# Option A: With custom prompt (reviews uncommitted by default)
+ccw cli -p "[Shared Prompt Template with artifacts]" --tool codex --mode review
+# Use for complex reviews with specific focus areas
+
+# Option B: Target flag only (no prompt allowed)
+ccw cli --tool codex --mode review --uncommitted
+# Quick review of uncommitted changes without custom instructions
+
+# ⚠️ IMPORTANT: -p prompt and target flags (--uncommitted/--base/--commit) are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE
 ```
 
 **Multi-Round Review with Fixed IDs**:
@@ -531,11 +594,11 @@ if (hasUnresolvedIssues(reviewResult)) {
 
 **Trigger**: After all executions complete (regardless of code review)
 
-**Skip Condition**: Skip if `.workflow/project.json` does not exist
+**Skip Condition**: Skip if `.workflow/project-tech.json` does not exist
 
 **Operations**:
 ```javascript
-const projectJsonPath = '.workflow/project.json'
+const projectJsonPath = '.workflow/project-tech.json'
 if (!fileExists(projectJsonPath)) return  // Silent skip
 
 const projectJson = JSON.parse(Read(projectJsonPath))
@@ -664,6 +727,10 @@ Collected after each execution call completes:
 
 Appended to `previousExecutionResults` array for context continuity in multi-execution scenarios.
 
+## Post-Completion Expansion
+
+完成后询问用户是否扩展为issue(test/enhance/refactor/doc)，选中项调用 `/issue:new "{summary} - {dimension}"`
+
 **Fixed ID Pattern**: `${sessionId}-${groupId}` enables predictable lookup without auto-generated timestamps.
 
 **Resume Usage**: If `status` is "partial" or "failed", use `fixedCliId` to resume:

.claude/commands/workflow/lite-fix.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: lite-fix
 description: Lightweight bug diagnosis and fix workflow with intelligent severity assessment and optional hotfix mode for production incidents
-argument-hint: "[--hotfix] \"bug description or issue reference\""
-allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), SlashCommand(*), AskUserQuestion(*)
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--hotfix] \"bug description or issue reference\""
+allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), Skill(*), AskUserQuestion(*)
 ---
 
 # Workflow Lite-Fix Command (/workflow:lite-fix)
@@ -25,10 +25,49 @@ Intelligent lightweight bug fixing command with dynamic workflow adaptation base
 /workflow:lite-fix [FLAGS] <BUG_DESCRIPTION>
 
 # Flags
+-y, --yes                  Skip all confirmations (auto mode)
 --hotfix, -h               Production hotfix mode (minimal diagnosis, fast fix)
 
 # Arguments
 <bug-description>          Bug description, error message, or path to .md file (required)
+
+# Examples
+/workflow:lite-fix "用户登录失败"                    # Interactive mode
+/workflow:lite-fix --yes "用户登录失败"              # Auto mode (no confirmations)
+/workflow:lite-fix -y --hotfix "生产环境数据库连接失败"   # Auto + hotfix mode
+```
+
+## Output Artifacts
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `diagnosis-{angle}.json` | Per-angle diagnosis results (1-4 files based on severity) |
+| `diagnoses-manifest.json` | Index of all diagnosis files |
+| `planning-context.md` | Evidence paths + synthesized understanding |
+| `fix-plan.json` | Structured fix plan (fix-plan-json-schema.json) |
+
+**Output Directory**: `.workflow/.lite-fix/{bug-slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}/`
+
+**Agent Usage**:
+- Low/Medium severity → Direct Claude planning (no agent)
+- High/Critical severity → `cli-lite-planning-agent` generates `fix-plan.json`
+
+**Schema Reference**: `~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/fix-plan-json-schema.json`
+
+## Auto Mode Defaults
+
+When `--yes` or `-y` flag is used:
+- **Clarification Questions**: Skipped (no clarification phase)
+- **Fix Plan Confirmation**: Auto-selected "Allow"
+- **Execution Method**: Auto-selected "Auto"
+- **Code Review**: Auto-selected "Skip"
+- **Severity**: Uses auto-detected severity (no manual override)
+- **Hotfix Mode**: Respects --hotfix flag if present, otherwise normal mode
+
+**Flag Parsing**:
+```javascript
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+const hotfixMode = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--hotfix') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-h')
 ```
 
 ## Execution Process
@@ -64,7 +103,7 @@ Phase 4: Confirmation & Selection
 
 Phase 5: Execute
    |- Build executionContext (fix-plan + diagnoses + clarifications + selections)
-   +- SlashCommand("/workflow:lite-execute --in-memory --mode bugfix")
+   +- Skill(skill="workflow:lite-execute", args="--in-memory --mode bugfix")
 ```
 
 ## Implementation
@@ -170,11 +209,15 @@ const diagnosisTasks = selectedAngles.map((angle, index) =>
 ## Task Objective
 Execute **${angle}** diagnosis for bug root cause analysis. Analyze codebase from this specific angle to discover root cause, affected paths, and fix hints.
 
+## Output Location
+
+**Session Folder**: ${sessionFolder}
+**Output File**: ${sessionFolder}/diagnosis-${angle}.json
+
 ## Assigned Context
 - **Diagnosis Angle**: ${angle}
 - **Bug Description**: ${bug_description}
 - **Diagnosis Index**: ${index + 1} of ${selectedAngles.length}
-- **Output File**: ${sessionFolder}/diagnosis-${angle}.json
 
 ## MANDATORY FIRST STEPS (Execute by Agent)
 **You (cli-explore-agent) MUST execute these steps in order:**
@@ -203,8 +246,6 @@ Execute **${angle}** diagnosis for bug root cause analysis. Analyze codebase fro
 
 ## Expected Output
 
-**File**: ${sessionFolder}/diagnosis-${angle}.json
-
 **Schema Reference**: Schema obtained in MANDATORY FIRST STEPS step 3, follow schema exactly
 
 **Required Fields** (all ${angle} focused):
@@ -233,9 +274,9 @@ Execute **${angle}** diagnosis for bug root cause analysis. Analyze codebase fro
 - [ ] JSON output follows schema exactly
 - [ ] clarification_needs includes options + recommended
 
-## Output
-Write: ${sessionFolder}/diagnosis-${angle}.json
-Return: 2-3 sentence summary of ${angle} diagnosis findings
+## Execution
+**Write**: \`${sessionFolder}/diagnosis-${angle}.json\`
+**Return**: 2-3 sentence summary of ${angle} diagnosis findings
 `
   )
 )
@@ -332,9 +373,17 @@ function deduplicateClarifications(clarifications) {
 
 const uniqueClarifications = deduplicateClarifications(allClarifications)
 
-// Multi-round clarification: batch questions (max 4 per round)
-// ⚠️ MUST execute ALL rounds until uniqueClarifications exhausted
-if (uniqueClarifications.length > 0) {
+// Parse --yes flag
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+
+if (autoYes) {
+  // Auto mode: Skip clarification phase
+  console.log(`[--yes] Skipping ${uniqueClarifications.length} clarification questions`)
+  console.log(`Proceeding to fix planning with diagnosis results...`)
+  // Continue to Phase 3
+} else if (uniqueClarifications.length > 0) {
+  // Interactive mode: Multi-round clarification
+  // ⚠️ MUST execute ALL rounds until uniqueClarifications exhausted
   const BATCH_SIZE = 4
   const totalRounds = Math.ceil(uniqueClarifications.length / BATCH_SIZE)
 
@@ -380,6 +429,7 @@ if (uniqueClarifications.length > 0) {
 const schema = Bash(`cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/fix-plan-json-schema.json`)
 
 // Step 2: Generate fix-plan following schema (Claude directly, no agent)
+// For Medium complexity: include rationale + verification (optional, but recommended)
 const fixPlan = {
   summary: "...",
   root_cause: "...",
@@ -389,13 +439,67 @@ const fixPlan = {
   recommended_execution: "Agent",
   severity: severity,
   risk_level: "...",
-  _metadata: { timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(), source: "direct-planning", planning_mode: "direct" }
+
+  // Medium complexity fields (optional for direct planning, auto-filled for Low)
+  ...(severity === "Medium" ? {
+    design_decisions: [
+      {
+        decision: "Use immediate_patch strategy for minimal risk",
+        rationale: "Keeps changes localized and quick to review",
+        tradeoff: "Defers comprehensive refactoring"
+      }
+    ],
+    tasks_with_rationale: {
+      // Each task gets rationale if Medium
+      task_rationale_example: {
+        rationale: {
+          chosen_approach: "Direct fix approach",
+          alternatives_considered: ["Workaround", "Refactor"],
+          decision_factors: ["Minimal impact", "Quick turnaround"],
+          tradeoffs: "Doesn't address underlying issue"
+        },
+        verification: {
+          unit_tests: ["test_bug_fix_basic"],
+          integration_tests: [],
+          manual_checks: ["Reproduce issue", "Verify fix"],
+          success_metrics: ["Issue resolved", "No regressions"]
+        }
+      }
+    }
+  } : {}),
+
+  _metadata: {
+    timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(),
+    source: "direct-planning",
+    planning_mode: "direct",
+    complexity: severity === "Medium" ? "Medium" : "Low"
+  }
 }
 
-// Step 3: Write fix-plan to session folder
+// Step 3: Merge task rationale into tasks array
+if (severity === "Medium") {
+  fixPlan.tasks = fixPlan.tasks.map(task => ({
+    ...task,
+    rationale: fixPlan.tasks_with_rationale[task.id]?.rationale || {
+      chosen_approach: "Standard fix",
+      alternatives_considered: [],
+      decision_factors: ["Correctness", "Simplicity"],
+      tradeoffs: "None"
+    },
+    verification: fixPlan.tasks_with_rationale[task.id]?.verification || {
+      unit_tests: [`test_${task.id}_basic`],
+      integration_tests: [],
+      manual_checks: ["Verify fix works"],
+      success_metrics: ["Test pass"]
+    }
+  }))
+  delete fixPlan.tasks_with_rationale  // Clean up temp field
+}
+
+// Step 4: Write fix-plan to session folder
 Write(`${sessionFolder}/fix-plan.json`, JSON.stringify(fixPlan, null, 2))
 
-// Step 4: MUST continue to Phase 4 (Confirmation) - DO NOT execute code here
+// Step 5: MUST continue to Phase 4 (Confirmation) - DO NOT execute code here
 ```
 
 **High/Critical Severity** - Invoke cli-lite-planning-agent:
@@ -408,6 +512,13 @@ Task(
   prompt=`
 Generate fix plan and write fix-plan.json.
 
+## Output Location
+
+**Session Folder**: ${sessionFolder}
+**Output Files**:
+- ${sessionFolder}/planning-context.md (evidence + understanding)
+- ${sessionFolder}/fix-plan.json (fix plan)
+
 ## Output Schema Reference
 Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/fix-plan-json-schema.json (get schema reference before generating plan)
 
@@ -451,11 +562,41 @@ Generate fix-plan.json with:
   - description
   - modification_points: ALL files to modify for this fix (group related changes)
   - implementation (2-5 steps covering all modification_points)
-  - verification (test criteria)
+  - acceptance: Quantified acceptance criteria
   - depends_on: task IDs this task depends on (use sparingly)
+
+  **High/Critical complexity fields per task** (REQUIRED):
+  - rationale:
+    - chosen_approach: Why this fix approach (not alternatives)
+    - alternatives_considered: Other approaches evaluated
+    - decision_factors: Key factors influencing choice
+    - tradeoffs: Known tradeoffs of this approach
+  - verification:
+    - unit_tests: Test names to add/verify
+    - integration_tests: Integration test names
+    - manual_checks: Manual verification steps
+    - success_metrics: Quantified success criteria
+  - risks:
+    - description: Risk description
+    - probability: Low|Medium|High
+    - impact: Low|Medium|High
+    - mitigation: How to mitigate
+    - fallback: Fallback if fix fails
+  - code_skeleton (optional): Key interfaces/functions to implement
+    - interfaces: [{name, definition, purpose}]
+    - key_functions: [{signature, purpose, returns}]
+
+**Top-level High/Critical fields** (REQUIRED):
+- data_flow: How data flows through affected code
+  - diagram: "A → B → C" style flow
+  - stages: [{stage, input, output, component}]
+- design_decisions: Global fix decisions
+  - [{decision, rationale, tradeoff}]
+
 - estimated_time, recommended_execution, severity, risk_level
 - _metadata:
   - timestamp, source, planning_mode
+  - complexity: "High" | "Critical"
   - diagnosis_angles: ${JSON.stringify(manifest.diagnoses.map(d => d.angle))}
 
 ## Task Grouping Rules
@@ -467,11 +608,22 @@ Generate fix-plan.json with:
 
 ## Execution
 1. Read ALL diagnosis files for comprehensive context
-2. Execute CLI planning using Gemini (Qwen fallback)
+2. Execute CLI planning using Gemini (Qwen fallback) with --rule planning-fix-strategy template
 3. Synthesize findings from multiple diagnosis angles
-4. Parse output and structure fix-plan
-5. Write JSON: Write('${sessionFolder}/fix-plan.json', jsonContent)
-6. Return brief completion summary
+4. Generate fix-plan with:
+   - For High/Critical: REQUIRED new fields (rationale, verification, risks, code_skeleton, data_flow, design_decisions)
+   - Each task MUST have rationale (why this fix), verification (how to verify success), and risks (potential issues)
+5. Parse output and structure fix-plan
+6. **Write**: \`${sessionFolder}/planning-context.md\` (evidence paths + understanding)
+7. **Write**: \`${sessionFolder}/fix-plan.json\`
+8. Return brief completion summary
+
+## Output Format for CLI
+Include these sections in your fix-plan output:
+- Summary, Root Cause, Strategy (existing)
+- Data Flow: Diagram showing affected code paths
+- Design Decisions: Key architectural choices in the fix
+- Tasks: Each with rationale (Medium/High), verification (Medium/High), risks (High), code_skeleton (High)
 `
 )
 ```
@@ -505,40 +657,60 @@ ${fixPlan.tasks.map((t, i) => `${i+1}. ${t.title} (${t.scope})`).join('\n')}
 
 **Step 4.2: Collect Confirmation**
 ```javascript
-AskUserQuestion({
-  questions: [
-    {
-      question: `Confirm fix plan? (${fixPlan.tasks.length} tasks, ${fixPlan.severity} severity)`,
-      header: "Confirm",
-      multiSelect: true,
-      options: [
-        { label: "Allow", description: "Proceed as-is" },
-        { label: "Modify", description: "Adjust before execution" },
-        { label: "Cancel", description: "Abort workflow" }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      question: "Execution method:",
-      header: "Execution",
-      multiSelect: false,
-      options: [
-        { label: "Agent", description: "@code-developer agent" },
-        { label: "Codex", description: "codex CLI tool" },
-        { label: "Auto", description: `Auto: ${fixPlan.severity === 'Low' ? 'Agent' : 'Codex'}` }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      question: "Code review after fix?",
-      header: "Review",
-      multiSelect: false,
-      options: [
-        { label: "Gemini Review", description: "Gemini CLI" },
-        { label: "Agent Review", description: "@code-reviewer" },
-        { label: "Skip", description: "No review" }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-})
+// Parse --yes flag
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+
+let userSelection
+
+if (autoYes) {
+  // Auto mode: Use defaults
+  console.log(`[--yes] Auto-confirming fix plan:`)
+  console.log(`  - Confirmation: Allow`)
+  console.log(`  - Execution: Auto`)
+  console.log(`  - Review: Skip`)
+
+  userSelection = {
+    confirmation: "Allow",
+    execution_method: "Auto",
+    code_review_tool: "Skip"
+  }
+} else {
+  // Interactive mode: Ask user
+  userSelection = AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [
+      {
+        question: `Confirm fix plan? (${fixPlan.tasks.length} tasks, ${fixPlan.severity} severity)`,
+        header: "Confirm",
+        multiSelect: false,
+        options: [
+          { label: "Allow", description: "Proceed as-is" },
+          { label: "Modify", description: "Adjust before execution" },
+          { label: "Cancel", description: "Abort workflow" }
+        ]
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Execution method:",
+        header: "Execution",
+        multiSelect: false,
+        options: [
+          { label: "Agent", description: "@code-developer agent" },
+          { label: "Codex", description: "codex CLI tool" },
+          { label: "Auto", description: `Auto: ${fixPlan.severity === 'Low' ? 'Agent' : 'Codex'}` }
+        ]
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Code review after fix?",
+        header: "Review",
+        multiSelect: false,
+        options: [
+          { label: "Gemini Review", description: "Gemini CLI" },
+          { label: "Agent Review", description: "@code-reviewer" },
+          { label: "Skip", description: "No review" }
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  })
+}
 ```
 
 ---
@@ -565,7 +737,11 @@ const fixPlan = JSON.parse(Read(`${sessionFolder}/fix-plan.json`))
 executionContext = {
   mode: "bugfix",
   severity: fixPlan.severity,
-  planObject: fixPlan,
+  planObject: {
+    ...fixPlan,
+    // Ensure complexity is set based on severity for new field consumption
+    complexity: fixPlan.complexity || (fixPlan.severity === 'Critical' ? 'High' : (fixPlan.severity === 'High' ? 'High' : 'Medium'))
+  },
   diagnosisContext: diagnoses,
   diagnosisAngles: manifest.diagnoses.map(d => d.angle),
   diagnosisManifest: manifest,
@@ -591,29 +767,31 @@ executionContext = {
 **Step 5.2: Execute**
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:lite-execute --in-memory --mode bugfix")
+Skill(skill="workflow:lite-execute", args="--in-memory --mode bugfix")
 ```
 
 ## Session Folder Structure
 
 ```
 .workflow/.lite-fix/{bug-slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}/
-|- diagnosis-{angle1}.json      # Diagnosis angle 1
-|- diagnosis-{angle2}.json      # Diagnosis angle 2
-|- diagnosis-{angle3}.json      # Diagnosis angle 3 (if applicable)
-|- diagnosis-{angle4}.json      # Diagnosis angle 4 (if applicable)
-|- diagnoses-manifest.json      # Diagnosis index
-+- fix-plan.json                # Fix plan
+├── diagnosis-{angle1}.json      # Diagnosis angle 1
+├── diagnosis-{angle2}.json      # Diagnosis angle 2
+├── diagnosis-{angle3}.json      # Diagnosis angle 3 (if applicable)
+├── diagnosis-{angle4}.json      # Diagnosis angle 4 (if applicable)
+├── diagnoses-manifest.json      # Diagnosis index
+├── planning-context.md          # Evidence + understanding
+└── fix-plan.json                # Fix plan
 ```
 
 **Example**:
 ```
-.workflow/.lite-fix/user-avatar-upload-fails-413-2025-11-25-14-30-25/
-|- diagnosis-error-handling.json
-|- diagnosis-dataflow.json
-|- diagnosis-validation.json
-|- diagnoses-manifest.json
-+- fix-plan.json
+.workflow/.lite-fix/user-avatar-upload-fails-413-2025-11-25/
+├── diagnosis-error-handling.json
+├── diagnosis-dataflow.json
+├── diagnosis-validation.json
+├── diagnoses-manifest.json
+├── planning-context.md
+└── fix-plan.json
 ```
 
 ## Error Handling

.claude/commands/workflow/lite-plan.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: lite-plan
 description: Lightweight interactive planning workflow with in-memory planning, code exploration, and execution execute to lite-execute after user confirmation
-argument-hint: "[-e|--explore] \"task description\"|file.md"
-allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), SlashCommand(*), AskUserQuestion(*)
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [-e|--explore] \"task description\"|file.md"
+allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), Skill(*), AskUserQuestion(*)
 ---
 
 # Workflow Lite-Plan Command (/workflow:lite-plan)
@@ -25,10 +25,47 @@ Intelligent lightweight planning command with dynamic workflow adaptation based
 /workflow:lite-plan [FLAGS] <TASK_DESCRIPTION>
 
 # Flags
+-y, --yes                  Skip all confirmations (auto mode)
 -e, --explore              Force code exploration phase (overrides auto-detection)
 
 # Arguments
 <task-description>         Task description or path to .md file (required)
+
+# Examples
+/workflow:lite-plan "实现JWT认证"                    # Interactive mode
+/workflow:lite-plan --yes "实现JWT认证"              # Auto mode (no confirmations)
+/workflow:lite-plan -y -e "优化数据库查询性能"       # Auto mode + force exploration
+```
+
+## Output Artifacts
+
+| Artifact | Description |
+|----------|-------------|
+| `exploration-{angle}.json` | Per-angle exploration results (1-4 files based on complexity) |
+| `explorations-manifest.json` | Index of all exploration files |
+| `planning-context.md` | Evidence paths + synthesized understanding |
+| `plan.json` | Structured implementation plan (plan-json-schema.json) |
+
+**Output Directory**: `.workflow/.lite-plan/{task-slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}/`
+
+**Agent Usage**:
+- Low complexity → Direct Claude planning (no agent)
+- Medium/High complexity → `cli-lite-planning-agent` generates `plan.json`
+
+**Schema Reference**: `~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/plan-json-schema.json`
+
+## Auto Mode Defaults
+
+When `--yes` or `-y` flag is used:
+- **Clarification Questions**: Skipped (no clarification phase)
+- **Plan Confirmation**: Auto-selected "Allow"
+- **Execution Method**: Auto-selected "Auto"
+- **Code Review**: Auto-selected "Skip"
+
+**Flag Parsing**:
+```javascript
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+const forceExplore = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--explore') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-e')
 ```
 
 ## Execution Process
@@ -52,8 +89,8 @@ Phase 2: Clarification (optional, multi-round)
 
 Phase 3: Planning (NO CODE EXECUTION - planning only)
    └─ Decision (based on Phase 1 complexity):
-      ├─ Low → Load schema: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/plan-json-schema.json → Direct Claude planning (following schema) → plan.json → MUST proceed to Phase 4
-      └─ Medium/High → cli-lite-planning-agent → plan.json → MUST proceed to Phase 4
+      ├─ Low → Load schema: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/plan-json-schema.json → Direct Claude planning (following schema) → plan.json
+      └─ Medium/High → cli-lite-planning-agent → plan.json (agent internally executes quality check)
 
 Phase 4: Confirmation & Selection
    ├─ Display plan summary (tasks, complexity, estimated time)
@@ -64,7 +101,7 @@ Phase 4: Confirmation & Selection
 
 Phase 5: Execute
    ├─ Build executionContext (plan + explorations + clarifications + selections)
-   └─ SlashCommand("/workflow:lite-execute --in-memory")
+   └─ Skill(skill="workflow:lite-execute", args="--in-memory")
 ```
 
 ## Implementation
@@ -173,11 +210,15 @@ const explorationTasks = selectedAngles.map((angle, index) =>
 ## Task Objective
 Execute **${angle}** exploration for task planning context. Analyze codebase from this specific angle to discover relevant structure, patterns, and constraints.
 
+## Output Location
+
+**Session Folder**: ${sessionFolder}
+**Output File**: ${sessionFolder}/exploration-${angle}.json
+
 ## Assigned Context
 - **Exploration Angle**: ${angle}
 - **Task Description**: ${task_description}
 - **Exploration Index**: ${index + 1} of ${selectedAngles.length}
-- **Output File**: ${sessionFolder}/exploration-${angle}.json
 
 ## MANDATORY FIRST STEPS (Execute by Agent)
 **You (cli-explore-agent) MUST execute these steps in order:**
@@ -205,8 +246,6 @@ Execute **${angle}** exploration for task planning context. Analyze codebase fro
 
 ## Expected Output
 
-**File**: ${sessionFolder}/exploration-${angle}.json
-
 **Schema Reference**: Schema obtained in MANDATORY FIRST STEPS step 3, follow schema exactly
 
 **Required Fields** (all ${angle} focused):
@@ -232,9 +271,9 @@ Execute **${angle}** exploration for task planning context. Analyze codebase fro
 - [ ] JSON output follows schema exactly
 - [ ] clarification_needs includes options + recommended
 
-## Output
-Write: ${sessionFolder}/exploration-${angle}.json
-Return: 2-3 sentence summary of ${angle} findings
+## Execution
+**Write**: \`${sessionFolder}/exploration-${angle}.json\`
+**Return**: 2-3 sentence summary of ${angle} findings
 `
   )
 )
@@ -323,8 +362,16 @@ explorations.forEach(exp => {
 // - Produce dedupedClarifications with unique intents only
 const dedupedClarifications = intelligentMerge(allClarifications)
 
-// Multi-round clarification: batch questions (max 4 per round)
-if (dedupedClarifications.length > 0) {
+// Parse --yes flag
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+
+if (autoYes) {
+  // Auto mode: Skip clarification phase
+  console.log(`[--yes] Skipping ${dedupedClarifications.length} clarification questions`)
+  console.log(`Proceeding to planning with exploration results...`)
+  // Continue to Phase 3
+} else if (dedupedClarifications.length > 0) {
+  // Interactive mode: Multi-round clarification
   const BATCH_SIZE = 4
   const totalRounds = Math.ceil(dedupedClarifications.length / BATCH_SIZE)
 
@@ -415,6 +462,13 @@ Task(
   prompt=`
 Generate implementation plan and write plan.json.
 
+## Output Location
+
+**Session Folder**: ${sessionFolder}
+**Output Files**:
+- ${sessionFolder}/planning-context.md (evidence + understanding)
+- ${sessionFolder}/plan.json (implementation plan)
+
 ## Output Schema Reference
 Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/plan-json-schema.json (get schema reference before generating plan)
 
@@ -464,8 +518,9 @@ Generate plan.json following the schema obtained above. Key constraints:
 2. Execute CLI planning using Gemini (Qwen fallback)
 3. Read ALL exploration files for comprehensive context
 4. Synthesize findings and generate plan following schema
-5. Write JSON: Write('${sessionFolder}/plan.json', jsonContent)
-6. Return brief completion summary
+5. **Write**: \`${sessionFolder}/planning-context.md\` (evidence paths + understanding)
+6. **Write**: \`${sessionFolder}/plan.json\`
+7. Return brief completion summary
 `
 )
 ```
@@ -497,40 +552,62 @@ ${plan.tasks.map((t, i) => `${i+1}. ${t.title} (${t.file})`).join('\n')}
 
 **Step 4.2: Collect Confirmation**
 ```javascript
-AskUserQuestion({
-  questions: [
-    {
-      question: `Confirm plan? (${plan.tasks.length} tasks, ${plan.complexity})`,
-      header: "Confirm",
-      multiSelect: true,
-      options: [
-        { label: "Allow", description: "Proceed as-is" },
-        { label: "Modify", description: "Adjust before execution" },
-        { label: "Cancel", description: "Abort workflow" }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      question: "Execution method:",
-      header: "Execution",
-      multiSelect: false,
-      options: [
-        { label: "Agent", description: "@code-developer agent" },
-        { label: "Codex", description: "codex CLI tool" },
-        { label: "Auto", description: `Auto: ${plan.complexity === 'Low' ? 'Agent' : 'Codex'}` }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      question: "Code review after execution?",
-      header: "Review",
-      multiSelect: false,
-      options: [
-        { label: "Gemini Review", description: "Gemini CLI" },
-        { label: "Agent Review", description: "@code-reviewer" },
-        { label: "Skip", description: "No review" }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-})
+// Parse --yes flag
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+
+let userSelection
+
+if (autoYes) {
+  // Auto mode: Use defaults
+  console.log(`[--yes] Auto-confirming plan:`)
+  console.log(`  - Confirmation: Allow`)
+  console.log(`  - Execution: Auto`)
+  console.log(`  - Review: Skip`)
+
+  userSelection = {
+    confirmation: "Allow",
+    execution_method: "Auto",
+    code_review_tool: "Skip"
+  }
+} else {
+  // Interactive mode: Ask user
+  // Note: Execution "Other" option allows specifying CLI tools from ~/.claude/cli-tools.json
+  userSelection = AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [
+      {
+        question: `Confirm plan? (${plan.tasks.length} tasks, ${plan.complexity})`,
+        header: "Confirm",
+        multiSelect: false,
+        options: [
+          { label: "Allow", description: "Proceed as-is" },
+          { label: "Modify", description: "Adjust before execution" },
+          { label: "Cancel", description: "Abort workflow" }
+        ]
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Execution method:",
+        header: "Execution",
+        multiSelect: false,
+        options: [
+          { label: "Agent", description: "@code-developer agent" },
+          { label: "Codex", description: "codex CLI tool" },
+          { label: "Auto", description: `Auto: ${plan.complexity === 'Low' ? 'Agent' : 'Codex'}` }
+        ]
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Code review after execution?",
+        header: "Review",
+        multiSelect: false,
+        options: [
+          { label: "Gemini Review", description: "Gemini CLI review" },
+          { label: "Codex Review", description: "Git-aware review (prompt OR --uncommitted)" },
+          { label: "Agent Review", description: "@code-reviewer agent" },
+          { label: "Skip", description: "No review" }
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  })
+}
 ```
 
 ---
@@ -585,7 +662,7 @@ executionContext = {
 **Step 5.2: Execute**
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:lite-execute --in-memory")
+Skill(skill="workflow:lite-execute", args="--in-memory")
 ```
 
 ## Session Folder Structure

.claude/commands/workflow/multi-cli-plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,579 @@
+---
+name: workflow:multi-cli-plan
+description: Multi-CLI collaborative planning workflow with ACE context gathering and iterative cross-verification. Uses cli-discuss-agent for Gemini+Codex+Claude analysis to converge on optimal execution plan.
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] <task description> [--max-rounds=3] [--tools=gemini,codex] [--mode=parallel|serial]"
+allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Write(*), mcp__ace-tool__search_context(*)
+---
+
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-approve plan, use recommended solution and execution method (Agent, Skip review).
+
+# Multi-CLI Collaborative Planning Command
+
+## Quick Start
+
+```bash
+# Basic usage
+/workflow:multi-cli-plan "Implement user authentication"
+
+# With options
+/workflow:multi-cli-plan "Add dark mode support" --max-rounds=3
+/workflow:multi-cli-plan "Refactor payment module" --tools=gemini,codex,claude
+/workflow:multi-cli-plan "Fix memory leak" --mode=serial
+```
+
+**Context Source**: ACE semantic search + Multi-CLI analysis
+**Output Directory**: `.workflow/.multi-cli-plan/{session-id}/`
+**Default Max Rounds**: 3 (convergence may complete earlier)
+**CLI Tools**: @cli-discuss-agent (analysis), @cli-lite-planning-agent (plan generation)
+**Execution**: Auto-hands off to `/workflow:lite-execute --in-memory` after plan approval
+
+## What & Why
+
+### Core Concept
+
+Multi-CLI collaborative planning with **three-phase architecture**: ACE context gathering → Iterative multi-CLI discussion → Plan generation. Orchestrator delegates analysis to agents, only handles user decisions and session management.
+
+**Process**:
+- **Phase 1**: ACE semantic search gathers codebase context
+- **Phase 2**: cli-discuss-agent orchestrates Gemini/Codex/Claude for cross-verified analysis
+- **Phase 3-5**: User decision → Plan generation → Execution handoff
+
+**vs Single-CLI Planning**:
+- **Single**: One model perspective, potential blind spots
+- **Multi-CLI**: Cross-verification catches inconsistencies, builds consensus on solutions
+
+### Value Proposition
+
+1. **Multi-Perspective Analysis**: Gemini + Codex + Claude analyze from different angles
+2. **Cross-Verification**: Identify agreements/disagreements, build confidence
+3. **User-Driven Decisions**: Every round ends with user decision point
+4. **Iterative Convergence**: Progressive refinement until consensus reached
+
+### Orchestrator Boundary (CRITICAL)
+
+- **ONLY command** for multi-CLI collaborative planning
+- Manages: Session state, user decisions, agent delegation, phase transitions
+- Delegates: CLI execution to @cli-discuss-agent, plan generation to @cli-lite-planning-agent
+
+### Execution Flow
+
+```
+Phase 1: Context Gathering
+   └─ ACE semantic search, extract keywords, build context package
+
+Phase 2: Multi-CLI Discussion (Iterative, via @cli-discuss-agent)
+   ├─ Round N: Agent executes Gemini + Codex + Claude
+   ├─ Cross-verify findings, synthesize solutions
+   ├─ Write synthesis.json to rounds/{N}/
+   └─ Loop until convergence or max rounds
+
+Phase 3: Present Options
+   └─ Display solutions with trade-offs from agent output
+
+Phase 4: User Decision
+   ├─ Select solution approach
+   ├─ Select execution method (Agent/Codex/Auto)
+   ├─ Select code review tool (Skip/Gemini/Codex/Agent)
+   └─ Route:
+      ├─ Approve → Phase 5
+      ├─ Need More Analysis → Return to Phase 2
+      └─ Cancel → Save session
+
+Phase 5: Plan Generation & Execution Handoff
+   ├─ Generate plan.json (via @cli-lite-planning-agent)
+   ├─ Build executionContext with user selections
+   └─ Execute to /workflow:lite-execute --in-memory
+```
+
+### Agent Roles
+
+| Agent | Responsibility |
+|-------|---------------|
+| **Orchestrator** | Session management, ACE context, user decisions, phase transitions, executionContext assembly |
+| **@cli-discuss-agent** | Multi-CLI execution (Gemini/Codex/Claude), cross-verification, solution synthesis, synthesis.json output |
+| **@cli-lite-planning-agent** | Task decomposition, plan.json generation following schema |
+
+## Core Responsibilities
+
+### Phase 1: Context Gathering
+
+**Session Initialization**:
+```javascript
+const sessionId = `MCP-${taskSlug}-${date}`
+const sessionFolder = `.workflow/.multi-cli-plan/${sessionId}`
+Bash(`mkdir -p ${sessionFolder}/rounds`)
+```
+
+**ACE Context Queries**:
+```javascript
+const aceQueries = [
+  `Project architecture related to ${keywords}`,
+  `Existing implementations of ${keywords[0]}`,
+  `Code patterns for ${keywords} features`,
+  `Integration points for ${keywords[0]}`
+]
+// Execute via mcp__ace-tool__search_context
+```
+
+**Context Package** (passed to agent):
+- `relevant_files[]` - Files identified by ACE
+- `detected_patterns[]` - Code patterns found
+- `architecture_insights` - Structure understanding
+
+### Phase 2: Agent Delegation
+
+**Core Principle**: Orchestrator only delegates and reads output - NO direct CLI execution.
+
+**⚠️ CRITICAL - CLI EXECUTION REQUIREMENT**:
+- **MUST** execute CLI calls via `Bash` with `run_in_background: true`
+- **MUST** wait for hook callback to receive complete results
+- **MUST NOT** proceed with next phase until CLI execution fully completes
+- Do NOT use `TaskOutput` polling during CLI execution - wait passively for results
+- Minimize scope: Proceed only when 100% result available
+
+**Agent Invocation**:
+```javascript
+Task({
+  subagent_type: "cli-discuss-agent",
+  run_in_background: false,
+  description: `Discussion round ${currentRound}`,
+  prompt: `
+## Input Context
+- task_description: ${taskDescription}
+- round_number: ${currentRound}
+- session: { id: "${sessionId}", folder: "${sessionFolder}" }
+- ace_context: ${JSON.stringify(contextPackageage)}
+- previous_rounds: ${JSON.stringify(analysisResults)}
+- user_feedback: ${userFeedback || 'None'}
+- cli_config: { tools: ["gemini", "codex"], mode: "parallel", fallback_chain: ["gemini", "codex", "claude"] }
+
+## Execution Process
+1. Parse input context (handle JSON strings)
+2. Check if ACE supplementary search needed
+3. Build CLI prompts with context
+4. Execute CLIs (parallel or serial per cli_config.mode)
+5. Parse CLI outputs, handle failures with fallback
+6. Perform cross-verification between CLI results
+7. Synthesize solutions, calculate scores
+8. Calculate convergence, generate clarification questions
+9. Write synthesis.json
+
+## Output
+Write: ${sessionFolder}/rounds/${currentRound}/synthesis.json
+
+## Completion Checklist
+- [ ] All configured CLI tools executed (or fallback triggered)
+- [ ] Cross-verification completed with agreements/disagreements
+- [ ] 2-3 solutions generated with file:line references
+- [ ] Convergence score calculated (0.0-1.0)
+- [ ] synthesis.json written with all Primary Fields
+`
+})
+```
+
+**Read Agent Output**:
+```javascript
+const synthesis = JSON.parse(Read(`${sessionFolder}/rounds/${round}/synthesis.json`))
+// Access top-level fields: solutions, convergence, cross_verification, clarification_questions
+```
+
+**Convergence Decision**:
+```javascript
+if (synthesis.convergence.recommendation === 'converged') {
+  // Proceed to Phase 3
+} else if (synthesis.convergence.recommendation === 'user_input_needed') {
+  // Collect user feedback, return to Phase 2
+} else {
+  // Continue to next round if new_insights && round < maxRounds
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 3: Present Options
+
+**Display from Agent Output** (no processing):
+```javascript
+console.log(`
+## Solution Options
+
+${synthesis.solutions.map((s, i) => `
+**Option ${i+1}: ${s.name}**
+Source: ${s.source_cli.join(' + ')}
+Effort: ${s.effort} | Risk: ${s.risk}
+
+Pros: ${s.pros.join(', ')}
+Cons: ${s.cons.join(', ')}
+
+Files: ${s.affected_files.slice(0,3).map(f => `${f.file}:${f.line}`).join(', ')}
+`).join('\n')}
+
+## Cross-Verification
+Agreements: ${synthesis.cross_verification.agreements.length}
+Disagreements: ${synthesis.cross_verification.disagreements.length}
+`)
+```
+
+### Phase 4: User Decision
+
+**Decision Options**:
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [
+    {
+      question: "Which solution approach?",
+      header: "Solution",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: solutions.map((s, i) => ({
+        label: `Option ${i+1}: ${s.name}`,
+        description: `${s.effort} effort, ${s.risk} risk`
+      })).concat([
+        { label: "Need More Analysis", description: "Return to Phase 2" }
+      ])
+    },
+    {
+      question: "Execution method:",
+      header: "Execution",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: "Agent", description: "@code-developer agent" },
+        { label: "Codex", description: "codex CLI tool" },
+        { label: "Auto", description: "Auto-select based on complexity" }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      question: "Code review after execution?",
+      header: "Review",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: "Skip", description: "No review" },
+        { label: "Gemini Review", description: "Gemini CLI tool" },
+        { label: "Codex Review", description: "codex review --uncommitted" },
+        { label: "Agent Review", description: "Current agent review" }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+})
+```
+
+**Routing**:
+- Approve + execution method → Phase 5
+- Need More Analysis → Phase 2 with feedback
+- Cancel → Save session for resumption
+
+### Phase 5: Plan Generation & Execution Handoff
+
+**Step 1: Build Context-Package** (Orchestrator responsibility):
+```javascript
+// Extract key information from user decision and synthesis
+const contextPackage = {
+  // Core solution details
+  solution: {
+    name: selectedSolution.name,
+    source_cli: selectedSolution.source_cli,
+    feasibility: selectedSolution.feasibility,
+    effort: selectedSolution.effort,
+    risk: selectedSolution.risk,
+    summary: selectedSolution.summary
+  },
+  // Implementation plan (tasks, flow, milestones)
+  implementation_plan: selectedSolution.implementation_plan,
+  // Dependencies
+  dependencies: selectedSolution.dependencies || { internal: [], external: [] },
+  // Technical concerns
+  technical_concerns: selectedSolution.technical_concerns || [],
+  // Consensus from cross-verification
+  consensus: {
+    agreements: synthesis.cross_verification.agreements,
+    resolved_conflicts: synthesis.cross_verification.resolution
+  },
+  // User constraints (from Phase 4 feedback)
+  constraints: userConstraints || [],
+  // Task context
+  task_description: taskDescription,
+  session_id: sessionId
+}
+
+// Write context-package for traceability
+Write(`${sessionFolder}/context-package.json`, JSON.stringify(contextPackage, null, 2))
+```
+
+**Context-Package Schema**:
+
+| Field | Type | Description |
+|-------|------|-------------|
+| `solution` | object | User-selected solution from synthesis |
+| `solution.name` | string | Solution identifier |
+| `solution.feasibility` | number | Viability score (0-1) |
+| `solution.summary` | string | Brief analysis summary |
+| `implementation_plan` | object | Task breakdown with flow and dependencies |
+| `implementation_plan.approach` | string | High-level technical strategy |
+| `implementation_plan.tasks[]` | array | Discrete tasks with id, name, depends_on, files |
+| `implementation_plan.execution_flow` | string | Task sequence (e.g., "T1 → T2 → T3") |
+| `implementation_plan.milestones` | string[] | Key checkpoints |
+| `dependencies` | object | Module and package dependencies |
+| `technical_concerns` | string[] | Risks and blockers |
+| `consensus` | object | Cross-verified agreements from multi-CLI |
+| `constraints` | string[] | User-specified constraints from Phase 4 |
+
+```json
+{
+  "solution": {
+    "name": "Strategy Pattern Refactoring",
+    "source_cli": ["gemini", "codex"],
+    "feasibility": 0.88,
+    "effort": "medium",
+    "risk": "low",
+    "summary": "Extract payment gateway interface, implement strategy pattern for multi-gateway support"
+  },
+  "implementation_plan": {
+    "approach": "Define interface → Create concrete strategies → Implement factory → Migrate existing code",
+    "tasks": [
+      {"id": "T1", "name": "Define PaymentGateway interface", "depends_on": [], "files": [{"file": "src/types/payment.ts", "line": 1, "action": "create"}], "key_point": "Include all existing Stripe methods"},
+      {"id": "T2", "name": "Implement StripeGateway", "depends_on": ["T1"], "files": [{"file": "src/payment/stripe.ts", "line": 1, "action": "create"}], "key_point": "Wrap existing logic"},
+      {"id": "T3", "name": "Create GatewayFactory", "depends_on": ["T1"], "files": [{"file": "src/payment/factory.ts", "line": 1, "action": "create"}], "key_point": null},
+      {"id": "T4", "name": "Migrate processor to use factory", "depends_on": ["T2", "T3"], "files": [{"file": "src/payment/processor.ts", "line": 45, "action": "modify"}], "key_point": "Backward compatible"}
+    ],
+    "execution_flow": "T1 → (T2 | T3) → T4",
+    "milestones": ["Interface defined", "Gateway implementations complete", "Migration done"]
+  },
+  "dependencies": {
+    "internal": ["@/lib/payment-gateway", "@/types/payment"],
+    "external": ["stripe@^14.0.0"]
+  },
+  "technical_concerns": ["Existing tests must pass", "No breaking API changes"],
+  "consensus": {
+    "agreements": ["Use strategy pattern", "Keep existing API"],
+    "resolved_conflicts": "Factory over DI for simpler integration"
+  },
+  "constraints": ["backward compatible", "no breaking changes to PaymentResult type"],
+  "task_description": "Refactor payment processing for multi-gateway support",
+  "session_id": "MCP-payment-refactor-2026-01-14"
+}
+```
+
+**Step 2: Invoke Planning Agent**:
+```javascript
+Task({
+  subagent_type: "cli-lite-planning-agent",
+  run_in_background: false,
+  description: "Generate implementation plan",
+  prompt: `
+## Schema Reference
+Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/plan-json-schema.json
+
+## Context-Package (from orchestrator)
+${JSON.stringify(contextPackage, null, 2)}
+
+## Execution Process
+1. Read plan-json-schema.json for output structure
+2. Read project-tech.json and project-guidelines.json
+3. Parse context-package fields:
+   - solution: name, feasibility, summary
+   - implementation_plan: tasks[], execution_flow, milestones
+   - dependencies: internal[], external[]
+   - technical_concerns: risks/blockers
+   - consensus: agreements, resolved_conflicts
+   - constraints: user requirements
+4. Use implementation_plan.tasks[] as task foundation
+5. Preserve task dependencies (depends_on) and execution_flow
+6. Expand tasks with detailed acceptance criteria
+7. Generate plan.json following schema exactly
+
+## Output
+- ${sessionFolder}/plan.json
+
+## Completion Checklist
+- [ ] plan.json preserves task dependencies from implementation_plan
+- [ ] Task execution order follows execution_flow
+- [ ] Key_points reflected in task descriptions
+- [ ] User constraints applied to implementation
+- [ ] Acceptance criteria are testable
+- [ ] Schema fields match plan-json-schema.json exactly
+`
+})
+```
+
+**Step 3: Build executionContext**:
+```javascript
+// After plan.json is generated by cli-lite-planning-agent
+const plan = JSON.parse(Read(`${sessionFolder}/plan.json`))
+
+// Build executionContext (same structure as lite-plan)
+executionContext = {
+  planObject: plan,
+  explorationsContext: null,  // Multi-CLI doesn't use exploration files
+  explorationAngles: [],      // No exploration angles
+  explorationManifest: null,  // No manifest
+  clarificationContext: null,  // Store user feedback from Phase 2 if exists
+  executionMethod: userSelection.execution_method,  // From Phase 4
+  codeReviewTool: userSelection.code_review_tool,   // From Phase 4
+  originalUserInput: taskDescription,
+
+  // Optional: Task-level executor assignments
+  executorAssignments: null,  // Could be enhanced in future
+
+  session: {
+    id: sessionId,
+    folder: sessionFolder,
+    artifacts: {
+      explorations: [],  // No explorations in multi-CLI workflow
+      explorations_manifest: null,
+      plan: `${sessionFolder}/plan.json`,
+      synthesis_rounds: Array.from({length: currentRound}, (_, i) =>
+        `${sessionFolder}/rounds/${i+1}/synthesis.json`
+      ),
+      context_package: `${sessionFolder}/context-package.json`
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Step 4: Hand off to Execution**:
+```javascript
+// Execute to lite-execute with in-memory context
+Skill(skill="workflow:lite-execute", args="--in-memory")
+```
+
+## Output File Structure
+
+```
+.workflow/.multi-cli-plan/{MCP-task-slug-YYYY-MM-DD}/
+├── session-state.json          # Session tracking (orchestrator)
+├── rounds/
+│   ├── 1/synthesis.json        # Round 1 analysis (cli-discuss-agent)
+│   ├── 2/synthesis.json        # Round 2 analysis (cli-discuss-agent)
+│   └── .../
+├── context-package.json        # Extracted context for planning (orchestrator)
+└── plan.json                   # Structured plan (cli-lite-planning-agent)
+```
+
+**File Producers**:
+
+| File | Producer | Content |
+|------|----------|---------|
+| `session-state.json` | Orchestrator | Session metadata, rounds, decisions |
+| `rounds/*/synthesis.json` | cli-discuss-agent | Solutions, convergence, cross-verification |
+| `context-package.json` | Orchestrator | Extracted solution, dependencies, consensus for planning |
+| `plan.json` | cli-lite-planning-agent | Structured tasks for lite-execute |
+
+## synthesis.json Schema
+
+```json
+{
+  "round": 1,
+  "solutions": [{
+    "name": "Solution Name",
+    "source_cli": ["gemini", "codex"],
+    "feasibility": 0.85,
+    "effort": "low|medium|high",
+    "risk": "low|medium|high",
+    "summary": "Brief analysis summary",
+    "implementation_plan": {
+      "approach": "High-level technical approach",
+      "tasks": [
+        {"id": "T1", "name": "Task", "depends_on": [], "files": [], "key_point": "..."}
+      ],
+      "execution_flow": "T1 → T2 → T3",
+      "milestones": ["Checkpoint 1", "Checkpoint 2"]
+    },
+    "dependencies": {"internal": [], "external": []},
+    "technical_concerns": ["Risk 1", "Blocker 2"]
+  }],
+  "convergence": {
+    "score": 0.85,
+    "new_insights": false,
+    "recommendation": "converged|continue|user_input_needed"
+  },
+  "cross_verification": {
+    "agreements": [],
+    "disagreements": [],
+    "resolution": "..."
+  },
+  "clarification_questions": []
+}
+```
+
+**Key Planning Fields**:
+
+| Field | Purpose |
+|-------|---------|
+| `feasibility` | Viability score (0-1) |
+| `implementation_plan.tasks[]` | Discrete tasks with dependencies |
+| `implementation_plan.execution_flow` | Task sequence visualization |
+| `implementation_plan.milestones` | Key checkpoints |
+| `technical_concerns` | Risks and blockers |
+
+**Note**: Solutions ranked by internal scoring (array order = priority)
+
+## TodoWrite Structure
+
+**Initialization**:
+```javascript
+TodoWrite({ todos: [
+  { content: "Phase 1: Context Gathering", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Gathering context" },
+  { content: "Phase 2: Multi-CLI Discussion", status: "pending", activeForm: "Running discussion" },
+  { content: "Phase 3: Present Options", status: "pending", activeForm: "Presenting options" },
+  { content: "Phase 4: User Decision", status: "pending", activeForm: "Awaiting decision" },
+  { content: "Phase 5: Plan Generation", status: "pending", activeForm: "Generating plan" }
+]})
+```
+
+**During Discussion Rounds**:
+```javascript
+TodoWrite({ todos: [
+  { content: "Phase 1: Context Gathering", status: "completed", activeForm: "Gathering context" },
+  { content: "Phase 2: Multi-CLI Discussion", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Running discussion" },
+  { content: "  → Round 1: Initial analysis", status: "completed", activeForm: "Analyzing" },
+  { content: "  → Round 2: Deep verification", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Verifying" },
+  { content: "Phase 3: Present Options", status: "pending", activeForm: "Presenting options" },
+  // ...
+]})
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Resolution |
+|-------|------------|
+| ACE search fails | Fall back to Glob/Grep for file discovery |
+| Agent fails | Retry once, then present partial results |
+| CLI timeout (in agent) | Agent uses fallback: gemini → codex → claude |
+| No convergence | Present best options, flag uncertainty |
+| synthesis.json parse error | Request agent retry |
+| User cancels | Save session for later resumption |
+
+## Configuration
+
+| Flag | Default | Description |
+|------|---------|-------------|
+| `--max-rounds` | 3 | Maximum discussion rounds |
+| `--tools` | gemini,codex | CLI tools for analysis |
+| `--mode` | parallel | Execution mode: parallel or serial |
+| `--auto-execute` | false | Auto-execute after approval |
+
+## Best Practices
+
+1. **Be Specific**: Detailed task descriptions improve ACE context quality
+2. **Provide Feedback**: Use clarification rounds to refine requirements
+3. **Trust Cross-Verification**: Multi-CLI consensus indicates high confidence
+4. **Review Trade-offs**: Consider pros/cons before selecting solution
+5. **Check synthesis.json**: Review agent output for detailed analysis
+6. **Iterate When Needed**: Don't hesitate to request more analysis
+
+## Related Commands
+
+```bash
+# Simpler single-round planning
+/workflow:lite-plan "task description"
+
+# Issue-driven discovery
+/issue:discover-by-prompt "find issues"
+
+# View session files
+cat .workflow/.multi-cli-plan/{session-id}/plan.json
+cat .workflow/.multi-cli-plan/{session-id}/rounds/1/synthesis.json
+cat .workflow/.multi-cli-plan/{session-id}/context-package.json
+
+# Direct execution (if you have plan.json)
+/workflow:lite-execute plan.json
+```

.claude/commands/workflow/plan-verify.md

@@ -0,0 +1,377 @@
+---
+name: plan-verify
+description: Perform READ-ONLY verification analysis between IMPL_PLAN.md, task JSONs, and brainstorming artifacts. Generates structured report with quality gate recommendation. Does NOT modify any files.
+argument-hint: "[optional: --session session-id]"
+allowed-tools: Read(*), Write(*), Glob(*), Bash(*)
+---
+
+## User Input
+
+```text
+$ARGUMENTS
+```
+
+You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
+
+## Goal
+
+Generate a comprehensive verification report that identifies inconsistencies, duplications, ambiguities, and underspecified items between action planning artifacts (`IMPL_PLAN.md`, `task.json`) and brainstorming artifacts (`role analysis documents`). This command MUST run only after `/workflow:plan` has successfully produced complete `IMPL_PLAN.md` and task JSON files.
+
+**Output**: A structured Markdown report saved to `.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.process/PLAN_VERIFICATION.md` containing:
+- Executive summary with quality gate recommendation
+- Detailed findings by severity (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)
+- Requirements coverage analysis
+- Dependency integrity check
+- Synthesis alignment validation
+- Actionable remediation recommendations
+
+## Operating Constraints
+
+**STRICTLY READ-ONLY FOR SOURCE ARTIFACTS**:
+- **MUST NOT** modify `IMPL_PLAN.md`, any `task.json` files, or brainstorming artifacts
+- **MUST NOT** create or delete task files
+- **MUST ONLY** write the verification report to `.process/PLAN_VERIFICATION.md`
+
+**Synthesis Authority**: The `role analysis documents` are **authoritative** for requirements and design decisions. Any conflicts between IMPL_PLAN/tasks and synthesis are automatically CRITICAL and require adjustment of the plan/tasks—not reinterpretation of requirements.
+
+**Quality Gate Authority**: The verification report provides a binding recommendation (BLOCK_EXECUTION / PROCEED_WITH_FIXES / PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION / PROCEED) based on objective severity criteria. User MUST review critical/high issues before proceeding with implementation.
+
+## Execution Steps
+
+### 1. Initialize Analysis Context
+
+```bash
+# Detect active workflow session
+IF --session parameter provided:
+    session_id = provided session
+ELSE:
+    # Auto-detect active session
+    active_sessions = bash(find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d 2>/dev/null)
+    IF active_sessions is empty:
+        ERROR: "No active workflow session found. Use --session <session-id>"
+        EXIT
+    ELSE IF active_sessions has multiple entries:
+        # Use most recently modified session
+        session_id = bash(ls -td .workflow/active/WFS-*/ 2>/dev/null | head -1 | xargs basename)
+    ELSE:
+        session_id = basename(active_sessions[0])
+
+# Derive absolute paths
+session_dir = .workflow/active/WFS-{session}
+brainstorm_dir = session_dir/.brainstorming
+task_dir = session_dir/.task
+process_dir = session_dir/.process
+session_file = session_dir/workflow-session.json
+
+# Create .process directory if not exists (report output location)
+IF NOT EXISTS(process_dir):
+    bash(mkdir -p "{process_dir}")
+
+# Validate required artifacts
+# Note: "role analysis documents" refers to [role]/analysis.md files (e.g., product-manager/analysis.md)
+SYNTHESIS_DIR = brainstorm_dir  # Contains role analysis files: */analysis.md
+IMPL_PLAN = session_dir/IMPL_PLAN.md
+TASK_FILES = Glob(task_dir/*.json)
+PLANNING_NOTES = session_dir/planning-notes.md  # N+1 context and constraints
+
+# Abort if missing - in order of dependency
+SESSION_FILE_EXISTS = EXISTS(session_file)
+IF NOT SESSION_FILE_EXISTS:
+    WARNING: "workflow-session.json not found. User intent alignment verification will be skipped."
+    # Continue execution - this is optional context, not blocking
+
+PLANNING_NOTES_EXISTS = EXISTS(PLANNING_NOTES)
+IF NOT PLANNING_NOTES_EXISTS:
+    WARNING: "planning-notes.md not found. Constraints/N+1 context verification will be skipped."
+    # Continue execution - optional context
+
+SYNTHESIS_FILES = Glob(brainstorm_dir/*/analysis.md)
+IF SYNTHESIS_FILES.count == 0:
+    ERROR: "No role analysis documents found in .brainstorming/*/analysis.md. Run /workflow:brainstorm:synthesis first"
+    EXIT
+
+IF NOT EXISTS(IMPL_PLAN):
+    ERROR: "IMPL_PLAN.md not found. Run /workflow:plan first"
+    EXIT
+
+IF TASK_FILES.count == 0:
+    ERROR: "No task JSON files found. Run /workflow:plan first"
+    EXIT
+```
+
+### 2. Load Artifacts (Progressive Disclosure)
+
+Load only minimal necessary context from each artifact:
+
+**From workflow-session.json** (OPTIONAL - Primary Reference for User Intent):
+- **ONLY IF EXISTS**: Load user intent context
+- Original user prompt/intent (project or description field)
+- User's stated goals and objectives
+- User's scope definition
+- **IF MISSING**: Set user_intent_analysis = "SKIPPED: workflow-session.json not found"
+
+**From planning-notes.md** (OPTIONAL - Constraints & N+1 Context):
+- **ONLY IF EXISTS**: Load planning context
+- Consolidated Constraints (numbered list from Phase 1-3)
+- N+1 Context: Decisions table (Decision | Rationale | Revisit?)
+- N+1 Context: Deferred items list
+- **IF MISSING**: Set planning_notes_analysis = "SKIPPED: planning-notes.md not found"
+
+**From role analysis documents** (AUTHORITATIVE SOURCE):
+- Functional Requirements (IDs, descriptions, acceptance criteria)
+- Non-Functional Requirements (IDs, targets)
+- Business Requirements (IDs, success metrics)
+- Key Architecture Decisions
+- Risk factors and mitigation strategies
+- Implementation Roadmap (high-level phases)
+
+**From IMPL_PLAN.md**:
+- Summary and objectives
+- Context Analysis
+- Implementation Strategy
+- Task Breakdown Summary
+- Success Criteria
+- Brainstorming Artifacts References (if present)
+
+**From task.json files**:
+- Task IDs
+- Titles and descriptions
+- Status
+- Dependencies (depends_on, blocks)
+- Context (requirements, focus_paths, acceptance, artifacts)
+- Flow control (pre_analysis, implementation_approach)
+- Meta (complexity, priority)
+
+### 3. Build Semantic Models
+
+Create internal representations (do not include raw artifacts in output):
+
+**Requirements inventory**:
+- Each functional/non-functional/business requirement with stable ID
+- Requirement text, acceptance criteria, priority
+
+**Architecture decisions inventory**:
+- ADRs from synthesis
+- Technology choices
+- Data model references
+
+**Task coverage mapping**:
+- Map each task to one or more requirements (by ID reference or keyword inference)
+- Map each requirement to covering tasks
+
+**Dependency graph**:
+- Task-to-task dependencies (depends_on, blocks)
+- Requirement-level dependencies (from synthesis)
+
+### 4. Detection Passes (Agent-Driven Multi-Dimensional Analysis)
+
+**Execution Strategy**:
+- Single `cli-explore-agent` invocation
+- Agent executes multiple CLI analyses internally (different dimensions: A-H)
+- Token Budget: 50 findings maximum (aggregate remainder in overflow summary)
+- Priority Allocation: CRITICAL (unlimited) → HIGH (15) → MEDIUM (20) → LOW (15)
+- Early Exit: If CRITICAL findings > 0 in User Intent/Requirements Coverage, skip LOW/MEDIUM checks
+
+**Execution Order** (Agent orchestrates internally):
+
+1. **Tier 1 (CRITICAL Path)**: A, B, C, I - User intent, coverage, consistency, constraints compliance (full analysis)
+2. **Tier 2 (HIGH Priority)**: D, E, J - Dependencies, synthesis alignment, N+1 context validation (limit 15 findings)
+3. **Tier 3 (MEDIUM Priority)**: F - Specification quality (limit 20 findings)
+4. **Tier 4 (LOW Priority)**: G, H - Duplication, feasibility (limit 15 findings)
+
+---
+
+#### Phase 4.1: Launch Unified Verification Agent
+
+```javascript
+Task(
+  subagent_type="cli-explore-agent",
+  run_in_background=false,
+  description="Multi-dimensional plan verification",
+  prompt=`
+## Plan Verification Task
+
+### MANDATORY FIRST STEPS
+1. Read: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/plan-verify-agent-schema.json (dimensions & rules)
+2. Read: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/verify-json-schema.json (output schema)
+3. Read: ${session_file} (user intent)
+4. Read: ${PLANNING_NOTES} (constraints & N+1 context)
+5. Read: ${IMPL_PLAN} (implementation plan)
+6. Glob: ${task_dir}/*.json (task files)
+7. Glob: ${SYNTHESIS_DIR}/*/analysis.md (role analyses)
+
+### Execution Flow
+
+**Load schema → Execute tiered CLI analysis → Aggregate findings → Write JSON**
+
+FOR each tier in [1, 2, 3, 4]:
+  - Load tier config from plan-verify-agent-schema.json
+  - Execute: ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Verify dimensions {tier.dimensions}
+    TASK: {tier.checks from schema}
+    CONTEXT: @${session_dir}/**/*
+    EXPECTED: Findings JSON with dimension, severity, location, summary, recommendation
+    CONSTRAINTS: Limit {tier.limit} findings
+    " --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule {tier.rule}
+  - Parse findings, check early exit condition
+  - IF tier == 1 AND critical_count > 0: skip tier 3-4
+
+### Output
+Write: ${process_dir}/verification-findings.json (follow verify-json-schema.json)
+Return: Quality gate decision + 2-3 sentence summary
+`
+)
+```
+
+---
+
+#### Phase 4.2: Load and Organize Findings
+
+```javascript
+// Load findings (single parse for all subsequent use)
+const data = JSON.parse(Read(`${process_dir}/verification-findings.json`))
+const { session_id, timestamp, verification_tiers_completed, findings, summary } = data
+const { critical_count, high_count, medium_count, low_count, total_findings, coverage_percentage, recommendation } = summary
+
+// Group by severity and dimension
+const bySeverity = Object.groupBy(findings, f => f.severity)
+const byDimension = Object.groupBy(findings, f => f.dimension)
+
+// Dimension metadata (from schema)
+const DIMS = {
+  A: "User Intent Alignment", B: "Requirements Coverage", C: "Consistency Validation",
+  D: "Dependency Integrity", E: "Synthesis Alignment", F: "Task Specification Quality",
+  G: "Duplication Detection", H: "Feasibility Assessment",
+  I: "Constraints Compliance", J: "N+1 Context Validation"
+}
+```
+
+### 5. Generate Report
+
+```javascript
+// Helper: render dimension section
+const renderDimension = (dim) => {
+  const items = byDimension[dim] || []
+  return items.length > 0
+    ? items.map(f => `### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}\n- **Severity**: ${f.severity}\n- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}\n- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}`).join('\n\n')
+    : `> ✅ No ${DIMS[dim]} issues detected.`
+}
+
+// Helper: render severity section
+const renderSeverity = (severity, impact) => {
+  const items = bySeverity[severity] || []
+  return items.length > 0
+    ? items.map(f => `#### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}\n- **Dimension**: ${f.dimension_name}\n- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}\n- **Impact**: ${impact}\n- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}`).join('\n\n')
+    : `> ✅ No ${severity.toLowerCase()}-severity issues detected.`
+}
+
+// Build Markdown report
+const fullReport = `
+# Plan Verification Report
+
+**Session**: WFS-${session_id} | **Generated**: ${timestamp}
+**Tiers Completed**: ${verification_tiers_completed.join(', ')}
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+| Metric | Value | Status |
+|--------|-------|--------|
+| Risk Level | ${critical_count > 0 ? 'CRITICAL' : high_count > 0 ? 'HIGH' : medium_count > 0 ? 'MEDIUM' : 'LOW'} | ${critical_count > 0 ? '🔴' : high_count > 0 ? '🟠' : medium_count > 0 ? '🟡' : '🟢'} |
+| Critical/High/Medium/Low | ${critical_count}/${high_count}/${medium_count}/${low_count} | |
+| Coverage | ${coverage_percentage}% | ${coverage_percentage >= 90 ? '🟢' : coverage_percentage >= 75 ? '🟡' : '🔴'} |
+
+**Recommendation**: **${recommendation}**
+
+---
+
+## Findings Summary
+
+| ID | Dimension | Severity | Location | Summary |
+|----|-----------|----------|----------|---------|
+${findings.map(f => `| ${f.id} | ${f.dimension_name} | ${f.severity} | ${f.location.join(', ')} | ${f.summary} |`).join('\n')}
+
+---
+
+## Analysis by Dimension
+
+${['A','B','C','D','E','F','G','H','I','J'].map(d => `### ${d}. ${DIMS[d]}\n\n${renderDimension(d)}`).join('\n\n---\n\n')}
+
+---
+
+## Findings by Severity
+
+### CRITICAL (${critical_count})
+${renderSeverity('CRITICAL', 'Blocks execution')}
+
+### HIGH (${high_count})
+${renderSeverity('HIGH', 'Fix before execution recommended')}
+
+### MEDIUM (${medium_count})
+${renderSeverity('MEDIUM', 'Address during/after implementation')}
+
+### LOW (${low_count})
+${renderSeverity('LOW', 'Optional improvement')}
+
+---
+
+## Next Steps
+
+${recommendation === 'BLOCK_EXECUTION' ? '🛑 **BLOCK**: Fix critical issues → Re-verify' :
+  recommendation === 'PROCEED_WITH_FIXES' ? '⚠️ **FIX RECOMMENDED**: Address high issues → Re-verify or Execute' :
+  '✅ **READY**: Proceed to /workflow:execute'}
+
+Re-verify: \`/workflow:plan-verify --session ${session_id}\`
+Execute: \`/workflow:execute --resume-session="${session_id}"\`
+`
+
+// Write report
+Write(`${process_dir}/PLAN_VERIFICATION.md`, fullReport)
+console.log(`✅ Report: ${process_dir}/PLAN_VERIFICATION.md\n📊 ${recommendation} | C:${critical_count} H:${high_count} M:${medium_count} L:${low_count} | Coverage:${coverage_percentage}%`)
+```
+
+### 6. Next Step Selection
+
+```javascript
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+const canExecute = recommendation !== 'BLOCK_EXECUTION'
+
+// Auto mode
+if (autoYes) {
+  if (canExecute) {
+    Skill(skill="workflow:execute", args="--yes --resume-session=\"${session_id}\"")
+  } else {
+    console.log(`[--yes] BLOCK_EXECUTION - Fix ${critical_count} critical issues first.`)
+  }
+  return
+}
+
+// Interactive mode - build options based on quality gate
+const options = canExecute
+  ? [
+      { label: canExecute && recommendation === 'PROCEED_WITH_FIXES' ? "Execute Anyway" : "Execute (Recommended)",
+        description: "Proceed to /workflow:execute" },
+      { label: "Review Report", description: "Review findings before deciding" },
+      { label: "Re-verify", description: "Re-run after manual fixes" }
+    ]
+  : [
+      { label: "Review Report", description: "Review critical issues" },
+      { label: "Re-verify", description: "Re-run after fixing issues" }
+    ]
+
+const selection = AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: `Quality gate: ${recommendation}. Next step?`,
+    header: "Action",
+    multiSelect: false,
+    options
+  }]
+})
+
+// Handle selection
+if (selection.includes("Execute")) {
+  Skill(skill="workflow:execute", args="--resume-session=\"${session_id}\"")
+} else if (selection === "Re-verify") {
+  Skill(skill="workflow:plan-verify", args="--session ${session_id}")
+}
+```

.claude/commands/workflow/plan.md

@@ -1,10 +1,15 @@
 ---
 name: plan
 description: 5-phase planning workflow with action-planning-agent task generation, outputs IMPL_PLAN.md and task JSONs
-argument-hint: "\"text description\"|file.md"
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] \"text description\"|file.md"
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
+group: workflow
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-continue all phases (skip confirmations), use recommended conflict resolutions.
+
 # Workflow Plan Command (/workflow:plan)
 
 ## Coordinator Role
@@ -23,7 +28,7 @@ This workflow runs **fully autonomously** once triggered. Phase 3 (conflict reso
 5. **Phase 4 executes** → Task generation (task-generate-agent) → Reports final summary
 
 **Task Attachment Model**:
-- SlashCommand execute **expands workflow** by attaching sub-tasks to current TodoWrite
+- Skill execute **expands workflow** by attaching sub-tasks to current TodoWrite
 - When a sub-command is executed (e.g., `/workflow:tools:context-gather`), its internal tasks are attached to the orchestrator's TodoWrite
 - Orchestrator **executes these attached tasks** sequentially
 - After completion, attached tasks are **collapsed** back to high-level phase summary
@@ -43,7 +48,7 @@ This workflow runs **fully autonomously** once triggered. Phase 3 (conflict reso
 3. **Parse Every Output**: Extract required data from each command/agent output for next phase
 4. **Auto-Continue via TodoList**: Check TodoList status to execute next pending phase automatically
 5. **Track Progress**: Update TodoWrite dynamically with task attachment/collapse pattern
-6. **Task Attachment Model**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** sub-tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **executes** these attached tasks itself, then **collapses** them after completion
+6. **Task Attachment Model**: Skill execute **attaches** sub-tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **executes** these attached tasks itself, then **collapses** them after completion
 7. **⚠️ CRITICAL: DO NOT STOP**: Continuous multi-phase workflow. After executing all attached tasks, immediately collapse them and execute next phase
 
 ## Execution Process
@@ -83,7 +88,7 @@ Return:
 **Step 1.1: Execute** - Create or discover workflow session
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:session:start --auto \"[structured-task-description]\"")
+Skill(skill="workflow:session:start", args="--auto \"[structured-task-description]\"")
 ```
 
 **Task Description Structure**:
@@ -111,7 +116,51 @@ CONTEXT: Existing user database schema, REST API endpoints
 
 **TodoWrite**: Mark phase 1 completed, phase 2 in_progress
 
-**After Phase 1**: Return to user showing Phase 1 results, then auto-continue to Phase 2
+**After Phase 1**: Initialize planning-notes.md with user intent
+
+```javascript
+// Create planning notes document with N+1 context support
+const planningNotesPath = `.workflow/active/${sessionId}/planning-notes.md`
+const userGoal = structuredDescription.goal
+const userConstraints = structuredDescription.context || "None specified"
+
+Write(planningNotesPath, `# Planning Notes
+
+**Session**: ${sessionId}
+**Created**: ${new Date().toISOString()}
+
+## User Intent (Phase 1)
+
+- **GOAL**: ${userGoal}
+- **KEY_CONSTRAINTS**: ${userConstraints}
+
+---
+
+## Context Findings (Phase 2)
+(To be filled by context-gather)
+
+## Conflict Decisions (Phase 3)
+(To be filled if conflicts detected)
+
+## Consolidated Constraints (Phase 4 Input)
+1. ${userConstraints}
+
+---
+
+## Task Generation (Phase 4)
+(To be filled by action-planning-agent)
+
+## N+1 Context
+### Decisions
+| Decision | Rationale | Revisit? |
+|----------|-----------|----------|
+
+### Deferred
+- [ ] (For N+1)
+`)
+```
+
+Return to user showing Phase 1 results, then auto-continue to Phase 2
 
 ---
 
@@ -120,7 +169,7 @@ CONTEXT: Existing user database schema, REST API endpoints
 **Step 2.1: Execute** - Gather project context and analyze codebase
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"[structured-task-description]\"")
+Skill(skill="workflow:tools:context-gather", args="--session [sessionId] \"[structured-task-description]\"")
 ```
 
 **Use Same Structured Description**: Pass the same structured format from Phase 1
@@ -134,10 +183,11 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"[st
 **Validation**:
 - Context package path extracted
 - File exists and is valid JSON
+- `prioritized_context` field exists
 
 <!-- TodoWrite: When context-gather executed, INSERT 3 context-gather tasks, mark first as in_progress -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 2 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 2 Skill executed - tasks attached)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 1: Session Discovery", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing session discovery"},
@@ -149,7 +199,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"[st
 ]
 ```
 
-**Note**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** context-gather's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
+**Note**: Skill execute **attaches** context-gather's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
 
 <!-- TodoWrite: After Phase 2 tasks complete, REMOVE Phase 2.1-2.3, restore to orchestrator view -->
 
@@ -164,7 +214,37 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"[st
 
 **Note**: Phase 2 tasks completed and collapsed to summary.
 
-**After Phase 2**: Return to user showing Phase 2 results, then auto-continue to Phase 3/4 (depending on conflict_risk)
+**After Phase 2**: Update planning-notes.md with context findings, then auto-continue
+
+```javascript
+// Read context-package to extract key findings
+const contextPackage = JSON.parse(Read(contextPath))
+const conflictRisk = contextPackage.conflict_detection?.risk_level || 'low'
+const criticalFiles = (contextPackage.exploration_results?.aggregated_insights?.critical_files || [])
+  .slice(0, 5).map(f => f.path)
+const archPatterns = contextPackage.project_context?.architecture_patterns || []
+const constraints = contextPackage.exploration_results?.aggregated_insights?.constraints || []
+
+// Append Phase 2 findings to planning-notes.md
+Edit(planningNotesPath, {
+  old: '## Context Findings (Phase 2)\n(To be filled by context-gather)',
+  new: `## Context Findings (Phase 2)
+
+- **CRITICAL_FILES**: ${criticalFiles.join(', ') || 'None identified'}
+- **ARCHITECTURE**: ${archPatterns.join(', ') || 'Not detected'}
+- **CONFLICT_RISK**: ${conflictRisk}
+- **CONSTRAINTS**: ${constraints.length > 0 ? constraints.join('; ') : 'None'}`
+})
+
+// Append Phase 2 constraints to consolidated list
+Edit(planningNotesPath, {
+  old: '## Consolidated Constraints (Phase 4 Input)',
+  new: `## Consolidated Constraints (Phase 4 Input)
+${constraints.map((c, i) => `${i + 2}. [Context] ${c}`).join('\n')}`
+})
+```
+
+Return to user showing Phase 2 results, then auto-continue to Phase 3/4 (depending on conflict_risk)
 
 ---
 
@@ -175,7 +255,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"[st
 **Step 3.1: Execute** - Detect and resolve conflicts with CLI analysis
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId] --context [contextPath]")
+Skill(skill="workflow:tools:conflict-resolution", args="--session [sessionId] --context [contextPath]")
 ```
 
 **Input**:
@@ -196,7 +276,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 
 <!-- TodoWrite: If conflict_risk ≥ medium, INSERT 3 conflict-resolution tasks -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached, if conflict_risk ≥ medium)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 Skill executed - tasks attached, if conflict_risk ≥ medium)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 1: Session Discovery", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing session discovery"},
@@ -209,7 +289,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 ]
 ```
 
-**Note**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** conflict-resolution's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
+**Note**: Skill execute **attaches** conflict-resolution's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
 
 <!-- TodoWrite: After Phase 3 tasks complete, REMOVE Phase 3.1-3.3, restore to orchestrator view -->
 
@@ -225,7 +305,45 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 
 **Note**: Phase 3 tasks completed and collapsed to summary.
 
-**After Phase 3**: Return to user showing conflict resolution results (if executed) and selected strategies, then auto-continue to Phase 3.5
+**After Phase 3**: Update planning-notes.md with conflict decisions (if executed), then auto-continue
+
+```javascript
+// If Phase 3 was executed, update planning-notes.md
+if (conflictRisk >= 'medium') {
+  const conflictResPath = `.workflow/active/${sessionId}/.process/conflict-resolution.json`
+
+  if (fs.existsSync(conflictResPath)) {
+    const conflictRes = JSON.parse(Read(conflictResPath))
+    const resolved = conflictRes.resolved_conflicts || []
+    const modifiedArtifacts = conflictRes.modified_artifacts || []
+    const planningConstraints = conflictRes.planning_constraints || []
+
+    // Update Phase 3 section
+    Edit(planningNotesPath, {
+      old: '## Conflict Decisions (Phase 3)\n(To be filled if conflicts detected)',
+      new: `## Conflict Decisions (Phase 3)
+
+- **RESOLVED**: ${resolved.map(r => `${r.type} → ${r.strategy}`).join('; ') || 'None'}
+- **MODIFIED_ARTIFACTS**: ${modifiedArtifacts.join(', ') || 'None'}
+- **CONSTRAINTS**: ${planningConstraints.join('; ') || 'None'}`
+    })
+
+    // Append Phase 3 constraints to consolidated list
+    if (planningConstraints.length > 0) {
+      const currentNotes = Read(planningNotesPath)
+      const constraintCount = (currentNotes.match(/^\d+\./gm) || []).length
+
+      Edit(planningNotesPath, {
+        old: '## Consolidated Constraints (Phase 4 Input)',
+        new: `## Consolidated Constraints (Phase 4 Input)
+${planningConstraints.map((c, i) => `${constraintCount + i + 1}. [Conflict] ${c}`).join('\n')}`
+      })
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+Return to user showing conflict resolution results (if executed) and selected strategies, then auto-continue to Phase 3.5
 
 **Memory State Check**:
 - Evaluate current context window usage and memory state
@@ -234,7 +352,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
   **Step 3.2: Execute** - Optimize memory before proceeding
 
   ```javascript
-  SlashCommand(command="/compact")
+  Skill(skill="compact")
   ```
 
 - Memory compaction is particularly important after analysis phase which may generate extensive documentation
@@ -273,12 +391,17 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 **Step 4.1: Execute** - Generate implementation plan and task JSONs
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:task-generate-agent --session [sessionId]")
+Skill(skill="workflow:tools:task-generate-agent", args="--session [sessionId]")
 ```
 
 **CLI Execution Note**: CLI tool usage is now determined semantically by action-planning-agent based on user's task description. If user specifies "use Codex/Gemini/Qwen for X", the agent embeds `command` fields in relevant `implementation_approach` steps.
 
-**Input**: `sessionId` from Phase 1
+**Input**:
+- `sessionId` from Phase 1
+- **planning-notes.md**: Consolidated constraints from all phases (Phase 1-3)
+  - Path: `.workflow/active/[sessionId]/planning-notes.md`
+  - Contains: User intent, context findings, conflict decisions, consolidated constraints
+  - **Purpose**: Provides structured, minimal context summary to action-planning-agent
 
 **Validation**:
 - `.workflow/active/[sessionId]/IMPL_PLAN.md` exists
@@ -287,7 +410,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:task-generate-agent --session [sessionId]"
 
 <!-- TodoWrite: When task-generate-agent executed, ATTACH 1 agent task -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 4 SlashCommand executed - agent task attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 4 Skill executed - agent task attached)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 1: Session Discovery", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing session discovery"},
@@ -311,27 +434,62 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:task-generate-agent --session [sessionId]"
 
 **Note**: Agent task completed. No collapse needed (single task).
 
-**Return to User**:
-```
-Planning complete for session: [sessionId]
-Tasks generated: [count]
-Plan: .workflow/active/[sessionId]/IMPL_PLAN.md
+**Step 4.2: User Decision** - Choose next action
 
-Recommended Next Steps:
-1. /workflow:action-plan-verify --session [sessionId]  # Verify plan quality before execution
-2. /workflow:status  # Review task breakdown
-3. /workflow:execute  # Start implementation (after verification)
+After Phase 4 completes, present user with action choices:
 
-Quality Gate: Consider running /workflow:action-plan-verify to catch issues early
+```javascript
+console.log(`
+✅ Planning complete for session: ${sessionId}
+📊 Tasks generated: ${taskCount}
+📋 Plan: .workflow/active/${sessionId}/IMPL_PLAN.md
+`);
+
+// Ask user for next action
+const userChoice = AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "Planning complete. What would you like to do next?",
+    header: "Next Action",
+    multiSelect: false,
+    options: [
+      {
+        label: "Verify Plan Quality (Recommended)",
+        description: "Run quality verification to catch issues before execution. Checks plan structure, task dependencies, and completeness."
+      },
+      {
+        label: "Start Execution",
+        description: "Begin implementing tasks immediately. Use this if you've already reviewed the plan or want to start quickly."
+      },
+      {
+        label: "Review Status Only",
+        description: "View task breakdown and session status without taking further action. You can decide what to do next manually."
+      }
+    ]
+  }]
+});
+
+// Execute based on user choice
+if (userChoice.answers["Next Action"] === "Verify Plan Quality (Recommended)") {
+  console.log("\n🔍 Starting plan verification...\n");
+  Skill(skill="workflow:plan-verify", args="--session " + sessionId);
+} else if (userChoice.answers["Next Action"] === "Start Execution") {
+  console.log("\n🚀 Starting task execution...\n");
+  Skill(skill="workflow:execute", args="--session " + sessionId);
+} else if (userChoice.answers["Next Action"] === "Review Status Only") {
+  console.log("\n📊 Displaying session status...\n");
+  Skill(skill="workflow:status", args="--session " + sessionId);
+}
 ```
 
+**Return to User**: Based on user's choice, execute the corresponding workflow command.
+
 ## TodoWrite Pattern
 
 **Core Concept**: Dynamic task attachment and collapse for real-time visibility into workflow execution.
 
 ### Key Principles
 
-1. **Task Attachment** (when SlashCommand executed):
+1. **Task Attachment** (when Skill executed):
    - Sub-command's internal tasks are **attached** to orchestrator's TodoWrite
    - **Phase 2, 3**: Multiple sub-tasks attached (e.g., Phase 2.1, 2.2, 2.3)
    - **Phase 4**: Single agent task attached (e.g., "Execute task-generate-agent")
@@ -400,26 +558,21 @@ User Input (task description)
     ↓
 Phase 1: session:start --auto "structured-description"
     ↓ Output: sessionId
-    ↓ Session Memory: Previous tasks, context, artifacts
+    ↓ Write: planning-notes.md (User Intent section)
     ↓
 Phase 2: context-gather --session sessionId "structured-description"
-    ↓ Input: sessionId + session memory + structured description
-    ↓ Output: contextPath (context-package.json) + conflict_risk
+    ↓ Input: sessionId + structured description
+    ↓ Output: contextPath (context-package.json with prioritized_context) + conflict_risk
+    ↓ Update: planning-notes.md (Context Findings + Consolidated Constraints)
     ↓
 Phase 3: conflict-resolution [AUTO-TRIGGERED if conflict_risk ≥ medium]
     ↓ Input: sessionId + contextPath + conflict_risk
-    ↓ CLI-powered conflict detection (JSON output)
-    ↓ AskUserQuestion: Present conflicts + resolution strategies
-    ↓ User selects strategies (or skip)
-    ↓ Apply modifications via Edit tool:
-    ↓   - Update guidance-specification.md
-    ↓   - Update role analyses (*.md)
-    ↓   - Mark context-package.json as "resolved"
-    ↓ Output: Modified brainstorm artifacts (NO report file)
+    ↓ Output: Modified brainstorm artifacts
+    ↓ Update: planning-notes.md (Conflict Decisions + Consolidated Constraints)
     ↓ Skip if conflict_risk is none/low → proceed directly to Phase 4
     ↓
 Phase 4: task-generate-agent --session sessionId
-    ↓ Input: sessionId + resolved brainstorm artifacts + session memory
+    ↓ Input: sessionId + planning-notes.md + context-package.json + brainstorm artifacts
     ↓ Output: IMPL_PLAN.md, task JSONs, TODO_LIST.md
     ↓
 Return summary to user
@@ -442,7 +595,7 @@ User triggers: /workflow:plan "Build authentication system"
 Phase 1: Session Discovery
   → sessionId extracted
   ↓
-Phase 2: Context Gathering (SlashCommand executed)
+Phase 2: Context Gathering (Skill executed)
   → ATTACH 3 sub-tasks: ← ATTACHED
     - → Analyze codebase structure
     - → Identify integration points
@@ -453,7 +606,7 @@ Phase 2: Context Gathering (SlashCommand executed)
   ↓
 Conditional Branch: Check conflict_risk
   ├─ IF conflict_risk ≥ medium:
-  │   Phase 3: Conflict Resolution (SlashCommand executed)
+  │   Phase 3: Conflict Resolution (Skill executed)
   │     → ATTACH 3 sub-tasks: ← ATTACHED
   │       - → Detect conflicts with CLI analysis
   │       - → Present conflicts to user
@@ -463,7 +616,7 @@ Conditional Branch: Check conflict_risk
   │
   └─ ELSE: Skip Phase 3, proceed to Phase 4
   ↓
-Phase 4: Task Generation (SlashCommand executed)
+Phase 4: Task Generation (Skill executed)
   → Single agent task (no sub-tasks)
   → Agent autonomously completes internally:
     (discovery → planning → output)
@@ -473,7 +626,7 @@ Return summary to user
 ```
 
 **Key Points**:
-- **← ATTACHED**: Tasks attached to TodoWrite when SlashCommand executed
+- **← ATTACHED**: Tasks attached to TodoWrite when Skill executed
   - Phase 2, 3: Multiple sub-tasks
   - Phase 4: Single agent task
 - **← COLLAPSED**: Sub-tasks collapsed to summary after completion (Phase 2, 3 only)
@@ -546,6 +699,6 @@ CONSTRAINTS: [Limitations or boundaries]
 - `/workflow:tools:task-generate-agent` - Phase 4: Generate task JSON files with agent-driven approach
 
 **Follow-up Commands**:
-- `/workflow:action-plan-verify` - Recommended: Verify plan quality and catch issues before execution
+- `/workflow:plan-verify` - Recommended: Verify plan quality and catch issues before execution
 - `/workflow:status` - Review task breakdown and current progress
 - `/workflow:execute` - Begin implementation of generated tasks

.claude/commands/workflow/replan.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 name: replan
 description: Interactive workflow replanning with session-level artifact updates and boundary clarification through guided questioning
-argument-hint: "[--session session-id] [task-id] \"requirements\"|file.md [--interactive]"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--session session-id] [task-id] \"requirements\"|file.md [--interactive]"
 allowed-tools: Read(*), Write(*), Edit(*), TodoWrite(*), Glob(*), Bash(*)
 ---
 
@@ -113,7 +113,59 @@ const taskId = taskIdMatch?.[1]
    - List existing tasks
    - Read `IMPL_PLAN.md` and `TODO_LIST.md`
 
-**Output**: Session validated, context loaded, mode determined
+4. **Parse Execution Intent** (from requirements text):
+   ```javascript
+   // Dynamic tool detection from cli-tools.json
+   // Read enabled tools: ["gemini", "qwen", "codex", ...]
+   const enabledTools = loadEnabledToolsFromConfig();  // See ~/.claude/cli-tools.json
+
+   // Build dynamic patterns from enabled tools
+   function buildExecPatterns(tools) {
+     const patterns = {
+       agent: /改为\s*Agent\s*执行|使用\s*Agent\s*执行/i
+     };
+     tools.forEach(tool => {
+       // Pattern: "使用 {tool} 执行" or "改用 {tool}"
+       patterns[`cli_${tool}`] = new RegExp(
+         `使用\\s*(${tool})\\s*执行|改用\\s*(${tool})`, 'i'
+       );
+     });
+     return patterns;
+   }
+
+   const execPatterns = buildExecPatterns(enabledTools);
+
+   let executionIntent = null
+   for (const [key, pattern] of Object.entries(execPatterns)) {
+     if (pattern.test(requirements)) {
+       executionIntent = key.startsWith('cli_')
+         ? { method: 'cli', cli_tool: key.replace('cli_', '') }
+         : { method: 'agent', cli_tool: null }
+       break
+     }
+   }
+   ```
+
+**Output**: Session validated, context loaded, mode determined, **executionIntent parsed**
+
+---
+
+### Auto Mode Support
+
+When `--yes` or `-y` flag is used, the command skips interactive clarification and uses safe defaults:
+
+```javascript
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+```
+
+**Auto Mode Defaults**:
+- **Modification Scope**: `tasks_only` (safest - only update task details)
+- **Affected Modules**: All modules related to the task
+- **Task Changes**: `update_only` (no structural changes)
+- **Dependency Changes**: `no` (preserve existing dependencies)
+- **User Confirmation**: Auto-confirm execution
+
+**Note**: `--interactive` flag overrides `--yes` flag (forces interactive mode).
 
 ---
 
@@ -121,6 +173,25 @@ const taskId = taskIdMatch?.[1]
 
 **Purpose**: Define modification scope through guided questioning
 
+**Auto Mode Check**:
+```javascript
+if (autoYes && !interactive) {
+  // Use defaults and skip to Phase 3
+  console.log(`[--yes] Using safe defaults for replan:`)
+  console.log(`  - Scope: tasks_only`)
+  console.log(`  - Changes: update_only`)
+  console.log(`  - Dependencies: preserve existing`)
+
+  userSelections = {
+    scope: 'tasks_only',
+    modules: 'all_affected',
+    task_changes: 'update_only',
+    dependency_changes: false
+  }
+  // Proceed to Phase 3
+}
+```
+
 #### Session Mode Questions
 
 **Q1: Modification Scope**
@@ -228,10 +299,29 @@ interface ImpactAnalysis {
 **Step 3.3: User Confirmation**
 
 ```javascript
-Options:
-- 确认执行: 开始应用所有修改
-- 调整计划: 重新回答问题调整范围
-- 取消操作: 放弃本次重规划
+// Parse --yes flag
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+
+if (autoYes) {
+  // Auto mode: Auto-confirm execution
+  console.log(`[--yes] Auto-confirming replan execution`)
+  userConfirmation = '确认执行'
+  // Proceed to Phase 4
+} else {
+  // Interactive mode: Ask user
+  AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "修改计划已生成，请确认操作:",
+      header: "Confirm",
+      options: [
+        { label: "确认执行", description: "开始应用所有修改" },
+        { label: "调整计划", description: "重新回答问题调整范围" },
+        { label: "取消操作", description: "放弃本次重规划" }
+      ],
+      multiSelect: false
+    }]
+  })
+}
 ```
 
 **Output**: Modification plan confirmed or adjusted
@@ -299,7 +389,18 @@ const updated_task = {
   flow_control: {
     ...task.flow_control,
     implementation_approach: [...updated_steps]
-  }
+  },
+  // Update execution config if intent detected
+  ...(executionIntent && {
+    meta: {
+      ...task.meta,
+      execution_config: {
+        method: executionIntent.method,
+        cli_tool: executionIntent.cli_tool,
+        enable_resume: executionIntent.method !== 'agent'
+      }
+    }
+  })
 };
 
 Write({
@@ -308,6 +409,8 @@ Write({
 });
 ```
 
+**Note**: Implementation approach steps are NO LONGER modified. CLI execution is controlled by task-level `meta.execution_config` only.
+
 **Step 5.4: Create New Tasks** (if needed)
 
 Generate complete task JSON with all required fields:
@@ -513,3 +616,33 @@ A: 是,需要同步更新依赖任务
 
 任务重规划完成! 更新 2 个任务
 ```
+
+### Task Replan - Change Execution Method
+
+```bash
+/workflow:replan IMPL-001 "改用 Codex 执行"
+
+# Semantic parsing detects executionIntent:
+# { method: 'cli', cli_tool: 'codex' }
+
+# Execution (no interactive questions needed)
+✓ 创建备份
+✓ 更新 IMPL-001.json
+  - meta.execution_config = { method: 'cli', cli_tool: 'codex', enable_resume: true }
+
+任务执行方式已更新: Agent → CLI (codex)
+```
+
+```bash
+/workflow:replan IMPL-002 "改为 Agent 执行"
+
+# Semantic parsing detects executionIntent:
+# { method: 'agent', cli_tool: null }
+
+# Execution
+✓ 创建备份
+✓ 更新 IMPL-002.json
+  - meta.execution_config = { method: 'agent', cli_tool: null }
+
+任务执行方式已更新: CLI → Agent
+```

.claude/commands/workflow/review-cycle-fix.md

@@ -0,0 +1,765 @@
+---
+name: review-cycle-fix
+description: Automated fixing of code review findings with AI-powered planning and coordinated execution. Uses intelligent grouping, multi-stage timeline coordination, and test-driven verification.
+argument-hint: "<export-file|review-dir> [--resume] [--max-iterations=N] [--batch-size=N]"
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*), Edit(*), Write(*)
+---
+
+# Workflow Review-Cycle-Fix Command
+
+## Quick Start
+
+```bash
+# Fix from exported findings file (session-based path)
+/workflow:review-cycle-fix .workflow/active/WFS-123/.review/fix-export-1706184622000.json
+
+# Fix from review directory (auto-discovers latest export)
+/workflow:review-cycle-fix .workflow/active/WFS-123/.review/
+
+# Resume interrupted fix session
+/workflow:review-cycle-fix --resume
+
+# Custom max retry attempts per finding
+/workflow:review-cycle-fix .workflow/active/WFS-123/.review/ --max-iterations=5
+
+# Custom batch size for parallel planning (default: 5 findings per batch)
+/workflow:review-cycle-fix .workflow/active/WFS-123/.review/ --batch-size=3
+```
+
+**Fix Source**: Exported findings from review cycle dashboard
+**Output Directory**: `{review-dir}/fixes/{fix-session-id}/` (within session .review/)
+**Default Max Iterations**: 3 (per finding, adjustable)
+**Default Batch Size**: 5 (findings per planning batch, adjustable)
+**Max Parallel Agents**: 10 (concurrent planning agents)
+**CLI Tools**: @cli-planning-agent (planning), @cli-execute-agent (fixing)
+
+## What & Why
+
+### Core Concept
+Automated fix orchestrator with **parallel planning architecture**: Multiple AI agents analyze findings concurrently in batches, then coordinate parallel/serial execution. Generates fix timeline with intelligent grouping and dependency analysis, executes fixes with conservative test verification.
+
+**Fix Process**:
+- **Batching Phase (1.5)**: Orchestrator groups findings by file+dimension similarity, creates batches
+- **Planning Phase (2)**: Up to 10 agents plan batches in parallel, generate partial plans, orchestrator aggregates
+- **Execution Phase (3)**: Main orchestrator coordinates agents per aggregated timeline stages
+- **Parallel Efficiency**: Customizable batch size (default: 5), MAX_PARALLEL=10 agents
+- **No rigid structure**: Adapts to task requirements, not bound to fixed JSON format
+
+**vs Manual Fixing**:
+- **Manual**: Developer reviews findings one-by-one, fixes sequentially
+- **Automated**: AI groups related issues, multiple agents plan in parallel, executes in optimal parallel/serial order with automatic test verification
+
+### Value Proposition
+1. **Parallel Planning**: Multiple agents analyze findings concurrently, reducing planning time for large batches (10+ findings)
+2. **Intelligent Batching**: Semantic similarity grouping ensures related findings are analyzed together
+3. **Multi-stage Coordination**: Supports complex parallel + serial execution with cross-batch dependency management
+4. **Conservative Safety**: Mandatory test verification with automatic rollback on failure
+5. **Resume Support**: Checkpoint-based recovery for interrupted sessions
+
+### Orchestrator Boundary (CRITICAL)
+- **ONLY command** for automated review finding fixes
+- Manages: Intelligent batching (Phase 1.5), parallel planning coordination (launch N agents), plan aggregation, stage-based execution, agent scheduling, progress tracking
+- Delegates: Batch planning to @cli-planning-agent, fix execution to @cli-execute-agent
+
+
+### Execution Flow
+
+```
+Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization
+   └─ Validate export file, create fix session structure, initialize state files
+
+Phase 1.5: Intelligent Grouping & Batching
+   ├─ Analyze findings metadata (file, dimension, severity)
+   ├─ Group by semantic similarity (file proximity + dimension affinity)
+   ├─ Create batches respecting --batch-size (default: 5)
+   └─ Output: Finding batches for parallel planning
+
+Phase 2: Parallel Planning Coordination (@cli-planning-agent × N)
+   ├─ Launch MAX_PARALLEL planning agents concurrently (default: 10)
+   ├─ Each agent processes one batch:
+   │  ├─ Analyze findings for patterns and dependencies
+   │  ├─ Group by file + dimension + root cause similarity
+   │  ├─ Determine execution strategy (parallel/serial/hybrid)
+   │  ├─ Generate fix timeline with stages
+   │  └─ Output: partial-plan-{batch-id}.json
+   ├─ Collect results from all agents
+   └─ Aggregate: Merge partial plans → fix-plan.json (resolve cross-batch dependencies)
+
+Phase 3: Execution Orchestration (Stage-based)
+   For each timeline stage:
+   ├─ Load groups for this stage
+   ├─ If parallel: Launch all group agents simultaneously
+   ├─ If serial: Execute groups sequentially
+   ├─ Each agent:
+   │  ├─ Analyze code context
+   │  ├─ Apply fix per strategy
+   │  ├─ Run affected tests
+   │  ├─ On test failure: Rollback, retry up to max_iterations
+   │  └─ On success: Commit, update fix-progress-{N}.json
+   └─ Advance to next stage
+
+Phase 4: Completion & Aggregation
+   └─ Aggregate results → Generate fix-summary.md → Update history → Output summary
+
+Phase 5: Session Completion (Optional)
+   └─ If all fixes successful → Prompt to complete workflow session
+```
+
+### Agent Roles
+
+| Agent | Responsibility |
+|-------|---------------|
+| **Orchestrator** | Input validation, session management, intelligent batching (Phase 1.5), parallel planning coordination (launch N agents), plan aggregation (merge partial plans, resolve cross-batch dependencies), stage-based execution scheduling, progress tracking, result aggregation |
+| **@cli-planning-agent** | Batch findings analysis, intelligent grouping (file+dimension+root cause), execution strategy determination (parallel/serial/hybrid), timeline generation with dependency mapping, partial plan output |
+| **@cli-execute-agent** | Fix execution per group, code context analysis, Edit tool operations, test verification, git rollback on failure, completion JSON generation |
+
+## Enhanced Features
+
+### 1. Parallel Planning Architecture
+
+**Batch Processing Strategy**:
+
+| Phase | Agent Count | Input | Output | Purpose |
+|-------|-------------|-------|--------|---------|  
+| **Batching (1.5)** | Orchestrator | All findings | Finding batches | Semantic grouping by file+dimension, respecting --batch-size |
+| **Planning (2)** | N agents (≤10) | 1 batch each | partial-plan-{batch-id}.json | Analyze batch in parallel, generate execution groups and timeline |
+| **Aggregation (2)** | Orchestrator | All partial plans | fix-plan.json | Merge timelines, resolve cross-batch dependencies |
+| **Execution (3)** | M agents (dynamic) | 1 group each | fix-progress-{N}.json | Execute fixes per aggregated plan with test verification |
+
+**Benefits**:
+- **Speed**: N agents plan concurrently, reducing planning time for large batches
+- **Scalability**: MAX_PARALLEL=10 prevents resource exhaustion
+- **Flexibility**: Batch size customizable via --batch-size (default: 5)
+- **Isolation**: Each planning agent focuses on related findings (semantic grouping)
+- **Reusable**: Aggregated plan can be re-executed without re-planning
+
+### 2. Intelligent Grouping Strategy
+
+**Three-Level Grouping**:
+
+```javascript
+// Level 1: Primary grouping by file + dimension
+{file: "auth.ts", dimension: "security"} → Group A
+{file: "auth.ts", dimension: "quality"} → Group B
+{file: "query-builder.ts", dimension: "security"} → Group C
+
+// Level 2: Secondary grouping by root cause similarity
+Group A findings → Semantic similarity analysis (threshold 0.7)
+  → Sub-group A1: "missing-input-validation" (findings 1, 2)
+  → Sub-group A2: "insecure-crypto" (finding 3)
+
+// Level 3: Dependency analysis
+Sub-group A1 creates validation utilities
+Sub-group C4 depends on those utilities
+→ A1 must execute before C4 (serial stage dependency)
+```
+
+**Similarity Computation**:
+- Combine: `description + recommendation + category`
+- Vectorize: TF-IDF or LLM embedding
+- Cluster: Greedy algorithm with cosine similarity > 0.7
+
+### 3. Execution Strategy Determination
+
+**Strategy Types**:
+
+| Strategy | When to Use | Stage Structure |
+|----------|-------------|-----------------|
+| **Parallel** | All groups independent, different files | Single stage, all groups in parallel |
+| **Serial** | Strong dependencies, shared resources | Multiple stages, one group per stage |
+| **Hybrid** | Mixed dependencies | Multiple stages, parallel within stages |
+
+**Dependency Detection**:
+- Shared file modifications
+- Utility creation + usage patterns
+- Test dependency chains
+- Risk level clustering (high-risk groups isolated)
+
+### 4. Conservative Test Verification
+
+**Test Strategy** (per fix):
+
+```javascript
+// 1. Identify affected tests
+const testPattern = identifyTestPattern(finding.file);
+// e.g., "tests/auth/**/*.test.*" for src/auth/service.ts
+
+// 2. Run tests
+const result = await runTests(testPattern);
+
+// 3. Evaluate
+if (result.passRate < 100%) {
+  // Rollback
+  await gitCheckout(finding.file);
+
+  // Retry with failure context
+  if (attempts < maxIterations) {
+    const fixContext = analyzeFailure(result.stderr);
+    regenerateFix(finding, fixContext);
+    retry();
+  } else {
+    markFailed(finding.id);
+  }
+} else {
+  // Commit
+  await gitCommit(`Fix: ${finding.title} [${finding.id}]`);
+  markFixed(finding.id);
+}
+```
+
+**Pass Criteria**: 100% test pass rate (no partial fixes)
+
+## Core Responsibilities
+
+### Orchestrator
+
+**Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization**
+- Input validation: Check export file exists and is valid JSON
+- Auto-discovery: If review-dir provided, find latest `*-fix-export.json`
+- Session creation: Generate fix-session-id (`fix-{timestamp}`)
+- Directory structure: Create `{review-dir}/fixes/{fix-session-id}/` with subdirectories
+- State files: Initialize active-fix-session.json (session marker)
+- TodoWrite initialization: Set up 5-phase tracking (including Phase 1.5)
+
+**Phase 1.5: Intelligent Grouping & Batching**
+- Load all findings metadata (id, file, dimension, severity, title)
+- Semantic similarity analysis:
+  - Primary: Group by file proximity (same file or related modules)
+  - Secondary: Group by dimension affinity (same review dimension)
+  - Tertiary: Analyze title/description similarity (root cause clustering)
+- Create batches respecting --batch-size (default: 5 findings per batch)
+- Balance workload: Distribute high-severity findings across batches
+- Output: Array of finding batches for parallel planning
+
+**Phase 2: Parallel Planning Coordination**
+- Determine concurrency: MIN(batch_count, MAX_PARALLEL=10)
+- For each batch chunk (≤10 batches):
+  - Launch all agents in parallel with run_in_background=true
+  - Pass batch findings + project context + batch_id to each agent
+  - Each agent outputs: partial-plan-{batch-id}.json
+- Collect results via TaskOutput (blocking until all complete)
+- Aggregate partial plans:
+  - Merge execution groups (renumber group_ids sequentially: G1, G2, ...)
+  - Merge timelines (detect cross-batch dependencies, adjust stages)
+  - Resolve conflicts (same file in multiple batches → serialize)
+- Generate final fix-plan.json with aggregated metadata
+- TodoWrite update: Mark planning complete, start execution
+
+**Phase 3: Execution Orchestration**
+- Load fix-plan.json timeline stages
+- For each stage:
+  - If parallel mode: Launch all group agents via `Promise.all()`
+  - If serial mode: Execute groups sequentially with `await`
+  - Assign agent IDs (agents update their fix-progress-{N}.json)
+- Handle agent failures gracefully (mark group as failed, continue)
+- Advance to next stage only when current stage complete
+
+**Phase 4: Completion & Aggregation**
+- Collect final status from all fix-progress-{N}.json files
+- Generate fix-summary.md with timeline and results
+- Update fix-history.json with new session entry
+- Remove active-fix-session.json
+- TodoWrite completion: Mark all phases done
+- Output summary to user
+
+**Phase 5: Session Completion (Optional)**
+- If all findings fixed successfully (no failures):
+  - Prompt user: "All fixes complete. Complete workflow session? [Y/n]"
+  - If confirmed: Execute `/workflow:session:complete` to archive session with lessons learned
+- If partial success (some failures):
+  - Output: "Some findings failed. Review fix-summary.md before completing session."
+  - Do NOT auto-complete session
+
+### Output File Structure
+
+```
+.workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/.review/
+├── fix-export-{timestamp}.json     # Exported findings (input)
+└── fixes/{fix-session-id}/
+    ├── partial-plan-1.json         # Batch 1 partial plan (planning agent 1 output)
+    ├── partial-plan-2.json         # Batch 2 partial plan (planning agent 2 output)
+    ├── partial-plan-N.json         # Batch N partial plan (planning agent N output)
+    ├── fix-plan.json               # Aggregated execution plan (orchestrator merges partials)
+    ├── fix-progress-1.json         # Group 1 progress (planning agent init → agent updates)
+    ├── fix-progress-2.json         # Group 2 progress (planning agent init → agent updates)
+    ├── fix-progress-3.json         # Group 3 progress (planning agent init → agent updates)
+    ├── fix-summary.md              # Final report (orchestrator generates)
+    ├── active-fix-session.json     # Active session marker
+    └── fix-history.json            # All sessions history
+```
+
+**File Producers**:
+- **Orchestrator**: Batches findings (Phase 1.5), aggregates partial plans → `fix-plan.json` (Phase 2), launches parallel planning agents
+- **Planning Agents (N)**: Each outputs `partial-plan-{batch-id}.json` + initializes `fix-progress-*.json` for assigned groups
+- **Execution Agents (M)**: Update assigned `fix-progress-{N}.json` in real-time
+
+
+### Agent Invocation Template
+
+**Phase 1.5: Intelligent Batching** (Orchestrator):
+```javascript
+// Load findings
+const findings = JSON.parse(Read(exportFile));
+const batchSize = flags.batchSize || 5;
+
+// Semantic similarity analysis: group by file+dimension
+const batches = [];
+const grouped = new Map(); // key: "${file}:${dimension}"
+
+for (const finding of findings) {
+  const key = `${finding.file || 'unknown'}:${finding.dimension || 'general'}`;
+  if (!grouped.has(key)) grouped.set(key, []);
+  grouped.get(key).push(finding);
+}
+
+// Create batches respecting batchSize
+for (const [key, group] of grouped) {
+  while (group.length > 0) {
+    const batch = group.splice(0, batchSize);
+    batches.push({
+      batch_id: batches.length + 1,
+      findings: batch,
+      metadata: { primary_file: batch[0].file, primary_dimension: batch[0].dimension }
+    });
+  }
+}
+
+console.log(`Created ${batches.length} batches (${batchSize} findings per batch)`);
+```
+
+**Phase 2: Parallel Planning** (Orchestrator launches N agents):
+```javascript
+const MAX_PARALLEL = 10;
+const partialPlans = [];
+
+// Process batches in chunks of MAX_PARALLEL
+for (let i = 0; i < batches.length; i += MAX_PARALLEL) {
+  const chunk = batches.slice(i, i + MAX_PARALLEL);
+  const taskIds = [];
+
+  // Launch agents in parallel (run_in_background=true)
+  for (const batch of chunk) {
+    const taskId = Task({
+      subagent_type: "cli-planning-agent",
+      run_in_background: true,
+      description: `Plan batch ${batch.batch_id}: ${batch.findings.length} findings`,
+      prompt: planningPrompt(batch)  // See Planning Agent template below
+    });
+    taskIds.push({ taskId, batch });
+  }
+
+  console.log(`Launched ${taskIds.length} planning agents...`);
+
+  // Collect results from this chunk (blocking)
+  for (const { taskId, batch } of taskIds) {
+    const result = TaskOutput({ task_id: taskId, block: true });
+    const partialPlan = JSON.parse(Read(`${sessionDir}/partial-plan-${batch.batch_id}.json`));
+    partialPlans.push(partialPlan);
+    updateTodo(`Batch ${batch.batch_id}`, 'completed');
+  }
+}
+
+// Aggregate partial plans → fix-plan.json
+let groupCounter = 1;
+const groupIdMap = new Map();
+
+for (const partial of partialPlans) {
+  for (const group of partial.groups) {
+    const newGroupId = `G${groupCounter}`;
+    groupIdMap.set(`${partial.batch_id}:${group.group_id}`, newGroupId);
+    aggregatedPlan.groups.push({ ...group, group_id: newGroupId, progress_file: `fix-progress-${groupCounter}.json` });
+    groupCounter++;
+  }
+}
+
+// Merge timelines, resolve cross-batch conflicts (shared files → serialize)
+let stageCounter = 1;
+for (const partial of partialPlans) {
+  for (const stage of partial.timeline) {
+    aggregatedPlan.timeline.push({
+      ...stage, stage_id: stageCounter,
+      groups: stage.groups.map(gid => groupIdMap.get(`${partial.batch_id}:${gid}`))
+    });
+    stageCounter++;
+  }
+}
+
+// Write aggregated plan + initialize progress files
+Write(`${sessionDir}/fix-plan.json`, JSON.stringify(aggregatedPlan, null, 2));
+for (let i = 1; i <= aggregatedPlan.groups.length; i++) {
+  Write(`${sessionDir}/fix-progress-${i}.json`, JSON.stringify(initProgressFile(aggregatedPlan.groups[i-1]), null, 2));
+}
+```
+
+**Planning Agent (Batch Mode - Partial Plan Only)**:
+```javascript
+Task({
+  subagent_type: "cli-planning-agent",
+  run_in_background: true,
+  description: `Plan batch ${batch.batch_id}: ${batch.findings.length} findings`,
+  prompt: `
+## Task Objective
+Analyze code review findings in batch ${batch.batch_id} and generate **partial** execution plan.
+
+## Input Data
+Review Session: ${reviewId}
+Fix Session ID: ${fixSessionId}
+Batch ID: ${batch.batch_id}
+Batch Findings: ${batch.findings.length}
+
+Findings:
+${JSON.stringify(batch.findings, null, 2)}
+
+Project Context:
+- Structure: ${projectStructure}
+- Test Framework: ${testFramework}
+- Git Status: ${gitStatus}
+
+## Output Requirements
+
+### 1. partial-plan-${batch.batch_id}.json
+Generate partial execution plan with structure:
+{
+  "batch_id": ${batch.batch_id},
+  "groups": [...],  // Groups created from batch findings (use local IDs: G1, G2, ...)
+  "timeline": [...],  // Local timeline for this batch only
+  "metadata": {
+    "findings_count": ${batch.findings.length},
+    "groups_count": N,
+    "created_at": "ISO-8601-timestamp"
+  }
+}
+
+**Key Generation Rules**:
+- **Groups**: Create groups with local IDs (G1, G2, ...) using intelligent grouping (file+dimension+root cause)
+- **Timeline**: Define stages for this batch only (local dependencies within batch)
+- **Progress Files**: DO NOT generate fix-progress-*.json here (orchestrator handles after aggregation)
+
+## Analysis Requirements
+
+### Intelligent Grouping Strategy
+Group findings using these criteria (in priority order):
+
+1. **File Proximity**: Findings in same file or related files
+2. **Dimension Affinity**: Same dimension (security, performance, etc.)
+3. **Root Cause Similarity**: Similar underlying issues
+4. **Fix Approach Commonality**: Can be fixed with similar approach
+
+**Grouping Guidelines**:
+- Optimal group size: 2-5 findings per group
+- Avoid cross-cutting concerns in same group
+- Consider test isolation (different test suites → different groups)
+- Balance workload across groups for parallel execution
+
+### Execution Strategy Determination (Local Only)
+
+**Parallel Mode**: Use when groups are independent, no shared files
+**Serial Mode**: Use when groups have dependencies or shared resources
+**Hybrid Mode**: Use for mixed dependency graphs (recommended for most cases)
+
+**Dependency Analysis**:
+- Identify shared files between groups
+- Detect test dependency chains
+- Evaluate risk of concurrent modifications
+
+### Risk Assessment
+
+For each group, evaluate:
+- **Complexity**: Based on code structure, file size, existing tests
+- **Impact Scope**: Number of files affected, API surface changes
+- **Rollback Feasibility**: Ease of reverting changes if tests fail
+
+### Test Strategy
+
+For each group, determine:
+- **Test Pattern**: Glob pattern matching affected tests
+- **Pass Criteria**: All tests must pass (100% pass rate)
+- **Test Command**: Infer from project (package.json, pytest.ini, etc.)
+
+## Output Files
+
+Write to ${sessionDir}:
+- ./partial-plan-${batch.batch_id}.json
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+Before finalizing outputs:
+- ✅ All batch findings assigned to exactly one group
+- ✅ Group dependencies (within batch) correctly identified
+- ✅ Timeline stages respect local dependencies
+- ✅ Test patterns are valid and specific
+- ✅ Risk assessments are realistic
+  `
+})
+```
+
+**Execution Agent** (per group):
+```javascript
+Task({
+  subagent_type: "cli-execute-agent",
+  description: `Fix ${group.findings.length} issues: ${group.group_name}`,
+  prompt: `
+## Task Objective
+Execute fixes for code review findings in group ${group.group_id}. Update progress file in real-time with flow control tracking.
+
+## Assignment
+- Group ID: ${group.group_id}
+- Group Name: ${group.group_name}
+- Progress File: ${sessionDir}/${group.progress_file}
+- Findings Count: ${group.findings.length}
+- Max Iterations: ${maxIterations} (per finding)
+
+## Fix Strategy
+${JSON.stringify(group.fix_strategy, null, 2)}
+
+## Risk Assessment
+${JSON.stringify(group.risk_assessment, null, 2)}
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+### Initialization (Before Starting)
+
+1. Read ${group.progress_file} to load initial state
+2. Update progress file:
+   - assigned_agent: "${agentId}"
+   - status: "in-progress"
+   - started_at: Current ISO 8601 timestamp
+   - last_update: Current ISO 8601 timestamp
+3. Write updated state back to ${group.progress_file}
+
+### Main Execution Loop
+
+For EACH finding in ${group.progress_file}.findings:
+
+#### Step 1: Analyze Context
+
+**Before Step**:
+- Update finding: status→"in-progress", started_at→now()
+- Update current_finding: Populate with finding details, status→"analyzing", action→"Reading file and understanding code structure"
+- Update phase→"analyzing"
+- Update flow_control: Add "analyze_context" step to implementation_approach (status→"in-progress"), set current_step→"analyze_context"
+- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
+
+**Action**:
+- Read file: finding.file
+- Understand code structure around line: finding.line
+- Analyze surrounding context (imports, dependencies, related functions)
+- Review recommendations: finding.recommendations
+
+**After Step**:
+- Update flow_control: Mark "analyze_context" step as "completed" with completed_at→now()
+- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
+
+#### Step 2: Apply Fix
+
+**Before Step**:
+- Update current_finding: status→"fixing", action→"Applying code changes per recommendations"
+- Update phase→"fixing"
+- Update flow_control: Add "apply_fix" step to implementation_approach (status→"in-progress"), set current_step→"apply_fix"
+- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
+
+**Action**:
+- Use Edit tool to implement code changes per finding.recommendations
+- Follow fix_strategy.approach
+- Maintain code style and existing patterns
+
+**After Step**:
+- Update flow_control: Mark "apply_fix" step as "completed" with completed_at→now()
+- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
+
+#### Step 3: Test Verification
+
+**Before Step**:
+- Update current_finding: status→"testing", action→"Running test suite to verify fix"
+- Update phase→"testing"
+- Update flow_control: Add "run_tests" step to implementation_approach (status→"in-progress"), set current_step→"run_tests"
+- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
+
+**Action**:
+- Run tests using fix_strategy.test_pattern
+- Require 100% pass rate
+- Capture test output
+
+**On Test Failure**:
+- Git rollback: \`git checkout -- \${finding.file}\`
+- Increment finding.attempts
+- Update flow_control: Mark "run_tests" step as "failed" with completed_at→now()
+- Update errors: Add entry (finding_id, error_type→"test_failure", message, timestamp)
+- If finding.attempts < ${maxIterations}:
+  - Reset flow_control: implementation_approach→[], current_step→null
+  - Retry from Step 1
+- Else:
+  - Update finding: status→"completed", result→"failed", error_message→"Max iterations reached", completed_at→now()
+  - Update summary counts, move to next finding
+
+**On Test Success**:
+- Update flow_control: Mark "run_tests" step as "completed" with completed_at→now()
+- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
+- Proceed to Step 4
+
+#### Step 4: Commit Changes
+
+**Before Step**:
+- Update current_finding: status→"committing", action→"Creating git commit for successful fix"
+- Update phase→"committing"
+- Update flow_control: Add "commit_changes" step to implementation_approach (status→"in-progress"), set current_step→"commit_changes"
+- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
+
+**Action**:
+- Git commit: \`git commit -m "fix(${finding.dimension}): ${finding.title} [${finding.id}]"\`
+- Capture commit hash
+
+**After Step**:
+- Update finding: status→"completed", result→"fixed", commit_hash→<captured>, test_passed→true, completed_at→now()
+- Update flow_control: Mark "commit_changes" step as "completed" with completed_at→now()
+- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
+
+#### After Each Finding
+
+- Update summary: Recalculate counts (pending/in_progress/fixed/failed) and percent_complete
+- If all findings completed: Clear current_finding, reset flow_control
+- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
+
+### Final Completion
+
+When all findings processed:
+- Update status→"completed", phase→"done", summary.percent_complete→100.0
+- Update last_update→now(), write final state to ${group.progress_file}
+
+## Critical Requirements
+
+### Progress File Updates
+- **MUST update after every significant action** (before/after each step)
+- **Always maintain complete structure** - never write partial updates
+- **Use ISO 8601 timestamps** - e.g., "2025-01-25T14:36:00Z"
+
+### Flow Control Format
+Follow action-planning-agent flow_control.implementation_approach format:
+- step: Identifier (e.g., "analyze_context", "apply_fix")
+- action: Human-readable description
+- status: "pending" | "in-progress" | "completed" | "failed"
+- started_at: ISO 8601 timestamp or null
+- completed_at: ISO 8601 timestamp or null
+
+### Error Handling
+- Capture all errors in errors[] array
+- Never leave progress file in invalid state
+- Always write complete updates, never partial
+- On unrecoverable error: Mark group as failed, preserve state
+
+## Test Patterns
+Use fix_strategy.test_pattern to run affected tests:
+- Pattern: ${group.fix_strategy.test_pattern}
+- Command: Infer from project (npm test, pytest, etc.)
+- Pass Criteria: 100% pass rate required
+  `
+})
+```
+
+
+
+### Error Handling
+
+**Batching Failures (Phase 1.5)**:
+- Invalid findings data → Abort with error message
+- Empty batches after grouping → Warn and skip empty batches
+
+**Planning Failures (Phase 2)**:
+- Planning agent timeout → Mark batch as failed, continue with other batches
+- Partial plan missing → Skip batch, warn user
+- Agent crash → Collect available partial plans, proceed with aggregation
+- All agents fail → Abort entire fix session with error
+- Aggregation conflicts → Apply conflict resolution (serialize conflicting groups)
+
+**Execution Failures (Phase 3)**:
+- Agent crash → Mark group as failed, continue with other groups
+- Test command not found → Skip test verification, warn user
+- Git operations fail → Abort with error, preserve state
+
+**Rollback Scenarios**:
+- Test failure after fix → Automatic `git checkout` rollback
+- Max iterations reached → Leave file unchanged, mark as failed
+- Unrecoverable error → Rollback entire group, save checkpoint
+
+### TodoWrite Structure
+
+**Initialization (after Phase 1.5 batching)**:
+```javascript
+TodoWrite({
+  todos: [
+    {content: "Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization", status: "completed", activeForm: "Discovering"},
+    {content: "Phase 1.5: Intelligent Batching", status: "completed", activeForm: "Batching"},
+    {content: "Phase 2: Parallel Planning", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Planning"},
+    {content: "  → Batch 1: 4 findings (auth.ts:security)", status: "pending", activeForm: "Planning batch 1"},
+    {content: "  → Batch 2: 3 findings (query.ts:security)", status: "pending", activeForm: "Planning batch 2"},
+    {content: "  → Batch 3: 2 findings (config.ts:quality)", status: "pending", activeForm: "Planning batch 3"},
+    {content: "Phase 3: Execution", status: "pending", activeForm: "Executing"},
+    {content: "Phase 4: Completion", status: "pending", activeForm: "Completing"}
+  ]
+});
+```
+
+**During Planning (parallel agents running)**:
+```javascript
+TodoWrite({
+  todos: [
+    {content: "Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization", status: "completed", activeForm: "Discovering"},
+    {content: "Phase 1.5: Intelligent Batching", status: "completed", activeForm: "Batching"},
+    {content: "Phase 2: Parallel Planning", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Planning"},
+    {content: "  → Batch 1: 4 findings (auth.ts:security)", status: "completed", activeForm: "Planning batch 1"},
+    {content: "  → Batch 2: 3 findings (query.ts:security)", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Planning batch 2"},
+    {content: "  → Batch 3: 2 findings (config.ts:quality)", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Planning batch 3"},
+    {content: "Phase 3: Execution", status: "pending", activeForm: "Executing"},
+    {content: "Phase 4: Completion", status: "pending", activeForm: "Completing"}
+  ]
+});
+```
+
+**During Execution**:
+```javascript
+TodoWrite({
+  todos: [
+    {content: "Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization", status: "completed", activeForm: "Discovering"},
+    {content: "Phase 1.5: Intelligent Batching", status: "completed", activeForm: "Batching"},
+    {content: "Phase 2: Parallel Planning (3 batches → 5 groups)", status: "completed", activeForm: "Planning"},
+    {content: "Phase 3: Execution", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Executing"},
+    {content: "  → Stage 1: Parallel execution (3 groups)", status: "completed", activeForm: "Executing stage 1"},
+    {content: "    • Group G1: Auth validation (2 findings)", status: "completed", activeForm: "Fixing G1"},
+    {content: "    • Group G2: Query security (3 findings)", status: "completed", activeForm: "Fixing G2"},
+    {content: "    • Group G3: Config quality (1 finding)", status: "completed", activeForm: "Fixing G3"},
+    {content: "  → Stage 2: Serial execution (1 group)", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Executing stage 2"},
+    {content: "    • Group G4: Dependent fixes (2 findings)", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Fixing G4"},
+    {content: "Phase 4: Completion", status: "pending", activeForm: "Completing"}
+  ]
+});
+```
+
+**Update Rules**:
+- Add batch items dynamically during Phase 1.5
+- Mark batch items completed as parallel agents return results
+- Add stage/group items dynamically after Phase 2 plan aggregation
+- Mark completed immediately after each group finishes
+- Update parent phase status when all child items complete
+
+## Post-Completion Expansion
+
+完成后询问用户是否扩展为issue(test/enhance/refactor/doc)，选中项调用 `/issue:new "{summary} - {dimension}"`
+
+## Best Practices
+
+1. **Leverage Parallel Planning**: For 10+ findings, parallel batching significantly reduces planning time
+2. **Tune Batch Size**: Use `--batch-size` to control granularity (smaller batches = more parallelism, larger = better grouping context)
+3. **Conservative Approach**: Test verification is mandatory - no fixes kept without passing tests
+4. **Parallel Efficiency**: MAX_PARALLEL=10 for planning agents, 3 concurrent execution agents per stage
+5. **Resume Support**: Fix sessions can resume from checkpoints after interruption
+6. **Manual Review**: Always review failed fixes manually - may require architectural changes
+7. **Incremental Fixing**: Start with small batches (5-10 findings) before large-scale fixes
+
+## Related Commands
+
+### View Fix Progress
+Use `ccw view` to open the workflow dashboard in browser:
+
+```bash
+ccw view
+```

.claude/commands/workflow/review-fix.md

@@ -1,606 +0,0 @@
----
-name: review-fix
-description: Automated fixing of code review findings with AI-powered planning and coordinated execution. Uses intelligent grouping, multi-stage timeline coordination, and test-driven verification.
-argument-hint: "<export-file|review-dir> [--resume] [--max-iterations=N]"
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*), Edit(*), Write(*)
----
-
-# Workflow Review-Fix Command
-
-## Quick Start
-
-```bash
-# Fix from exported findings file (session-based path)
-/workflow:review-fix .workflow/active/WFS-123/.review/fix-export-1706184622000.json
-
-# Fix from review directory (auto-discovers latest export)
-/workflow:review-fix .workflow/active/WFS-123/.review/
-
-# Resume interrupted fix session
-/workflow:review-fix --resume
-
-# Custom max retry attempts per finding
-/workflow:review-fix .workflow/active/WFS-123/.review/ --max-iterations=5
-```
-
-**Fix Source**: Exported findings from review cycle dashboard
-**Output Directory**: `{review-dir}/fixes/{fix-session-id}/` (within session .review/)
-**Default Max Iterations**: 3 (per finding, adjustable)
-**CLI Tools**: @cli-planning-agent (planning), @cli-execute-agent (fixing)
-
-## What & Why
-
-### Core Concept
-Automated fix orchestrator with **two-phase architecture**: AI-powered planning followed by coordinated parallel/serial execution. Generates fix timeline with intelligent grouping and dependency analysis, then executes fixes with conservative test verification.
-
-**Fix Process**:
-- **Planning Phase**: AI analyzes findings, generates fix plan with grouping and execution strategy
-- **Execution Phase**: Main orchestrator coordinates agents per timeline stages
-- **No rigid structure**: Adapts to task requirements, not bound to fixed JSON format
-
-**vs Manual Fixing**:
-- **Manual**: Developer reviews findings one-by-one, fixes sequentially
-- **Automated**: AI groups related issues, executes in optimal parallel/serial order with automatic test verification
-
-### Value Proposition
-1. **Intelligent Planning**: AI-powered analysis identifies optimal grouping and execution strategy
-2. **Multi-stage Coordination**: Supports complex parallel + serial execution with dependency management
-3. **Conservative Safety**: Mandatory test verification with automatic rollback on failure
-4. **Resume Support**: Checkpoint-based recovery for interrupted sessions
-
-### Orchestrator Boundary (CRITICAL)
-- **ONLY command** for automated review finding fixes
-- Manages: Planning phase coordination, stage-based execution, agent scheduling, progress tracking
-- Delegates: Fix planning to @cli-planning-agent, fix execution to @cli-execute-agent
-
-
-### Execution Flow
-
-```
-Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization
-   └─ Validate export file, create fix session structure, initialize state files
-
-Phase 2: Planning Coordination (@cli-planning-agent)
-   ├─ Analyze findings for patterns and dependencies
-   ├─ Group by file + dimension + root cause similarity
-   ├─ Determine execution strategy (parallel/serial/hybrid)
-   ├─ Generate fix timeline with stages
-   └─ Output: fix-plan.json
-
-Phase 3: Execution Orchestration (Stage-based)
-   For each timeline stage:
-   ├─ Load groups for this stage
-   ├─ If parallel: Launch all group agents simultaneously
-   ├─ If serial: Execute groups sequentially
-   ├─ Each agent:
-   │  ├─ Analyze code context
-   │  ├─ Apply fix per strategy
-   │  ├─ Run affected tests
-   │  ├─ On test failure: Rollback, retry up to max_iterations
-   │  └─ On success: Commit, update fix-progress-{N}.json
-   └─ Advance to next stage
-
-Phase 4: Completion & Aggregation
-   └─ Aggregate results → Generate fix-summary.md → Update history → Output summary
-
-Phase 5: Session Completion (Optional)
-   └─ If all fixes successful → Prompt to complete workflow session
-```
-
-### Agent Roles
-
-| Agent | Responsibility |
-|-------|---------------|
-| **Orchestrator** | Input validation, session management, planning coordination, stage-based execution scheduling, progress tracking, aggregation |
-| **@cli-planning-agent** | Findings analysis, intelligent grouping (file+dimension+root cause), execution strategy determination (parallel/serial/hybrid), timeline generation with dependency mapping |
-| **@cli-execute-agent** | Fix execution per group, code context analysis, Edit tool operations, test verification, git rollback on failure, completion JSON generation |
-
-## Enhanced Features
-
-### 1. Two-Phase Architecture
-
-**Phase Separation**:
-
-| Phase | Agent | Output | Purpose |
-|-------|-------|--------|---------|
-| **Planning** | @cli-planning-agent | fix-plan.json | Analyze findings, group intelligently, determine optimal execution strategy |
-| **Execution** | @cli-execute-agent | completions/*.json | Execute fixes per plan with test verification and rollback |
-
-**Benefits**:
-- Clear separation of concerns (analysis vs execution)
-- Reusable plans (can re-execute without re-planning)
-- Better error isolation (planning failures vs execution failures)
-
-### 2. Intelligent Grouping Strategy
-
-**Three-Level Grouping**:
-
-```javascript
-// Level 1: Primary grouping by file + dimension
-{file: "auth.ts", dimension: "security"} → Group A
-{file: "auth.ts", dimension: "quality"} → Group B
-{file: "query-builder.ts", dimension: "security"} → Group C
-
-// Level 2: Secondary grouping by root cause similarity
-Group A findings → Semantic similarity analysis (threshold 0.7)
-  → Sub-group A1: "missing-input-validation" (findings 1, 2)
-  → Sub-group A2: "insecure-crypto" (finding 3)
-
-// Level 3: Dependency analysis
-Sub-group A1 creates validation utilities
-Sub-group C4 depends on those utilities
-→ A1 must execute before C4 (serial stage dependency)
-```
-
-**Similarity Computation**:
-- Combine: `description + recommendation + category`
-- Vectorize: TF-IDF or LLM embedding
-- Cluster: Greedy algorithm with cosine similarity > 0.7
-
-### 3. Execution Strategy Determination
-
-**Strategy Types**:
-
-| Strategy | When to Use | Stage Structure |
-|----------|-------------|-----------------|
-| **Parallel** | All groups independent, different files | Single stage, all groups in parallel |
-| **Serial** | Strong dependencies, shared resources | Multiple stages, one group per stage |
-| **Hybrid** | Mixed dependencies | Multiple stages, parallel within stages |
-
-**Dependency Detection**:
-- Shared file modifications
-- Utility creation + usage patterns
-- Test dependency chains
-- Risk level clustering (high-risk groups isolated)
-
-### 4. Conservative Test Verification
-
-**Test Strategy** (per fix):
-
-```javascript
-// 1. Identify affected tests
-const testPattern = identifyTestPattern(finding.file);
-// e.g., "tests/auth/**/*.test.*" for src/auth/service.ts
-
-// 2. Run tests
-const result = await runTests(testPattern);
-
-// 3. Evaluate
-if (result.passRate < 100%) {
-  // Rollback
-  await gitCheckout(finding.file);
-
-  // Retry with failure context
-  if (attempts < maxIterations) {
-    const fixContext = analyzeFailure(result.stderr);
-    regenerateFix(finding, fixContext);
-    retry();
-  } else {
-    markFailed(finding.id);
-  }
-} else {
-  // Commit
-  await gitCommit(`Fix: ${finding.title} [${finding.id}]`);
-  markFixed(finding.id);
-}
-```
-
-**Pass Criteria**: 100% test pass rate (no partial fixes)
-
-## Core Responsibilities
-
-### Orchestrator
-
-**Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization**
-- Input validation: Check export file exists and is valid JSON
-- Auto-discovery: If review-dir provided, find latest `*-fix-export.json`
-- Session creation: Generate fix-session-id (`fix-{timestamp}`)
-- Directory structure: Create `{review-dir}/fixes/{fix-session-id}/` with subdirectories
-- State files: Initialize active-fix-session.json (session marker)
-- TodoWrite initialization: Set up 4-phase tracking
-
-**Phase 2: Planning Coordination**
-- Launch @cli-planning-agent with findings data and project context
-- Validate fix-plan.json output (schema conformance, includes metadata with session status)
-- Load plan into memory for execution phase
-- TodoWrite update: Mark planning complete, start execution
-
-**Phase 3: Execution Orchestration**
-- Load fix-plan.json timeline stages
-- For each stage:
-  - If parallel mode: Launch all group agents via `Promise.all()`
-  - If serial mode: Execute groups sequentially with `await`
-  - Assign agent IDs (agents update their fix-progress-{N}.json)
-- Handle agent failures gracefully (mark group as failed, continue)
-- Advance to next stage only when current stage complete
-
-**Phase 4: Completion & Aggregation**
-- Collect final status from all fix-progress-{N}.json files
-- Generate fix-summary.md with timeline and results
-- Update fix-history.json with new session entry
-- Remove active-fix-session.json
-- TodoWrite completion: Mark all phases done
-- Output summary to user
-
-**Phase 5: Session Completion (Optional)**
-- If all findings fixed successfully (no failures):
-  - Prompt user: "All fixes complete. Complete workflow session? [Y/n]"
-  - If confirmed: Execute `/workflow:session:complete` to archive session with lessons learned
-- If partial success (some failures):
-  - Output: "Some findings failed. Review fix-summary.md before completing session."
-  - Do NOT auto-complete session
-
-### Output File Structure
-
-```
-.workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/.review/
-├── fix-export-{timestamp}.json     # Exported findings (input)
-└── fixes/{fix-session-id}/
-    ├── fix-plan.json               # Planning agent output (execution plan with metadata)
-    ├── fix-progress-1.json         # Group 1 progress (planning agent init → agent updates)
-    ├── fix-progress-2.json         # Group 2 progress (planning agent init → agent updates)
-    ├── fix-progress-3.json         # Group 3 progress (planning agent init → agent updates)
-    ├── fix-summary.md              # Final report (orchestrator generates)
-    ├── active-fix-session.json     # Active session marker
-    └── fix-history.json            # All sessions history
-```
-
-**File Producers**:
-- **Planning Agent**: `fix-plan.json` (with metadata), all `fix-progress-*.json` (initial state)
-- **Execution Agents**: Update assigned `fix-progress-{N}.json` in real-time
-
-
-### Agent Invocation Template
-
-**Planning Agent**:
-```javascript
-Task({
-  subagent_type: "cli-planning-agent",
-  description: `Generate fix plan and initialize progress files for ${findings.length} findings`,
-  prompt: `
-## Task Objective
-Analyze ${findings.length} code review findings and generate execution plan with intelligent grouping and timeline coordination.
-
-## Input Data
-Review Session: ${reviewId}
-Fix Session ID: ${fixSessionId}
-Total Findings: ${findings.length}
-
-Findings:
-${JSON.stringify(findings, null, 2)}
-
-Project Context:
-- Structure: ${projectStructure}
-- Test Framework: ${testFramework}
-- Git Status: ${gitStatus}
-
-## Output Requirements
-
-### 1. fix-plan.json
-Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/fix-plan-template.json
-
-Generate execution plan following template structure:
-
-**Key Generation Rules**:
-- **Metadata**: Populate fix_session_id, review_session_id, status ("planning"), created_at, started_at timestamps
-- **Execution Strategy**: Choose approach (parallel/serial/hybrid) based on dependency analysis, set parallel_limit and stages count
-- **Groups**: Create groups (G1, G2, ...) with intelligent grouping (see Analysis Requirements below), assign progress files (fix-progress-1.json, ...), populate fix_strategy with approach/complexity/test_pattern, assess risks, identify dependencies
-- **Timeline**: Define stages respecting dependencies, set execution_mode per stage, map groups to stages, calculate critical path
-
-### 2. fix-progress-{N}.json (one per group)
-Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/fix-progress-template.json
-
-For each group (G1, G2, G3, ...), generate fix-progress-{N}.json following template structure:
-
-**Initial State Requirements**:
-- Status: "pending", phase: "waiting"
-- Timestamps: Set last_update to now, others null
-- Findings: Populate from review findings with status "pending", all operation fields null
-- Summary: Initialize all counters to zero
-- Flow control: Empty implementation_approach array
-- Errors: Empty array
-
-**CRITICAL**: Ensure complete template structure - all fields must be present.
-
-## Analysis Requirements
-
-### Intelligent Grouping Strategy
-Group findings using these criteria (in priority order):
-
-1. **File Proximity**: Findings in same file or related files
-2. **Dimension Affinity**: Same dimension (security, performance, etc.)
-3. **Root Cause Similarity**: Similar underlying issues
-4. **Fix Approach Commonality**: Can be fixed with similar approach
-
-**Grouping Guidelines**:
-- Optimal group size: 2-5 findings per group
-- Avoid cross-cutting concerns in same group
-- Consider test isolation (different test suites → different groups)
-- Balance workload across groups for parallel execution
-
-### Execution Strategy Determination
-
-**Parallel Mode**: Use when groups are independent, no shared files
-**Serial Mode**: Use when groups have dependencies or shared resources
-**Hybrid Mode**: Use for mixed dependency graphs (recommended for most cases)
-
-**Dependency Analysis**:
-- Identify shared files between groups
-- Detect test dependency chains
-- Evaluate risk of concurrent modifications
-
-### Risk Assessment
-
-For each group, evaluate:
-- **Complexity**: Based on code structure, file size, existing tests
-- **Impact Scope**: Number of files affected, API surface changes
-- **Rollback Feasibility**: Ease of reverting changes if tests fail
-
-### Test Strategy
-
-For each group, determine:
-- **Test Pattern**: Glob pattern matching affected tests
-- **Pass Criteria**: All tests must pass (100% pass rate)
-- **Test Command**: Infer from project (package.json, pytest.ini, etc.)
-
-## Output Files
-
-Write to ${sessionDir}:
-- ./fix-plan.json
-- ./fix-progress-1.json
-- ./fix-progress-2.json
-- ./fix-progress-{N}.json (as many as groups created)
-
-## Quality Checklist
-
-Before finalizing outputs:
-- ✅ All findings assigned to exactly one group
-- ✅ Group dependencies correctly identified
-- ✅ Timeline stages respect dependencies
-- ✅ All progress files have complete initial structure
-- ✅ Test patterns are valid and specific
-- ✅ Risk assessments are realistic
-- ✅ Estimated times are reasonable
-  `
-})
-```
-
-**Execution Agent** (per group):
-```javascript
-Task({
-  subagent_type: "cli-execute-agent",
-  description: `Fix ${group.findings.length} issues: ${group.group_name}`,
-  prompt: `
-## Task Objective
-Execute fixes for code review findings in group ${group.group_id}. Update progress file in real-time with flow control tracking.
-
-## Assignment
-- Group ID: ${group.group_id}
-- Group Name: ${group.group_name}
-- Progress File: ${sessionDir}/${group.progress_file}
-- Findings Count: ${group.findings.length}
-- Max Iterations: ${maxIterations} (per finding)
-
-## Fix Strategy
-${JSON.stringify(group.fix_strategy, null, 2)}
-
-## Risk Assessment
-${JSON.stringify(group.risk_assessment, null, 2)}
-
-## Execution Flow
-
-### Initialization (Before Starting)
-
-1. Read ${group.progress_file} to load initial state
-2. Update progress file:
-   - assigned_agent: "${agentId}"
-   - status: "in-progress"
-   - started_at: Current ISO 8601 timestamp
-   - last_update: Current ISO 8601 timestamp
-3. Write updated state back to ${group.progress_file}
-
-### Main Execution Loop
-
-For EACH finding in ${group.progress_file}.findings:
-
-#### Step 1: Analyze Context
-
-**Before Step**:
-- Update finding: status→"in-progress", started_at→now()
-- Update current_finding: Populate with finding details, status→"analyzing", action→"Reading file and understanding code structure"
-- Update phase→"analyzing"
-- Update flow_control: Add "analyze_context" step to implementation_approach (status→"in-progress"), set current_step→"analyze_context"
-- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
-
-**Action**:
-- Read file: finding.file
-- Understand code structure around line: finding.line
-- Analyze surrounding context (imports, dependencies, related functions)
-- Review recommendations: finding.recommendations
-
-**After Step**:
-- Update flow_control: Mark "analyze_context" step as "completed" with completed_at→now()
-- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
-
-#### Step 2: Apply Fix
-
-**Before Step**:
-- Update current_finding: status→"fixing", action→"Applying code changes per recommendations"
-- Update phase→"fixing"
-- Update flow_control: Add "apply_fix" step to implementation_approach (status→"in-progress"), set current_step→"apply_fix"
-- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
-
-**Action**:
-- Use Edit tool to implement code changes per finding.recommendations
-- Follow fix_strategy.approach
-- Maintain code style and existing patterns
-
-**After Step**:
-- Update flow_control: Mark "apply_fix" step as "completed" with completed_at→now()
-- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
-
-#### Step 3: Test Verification
-
-**Before Step**:
-- Update current_finding: status→"testing", action→"Running test suite to verify fix"
-- Update phase→"testing"
-- Update flow_control: Add "run_tests" step to implementation_approach (status→"in-progress"), set current_step→"run_tests"
-- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
-
-**Action**:
-- Run tests using fix_strategy.test_pattern
-- Require 100% pass rate
-- Capture test output
-
-**On Test Failure**:
-- Git rollback: \`git checkout -- \${finding.file}\`
-- Increment finding.attempts
-- Update flow_control: Mark "run_tests" step as "failed" with completed_at→now()
-- Update errors: Add entry (finding_id, error_type→"test_failure", message, timestamp)
-- If finding.attempts < ${maxIterations}:
-  - Reset flow_control: implementation_approach→[], current_step→null
-  - Retry from Step 1
-- Else:
-  - Update finding: status→"completed", result→"failed", error_message→"Max iterations reached", completed_at→now()
-  - Update summary counts, move to next finding
-
-**On Test Success**:
-- Update flow_control: Mark "run_tests" step as "completed" with completed_at→now()
-- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
-- Proceed to Step 4
-
-#### Step 4: Commit Changes
-
-**Before Step**:
-- Update current_finding: status→"committing", action→"Creating git commit for successful fix"
-- Update phase→"committing"
-- Update flow_control: Add "commit_changes" step to implementation_approach (status→"in-progress"), set current_step→"commit_changes"
-- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
-
-**Action**:
-- Git commit: \`git commit -m "fix(${finding.dimension}): ${finding.title} [${finding.id}]"\`
-- Capture commit hash
-
-**After Step**:
-- Update finding: status→"completed", result→"fixed", commit_hash→<captured>, test_passed→true, completed_at→now()
-- Update flow_control: Mark "commit_changes" step as "completed" with completed_at→now()
-- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
-
-#### After Each Finding
-
-- Update summary: Recalculate counts (pending/in_progress/fixed/failed) and percent_complete
-- If all findings completed: Clear current_finding, reset flow_control
-- Update last_update→now(), write to ${group.progress_file}
-
-### Final Completion
-
-When all findings processed:
-- Update status→"completed", phase→"done", summary.percent_complete→100.0
-- Update last_update→now(), write final state to ${group.progress_file}
-
-## Critical Requirements
-
-### Progress File Updates
-- **MUST update after every significant action** (before/after each step)
-- **Always maintain complete structure** - never write partial updates
-- **Use ISO 8601 timestamps** - e.g., "2025-01-25T14:36:00Z"
-
-### Flow Control Format
-Follow action-planning-agent flow_control.implementation_approach format:
-- step: Identifier (e.g., "analyze_context", "apply_fix")
-- action: Human-readable description
-- status: "pending" | "in-progress" | "completed" | "failed"
-- started_at: ISO 8601 timestamp or null
-- completed_at: ISO 8601 timestamp or null
-
-### Error Handling
-- Capture all errors in errors[] array
-- Never leave progress file in invalid state
-- Always write complete updates, never partial
-- On unrecoverable error: Mark group as failed, preserve state
-
-## Test Patterns
-Use fix_strategy.test_pattern to run affected tests:
-- Pattern: ${group.fix_strategy.test_pattern}
-- Command: Infer from project (npm test, pytest, etc.)
-- Pass Criteria: 100% pass rate required
-  `
-})
-```
-
-
-
-### Error Handling
-
-**Planning Failures**:
-- Invalid template → Abort with error message
-- Insufficient findings data → Request complete export
-- Planning timeout → Retry once, then fail gracefully
-
-**Execution Failures**:
-- Agent crash → Mark group as failed, continue with other groups
-- Test command not found → Skip test verification, warn user
-- Git operations fail → Abort with error, preserve state
-
-**Rollback Scenarios**:
-- Test failure after fix → Automatic `git checkout` rollback
-- Max iterations reached → Leave file unchanged, mark as failed
-- Unrecoverable error → Rollback entire group, save checkpoint
-
-### TodoWrite Structure
-
-**Initialization**:
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({
-  todos: [
-    {content: "Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization", status: "completed"},
-    {content: "Phase 2: Planning", status: "in_progress"},
-    {content: "Phase 3: Execution", status: "pending"},
-    {content: "Phase 4: Completion", status: "pending"}
-  ]
-});
-```
-
-**During Execution**:
-```javascript
-TodoWrite({
-  todos: [
-    {content: "Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization", status: "completed"},
-    {content: "Phase 2: Planning", status: "completed"},
-    {content: "Phase 3: Execution", status: "in_progress"},
-    {content: "  → Stage 1: Parallel execution (3 groups)", status: "completed"},
-    {content: "    • Group G1: Auth validation (2 findings)", status: "completed"},
-    {content: "    • Group G2: Query security (3 findings)", status: "completed"},
-    {content: "    • Group G3: Config quality (1 finding)", status: "completed"},
-    {content: "  → Stage 2: Serial execution (1 group)", status: "in_progress"},
-    {content: "    • Group G4: Dependent fixes (2 findings)", status: "in_progress"},
-    {content: "Phase 4: Completion", status: "pending"}
-  ]
-});
-```
-
-**Update Rules**:
-- Add stage items dynamically based on fix-plan.json timeline
-- Add group items per stage
-- Mark completed immediately after each group finishes
-- Update parent phase status when all child items complete
-
-## Best Practices
-
-1. **Trust AI Planning**: Planning agent's grouping and execution strategy are based on dependency analysis
-2. **Conservative Approach**: Test verification is mandatory - no fixes kept without passing tests
-3. **Parallel Efficiency**: Default 3 concurrent agents balances speed and resource usage
-4. **Resume Support**: Fix sessions can resume from checkpoints after interruption
-5. **Manual Review**: Always review failed fixes manually - may require architectural changes
-6. **Incremental Fixing**: Start with small batches (5-10 findings) before large-scale fixes
-
-## Related Commands
-
-### View Fix Progress
-Use `ccw view` to open the workflow dashboard in browser:
-
-```bash
-ccw view
-```
-
-

.claude/commands/workflow/review-module-cycle.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 name: review-module-cycle
 description: Independent multi-dimensional code review for specified modules/files. Analyzes specific code paths across 7 dimensions with hybrid parallel-iterative execution, independent of workflow sessions.
 argument-hint: "<path-pattern> [--dimensions=security,architecture,...] [--max-iterations=N]"
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*)
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*)
 ---
 
 # Workflow Review-Module-Cycle Command
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ const CATEGORIES = {
 **Step 1: Session Creation**
 ```javascript
 // Create workflow session for this review (type: review)
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:session:start --type review \"Code review for [target_pattern]\"")
+Skill(skill="workflow:session:start", args="--type review \"Code review for [target_pattern]\"")
 
 // Parse output
 const sessionId = output.match(/SESSION_ID: (WFS-[^\s]+)/)[1];
@@ -764,8 +764,8 @@ After completing a module review, use the generated findings JSON for automated
 /workflow:review-module-cycle src/auth/**
 
 # Step 2: Run automated fixes using dimension findings
-/workflow:review-fix .workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/.review/
+/workflow:review-cycle-fix .workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/.review/
 ```
 
-See `/workflow:review-fix` for automated fixing with smart grouping, parallel execution, and test verification.
+See `/workflow:review-cycle-fix` for automated fixing with smart grouping, parallel execution, and test verification.
 

.claude/commands/workflow/review-session-cycle.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 name: review-session-cycle
 description: Session-based comprehensive multi-dimensional code review. Analyzes git changes from workflow session across 7 dimensions with hybrid parallel-iterative execution, aggregates findings, and performs focused deep-dives on critical issues until quality gates met.
 argument-hint: "[session-id] [--dimensions=security,architecture,...] [--max-iterations=N]"
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*)
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*)
 ---
 
 # Workflow Review-Session-Cycle Command
@@ -775,8 +775,8 @@ After completing a review, use the generated findings JSON for automated fixing:
 /workflow:review-session-cycle
 
 # Step 2: Run automated fixes using dimension findings
-/workflow:review-fix .workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/.review/
+/workflow:review-cycle-fix .workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/.review/
 ```
 
-See `/workflow:review-fix` for automated fixing with smart grouping, parallel execution, and test verification.
+See `/workflow:review-cycle-fix` for automated fixing with smart grouping, parallel execution, and test verification.
 

.claude/commands/workflow/session/complete.md

@@ -1,8 +1,10 @@
 ---
 name: complete
 description: Mark active workflow session as complete, archive with lessons learned, update manifest, remove active flag
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--detailed]"
 examples:
   - /workflow:session:complete
+  - /workflow:session:complete --yes
   - /workflow:session:complete --detailed
 ---
 
@@ -107,13 +109,13 @@ rm -f .workflow/archives/$SESSION_ID/.archiving
   Manifest: Updated with N total sessions
 ```
 
-### Phase 4: Update project.json (Optional)
+### Phase 4: Update project-tech.json (Optional)
 
-**Skip if**: `.workflow/project.json` doesn't exist
+**Skip if**: `.workflow/project-tech.json` doesn't exist
 
 ```bash
 # Check
-test -f .workflow/project.json || echo "SKIP"
+test -f .workflow/project-tech.json || echo "SKIP"
 ```
 
 **If exists**, add feature entry:
@@ -134,6 +136,53 @@ test -f .workflow/project.json || echo "SKIP"
 ✓ Feature added to project registry
 ```
 
+### Phase 5: Ask About Solidify (Always)
+
+After successful archival, prompt user to capture learnings:
+
+```javascript
+// Parse --yes flag
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+
+if (autoYes) {
+  // Auto mode: Skip solidify
+  console.log(`[--yes] Auto-selecting: Skip solidify`)
+  console.log(`Session archived successfully.`)
+  // Done - no solidify
+} else {
+  // Interactive mode: Ask user
+  AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Would you like to solidify learnings from this session into project guidelines?",
+      header: "Solidify",
+      options: [
+        { label: "Yes, solidify now", description: "Extract learnings and update project-guidelines.json" },
+        { label: "Skip", description: "Archive complete, no learnings to capture" }
+      ],
+      multiSelect: false
+    }]
+  })
+
+  // **If "Yes, solidify now"**: Execute `/workflow:session:solidify` with the archived session ID.
+}
+```
+
+## Auto Mode Defaults
+
+When `--yes` or `-y` flag is used:
+- **Solidify Learnings**: Auto-selected "Skip" (archive only, no solidify)
+
+**Flag Parsing**:
+```javascript
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+```
+
+**Output**:
+```
+Session archived successfully.
+→ Run /workflow:session:solidify to capture learnings (recommended)
+```
+
 ## Error Recovery
 
 | Phase | Symptom | Recovery |
@@ -149,5 +198,6 @@ test -f .workflow/project.json || echo "SKIP"
 Phase 1: find session → create .archiving marker
 Phase 2: read key files → build manifest entry (no writes)
 Phase 3: mkdir → mv → update manifest.json → rm marker
-Phase 4: update project.json features array (optional)
+Phase 4: update project-tech.json features array (optional)
+Phase 5: ask user → solidify learnings (optional)
 ```

.claude/commands/workflow/session/solidify.md

@@ -1,14 +1,18 @@
 ---
 name: solidify
 description: Crystallize session learnings and user-defined constraints into permanent project guidelines
-argument-hint: "[--type <convention|constraint|learning>] [--category <category>] \"rule or insight\""
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--type <convention|constraint|learning>] [--category <category>] \"rule or insight\""
 examples:
   - /workflow:session:solidify "Use functional components for all React code" --type convention
-  - /workflow:session:solidify "No direct DB access from controllers" --type constraint --category architecture
+  - /workflow:session:solidify -y "No direct DB access from controllers" --type constraint --category architecture
   - /workflow:session:solidify "Cache invalidation requires event sourcing" --type learning --category architecture
   - /workflow:session:solidify --interactive
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-categorize and add guideline without confirmation.
+
 # Session Solidify Command (/workflow:session:solidify)
 
 ## Overview

.claude/commands/workflow/session/start.md

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ examples:
 Manages workflow sessions with three operation modes: discovery (manual), auto (intelligent), and force-new.
 
 **Dual Responsibility**:
-1. **Project-level initialization** (first-time only): Creates `.workflow/project.json` for feature registry
+1. **Project-level initialization** (first-time only): Creates `.workflow/project-tech.json` for feature registry
 2. **Session-level initialization** (always): Creates session directory structure
 
 ## Session Types
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ bash(test -f .workflow/project-guidelines.json && echo "GUIDELINES_EXISTS" || ec
 **If either NOT_FOUND**, delegate to `/workflow:init`:
 ```javascript
 // Call workflow:init for intelligent project analysis
-SlashCommand({command: "/workflow:init"});
+Skill(skill="workflow:init");
 
 // Wait for init completion
 // project-tech.json and project-guidelines.json will be created

.claude/commands/workflow/tdd-plan.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 name: tdd-plan
 description: TDD workflow planning with Red-Green-Refactor task chain generation, test-first development structure, and cycle tracking
 argument-hint: "\"feature description\"|file.md"
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
 ---
 
 # TDD Workflow Plan Command (/workflow:tdd-plan)
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
 **CLI Tool Selection**: CLI tool usage is determined semantically from user's task description. Include "use Codex/Gemini/Qwen" in your request for CLI execution.
 
 **Task Attachment Model**:
-- SlashCommand execute **expands workflow** by attaching sub-tasks to current TodoWrite
+- Skill execute **expands workflow** by attaching sub-tasks to current TodoWrite
 - When executing a sub-command (e.g., `/workflow:tools:test-context-gather`), its internal tasks are attached to the orchestrator's TodoWrite
 - Orchestrator **executes these attached tasks** sequentially
 - After completion, attached tasks are **collapsed** back to high-level phase summary
@@ -34,9 +34,47 @@ allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
 4. **Auto-Continue via TodoList**: Check TodoList status to execute next pending phase automatically
 5. **Track Progress**: Update TodoWrite dynamically with task attachment/collapse pattern
 6. **TDD Context**: All descriptions include "TDD:" prefix
-7. **Task Attachment Model**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** sub-tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **executes** these attached tasks itself, then **collapses** them after completion
+7. **Task Attachment Model**: Skill execute **attaches** sub-tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **executes** these attached tasks itself, then **collapses** them after completion
 8. **⚠️ CRITICAL: DO NOT STOP**: Continuous multi-phase workflow. After executing all attached tasks, immediately collapse them and execute next phase
 
+## TDD Compliance Requirements
+
+### The Iron Law
+
+```
+NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST
+```
+
+**Enforcement Method**:
+- Phase 5: `implementation_approach` includes test-first steps (Red → Green → Refactor)
+- Green phase: Includes test-fix-cycle configuration (max 3 iterations)
+- Auto-revert: Triggered when max iterations reached without passing tests
+
+**Verification**: Phase 6 validates Red-Green-Refactor structure in all generated tasks
+
+### TDD Compliance Checkpoint
+
+| Checkpoint | Validation Phase | Evidence Required |
+|------------|------------------|-------------------|
+| Test-first structure | Phase 5 | `implementation_approach` has 3 steps |
+| Red phase exists | Phase 6 | Step 1: `tdd_phase: "red"` |
+| Green phase with test-fix | Phase 6 | Step 2: `tdd_phase: "green"` + test-fix-cycle |
+| Refactor phase exists | Phase 6 | Step 3: `tdd_phase: "refactor"` |
+
+### Core TDD Principles (from ref skills)
+
+**Red Flags - STOP and Reassess**:
+- Code written before test
+- Test passes immediately (no Red phase witnessed)
+- Cannot explain why test should fail
+- "Just this once" rationalization
+- "Tests after achieve same goals" thinking
+
+**Why Order Matters**:
+- Tests written after code pass immediately → proves nothing
+- Test-first forces edge case discovery before implementation
+- Tests-after verify what was built, not what's required
+
 ## 6-Phase Execution (with Conflict Resolution)
 
 ### Phase 1: Session Discovery
@@ -44,7 +82,7 @@ allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
 **Step 1.1: Execute** - Session discovery and initialization
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:session:start --type tdd --auto \"TDD: [structured-description]\"")
+Skill(skill="workflow:session:start", args="--type tdd --auto \"TDD: [structured-description]\"")
 ```
 
 **TDD Structured Format**:
@@ -69,7 +107,7 @@ TEST_FOCUS: [Test scenarios]
 **Step 2.1: Execute** - Context gathering and analysis
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"TDD: [structured-description]\"")
+Skill(skill="workflow:tools:context-gather", args="--session [sessionId] \"TDD: [structured-description]\"")
 ```
 
 **Use Same Structured Description**: Pass the same structured format from Phase 1
@@ -95,7 +133,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"TDD
 **Step 3.1: Execute** - Test coverage analysis and framework detection
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-context-gather --session [sessionId]")
+Skill(skill="workflow:tools:test-context-gather", args="--session [sessionId]")
 ```
 
 **Purpose**: Analyze existing codebase for:
@@ -110,7 +148,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-context-gather --session [sessionId]"
 
 <!-- TodoWrite: When test-context-gather executed, INSERT 3 test-context-gather tasks -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 Skill executed - tasks attached)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 1: Session Discovery", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing session discovery"},
@@ -124,7 +162,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-context-gather --session [sessionId]"
 ]
 ```
 
-**Note**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** test-context-gather's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks.
+**Note**: Skill execute **attaches** test-context-gather's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks.
 
 **Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 3.1-3.3** sequentially
 
@@ -154,7 +192,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-context-gather --session [sessionId]"
 **Step 4.1: Execute** - Conflict detection and resolution
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId] --context [contextPath]")
+Skill(skill="workflow:tools:conflict-resolution", args="--session [sessionId] --context [contextPath]")
 ```
 
 **Input**:
@@ -175,7 +213,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 
 <!-- TodoWrite: If conflict_risk ≥ medium, INSERT 3 conflict-resolution tasks when executed -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 4 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached, if conflict_risk ≥ medium)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 4 Skill executed - tasks attached, if conflict_risk ≥ medium)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 1: Session Discovery", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing session discovery"},
@@ -183,14 +221,14 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
   {"content": "Phase 3: Test Coverage Analysis", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing test coverage analysis"},
   {"content": "Phase 4: Conflict Resolution", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Executing conflict resolution"},
   {"content": "  → Detect conflicts with CLI analysis", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Detecting conflicts"},
-  {"content": "  → Present conflicts to user", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Presenting conflicts"},
+  {"content": "  → Log and analyze detected conflicts", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Analyzing conflicts"},
   {"content": "  → Apply resolution strategies", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Applying resolution strategies"},
   {"content": "Phase 5: TDD Task Generation", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Executing TDD task generation"},
   {"content": "Phase 6: TDD Structure Validation", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Validating TDD structure"}
 ]
 ```
 
-**Note**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** conflict-resolution's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks.
+**Note**: Skill execute **attaches** conflict-resolution's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks.
 
 **Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 4.1-4.3** sequentially
 
@@ -219,7 +257,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
   **Step 4.5: Execute** - Memory compaction
 
   ```javascript
-  SlashCommand(command="/compact")
+  Skill(skill="compact")
   ```
 
   - This optimizes memory before proceeding to Phase 5
@@ -230,15 +268,19 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 
 ### Phase 5: TDD Task Generation
 
-**Step 5.1: Execute** - TDD task generation via action-planning-agent
+**Step 5.1: Execute** - TDD task generation via action-planning-agent with Phase 0 user configuration
 
 ```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:task-generate-tdd --session [sessionId]")
+Skill(skill="workflow:tools:task-generate-tdd", args="--session [sessionId]")
 ```
 
-**Note**: CLI tool usage is determined semantically from user's task description.
+**Note**: Phase 0 now includes:
+- Supplementary materials collection (file paths or inline content)
+- Execution method preference (Agent/Hybrid/CLI)
+- CLI tool preference (Codex/Gemini/Qwen/Auto)
+- These preferences are passed to agent for task generation
 
-**Parse**: Extract feature count, task count (not chain count - tasks now contain internal TDD cycles)
+**Parse**: Extract feature count, task count (not chain count - tasks now contain internal TDD cycles), CLI execution IDs assigned
 
 **Validate**:
 - IMPL_PLAN.md exists (unified plan with TDD Implementation Tasks section)
@@ -246,14 +288,30 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:task-generate-tdd --session [sessionId]")
 - TODO_LIST.md exists with internal TDD phase indicators
 - Each IMPL task includes:
   - `meta.tdd_workflow: true`
-  - `flow_control.implementation_approach` with 3 steps (red/green/refactor)
+  - `meta.cli_execution_id: {session_id}-{task_id}`
+  - `meta.cli_execution: { "strategy": "new|resume|fork|merge_fork", ... }`
+  - `flow_control.implementation_approach` with exactly 3 steps (red/green/refactor)
   - Green phase includes test-fix-cycle configuration
+  - `context.focus_paths`: absolute or clear relative paths (enhanced with exploration critical_files)
+  - `flow_control.pre_analysis`: includes exploration integration_points analysis
 - IMPL_PLAN.md contains workflow_type: "tdd" in frontmatter
-- Task count ≤10 (compliance with task limit)
+- User configuration applied:
+  - If executionMethod == "cli" or "hybrid": command field added to steps
+  - CLI tool preference reflected in execution guidance
+- Task count ≤18 (compliance with hard limit)
+
+**Red Flag Detection** (Non-Blocking Warnings):
+- Task count >18: `⚠️ Task count exceeds hard limit - request re-scope`
+- Missing cli_execution_id: `⚠️ Task lacks CLI execution ID for resume support`
+- Missing test-fix-cycle: `⚠️ Green phase lacks auto-revert configuration`
+- Generic task names: `⚠️ Vague task names suggest unclear TDD cycles`
+- Missing focus_paths: `⚠️ Task lacks clear file scope for implementation`
+
+**Action**: Log warnings to `.workflow/active/[sessionId]/.process/tdd-warnings.log` (non-blocking)
 
 <!-- TodoWrite: When task-generate-tdd executed, INSERT 3 task-generate-tdd tasks -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 5 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 5 Skill executed - tasks attached)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 1: Session Discovery", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing session discovery"},
@@ -267,7 +325,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:task-generate-tdd --session [sessionId]")
 ]
 ```
 
-**Note**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** task-generate-tdd's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks. Each generated IMPL task will contain internal Red-Green-Refactor cycle.
+**Note**: Skill execute **attaches** task-generate-tdd's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks. Each generated IMPL task will contain internal Red-Green-Refactor cycle.
 
 **Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 5.1-5.3** sequentially
 
@@ -293,14 +351,59 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:task-generate-tdd --session [sessionId]")
 1. Each task contains complete TDD workflow (Red-Green-Refactor internally)
 2. Task structure validation:
    - `meta.tdd_workflow: true` in all IMPL tasks
+   - `meta.cli_execution_id` present (format: {session_id}-{task_id})
+   - `meta.cli_execution` strategy assigned (new/resume/fork/merge_fork)
    - `flow_control.implementation_approach` has exactly 3 steps
    - Each step has correct `tdd_phase`: "red", "green", "refactor"
+   - `context.focus_paths` are absolute or clear relative paths
+   - `flow_control.pre_analysis` includes exploration integration analysis
 3. Dependency validation:
    - Sequential features: IMPL-N depends_on ["IMPL-(N-1)"] if needed
    - Complex features: IMPL-N.M depends_on ["IMPL-N.(M-1)"] for subtasks
+   - CLI execution strategies correctly assigned based on dependency graph
 4. Agent assignment: All IMPL tasks use @code-developer
 5. Test-fix cycle: Green phase step includes test-fix-cycle logic with max_iterations
-6. Task count: Total tasks ≤10 (simple + subtasks)
+6. Task count: Total tasks ≤18 (simple + subtasks hard limit)
+7. User configuration:
+   - Execution method choice reflected in task structure
+   - CLI tool preference documented in implementation guidance (if CLI selected)
+
+**Red Flag Checklist** (from TDD best practices):
+- [ ] No tasks skip Red phase (`tdd_phase: "red"` exists in step 1)
+- [ ] Test files referenced in Red phase (explicit paths, not placeholders)
+- [ ] Green phase has test-fix-cycle with `max_iterations` configured
+- [ ] Refactor phase has clear completion criteria
+
+**Non-Compliance Warning Format**:
+```
+⚠️ TDD Red Flag: [issue description]
+   Task: [IMPL-N]
+   Recommendation: [action to fix]
+```
+
+**Evidence Gathering** (Before Completion Claims):
+
+```bash
+# Verify session artifacts exist
+ls -la .workflow/active/[sessionId]/{IMPL_PLAN.md,TODO_LIST.md}
+ls -la .workflow/active/[sessionId]/.task/IMPL-*.json
+
+# Count generated artifacts
+echo "IMPL tasks: $(ls .workflow/active/[sessionId]/.task/IMPL-*.json 2>/dev/null | wc -l)"
+
+# Sample task structure verification (first task)
+jq '{id, tdd: .meta.tdd_workflow, cli_id: .meta.cli_execution_id, phases: [.flow_control.implementation_approach[].tdd_phase]}' \
+  "$(ls .workflow/active/[sessionId]/.task/IMPL-*.json | head -1)"
+```
+
+**Evidence Required Before Summary**:
+| Evidence Type | Verification Method | Pass Criteria |
+|---------------|---------------------|---------------|
+| File existence | `ls -la` artifacts | All files present |
+| Task count | Count IMPL-*.json | Count matches claims (≤18) |
+| TDD structure | jq sample extraction | Shows red/green/refactor + cli_execution_id |
+| CLI execution IDs | jq extraction | All tasks have cli_execution_id assigned |
+| Warning log | Check tdd-warnings.log | Logged (may be empty) |
 
 **Return Summary**:
 ```
@@ -312,7 +415,7 @@ Total tasks: [M] (1 task per simple feature + subtasks for complex features)
 Task breakdown:
 - Simple features: [K] tasks (IMPL-1 to IMPL-K)
 - Complex features: [L] features with [P] subtasks
-- Total task count: [M] (within 10-task limit)
+- Total task count: [M] (within 18-task hard limit)
 
 Structure:
 - IMPL-1: {Feature 1 Name} (Internal: Red → Green → Refactor)
@@ -326,19 +429,31 @@ Plans generated:
 - Unified Implementation Plan: .workflow/active/[sessionId]/IMPL_PLAN.md
   (includes TDD Implementation Tasks section with workflow_type: "tdd")
 - Task List: .workflow/active/[sessionId]/TODO_LIST.md
-  (with internal TDD phase indicators)
+  (with internal TDD phase indicators and CLI execution strategies)
+- Task JSONs: .workflow/active/[sessionId]/.task/IMPL-*.json
+  (with cli_execution_id and execution strategies for resume support)
 
 TDD Configuration:
 - Each task contains complete Red-Green-Refactor cycle
 - Green phase includes test-fix cycle (max 3 iterations)
 - Auto-revert on max iterations reached
+- CLI execution strategies: new/resume/fork/merge_fork based on dependency graph
+
+User Configuration Applied:
+- Execution Method: [agent|hybrid|cli]
+- CLI Tool Preference: [codex|gemini|qwen|auto]
+- Supplementary Materials: [included|none]
+- Task generation follows cli-tools-usage.md guidelines
+
+⚠️ ACTION REQUIRED: Before execution, ensure you understand WHY each Red phase test is expected to fail.
+   This is crucial for valid TDD - if you don't know why the test fails, you can't verify it tests the right thing.
 
 Recommended Next Steps:
-1. /workflow:action-plan-verify --session [sessionId]  # Verify TDD plan quality and dependencies
-2. /workflow:execute --session [sessionId]  # Start TDD execution
+1. /workflow:plan-verify --session [sessionId]  # Verify TDD plan quality and dependencies
+2. /workflow:execute --session [sessionId]  # Start TDD execution with CLI strategies
 3. /workflow:tdd-verify [sessionId]  # Post-execution TDD compliance check
 
-Quality Gate: Consider running /workflow:action-plan-verify to validate TDD task structure and dependencies
+Quality Gate: Consider running /workflow:plan-verify to validate TDD task structure, dependencies, and CLI execution strategies
 ```
 
 ## TodoWrite Pattern
@@ -347,7 +462,7 @@ Quality Gate: Consider running /workflow:action-plan-verify to validate TDD task
 
 ### Key Principles
 
-1. **Task Attachment** (when SlashCommand executed):
+1. **Task Attachment** (when Skill executed):
    - Sub-command's internal tasks are **attached** to orchestrator's TodoWrite
    - Example: `/workflow:tools:test-context-gather` attaches 3 sub-tasks (Phase 3.1, 3.2, 3.3)
    - First attached task marked as `in_progress`, others as `pending`
@@ -400,7 +515,7 @@ TDD Workflow Orchestrator
 │  IF conflict_risk ≥ medium:
 │  └─ /workflow:tools:conflict-resolution             ← ATTACHED (3 tasks)
 │     ├─ Phase 4.1: Detect conflicts with CLI
-│     ├─ Phase 4.2: Present conflicts to user
+│     ├─ Phase 4.2: Log and analyze detected conflicts
 │     └─ Phase 4.3: Apply resolution strategies
 │     └─ Returns: conflict-resolution.json            ← COLLAPSED
 │  ELSE:
@@ -416,10 +531,10 @@ TDD Workflow Orchestrator
 │
 └─ Phase 6: TDD Structure Validation
    └─ Internal validation + summary returned
-   └─ Recommend: /workflow:action-plan-verify
+   └─ Recommend: /workflow:plan-verify
 
 Key Points:
-• ← ATTACHED: SlashCommand attaches sub-tasks to orchestrator TodoWrite
+• ← ATTACHED: Skill attaches sub-tasks to orchestrator TodoWrite
 • ← COLLAPSED: Sub-tasks executed and collapsed to phase summary
 • TDD-specific: Each generated IMPL task contains complete Red-Green-Refactor cycle
 ```
@@ -439,6 +554,36 @@ Convert user input to TDD-structured format:
 - **Command failure**: Keep phase in_progress, report error
 - **TDD validation failure**: Report incomplete chains or wrong dependencies
 
+### TDD Warning Patterns
+
+| Pattern | Warning Message | Recommended Action |
+|---------|----------------|-------------------|
+| Task count >10 | High task count detected | Consider splitting into multiple sessions |
+| Missing test-fix-cycle | Green phase lacks auto-revert | Add `max_iterations: 3` to task config |
+| Red phase missing test path | Test file path not specified | Add explicit test file paths |
+| Generic task names | Vague names like "Add feature" | Use specific behavior descriptions |
+| No refactor criteria | Refactor phase lacks completion criteria | Define clear refactor scope |
+
+### Non-Blocking Warning Policy
+
+**All warnings are advisory** - they do not halt execution:
+1. Warnings logged to `.process/tdd-warnings.log`
+2. Summary displayed in Phase 6 output
+3. User decides whether to address before `/workflow:execute`
+
+### Error Handling Quick Reference
+
+| Error Type | Detection | Recovery Action |
+|------------|-----------|-----------------|
+| Parsing failure | Empty/malformed output | Retry once, then report |
+| Missing context-package | File read error | Re-run `/workflow:tools:context-gather` |
+| Invalid task JSON | jq parse error | Report malformed file path |
+| Task count exceeds 18 | Count validation ≥19 | Request re-scope, split into multiple sessions |
+| Missing cli_execution_id | All tasks lack ID | Regenerate tasks with phase 0 user config |
+| Test-context missing | File not found | Re-run `/workflow:tools:test-context-gather` |
+| Phase timeout | No response | Retry phase, check CLI connectivity |
+| CLI tool not available | Tool not in cli-tools.json | Fall back to alternative preferred tool |
+
 ## Related Commands
 
 **Prerequisite Commands**:
@@ -453,8 +598,33 @@ Convert user input to TDD-structured format:
 - `/workflow:tools:task-generate-tdd` - Phase 5: Generate TDD tasks (CLI tool usage determined semantically)
 
 **Follow-up Commands**:
-- `/workflow:action-plan-verify` - Recommended: Verify TDD plan quality and structure before execution
+- `/workflow:plan-verify` - Recommended: Verify TDD plan quality and structure before execution
 - `/workflow:status` - Review TDD task breakdown
 - `/workflow:execute` - Begin TDD implementation
 - `/workflow:tdd-verify` - Post-execution: Verify TDD compliance and generate quality report
 
+## Next Steps Decision Table
+
+| Situation | Recommended Command | Purpose |
+|-----------|---------------------|---------|
+| First time planning | `/workflow:plan-verify` | Validate task structure before execution |
+| Warnings in tdd-warnings.log | Review log, refine tasks | Address Red Flags before proceeding |
+| High task count warning | Consider `/workflow:session:start` | Split into focused sub-sessions |
+| Ready to implement | `/workflow:execute` | Begin TDD Red-Green-Refactor cycles |
+| After implementation | `/workflow:tdd-verify` | Generate TDD compliance report |
+| Need to review tasks | `/workflow:status --session [id]` | Inspect current task breakdown |
+| Plan needs changes | `/task:replan` | Update task JSON with new requirements |
+
+### TDD Workflow State Transitions
+
+```
+/workflow:tdd-plan
+        ↓
+[Planning Complete] ──→ /workflow:plan-verify (recommended)
+        ↓
+[Verified/Ready] ─────→ /workflow:execute
+        ↓
+[Implementation] ─────→ /workflow:tdd-verify (post-execution)
+        ↓
+[Quality Report] ─────→ Done or iterate
+```

.claude/commands/workflow/tdd-verify.md

@@ -1,214 +1,301 @@
 ---
 name: tdd-verify
-description: Verify TDD workflow compliance against Red-Green-Refactor cycles, generate quality report with coverage analysis
-
-argument-hint: "[optional: WFS-session-id]"
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(gemini:*)
+description: Verify TDD workflow compliance against Red-Green-Refactor cycles. Generates quality report with coverage analysis and quality gate recommendation. Orchestrates sub-commands for comprehensive validation.
+argument-hint: "[optional: --session WFS-session-id]"
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Bash(*), Glob(*)
 ---
 
 # TDD Verification Command (/workflow:tdd-verify)
 
+## Goal
+
+Verify TDD workflow execution quality by validating Red-Green-Refactor cycle compliance, test coverage completeness, and task chain structure integrity. This command orchestrates multiple analysis phases and generates a comprehensive compliance report with quality gate recommendation.
+
+**Output**: A structured Markdown report saved to `.workflow/active/WFS-{session}/TDD_COMPLIANCE_REPORT.md` containing:
+- Executive summary with compliance score and quality gate recommendation
+- Task chain validation (TEST → IMPL → REFACTOR structure)
+- Test coverage metrics (line, branch, function)
+- Red-Green-Refactor cycle verification
+- Best practices adherence assessment
+- Actionable improvement recommendations
+
+## Operating Constraints
+
+**ORCHESTRATOR MODE**:
+- This command coordinates multiple sub-commands (`/workflow:tools:tdd-coverage-analysis`, `ccw cli`)
+- MAY write output files: TDD_COMPLIANCE_REPORT.md (primary report), .process/*.json (intermediate artifacts)
+- MUST NOT modify source task files or implementation code
+- MUST NOT create or delete tasks in the workflow
+
+**Quality Gate Authority**: The compliance report provides a binding recommendation (BLOCK_MERGE / REQUIRE_FIXES / PROCEED_WITH_CAVEATS / APPROVED) based on objective compliance criteria.
+
 ## Coordinator Role
 
 **This command is a pure orchestrator**: Execute 4 phases to verify TDD workflow compliance, test coverage, and Red-Green-Refactor cycle execution.
 
 ## Core Responsibilities
-- Verify TDD task chain structure
-- Analyze test coverage
-- Validate TDD cycle execution
-- Generate compliance report
+- Verify TDD task chain structure (TEST → IMPL → REFACTOR)
+- Analyze test coverage metrics
+- Validate TDD cycle execution quality
+- Generate compliance report with quality gate recommendation
 
 ## Execution Process
 
 ```
 Input Parsing:
    └─ Decision (session argument):
-      ├─ session-id provided → Use provided session
-      └─ No session-id → Auto-detect active session
+      ├─ --session provided → Use provided session
+      └─ No session → Auto-detect active session
 
-Phase 1: Session Discovery
-   ├─ Validate session directory exists
-   └─ TodoWrite: Mark phase 1 completed
+Phase 1: Session Discovery & Validation
+   ├─ Detect or validate session directory
+   ├─ Check required artifacts exist (.task/*.json, .summaries/*)
+   └─ ERROR if invalid or incomplete
 
-Phase 2: Task Chain Validation
+Phase 2: Task Chain Structure Validation
    ├─ Load all task JSONs from .task/
-   ├─ Extract task IDs and group by feature
-   ├─ Validate TDD structure:
-   │  ├─ TEST-N.M → IMPL-N.M → REFACTOR-N.M chain
-   │  ├─ Dependency verification
-   │  └─ Meta field validation (tdd_phase, agent)
-   └─ TodoWrite: Mark phase 2 completed
+   ├─ Validate TDD structure: TEST-N.M → IMPL-N.M → REFACTOR-N.M
+   ├─ Verify dependencies (depends_on)
+   ├─ Validate meta fields (tdd_phase, agent)
+   └─ Extract chain validation data
 
-Phase 3: Test Execution Analysis
-   └─ /workflow:tools:tdd-coverage-analysis
-      ├─ Coverage metrics extraction
-      ├─ TDD cycle verification
-      └─ Compliance score calculation
+Phase 3: Coverage & Cycle Analysis
+   ├─ Call: /workflow:tools:tdd-coverage-analysis
+   ├─ Parse: test-results.json, coverage-report.json, tdd-cycle-report.md
+   └─ Extract coverage metrics and TDD cycle verification
 
 Phase 4: Compliance Report Generation
-   ├─ Gemini analysis for comprehensive report
+   ├─ Aggregate findings from Phases 1-3
+   ├─ Calculate compliance score (0-100)
+   ├─ Determine quality gate recommendation
    ├─ Generate TDD_COMPLIANCE_REPORT.md
-   └─ Return summary to user
+   └─ Display summary to user
 ```
 
 ## 4-Phase Execution
 
-### Phase 1: Session Discovery
-**Auto-detect or use provided session**
+### Phase 1: Session Discovery & Validation
 
+**Step 1.1: Detect Session**
 ```bash
-# If session-id provided
-sessionId = argument
+IF --session parameter provided:
+    session_id = provided session
+ELSE:
+    # Auto-detect active session
+    active_sessions = bash(find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d 2>/dev/null)
+    IF active_sessions is empty:
+        ERROR: "No active workflow session found. Use --session <session-id>"
+        EXIT
+    ELSE IF active_sessions has multiple entries:
+        # Use most recently modified session
+        session_id = bash(ls -td .workflow/active/WFS-*/ 2>/dev/null | head -1 | xargs basename)
+    ELSE:
+        session_id = basename(active_sessions[0])
 
-# Else auto-detect active session
-find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d | head -1 | sed 's/.*\///'
+# Derive paths
+session_dir = .workflow/active/WFS-{session_id}
+task_dir = session_dir/.task
+summaries_dir = session_dir/.summaries
+process_dir = session_dir/.process
 ```
 
-**Extract**: sessionId
+**Step 1.2: Validate Required Artifacts**
+```bash
+# Check task files exist
+task_files = Glob(task_dir/*.json)
+IF task_files.count == 0:
+    ERROR: "No task JSON files found. Run /workflow:tdd-plan first"
+    EXIT
 
-**Validation**: Session directory exists
+# Check summaries exist (optional but recommended for full analysis)
+summaries_exist = EXISTS(summaries_dir)
+IF NOT summaries_exist:
+    WARNING: "No .summaries/ directory found. Some analysis may be limited."
+```
 
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 1 completed, phase 2 in_progress
+**Output**: session_id, session_dir, task_files list
 
 ---
 
-### Phase 2: Task Chain Validation
-**Validate TDD structure using bash commands**
+### Phase 2: Task Chain Structure Validation
 
+**Step 2.1: Load and Parse Task JSONs**
 ```bash
-# Load all task JSONs
-for task_file in .workflow/active/{sessionId}/.task/*.json; do
-  cat "$task_file"
-done
+# Single-pass JSON extraction using jq
+validation_data = bash("""
+# Load all tasks and extract structured data
+cd '{session_dir}/.task'
 
-# Extract task IDs
-for task_file in .workflow/active/{sessionId}/.task/*.json; do
-  cat "$task_file" | jq -r '.id'
-done
+# Extract all task IDs
+task_ids=$(jq -r '.id' *.json 2>/dev/null | sort)
 
-# Check dependencies - read tasks and filter for IMPL/REFACTOR
-for task_file in .workflow/active/{sessionId}/.task/IMPL-*.json; do
-  cat "$task_file" | jq -r '.context.depends_on[]?'
-done
+# Extract dependencies for IMPL tasks
+impl_deps=$(jq -r 'select(.id | startswith("IMPL")) | .id + ":" + (.context.depends_on[]? // "none")' *.json 2>/dev/null)
 
-for task_file in .workflow/active/{sessionId}/.task/REFACTOR-*.json; do
-  cat "$task_file" | jq -r '.context.depends_on[]?'
-done
+# Extract dependencies for REFACTOR tasks
+refactor_deps=$(jq -r 'select(.id | startswith("REFACTOR")) | .id + ":" + (.context.depends_on[]? // "none")' *.json 2>/dev/null)
 
-# Check meta fields
-for task_file in .workflow/active/{sessionId}/.task/*.json; do
-  cat "$task_file" | jq -r '.meta.tdd_phase'
-done
+# Extract meta fields
+meta_tdd=$(jq -r '.id + ":" + (.meta.tdd_phase // "missing")' *.json 2>/dev/null)
+meta_agent=$(jq -r '.id + ":" + (.meta.agent // "missing")' *.json 2>/dev/null)
 
-for task_file in .workflow/active/{sessionId}/.task/*.json; do
-  cat "$task_file" | jq -r '.meta.agent'
-done
+# Output as JSON
+jq -n --arg ids "$task_ids" \\
+       --arg impl "$impl_deps" \\
+       --arg refactor "$refactor_deps" \\
+       --arg tdd "$meta_tdd" \\
+       --arg agent "$meta_agent" \\
+       '{ids: $ids, impl_deps: $impl, refactor_deps: $refactor, tdd: $tdd, agent: $agent}'
+""")
 ```
 
-**Validation**:
-- For each feature N, verify TEST-N.M → IMPL-N.M → REFACTOR-N.M exists
-- IMPL-N.M.context.depends_on includes TEST-N.M
-- REFACTOR-N.M.context.depends_on includes IMPL-N.M
-- TEST tasks have tdd_phase="red" and agent="@code-review-test-agent"
-- IMPL/REFACTOR tasks have tdd_phase="green"/"refactor" and agent="@code-developer"
+**Step 2.2: Validate TDD Chain Structure**
+```
+Parse validation_data JSON and validate:
 
-**Extract**: Chain validation report
+For each feature N (extracted from task IDs):
+   1. TEST-N.M exists?
+   2. IMPL-N.M exists?
+   3. REFACTOR-N.M exists? (optional but recommended)
+   4. IMPL-N.M.context.depends_on contains TEST-N.M?
+   5. REFACTOR-N.M.context.depends_on contains IMPL-N.M?
+   6. TEST-N.M.meta.tdd_phase == "red"?
+   7. TEST-N.M.meta.agent == "@code-review-test-agent"?
+   8. IMPL-N.M.meta.tdd_phase == "green"?
+   9. IMPL-N.M.meta.agent == "@code-developer"?
+   10. REFACTOR-N.M.meta.tdd_phase == "refactor"?
 
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 2 completed, phase 3 in_progress
+Calculate:
+- chain_completeness_score = (complete_chains / total_chains) * 100
+- dependency_accuracy = (correct_deps / total_deps) * 100
+- meta_field_accuracy = (correct_meta / total_meta) * 100
+```
+
+**Output**: chain_validation_report (JSON structure with validation results)
 
 ---
 
-### Phase 3: Test Execution Analysis
-**Command**: `SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:tdd-coverage-analysis --session [sessionId]")`
+### Phase 3: Coverage & Cycle Analysis
 
-**Input**: sessionId from Phase 1
+**Step 3.1: Call Coverage Analysis Sub-command**
+```bash
+Skill(skill="workflow:tools:tdd-coverage-analysis", args="--session {session_id}")
+```
 
-**Parse Output**:
-- Coverage metrics (line, branch, function percentages)
-- TDD cycle verification results
-- Compliance score
+**Step 3.2: Parse Output Files**
+```bash
+# Check required outputs exist
+IF NOT EXISTS(process_dir/test-results.json):
+    WARNING: "test-results.json not found. Coverage analysis incomplete."
+    coverage_data = null
+ELSE:
+    coverage_data = Read(process_dir/test-results.json)
 
-**Validation**:
-- `.workflow/active/{sessionId}/.process/test-results.json` exists
-- `.workflow/active/{sessionId}/.process/coverage-report.json` exists
-- `.workflow/active/{sessionId}/.process/tdd-cycle-report.md` exists
+IF NOT EXISTS(process_dir/coverage-report.json):
+    WARNING: "coverage-report.json not found. Coverage metrics incomplete."
+    metrics = null
+ELSE:
+    metrics = Read(process_dir/coverage-report.json)
 
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 3 completed, phase 4 in_progress
+IF NOT EXISTS(process_dir/tdd-cycle-report.md):
+    WARNING: "tdd-cycle-report.md not found. Cycle validation incomplete."
+    cycle_data = null
+ELSE:
+    cycle_data = Read(process_dir/tdd-cycle-report.md)
+```
+
+**Step 3.3: Extract Coverage Metrics**
+```
+If coverage_data exists:
+   - line_coverage_percent
+   - branch_coverage_percent
+   - function_coverage_percent
+   - uncovered_files (list)
+   - uncovered_lines (map: file -> line ranges)
+
+If cycle_data exists:
+   - red_phase_compliance (tests failed initially?)
+   - green_phase_compliance (tests pass after impl?)
+   - refactor_phase_compliance (tests stay green during refactor?)
+   - minimal_implementation_score (was impl minimal?)
+```
+
+**Output**: coverage_analysis, cycle_analysis
 
 ---
 
 ### Phase 4: Compliance Report Generation
-**Gemini analysis for comprehensive TDD compliance report**
 
+**Step 4.1: Calculate Compliance Score**
+```
+Base Score: 100 points
+
+Deductions:
+Chain Structure:
+   - Missing TEST task: -30 points per feature
+   - Missing IMPL task: -30 points per feature
+   - Missing REFACTOR task: -10 points per feature
+   - Wrong dependency: -15 points per error
+   - Wrong agent: -5 points per error
+   - Wrong tdd_phase: -5 points per error
+
+TDD Cycle Compliance:
+   - Test didn't fail initially: -10 points per feature
+   - Tests didn't pass after IMPL: -20 points per feature
+   - Tests broke during REFACTOR: -15 points per feature
+   - Over-engineered IMPL: -10 points per feature
+
+Coverage Quality:
+   - Line coverage < 80%: -5 points
+   - Branch coverage < 70%: -5 points
+   - Function coverage < 80%: -5 points
+   - Critical paths uncovered: -10 points
+
+Final Score: Max(0, Base Score - Total Deductions)
+```
+
+**Step 4.2: Determine Quality Gate**
+```
+IF score >= 90 AND no_critical_violations:
+    recommendation = "APPROVED"
+ELSE IF score >= 70 AND critical_violations == 0:
+    recommendation = "PROCEED_WITH_CAVEATS"
+ELSE IF score >= 50:
+    recommendation = "REQUIRE_FIXES"
+ELSE:
+    recommendation = "BLOCK_MERGE"
+```
+
+**Step 4.3: Generate Report**
 ```bash
-ccw cli -p "
-PURPOSE: Generate TDD compliance report
-TASK: Analyze TDD workflow execution and generate quality report
-CONTEXT: @{.workflow/active/{sessionId}/.task/*.json,.workflow/active/{sessionId}/.summaries/*,.workflow/active/{sessionId}/.process/tdd-cycle-report.md}
-EXPECTED:
-- TDD compliance score (0-100)
-- Chain completeness verification
-- Test coverage analysis summary
-- Quality recommendations
-- Red-Green-Refactor cycle validation
-- Best practices adherence assessment
-RULES: Focus on TDD best practices and workflow adherence. Be specific about violations and improvements.
-" --tool gemini --mode analysis --cd project-root > .workflow/active/{sessionId}/TDD_COMPLIANCE_REPORT.md
+report_content = Generate markdown report (see structure below)
+report_path = "{session_dir}/TDD_COMPLIANCE_REPORT.md"
+Write(report_path, report_content)
 ```
 
-**Output**: TDD_COMPLIANCE_REPORT.md
-
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 4 completed
-
-**Return to User**:
-```
-TDD Verification Report - Session: {sessionId}
-
-## Chain Validation
-[COMPLETE] Feature 1: TEST-1.1 → IMPL-1.1 → REFACTOR-1.1 (Complete)
-[COMPLETE] Feature 2: TEST-2.1 → IMPL-2.1 → REFACTOR-2.1 (Complete)
-[INCOMPLETE] Feature 3: TEST-3.1 → IMPL-3.1 (Missing REFACTOR phase)
-
-## Test Execution
-All TEST tasks produced failing tests
-All IMPL tasks made tests pass
-All REFACTOR tasks maintained green tests
-
-## Coverage Metrics
-Line Coverage: {percentage}%
-Branch Coverage: {percentage}%
-Function Coverage: {percentage}%
-
-## Compliance Score: {score}/100
-
-Detailed report: .workflow/active/{sessionId}/TDD_COMPLIANCE_REPORT.md
-
-Recommendations:
-- Complete missing REFACTOR-3.1 task
-- Consider additional edge case tests for Feature 2
-- Improve test failure message clarity in Feature 1
+**Step 4.4: Display Summary to User**
+```bash
+echo "=== TDD Verification Complete ==="
+echo "Session: {session_id}"
+echo "Report: {report_path}"
+echo ""
+echo "Quality Gate: {recommendation}"
+echo "Compliance Score: {score}/100"
+echo ""
+echo "Chain Validation: {chain_completeness_score}%"
+echo "Line Coverage: {line_coverage}%"
+echo "Branch Coverage: {branch_coverage}%"
+echo ""
+echo "Next: Review full report for detailed findings"
 ```
 
-## TodoWrite Pattern
+## TodoWrite Pattern (Optional)
+
+**Note**: As an orchestrator command, TodoWrite tracking is optional and primarily useful for long-running verification processes. For most cases, the 4-phase execution is fast enough that progress tracking adds noise without value.
 
 ```javascript
-// Initialize (before Phase 1)
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Identify target session", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Identifying target session"},
-  {"content": "Validate task chain structure", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Validating task chain structure"},
-  {"content": "Analyze test execution", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Analyzing test execution"},
-  {"content": "Generate compliance report", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating compliance report"}
-]})
-
-// After Phase 1
-TodoWrite({todos: [
-  {"content": "Identify target session", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Identifying target session"},
-  {"content": "Validate task chain structure", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Validating task chain structure"},
-  {"content": "Analyze test execution", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Analyzing test execution"},
-  {"content": "Generate compliance report", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating compliance report"}
-]})
-
-// Continue pattern for Phase 2, 3, 4...
+// Only use TodoWrite for complex multi-session verification
+// Skip for single-session verification
 ```
 
 ## Validation Logic
@@ -229,27 +316,24 @@ TodoWrite({todos: [
 5. Report incomplete or invalid chains
 ```
 
-### Compliance Scoring
-```
-Base Score: 100 points
+### Quality Gate Criteria
 
-Deductions:
-- Missing TEST task: -30 points per feature
-- Missing IMPL task: -30 points per feature
-- Missing REFACTOR task: -10 points per feature
-- Wrong dependency: -15 points per error
-- Wrong agent: -5 points per error
-- Wrong tdd_phase: -5 points per error
-- Test didn't fail initially: -10 points per feature
-- Tests didn't pass after IMPL: -20 points per feature
-- Tests broke during REFACTOR: -15 points per feature
+| Recommendation | Score Range | Critical Violations | Action |
+|----------------|-------------|---------------------|--------|
+| **APPROVED** | ≥90 | 0 | Safe to merge |
+| **PROCEED_WITH_CAVEATS** | ≥70 | 0 | Can proceed, address minor issues |
+| **REQUIRE_FIXES** | ≥50 | Any | Must fix before merge |
+| **BLOCK_MERGE** | <50 | Any | Block merge until resolved |
 
-Final Score: Max(0, Base Score - Deductions)
-```
+**Critical Violations**:
+- Missing TEST or IMPL task for any feature
+- Tests didn't fail initially (Red phase violation)
+- Tests didn't pass after IMPL (Green phase violation)
+- Tests broke during REFACTOR (Refactor phase violation)
 
 ## Output Files
 ```
-.workflow/active/{session-id}/
+.workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/
 ├── TDD_COMPLIANCE_REPORT.md     # Comprehensive compliance report ⭐
 └── .process/
     ├── test-results.json         # From tdd-coverage-analysis
@@ -262,14 +346,14 @@ Final Score: Max(0, Base Score - Deductions)
 ### Session Discovery Errors
 | Error | Cause | Resolution |
 |-------|-------|------------|
-| No active session | No WFS-* directories | Provide session-id explicitly |
-| Multiple active sessions | Multiple WFS-* directories | Provide session-id explicitly |
+| No active session | No WFS-* directories | Provide --session explicitly |
+| Multiple active sessions | Multiple WFS-* directories | Provide --session explicitly |
 | Session not found | Invalid session-id | Check available sessions |
 
 ### Validation Errors
 | Error | Cause | Resolution |
 |-------|-------|------------|
-| Task files missing | Incomplete planning | Run tdd-plan first |
+| Task files missing | Incomplete planning | Run /workflow:tdd-plan first |
 | Invalid JSON | Corrupted task files | Regenerate tasks |
 | Missing summaries | Tasks not executed | Execute tasks before verify |
 
@@ -278,13 +362,13 @@ Final Score: Max(0, Base Score - Deductions)
 |-------|-------|------------|
 | Coverage tool missing | No test framework | Configure testing first |
 | Tests fail to run | Code errors | Fix errors before verify |
-| Gemini analysis fails | Token limit / API error | Retry or reduce context |
+| Sub-command fails | tdd-coverage-analysis error | Check sub-command logs |
 
 ## Integration & Usage
 
 ### Command Chain
 - **Called After**: `/workflow:execute` (when TDD tasks completed)
-- **Calls**: `/workflow:tools:tdd-coverage-analysis`, Gemini CLI
+- **Calls**: `/workflow:tools:tdd-coverage-analysis`
 - **Related**: `/workflow:tdd-plan`, `/workflow:status`
 
 ### Basic Usage
@@ -293,7 +377,7 @@ Final Score: Max(0, Base Score - Deductions)
 /workflow:tdd-verify
 
 # Specify session
-/workflow:tdd-verify WFS-auth
+/workflow:tdd-verify --session WFS-auth
 ```
 
 ### When to Use
@@ -308,61 +392,125 @@ Final Score: Max(0, Base Score - Deductions)
 # TDD Compliance Report - {Session ID}
 
 **Generated**: {timestamp}
-**Session**: {sessionId}
+**Session**: WFS-{sessionId}
 **Workflow Type**: TDD
 
+---
+
 ## Executive Summary
-Overall Compliance Score: {score}/100
-Status: {EXCELLENT | GOOD | NEEDS IMPROVEMENT | FAILED}
+
+### Quality Gate Decision
+
+| Metric | Value | Status |
+|--------|-------|--------|
+| Compliance Score | {score}/100 | {status_emoji} |
+| Chain Completeness | {percentage}% | {status} |
+| Line Coverage | {percentage}% | {status} |
+| Branch Coverage | {percentage}% | {status} |
+| Function Coverage | {percentage}% | {status} |
+
+### Recommendation
+
+**{RECOMMENDATION}**
+
+**Decision Rationale**:
+{brief explanation based on score and violations}
+
+**Quality Gate Criteria**:
+- **APPROVED**: Score ≥90, no critical violations
+- **PROCEED_WITH_CAVEATS**: Score ≥70, no critical violations
+- **REQUIRE_FIXES**: Score ≥50 or critical violations exist
+- **BLOCK_MERGE**: Score <50
+
+---
 
 ## Chain Analysis
 
 ### Feature 1: {Feature Name}
-**Status**: Complete
+**Status**: ✅ Complete
 **Chain**: TEST-1.1 → IMPL-1.1 → REFACTOR-1.1
 
-- **Red Phase**: Test created and failed with clear message
-- **Green Phase**: Minimal implementation made test pass
-- **Refactor Phase**: Code improved, tests remained green
+| Phase | Task | Status | Details |
+|-------|------|--------|---------|
+| Red | TEST-1.1 | ✅ Pass | Test created and failed with clear message |
+| Green | IMPL-1.1 | ✅ Pass | Minimal implementation made test pass |
+| Refactor | REFACTOR-1.1 | ✅ Pass | Code improved, tests remained green |
 
 ### Feature 2: {Feature Name}
-**Status**: Incomplete
+**Status**: ⚠️ Incomplete
 **Chain**: TEST-2.1 → IMPL-2.1 (Missing REFACTOR-2.1)
 
-- **Red Phase**: Test created and failed
-- **Green Phase**: Implementation seems over-engineered
-- **Refactor Phase**: Missing
+| Phase | Task | Status | Details |
+|-------|------|--------|---------|
+| Red | TEST-2.1 | ✅ Pass | Test created and failed |
+| Green | IMPL-2.1 | ⚠️ Warning | Implementation seems over-engineered |
+| Refactor | REFACTOR-2.1 | ❌ Missing | Task not completed |
 
 **Issues**:
-- REFACTOR-2.1 task not completed
-- IMPL-2.1 implementation exceeded minimal scope
+- REFACTOR-2.1 task not completed (-10 points)
+- IMPL-2.1 implementation exceeded minimal scope (-10 points)
 
-[Repeat for all features]
+### Chain Validation Summary
+
+| Metric | Value |
+|--------|-------|
+| Total Features | {count} |
+| Complete Chains | {count} ({percent}%) |
+| Incomplete Chains | {count} |
+| Missing TEST | {count} |
+| Missing IMPL | {count} |
+| Missing REFACTOR | {count} |
+| Dependency Errors | {count} |
+| Meta Field Errors | {count} |
+
+---
 
 ## Test Coverage Analysis
 
 ### Coverage Metrics
-- Line Coverage: {percentage}% {status}
-- Branch Coverage: {percentage}% {status}
-- Function Coverage: {percentage}% {status}
+
+| Metric | Coverage | Target | Status |
+|--------|----------|--------|--------|
+| Line Coverage | {percentage}% | ≥80% | {status} |
+| Branch Coverage | {percentage}% | ≥70% | {status} |
+| Function Coverage | {percentage}% | ≥80% | {status} |
 
 ### Coverage Gaps
-- {file}:{lines} - Uncovered error handling
-- {file}:{lines} - Uncovered edge case
+
+| File | Lines | Issue | Priority |
+|------|-------|-------|----------|
+| src/auth/service.ts | 45-52 | Uncovered error handling | HIGH |
+| src/utils/parser.ts | 78-85 | Uncovered edge case | MEDIUM |
+
+---
 
 ## TDD Cycle Validation
 
 ### Red Phase (Write Failing Test)
-- {N}/{total} features had failing tests initially
-- Feature 3: No evidence of initial test failure
+- {N}/{total} features had failing tests initially ({percent}%)
+- ✅ Compliant features: {list}
+- ❌ Non-compliant features: {list}
+
+**Violations**:
+- Feature 3: No evidence of initial test failure (-10 points)
 
 ### Green Phase (Make Test Pass)
-- {N}/{total} implementations made tests pass
-- All implementations minimal and focused
+- {N}/{total} implementations made tests pass ({percent}%)
+- ✅ Compliant features: {list}
+- ❌ Non-compliant features: {list}
+
+**Violations**:
+- Feature 2: Implementation over-engineered (-10 points)
 
 ### Refactor Phase (Improve Quality)
-- {N}/{total} features completed refactoring
-- Feature 2, 4: Refactoring step skipped
+- {N}/{total} features completed refactoring ({percent}%)
+- ✅ Compliant features: {list}
+- ❌ Non-compliant features: {list}
+
+**Violations**:
+- Feature 2, 4: Refactoring step skipped (-20 points total)
+
+---
 
 ## Best Practices Assessment
 
@@ -377,24 +525,61 @@ Status: {EXCELLENT | GOOD | NEEDS IMPROVEMENT | FAILED}
 - Missing refactoring steps
 - Test failure messages could be more descriptive
 
+---
+
+## Detailed Findings by Severity
+
+### Critical Issues ({count})
+{List of critical issues with impact and remediation}
+
+### High Priority Issues ({count})
+{List of high priority issues with impact and remediation}
+
+### Medium Priority Issues ({count})
+{List of medium priority issues with impact and remediation}
+
+### Low Priority Issues ({count})
+{List of low priority issues with impact and remediation}
+
+---
+
 ## Recommendations
 
-### High Priority
+### Required Fixes (Before Merge)
 1. Complete missing REFACTOR tasks (Features 2, 4)
 2. Verify initial test failures for Feature 3
-3. Simplify over-engineered implementations
+3. Fix tests that broke during refactoring
 
-### Medium Priority
-1. Add edge case tests for Features 1, 3
-2. Improve test failure message clarity
-3. Increase branch coverage to >85%
+### Recommended Improvements
+1. Simplify over-engineered implementations
+2. Add edge case tests for Features 1, 3
+3. Improve test failure message clarity
+4. Increase branch coverage to >85%
 
-### Low Priority
+### Optional Enhancements
 1. Add more descriptive test names
 2. Consider parameterized tests for similar scenarios
 3. Document TDD process learnings
 
-## Conclusion
-{Summary of compliance status and next steps}
+---
+
+## Metrics Summary
+
+| Metric | Value |
+|--------|-------|
+| Total Features | {count} |
+| Complete Chains | {count} ({percent}%) |
+| Compliance Score | {score}/100 |
+| Critical Issues | {count} |
+| High Issues | {count} |
+| Medium Issues | {count} |
+| Low Issues | {count} |
+| Line Coverage | {percent}% |
+| Branch Coverage | {percent}% |
+| Function Coverage | {percent}% |
+
+---
+
+**Report End**
 ```
 

.claude/commands/workflow/test-cycle-execute.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 name: test-cycle-execute
 description: Execute test-fix workflow with dynamic task generation and iterative fix cycles until test pass rate >= 95% or max iterations reached. Uses @cli-planning-agent for failure analysis and task generation.
 argument-hint: "[--resume-session=\"session-id\"] [--max-iterations=N]"
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*)
+allowed-tools: Skill(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*)
 ---
 
 # Workflow Test-Cycle-Execute Command
@@ -491,6 +491,10 @@ The orchestrator automatically creates git commits at key checkpoints to enable
 
 **Note**: Final session completion creates additional commit with full summary.
 
+## Post-Completion Expansion
+
+完成后询问用户是否扩展为issue(test/enhance/refactor/doc)，选中项调用 `/issue:new "{summary} - {dimension}"`
+
 ## Best Practices
 
 1. **Default Settings Work**: 10 iterations sufficient for most cases

.claude/commands/workflow/test-gen.md

@@ -1,529 +0,0 @@
----
-name: test-gen
-description: Create independent test-fix workflow session from completed implementation session, analyzes code to generate test tasks
-argument-hint: "source-session-id"
-allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
----
-
-# Workflow Test Generation Command (/workflow:test-gen)
-
-## Coordinator Role
-
-**This command is a pure orchestrator**: Creates an independent test-fix workflow session for validating a completed implementation. It reuses the standard planning toolchain with automatic cross-session context gathering.
-
-**Core Principles**:
-- **Session Isolation**: Creates new `WFS-test-[source]` session to keep verification separate from implementation
-- **Context-First**: Prioritizes gathering code changes and summaries from source session
-- **Format Reuse**: Creates standard `IMPL-*.json` task, using `meta.type: "test-fix"` for agent assignment
-- **Parameter Simplification**: Tools auto-detect test session type via metadata, no manual cross-session parameters needed
-- **Semantic CLI Selection**: CLI tool usage is determined by user's task description (e.g., "use Codex for fixes")
-
-**Task Attachment Model**:
-- SlashCommand dispatch **expands workflow** by attaching sub-tasks to current TodoWrite
-- When a sub-command is executed (e.g., `/workflow:tools:test-context-gather`), its internal tasks are attached to the orchestrator's TodoWrite
-- Orchestrator **executes these attached tasks** sequentially
-- After completion, attached tasks are **collapsed** back to high-level phase summary
-- This is **task expansion**, not external delegation
-
-**Auto-Continue Mechanism**:
-- TodoList tracks current phase status and dynamically manages task attachment/collapse
-- When each phase finishes executing, automatically execute next pending phase
-- All phases run autonomously without user interaction
-- **⚠️ CONTINUOUS EXECUTION** - Do not stop until all phases complete
-
-**Execution Flow**:
-1. Initialize TodoWrite → Create test session → Parse session ID
-2. Gather cross-session context (automatic) → Parse context path
-3. Analyze implementation with concept-enhanced → Parse ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md
-4. Generate test task from analysis → Return summary
-
-**Command Scope**: This command ONLY prepares test workflow artifacts. It does NOT execute tests or implementation. Task execution requires separate user action.
-
-## Core Rules
-
-1. **Start Immediately**: First action is TodoWrite initialization, second action is Phase 1 test session creation
-2. **No Preliminary Analysis**: Do not read files or analyze before Phase 1
-3. **Parse Every Output**: Extract required data from each phase for next phase
-4. **Sequential Execution**: Each phase depends on previous phase's output
-5. **Complete All Phases**: Do not return to user until Phase 5 completes (summary returned)
-6. **Track Progress**: Update TodoWrite dynamically with task attachment/collapse pattern
-7. **Automatic Detection**: context-gather auto-detects test session and gathers source session context
-8. **Semantic CLI Selection**: CLI tool usage determined from user's task description, passed to Phase 4
-9. **Command Boundary**: This command ends at Phase 5 summary. Test execution is NOT part of this command.
-10. **Task Attachment Model**: SlashCommand dispatch **attaches** sub-tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **executes** these attached tasks itself, then **collapses** them after completion
-11. **⚠️ CRITICAL: DO NOT STOP**: Continuous multi-phase workflow. After executing all attached tasks, immediately collapse them and execute next phase
-
-## 5-Phase Execution
-
-### Phase 1: Create Test Session
-
-**Step 1.0: Load Source Session Intent** - Preserve user's original task description for semantic CLI selection
-
-```javascript
-// Read source session metadata to get original task description
-Read(".workflow/active/[sourceSessionId]/workflow-session.json")
-// OR if context-package exists:
-Read(".workflow/active/[sourceSessionId]/.process/context-package.json")
-
-// Extract: metadata.task_description or project/description field
-// This preserves user's CLI tool preferences (e.g., "use Codex for fixes")
-```
-
-**Step 1.1: Execute** - Create new test workflow session with preserved intent
-
-```javascript
-// Include original task description to enable semantic CLI selection
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:session:start --new \"Test validation for [sourceSessionId]: [originalTaskDescription]\"")
-```
-
-**Input**:
-- `sourceSessionId` from user argument (e.g., `WFS-user-auth`)
-- `originalTaskDescription` from source session metadata (preserves CLI tool preferences)
-
-**Expected Behavior**:
-- Creates new session with pattern `WFS-test-[source-slug]` (e.g., `WFS-test-user-auth`)
-- Writes metadata to `workflow-session.json`:
-  - `workflow_type: "test_session"`
-  - `source_session_id: "[sourceSessionId]"`
-  - Description includes original user intent for semantic CLI selection
-- Returns new session ID for subsequent phases
-
-**Parse Output**:
-- Extract: new test session ID (store as `testSessionId`)
-- Pattern: `WFS-test-[slug]`
-
-**Validation**:
-- Source session `.workflow/[sourceSessionId]/` exists
-- Source session has completed IMPL tasks (`.summaries/IMPL-*-summary.md`)
-- New test session directory created
-- Metadata includes `workflow_type` and `source_session_id`
-
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 1 completed, phase 2 in_progress
-
----
-
-### Phase 2: Gather Test Context
-
-**Step 2.1: Execute** - Gather test coverage context from source session
-
-```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-context-gather --session [testSessionId]")
-```
-
-**Input**: `testSessionId` from Phase 1 (e.g., `WFS-test-user-auth`)
-
-**Expected Behavior**:
-- Load source session implementation context and summaries
-- Analyze test coverage using MCP tools (find existing tests)
-- Identify files requiring tests (coverage gaps)
-- Detect test framework and conventions
-- Generate `test-context-package.json`
-
-**Parse Output**:
-- Extract: test context package path (store as `testContextPath`)
-- Pattern: `.workflow/[testSessionId]/.process/test-context-package.json`
-
-**Validation**:
-- Test context package created
-- Contains source session summaries
-- Includes coverage gap analysis
-- Test framework detected
-- Test conventions documented
-
-<!-- TodoWrite: When test-context-gather executed, INSERT 3 test-context-gather tasks -->
-
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 2 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
-```json
-[
-  {"content": "Create independent test session", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Creating test session"},
-  {"content": "Phase 2.1: Load source session summaries (test-context-gather)", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Loading source session summaries"},
-  {"content": "Phase 2.2: Analyze test coverage with MCP tools (test-context-gather)", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Analyzing test coverage"},
-  {"content": "Phase 2.3: Identify coverage gaps and framework (test-context-gather)", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Identifying coverage gaps"},
-  {"content": "Analyze test requirements with Gemini", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Analyzing test requirements"},
-  {"content": "Generate test generation and execution tasks", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating test tasks"},
-  {"content": "Return workflow summary", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Returning workflow summary"}
-]
-```
-
-**Note**: SlashCommand dispatch **attaches** test-context-gather's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks.
-
-**Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 2.1-2.3** sequentially
-
-<!-- TodoWrite: After Phase 2 tasks complete, REMOVE Phase 2.1-2.3, restore to orchestrator view -->
-
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 2 completed - tasks collapsed)**:
-```json
-[
-  {"content": "Create independent test session", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Creating test session"},
-  {"content": "Gather test coverage context", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Gathering test coverage context"},
-  {"content": "Analyze test requirements with Gemini", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Analyzing test requirements"},
-  {"content": "Generate test generation and execution tasks", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating test tasks"},
-  {"content": "Return workflow summary", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Returning workflow summary"}
-]
-```
-
-**Note**: Phase 2 tasks completed and collapsed to summary.
-
----
-
-### Phase 3: Test Generation Analysis
-
-**Step 3.1: Execute** - Analyze test requirements with Gemini
-
-```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-concept-enhanced --session [testSessionId] --context [testContextPath]")
-```
-
-**Input**:
-- `testSessionId` from Phase 1
-- `testContextPath` from Phase 2
-
-**Expected Behavior**:
-- Use Gemini to analyze coverage gaps and implementation context
-- Study existing test patterns and conventions
-- Generate test requirements for each missing test file
-- Design test generation strategy
-- Generate `TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md`
-
-**Parse Output**:
-- Verify `.workflow/[testSessionId]/.process/TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md` created
-- Contains test requirements and generation strategy
-- Lists test files to create with specifications
-
-**Validation**:
-- TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md exists with complete sections:
-  - Coverage Assessment
-  - Test Framework & Conventions
-  - Test Requirements by File
-  - Test Generation Strategy
-  - Implementation Targets (test files to create)
-  - Success Criteria
-
-<!-- TodoWrite: When test-concept-enhanced executed, INSERT 3 concept-enhanced tasks -->
-
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
-```json
-[
-  {"content": "Create independent test session", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Creating test session"},
-  {"content": "Gather test coverage context", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Gathering test coverage context"},
-  {"content": "Phase 3.1: Analyze coverage gaps with Gemini (test-concept-enhanced)", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Analyzing coverage gaps"},
-  {"content": "Phase 3.2: Study existing test patterns (test-concept-enhanced)", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Studying test patterns"},
-  {"content": "Phase 3.3: Generate test generation strategy (test-concept-enhanced)", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating test strategy"},
-  {"content": "Generate test generation and execution tasks", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating test tasks"},
-  {"content": "Return workflow summary", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Returning workflow summary"}
-]
-```
-
-**Note**: SlashCommand dispatch **attaches** test-concept-enhanced's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks.
-
-**Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 3.1-3.3** sequentially
-
-<!-- TodoWrite: After Phase 3 tasks complete, REMOVE Phase 3.1-3.3, restore to orchestrator view -->
-
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 completed - tasks collapsed)**:
-```json
-[
-  {"content": "Create independent test session", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Creating test session"},
-  {"content": "Gather test coverage context", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Gathering test coverage context"},
-  {"content": "Analyze test requirements with Gemini", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Analyzing test requirements"},
-  {"content": "Generate test generation and execution tasks", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating test tasks"},
-  {"content": "Return workflow summary", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Returning workflow summary"}
-]
-```
-
-**Note**: Phase 3 tasks completed and collapsed to summary.
-
----
-
-### Phase 4: Generate Test Tasks
-
-**Step 4.1: Execute** - Generate test task JSON files and planning documents
-
-```javascript
-SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-task-generate --session [testSessionId]")
-```
-
-**Input**:
-- `testSessionId` from Phase 1
-
-**Note**: CLI tool usage for fixes is determined semantically from user's task description (e.g., "use Codex for automated fixes").
-
-**Expected Behavior**:
-- Parse TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md from Phase 3
-- Extract test requirements and generation strategy
-- Generate **TWO task JSON files**:
-  - **IMPL-001.json**: Test Generation task (calls @code-developer)
-  - **IMPL-002.json**: Test Execution and Fix Cycle task (calls @test-fix-agent)
-- Generate IMPL_PLAN.md with test generation and execution strategy
-- Generate TODO_LIST.md with both tasks
-
-**Parse Output**:
-- Verify `.workflow/[testSessionId]/.task/IMPL-001.json` exists (test generation)
-- Verify `.workflow/[testSessionId]/.task/IMPL-002.json` exists (test execution & fix)
-- Verify `.workflow/[testSessionId]/IMPL_PLAN.md` created
-- Verify `.workflow/[testSessionId]/TODO_LIST.md` created
-
-**Validation - IMPL-001.json (Test Generation)**:
-- Task ID: `IMPL-001`
-- `meta.type: "test-gen"`
-- `meta.agent: "@code-developer"`
-- `context.requirements`: Generate tests based on TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md
-- `flow_control.pre_analysis`: Load TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md and test context
-- `flow_control.implementation_approach`: Test generation steps
-- `flow_control.target_files`: Test files to create from analysis section 5
-
-**Validation - IMPL-002.json (Test Execution & Fix)**:
-- Task ID: `IMPL-002`
-- `meta.type: "test-fix"`
-- `meta.agent: "@test-fix-agent"`
-- `context.depends_on: ["IMPL-001"]`
-- `context.requirements`: Execute and fix tests
-- `flow_control.implementation_approach.test_fix_cycle`: Complete cycle specification
-  - **Cycle pattern**: test → gemini_diagnose → fix (agent or CLI based on `command` field) → retest
-  - **Tools configuration**: Gemini for analysis with bug-fix template, agent or CLI for fixes
-  - **Exit conditions**: Success (all pass) or failure (max iterations)
-- `flow_control.implementation_approach.modification_points`: 3-phase execution flow
-  - Phase 1: Initial test execution
-  - Phase 2: Iterative Gemini diagnosis + fixes (agent or CLI based on step's `command` field)
-  - Phase 3: Final validation and certification
-
-<!-- TodoWrite: When test-task-generate executed, INSERT 3 test-task-generate tasks -->
-
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 4 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
-```json
-[
-  {"content": "Create independent test session", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Creating test session"},
-  {"content": "Gather test coverage context", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Gathering test coverage context"},
-  {"content": "Analyze test requirements with Gemini", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Analyzing test requirements"},
-  {"content": "Phase 4.1: Parse TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md (test-task-generate)", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Parsing test analysis"},
-  {"content": "Phase 4.2: Generate IMPL-001.json and IMPL-002.json (test-task-generate)", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating task JSONs"},
-  {"content": "Phase 4.3: Generate IMPL_PLAN.md and TODO_LIST.md (test-task-generate)", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating plan documents"},
-  {"content": "Return workflow summary", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Returning workflow summary"}
-]
-```
-
-**Note**: SlashCommand dispatch **attaches** test-task-generate's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks.
-
-**Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 4.1-4.3** sequentially
-
-<!-- TodoWrite: After Phase 4 tasks complete, REMOVE Phase 4.1-4.3, restore to orchestrator view -->
-
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 4 completed - tasks collapsed)**:
-```json
-[
-  {"content": "Create independent test session", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Creating test session"},
-  {"content": "Gather test coverage context", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Gathering test coverage context"},
-  {"content": "Analyze test requirements with Gemini", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Analyzing test requirements"},
-  {"content": "Generate test generation and execution tasks", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Generating test tasks"},
-  {"content": "Return workflow summary", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Returning workflow summary"}
-]
-```
-
-**Note**: Phase 4 tasks completed and collapsed to summary.
-
----
-
-### Phase 5: Return Summary (Command Ends Here)
-
-**Important**: This is the final phase of `/workflow:test-gen`. The command completes and returns control to the user. No automatic execution occurs.
-
-**Return to User**:
-```
-Test workflow preparation complete!
-
-Source Session: [sourceSessionId]
-Test Session: [testSessionId]
-
-Artifacts Created:
-- Test context analysis
-- Test generation strategy
-- Task definitions (IMPL-001, IMPL-002)
-- Implementation plan
-
-Test Framework: [detected framework]
-Test Files to Generate: [count]
-Fix Mode: [Agent|CLI] (based on `command` field in implementation_approach steps)
-
-Review Generated Artifacts:
-- Test plan: .workflow/[testSessionId]/IMPL_PLAN.md
-- Task list: .workflow/[testSessionId]/TODO_LIST.md
-- Analysis: .workflow/[testSessionId]/.process/TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md
-
-Ready for execution. Use appropriate workflow commands to proceed.
-```
-
-**TodoWrite**: Mark phase 5 completed
-
-**Command Boundary**: After this phase, the command terminates and returns to user prompt.
-
----
-
-## TodoWrite Pattern
-
-**Core Concept**: Dynamic task attachment and collapse for test-gen workflow with cross-session context gathering and test generation strategy.
-
-### Key Principles
-
-1. **Task Attachment** (when SlashCommand executed):
-   - Sub-command's internal tasks are **attached** to orchestrator's TodoWrite
-   - Example: `/workflow:tools:test-context-gather` attaches 3 sub-tasks (Phase 2.1, 2.2, 2.3)
-   - First attached task marked as `in_progress`, others as `pending`
-   - Orchestrator **executes** these attached tasks sequentially
-
-2. **Task Collapse** (after sub-tasks complete):
-   - Remove detailed sub-tasks from TodoWrite
-   - **Collapse** to high-level phase summary
-   - Example: Phase 2.1-2.3 collapse to "Gather test coverage context: completed"
-   - Maintains clean orchestrator-level view
-
-3. **Continuous Execution**:
-   - After collapse, automatically proceed to next pending phase
-   - No user intervention required between phases
-   - TodoWrite dynamically reflects current execution state
-
-**Lifecycle Summary**: Initial pending tasks → Phase executed (tasks ATTACHED) → Sub-tasks executed sequentially → Phase completed (tasks COLLAPSED to summary) → Next phase begins → Repeat until all phases complete.
-
-### Test-Gen Specific Features
-
-- **Phase 2**: Cross-session context gathering from source implementation session
-- **Phase 3**: Test requirements analysis with Gemini for generation strategy
-- **Phase 4**: Dual-task generation (IMPL-001 for test generation, IMPL-002 for test execution)
-- **Fix Mode Configuration**: CLI tool usage determined semantically from user's task description
-
-
-
-**Note**: See individual Phase descriptions (Phase 2, 3, 4) for detailed TodoWrite Update examples with full JSON structures.
-
-## Execution Flow Diagram
-
-```
-Test-Gen Workflow Orchestrator
-│
-├─ Phase 1: Create Test Session
-│  └─ /workflow:session:start --new
-│     └─ Returns: testSessionId (WFS-test-[source])
-│
-├─ Phase 2: Gather Test Context                           ← ATTACHED (3 tasks)
-│  └─ /workflow:tools:test-context-gather
-│     ├─ Phase 2.1: Load source session summaries
-│     ├─ Phase 2.2: Analyze test coverage with MCP tools
-│     └─ Phase 2.3: Identify coverage gaps and framework
-│     └─ Returns: test-context-package.json               ← COLLAPSED
-│
-├─ Phase 3: Test Generation Analysis                      ← ATTACHED (3 tasks)
-│  └─ /workflow:tools:test-concept-enhanced
-│     ├─ Phase 3.1: Analyze coverage gaps with Gemini
-│     ├─ Phase 3.2: Study existing test patterns
-│     └─ Phase 3.3: Generate test generation strategy
-│     └─ Returns: TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md                ← COLLAPSED
-│
-├─ Phase 4: Generate Test Tasks                           ← ATTACHED (3 tasks)
-│  └─ /workflow:tools:test-task-generate
-│     ├─ Phase 4.1: Parse TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md
-│     ├─ Phase 4.2: Generate IMPL-001.json and IMPL-002.json
-│     └─ Phase 4.3: Generate IMPL_PLAN.md and TODO_LIST.md
-│     └─ Returns: Task JSONs and plans                    ← COLLAPSED
-│
-└─ Phase 5: Return Summary
-   └─ Command ends, control returns to user
-
-Artifacts Created:
-├── .workflow/active/WFS-test-[session]/
-│   ├── workflow-session.json
-│   ├── IMPL_PLAN.md
-│   ├── TODO_LIST.md
-│   ├── .task/
-│   │   ├── IMPL-001.json (test generation task)
-│   │   └── IMPL-002.json (test execution task)
-│   └── .process/
-│       ├── test-context-package.json
-│       └── TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md
-
-Key Points:
-• ← ATTACHED: SlashCommand attaches sub-tasks to orchestrator TodoWrite
-• ← COLLAPSED: Sub-tasks executed and collapsed to phase summary
-```
-
-## Session Metadata
-
-Test session includes `workflow_type: "test_session"` and `source_session_id` for automatic context gathering.
-
-## Task Output
-
-Generates two task definition files:
-- **IMPL-001.json**: Test generation task specification
-  - Agent: @code-developer
-  - Input: TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md
-  - Output: Test files based on analysis
-- **IMPL-002.json**: Test execution and fix cycle specification
-  - Agent: @test-fix-agent
-  - Dependency: IMPL-001 must complete first
-  - Max iterations: 5
-  - Fix mode: Agent or CLI (based on `command` field in implementation_approach)
-
-See `/workflow:tools:test-task-generate` for complete task JSON schemas.
-
-## Error Handling
-
-| Phase | Error | Action |
-|-------|-------|--------|
-| 1 | Source session not found | Return error with source session ID |
-| 1 | No completed IMPL tasks | Return error, source incomplete |
-| 2 | Context gathering failed | Return error, check source artifacts |
-| 3 | Analysis failed | Return error, check context package |
-| 4 | Task generation failed | Retry once, then error with details |
-
-## Output Files
-
-Created in `.workflow/active/WFS-test-[session]/`:
-- `workflow-session.json` - Session metadata
-- `.process/test-context-package.json` - Coverage analysis
-- `.process/TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md` - Test requirements
-- `.task/IMPL-001.json` - Test generation task
-- `.task/IMPL-002.json` - Test execution & fix task
-- `IMPL_PLAN.md` - Test plan
-- `TODO_LIST.md` - Task checklist
-
-## Task Specifications
-
-**IMPL-001.json Structure**:
-- `meta.type: "test-gen"`
-- `meta.agent: "@code-developer"`
-- `context.requirements`: Generate tests based on TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md
-- `flow_control.target_files`: Test files to create
-- `flow_control.implementation_approach`: Test generation strategy
-
-**IMPL-002.json Structure**:
-- `meta.type: "test-fix"`
-- `meta.agent: "@test-fix-agent"`
-- `context.depends_on: ["IMPL-001"]`
-- `flow_control.implementation_approach.test_fix_cycle`: Complete cycle specification
-  - Gemini diagnosis template
-  - Fix application mode (agent or CLI based on `command` field)
-  - Max iterations: 5
-- `flow_control.implementation_approach.modification_points`: 3-phase flow
-
-See `/workflow:tools:test-task-generate` for complete JSON schemas.
-
-## Best Practices
-
-1. **Prerequisites**: Ensure source session has completed IMPL tasks with summaries
-2. **Clean State**: Commit implementation changes before running test-gen
-3. **Review Artifacts**: Check generated IMPL_PLAN.md and TODO_LIST.md before proceeding
-4. **Understand Scope**: This command only prepares artifacts; it does not execute tests
-
-## Related Commands
-
-**Prerequisite Commands**:
-- `/workflow:plan` or `/workflow:execute` - Complete implementation session that needs test validation
-
-**Executed by This Command** (4 phases):
-- `/workflow:session:start` - Phase 1: Create independent test workflow session
-- `/workflow:tools:test-context-gather` - Phase 2: Analyze test coverage and gather source session context
-- `/workflow:tools:test-concept-enhanced` - Phase 3: Generate test requirements and strategy using Gemini
-- `/workflow:tools:test-task-generate` - Phase 4: Generate test task JSONs (CLI tool usage determined semantically)
-
-**Follow-up Commands**:
-- `/workflow:status` - Review generated test tasks
-- `/workflow:test-cycle-execute` - Execute test generation and fix cycles
-- `/workflow:execute` - Execute generated test tasks

.claude/commands/workflow/tools/code-validation-gate.md

@@ -0,0 +1,391 @@
+---
+name: code-validation-gate
+description: Validate AI-generated code for common errors (imports, variables, types) before test execution
+argument-hint: "--session WFS-test-session-id [--fix] [--strict]"
+examples:
+  - /workflow:tools:code-validation-gate --session WFS-test-auth
+  - /workflow:tools:code-validation-gate --session WFS-test-auth --fix
+  - /workflow:tools:code-validation-gate --session WFS-test-auth --strict
+---
+
+# Code Validation Gate Command
+
+## Overview
+
+Pre-test validation gate that checks AI-generated code for common errors before test execution. This prevents wasted test cycles on code with fundamental issues like import errors, variable conflicts, and type mismatches.
+
+## Core Philosophy
+
+- **Fail Fast**: Catch fundamental errors before expensive test execution
+- **AI-Aware**: Specifically targets common AI code generation mistakes
+- **Auto-Remediation**: Attempt safe fixes before failing
+- **Clear Feedback**: Provide actionable fix suggestions for manual intervention
+
+## Target Error Categories
+
+### L0.1: Compilation Errors
+- TypeScript compilation failures
+- Syntax errors
+- Module resolution failures
+
+### L0.2: Import Errors
+- Unresolved module imports (hallucinated packages)
+- Circular dependencies
+- Duplicate imports
+- Unused imports
+
+### L0.3: Variable Errors
+- Variable redeclaration
+- Scope conflicts (shadowing)
+- Undefined variable usage
+- Unused variables
+
+### L0.4: Type Errors (TypeScript)
+- Type mismatches
+- Missing type definitions
+- Excessive `any` usage
+- Implicit `any` types
+
+### L0.5: AI-Specific Patterns
+- Placeholder code (`// TODO: implement`)
+- Hallucinated package imports
+- Mock code in production files
+- Inconsistent naming patterns
+
+## Execution Process
+
+```
+Input Parsing:
+   ├─ Parse flags: --session (required), --fix, --strict
+   └─ Load test-quality-config.json
+
+Phase 1: Context Loading
+   ├─ Load session metadata
+   ├─ Identify target files (from IMPL-001 output or context-package)
+   └─ Detect project configuration (tsconfig, eslint, etc.)
+
+Phase 2: Validation Execution
+   ├─ L0.1: Run TypeScript compilation check
+   ├─ L0.2: Run import validation
+   ├─ L0.3: Run variable validation
+   ├─ L0.4: Run type validation
+   └─ L0.5: Run AI-specific checks
+
+Phase 3: Result Analysis
+   ├─ Aggregate all findings by severity
+   ├─ Calculate pass/fail status
+   └─ Generate fix suggestions
+
+Phase 4: Auto-Fix (if --fix enabled)
+   ├─ Apply safe auto-fixes (imports, formatting)
+   ├─ Re-run validation
+   └─ Report remaining issues
+
+Phase 5: Gate Decision
+   ├─ PASS: Proceed to IMPL-001.5
+   ├─ SOFT_FAIL: Auto-fix applied, needs re-validation
+   └─ HARD_FAIL: Block with detailed report
+```
+
+## Execution Lifecycle
+
+### Phase 1: Context Loading
+
+**Load session and identify validation targets.**
+
+```javascript
+// Load session metadata
+Read(".workflow/active/{session_id}/workflow-session.json")
+
+// Load context package for target files
+Read(".workflow/active/{session_id}/.process/context-package.json")
+// OR
+Read(".workflow/active/{session_id}/.process/test-context-package.json")
+
+// Identify files to validate:
+// 1. Source files from context.implementation_files
+// 2. Test files from IMPL-001 output (if exists)
+// 3. All modified files since session start
+```
+
+**Target File Discovery**:
+- Source files: `context.focus_paths` from context-package
+- Generated tests: `.workflow/active/{session_id}/.task/IMPL-001-output/`
+- All TypeScript/JavaScript in target directories
+
+### Phase 2: Validation Execution
+
+**Execute validation checks in order of dependency.**
+
+#### L0.1: TypeScript Compilation
+
+```bash
+# Primary check - catches most fundamental errors
+npx tsc --noEmit --skipLibCheck --project tsconfig.json 2>&1
+
+# Parse output for errors
+# Critical: Any compilation error blocks further validation
+```
+
+**Error Patterns**:
+```
+error TS2307: Cannot find module 'xxx'
+error TS2451: Cannot redeclare block-scoped variable 'xxx'
+error TS2322: Type 'xxx' is not assignable to type 'yyy'
+```
+
+#### L0.2: Import Validation
+
+```bash
+# Check for circular dependencies
+npx madge --circular --extensions ts,tsx,js,jsx {target_dirs}
+
+# ESLint import rules
+npx eslint --rule 'import/no-duplicates: error' --rule 'import/no-unresolved: error' {files}
+```
+
+**Hallucinated Package Check**:
+```javascript
+// Extract all imports from files
+// Verify each package exists in package.json or node_modules
+// Flag any unresolvable imports as "hallucinated"
+```
+
+#### L0.3: Variable Validation
+
+```bash
+# ESLint variable rules
+npx eslint --rule 'no-shadow: error' --rule 'no-undef: error' --rule 'no-redeclare: error' {files}
+```
+
+#### L0.4: Type Validation
+
+```bash
+# TypeScript strict checks
+npx tsc --noEmit --strict {files}
+
+# Check for any abuse
+npx eslint --rule '@typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any: warn' {files}
+```
+
+#### L0.5: AI-Specific Checks
+
+```bash
+# Check for placeholder code
+grep -rn "// TODO: implement\|// Add your code here\|throw new Error.*Not implemented" {files}
+
+# Check for mock code in production files
+grep -rn "jest\.mock\|sinon\.\|vi\.mock" {source_files_only}
+```
+
+### Phase 3: Result Analysis
+
+**Aggregate and categorize findings.**
+
+```javascript
+const findings = {
+  critical: [],   // Blocks all progress
+  error: [],      // Blocks with threshold
+  warning: []     // Advisory only
+};
+
+// Apply thresholds from config
+const config = loadConfig("test-quality-config.json");
+const thresholds = config.code_validation.severity_thresholds;
+
+// Gate decision
+if (findings.critical.length > thresholds.critical) {
+  decision = "HARD_FAIL";
+} else if (findings.error.length > thresholds.error) {
+  decision = "SOFT_FAIL";  // Try auto-fix
+} else {
+  decision = "PASS";
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 4: Auto-Fix (Optional)
+
+**Apply safe automatic fixes when --fix flag provided.**
+
+```bash
+# Safe fixes only
+npx eslint --fix --rule 'import/no-duplicates: error' --rule 'unused-imports/no-unused-imports: error' {files}
+
+# Re-run validation after fixes
+# Report what was fixed vs what remains
+```
+
+**Safe Fix Categories**:
+- Remove unused imports
+- Remove duplicate imports
+- Fix import ordering
+- Remove unused variables (with caution)
+- Formatting fixes
+
+**Unsafe (Manual Only)**:
+- Missing imports (need to determine correct package)
+- Type errors (need to understand intent)
+- Variable shadowing (need to understand scope intent)
+
+### Phase 5: Gate Decision
+
+**Determine next action based on results.**
+
+| Decision | Condition | Action |
+|----------|-----------|--------|
+| **PASS** | critical=0, error<=3, warning<=10 | Proceed to IMPL-001.5 |
+| **SOFT_FAIL** | critical=0, error>3 OR fixable issues | Auto-fix and retry (max 2) |
+| **HARD_FAIL** | critical>0 OR max retries exceeded | Block with report |
+
+## Output Artifacts
+
+### Validation Report
+
+**File**: `.workflow/active/{session_id}/.process/code-validation-report.md`
+
+```markdown
+# Code Validation Report
+
+**Session**: {session_id}
+**Timestamp**: {timestamp}
+**Status**: PASS | SOFT_FAIL | HARD_FAIL
+
+## Summary
+- Files Validated: {count}
+- Critical Issues: {count}
+- Errors: {count}
+- Warnings: {count}
+
+## Critical Issues (Must Fix)
+### Import Errors
+- `src/auth/service.ts:5` - Cannot find module 'non-existent-package'
+  - **Suggestion**: Check if package exists, may be hallucinated by AI
+
+### Variable Conflicts
+- `src/utils/helper.ts:12` - Cannot redeclare block-scoped variable 'config'
+  - **Suggestion**: Rename one of the variables or merge declarations
+
+## Errors (Should Fix)
+...
+
+## Warnings (Consider Fixing)
+...
+
+## Auto-Fix Applied
+- Removed 3 unused imports in `src/auth/service.ts`
+- Fixed import ordering in `src/utils/index.ts`
+
+## Remaining Issues Requiring Manual Fix
+...
+
+## Next Steps
+- [ ] Fix critical issues before proceeding
+- [ ] Review error suggestions
+- [ ] Re-run validation: `/workflow:tools:code-validation-gate --session {session_id}`
+```
+
+### JSON Report (Machine-Readable)
+
+**File**: `.workflow/active/{session_id}/.process/code-validation-report.json`
+
+```json
+{
+  "session_id": "WFS-test-xxx",
+  "timestamp": "2025-01-30T10:00:00Z",
+  "status": "HARD_FAIL",
+  "summary": {
+    "files_validated": 15,
+    "critical": 2,
+    "error": 5,
+    "warning": 8
+  },
+  "findings": {
+    "critical": [
+      {
+        "category": "import",
+        "file": "src/auth/service.ts",
+        "line": 5,
+        "message": "Cannot find module 'non-existent-package'",
+        "suggestion": "Check if package exists in package.json",
+        "auto_fixable": false
+      }
+    ],
+    "error": [...],
+    "warning": [...]
+  },
+  "auto_fixes_applied": [...],
+  "gate_decision": "HARD_FAIL",
+  "retry_count": 0,
+  "max_retries": 2
+}
+```
+
+## Command Options
+
+| Option | Description | Default |
+|--------|-------------|---------|
+| `--session` | Test session ID (required) | - |
+| `--fix` | Enable auto-fix for safe issues | false |
+| `--strict` | Use strict thresholds (0 errors allowed) | false |
+| `--files` | Specific files to validate (comma-separated) | All target files |
+| `--skip-types` | Skip TypeScript type checks | false |
+
+## Integration
+
+### Command Chain
+
+- **Called By**: `/workflow:test-fix-gen` (after IMPL-001)
+- **Requires**: IMPL-001 output OR context-package.json
+- **Followed By**: IMPL-001.5 (Test Quality Gate) on PASS
+
+### Task JSON Integration
+
+When used in test-fix workflow, generates task:
+
+```json
+{
+  "id": "IMPL-001.3-validation",
+  "meta": {
+    "type": "code-validation",
+    "agent": "@test-fix-agent"
+  },
+  "context": {
+    "depends_on": ["IMPL-001"],
+    "requirements": "Validate generated code for AI common errors"
+  },
+  "flow_control": {
+    "validation_config": "~/.claude/workflows/test-quality-config.json",
+    "max_retries": 2,
+    "auto_fix_enabled": true
+  },
+  "acceptance_criteria": [
+    "Zero critical issues",
+    "Maximum 3 error issues",
+    "All imports resolvable",
+    "No variable redeclarations"
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Resolution |
+|-------|------------|
+| tsconfig.json not found | Use default compiler options |
+| ESLint not installed | Skip ESLint checks, use tsc only |
+| madge not installed | Skip circular dependency check |
+| No files to validate | Return PASS (nothing to check) |
+
+## Best Practices
+
+1. **Run Early**: Execute validation immediately after code generation
+2. **Use --fix First**: Let auto-fix resolve trivial issues
+3. **Review Suggestions**: AI fix suggestions may need human judgment
+4. **Don't Skip Critical**: Never proceed with critical errors
+5. **Track Patterns**: Common failures indicate prompt improvement opportunities
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/workflow:test-fix-gen` - Parent workflow that invokes this command
+- `/workflow:tools:test-quality-gate` - Next phase (IMPL-001.5) for test quality
+- `/workflow:test-cycle-execute` - Execute tests after validation passes

.claude/commands/workflow/tools/conflict-resolution.md

@@ -1,12 +1,16 @@
 ---
 name: conflict-resolution
 description: Detect and resolve conflicts between plan and existing codebase using CLI-powered analysis with Gemini/Qwen
-argument-hint: "--session WFS-session-id --context path/to/context-package.json"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] --session WFS-session-id --context path/to/context-package.json"
 examples:
   - /workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session WFS-auth --context .workflow/active/WFS-auth/.process/context-package.json
-  - /workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session WFS-payment --context .workflow/active/WFS-payment/.process/context-package.json
+  - /workflow:tools:conflict-resolution -y --session WFS-payment --context .workflow/active/WFS-payment/.process/context-package.json
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-select recommended strategy for each conflict, skip clarification questions.
+
 # Conflict Resolution Command
 
 ## Purpose
@@ -21,10 +25,10 @@ Analyzes conflicts between implementation plans and existing codebase, **includi
 | Responsibility | Description |
 |---------------|-------------|
 | **Detect Conflicts** | Analyze plan vs existing code inconsistencies |
-| **Scenario Uniqueness** | **NEW**: Search and compare new modules with existing modules for functional overlaps |
+| **Scenario Uniqueness** | Search and compare new modules with existing modules for functional overlaps |
 | **Generate Strategies** | Provide 2-4 resolution options per conflict |
-| **Iterative Clarification** | **NEW**: Ask unlimited questions until scenario boundaries are clear and unique |
-| **Agent Re-analysis** | **NEW**: Dynamically update strategies based on user clarifications |
+| **Iterative Clarification** | Ask unlimited questions until scenario boundaries are clear and unique |
+| **Agent Re-analysis** | Dynamically update strategies based on user clarifications |
 | **CLI Analysis** | Use Gemini/Qwen (Claude fallback) |
 | **User Decision** | Present options ONE BY ONE, never auto-apply |
 | **Direct Text Output** | Output questions via text directly, NEVER use bash echo/printf |
@@ -53,7 +57,7 @@ Analyzes conflicts between implementation plans and existing codebase, **includi
 - Breaking updates
 
 ### 5. Module Scenario Overlap
-- **NEW**: Functional overlap between new and existing modules
+- Functional overlap between new and existing modules
 - Scenario boundary ambiguity
 - Duplicate responsibility detection
 - Module merge/split decisions
@@ -130,7 +134,7 @@ Task(subagent_type="cli-execution-agent", run_in_background=false, prompt=`
   ### 1. Load Context
   - Read existing files from conflict_detection.existing_files
   - Load plan from .workflow/active/{session_id}/.process/context-package.json
-  - **NEW**: Load exploration_results and use aggregated_insights for enhanced analysis
+  - Load exploration_results and use aggregated_insights for enhanced analysis
   - Extract role analyses and requirements
 
   ### 2. Execute CLI Analysis (Enhanced with Exploration + Scenario Uniqueness)
@@ -154,8 +158,8 @@ Task(subagent_type="cli-execution-agent", run_in_background=false, prompt=`
     - Validation of exploration conflict_indicators
     - ModuleOverlap conflicts with overlap_analysis
     - Targeted clarification questions
-  RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/analysis/02-analyze-code-patterns.txt) | Focus on breaking changes, migration needs, and functional overlaps | Prioritize exploration-identified conflicts | analysis=READ-ONLY
-  " --tool gemini --mode analysis --cd {project_root}
+  CONSTRAINTS: Focus on breaking changes, migration needs, and functional overlaps | Prioritize exploration-identified conflicts | analysis=READ-ONLY
+  " --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-code-patterns --cd {project_root}
 
   Fallback: Qwen (same prompt) → Claude (manual analysis)
 
@@ -182,33 +186,25 @@ Task(subagent_type="cli-execution-agent", run_in_background=false, prompt=`
   - modifications.old_content: 20-100 chars for unique Edit tool matching
   - modifications.new_content: preserves markdown formatting
   - modification_suggestions: 2-5 actionable suggestions for custom handling
-`)
-```
 
-**Agent Internal Flow** (Enhanced):
-```
-1. Load context package
-2. Check conflict_risk (exit if none/low)
-3. Read existing files + plan artifacts
-4. Run CLI analysis (Gemini→Qwen→Claude) with enhanced tasks:
-   - Standard conflict detection (Architecture/API/Data/Dependency)
-   - **NEW: Module scenario uniqueness detection**
-     * Extract new module functionality from plan
-     * Search all existing modules with similar keywords/functionality
-     * Compare scenario coverage and responsibilities
-     * Identify functional overlaps and boundary ambiguities
-     * Generate ModuleOverlap conflicts with overlap_analysis
-5. Parse conflict findings (including ModuleOverlap category)
-6. Generate 2-4 strategies per conflict:
-   - Include modifications for each strategy
-   - **For ModuleOverlap**: Add clarification_needed questions for boundary definition
-7. Return JSON to stdout (NOT file write)
-8. Return execution log path
+  ### 5. Planning Notes Record (REQUIRED)
+  After analysis complete, append a brief execution record to planning-notes.md:
+
+  **File**: .workflow/active/{session_id}/planning-notes.md
+  **Location**: Under "## Conflict Decisions (Phase 3)" section
+  **Format**:
+  \`\`\`
+  ### [Conflict-Resolution Agent] YYYY-MM-DD
+  - **Note**: [智能补充：简短总结冲突类型、解决策略、关键决策等]
+  \`\`\`
+`)
 ```
 
 ### Phase 3: User Interaction Loop
 
 ```javascript
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+
 FOR each conflict:
   round = 0, clarified = false, userClarifications = []
 
@@ -216,8 +212,13 @@ FOR each conflict:
     // 1. Display conflict info (text output for context)
     displayConflictSummary(conflict)  // id, brief, severity, overlap_analysis if ModuleOverlap
 
-    // 2. Strategy selection via AskUserQuestion
-    AskUserQuestion({
+    // 2. Strategy selection
+    if (autoYes) {
+      console.log(`[--yes] Auto-selecting recommended strategy`)
+      selectedStrategy = conflict.strategies[conflict.recommended || 0]
+      clarified = true  // Skip clarification loop
+    } else {
+      AskUserQuestion({
       questions: [{
         question: formatStrategiesForDisplay(conflict.strategies),
         header: "策略选择",
@@ -230,18 +231,19 @@ FOR each conflict:
           { label: "自定义修改", description: `建议: ${conflict.modification_suggestions?.slice(0,2).join('; ')}` }
         ]
       }]
-    })
+      })
 
-    // 3. Handle selection
-    if (userChoice === "自定义修改") {
-      customConflicts.push({ id, brief, category, suggestions, overlap_analysis })
-      break
+      // 3. Handle selection
+      if (userChoice === "自定义修改") {
+        customConflicts.push({ id, brief, category, suggestions, overlap_analysis })
+        break
+      }
+
+      selectedStrategy = findStrategyByName(userChoice)
     }
 
-    selectedStrategy = findStrategyByName(userChoice)
-
     // 4. Clarification (if needed) - batched max 4 per call
-    if (selectedStrategy.clarification_needed?.length > 0) {
+    if (!autoYes && selectedStrategy.clarification_needed?.length > 0) {
       for (batch of chunk(selectedStrategy.clarification_needed, 4)) {
         AskUserQuestion({
           questions: batch.map((q, i) => ({

.claude/commands/workflow/tools/context-gather.md

@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ Step 1: Context-Package Detection
       ├─ Valid package exists → Return existing (skip execution)
       └─ No valid package → Continue to Step 2
 
-Step 2: Complexity Assessment & Parallel Explore (NEW)
+Step 2: Complexity Assessment & Parallel Explore
    ├─ Analyze task_description → classify Low/Medium/High
    ├─ Select exploration angles (1-4 based on complexity)
    ├─ Launch N cli-explore-agents in parallel
@@ -213,19 +213,37 @@ Write(`${sessionFolder}/explorations-manifest.json`, JSON.stringify(explorationM
 **Only execute after Step 2 completes**
 
 ```javascript
+// Load user intent from planning-notes.md (from Phase 1)
+const planningNotesPath = `.workflow/active/${session_id}/planning-notes.md`;
+let userIntent = { goal: task_description, key_constraints: "None specified" };
+
+if (file_exists(planningNotesPath)) {
+  const notesContent = Read(planningNotesPath);
+  const goalMatch = notesContent.match(/\*\*GOAL\*\*:\s*(.+)/);
+  const constraintsMatch = notesContent.match(/\*\*KEY_CONSTRAINTS\*\*:\s*(.+)/);
+  if (goalMatch) userIntent.goal = goalMatch[1].trim();
+  if (constraintsMatch) userIntent.key_constraints = constraintsMatch[1].trim();
+}
+
 Task(
   subagent_type="context-search-agent",
   run_in_background=false,
   description="Gather comprehensive context for plan",
   prompt=`
 ## Execution Mode
-**PLAN MODE** (Comprehensive) - Full Phase 1-3 execution
+**PLAN MODE** (Comprehensive) - Full Phase 1-3 execution with priority sorting
 
 ## Session Information
 - **Session ID**: ${session_id}
 - **Task Description**: ${task_description}
 - **Output Path**: .workflow/${session_id}/.process/context-package.json
 
+## User Intent (from Phase 1 - Planning Notes)
+**GOAL**: ${userIntent.goal}
+**KEY_CONSTRAINTS**: ${userIntent.key_constraints}
+
+This is the PRIMARY context source - all subsequent analysis must align with user intent.
+
 ## Exploration Input (from Step 2)
 - **Manifest**: ${sessionFolder}/explorations-manifest.json
 - **Exploration Count**: ${explorationManifest.exploration_count}
@@ -237,7 +255,7 @@ Execute complete context-search-agent workflow for implementation planning:
 
 ### Phase 1: Initialization & Pre-Analysis
 1. **Project State Loading**:
-   - Read and parse `.workflow/project-tech.json`. Use its `technology_analysis` section as the foundational `project_context`. This is your primary source for architecture, tech stack, and key components.
+   - Read and parse `.workflow/project-tech.json`. Use its `overview` section as the foundational `project_context`. This is your primary source for architecture, tech stack, and key components.
    - Read and parse `.workflow/project-guidelines.json`. Load `conventions`, `constraints`, and `learnings` into a `project_guidelines` section.
    - If files don't exist, proceed with fresh analysis.
 2. **Detection**: Check for existing context-package (early exit if valid)
@@ -245,7 +263,13 @@ Execute complete context-search-agent workflow for implementation planning:
 4. **Analysis**: Extract keywords, determine scope, classify complexity based on task description and project state
 
 ### Phase 2: Multi-Source Context Discovery
-Execute all discovery tracks:
+Execute all discovery tracks (WITH USER INTENT INTEGRATION):
+- **Track -1**: User Intent & Priority Foundation (EXECUTE FIRST)
+  - Load user intent (GOAL, KEY_CONSTRAINTS) from session input
+  - Map user requirements to codebase entities (files, modules, patterns)
+  - Establish baseline priority scores based on user goal alignment
+  - Output: user_intent_mapping.json with preliminary priority scores
+
 - **Track 0**: Exploration Synthesis (load ${sessionFolder}/explorations-manifest.json, prioritize critical_files, deduplicate patterns/integration_points)
 - **Track 1**: Historical archive analysis (query manifest.json for lessons learned)
 - **Track 2**: Reference documentation (CLAUDE.md, architecture docs)
@@ -254,13 +278,45 @@ Execute all discovery tracks:
 
 ### Phase 3: Synthesis, Assessment & Packaging
 1. Apply relevance scoring and build dependency graph
-2. **Synthesize 4-source data**: Merge findings from all sources (archive > docs > code > web). **Prioritize the context from `project-tech.json`** for architecture and tech stack unless code analysis reveals it's outdated.
-3. **Populate `project_context`**: Directly use the `technology_analysis` from `project-tech.json` to fill the `project_context` section. Include description, technology_stack, architecture, and key_components.
-4. **Populate `project_guidelines`**: Load conventions, constraints, and learnings from `project-guidelines.json` into a dedicated section.
-5. Integrate brainstorm artifacts (if .brainstorming/ exists, read content)
-6. Perform conflict detection with risk assessment
-7. **Inject historical conflicts** from archive analysis into conflict_detection
-8. Generate and validate context-package.json
+2. **Synthesize 5-source data** (including Track -1): Merge findings from all sources
+   - Priority order: User Intent > Archive > Docs > Exploration > Code > Web
+   - **Prioritize the context from `project-tech.json`** for architecture and tech stack unless code analysis reveals it's outdated
+3. **Context Priority Sorting**:
+   a. Combine scores from Track -1 (user intent alignment) + relevance scores + exploration critical_files
+   b. Classify files into priority tiers:
+      - **Critical** (score ≥ 0.85): Directly mentioned in user goal OR exploration critical_files
+      - **High** (0.70-0.84): Key dependencies, patterns required for goal
+      - **Medium** (0.50-0.69): Supporting files, indirect dependencies
+      - **Low** (< 0.50): Contextual awareness only
+   c. Generate dependency_order: Based on dependency graph + user goal sequence
+   d. Document sorting_rationale: Explain prioritization logic
+
+4. **Populate `project_context`**: Directly use the `overview` from `project-tech.json` to fill the `project_context` section. Include description, technology_stack, architecture, and key_components.
+5. **Populate `project_guidelines`**: Load conventions, constraints, and learnings from `project-guidelines.json` into a dedicated section.
+6. Integrate brainstorm artifacts (if .brainstorming/ exists, read content)
+7. Perform conflict detection with risk assessment
+8. **Inject historical conflicts** from archive analysis into conflict_detection
+9. **Generate prioritized_context section**:
+   ```json
+   {
+     "prioritized_context": {
+       "user_intent": {
+         "goal": "...",
+         "scope": "...",
+         "key_constraints": ["..."]
+       },
+       "priority_tiers": {
+         "critical": [{ "path": "...", "relevance": 0.95, "rationale": "..." }],
+         "high": [...],
+         "medium": [...],
+         "low": [...]
+       },
+       "dependency_order": ["module1", "module2", "module3"],
+       "sorting_rationale": "Based on user goal alignment (Track -1), exploration critical files, and dependency graph analysis"
+     }
+   }
+   ```
+10. Generate and validate context-package.json with prioritized_context field
 
 ## Output Requirements
 Complete context-package.json with:
@@ -272,6 +328,7 @@ Complete context-package.json with:
 - **brainstorm_artifacts**: {guidance_specification, role_analyses[], synthesis_output} with content
 - **conflict_detection**: {risk_level, risk_factors, affected_modules[], mitigation_strategy, historical_conflicts[]}
 - **exploration_results**: {manifest_path, exploration_count, angles, explorations[], aggregated_insights} (from Track 0)
+- **prioritized_context**: {user_intent, priority_tiers{critical, high, medium, low}, dependency_order[], sorting_rationale}
 
 ## Quality Validation
 Before completion verify:
@@ -282,6 +339,17 @@ Before completion verify:
 - [ ] No sensitive data exposed
 - [ ] Total files ≤50 (prioritize high-relevance)
 
+## Planning Notes Record (REQUIRED)
+After completing context-package.json, append a brief execution record to planning-notes.md:
+
+**File**: .workflow/active/${session_id}/planning-notes.md
+**Location**: Under "## Context Findings (Phase 2)" section
+**Format**:
+\`\`\`
+### [Context-Search Agent] YYYY-MM-DD
+- **Note**: [智能补充：简短总结关键发现，如探索角度、关键文件、冲突风险等]
+\`\`\`
+
 Execute autonomously following agent documentation.
 Report completion with statistics.
 `
@@ -326,116 +394,11 @@ Refer to `context-search-agent.md` Phase 3.7 for complete `context-package.json`
 - **brainstorm_artifacts**: Brainstorm documents with full content (if exists)
 - **conflict_detection**: Risk assessment with mitigation strategies and historical conflicts
 - **exploration_results**: Aggregated exploration insights (from parallel explore phase)
-
-## Historical Archive Analysis
-
-### Track 1: Query Archive Manifest
-
-The context-search-agent MUST perform historical archive analysis as Track 1 in Phase 2:
-
-**Step 1: Check for Archive Manifest**
-```bash
-# Check if archive manifest exists
-if [[ -f .workflow/archives/manifest.json ]]; then
-  # Manifest available for querying
-fi
-```
-
-**Step 2: Extract Task Keywords**
-```javascript
-// From current task description, extract key entities and operations
-const keywords = extractKeywords(task_description);
-// Examples: ["User", "model", "authentication", "JWT", "reporting"]
-```
-
-**Step 3: Search Archive for Relevant Sessions**
-```javascript
-// Query manifest for sessions with matching tags or descriptions
-const relevantArchives = archives.filter(archive => {
-  return archive.tags.some(tag => keywords.includes(tag)) ||
-         keywords.some(kw => archive.description.toLowerCase().includes(kw.toLowerCase()));
-});
-```
-
-**Step 4: Extract Watch Patterns**
-```javascript
-// For each relevant archive, check watch_patterns for applicability
-const historicalConflicts = [];
-
-relevantArchives.forEach(archive => {
-  archive.lessons.watch_patterns?.forEach(pattern => {
-    // Check if pattern trigger matches current task
-    if (isPatternRelevant(pattern.pattern, task_description)) {
-      historicalConflicts.push({
-        source_session: archive.session_id,
-        pattern: pattern.pattern,
-        action: pattern.action,
-        files_to_check: pattern.related_files,
-        archived_at: archive.archived_at
-      });
-    }
-  });
-});
-```
-
-**Step 5: Inject into Context Package**
-```json
-{
-  "conflict_detection": {
-    "risk_level": "medium",
-    "risk_factors": ["..."],
-    "affected_modules": ["..."],
-    "mitigation_strategy": "...",
-    "historical_conflicts": [
-      {
-        "source_session": "WFS-auth-feature",
-        "pattern": "When modifying User model",
-        "action": "Check reporting-service and auditing-service dependencies",
-        "files_to_check": ["src/models/User.ts", "src/services/reporting.ts"],
-        "archived_at": "2025-09-16T09:00:00Z"
-      }
-    ]
-  }
-}
-```
-
-### Risk Level Escalation
-
-If `historical_conflicts` array is not empty, minimum risk level should be "medium":
-
-```javascript
-if (historicalConflicts.length > 0 && currentRisk === "low") {
-  conflict_detection.risk_level = "medium";
-  conflict_detection.risk_factors.push(
-    `${historicalConflicts.length} historical conflict pattern(s) detected from past sessions`
-  );
-}
-```
-
-### Archive Query Algorithm
-
-```markdown
-1. IF .workflow/archives/manifest.json does NOT exist → Skip Track 1, continue to Track 2
-2. IF manifest exists:
-   a. Load manifest.json
-   b. Extract keywords from task_description (nouns, verbs, technical terms)
-   c. Filter archives where:
-      - ANY tag matches keywords (case-insensitive) OR
-      - description contains keywords (case-insensitive substring match)
-   d. For each relevant archive:
-      - Read lessons.watch_patterns array
-      - Check if pattern.pattern keywords overlap with task_description
-      - If relevant: Add to historical_conflicts array
-   e. IF historical_conflicts.length > 0:
-      - Set risk_level = max(current_risk, "medium")
-      - Add to risk_factors
-3. Continue to Track 2 (reference documentation)
-```
+- **prioritized_context**: Pre-sorted context with user intent and priority tiers (critical/high/medium/low)
 
 ## Notes
 
 - **Detection-first**: Always check for existing package before invoking agent
-- **Dual project file integration**: Agent reads both `.workflow/project-tech.json` (tech analysis) and `.workflow/project-guidelines.json` (user constraints) as primary sources
-- **Guidelines injection**: Project guidelines are included in context-package to ensure task generation respects user-defined constraints
-- **No redundancy**: This command is a thin orchestrator, all logic in agent
+- **User intent integration**: Load user intent from planning-notes.md (Phase 1 output)
+- **Output**: Generates `context-package.json` with `prioritized_context` field
 - **Plan-specific**: Use this for implementation planning; brainstorm mode uses direct agent call

.claude/commands/workflow/tools/task-generate-agent.md

@@ -1,11 +1,16 @@
 ---
 name: task-generate-agent
 description: Generate implementation plan documents (IMPL_PLAN.md, task JSONs, TODO_LIST.md) using action-planning-agent - produces planning artifacts, does NOT execute code implementation
-argument-hint: "--session WFS-session-id"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] --session WFS-session-id"
 examples:
   - /workflow:tools:task-generate-agent --session WFS-auth
+  - /workflow:tools:task-generate-agent -y --session WFS-auth
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Skip user questions, use defaults (no materials, Agent executor, Codex CLI tool).
+
 # Generate Implementation Plan Command
 
 ## Overview
@@ -14,6 +19,10 @@ Generate implementation planning documents (IMPL_PLAN.md, task JSONs, TODO_LIST.
 ## Core Philosophy
 - **Planning Only**: Generate planning documents (IMPL_PLAN.md, task JSONs, TODO_LIST.md) - does NOT implement code
 - **Agent-Driven Document Generation**: Delegate plan generation to action-planning-agent
+- **NO Redundant Context Sorting**: Context priority sorting is ALREADY completed in context-gather Phase 2/3
+  - Use `context-package.json.prioritized_context` directly
+  - DO NOT re-sort files or re-compute priorities
+  - `priority_tiers` and `dependency_order` are pre-computed and ready-to-use
 - **N+1 Parallel Planning**: Auto-detect multi-module projects, enable parallel planning (2+1 or 3+1 mode)
 - **Progressive Loading**: Load context incrementally (Core → Selective → On-Demand) due to analysis.md file size
 - **Memory-First**: Reuse loaded documents from conversation memory
@@ -67,9 +76,25 @@ Phase 3: Integration (+1 Coordinator, Multi-Module Only)
 
 **Purpose**: Collect user preferences before task generation to ensure generated tasks match execution expectations.
 
-**User Questions**:
+**Auto Mode Check**:
 ```javascript
-AskUserQuestion({
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+
+if (autoYes) {
+  console.log(`[--yes] Using defaults: No materials, Agent executor, Codex CLI`)
+  userConfig = {
+    supplementaryMaterials: { type: "none", content: [] },
+    executionMethod: "agent",
+    preferredCliTool: "codex",
+    enableResume: true
+  }
+  // Skip to Phase 1
+}
+```
+
+**User Questions** (skipped if autoYes):
+```javascript
+if (!autoYes) AskUserQuestion({
   questions: [
     {
       question: "Do you have supplementary materials or guidelines to include?",
@@ -104,11 +129,10 @@ AskUserQuestion({
     }
   ]
 })
-```
 
-**Handle Materials Response**:
+**Handle Materials Response** (skipped if autoYes):
 ```javascript
-if (userConfig.materials === "Provide file paths") {
+if (!autoYes && userConfig.materials === "Provide file paths") {
   // Follow-up question for file paths
   const pathsResponse = AskUserQuestion({
     questions: [{
@@ -141,12 +165,13 @@ const userConfig = {
 
 ### Phase 1: Context Preparation & Module Detection (Command Responsibility)
 
-**Command prepares session paths, metadata, and detects module structure.**
+**Command prepares session paths, metadata, detects module structure. Context priority sorting is NOT performed here - it's already completed in context-gather Phase 2/3.**
 
 **Session Path Structure**:
 ```
 .workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/
 ├── workflow-session.json          # Session metadata
+├── planning-notes.md              # Consolidated planning notes
 ├── .process/
 │   └── context-package.json       # Context package with artifact catalog
 ├── .task/                         # Output: Task JSON files
@@ -228,9 +253,21 @@ IMPORTANT: This is PLANNING ONLY - you are generating planning documents, NOT im
 
 CRITICAL: Follow the progressive loading strategy defined in agent specification (load analysis.md files incrementally due to file size)
 
+## PLANNING NOTES (PHASE 1-3 CONTEXT)
+Load: .workflow/active/{session-id}/planning-notes.md
+
+This document contains:
+- User Intent: Original GOAL and KEY_CONSTRAINTS from Phase 1
+- Context Findings: Critical files, architecture, and constraints from Phase 2
+- Conflict Decisions: Resolved conflicts and planning constraints from Phase 3
+- Consolidated Constraints: All constraints from all phases
+
+**USAGE**: Read planning-notes.md FIRST. Use Consolidated Constraints list to guide task sequencing and dependencies.
+
 ## SESSION PATHS
 Input:
   - Session Metadata: .workflow/active/{session-id}/workflow-session.json
+  - Planning Notes: .workflow/active/{session-id}/planning-notes.md
   - Context Package: .workflow/active/{session-id}/.process/context-package.json
 
 Output:
@@ -247,18 +284,36 @@ Execution Method: ${userConfig.executionMethod}  // agent|hybrid|cli
 Preferred CLI Tool: ${userConfig.preferredCliTool}  // codex|gemini|qwen|auto
 Supplementary Materials: ${userConfig.supplementaryMaterials}
 
-## CLI TOOL SELECTION
-Based on userConfig.executionMethod:
-- "agent": No command field in implementation_approach steps
-- "hybrid": Add command field to complex steps only (agent handles simple steps)
-- "cli": Add command field to ALL implementation_approach steps
+## EXECUTION METHOD MAPPING
+Based on userConfig.executionMethod, set task-level meta.execution_config:
 
-CLI Resume Support (MANDATORY for all CLI commands):
-- Use --resume parameter to continue from previous task execution
-- Read previous task's cliExecutionId from session state
-- Format: ccw cli -p "[prompt]" --resume ${previousCliId} --tool ${tool} --mode write
+"agent" →
+  meta.execution_config = { method: "agent", cli_tool: null, enable_resume: false }
+  Agent executes implementation_approach steps directly
 
-## EXPLORATION CONTEXT (from context-package.exploration_results)
+"cli" →
+  meta.execution_config = { method: "cli", cli_tool: userConfig.preferredCliTool, enable_resume: true }
+  Agent executes pre_analysis, then hands off full context to CLI via buildCliHandoffPrompt()
+
+"hybrid" →
+  Per-task decision: Analyze task complexity, set method to "agent" OR "cli" per task
+  - Simple tasks (≤3 files, straightforward logic) → method: "agent"
+  - Complex tasks (>3 files, complex logic, refactoring) → method: "cli"
+  CLI tool: userConfig.preferredCliTool, enable_resume: true
+
+IMPORTANT: Do NOT add command field to implementation_approach steps. Execution routing is controlled by task-level meta.execution_config.method only.
+
+## PRIORITIZED CONTEXT (from context-package.prioritized_context) - ALREADY SORTED
+Context sorting is ALREADY COMPLETED in context-gather Phase 2/3. DO NOT re-sort.
+Direct usage:
+- **user_intent**: Use goal/scope/key_constraints for task alignment
+- **priority_tiers.critical**: These files are PRIMARY focus for task generation
+- **priority_tiers.high**: These files are SECONDARY focus
+- **dependency_order**: Use this for task sequencing - already computed
+- **sorting_rationale**: Reference for understanding priority decisions
+
+## EXPLORATION CONTEXT (from context-package.exploration_results) - SUPPLEMENT ONLY
+If prioritized_context is incomplete, fall back to exploration_results:
 - Load exploration_results from context-package.json
 - Use aggregated_insights.critical_files for focus_paths generation
 - Apply aggregated_insights.constraints to acceptance criteria
@@ -278,8 +333,10 @@ CLI Resume Support (MANDATORY for all CLI commands):
    - 6-field schema (id, title, status, context_package_path, meta, context, flow_control)
    - Quantified requirements with explicit counts
    - Artifacts integration from context package
-   - **focus_paths enhanced with exploration critical_files**
-   - Flow control with pre_analysis steps (include exploration integration_points analysis)
+   - **focus_paths generated directly from prioritized_context.priority_tiers (critical + high)**
+     - NO re-sorting or re-prioritization - use pre-computed tiers as-is
+     - Critical files are PRIMARY focus, High files are SECONDARY
+   - Flow control with pre_analysis steps (use prioritized_context.dependency_order for task sequencing)
    - **CLI Execution IDs and strategies (MANDATORY)**
 
 2. Implementation Plan (IMPL_PLAN.md)
@@ -327,6 +384,29 @@ Hard Constraints:
   - IMPL_PLAN.md created with complete structure
   - TODO_LIST.md generated matching task JSONs
 - Return completion status with document count and task breakdown summary
+
+## PLANNING NOTES RECORD (REQUIRED)
+After completing, update planning-notes.md:
+
+**File**: .workflow/active/{session_id}/planning-notes.md
+
+1. **Task Generation (Phase 4)**: Task count and key tasks
+2. **N+1 Context**: Key decisions (with rationale) + deferred items
+
+\`\`\`markdown
+## Task Generation (Phase 4)
+### [Action-Planning Agent] YYYY-MM-DD
+- **Tasks**: [count] ([IDs])
+
+## N+1 Context
+### Decisions
+| Decision | Rationale | Revisit? |
+|----------|-----------|----------|
+| [choice] | [why] | [Yes/No] |
+
+### Deferred
+- [ ] [item] - [reason]
+\`\`\`
 `
 )
 ```
@@ -356,16 +436,22 @@ IMPORTANT: Generate Task JSONs ONLY. IMPL_PLAN.md and TODO_LIST.md by Phase 3 Co
 
 CRITICAL: Follow the progressive loading strategy defined in agent specification (load analysis.md files incrementally due to file size)
 
+## PLANNING NOTES (PHASE 1-3 CONTEXT)
+Load: .workflow/active/{session-id}/planning-notes.md
+
+This document contains consolidated constraints and user intent to guide module-scoped task generation.
+
 ## MODULE SCOPE
 - Module: ${module.name} (${module.type})
 - Focus Paths: ${module.paths.join(', ')}
 - Task ID Prefix: IMPL-${module.prefix}
-- Task Limit: ≤9 tasks (hard limit for this module)
+- Task Limit: ≤6 tasks (hard limit for this module)
 - Other Modules: ${otherModules.join(', ')} (reference only, do NOT generate tasks for them)
 
 ## SESSION PATHS
 Input:
   - Session Metadata: .workflow/active/{session-id}/workflow-session.json
+  - Planning Notes: .workflow/active/{session-id}/planning-notes.md
   - Context Package: .workflow/active/{session-id}/.process/context-package.json
 
 Output:
@@ -380,18 +466,35 @@ Execution Method: ${userConfig.executionMethod}  // agent|hybrid|cli
 Preferred CLI Tool: ${userConfig.preferredCliTool}  // codex|gemini|qwen|auto
 Supplementary Materials: ${userConfig.supplementaryMaterials}
 
-## CLI TOOL SELECTION
-Based on userConfig.executionMethod:
-- "agent": No command field in implementation_approach steps
-- "hybrid": Add command field to complex steps only (agent handles simple steps)
-- "cli": Add command field to ALL implementation_approach steps
+## EXECUTION METHOD MAPPING
+Based on userConfig.executionMethod, set task-level meta.execution_config:
 
-CLI Resume Support (MANDATORY for all CLI commands):
-- Use --resume parameter to continue from previous task execution
-- Read previous task's cliExecutionId from session state
-- Format: ccw cli -p "[prompt]" --resume ${previousCliId} --tool ${tool} --mode write
+"agent" →
+  meta.execution_config = { method: "agent", cli_tool: null, enable_resume: false }
+  Agent executes implementation_approach steps directly
 
-## EXPLORATION CONTEXT (from context-package.exploration_results)
+"cli" →
+  meta.execution_config = { method: "cli", cli_tool: userConfig.preferredCliTool, enable_resume: true }
+  Agent executes pre_analysis, then hands off full context to CLI via buildCliHandoffPrompt()
+
+"hybrid" →
+  Per-task decision: Analyze task complexity, set method to "agent" OR "cli" per task
+  - Simple tasks (≤3 files, straightforward logic) → method: "agent"
+  - Complex tasks (>3 files, complex logic, refactoring) → method: "cli"
+  CLI tool: userConfig.preferredCliTool, enable_resume: true
+
+IMPORTANT: Do NOT add command field to implementation_approach steps. Execution routing is controlled by task-level meta.execution_config.method only.
+
+## PRIORITIZED CONTEXT (from context-package.prioritized_context) - ALREADY SORTED
+Context sorting is ALREADY COMPLETED in context-gather Phase 2/3. DO NOT re-sort.
+Filter by module scope (${module.paths.join(', ')}):
+- **user_intent**: Use for task alignment within module
+- **priority_tiers.critical**: Filter for files in ${module.paths.join(', ')} → PRIMARY focus
+- **priority_tiers.high**: Filter for files in ${module.paths.join(', ')} → SECONDARY focus
+- **dependency_order**: Use module-relevant entries for task sequencing
+
+## EXPLORATION CONTEXT (from context-package.exploration_results) - SUPPLEMENT ONLY
+If prioritized_context is incomplete for this module, fall back to exploration_results:
 - Load exploration_results from context-package.json
 - Filter for ${module.name} module: Use aggregated_insights.critical_files matching ${module.paths.join(', ')}
 - Apply module-relevant constraints from aggregated_insights.constraints
@@ -418,8 +521,10 @@ Task JSON Files (.task/IMPL-${module.prefix}*.json):
   - Task ID format: IMPL-${module.prefix}1, IMPL-${module.prefix}2, ...
   - Quantified requirements with explicit counts
   - Artifacts integration from context package (filtered for ${module.name})
-  - **focus_paths enhanced with exploration critical_files (module-scoped)**
-  - Flow control with pre_analysis steps (include exploration integration_points analysis)
+  - **focus_paths generated directly from prioritized_context.priority_tiers filtered by ${module.paths.join(', ')}**
+    - NO re-sorting - use pre-computed tiers filtered for this module
+    - Critical files are PRIMARY focus, High files are SECONDARY
+  - Flow control with pre_analysis steps (use prioritized_context.dependency_order for module task sequencing)
   - **CLI Execution IDs and strategies (MANDATORY)**
   - Focus ONLY on ${module.name} module scope
 
@@ -462,6 +567,15 @@ Hard Constraints:
 - Cross-module dependencies use CROSS:: placeholder format consistently
 - Focus paths scoped to ${module.paths.join(', ')} only
 - Return: task count, task IDs, dependency summary (internal + cross-module)
+
+## PLANNING NOTES RECORD (REQUIRED)
+After completing, append to planning-notes.md:
+
+\`\`\`markdown
+### [${module.name}] YYYY-MM-DD
+- **Tasks**: [count] ([IDs])
+- **CROSS deps**: [placeholders used]
+\`\`\`
     `
   )
 );
@@ -542,6 +656,24 @@ Module Count: ${modules.length}
 - No CROSS:: placeholders remaining in task JSONs
 - IMPL_PLAN.md and TODO_LIST.md generated with multi-module structure
 - Return: task count, per-module breakdown, resolved dependency count
+
+## PLANNING NOTES RECORD (REQUIRED)
+After integration, update planning-notes.md:
+
+\`\`\`markdown
+### [Coordinator] YYYY-MM-DD
+- **Total**: [count] tasks
+- **Resolved**: [CROSS:: resolutions]
+
+## N+1 Context
+### Decisions
+| Decision | Rationale | Revisit? |
+|----------|-----------|----------|
+| CROSS::X → IMPL-Y | [why this resolution] | [Yes/No] |
+
+### Deferred
+- [ ] [unresolved CROSS or conflict] - [reason]
+\`\`\`
   `
 )
 ```
@@ -559,5 +691,4 @@ function resolveCrossModuleDependency(placeholder, allTasks) {
     ? candidates.sort((a, b) => a.id.localeCompare(b.id))[0].id
     : placeholder; // Keep for manual resolution
 }
-```
-
+```

.claude/commands/workflow/tools/task-generate-tdd.md

@@ -1,11 +1,16 @@
 ---
 name: task-generate-tdd
 description: Autonomous TDD task generation using action-planning-agent with Red-Green-Refactor cycles, test-first structure, and cycle validation
-argument-hint: "--session WFS-session-id"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] --session WFS-session-id"
 examples:
   - /workflow:tools:task-generate-tdd --session WFS-auth
+  - /workflow:tools:task-generate-tdd -y --session WFS-auth
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Skip user questions, use defaults (no materials, Agent executor).
+
 # Autonomous TDD Task Generation Command
 
 ## Overview
@@ -78,44 +83,176 @@ Phase 2: Agent Execution (Document Generation)
 
 ## Execution Lifecycle
 
-### Phase 1: Discovery & Context Loading
+### Phase 0: User Configuration (Interactive)
+
+**Purpose**: Collect user preferences before TDD task generation to ensure generated tasks match execution expectations and provide necessary supplementary context.
+
+**User Questions**:
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [
+    {
+      question: "Do you have supplementary materials or guidelines to include?",
+      header: "Materials",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: "No additional materials", description: "Use existing context only" },
+        { label: "Provide file paths", description: "I'll specify paths to include" },
+        { label: "Provide inline content", description: "I'll paste content directly" }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      question: "Select execution method for generated TDD tasks:",
+      header: "Execution",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: "Agent (Recommended)", description: "Claude agent executes Red-Green-Refactor cycles directly" },
+        { label: "Hybrid", description: "Agent orchestrates, calls CLI for complex steps (Red/Green phases)" },
+        { label: "CLI Only", description: "All TDD cycles via CLI tools (codex/gemini/qwen)" }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      question: "If using CLI, which tool do you prefer?",
+      header: "CLI Tool",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: "Codex (Recommended)", description: "Best for TDD Red-Green-Refactor cycles" },
+        { label: "Gemini", description: "Best for analysis and large context" },
+        { label: "Qwen", description: "Alternative analysis tool" },
+        { label: "Auto", description: "Let agent decide per-task" }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+})
+```
+
+**Handle Materials Response**:
+```javascript
+if (userConfig.materials === "Provide file paths") {
+  // Follow-up question for file paths
+  const pathsResponse = AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Enter file paths to include (comma-separated or one per line):",
+      header: "Paths",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: "Enter paths", description: "Provide paths in text input" }
+      ]
+    }]
+  })
+  userConfig.supplementaryPaths = parseUserPaths(pathsResponse)
+}
+```
+
+**Build userConfig**:
+```javascript
+const userConfig = {
+  supplementaryMaterials: {
+    type: "none|paths|inline",
+    content: [...],  // Parsed paths or inline content
+  },
+  executionMethod: "agent|hybrid|cli",
+  preferredCliTool: "codex|gemini|qwen|auto",
+  enableResume: true  // Always enable resume for CLI executions
+}
+```
+
+**Pass to Agent**: Include `userConfig` in agent prompt for Phase 2.
+
+---
+
+### Phase 1: Context Preparation & Discovery
+
+**Command Responsibility**: Command prepares session paths and metadata, provides to agent for autonomous context loading.
+
 **⚡ Memory-First Rule**: Skip file loading if documents already in conversation memory
 
-**Agent Context Package**:
+**📊 Progressive Loading Strategy**: Load context incrementally due to large analysis.md file sizes:
+- **Core**: session metadata + context-package.json (always load)
+- **Selective**: synthesis_output OR (guidance + relevant role analyses) - NOT all role analyses
+- **On-Demand**: conflict resolution (if conflict_risk >= medium), test context
+
+**🛤️ Path Clarity Requirement**: All `focus_paths` prefer absolute paths (e.g., `D:\\project\\src\\module`), or clear relative paths from project root (e.g., `./src/module`)
+
+**Session Path Structure** (Provided by Command to Agent):
+```
+.workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/
+├── workflow-session.json          # Session metadata
+├── .process/
+│   ├── context-package.json       # Context package with artifact catalog
+│   ├── test-context-package.json  # Test coverage analysis
+│   └── conflict-resolution.json   # Conflict resolution (if exists)
+├── .task/                         # Output: Task JSON files
+│   ├── IMPL-1.json
+│   ├── IMPL-2.json
+│   └── ...
+├── IMPL_PLAN.md                   # Output: TDD implementation plan
+└── TODO_LIST.md                   # Output: TODO list with TDD phases
+```
+
+**Command Preparation**:
+1. **Assemble Session Paths** for agent prompt:
+   - `session_metadata_path`: `.workflow/active/{session-id}/workflow-session.json`
+   - `context_package_path`: `.workflow/active/{session-id}/.process/context-package.json`
+   - `test_context_package_path`: `.workflow/active/{session-id}/.process/test-context-package.json`
+   - Output directory paths
+
+2. **Provide Metadata** (simple values):
+   - `session_id`: WFS-{session-id}
+   - `workflow_type`: "tdd"
+   - `mcp_capabilities`: {exa_code, exa_web, code_index}
+
+3. **Pass userConfig** from Phase 0
+
+**Agent Context Package** (Agent loads autonomously):
 ```javascript
 {
   "session_id": "WFS-[session-id]",
   "workflow_type": "tdd",
-  // Note: CLI tool usage is determined semantically by action-planning-agent based on user's task description
+
+  // Core (ALWAYS load)
   "session_metadata": {
     // If in memory: use cached content
-    // Else: Load from .workflow/active//{session-id}/workflow-session.json
+    // Else: Load from workflow-session.json
   },
+  "context_package": {
+    // If in memory: use cached content
+    // Else: Load from context-package.json
+  },
+
+  // Selective (load based on progressive strategy)
   "brainstorm_artifacts": {
     // Loaded from context-package.json → brainstorm_artifacts section
-    "role_analyses": [
+    "synthesis_output": {"path": "...", "exists": true},  // Load if exists (highest priority)
+    "guidance_specification": {"path": "...", "exists": true},  // Load if no synthesis
+    "role_analyses": [  // Load SELECTIVELY based on task relevance
       {
         "role": "system-architect",
         "files": [{"path": "...", "type": "primary|supplementary"}]
       }
-    ],
-    "guidance_specification": {"path": "...", "exists": true},
-    "synthesis_output": {"path": "...", "exists": true},
-    "conflict_resolution": {"path": "...", "exists": true}  // if conflict_risk >= medium
+    ]
   },
-  "context_package_path": ".workflow/active//{session-id}/.process/context-package.json",
-  "context_package": {
-    // If in memory: use cached content
-    // Else: Load from .workflow/active//{session-id}/.process/context-package.json
-  },
-  "test_context_package_path": ".workflow/active//{session-id}/.process/test-context-package.json",
+
+  // On-Demand (load if exists)
   "test_context_package": {
-    // Existing test patterns and coverage analysis
+    // Load from test-context-package.json
+    // Contains existing test patterns and coverage analysis
   },
+  "conflict_resolution": {
+    // Load from conflict-resolution.json if conflict_risk >= medium
+    // Check context-package.conflict_detection.resolution_file
+  },
+
+  // Capabilities
   "mcp_capabilities": {
-    "codex_lens": true,
     "exa_code": true,
-    "exa_web": true
+    "exa_web": true,
+    "code_index": true
+  },
+
+  // User configuration from Phase 0
+  "user_config": {
+    // From Phase 0 AskUserQuestion
   }
 }
 ```
@@ -124,21 +261,21 @@ Phase 2: Agent Execution (Document Generation)
 1. **Load Session Context** (if not in memory)
    ```javascript
    if (!memory.has("workflow-session.json")) {
-     Read(.workflow/active//{session-id}/workflow-session.json)
+     Read(.workflow/active/{session-id}/workflow-session.json)
    }
    ```
 
 2. **Load Context Package** (if not in memory)
    ```javascript
    if (!memory.has("context-package.json")) {
-     Read(.workflow/active//{session-id}/.process/context-package.json)
+     Read(.workflow/active/{session-id}/.process/context-package.json)
    }
    ```
 
 3. **Load Test Context Package** (if not in memory)
    ```javascript
    if (!memory.has("test-context-package.json")) {
-     Read(.workflow/active//{session-id}/.process/test-context-package.json)
+     Read(.workflow/active/{session-id}/.process/test-context-package.json)
    }
    ```
 
@@ -180,62 +317,89 @@ Phase 2: Agent Execution (Document Generation)
    )
    ```
 
-### Phase 2: Agent Execution (Document Generation)
+### Phase 2: Agent Execution (TDD Document Generation)
 
-**Pre-Agent Template Selection** (Command decides path before invoking agent):
-```javascript
-// Command checks flag and selects template PATH (not content)
-const templatePath = hasCliExecuteFlag
-  ? "~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/workflow/task-json-cli-mode.txt"
-  : "~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/workflow/task-json-agent-mode.txt";
-```
+**Purpose**: Generate TDD planning documents (IMPL_PLAN.md, task JSONs, TODO_LIST.md) - planning only, NOT code implementation.
 
 **Agent Invocation**:
 ```javascript
 Task(
   subagent_type="action-planning-agent",
   run_in_background=false,
-  description="Generate TDD task JSON and implementation plan",
+  description="Generate TDD planning documents (IMPL_PLAN.md, task JSONs, TODO_LIST.md)",
   prompt=`
-## Execution Context
+## TASK OBJECTIVE
+Generate TDD implementation planning documents (IMPL_PLAN.md, task JSONs, TODO_LIST.md) for workflow session
 
-**Session ID**: WFS-{session-id}
-**Workflow Type**: TDD
-**Note**: CLI tool usage is determined semantically from user's task description
+IMPORTANT: This is PLANNING ONLY - you are generating planning documents, NOT implementing code.
 
-## Phase 1: Discovery Results (Provided Context)
+CRITICAL: Follow the progressive loading strategy (load analysis.md files incrementally due to file size):
+- **Core**: session metadata + context-package.json (always)
+- **Selective**: synthesis_output OR (guidance + relevant role analyses) - NOT all
+- **On-Demand**: conflict resolution (if conflict_risk >= medium), test context
 
-### Session Metadata
-{session_metadata_content}
+## SESSION PATHS
+Input:
+  - Session Metadata: .workflow/active/{session-id}/workflow-session.json
+  - Context Package: .workflow/active/{session-id}/.process/context-package.json
+  - Test Context: .workflow/active/{session-id}/.process/test-context-package.json
 
-### Role Analyses (Enhanced by Synthesis)
-{role_analyses_content}
-- Includes requirements, design specs, enhancements, and clarifications from synthesis phase
+Output:
+  - Task Dir: .workflow/active/{session-id}/.task/
+  - IMPL_PLAN: .workflow/active/{session-id}/IMPL_PLAN.md
+  - TODO_LIST: .workflow/active/{session-id}/TODO_LIST.md
 
-### Artifacts Inventory
-- **Guidance Specification**: {guidance_spec_path}
-- **Role Analyses**: {role_analyses_list}
+## CONTEXT METADATA
+Session ID: {session-id}
+Workflow Type: TDD
+MCP Capabilities: {exa_code, exa_web, code_index}
 
-### Context Package
-{context_package_summary}
-- Includes conflict_risk assessment
+## USER CONFIGURATION (from Phase 0)
+Execution Method: ${userConfig.executionMethod}  // agent|hybrid|cli
+Preferred CLI Tool: ${userConfig.preferredCliTool}  // codex|gemini|qwen|auto
+Supplementary Materials: ${userConfig.supplementaryMaterials}
 
-### Test Context Package
-{test_context_package_summary}
-- Existing test patterns, framework config, coverage analysis
+## EXECUTION METHOD MAPPING
+Based on userConfig.executionMethod, set task-level meta.execution_config:
 
-### Conflict Resolution (Conditional)
-If conflict_risk was medium/high, modifications have been applied to:
-- **guidance-specification.md**: Design decisions updated to resolve conflicts
-- **Role analyses (*.md)**: Recommendations adjusted for compatibility
-- **context-package.json**: Marked as "resolved" with conflict IDs
-- Conflict resolution results stored in conflict-resolution.json
+"agent" →
+  meta.execution_config = { method: "agent", cli_tool: null, enable_resume: false }
+  Agent executes Red-Green-Refactor phases directly
 
-### MCP Analysis Results (Optional)
-**Code Structure**: {mcp_code_index_results}
-**External Research**: {mcp_exa_research_results}
+"cli" →
+  meta.execution_config = { method: "cli", cli_tool: userConfig.preferredCliTool, enable_resume: true }
+  Agent executes pre_analysis, then hands off full context to CLI via buildCliHandoffPrompt()
 
-## Phase 2: TDD Document Generation Task
+"hybrid" →
+  Per-task decision: Analyze TDD cycle complexity, set method to "agent" OR "cli" per task
+  - Simple cycles (≤5 test cases, ≤3 files) → method: "agent"
+  - Complex cycles (>5 test cases, >3 files, integration tests) → method: "cli"
+  CLI tool: userConfig.preferredCliTool, enable_resume: true
+
+IMPORTANT: Do NOT add command field to implementation_approach steps. Execution routing is controlled by task-level meta.execution_config.method only.
+
+## EXPLORATION CONTEXT (from context-package.exploration_results)
+- Load exploration_results from context-package.json
+- Use aggregated_insights.critical_files for focus_paths generation
+- Apply aggregated_insights.constraints to acceptance criteria
+- Reference aggregated_insights.all_patterns for implementation approach
+- Use aggregated_insights.all_integration_points for precise modification locations
+- Use conflict_indicators for risk-aware task sequencing
+
+## CONFLICT RESOLUTION CONTEXT (if exists)
+- Check context-package.conflict_detection.resolution_file for conflict-resolution.json path
+- If exists, load .process/conflict-resolution.json:
+  - Apply planning_constraints as task constraints (for brainstorm-less workflows)
+  - Reference resolved_conflicts for implementation approach alignment
+  - Handle custom_conflicts with explicit task notes
+
+## TEST CONTEXT INTEGRATION
+- Load test-context-package.json for existing test patterns and coverage analysis
+- Extract test framework configuration (Jest/Pytest/etc.)
+- Identify existing test conventions and patterns
+- Map coverage gaps to TDD Red phase test targets
+
+## TDD DOCUMENT GENERATION TASK
 
 **Agent Configuration Reference**: All TDD task generation rules, quantification requirements, Red-Green-Refactor cycle structure, quality standards, and execution details are defined in action-planning-agent.
 
@@ -256,31 +420,61 @@ If conflict_risk was medium/high, modifications have been applied to:
 #### Required Outputs Summary
 
 ##### 1. TDD Task JSON Files (.task/IMPL-*.json)
-- **Location**: `.workflow/active//{session-id}/.task/`
-- **Schema**: 5-field structure with TDD-specific metadata
+- **Location**: `.workflow/active/{session-id}/.task/`
+- **Schema**: 6-field structure with TDD-specific metadata
+  - `id, title, status, context_package_path, meta, context, flow_control`
   - `meta.tdd_workflow`: true (REQUIRED)
   - `meta.max_iterations`: 3 (Green phase test-fix cycle limit)
+  - `meta.cli_execution_id`: Unique CLI execution ID (format: `{session_id}-{task_id}`)
+  - `meta.cli_execution`: Strategy object (new|resume|fork|merge_fork)
   - `context.tdd_cycles`: Array with quantified test cases and coverage
+  - `context.focus_paths`: Absolute or clear relative paths (enhanced with exploration critical_files)
   - `flow_control.implementation_approach`: Exactly 3 steps with `tdd_phase` field
     1. Red Phase (`tdd_phase: "red"`): Write failing tests
     2. Green Phase (`tdd_phase: "green"`): Implement to pass tests
     3. Refactor Phase (`tdd_phase: "refactor"`): Improve code quality
-  - CLI tool usage determined semantically (add `command` field when user requests CLI execution)
+  - `flow_control.pre_analysis`: Include exploration integration_points analysis
+  - **meta.execution_config**: Set per userConfig.executionMethod (agent/cli/hybrid)
 - **Details**: See action-planning-agent.md § TDD Task JSON Generation
 
 ##### 2. IMPL_PLAN.md (TDD Variant)
-- **Location**: `.workflow/active//{session-id}/IMPL_PLAN.md`
+- **Location**: `.workflow/active/{session-id}/IMPL_PLAN.md`
 - **Template**: `~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/workflow/impl-plan-template.txt`
 - **TDD-Specific Frontmatter**: workflow_type="tdd", tdd_workflow=true, feature_count, task_breakdown
 - **TDD Implementation Tasks Section**: Feature-by-feature with internal Red-Green-Refactor cycles
+- **Context Analysis**: Artifact references and exploration insights
 - **Details**: See action-planning-agent.md § TDD Implementation Plan Creation
 
 ##### 3. TODO_LIST.md
-- **Location**: `.workflow/active//{session-id}/TODO_LIST.md`
+- **Location**: `.workflow/active/{session-id}/TODO_LIST.md`
 - **Format**: Hierarchical task list with internal TDD phase indicators (Red → Green → Refactor)
 - **Status**: ▸ (container), [ ] (pending), [x] (completed)
+- **Links**: Task JSON references and summaries
 - **Details**: See action-planning-agent.md § TODO List Generation
 
+### CLI EXECUTION ID REQUIREMENTS (MANDATORY)
+
+Each task JSON MUST include:
+- **meta.cli_execution_id**: Unique ID for CLI execution (format: `{session_id}-{task_id}`)
+- **meta.cli_execution**: Strategy object based on depends_on:
+  - No deps → `{ "strategy": "new" }`
+  - 1 dep (single child) → `{ "strategy": "resume", "resume_from": "parent-cli-id" }`
+  - 1 dep (multiple children) → `{ "strategy": "fork", "resume_from": "parent-cli-id" }`
+  - N deps → `{ "strategy": "merge_fork", "resume_from": ["id1", "id2", ...] }`
+  - **Type**: `resume_from: string | string[]` (string for resume/fork, array for merge_fork)
+
+**CLI Execution Strategy Rules**:
+1. **new**: Task has no dependencies - starts fresh CLI conversation
+2. **resume**: Task has 1 parent AND that parent has only this child - continues same conversation
+3. **fork**: Task has 1 parent BUT parent has multiple children - creates new branch with parent context
+4. **merge_fork**: Task has multiple parents - merges all parent contexts into new conversation
+
+**Execution Command Patterns**:
+- new: `ccw cli -p "[prompt]" --tool [tool] --mode write --id [cli_execution_id]`
+- resume: `ccw cli -p "[prompt]" --resume [resume_from] --tool [tool] --mode write`
+- fork: `ccw cli -p "[prompt]" --resume [resume_from] --id [cli_execution_id] --tool [tool] --mode write`
+- merge_fork: `ccw cli -p "[prompt]" --resume [resume_from.join(',')] --id [cli_execution_id] --tool [tool] --mode write` (resume_from is array)
+
 ### Quantification Requirements (MANDATORY)
 
 **Core Rules**:
@@ -302,6 +496,7 @@ If conflict_risk was medium/high, modifications have been applied to:
 - [ ] Every acceptance criterion includes measurable coverage percentage
 - [ ] tdd_cycles array contains test_count and test_cases for each cycle
 - [ ] No vague language ("comprehensive", "complete", "thorough")
+- [ ] cli_execution_id and cli_execution strategy assigned to each task
 
 ### Agent Execution Summary
 
@@ -317,20 +512,34 @@ If conflict_risk was medium/high, modifications have been applied to:
 - ✓ Quantification requirements enforced (explicit counts, measurable acceptance, exact targets)
 - ✓ Task count ≤18 (hard limit)
 - ✓ Each task has meta.tdd_workflow: true
-- ✓ Each task has exactly 3 implementation steps with tdd_phase field
-- ✓ Green phase includes test-fix cycle logic
-- ✓ Artifact references mapped correctly
-- ✓ MCP tool integration added
+- ✓ Each task has exactly 3 implementation steps with tdd_phase field ("red", "green", "refactor")
+- ✓ Each task has meta.cli_execution_id and meta.cli_execution strategy
+- ✓ Green phase includes test-fix cycle logic with max_iterations
+- ✓ focus_paths are absolute or clear relative paths (from exploration critical_files)
+- ✓ Artifact references mapped correctly from context package
+- ✓ Exploration context integrated (critical_files, constraints, patterns, integration_points)
+- ✓ Conflict resolution context applied (if conflict_risk >= medium)
+- ✓ Test context integrated (existing test patterns and coverage analysis)
 - ✓ Documents follow TDD template structure
+- ✓ CLI tool selection based on userConfig.executionMethod
 
-## Output
+## SUCCESS CRITERIA
+- All planning documents generated successfully:
+  - Task JSONs valid and saved to .task/ directory with cli_execution_id
+  - IMPL_PLAN.md created with complete TDD structure
+  - TODO_LIST.md generated matching task JSONs
+- CLI execution strategies assigned based on task dependencies
+- Return completion status with document count and task breakdown summary
 
-Generate all three documents and report completion status:
-- TDD task JSON files created: N files (IMPL-*.json)
+## OUTPUT SUMMARY
+Generate all three documents and report:
+- TDD task JSON files created: N files (IMPL-*.json) with cli_execution_id assigned
 - TDD cycles configured: N cycles with quantified test cases
-- Artifacts integrated: synthesis-spec, guidance-specification, N role analyses
+- CLI execution strategies: new/resume/fork/merge_fork assigned per dependency graph
+- Artifacts integrated: synthesis-spec/guidance-specification, relevant role analyses
+- Exploration context: critical_files, constraints, patterns, integration_points
 - Test context integrated: existing patterns and coverage
-- MCP enhancements: CodexLens, exa-research
+- Conflict resolution: applied (if conflict_risk >= medium)
 - Session ready for TDD execution: /workflow:execute
 `
 )
@@ -338,50 +547,64 @@ Generate all three documents and report completion status:
 
 ### Agent Context Passing
 
-**Memory-Aware Context Assembly**:
+**Context Delegation Model**: Command provides paths and metadata, agent loads context autonomously using progressive loading strategy.
+
+**Command Provides** (in agent prompt):
 ```javascript
-// Assemble context package for agent
-const agentContext = {
-  session_id: "WFS-[id]",
+// Command assembles these simple values and paths for agent
+const commandProvides = {
+  // Session paths
+  session_metadata_path: ".workflow/active/WFS-{id}/workflow-session.json",
+  context_package_path: ".workflow/active/WFS-{id}/.process/context-package.json",
+  test_context_package_path: ".workflow/active/WFS-{id}/.process/test-context-package.json",
+  output_task_dir: ".workflow/active/WFS-{id}/.task/",
+  output_impl_plan: ".workflow/active/WFS-{id}/IMPL_PLAN.md",
+  output_todo_list: ".workflow/active/WFS-{id}/TODO_LIST.md",
+
+  // Simple metadata
+  session_id: "WFS-{id}",
   workflow_type: "tdd",
+  mcp_capabilities: { exa_code: true, exa_web: true, code_index: true },
 
-  // Use memory if available, else load
-  session_metadata: memory.has("workflow-session.json")
-    ? memory.get("workflow-session.json")
-    : Read(.workflow/active/WFS-[id]/workflow-session.json),
-
-  context_package_path: ".workflow/active/WFS-[id]/.process/context-package.json",
-
-  context_package: memory.has("context-package.json")
-    ? memory.get("context-package.json")
-    : Read(".workflow/active/WFS-[id]/.process/context-package.json"),
-
-  test_context_package_path: ".workflow/active/WFS-[id]/.process/test-context-package.json",
-
-  test_context_package: memory.has("test-context-package.json")
-    ? memory.get("test-context-package.json")
-    : Read(".workflow/active/WFS-[id]/.process/test-context-package.json"),
-
-  // Extract brainstorm artifacts from context package
-  brainstorm_artifacts: extractBrainstormArtifacts(context_package),
-
-  // Load role analyses using paths from context package
-  role_analyses: brainstorm_artifacts.role_analyses
-    .flatMap(role => role.files)
-    .map(file => Read(file.path)),
-
-  // Load conflict resolution if exists (prefer new JSON format)
-  conflict_resolution: context_package.conflict_detection?.resolution_file
-    ? Read(context_package.conflict_detection.resolution_file)  // .process/conflict-resolution.json
-    : (brainstorm_artifacts?.conflict_resolution?.exists
-        ? Read(brainstorm_artifacts.conflict_resolution.path)
-        : null),
-
-  // Optional MCP enhancements
-  mcp_analysis: executeMcpDiscovery()
+  // User configuration from Phase 0
+  user_config: {
+    supplementaryMaterials: { type: "...", content: [...] },
+    executionMethod: "agent|hybrid|cli",
+    preferredCliTool: "codex|gemini|qwen|auto",
+    enableResume: true
+  }
 }
 ```
 
+**Agent Loads Autonomously** (progressive loading):
+```javascript
+// Agent executes progressive loading based on memory state
+const agentLoads = {
+  // Core (ALWAYS load if not in memory)
+  session_metadata: loadIfNotInMemory(session_metadata_path),
+  context_package: loadIfNotInMemory(context_package_path),
+
+  // Selective (based on progressive strategy)
+  // Priority: synthesis_output > guidance + relevant_role_analyses
+  brainstorm_content: loadSelectiveBrainstormArtifacts(context_package),
+
+  // On-Demand (load if exists and relevant)
+  test_context: loadIfExists(test_context_package_path),
+  conflict_resolution: loadConflictResolution(context_package),
+
+  // Optional (if MCP available)
+  exploration_results: extractExplorationResults(context_package),
+  external_research: executeMcpResearch()  // If needed
+}
+```
+
+**Progressive Loading Implementation** (agent responsibility):
+1. **Check memory first** - skip if already loaded
+2. **Load core files** - session metadata + context-package.json
+3. **Smart selective loading** - synthesis_output OR (guidance + task-relevant role analyses)
+4. **On-demand loading** - test context, conflict resolution (if conflict_risk >= medium)
+5. **Extract references** - exploration results, artifact paths from context package
+
 ## TDD Task Structure Reference
 
 This section provides quick reference for TDD task JSON structure. For complete implementation details, see the agent invocation prompt in Phase 2 above.
@@ -389,14 +612,31 @@ This section provides quick reference for TDD task JSON structure. For complete
 **Quick Reference**:
 - Each TDD task contains complete Red-Green-Refactor cycle
 - Task ID format: `IMPL-N` (simple) or `IMPL-N.M` (complex subtasks)
-- Required metadata: `meta.tdd_workflow: true`, `meta.max_iterations: 3`
-- Flow control: Exactly 3 steps with `tdd_phase` field (red, green, refactor)
-- Context: `tdd_cycles` array with quantified test cases and coverage
+- Required metadata:
+  - `meta.tdd_workflow: true`
+  - `meta.max_iterations: 3`
+  - `meta.cli_execution_id: "{session_id}-{task_id}"`
+  - `meta.cli_execution: { "strategy": "new|resume|fork|merge_fork", ... }`
+- Context: `tdd_cycles` array with quantified test cases and coverage:
+  ```javascript
+  tdd_cycles: [
+    {
+      test_count: 5,                    // Number of test cases to write
+      test_cases: ["case1", "case2"],   // Enumerated test scenarios
+      implementation_scope: "...",      // Files and functions to implement
+      expected_coverage: ">=85%"        // Coverage target
+    }
+  ]
+  ```
+- Context: `focus_paths` use absolute or clear relative paths
+- Flow control: Exactly 3 steps with `tdd_phase` field ("red", "green", "refactor")
+- Flow control: `pre_analysis` includes exploration integration_points analysis
+- **meta.execution_config**: Set per `userConfig.executionMethod` (agent/cli/hybrid)
 - See Phase 2 agent prompt for full schema and requirements
 
 ## Output Files Structure
 ```
-.workflow/active//{session-id}/
+.workflow/active/{session-id}/
 ├── IMPL_PLAN.md                     # Unified plan with TDD Implementation Tasks section
 ├── TODO_LIST.md                     # Progress tracking with internal TDD phase indicators
 ├── .task/
@@ -432,9 +672,9 @@ This section provides quick reference for TDD task JSON structure. For complete
 - No circular dependencies allowed
 
 ### Task Limits
-- Maximum 10 total tasks (simple + subtasks)
-- Flat hierarchy (≤5 tasks) or two-level (6-10 tasks with containers)
-- Re-scope requirements if >10 tasks needed
+- Maximum 18 total tasks (simple + subtasks) - hard limit for TDD workflows
+- Flat hierarchy (≤5 tasks) or two-level (6-18 tasks with containers)
+- Re-scope requirements if >18 tasks needed
 
 ### TDD Workflow Validation
 - `meta.tdd_workflow` must be true
@@ -454,7 +694,7 @@ This section provides quick reference for TDD task JSON structure. For complete
 ### TDD Generation Errors
 | Error | Cause | Resolution |
 |-------|-------|------------|
-| Task count exceeds 10 | Too many features or subtasks | Re-scope requirements or merge features |
+| Task count exceeds 18 | Too many features or subtasks | Re-scope requirements or merge features into multiple TDD sessions |
 | Missing test framework | No test config | Configure testing first |
 | Invalid TDD workflow | Missing tdd_phase or incomplete flow_control | Fix TDD structure in ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md |
 | Missing tdd_workflow flag | Task doesn't have meta.tdd_workflow: true | Add TDD workflow metadata |
@@ -504,7 +744,7 @@ IMPL (Green phase) tasks include automatic test-fix cycle:
 3. **Success Path**: Tests pass → Complete task
 4. **Failure Path**: Tests fail → Enter iterative fix cycle:
    - **Gemini Diagnosis**: Analyze failures with bug-fix template
-   - **Fix Application**: Agent (default) or CLI (if `command` field present)
+   - **Fix Application**: Agent executes fixes directly
    - **Retest**: Verify fix resolves failures
    - **Repeat**: Up to max_iterations (default: 3)
 5. **Safety Net**: Auto-revert all changes if max iterations reached
@@ -512,6 +752,6 @@ IMPL (Green phase) tasks include automatic test-fix cycle:
 
 
 ## Configuration Options
-- **meta.max_iterations**: Number of fix attempts (default: 3 for TDD, 5 for test-gen)
-- **CLI tool usage**: Determined semantically from user's task description via `command` field in implementation_approach
+- **meta.max_iterations**: Number of fix attempts in Green phase (default: 3)
+- **meta.execution_config.method**: Execution routing (agent/cli) determined from userConfig.executionMethod