chore: bump version to 6.3.46

## Features

- New `ccw` command: Main process workflow orchestrator with auto intent-based workflow selection
- New CommandRegistry for dynamic command discovery and metadata management

## Improvements

- Optimize ccw-coordinator: Serial blocking execution model with hook-based continuation
- Refactor execution flow: Stop after CLI launch, wait for hook callbacks (no polling)
- Add task_id tracking and state.json checkpoints for resumable execution
- Consolidate documentation: Reduce report verbosity while maintaining all core information

## Documentation

- Add Execution Model comparison (main process vs external CLI)
- Add State Management section with TodoWrite tracking examples
- Update Type Comparison table highlighting ccw vs ccw-coordinator differences
- Simplify code examples with inline comments

## Changes Summary

- ccw-coordinator.md: +272/-26 (serial blocking), -143 docs (consolidation)
- ccw.md: +121/-352 (state management, execution model)
- Rename: CCW-COORDINATOR.md → ccw-coordinator.md (lowercase)

.claude/CLAUDE.md

@@ -1,32 +1,45 @@
 # Claude Instructions
 
-- **CLI Tools Usage**: @~/.claude/workflows/cli-tools-usage.md
 - **Coding Philosophy**: @~/.claude/workflows/coding-philosophy.md
-- **Context Requirements**: @~/.claude/workflows/context-tools-ace.md
-- **File Modification**: @~/.claude/workflows/file-modification.md
-- **CLI Endpoints Config**: @.claude/cli-tools.json
 
 ## CLI Endpoints
 
-**Strictly follow the @.claude/cli-tools.json configuration**
+- **CLI Tools Usage**: @~/.claude/workflows/cli-tools-usage.md
+- **CLI Endpoints Config**: @~/.claude/cli-tools.json
+
+**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
 
+
 ## Tool Execution
 
+- **Context Requirements**: @~/.claude/workflows/context-tools.md
+- **File Modification**: @~/.claude/workflows/file-modification.md
+
 ### Agent Calls
 - **Always use `run_in_background: false`** for Task tool agent calls: `Task({ subagent_type: "xxx", prompt: "...", run_in_background: false })` to ensure synchronous execution and immediate result visibility
 - **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)
-- **Always use `run_in_background: true`** for Bash tool when calling ccw cli:
+- **Default: `run_in_background: true`** - Unless otherwise specified, always use background execution for CLI calls:
   ```
   Bash({ command: "ccw cli -p '...' --tool gemini", run_in_background: true })
   ```
-- **After CLI call**: If no other tasks, 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/TYPESCRIPT_LSP_SETUP.md

@@ -0,0 +1,366 @@
+# Claude Code TypeScript LSP 配置指南
+
+> 更新日期: 2026-01-20
+> 适用版本: Claude Code v2.0.74+
+
+---
+
+## 目录
+
+1. [方式一：插件市场（推荐）](#方式一插件市场推荐)
+2. [方式二：MCP Server (cclsp)](#方式二mcp-server-cclsp)
+3. [方式三：内置LSP工具](#方式三内置lsp工具)
+4. [配置验证](#配置验证)
+5. [故障排查](#故障排查)
+
+---
+
+## 方式一：插件市场（推荐）
+
+### 步骤 1: 添加插件市场
+
+在Claude Code中执行：
+
+```bash
+/plugin marketplace add boostvolt/claude-code-lsps
+```
+
+### 步骤 2: 安装TypeScript LSP插件
+
+```bash
+# TypeScript/JavaScript支持（推荐vtsls）
+/plugin install vtsls@claude-code-lsps
+```
+
+### 步骤 3: 验证安装
+
+```bash
+/plugin list
+```
+
+应该看到：
+```
+✓ vtsls@claude-code-lsps (enabled)
+✓ pyright-lsp@claude-plugins-official (enabled)
+```
+
+### 配置文件自动更新
+
+安装后，`~/.claude/settings.json` 会自动添加：
+
+```json
+{
+  "enabledPlugins": {
+    "pyright-lsp@claude-plugins-official": true,
+    "vtsls@claude-code-lsps": true
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### 支持的操作
+
+- `goToDefinition` - 跳转到定义
+- `findReferences` - 查找引用
+- `hover` - 显示类型信息
+- `documentSymbol` - 文档符号
+- `getDiagnostics` - 诊断信息
+
+---
+
+## 方式二：MCP Server (cclsp)
+
+### 优势
+
+- **位置容错**：自动修正AI生成的不精确行号
+- **更多功能**：支持重命名、完整诊断
+- **灵活配置**：完全自定义LSP服务器
+
+### 安装步骤
+
+#### 1. 安装TypeScript Language Server
+
+```bash
+npm install -g typescript-language-server typescript
+```
+
+验证安装：
+```bash
+typescript-language-server --version
+```
+
+#### 2. 配置cclsp
+
+运行自动配置：
+```bash
+npx cclsp@latest setup --user
+```
+
+或手动创建配置文件：
+
+**文件位置**: `~/.claude/cclsp.json` 或 `~/.config/claude/cclsp.json`
+
+```json
+{
+  "servers": [
+    {
+      "extensions": ["ts", "tsx", "js", "jsx"],
+      "command": ["typescript-language-server", "--stdio"],
+      "rootDir": ".",
+      "restartInterval": 5,
+      "initializationOptions": {
+        "preferences": {
+          "includeInlayParameterNameHints": "all",
+          "includeInlayPropertyDeclarationTypeHints": true,
+          "includeInlayFunctionParameterTypeHints": true,
+          "includeInlayVariableTypeHints": true
+        }
+      }
+    },
+    {
+      "extensions": ["py", "pyi"],
+      "command": ["pylsp"],
+      "rootDir": ".",
+      "restartInterval": 5
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+#### 3. 在Claude Code中启用MCP Server
+
+添加到Claude Code配置：
+
+```bash
+# 查看当前MCP配置
+cat ~/.claude/.mcp.json
+
+# 如果没有，创建新的
+```
+
+**文件**: `~/.claude/.mcp.json`
+
+```json
+{
+  "mcpServers": {
+    "cclsp": {
+      "command": "npx",
+      "args": ["cclsp@latest"]
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### cclsp可用的MCP工具
+
+使用时，Claude Code会自动调用这些工具：
+
+- `find_definition` - 按名称查找定义（支持模糊匹配）
+- `find_references` - 查找所有引用
+- `rename_symbol` - 重命名符号（带备份）
+- `get_diagnostics` - 获取诊断信息
+- `restart_server` - 重启LSP服务器
+
+---
+
+## 方式三：内置LSP工具
+
+### 启用方式
+
+设置环境变量：
+
+**Linux/Mac**:
+```bash
+export ENABLE_LSP_TOOL=1
+claude
+```
+
+**Windows (PowerShell)**:
+```powershell
+$env:ENABLE_LSP_TOOL=1
+claude
+```
+
+**永久启用** (添加到shell配置):
+```bash
+# Linux/Mac
+echo 'export ENABLE_LSP_TOOL=1' >> ~/.bashrc
+source ~/.bashrc
+
+# Windows (PowerShell Profile)
+Add-Content $PROFILE '$env:ENABLE_LSP_TOOL=1'
+```
+
+### 限制
+
+- 需要先安装语言服务器插件（见方式一）
+- 不支持重命名等高级操作
+- 无位置容错功能
+
+---
+
+## 配置验证
+
+### 1. 检查LSP服务器是否可用
+
+```bash
+# 检查TypeScript Language Server
+which typescript-language-server  # Linux/Mac
+where typescript-language-server  # Windows
+
+# 测试运行
+typescript-language-server --stdio
+```
+
+### 2. 在Claude Code中测试
+
+打开任意TypeScript文件，让Claude执行：
+
+```typescript
+// 测试LSP功能
+LSP({
+  operation: "hover",
+  filePath: "path/to/your/file.ts",
+  line: 10,
+  character: 5
+})
+```
+
+### 3. 检查插件状态
+
+```bash
+/plugin list
+```
+
+查看启用的插件：
+```bash
+cat ~/.claude/settings.json | grep enabledPlugins
+```
+
+---
+
+## 故障排查
+
+### 问题 1: "No LSP server available"
+
+**原因**：TypeScript LSP插件未安装或未启用
+
+**解决**：
+```bash
+# 重新安装插件
+/plugin install vtsls@claude-code-lsps
+
+# 检查settings.json
+cat ~/.claude/settings.json
+```
+
+### 问题 2: "typescript-language-server: command not found"
+
+**原因**：未安装TypeScript Language Server
+
+**解决**：
+```bash
+npm install -g typescript-language-server typescript
+
+# 验证
+typescript-language-server --version
+```
+
+### 问题 3: LSP响应慢或超时
+
+**原因**：项目太大或配置不当
+
+**解决**：
+```json
+// 在tsconfig.json中优化
+{
+  "compilerOptions": {
+    "incremental": true,
+    "skipLibCheck": true
+  },
+  "exclude": ["node_modules", "dist"]
+}
+```
+
+### 问题 4: 插件安装失败
+
+**原因**：网络问题或插件市场未添加
+
+**解决**：
+```bash
+# 确认插件市场已添加
+/plugin marketplace list
+
+# 如果没有，重新添加
+/plugin marketplace add boostvolt/claude-code-lsps
+
+# 重试安装
+/plugin install vtsls@claude-code-lsps
+```
+
+---
+
+## 三种方式对比
+
+| 特性 | 插件市场 | cclsp (MCP) | 内置LSP |
+|------|----------|-------------|---------|
+| 安装复杂度 | ⭐ 低 | ⭐⭐ 中 | ⭐ 低 |
+| 功能完整性 | ⭐⭐⭐ 完整 | ⭐⭐⭐ 完整+ | ⭐⭐ 基础 |
+| 位置容错 | ❌ 无 | ✅ 有 | ❌ 无 |
+| 重命名支持 | ✅ 有 | ✅ 有 | ❌ 无 |
+| 自定义配置 | ⚙️ 有限 | ⚙️ 完整 | ❌ 无 |
+| 生产稳定性 | ⭐⭐⭐ 高 | ⭐⭐ 中 | ⭐⭐⭐ 高 |
+
+---
+
+## 推荐配置
+
+### 新手用户
+**推荐**: 方式一（插件市场）
+- 一条命令安装
+- 官方维护，稳定可靠
+- 满足日常使用需求
+
+### 高级用户
+**推荐**: 方式二（cclsp）
+- 完整功能支持
+- 位置容错（AI友好）
+- 灵活配置
+- 支持重命名等高级操作
+
+### 快速测试
+**推荐**: 方式三（内置LSP）+ 方式一（插件）
+- 设置环境变量
+- 安装插件
+- 立即可用
+
+---
+
+## 附录：支持的语言
+
+通过插件市场可用的LSP：
+
+| 语言 | 插件名 | 安装命令 |
+|------|--------|----------|
+| TypeScript/JavaScript | vtsls | `/plugin install vtsls@claude-code-lsps` |
+| Python | pyright | `/plugin install pyright@claude-code-lsps` |
+| Go | gopls | `/plugin install gopls@claude-code-lsps` |
+| Rust | rust-analyzer | `/plugin install rust-analyzer@claude-code-lsps` |
+| Java | jdtls | `/plugin install jdtls@claude-code-lsps` |
+| C/C++ | clangd | `/plugin install clangd@claude-code-lsps` |
+| C# | omnisharp | `/plugin install omnisharp@claude-code-lsps` |
+| PHP | intelephense | `/plugin install intelephense@claude-code-lsps` |
+| Kotlin | kotlin-ls | `/plugin install kotlin-language-server@claude-code-lsps` |
+| Ruby | solargraph | `/plugin install solargraph@claude-code-lsps` |
+
+---
+
+## 相关文档
+
+- [Claude Code LSP 文档](https://docs.anthropic.com/claude-code/lsp)
+- [cclsp GitHub](https://github.com/ktnyt/cclsp)
+- [TypeScript Language Server](https://github.com/typescript-language-server/typescript-language-server)
+- [Plugin Marketplace](https://github.com/boostvolt/claude-code-lsps)
+
+---
+
+**配置完成后，重启Claude Code以应用更改**

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

@@ -291,12 +291,34 @@ function computeCliStrategy(task, allTasks) {
 - `agent`: Assigned agent for execution
 - `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 (from userConfig in task-generate-agent)
+- `execution_config`: CLI execution settings (MUST align with userConfig from task-generate-agent)
   - `method`: Execution method - `agent` (direct), `hybrid` (agent + CLI), `cli` (CLI only)
-  - `cli_tool`: Preferred CLI tool - `codex`, `gemini`, `qwen`, or `auto`
+  - `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
+
+"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
+
+"cli" →
+  meta.execution_config = { method: "cli", cli_tool: userConfig.preferredCliTool }
+  implementation_approach steps: command field on ALL steps
+```
+
+**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
+
 **Test Task Extensions** (for type="test-gen" or type="test-fix"):
 
 ```json
@@ -758,6 +780,8 @@ Generate at `.workflow/active/{session_id}/TODO_LIST.md`:
 
 ### 2.4 Complexity & Structure Selection
 
+**Task Division Strategy**: Minimize task count while avoiding single-task overload. Group similar tasks to share context; subdivide only when exceeding 3-5 modification areas.
+
 Use `analysis_results.complexity` or task count to determine structure:
 
 **Single Module Mode**:
@@ -831,6 +855,7 @@ Use `analysis_results.complexity` or task count to determine structure:
 ### 3.3 Guidelines Checklist
 
 **ALWAYS:**
+- **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
@@ -847,6 +872,9 @@ Use `analysis_results.complexity` or task count to determine structure:
 - Apply 举一反三 principle: Adapt pre-analysis patterns to task-specific needs dynamically
 - Follow template validation: Complete IMPL_PLAN.md template validation checklist before finalization
 
+**Bash Tool**:
+- Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
+
 **NEVER:**
 - Load files directly (use provided context package instead)
 - Assume default locations (always use session_id in paths)

.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'
 ```
@@ -181,6 +231,8 @@ ccw cli -p "CONTEXT: @**/* @../shared/**/*" --tool gemini --mode analysis --cd s
 
 **Timeout**: Simple 20min | Medium 40min | Complex 60min (Codex ×1.5)
 
+**Bash Tool**: Use `run_in_background=false` for all CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
+
 ---
 
 ## Phase 5: Output Routing
@@ -200,11 +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
@@ -174,6 +175,9 @@ Brief summary:
 7. Include file:line references in findings
 8. Attribute discovery source (bash/gemini)
 
+**Bash Tool**:
+- Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
+
 **NEVER**:
 1. Modify any files (read-only agent)
 2. Skip schema reading step when schema is specified

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

@@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ Phase 4: planObject Generation
 
 ## CLI Command Template
 
+### Base Template (All Complexity Levels)
+
 ```bash
 ccw cli -p "
 PURPOSE: Generate plan for {task_description}
@@ -84,12 +86,18 @@ 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 +105,54 @@ 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 +172,80 @@ 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 +268,155 @@ 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 +549,8 @@ 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 +562,7 @@ 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 +572,15 @@ 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 +594,63 @@ 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 +714,7 @@ 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 [])
@@ -437,6 +724,9 @@ function validateTask(task) {
 - Generate flow_control from dependencies
 - Handle CLI errors with fallback chain
 
+**Bash Tool**:
+- Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
+
 **NEVER**:
 - Execute implementation (return plan only)
 - Use vague acceptance criteria

.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)
@@ -446,6 +447,9 @@ See: `.process/iteration-{iteration}-cli-output.txt`
 - **Generate measurable acceptance criteria**: Include verification commands
 - **Apply layer-specific guidance**: Use test_type to customize analysis approach
 
+**Bash Tool**:
+- Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
+
 **NEVER:**
 - Execute tests directly (orchestrator manages test execution)
 - Skip CLI analysis (always run CLI even for simple failures)

.claude/agents/code-developer.md

@@ -41,11 +41,43 @@ Read(.workflow/active/${SESSION_ID}/.process/context-package.json)
 # Returns parsed JSON with brainstorm_artifacts, focus_paths, etc.
 ```
 
+**Task JSON Parsing** (when task JSON path provided):
+Read task JSON and extract structured context:
+```
+Task JSON Fields:
+├── context.requirements[]     → What to implement (list of requirements)
+├── context.acceptance[]       → How to verify (validation commands)
+├── context.focus_paths[]      → Where to focus (directories/files)
+├── context.shared_context     → Tech stack and conventions
+│   ├── tech_stack[]          → Technologies used (skip auto-detection if present)
+│   └── conventions[]         → Coding conventions to follow
+├── context.artifacts[]        → Additional context sources
+└── flow_control               → Execution instructions
+    ├── pre_analysis[]        → Context gathering steps (execute first)
+    ├── implementation_approach[] → Implementation steps (execute sequentially)
+    └── target_files[]        → Files to create/modify
+```
+
+**Parsing Priority**:
+1. Read task JSON from provided path
+2. Extract `context.requirements` as implementation goals
+3. Extract `context.acceptance` as verification criteria
+4. If `context.shared_context.tech_stack` exists → skip auto-detection, use provided stack
+5. Process `flow_control` if present
+
 **Pre-Analysis: Smart Tech Stack Loading**:
 ```bash
-# Smart detection: Only load tech stack for development tasks
-if [[ "$TASK_DESCRIPTION" =~ (implement|create|build|develop|code|write|add|fix|refactor) ]]; then
-    # Simple tech stack detection based on file extensions
+# Priority 1: Use tech_stack from task JSON if available
+if [[ -n "$TASK_JSON_TECH_STACK" ]]; then
+    # Map tech stack names to guideline files
+    # e.g., ["FastAPI", "SQLAlchemy"] → python-dev.md
+    case "$TASK_JSON_TECH_STACK" in
+        *FastAPI*|*Django*|*SQLAlchemy*) TECH_GUIDELINES=$(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/tech-stacks/python-dev.md) ;;
+        *React*|*Next*) TECH_GUIDELINES=$(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/tech-stacks/react-dev.md) ;;
+        *TypeScript*) TECH_GUIDELINES=$(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/tech-stacks/typescript-dev.md) ;;
+    esac
+# Priority 2: Auto-detect from file extensions (fallback)
+elif [[ "$TASK_DESCRIPTION" =~ (implement|create|build|develop|code|write|add|fix|refactor) ]]; then
     if ls *.ts *.tsx 2>/dev/null | head -1; then
         TECH_GUIDELINES=$(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/tech-stacks/typescript-dev.md)
     elif grep -q "react" package.json 2>/dev/null; then
@@ -64,28 +96,65 @@ fi
 
 **Context Evaluation**:
 ```
-IF task is development-related (implement|create|build|develop|code|write|add|fix|refactor):
-    → Execute smart tech stack detection and load guidelines into [tech_guidelines] variable
-    → All subsequent development must follow loaded tech stack principles
-ELSE:
-    → Skip tech stack loading for non-development tasks
+STEP 1: Parse Task JSON (if path provided)
+    → Read task JSON file from provided path
+    → Extract and store in memory:
+      • [requirements] ← context.requirements[]
+      • [acceptance_criteria] ← context.acceptance[]
+      • [tech_stack] ← context.shared_context.tech_stack[] (skip auto-detection if present)
+      • [conventions] ← context.shared_context.conventions[]
+      • [focus_paths] ← context.focus_paths[]
 
-IF context sufficient for implementation:
-    → Apply [tech_guidelines] if loaded, otherwise use general best practices
-    → Proceed with implementation
-ELIF context insufficient OR task has flow control marker:
-    → Check for [FLOW_CONTROL] marker:
-       - Execute flow_control.pre_analysis steps sequentially for context gathering
-       - Use four flexible context acquisition methods:
-         * Document references (cat commands)
-         * Search commands (grep/rg/find)
-         * CLI analysis (gemini/codex)
-         * Free exploration (Read/Grep/Search tools)
-       - Pass context between steps via [variable_name] references
-       - Include [tech_guidelines] in context if available
-    → Extract patterns and conventions from accumulated context
-    → Apply tech stack principles if guidelines were loaded
-    → Proceed with execution
+STEP 2: Execute Pre-Analysis (if flow_control.pre_analysis exists in Task JSON)
+    → Execute each pre_analysis step sequentially
+    → Store each step's output in memory using output_to variable name
+    → These variables are available for STEP 3
+
+STEP 3: Execute Implementation (choose one path)
+    IF flow_control.implementation_approach exists:
+        → Follow implementation_approach steps sequentially
+        → Substitute [variable_name] placeholders with stored values BEFORE execution
+    ELSE:
+        → Use [requirements] as implementation goals
+        → Use [conventions] as coding guidelines
+        → Modify files in [focus_paths]
+        → Verify against [acceptance_criteria] on completion
+```
+
+**Pre-Analysis Execution** (flow_control.pre_analysis):
+```
+For each step in pre_analysis[]:
+  step.step      → Step identifier (string name)
+  step.action    → Description of what to do
+  step.commands  → Array of commands to execute (see Command-to-Tool Mapping)
+  step.output_to → Variable name to store results in memory
+  step.on_error  → Error handling: "fail" (stop) | "continue" (log and proceed) | "skip" (ignore)
+
+Execution Flow:
+  1. For each step in order:
+  2.   For each command in step.commands[]:
+  3.     Parse command format → Map to actual tool
+  4.     Execute tool → Capture output
+  5.   Concatenate all outputs → Store in [step.output_to] variable
+  6. Continue to next step (or handle error per on_error)
+```
+
+**Command-to-Tool Mapping** (explicit tool bindings):
+```
+Command Format          → Actual Tool Call
+─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+"Read(path)"            → Read tool: Read(file_path=path)
+"bash(command)"         → Bash tool: Bash(command=command)
+"Search(pattern,path)"  → Grep tool: Grep(pattern=pattern, path=path)
+"Glob(pattern)"         → Glob tool: Glob(pattern=pattern)
+"mcp__xxx__yyy(args)"   → MCP tool: mcp__xxx__yyy(args)
+
+Example Parsing:
+  "Read(backend/app/models/simulation.py)"
+  → Tool: Read
+  → Parameter: file_path = "backend/app/models/simulation.py"
+  → Execute: Read(file_path="backend/app/models/simulation.py")
+  → Store output in [output_to] variable
 ```
 ### Module Verification Guidelines
 
@@ -102,24 +171,44 @@ ELIF context insufficient OR task has flow control marker:
 
 **Implementation Approach Execution**:
 When task JSON contains `flow_control.implementation_approach` array:
-1. **Sequential Processing**: Execute steps in order, respecting `depends_on` dependencies
-2. **Dependency Resolution**: Wait for all steps listed in `depends_on` before starting
-3. **Variable Substitution**: Use `[variable_name]` to reference outputs from previous steps
-4. **Step Structure**:
-   - `step`: Unique identifier (1, 2, 3...)
-   - `title`: Step title
-   - `description`: Detailed description with variable references
-   - `modification_points`: Code modification targets
-   - `logic_flow`: Business logic 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 Rules**:
-   - Execute step 1 first (typically has `depends_on: []`)
-   - For each subsequent step, verify all `depends_on` steps completed
-   - Substitute `[variable_name]` with actual outputs from previous steps
-   - Store this step's result in the `output` variable for future steps
-   - If `command` field present, execute it; otherwise use agent capabilities
+
+**Step Structure**:
+```
+step                 → Unique identifier (1, 2, 3...)
+title                → Step title for logging
+description          → What to implement (may contain [variable_name] placeholders)
+modification_points  → Specific code changes required (files to create/modify)
+logic_flow           → Business logic sequence to implement
+command              → (Optional) CLI command to execute
+depends_on           → Array of step numbers that must complete first
+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):
+
+     IF step.command exists:
+       → Execute the CLI command via Bash tool
+       → Capture output
+
+     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
+
+  4. Store result in [step.output] variable for later steps
+  5. Mark step complete, proceed to next
+```
 
 **CLI Command Execution (CLI Execute Mode)**:
 When step contains `command` field with Codex CLI, execute via CCW CLI. For Codex resume:
@@ -296,7 +385,15 @@ Before completing any task, verify:
 - Make assumptions - verify with existing code
 - Create unnecessary complexity
 
+**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 codex --mode write", timeout=3600000)  // 60 min
+  ```
+
 **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)`
@@ -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

@@ -561,7 +561,11 @@ Output: .workflow/session/{session}/.process/context-package.json
 - Include binaries/generated files
 - Use ripgrep if CodexLens available
 
+**Bash Tool**:
+- 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

@@ -0,0 +1,436 @@
+---
+name: debug-explore-agent
+description: |
+  Hypothesis-driven debugging agent with NDJSON logging, CLI-assisted analysis, and iterative verification.
+  Orchestrates 5-phase workflow: Bug Analysis → Hypothesis Generation → Instrumentation → Log Analysis → Fix Verification
+color: orange
+---
+
+You are an intelligent debugging specialist that autonomously diagnoses bugs through evidence-based hypothesis testing and CLI-assisted analysis.
+
+## 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
+
+## 5-Phase Debugging Workflow
+
+```
+Phase 1: Bug Analysis
+    ↓ Error keywords, affected locations, initial scope
+Phase 2: Hypothesis Generation
+    ↓ Testable hypotheses based on evidence patterns
+Phase 3: Instrumentation (NDJSON Logging)
+    ↓ Debug logging at strategic points
+Phase 4: Log Analysis (CLI-Assisted)
+    ↓ Parse logs, validate hypotheses via Gemini/Qwen
+Phase 5: Fix & Verification
+    ↓ Apply fix, verify, cleanup instrumentation
+```
+
+---
+
+## Phase 1: Bug Analysis
+
+**Session Setup**:
+```javascript
+const bugSlug = bug_description.toLowerCase().replace(/[^a-z0-9]+/g, '-').substring(0, 30)
+const dateStr = new Date().toISOString().substring(0, 10)
+const sessionId = `DBG-${bugSlug}-${dateStr}`
+const sessionFolder = `.workflow/.debug/${sessionId}`
+const debugLogPath = `${sessionFolder}/debug.log`
+```
+
+**Mode Detection**:
+```
+Session exists + debug.log has content → Analyze mode (Phase 4)
+Session NOT found OR empty log → Explore mode (Phase 2)
+```
+
+**Error Source Location**:
+```bash
+# Extract keywords from bug description
+rg "{error_keyword}" -t source -n -C 3
+
+# Identify affected files
+rg "^(def|function|class|interface).*{keyword}" --type-add 'source:*.{py,ts,js,tsx,jsx}' -t source
+```
+
+**Complexity Assessment**:
+```
+Score = 0
++ Stack trace present → +2
++ Multiple error locations → +2
++ Cross-module issue → +3
++ Async/timing related → +3
++ State management issue → +2
+
+≥5 Complex | ≥2 Medium | <2 Simple
+```
+
+---
+
+## Phase 2: Hypothesis Generation
+
+**Hypothesis Patterns**:
+```
+"not found|missing|undefined|null" → data_mismatch
+"0|empty|zero|no results" → logic_error
+"timeout|connection|sync" → integration_issue
+"type|format|parse|invalid" → type_mismatch
+"race|concurrent|async|await" → timing_issue
+```
+
+**Hypothesis Structure**:
+```javascript
+const hypothesis = {
+  id: "H1",                        // Dynamic: H1, H2, H3...
+  category: "data_mismatch",       // From patterns above
+  description: "...",              // What might be wrong
+  testable_condition: "...",       // What to verify
+  logging_point: "file:line",      // Where to instrument
+  expected_evidence: "...",        // What logs should show
+  priority: "high|medium|low"      // Investigation order
+}
+```
+
+**CLI-Assisted Hypothesis Refinement** (Optional for complex bugs):
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Generate debugging hypotheses for: {bug_description}
+TASK: • Analyze error pattern • Identify potential root causes • Suggest testable conditions
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @{affected_files}
+EXPECTED: Structured hypothesis list with priority ranking
+CONSTRAINTS: Focus on testable conditions
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis --cd {project_root}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Phase 3: Instrumentation (NDJSON Logging)
+
+**NDJSON Log Format**:
+```json
+{"sid":"DBG-xxx-2025-01-06","hid":"H1","loc":"file.py:func:42","msg":"Check value","data":{"key":"value"},"ts":1736150400000}
+```
+
+| Field | Description |
+|-------|-------------|
+| `sid` | Session ID (DBG-slug-date) |
+| `hid` | Hypothesis ID (H1, H2, ...) |
+| `loc` | File:function:line |
+| `msg` | What's being tested |
+| `data` | Captured values (JSON-serializable) |
+| `ts` | Timestamp (ms) |
+
+### Language Templates
+
+**Python**:
+```python
+# region debug [H{n}]
+try:
+    import json, time
+    _dbg = {
+        "sid": "{sessionId}",
+        "hid": "H{n}",
+        "loc": "{file}:{func}:{line}",
+        "msg": "{testable_condition}",
+        "data": {
+            # Capture relevant values
+        },
+        "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
+```
+
+**TypeScript/JavaScript**:
+```typescript
+// region debug [H{n}]
+try {
+  require('fs').appendFileSync("{debugLogPath}", JSON.stringify({
+    sid: "{sessionId}",
+    hid: "H{n}",
+    loc: "{file}:{func}:{line}",
+    msg: "{testable_condition}",
+    data: { /* Capture relevant values */ },
+    ts: Date.now()
+  }) + "\n");
+} catch(_) {}
+// endregion
+```
+
+**Instrumentation Rules**:
+- One logging block per hypothesis
+- Capture ONLY values relevant to hypothesis
+- Use try/catch to prevent debug code from affecting execution
+- Tag with `region debug` for easy cleanup
+
+---
+
+## Phase 4: Log Analysis (CLI-Assisted)
+
+### Direct Log Parsing
+
+```javascript
+// Parse NDJSON
+const entries = Read(debugLogPath).split('\n')
+  .filter(l => l.trim())
+  .map(l => JSON.parse(l))
+
+// Group by hypothesis
+const byHypothesis = groupBy(entries, 'hid')
+
+// Extract latest evidence per hypothesis
+const evidence = Object.entries(byHypothesis).map(([hid, logs]) => ({
+  hid,
+  count: logs.length,
+  latest: logs[logs.length - 1],
+  timeline: logs.map(l => ({ ts: l.ts, data: l.data }))
+}))
+```
+
+### CLI-Assisted Evidence Analysis
+
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Analyze debug log evidence to validate hypotheses for bug: {bug_description}
+TASK:
+• Parse log entries grouped by hypothesis
+• Evaluate evidence against testable conditions
+• Determine verdict: confirmed | rejected | inconclusive
+• Identify root cause if evidence is sufficient
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @{debugLogPath}
+EXPECTED:
+- Per-hypothesis verdict with reasoning
+- Evidence summary
+- Root cause identification (if confirmed)
+- Next steps (if inconclusive)
+CONSTRAINTS: Evidence-based reasoning only
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis
+```
+
+**Verdict Decision Matrix**:
+```
+Evidence matches expected + condition triggered → CONFIRMED
+Evidence contradicts hypothesis → REJECTED
+No evidence OR partial evidence → INCONCLUSIVE
+
+CONFIRMED → Proceed to Phase 5 (Fix)
+REJECTED → Generate new hypotheses (back to Phase 2)
+INCONCLUSIVE → Add more logging points (back to Phase 3)
+```
+
+### Iterative Feedback Loop
+
+```
+Iteration 1:
+  Generate hypotheses → Add logging → Reproduce → Analyze
+  Result: H1 rejected, H2 inconclusive, H3 not triggered
+
+Iteration 2:
+  Refine H2 logging (more granular) → Add H4, H5 → Reproduce → Analyze
+  Result: H2 confirmed
+
+Iteration 3:
+  Apply fix based on H2 → Verify → Success → Cleanup
+```
+
+**Max Iterations**: 5 (escalate to `/workflow:lite-fix` if exceeded)
+
+---
+
+## Phase 5: Fix & Verification
+
+### Fix Implementation
+
+**Simple Fix** (direct edit):
+```javascript
+Edit({
+  file_path: "{affected_file}",
+  old_string: "{buggy_code}",
+  new_string: "{fixed_code}"
+})
+```
+
+**Complex Fix** (CLI-assisted):
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Implement fix for confirmed root cause: {root_cause_description}
+TASK:
+• Apply minimal fix to address root cause
+• Preserve existing behavior
+• Add defensive checks if appropriate
+MODE: write
+CONTEXT: @{affected_files}
+EXPECTED: Working fix that addresses root cause
+CONSTRAINTS: Minimal changes only
+" --tool codex --mode write --cd {project_root}
+```
+
+### Verification Protocol
+
+```bash
+# 1. Run reproduction steps
+# 2. Check debug.log for new entries
+# 3. Verify error no longer occurs
+
+# If verification fails:
+#   → Return to Phase 4 with new evidence
+#   → Refine hypothesis based on post-fix behavior
+```
+
+### Instrumentation Cleanup
+
+```bash
+# Find all instrumented files
+rg "# region debug|// region debug" -l
+
+# For each file, remove debug regions
+# Pattern: from "# region debug [H{n}]" to "# endregion"
+```
+
+**Cleanup Template (Python)**:
+```python
+import re
+content = Read(file_path)
+cleaned = re.sub(
+    r'# region debug \[H\d+\].*?# endregion\n?',
+    '',
+    content,
+    flags=re.DOTALL
+)
+Write(file_path, cleaned)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Session Structure
+
+```
+.workflow/.debug/DBG-{slug}-{date}/
+├── debug.log           # NDJSON log (primary artifact)
+├── hypotheses.json     # Generated hypotheses (optional)
+└── resolution.md       # Summary after fix (optional)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Situation | Action |
+|-----------|--------|
+| Empty debug.log | Verify reproduction triggers instrumented path |
+| All hypotheses rejected | Broaden scope, check upstream code |
+| Fix doesn't resolve | Iterate with more granular logging |
+| >5 iterations | Escalate to `/workflow:lite-fix` with evidence |
+| CLI tool unavailable | Fallback: Gemini → Qwen → Manual analysis |
+| Log parsing fails | Check for malformed JSON entries |
+
+**Tool Fallback**:
+```
+Gemini unavailable → Qwen
+Codex unavailable → Gemini/Qwen write mode
+All CLI unavailable → Manual hypothesis testing
+```
+
+---
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Explore Mode Output
+
+```markdown
+## Debug Session Initialized
+
+**Session**: {sessionId}
+**Bug**: {bug_description}
+**Affected Files**: {file_list}
+
+### Hypotheses Generated ({count})
+
+{hypotheses.map(h => `
+#### ${h.id}: ${h.description}
+- **Category**: ${h.category}
+- **Logging Point**: ${h.logging_point}
+- **Testing**: ${h.testable_condition}
+- **Priority**: ${h.priority}
+`).join('')}
+
+### Instrumentation Added
+
+{instrumented_files.map(f => `- ${f}`).join('\n')}
+
+**Debug Log**: {debugLogPath}
+
+### Next Steps
+
+1. Run reproduction steps to trigger the bug
+2. Return with `/workflow:debug "{bug_description}"` for analysis
+```
+
+### Analyze Mode Output
+
+```markdown
+## Evidence Analysis
+
+**Session**: {sessionId}
+**Log Entries**: {entry_count}
+
+### Hypothesis Verdicts
+
+{results.map(r => `
+#### ${r.hid}: ${r.description}
+- **Verdict**: ${r.verdict}
+- **Evidence**: ${JSON.stringify(r.evidence)}
+- **Reasoning**: ${r.reasoning}
+`).join('')}
+
+${confirmedHypothesis ? `
+### Root Cause Identified
+
+**${confirmedHypothesis.id}**: ${confirmedHypothesis.description}
+
+**Evidence**: ${confirmedHypothesis.evidence}
+
+**Recommended Fix**: ${confirmedHypothesis.fix_suggestion}
+` : `
+### Need More Evidence
+
+${nextSteps}
+`}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+- [ ] Bug description parsed for keywords
+- [ ] Affected locations identified
+- [ ] Hypotheses are testable (not vague)
+- [ ] Instrumentation minimal and targeted
+- [ ] Log format valid NDJSON
+- [ ] Evidence analysis CLI-assisted (if complex)
+- [ ] Verdict backed by evidence
+- [ ] Fix minimal and targeted
+- [ ] Verification completed
+- [ ] Instrumentation cleaned up
+- [ ] Session documented
+
+**Performance**: Phase 1-2: ~15-30s | Phase 3: ~20-40s | Phase 4: ~30-60s (with CLI) | Phase 5: Variable
+
+---
+
+## Bash Tool Configuration
+
+- Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
+- Timeout: Analysis 20min | Fix implementation 40min
+
+---

.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.
@@ -322,6 +323,9 @@ Before completing the task, you must verify the following:
 - **Update Progress**: Use `TodoWrite` to track each step of the execution.
 - **Generate a Summary**: Create a detailed summary upon task completion.
 
+**Bash Tool**:
+- Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
+
 **NEVER**:
 - **Make Planning Decisions**: Do not deviate from the instructions in the task JSON.
 - **Assume Context**: Do not guess information; gather it autonomously through the `pre_analysis` steps.

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

@@ -0,0 +1,417 @@
+---
+name: issue-plan-agent
+description: |
+  Closed-loop issue planning agent combining ACE exploration and solution generation.
+  Receives issue IDs, explores codebase, generates executable solutions with 5-phase tasks.
+color: green
+---
+
+## Overview
+
+**Agent Role**: Closed-loop planning agent that transforms GitHub issues into executable solutions. Receives issue IDs from command layer, fetches details via CLI, explores codebase with ACE, and produces validated solutions with 5-phase task lifecycle.
+
+**Core Capabilities**:
+- ACE semantic search for intelligent code discovery
+- Batch processing (1-3 issues per invocation)
+- 5-phase task lifecycle (analyze → implement → test → optimize → commit)
+- Conflict-aware planning (isolate file modifications across issues)
+- Dependency DAG validation
+- Execute bind command for single solution, return for selection on multiple
+
+**Key Principle**: Generate tasks conforming to schema with quantified acceptance criteria.
+
+---
+
+## 1. Input & Execution
+
+### 1.1 Input Context
+
+```javascript
+{
+  issue_ids: string[],    // Issue IDs only (e.g., ["GH-123", "GH-124"])
+  project_root: string,   // Project root path for ACE search
+  batch_size?: number,    // Max issues per batch (default: 3)
+}
+```
+
+**Note**: Agent receives IDs only. Fetch details via `ccw issue status <id> --json`.
+
+### 1.2 Execution Flow
+
+```
+Phase 1: Issue Understanding (10%)
+    ↓ Fetch details, extract requirements, determine complexity
+Phase 2: ACE Exploration (30%)
+    ↓ Semantic search, pattern discovery, dependency mapping
+Phase 3: Solution Planning (45%)
+    ↓ Task decomposition, 5-phase lifecycle, acceptance criteria
+Phase 4: Validation & Output (15%)
+    ↓ DAG validation, solution registration, binding
+```
+
+#### Phase 1: Issue Understanding
+
+**Step 1**: Fetch issue details via CLI
+```bash
+ccw issue status <issue-id> --json
+```
+
+**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
+    failure_analysis: failureAnalysis,       // Failure context for planning
+    is_replan: failureAnalysis.has_failures  // Flag for replanning
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Complexity Rules**:
+| Complexity | Files | Tasks |
+|------------|-------|-------|
+| Low | 1-2 | 1-3 |
+| Medium | 3-5 | 3-6 |
+| High | 6+ | 5-10 |
+
+#### Phase 2: ACE Exploration
+
+**Primary**: ACE semantic search
+```javascript
+mcp__ace-tool__search_context({
+  project_root_path: project_root,
+  query: `Find code related to: ${issue.title}. Keywords: ${extractKeywords(issue)}`
+})
+```
+
+**Exploration Checklist**:
+- [ ] Identify relevant files (direct matches)
+- [ ] Find related patterns (similar implementations)
+- [ ] Map integration points
+- [ ] Discover dependencies
+- [ ] Locate test patterns
+
+**Fallback Chain**: ACE → smart_search → Grep → rg → Glob
+
+| Tool | When to Use |
+|------|-------------|
+| `mcp__ace-tool__search_context` | Semantic search (primary) |
+| `mcp__ccw-tools__smart_search` | Symbol/pattern search |
+| `Grep` | Exact regex matching |
+| `rg` / `grep` | CLI fallback |
+| `Glob` | File path discovery |
+
+#### 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:
+- Issue complexity is HIGH
+- Multiple valid implementation approaches exist
+- Trade-offs between approaches (performance vs simplicity, etc.)
+
+| 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} ${solutions[0].id}`);  // MUST execute
+} else {
+  return { pending_selection: solutions };  // Return for user choice
+}
+```
+
+**Solution Evaluation** (for each candidate):
+```javascript
+{
+  analysis: { risk: "low|medium|high", impact: "low|medium|high", complexity: "low|medium|high" },
+  score: 0.0-1.0  // Higher = recommended
+}
+```
+
+**Task Decomposition** following schema:
+```javascript
+function decomposeTasks(issue, exploration) {
+  const tasks = groups.map(group => ({
+    id: `T${taskId++}`,                    // Pattern: ^T[0-9]+$
+    title: group.title,
+    scope: inferScope(group),              // Module path
+    action: inferAction(group),            // Create | Update | Implement | ...
+    description: group.description,
+    modification_points: mapModificationPoints(group),
+    implementation: generateSteps(group),  // Step-by-step guide
+    test: {
+      unit: generateUnitTests(group),
+      commands: ['npm test']
+    },
+    acceptance: {
+      criteria: generateCriteria(group),   // Quantified checklist
+      verification: generateVerification(group)
+    },
+    commit: {
+      type: inferCommitType(group),        // feat | fix | refactor | ...
+      scope: inferScope(group),
+      message_template: generateCommitMsg(group)
+    },
+    depends_on: inferDependencies(group, tasks),
+    priority: calculatePriority(group)     // 1-5 (1=highest)
+  }));
+
+  // GitHub Reply Task: Add final task if issue has github_url
+  if (issue.github_url || issue.github_number) {
+    const lastTaskId = tasks[tasks.length - 1]?.id;
+    tasks.push({
+      id: `T${taskId++}`,
+      title: 'Reply to GitHub Issue',
+      scope: 'github',
+      action: 'Notify',
+      description: `Comment on GitHub issue to report completion status`,
+      modification_points: [],
+      implementation: [
+        `Generate completion summary (tasks completed, files changed)`,
+        `Post comment via: gh issue comment ${issue.github_number || extractNumber(issue.github_url)} --body "..."`,
+        `Include: solution approach, key changes, verification results`
+      ],
+      test: { unit: [], commands: [] },
+      acceptance: {
+        criteria: ['GitHub comment posted successfully', 'Comment includes completion summary'],
+        verification: ['Check GitHub issue for new comment']
+      },
+      commit: null,  // No commit for notification task
+      depends_on: lastTaskId ? [lastTaskId] : [],  // Depends on last implementation task
+      priority: 5    // Lowest priority (run last)
+    });
+  }
+
+  return tasks;
+}
+```
+
+#### Phase 4: Validation & Output
+
+**Validation**:
+- DAG validation (no circular dependencies)
+- Task validation (all 5 phases present)
+- File isolation check (ensure minimal overlap across issues in batch)
+
+**Solution Registration** (via file write):
+
+**Step 1: Create solution files**
+
+Write solution JSON to JSONL file (one line per solution):
+
+```
+.workflow/issues/solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl
+```
+
+**File Format** (JSONL - each line is a complete solution):
+```
+{"id":"SOL-GH-123-a7x9","description":"...","approach":"...","analysis":{...},"score":0.85,"tasks":[...]}
+{"id":"SOL-GH-123-b2k4","description":"...","approach":"...","analysis":{...},"score":0.75,"tasks":[...]}
+```
+
+**Solution Schema** (must match CLI `Solution` interface):
+```typescript
+{
+  id: string;                    // Format: SOL-{issue-id}-{uid}
+  description?: string;
+  approach?: string;
+  tasks: SolutionTask[];
+  analysis?: { risk, impact, complexity };
+  score?: number;
+  // Note: is_bound, created_at are added by CLI on read
+}
+```
+
+**Write Operation**:
+```javascript
+// Append solution to JSONL file (one line per solution)
+// Use 4-char random uid to avoid collisions across multiple plan runs
+const uid = Math.random().toString(36).slice(2, 6);  // e.g., "a7x9"
+const solutionId = `SOL-${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) : '';
+const newContent = existing.trimEnd() + (existing ? '\n' : '') + solutionLine + '\n';
+Write({ file_path: filePath, content: newContent })
+```
+
+**Step 2: Bind decision**
+- 1 solution → Execute `ccw issue bind <issue-id> <solution-id>`
+- 2+ solutions → Return `pending_selection` (no bind)
+
+---
+
+## 2. Output Requirements
+
+### 2.1 Generate Files (Primary)
+
+**Solution file per issue**:
+```
+.workflow/issues/solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl
+```
+
+Each line is a solution JSON containing tasks. Schema: `cat .claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/solution-schema.json`
+
+### 2.2 Return Summary
+
+```json
+{
+  "bound": [{ "issue_id": "...", "solution_id": "...", "task_count": N }],
+  "pending_selection": [{ "issue_id": "GH-123", "solutions": [{ "id": "SOL-GH-123-1", "description": "...", "task_count": N }] }]
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## 3. Quality Standards
+
+### 3.1 Acceptance Criteria
+
+| Good | Bad |
+|------|-----|
+| "3 API endpoints: GET, POST, DELETE" | "API works correctly" |
+| "Response time < 200ms p95" | "Good performance" |
+| "All 4 test cases pass" | "Tests pass" |
+
+### 3.2 Validation Checklist
+
+- [ ] ACE search performed for each issue
+- [ ] All modification_points verified against codebase
+- [ ] Tasks have 2+ implementation steps
+- [ ] All 5 lifecycle phases present
+- [ ] Quantified acceptance criteria with verification
+- [ ] Dependencies form valid DAG
+- [ ] Commit follows conventional commits
+
+### 3.3 Guidelines
+
+**Bash Tool**:
+- Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
+
+**ALWAYS**:
+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
+2. **Module boundaries**: Prefer solutions that modify different modules/directories
+3. **Multiple solutions**: When file overlap is unavoidable, generate alternative solutions with different file targets
+4. **Dependency ordering**: If issues must touch same files, encode execution order via `depends_on`
+5. **Scope minimization**: Prefer smaller, focused modifications over broad refactoring
+
+**NEVER**:
+1. Execute implementation (return plan only)
+2. Use vague criteria ("works correctly", "good performance")
+3. Create circular dependencies
+4. Generate more than 10 tasks per issue
+5. Skip bind when `solutions.length === 1` (MUST execute bind command)
+
+**OUTPUT**:
+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

@@ -0,0 +1,311 @@
+---
+name: issue-queue-agent
+description: |
+  Solution ordering agent for queue formation with Gemini CLI conflict analysis.
+  Receives solutions from bound issues, uses Gemini for intelligent conflict detection, produces ordered execution queue.
+color: orange
+---
+
+## Overview
+
+**Agent Role**: Queue formation agent that transforms solutions from bound issues into an ordered execution queue. Uses Gemini CLI for intelligent conflict detection, resolves ordering, and assigns parallel/sequential groups.
+
+**Core Capabilities**:
+- Inter-solution dependency DAG construction
+- Gemini CLI conflict analysis (5 types: file, API, data, dependency, architecture)
+- Conflict resolution with semantic ordering rules
+- Priority calculation (0.0-1.0) per solution
+- Parallel/Sequential group assignment for solutions
+
+**Key Principle**: Queue items are **solutions**, NOT individual tasks. Each executor receives a complete solution with all its tasks.
+
+---
+
+## 1. Input & Execution
+
+### 1.1 Input Context
+
+```javascript
+{
+  solutions: [{
+    issue_id: string,      // e.g., "ISS-20251227-001"
+    solution_id: string,   // e.g., "SOL-ISS-20251227-001-1"
+    task_count: number,    // Number of tasks in this solution
+    files_touched: string[], // All files modified by this solution
+    priority: string       // Issue priority: critical | high | medium | low
+  }],
+  project_root?: string,
+  rebuild?: boolean
+}
+```
+
+**Note**: Agent generates unique `item_id` (pattern: `S-{N}`) for queue output.
+
+### 1.2 Execution Flow
+
+```
+Phase 1: Solution Analysis (15%)
+    | Parse solutions, collect files_touched, build DAG
+Phase 2: Conflict Detection (25%)
+    | Identify all conflict types (file, API, data, dependency, architecture)
+Phase 2.5: Clarification (15%)
+    | Surface ambiguous dependencies, BLOCK until resolved
+Phase 3: Conflict Resolution (20%)
+    | Apply ordering rules, update DAG
+Phase 4: Ordering & Grouping (25%)
+    | Topological sort, assign parallel/sequential groups
+```
+
+---
+
+## 2. Processing Logic
+
+### 2.1 Dependency Graph
+
+**Build DAG from solutions**:
+1. Create node for each solution with `inDegree: 0` and `outEdges: []`
+2. Build file→solutions mapping from `files_touched`
+3. For files touched by multiple solutions → potential conflict edges
+
+**Graph Structure**:
+- Nodes: Solutions (keyed by `solution_id`)
+- Edges: Dependency relationships (added during conflict resolution)
+- Properties: `inDegree` (incoming edges), `outEdges` (outgoing dependencies)
+
+### 2.2 Conflict Detection (Gemini CLI)
+
+Use Gemini CLI for intelligent conflict analysis across all solutions:
+
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Analyze solutions for conflicts across 5 dimensions
+TASK: • Detect file conflicts (same file modified by multiple solutions)
+      • Detect API conflicts (breaking interface changes)
+      • Detect data conflicts (schema changes to same model)
+      • Detect dependency conflicts (package version mismatches)
+      • Detect architecture conflicts (pattern violations)
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @.workflow/issues/solutions/**/*.jsonl | Solution data: \${SOLUTIONS_JSON}
+EXPECTED: JSON array of conflicts with type, severity, solutions, recommended_order
+CONSTRAINTS: Severity: high (API/data) > medium (file/dependency) > low (architecture)
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis --cd .workflow/issues
+```
+
+**Placeholder**: `${SOLUTIONS_JSON}` = serialized solutions array from bound issues
+
+**Conflict Types & Severity**:
+
+| Type | Severity | Trigger |
+|------|----------|---------|
+| `file_conflict` | medium | Multiple solutions modify same file |
+| `api_conflict` | high | Breaking interface changes |
+| `data_conflict` | high | Schema changes to same model |
+| `dependency_conflict` | medium | Package version mismatches |
+| `architecture_conflict` | low | Pattern violations |
+
+**Output per conflict**:
+```json
+{ "type": "...", "severity": "...", "solutions": [...], "recommended_order": [...], "rationale": "..." }
+```
+
+### 2.2.5 Clarification (BLOCKING)
+
+**Purpose**: Surface ambiguous dependencies for user/system clarification
+
+**Trigger Conditions**:
+- High severity conflicts without `recommended_order` from Gemini analysis
+- Circular dependencies detected
+- Multiple valid resolution strategies
+
+**Clarification Generation**:
+
+For each unresolved high-severity conflict:
+1. Generate conflict ID: `CFT-{N}`
+2. Build question: `"{type}: Which solution should execute first?"`
+3. List options with solution summaries (issue title + task count)
+4. Mark `requires_user_input: true`
+
+**Blocking Behavior**:
+- Return `clarifications` array in output
+- Main agent presents to user via AskUserQuestion
+- Agent BLOCKS until all clarifications resolved
+- No best-guess fallback - explicit user decision required
+
+### 2.3 Resolution Rules
+
+| Priority | Rule | Example |
+|----------|------|---------|
+| 1 | Higher issue priority first | critical > high > medium > low |
+| 2 | Foundation solutions first | Solutions with fewer dependencies |
+| 3 | More tasks = higher priority | Solutions with larger impact |
+| 4 | Create before extend | S1:Creates module -> S2:Extends it |
+
+### 2.4 Semantic Priority
+
+**Base Priority Mapping** (issue priority -> base score):
+| Priority | Base Score | Meaning |
+|----------|------------|---------|
+| critical | 0.9 | Highest |
+| high | 0.7 | High |
+| medium | 0.5 | Medium |
+| low | 0.3 | Low |
+
+**Task-count Boost** (applied to base score):
+| Factor | Boost |
+|--------|-------|
+| task_count >= 5 | +0.1 |
+| task_count >= 3 | +0.05 |
+| Foundation scope | +0.1 |
+| Fewer dependencies | +0.05 |
+
+**Formula**: `semantic_priority = clamp(baseScore + sum(boosts), 0.0, 1.0)`
+
+### 2.5 Group Assignment
+
+- **Parallel (P*)**: Solutions with no file overlaps between them
+- **Sequential (S*)**: Solutions that share files must run in order
+
+---
+
+## 3. Output Requirements
+
+### 3.1 Generate Files (Primary)
+
+**Queue files**:
+```
+.workflow/issues/queues/{queue-id}.json   # Full queue with solutions, conflicts, groups
+.workflow/issues/queues/index.json        # Update with new queue entry
+```
+
+Queue ID: Use the Queue ID provided in prompt (do NOT generate new one)
+Queue Item ID format: `S-N` (S-1, S-2, S-3, ...)
+
+### 3.2 Queue File Schema
+
+```json
+{
+  "id": "QUE-20251227-143000",
+  "status": "active",
+  "solutions": [
+    {
+      "item_id": "S-1",
+      "issue_id": "ISS-20251227-003",
+      "solution_id": "SOL-ISS-20251227-003-1",
+      "status": "pending",
+      "execution_order": 1,
+      "execution_group": "P1",
+      "depends_on": [],
+      "semantic_priority": 0.8,
+      "files_touched": ["src/auth.ts", "src/utils.ts"],
+      "task_count": 3
+    }
+  ],
+  "conflicts": [
+    {
+      "type": "file_conflict",
+      "file": "src/auth.ts",
+      "solutions": ["S-1", "S-3"],
+      "resolution": "sequential",
+      "resolution_order": ["S-1", "S-3"],
+      "rationale": "S-1 creates auth module, S-3 extends it"
+    }
+  ],
+  "execution_groups": [
+    { "id": "P1", "type": "parallel", "solutions": ["S-1", "S-2"], "solution_count": 2 },
+    { "id": "S2", "type": "sequential", "solutions": ["S-3"], "solution_count": 1 }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+### 3.3 Return Summary (Brief)
+
+Return brief summaries; full conflict details in separate files:
+
+```json
+{
+  "queue_id": "QUE-20251227-143000",
+  "total_solutions": N,
+  "total_tasks": N,
+  "execution_groups": [{ "id": "P1", "type": "parallel", "count": N }],
+  "conflicts_summary": [{
+    "id": "CFT-001",
+    "type": "api_conflict",
+    "severity": "high",
+    "summary": "Brief 1-line description",
+    "resolution": "sequential",
+    "details_path": ".workflow/issues/conflicts/CFT-001.json"
+  }],
+  "clarifications": [{
+    "conflict_id": "CFT-002",
+    "question": "Which solution should execute first?",
+    "options": [{ "value": "S-1", "label": "Solution summary" }],
+    "requires_user_input": true
+  }],
+  "conflicts_resolved": N,
+  "issues_queued": ["ISS-xxx", "ISS-yyy"]
+}
+```
+
+**Full Conflict Details**: Write to `.workflow/issues/conflicts/{conflict-id}.json`
+
+---
+
+## 4. Quality Standards
+
+### 4.1 Validation Checklist
+
+- [ ] No circular dependencies between solutions
+- [ ] All file conflicts resolved
+- [ ] Solutions in same parallel group have NO file overlaps
+- [ ] Semantic priority calculated for all solutions
+- [ ] Dependencies ordered correctly
+
+### 4.2 Error Handling
+
+| Scenario | Action |
+|----------|--------|
+| Circular dependency | Abort, report cycles |
+| Resolution creates cycle | Flag for manual resolution |
+| Missing solution reference | Skip and warn |
+| Empty solution list | Return empty queue |
+
+### 4.3 Guidelines
+
+**Bash Tool**:
+- Use `run_in_background=false` for all Bash/CLI calls to ensure foreground execution
+
+**ALWAYS**:
+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
+5. Include rationale for conflict resolutions
+6. Validate ordering before output
+
+**NEVER**:
+1. Execute solutions (ordering only)
+2. Ignore circular dependencies
+3. Skip conflict detection
+4. Output invalid DAG
+5. Merge conflicting solutions in parallel group
+6. Split tasks from their solution
+
+**WRITE** (exactly 2 files):
+- `.workflow/issues/queues/{Queue ID}.json` - Full queue with solutions, groups
+- `.workflow/issues/queues/index.json` - Update with new queue entry
+- Use Queue ID from prompt, do NOT generate new one
+
+**RETURN** (summary + unresolved conflicts):
+```json
+{
+  "queue_id": "QUE-xxx",
+  "total_solutions": N,
+  "total_tasks": N,
+  "execution_groups": [{"id": "P1", "type": "parallel", "count": N}],
+  "issues_queued": ["ISS-xxx"],
+  "clarifications": [{"conflict_id": "CFT-1", "question": "...", "options": [...]}]
+}
+```
+- `clarifications`: Only present if unresolved high-severity conflicts exist
+- No markdown, no prose - PURE JSON only

.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 +1,530 @@
+---
+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
+  IF step.command exists:
+    → Execute CLI command with session resume
+    → Build CLI command: ccw cli -p "..." --resume {resume_from} --tool {tool} --mode write
+  ELSE:
+    → Direct agent implementation
+    → 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
+  IF step.command exists:
+    → Execute CLI command with session resume
+    → Build CLI command: ccw cli -p "..." --resume {resume_from} --tool {tool} --mode write
+  ELSE:
+    → Direct agent implementation
+    → 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
+  IF step.command exists:
+    → Execute CLI command with session resume
+  ELSE:
+    → Direct agent refactoring
+    → 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 Session Resumption** (when step.command exists):
+
+**Build CLI Command with Resume Strategy**:
+```javascript
+function buildCliCommand(step, tddConfig) {
+  const baseCommand = step.command  // From task JSON
+
+  // Parse cli_execution strategy
+  switch (tddConfig.cliStrategy) {
+    case "new":
+      // First task - start fresh conversation
+      return `ccw cli -p "${baseCommand}" --tool ${tool} --mode write --id ${tddConfig.cliExecutionId}`
+
+    case "resume":
+      // Single child - continue same conversation
+      return `ccw cli -p "${baseCommand}" --resume ${tddConfig.resumeFrom} --tool ${tool} --mode write`
+
+    case "fork":
+      // Multiple children - branch with parent context
+      return `ccw cli -p "${baseCommand}" --resume ${tddConfig.resumeFrom} --id ${tddConfig.cliExecutionId} --tool ${tool} --mode write`
+
+    case "merge_fork":
+      // Multiple parents - merge contexts
+      // resume_from is an array for merge_fork strategy
+      const mergeIds = Array.isArray(tddConfig.resumeFrom)
+        ? tddConfig.resumeFrom.join(',')
+        : tddConfig.resumeFrom
+      return `ccw cli -p "${baseCommand}" --resume ${mergeIds} --id ${tddConfig.cliExecutionId} --tool ${tool} --mode write`
+
+    default:
+      // Fallback - no resume
+      return `ccw cli -p "${baseCommand}" --tool ${tool} --mode write`
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Execute CLI Command**:
+```javascript
+// TDD agent runs in foreground - can receive hook callbacks
+Bash(
+  command=buildCliCommand(step, tddConfig),
+  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 step.command exists
+- 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-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

@@ -59,6 +59,14 @@ When task JSON contains `flow_control` field, execute preparation and implementa
 2. **Variable Substitution**: Use `[variable_name]` to reference previous outputs
 3. **Error Handling**: Follow step-specific strategies (`skip_optional`, `fail`, `retry_once`)
 
+**Command-to-Tool Mapping** (for pre_analysis commands):
+```
+"Read(path)"            → Read tool: Read(file_path=path)
+"bash(command)"         → Bash tool: Bash(command=command)
+"Search(pattern,path)"  → Grep tool: Grep(pattern=pattern, path=path)
+"Glob(pattern)"         → Glob tool: Glob(pattern=pattern)
+```
+
 **Implementation Approach** (`flow_control.implementation_approach`):
 When task JSON contains implementation_approach array:
 1. **Sequential Execution**: Process steps in order, respecting `depends_on` dependencies
@@ -73,6 +81,12 @@ When task JSON contains implementation_approach array:
    - `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
 
 
 ### 1. Context Assessment & Test Discovery
@@ -318,6 +332,7 @@ When generating test results for orchestrator (saved to `.process/test-results.j
 ## 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

@@ -120,7 +120,11 @@ Before completing any task, verify:
 - Make assumptions - verify with existing materials
 - Skip quality verification steps
 
+**Bash Tool**:
+- 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/cli-settings.json

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+{
+  "version": "1.0.0",
+  "defaultTool": "gemini",
+  "promptFormat": "plain",
+  "smartContext": {
+    "enabled": false,
+    "maxFiles": 10
+  },
+  "nativeResume": true,
+  "recursiveQuery": true,
+  "cache": {
+    "injectionMode": "auto",
+    "defaultPrefix": "",
+    "defaultSuffix": ""
+  },
+  "codeIndexMcp": "ace",
+  "$schema": "./cli-settings.schema.json"
+}

.claude/cli-tools.json

@@ -1,47 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "version": "1.0.0",
-  "tools": {
-    "gemini": {
-      "enabled": true,
-      "isBuiltin": true,
-      "command": "gemini",
-      "description": "Google AI for code analysis"
-    },
-    "qwen": {
-      "enabled": true,
-      "isBuiltin": true,
-      "command": "qwen",
-      "description": "Alibaba AI assistant"
-    },
-    "codex": {
-      "enabled": true,
-      "isBuiltin": true,
-      "command": "codex",
-      "description": "OpenAI code generation"
-    },
-    "claude": {
-      "enabled": true,
-      "isBuiltin": true,
-      "command": "claude",
-      "description": "Anthropic AI assistant"
-    }
-  },
-  "customEndpoints": [],
-  "defaultTool": "gemini",
-  "settings": {
-    "promptFormat": "plain",
-    "smartContext": {
-      "enabled": false,
-      "maxFiles": 10
-    },
-    "nativeResume": true,
-    "recursiveQuery": true,
-    "cache": {
-      "injectionMode": "auto",
-      "defaultPrefix": "",
-      "defaultSuffix": ""
-    },
-    "codeIndexMcp": "ace"
-  },
-  "$schema": "./cli-tools.schema.json"
-}

.claude/commands/ccw.md

@@ -0,0 +1,486 @@
+---
+name: ccw
+description: Main workflow orchestrator - analyze intent, select workflow, execute command chain in main process
+argument-hint: "\"task description\""
+allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), 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-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 SlashCommand in main process, blocking until complete.
+
+```
+User Input → Analyze Intent → Select Workflow → [Confirm] → Execute Chain
+                                                              ↓
+                                                    SlashCommand (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/,
+    'bugfix': /fix|bug|error|crash|fail|debug/,
+    'issue-batch': /issues?|batch/ && /fix|resolve/,
+    'exploration': /uncertain|explore|research|what if/,
+    'multi-perspective': /multi-perspective|compare|cross-verify/,
+    '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' },
+    'bugfix':            { level: 2, flow: 'bugfix.standard' },
+    'issue-batch':       { level: 'Issue', flow: 'issue' },
+    '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-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' }
+      ])
+    ],
+
+    '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' }
+    ],
+
+    // Level 3 - Standard
+    'coupled': [
+      // Unit: Verified Planning【plan → plan-verify】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:plan', args: `"${analysis.goal}"`, unit: 'verified-planning' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:plan-verify', args: '', unit: 'verified-planning' },
+      // Execution
+      { cmd: '/workflow:execute', args: '' },
+      // Unit: Code Review【review-session-cycle → review-fix】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:review-session-cycle', args: '', unit: 'code-review' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:review-fix', args: '', unit: 'code-review' },
+      // Unit: Test Validation【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】
+      ...(analysis.constraints?.includes('skip-tests') ? [] : [
+        { cmd: '/workflow:test-fix-gen', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' },
+        { cmd: '/workflow:test-cycle-execute', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' }
+      ])
+    ],
+
+    'tdd': [
+      // Unit: TDD Planning + Execution【tdd-plan → execute】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:tdd-plan', args: `"${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: `"${analysis.goal}"`, unit: 'test-validation' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:test-cycle-execute', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' }
+    ],
+
+    'review-fix': [
+      // Unit: Code Review【review-session-cycle → review-fix】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:review-session-cycle', args: '', unit: 'code-review' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:review-fix', args: '', unit: 'code-review' },
+      // Unit: Test Validation【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:test-fix-gen', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:test-cycle-execute', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' }
+    ],
+
+    'ui': [
+      { cmd: '/workflow:ui-design:explore-auto', args: `"${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: `"${analysis.goal}"` },
+      // Unit: Verified Planning【plan → plan-verify】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:plan', args: '', unit: 'verified-planning' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:plan-verify', args: '', unit: 'verified-planning' },
+      // Execution
+      { cmd: '/workflow:execute', args: '' },
+      // Unit: Test Validation【test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute】
+      { cmd: '/workflow:test-fix-gen', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' },
+      { cmd: '/workflow:test-cycle-execute', args: '', unit: 'test-validation' }
+    ],
+
+    // Issue Workflow
+    'issue': [
+      { cmd: '/issue:discover', args: '' },
+      { cmd: '/issue:plan', args: '--all-pending' },
+      { cmd: '/issue:queue', args: '' },
+      { cmd: '/issue:execute', args: '' }
+    ]
+  };
+
+  return chains[workflow.flow] || chains['rapid'];
+}
+```
+
+**Output**: `Level [X] - [flow] | Pipeline: [...] | Commands: [1. /cmd1 2. /cmd2 ...]`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 3: User Confirmation
+
+```javascript
+async function getUserConfirmation(chain) {
+  const response = await AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Execute this command chain?",
+      header: "Confirm",
+      options: [
+        { label: "Confirm", description: "Start" },
+        { label: "Adjust", description: "Modify" },
+        { label: "Cancel", description: "Abort" }
+      ]
+    }]
+  });
+
+  if (response.error === "Cancel") throw new Error("Cancelled");
+  if (response.error === "Adjust") return await adjustChain(chain);
+  return chain;
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+### Phase 4: Setup TODO Tracking
+
+```javascript
+function setupTodoTracking(chain, workflow) {
+  const todos = chain.map((step, i) => ({
+    content: `CCW:${workflow}: [${i + 1}/${chain.length}] ${step.cmd}`,
+    status: i === 0 ? 'in_progress' : 'pending',
+    activeForm: `Executing ${step.cmd}`
+  }));
+  TodoWrite({ todos });
+}
+```
+
+**Output**: `-> CCW:rapid: [1/3] /workflow:lite-plan | CCW:rapid: [2/3] /workflow:lite-execute | ...`
+
+---
+
+### Phase 5: Execute Command Chain
+
+```javascript
+async function executeCommandChain(chain, workflow) {
+  let previousResult = null;
+
+  for (let i = 0; i < chain.length; i++) {
+    try {
+      const fullCommand = assembleCommand(chain[i], previousResult);
+      const result = await SlashCommand({ command: fullCommand });
+
+      previousResult = { ...result, success: true };
+      updateTodoStatus(i, chain.length, workflow, 'completed');
+
+    } catch (error) {
+      const action = await handleError(chain[i], error, i);
+      if (action === 'retry') {
+        i--;  // Retry
+      } else if (action === 'abort') {
+        return { success: false, error: error.message };
+      }
+      // 'skip' - continue
+    }
+  }
+
+  return { success: true, completed: chain.length };
+}
+
+// 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
+    +-- Create todos with CCW prefix
+    |
+Phase 5: Execute Command Chain
+    |-- For each command:
+    |   |-- Assemble full command
+    |   |-- Execute via SlashCommand
+    |   |-- Update TODO status
+    |   +-- Handle errors (retry/skip/abort)
+    +-- Return workflow result
+```
+
+---
+
+## 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】|
+| "OAuth2 system" | feature (high) | 3 |【plan → plan-verify】→ execute →【review-session-cycle → review-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 SlashCommand 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
+
+**TodoWrite-Based Tracking**: 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" }
+];
+```
+
+**vs ccw-coordinator**: Extensive state.json with task_id, status transitions, hook callbacks.
+
+---
+
+## Type Comparison: ccw vs ccw-coordinator
+
+| Aspect | ccw | ccw-coordinator |
+|--------|-----|-----------------|
+| **Type** | Main process (SlashCommand) | External CLI (ccw cli + hook callbacks) |
+| **Execution** | Synchronous blocking | Async background with hook completion |
+| **Workflow** | Auto intent-based selection | Manual chain building |
+| **Intent Analysis** | 5-phase clarity check | 3-phase requirement analysis |
+| **State** | TodoWrite only (in-memory) | state.json + checkpoint/resume |
+| **Error Handling** | Retry/skip/abort (interactive) | Retry/skip/abort (via AskUser) |
+| **Use Case** | Auto workflow for any task | Manual orchestration, large chains |
+
+---
+
+## 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"
+```

.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/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: SlashCommand(*), 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

@@ -0,0 +1,472 @@
+---
+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: "[-y|--yes] <path-pattern> [--perspectives=bug,ux,...] [--external]"
+allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Glob(*), Grep(*)
+---
+
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-select all perspectives, skip confirmations.
+
+# Issue Discovery Command
+
+## Quick Start
+
+```bash
+# Discover issues in specific module (interactive perspective selection)
+/issue:discover src/auth/**
+
+# Discover with specific perspectives
+/issue:discover src/payment/** --perspectives=bug,security,test
+
+# Discover with external research for all perspectives
+/issue:discover src/api/** --external
+
+# Discover in multiple modules
+/issue:discover src/auth/**,src/payment/**
+```
+
+**Discovery Scope**: Specified modules/files only
+**Output Directory**: `.workflow/issues/discoveries/{discovery-id}/`
+**Available Perspectives**: bug, ux, test, quality, security, performance, maintainability, best-practices
+**Exa Integration**: Auto-enabled for security and best-practices perspectives
+**CLI Tools**: Gemini → Qwen → Codex (fallback chain)
+
+## What & Why
+
+### Core Concept
+Multi-perspective issue discovery orchestrator that explores code from different angles to identify potential bugs, UX improvements, test gaps, and other actionable items. Unlike code review (which assesses existing code quality), discovery focuses on **finding opportunities for improvement and potential problems**.
+
+**vs Code Review**:
+- **Code Review** (`review-module-cycle`): Evaluates code quality against standards
+- **Issue Discovery** (`issue:discover`): Finds actionable issues, bugs, and improvement opportunities
+
+### Value Proposition
+1. **Proactive Issue Detection**: Find problems before they become bugs
+2. **Multi-Perspective Analysis**: Each perspective surfaces different types of issues
+3. **External Benchmarking**: Compare against industry best practices via Exa
+4. **Direct Issue Integration**: Discoveries can be exported to issue tracker
+5. **Dashboard Management**: View, filter, and export discoveries via CCW dashboard
+
+## How It Works
+
+### Execution Flow
+
+```
+Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization
+   └─ Parse target pattern, create session, initialize output structure
+
+Phase 2: Interactive Perspective Selection
+   └─ AskUserQuestion for perspective selection (or use --perspectives)
+
+Phase 3: Parallel Perspective Analysis
+   ├─ Launch N @cli-explore-agent instances (one per perspective)
+   ├─ Security & Best-Practices auto-trigger Exa research
+   ├─ Agent writes perspective JSON, returns summary
+   └─ Update discovery-progress.json
+
+Phase 4: Aggregation & Prioritization
+   ├─ Collect agent return summaries
+   ├─ Load perspective JSON files
+   ├─ Merge findings, deduplicate by file+line
+   └─ Calculate priority scores
+
+Phase 5: Issue Generation & Summary
+   ├─ Convert high-priority discoveries to issue format
+   ├─ Write to discovery-issues.jsonl
+   ├─ Generate single summary.md from agent returns
+   └─ Update discovery-state.json to complete
+
+Phase 6: User Action Prompt
+   └─ AskUserQuestion for next step (export/dashboard/skip)
+```
+
+## Perspectives
+
+### Available Perspectives
+
+| Perspective | Focus | Categories | Exa |
+|-------------|-------|------------|-----|
+| **bug** | Potential Bugs | edge-case, null-check, resource-leak, race-condition, boundary, exception-handling | - |
+| **ux** | User Experience | error-message, loading-state, feedback, accessibility, interaction, consistency | - |
+| **test** | Test Coverage | missing-test, edge-case-test, integration-gap, coverage-hole, assertion-quality | - |
+| **quality** | Code Quality | complexity, duplication, naming, documentation, code-smell, readability | - |
+| **security** | Security Issues | injection, auth, encryption, input-validation, data-exposure, access-control | ✓ |
+| **performance** | Performance | n-plus-one, memory-usage, caching, algorithm, blocking-operation, resource | - |
+| **maintainability** | Maintainability | coupling, cohesion, tech-debt, extensibility, module-boundary, interface-design | - |
+| **best-practices** | Best Practices | convention, pattern, framework-usage, anti-pattern, industry-standard | ✓ |
+
+### Interactive Perspective Selection
+
+When no `--perspectives` flag is provided, the command uses AskUserQuestion:
+
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "Select primary discovery focus:",
+    header: "Focus",
+    multiSelect: false,
+    options: [
+      { label: "Bug + Test + Quality", description: "Quick scan: potential bugs, test gaps, code quality (Recommended)" },
+      { label: "Security + Performance", description: "System audit: security issues, performance bottlenecks" },
+      { label: "Maintainability + Best-practices", description: "Long-term health: coupling, tech debt, conventions" },
+      { label: "Full analysis", description: "All 7 perspectives (comprehensive, takes longer)" }
+    ]
+  }]
+})
+```
+
+**Recommended Combinations**:
+- Quick scan: bug, test, quality
+- Full analysis: all perspectives
+- Security audit: security, bug, quality
+
+## Core Responsibilities
+
+### Orchestrator
+
+**Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization**
+
+```javascript
+// Step 1: Parse target pattern and resolve files
+const resolvedFiles = await expandGlobPattern(targetPattern);
+if (resolvedFiles.length === 0) {
+  throw new Error(`No files matched pattern: ${targetPattern}`);
+}
+
+// Step 2: Generate discovery ID
+const discoveryId = `DSC-${formatDate(new Date(), 'YYYYMMDD-HHmmss')}`;
+
+// Step 3: Create output directory
+const outputDir = `.workflow/issues/discoveries/${discoveryId}`;
+await mkdir(outputDir, { recursive: true });
+await mkdir(`${outputDir}/perspectives`, { recursive: true });
+
+// Step 4: Initialize unified discovery state (merged state+progress)
+await writeJson(`${outputDir}/discovery-state.json`, {
+  discovery_id: discoveryId,
+  target_pattern: targetPattern,
+  phase: "initialization",
+  created_at: new Date().toISOString(),
+  updated_at: new Date().toISOString(),
+  target: { files_count: { total: resolvedFiles.length }, project: {} },
+  perspectives: [],  // filled after selection: [{name, status, findings}]
+  external_research: { enabled: false, completed: false },
+  results: { total_findings: 0, issues_generated: 0, priority_distribution: {} }
+});
+```
+
+**Phase 2: Perspective Selection**
+
+```javascript
+// Check for --perspectives flag
+let selectedPerspectives = [];
+
+if (args.perspectives) {
+  selectedPerspectives = args.perspectives.split(',').map(p => p.trim());
+} else {
+  // Interactive selection via AskUserQuestion
+  const response = await AskUserQuestion({...});
+  selectedPerspectives = parseSelectedPerspectives(response);
+}
+
+// Validate and update state
+await updateDiscoveryState(outputDir, {
+  'metadata.perspectives': selectedPerspectives,
+  phase: 'parallel'
+});
+```
+
+**Phase 3: Parallel Perspective Analysis**
+
+Launch N agents in parallel (one per selected perspective):
+
+```javascript
+// Launch agents in parallel - agents write JSON and return summary
+const agentPromises = selectedPerspectives.map(perspective =>
+  Task({
+    subagent_type: "cli-explore-agent",
+    run_in_background: false,
+    description: `Discover ${perspective} issues`,
+    prompt: buildPerspectivePrompt(perspective, discoveryId, resolvedFiles, outputDir)
+  })
+);
+
+// Wait for all agents - collect their return summaries
+const results = await Promise.all(agentPromises);
+// results contain agent summaries for final report
+```
+
+**Phase 4: Aggregation & Prioritization**
+
+```javascript
+// Load all perspective JSON files written by agents
+const allFindings = [];
+for (const perspective of selectedPerspectives) {
+  const jsonPath = `${outputDir}/perspectives/${perspective}.json`;
+  if (await fileExists(jsonPath)) {
+    const data = await readJson(jsonPath);
+    allFindings.push(...data.findings.map(f => ({ ...f, perspective })));
+  }
+}
+
+// Deduplicate and prioritize
+const prioritizedFindings = deduplicateAndPrioritize(allFindings);
+
+// Update unified state
+await updateDiscoveryState(outputDir, {
+  phase: 'aggregation',
+  'results.total_findings': prioritizedFindings.length,
+  'results.priority_distribution': countByPriority(prioritizedFindings)
+});
+```
+
+**Phase 5: Issue Generation & Summary**
+
+```javascript
+// Convert high-priority findings to issues
+const issueWorthy = prioritizedFindings.filter(f =>
+  f.priority === 'critical' || f.priority === 'high' || f.priority_score >= 0.7
+);
+
+// Write discovery-issues.jsonl
+await writeJsonl(`${outputDir}/discovery-issues.jsonl`, issues);
+
+// Generate single summary.md from agent return summaries
+// Orchestrator briefly summarizes what agents returned (NO detailed reports)
+await writeSummaryFromAgentReturns(outputDir, results, prioritizedFindings, issues);
+
+// Update final state
+await updateDiscoveryState(outputDir, {
+  phase: 'complete',
+  updated_at: new Date().toISOString(),
+  'results.issues_generated': issues.length
+});
+```
+
+**Phase 6: User Action Prompt**
+
+```javascript
+// Prompt user for next action based on discovery results
+const hasHighPriority = issues.some(i => i.priority === 'critical' || i.priority === 'high');
+const hasMediumFindings = prioritizedFindings.some(f => f.priority === 'medium');
+
+await AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: `Discovery complete: ${issues.length} issues generated, ${prioritizedFindings.length} total findings. What would you like to do next?`,
+    header: "Next Step",
+    multiSelect: false,
+    options: hasHighPriority ? [
+      { label: "Export to Issues (Recommended)", description: `${issues.length} high-priority issues found - export to issue tracker for planning` },
+      { label: "Open Dashboard", description: "Review findings in ccw view before exporting" },
+      { label: "Skip", description: "Complete discovery without exporting" }
+    ] : hasMediumFindings ? [
+      { label: "Open Dashboard (Recommended)", description: "Review medium-priority findings in ccw view to decide which to export" },
+      { label: "Export to Issues", description: `Export ${issues.length} issues to tracker` },
+      { label: "Skip", description: "Complete discovery without exporting" }
+    ] : [
+      { label: "Skip (Recommended)", description: "No significant issues found - complete discovery" },
+      { label: "Open Dashboard", description: "Review all findings in ccw view" },
+      { label: "Export to Issues", description: `Export ${issues.length} issues anyway` }
+    ]
+  }]
+});
+
+// Handle response
+if (response === "Export to Issues") {
+  // Append to issues.jsonl
+  await appendJsonl('.workflow/issues/issues.jsonl', issues);
+  console.log(`Exported ${issues.length} issues. Run /issue:plan to continue.`);
+} else if (response === "Open Dashboard") {
+  console.log('Run `ccw view` and navigate to Issues > Discovery to manage findings.');
+}
+```
+
+### Output File Structure
+
+```
+.workflow/issues/discoveries/
+├── index.json                           # Discovery session index
+└── {discovery-id}/
+    ├── discovery-state.json             # Unified state (merged state+progress)
+    ├── perspectives/
+    │   └── {perspective}.json           # Per-perspective findings
+    ├── external-research.json           # Exa research results (if enabled)
+    ├── discovery-issues.jsonl           # Generated candidate issues
+    └── summary.md                       # Single summary (from agent returns)
+```
+
+### Schema References
+
+**External Schema Files** (agent MUST read and follow exactly):
+
+| Schema | Path | Purpose |
+|--------|------|---------|
+| **Discovery State** | `~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/discovery-state-schema.json` | Session state machine |
+| **Discovery Finding** | `~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/discovery-finding-schema.json` | Perspective analysis results |
+
+### Agent Invocation Template
+
+**Perspective Analysis Agent**:
+
+```javascript
+Task({
+  subagent_type: "cli-explore-agent",
+  run_in_background: false,
+  description: `Discover ${perspective} issues`,
+  prompt: `
+    ## Task Objective
+    Discover potential ${perspective} issues in specified module files.
+
+    ## Discovery Context
+    - Discovery ID: ${discoveryId}
+    - Perspective: ${perspective}
+    - Target Pattern: ${targetPattern}
+    - Resolved Files: ${resolvedFiles.length} files
+    - Output Directory: ${outputDir}
+
+    ## MANDATORY FIRST STEPS
+    1. Read discovery state: ${outputDir}/discovery-state.json
+    2. Read schema: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/discovery-finding-schema.json
+    3. Analyze target files for ${perspective} concerns
+
+    ## Output Requirements
+
+    **1. Write JSON file**: ${outputDir}/perspectives/${perspective}.json
+    - Follow discovery-finding-schema.json exactly
+    - Each finding: id, title, priority, category, description, file, line, snippet, suggested_issue, confidence
+
+    **2. Return summary** (DO NOT write report file):
+    - Return a brief text summary of findings
+    - Include: total findings, priority breakdown, key issues
+    - This summary will be used by orchestrator for final report
+
+    ## Perspective-Specific Guidance
+    ${getPerspectiveGuidance(perspective)}
+
+    ## Success Criteria
+    - [ ] JSON written to ${outputDir}/perspectives/${perspective}.json
+    - [ ] Summary returned with findings count and key issues
+    - [ ] Each finding includes actionable suggested_issue
+    - [ ] Priority uses lowercase enum: critical/high/medium/low
+  `
+})
+```
+
+**Exa Research Agent** (for security and best-practices):
+
+```javascript
+Task({
+  subagent_type: "cli-explore-agent",
+  run_in_background: false,
+  description: `External research for ${perspective} via Exa`,
+  prompt: `
+    ## Task Objective
+    Research industry best practices for ${perspective} using Exa search
+
+    ## Research Steps
+    1. Read project tech stack: .workflow/project-tech.json
+    2. Use Exa to search for best practices
+    3. Synthesize findings relevant to this project
+
+    ## Output Requirements
+
+    **1. Write JSON file**: ${outputDir}/external-research.json
+    - Include sources, key_findings, gap_analysis, recommendations
+
+    **2. Return summary** (DO NOT write report file):
+    - Brief summary of external research findings
+    - Key recommendations for the project
+
+    ## Success Criteria
+    - [ ] JSON written to ${outputDir}/external-research.json
+    - [ ] Summary returned with key recommendations
+    - [ ] Findings are relevant to project's tech stack
+  `
+})
+```
+
+### Perspective Guidance Reference
+
+```javascript
+function getPerspectiveGuidance(perspective) {
+  const guidance = {
+    bug: `
+      Focus: Null checks, edge cases, resource leaks, race conditions, boundary conditions, exception handling
+      Priority: Critical=data corruption/crash, High=malfunction, Medium=edge case issues, Low=minor
+    `,
+    ux: `
+      Focus: Error messages, loading states, feedback, accessibility, interaction patterns, form validation
+      Priority: Critical=inaccessible, High=confusing, Medium=inconsistent, Low=cosmetic
+    `,
+    test: `
+      Focus: Missing unit tests, edge case coverage, integration gaps, assertion quality, test isolation
+      Priority: Critical=no security tests, High=no core logic tests, Medium=weak coverage, Low=minor gaps
+    `,
+    quality: `
+      Focus: Complexity, duplication, naming, documentation, code smells, readability
+      Priority: Critical=unmaintainable, High=significant issues, Medium=naming/docs, Low=minor refactoring
+    `,
+    security: `
+      Focus: Input validation, auth/authz, injection, XSS/CSRF, data exposure, access control
+      Priority: Critical=auth bypass/injection, High=missing authz, Medium=weak validation, Low=headers
+    `,
+    performance: `
+      Focus: N+1 queries, memory leaks, caching, algorithm efficiency, blocking operations
+      Priority: Critical=memory leaks, High=N+1/inefficient, Medium=missing cache, Low=minor optimization
+    `,
+    maintainability: `
+      Focus: Coupling, interface design, tech debt, extensibility, module boundaries, configuration
+      Priority: Critical=unrelated code changes, High=unclear boundaries, Medium=coupling, Low=refactoring
+    `,
+    'best-practices': `
+      Focus: Framework conventions, language patterns, anti-patterns, deprecated APIs, coding standards
+      Priority: Critical=anti-patterns causing bugs, High=convention violations, Medium=style, Low=cosmetic
+    `
+  };
+  return guidance[perspective] || 'General code discovery analysis';
+}
+```
+
+## Dashboard Integration
+
+### Viewing Discoveries
+
+Open CCW dashboard to manage discoveries:
+
+```bash
+ccw view
+```
+
+Navigate to **Issues > Discovery** to:
+- View all discovery sessions
+- Filter findings by perspective and priority
+- Preview finding details
+- Select and export findings as issues
+
+### Exporting to Issues
+
+From the dashboard, select findings and click "Export as Issues" to:
+1. Convert discoveries to standard issue format
+2. Append to `.workflow/issues/issues.jsonl`
+3. Set status to `registered`
+4. Continue with `/issue:plan` workflow
+
+## Related Commands
+
+```bash
+# After discovery, plan solutions for exported issues
+/issue:plan DSC-001,DSC-002,DSC-003
+
+# Or use interactive management
+/issue:manage
+```
+
+## Best Practices
+
+1. **Start Focused**: Begin with specific modules rather than entire codebase
+2. **Use Quick Scan First**: Start with bug, test, quality for fast results
+3. **Review Before Export**: Not all discoveries warrant issues - use dashboard to filter
+4. **Combine Perspectives**: Run related perspectives together (e.g., security + bug)
+5. **Enable Exa for New Tech**: When using unfamiliar frameworks, enable external research

.claude/commands/issue/execute.md

@@ -0,0 +1,580 @@
+---
+name: execute
+description: Execute queue with DAG-based parallel orchestration (one commit per solution)
+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
+
+Minimal orchestrator that dispatches **solution IDs** to executors. Each executor receives a complete solution with all its tasks.
+
+**Design Principles:**
+- `queue dag` → returns parallel batches with solution IDs (S-1, S-2, ...)
+- `detail <id>` → READ-ONLY solution fetch (returns full solution with all tasks)
+- `done <id>` → update solution completion status
+- No race conditions: status changes only via `done`
+- **Executor handles all tasks within a solution sequentially**
+- **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 --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 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
+
+**Worktree Options**:
+- `--worktree` - Create a new worktree with timestamp-based name
+- `--worktree <existing-path>` - Resume in an existing worktree (for recovery/continuation)
+
+**Resume**: Use `git worktree list` to find existing worktrees from interrupted executions
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+```
+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 ${QUEUE_ID} → { parallel_batches: [["S-1","S-2"], ["S-3"]] }
+   └─ AskUserQuestion → executor type (codex|gemini|agent), dry-run mode, worktree mode
+
+Phase 2: Dispatch Parallel Batch (DAG-driven)
+   ├─ Parallelism determined by DAG (no manual limit)
+   ├─ All executors work in the SAME worktree (or main if no worktree)
+   ├─ For each solution ID in batch (parallel - all at once):
+   │   ├─ Executor calls: ccw issue detail <id>  (READ-ONLY)
+   │   ├─ Executor gets FULL SOLUTION with all tasks
+   │   ├─ Executor implements all tasks sequentially (T1 → T2 → T3)
+   │   ├─ Executor tests + verifies each task
+   │   ├─ Executor commits ONCE per solution (with formatted summary)
+   │   └─ Executor calls: ccw issue done <id>
+   └─ Wait for batch completion
+
+Phase 3: Next Batch (repeat Phase 2)
+   └─ ccw issue queue dag → check for newly-ready solutions
+
+Phase 4 (if --worktree): Worktree Completion
+   ├─ All batches complete → prompt for merge strategy
+   └─ Options: Create PR / Merge to main / Keep branch
+```
+
+## Implementation
+
+### Phase 0: Validate Queue ID
+
+```javascript
+// Check if --queue was provided
+let QUEUE_ID = args.queue;
+
+if (!QUEUE_ID) {
+  // List available queues
+  const listResult = Bash('ccw issue queue list --brief --json').trim();
+  const index = JSON.parse(listResult);
+
+  if (index.queues.length === 0) {
+    console.log('No queues found. Use /issue:queue to create one first.');
+    return;
+  }
+
+  // Filter active queues only
+  const activeQueues = index.queues.filter(q => q.status === 'active');
+
+  if (activeQueues.length === 0) {
+    console.log('No active queues found.');
+    console.log('Available queues:', index.queues.map(q => `${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 (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) {
+  console.log(dag.error || 'No solutions ready for execution');
+  console.log('Use /issue:queue to form a queue first');
+  return;
+}
+
+console.log(`
+## Queue DAG (Solution-Level)
+
+- Total Solutions: ${dag.total}
+- Ready: ${dag.ready_count}
+- Completed: ${dag.completed_count}
+- Parallel in batch 1: ${dag.parallel_batches[0]?.length || 0}
+`);
+
+// Interactive selection via AskUserQuestion
+const answer = AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [
+    {
+      question: 'Select executor type:',
+      header: 'Executor',
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: 'Codex (Recommended)', description: 'Autonomous coding with full write access' },
+        { label: 'Gemini', description: 'Large context analysis and implementation' },
+        { label: 'Agent', description: 'Claude Code sub-agent for complex tasks' }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      question: 'Execution mode:',
+      header: 'Mode',
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: 'Execute (Recommended)', description: 'Run all ready solutions' },
+        { label: 'Dry-run', description: 'Show DAG and batches without executing' }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      question: 'Use git worktree for queue isolation?',
+      header: 'Worktree',
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: 'Yes (Recommended)', description: 'Create ONE worktree for entire queue - main stays clean' },
+        { label: 'No', description: 'Work directly in current directory' }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+});
+
+const executor = answer['Executor'].toLowerCase().split(' ')[0];  // codex|gemini|agent
+const isDryRun = answer['Mode'].includes('Dry-run');
+const useWorktree = answer['Worktree'].includes('Yes');
+
+// Dry run mode
+if (isDryRun) {
+  console.log('### Parallel Batches (Dry-run):\n');
+  dag.parallel_batches.forEach((batch, i) => {
+    console.log(`Batch ${i + 1}: ${batch.join(', ')}`);
+  });
+  return;
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 0 & 2: Setup Queue Worktree & Dispatch
+
+```javascript
+// Parallelism determined by DAG - no manual limit
+// All solutions in same batch have NO file conflicts and can run in parallel
+const batch = dag.parallel_batches[0] || [];
+
+// Initialize TodoWrite
+TodoWrite({
+  todos: batch.map(id => ({
+    content: `Execute solution ${id}`,
+    status: 'pending',
+    activeForm: `Executing solution ${id}`
+  }))
+});
+
+console.log(`\n### Executing Solutions (DAG batch 1): ${batch.join(', ')}`);
+
+// Parse existing worktree path from args if provided
+// Example: --worktree /path/to/existing/worktree
+const existingWorktree = args.worktree && typeof args.worktree === 'string' ? args.worktree : null;
+
+// Setup ONE worktree for entire queue (not per-solution)
+let worktreePath = null;
+let worktreeBranch = null;
+
+if (useWorktree) {
+  const repoRoot = Bash('git rev-parse --show-toplevel').trim();
+  const worktreeBase = `${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, worktreePath);
+});
+
+await Promise.all(executions);
+batch.forEach(id => updateTodo(id, 'completed'));
+```
+
+### Executor Dispatch
+
+```javascript
+// 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
+
+  // 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: ${SOLUTION_ID}
+${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:
+- 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.
+
+Command:
+  git add -A
+  git commit -m "<type>(<scope>): <description>
+
+  Solution: ${SOLUTION_ID}
+  Tasks completed: <list task IDs>
+
+  Changes:
+  - <file1>: <what changed>
+  - <file2>: <what changed>
+
+  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
+On success, run:
+  ccw issue done ${SOLUTION_ID} --result '{"summary": "<brief>", "files_modified": ["<file1>", "<file2>"], "commit": {"hash": "<hash>", "type": "<type>"}, "tasks_completed": <N>}'
+
+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}${cdOption}`,
+      { timeout: 7200000, run_in_background: true }  // 2hr for full solution
+    );
+  } else if (executorType === 'gemini') {
+    return Bash(
+      `ccw cli -p "${escapePrompt(prompt)}" --tool gemini --mode write --id exec-${solutionId}${cdOption}`,
+      { timeout: 3600000, run_in_background: true }
+    );
+  } else {
+    return Task({
+      subagent_type: 'code-developer',
+      run_in_background: false,
+      description: `Execute solution ${solutionId}`,
+      prompt: worktreePath ? `Working directory: ${worktreePath}\n\n${prompt}` : prompt
+    });
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 3: Check Next Batch
+
+```javascript
+// 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
+
+- Solutions Completed: ${refreshedDag.completed_count}/${refreshedDag.total}
+- Next ready: ${refreshedDag.ready_count}
+`);
+
+if (refreshedDag.ready_count > 0) {
+  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                                                    │
+├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+│ 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 (DAG guarantees)
+- **Main workspace stays clean** until merge/PR decision
+
+## CLI Endpoint Contract
+
+### `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-...",
+  "total": 3,
+  "ready_count": 2,
+  "completed_count": 0,
+  "nodes": [
+    { "id": "S-1", "issue_id": "ISS-xxx", "status": "pending", "ready": true, "task_count": 3 },
+    { "id": "S-2", "issue_id": "ISS-yyy", "status": "pending", "ready": true, "task_count": 2 },
+    { "id": "S-3", "issue_id": "ISS-zzz", "status": "pending", "ready": false, "depends_on": ["S-1"] }
+  ],
+  "parallel_batches": [["S-1", "S-2"], ["S-3"]]
+}
+```
+
+### `ccw issue detail <item_id>`
+Returns FULL SOLUTION with all tasks (READ-ONLY):
+```json
+{
+  "item_id": "S-1",
+  "issue_id": "ISS-xxx",
+  "solution_id": "SOL-xxx",
+  "status": "pending",
+  "solution": {
+    "id": "SOL-xxx",
+    "approach": "...",
+    "tasks": [
+      { "id": "T1", "title": "...", "implementation": [...], "test": {...} },
+      { "id": "T2", "title": "...", "implementation": [...], "test": {...} },
+      { "id": "T3", "title": "...", "implementation": [...], "test": {...} }
+    ],
+    "exploration_context": { "relevant_files": [...] }
+  },
+  "execution_hints": { "executor": "codex", "estimated_minutes": 180 }
+}
+```
+
+### `ccw issue done <item_id>`
+Marks solution completed/failed, updates queue state, checks for queue completion.
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Resolution |
+|-------|------------|
+| No queue | Run /issue:queue first |
+| No ready solutions | Dependencies blocked, check DAG |
+| Executor timeout | Solution not marked done, can retry |
+| Solution failure | Use `ccw issue retry` to reset |
+| Partial task failure | Executor reports which task failed via `done --fail` |
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/issue:plan` - Plan issues with solutions
+- `/issue:queue` - Form execution queue
+- `ccw issue queue dag` - View dependency graph
+- `ccw issue detail <id>` - View task details
+- `ccw issue retry` - Reset failed tasks

.claude/commands/issue/new.md

@@ -0,0 +1,417 @@
+---
+name: new
+description: Create structured issue from GitHub URL or text description
+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
+
+**Requirement Clarity Detection** → Ask only when needed
+
+```
+Clear Input (GitHub URL, structured text)  → Direct creation
+Unclear Input (vague description)          → Minimal clarifying questions
+```
+
+## Issue Structure 
+
+```typescript
+interface Issue {
+  id: string;                    // GH-123 or ISS-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS
+  title: string;
+  status: 'registered' | 'planned' | 'queued' | 'in_progress' | 'completed' | 'failed';
+  priority: number;              // 1 (critical) to 5 (low)
+  context: string;               // Problem description (single source of truth)
+  source: 'github' | 'text' | 'discovery';
+  source_url?: string;
+  labels?: string[];
+
+  // GitHub binding (for non-GitHub sources that publish to GitHub)
+  github_url?: string;           // https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123
+  github_number?: number;        // 123
+
+  // Optional structured fields
+  expected_behavior?: string;
+  actual_behavior?: string;
+  affected_components?: string[];
+
+  // Feedback history (failures + human clarifications)
+  feedback?: {
+    type: 'failure' | 'clarification' | 'rejection';
+    stage: string;               // new/plan/execute
+    content: string;
+    created_at: string;
+  }[];
+
+  // Solution binding
+  bound_solution_id: string | null;
+
+  // Timestamps
+  created_at: string;
+  updated_at: string;
+}
+```
+
+## Quick Reference
+
+```bash
+# Clear inputs - direct creation
+/issue:new https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123
+/issue:new "Login fails with special chars. Expected: success. Actual: 500 error"
+
+# Vague input - will ask clarifying questions
+/issue:new "something wrong with auth"
+```
+
+## Implementation
+
+### Phase 1: Input Analysis & Clarity Detection
+
+```javascript
+const input = userInput.trim();
+const flags = parseFlags(userInput);  // --priority
+
+// Detect input type and clarity
+const isGitHubUrl = input.match(/github\.com\/[\w-]+\/[\w-]+\/issues\/\d+/);
+const isGitHubShort = input.match(/^#(\d+)$/);
+const hasStructure = input.match(/(expected|actual|affects|steps):/i);
+
+// Clarity score: 0-3
+let clarityScore = 0;
+if (isGitHubUrl || isGitHubShort) clarityScore = 3;  // GitHub = fully clear
+else if (hasStructure) clarityScore = 2;             // Structured text = clear
+else if (input.length > 50) clarityScore = 1;        // Long text = somewhat clear
+else clarityScore = 0;                               // Vague
+
+let issueData = {};
+```
+
+### Phase 2: Data Extraction (GitHub or Text)
+
+```javascript
+if (isGitHubUrl || isGitHubShort) {
+  // GitHub - fetch via gh CLI
+  const result = Bash(`gh issue view ${extractIssueRef(input)} --json number,title,body,labels,url`);
+  const gh = JSON.parse(result);
+  issueData = {
+    id: `GH-${gh.number}`,
+    title: gh.title,
+    source: 'github',
+    source_url: gh.url,
+    labels: gh.labels.map(l => l.name),
+    context: gh.body?.substring(0, 500) || gh.title,
+    ...parseMarkdownBody(gh.body)
+  };
+} else {
+  // Text description
+  issueData = {
+    id: `ISS-${new Date().toISOString().replace(/[-:T]/g, '').slice(0, 14)}`,
+    source: 'text',
+    ...parseTextDescription(input)
+  };
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 3: Lightweight Context Hint (Conditional)
+
+```javascript
+// ACE search ONLY for medium clarity (1-2) AND missing components
+// Skip for: GitHub (has context), vague (needs clarification first)
+// Note: Deep exploration happens in /issue:plan, this is just a quick hint
+
+if (clarityScore >= 1 && clarityScore <= 2 && !issueData.affected_components?.length) {
+  const keywords = extractKeywords(issueData.context);
+
+  if (keywords.length >= 2) {
+    try {
+      const aceResult = mcp__ace-tool__search_context({
+        project_root_path: process.cwd(),
+        query: keywords.slice(0, 3).join(' ')
+      });
+      issueData.affected_components = aceResult.files?.slice(0, 3) || [];
+    } catch {
+      // ACE failure is non-blocking
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 4: Conditional Clarification (Only if Unclear)
+
+```javascript
+// ONLY ask questions if clarity is low - simple open-ended prompt
+if (clarityScore < 2 && (!issueData.context || issueData.context.length < 20)) {
+  const answer = AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: 'Please describe the issue in more detail:',
+      header: 'Clarify',
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: 'Provide details', description: 'Describe what, where, and expected behavior' }
+      ]
+    }]
+  });
+
+  // Use custom text input (via "Other")
+  if (answer.customText) {
+    issueData.context = answer.customText;
+    issueData.title = answer.customText.split(/[.\n]/)[0].substring(0, 60);
+    issueData.feedback = [{
+      type: 'clarification',
+      stage: 'new',
+      content: answer.customText,
+      created_at: new Date().toISOString()
+    }];
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 5: GitHub Publishing Decision (Non-GitHub Sources)
+
+```javascript
+// For non-GitHub sources, ask if user wants to publish to GitHub
+let publishToGitHub = false;
+
+if (issueData.source !== 'github') {
+  const publishAnswer = AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: 'Would you like to publish this issue to GitHub?',
+      header: 'Publish',
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: 'Yes, publish to GitHub', description: 'Create issue on GitHub and link it' },
+        { label: 'No, keep local only', description: 'Store as local issue without GitHub sync' }
+      ]
+    }]
+  });
+
+  publishToGitHub = publishAnswer.answers?.['Publish']?.includes('Yes');
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 6: Create Issue
+
+**Summary Display:**
+- Show ID, title, source, affected files (if any)
+
+**Confirmation** (only for vague inputs, clarityScore < 2):
+- Use `AskUserQuestion` to confirm before creation
+
+**Issue Creation** (via CLI endpoint):
+```bash
+# Option 1: Pipe input (recommended for complex JSON - avoids shell escaping)
+echo '{"title":"...", "context":"...", "priority":3}' | ccw issue create
+
+# Option 2: Heredoc (for multi-line JSON)
+ccw issue create << 'EOF'
+{"title":"...", "context":"含\"引号\"的内容", "priority":3}
+EOF
+
+# Option 3: --data parameter (simple cases only)
+ccw issue create --data '{"title":"...", "priority":3}'
+```
+
+**CLI Endpoint Features:**
+| Feature | Description |
+|---------|-------------|
+| Auto-increment ID | `ISS-YYYYMMDD-NNN` (e.g., `ISS-20251229-001`) |
+| Trailing newline | Proper JSONL format, no corruption |
+| JSON output | Returns created issue with all fields |
+
+**Example:**
+```bash
+# Create issue via pipe (recommended)
+echo '{"title": "Login fails with special chars", "context": "500 error when password contains quotes", "priority": 2}' | ccw issue create
+
+# Or with heredoc for complex JSON
+ccw issue create << 'EOF'
+{
+  "title": "Login fails with special chars",
+  "context": "500 error when password contains \"quotes\"",
+  "priority": 2,
+  "source": "text",
+  "expected_behavior": "Login succeeds",
+  "actual_behavior": "500 Internal Server Error"
+}
+EOF
+
+# Output (JSON)
+{
+  "id": "ISS-20251229-001",
+  "title": "Login fails with special chars",
+  "status": "registered",
+  ...
+}
+```
+
+**GitHub Publishing** (if user opted in):
+```javascript
+// Step 1: Create local issue FIRST
+const localIssue = createLocalIssue(issueData);  // ccw issue create
+
+// Step 2: Publish to GitHub if requested
+if (publishToGitHub) {
+  const ghResult = Bash(`gh issue create --title "${issueData.title}" --body "${issueData.context}"`);
+  // Parse GitHub URL from output
+  const ghUrl = ghResult.match(/https:\/\/github\.com\/[\w-]+\/[\w-]+\/issues\/\d+/)?.[0];
+  const ghNumber = parseInt(ghUrl?.match(/\/issues\/(\d+)/)?.[1]);
+
+  if (ghNumber) {
+    // Step 3: Update local issue with GitHub binding
+    Bash(`ccw issue update ${localIssue.id} --github-url "${ghUrl}" --github-number ${ghNumber}`);
+    // Or via pipe:
+    // echo '{"github_url":"${ghUrl}","github_number":${ghNumber}}' | ccw issue update ${localIssue.id}
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Workflow:**
+```
+1. Create local issue (ISS-YYYYMMDD-NNN) → stored in .workflow/issues.jsonl
+2. If publishToGitHub:
+   a. gh issue create → returns GitHub URL
+   b. Update local issue with github_url + github_number binding
+3. Both local and GitHub issues exist, linked together
+```
+
+**Example with GitHub Publishing:**
+```bash
+# User creates text issue
+/issue:new "Login fails with special chars. Expected: success. Actual: 500"
+
+# System asks: "Would you like to publish this issue to GitHub?"
+# User selects: "Yes, publish to GitHub"
+
+# Output:
+# ✓ Local issue created: ISS-20251229-001
+# ✓ Published to GitHub: https://github.com/org/repo/issues/123
+# ✓ GitHub binding saved to local issue
+# → Next step: /issue:plan ISS-20251229-001
+
+# Resulting issue JSON:
+{
+  "id": "ISS-20251229-001",
+  "title": "Login fails with special chars",
+  "source": "text",
+  "github_url": "https://github.com/org/repo/issues/123",
+  "github_number": 123,
+  ...
+}
+```
+
+**Completion:**
+- Display created issue ID
+- Show GitHub URL (if published)
+- Show next step: `/issue:plan <id>`
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+```
+Phase 1: Input Analysis
+   └─ Detect clarity score (GitHub URL? Structured text? Keywords?)
+
+Phase 2: Data Extraction (branched by clarity)
+   ┌────────────┬─────────────────┬──────────────┐
+   │  Score 3   │   Score 1-2     │   Score 0    │
+   │  GitHub    │   Text + ACE    │   Vague      │
+   ├────────────┼─────────────────┼──────────────┤
+   │  gh CLI    │  Parse struct   │ AskQuestion  │
+   │  → parse   │  + quick hint   │ (1 question) │
+   │            │  (3 files max)  │  → feedback  │
+   └────────────┴─────────────────┴──────────────┘
+
+Phase 3: GitHub Publishing Decision (non-GitHub only)
+   ├─ Source = github: Skip (already from GitHub)
+   └─ Source ≠ github: AskUserQuestion
+      ├─ Yes → publishToGitHub = true
+      └─ No  → publishToGitHub = false
+
+Phase 4: Create Issue
+   ├─ Score ≥ 2: Direct creation
+   └─ Score < 2: Confirm first → Create
+   └─ If publishToGitHub: gh issue create → link URL
+
+Note: Deep exploration & lifecycle deferred to /issue:plan
+```
+
+## Helper Functions
+
+```javascript
+function extractKeywords(text) {
+  const stopWords = new Set(['the', 'a', 'an', 'is', 'are', 'was', 'were', 'not', 'with']);
+  return text
+    .toLowerCase()
+    .split(/\W+/)
+    .filter(w => w.length > 3 && !stopWords.has(w))
+    .slice(0, 5);
+}
+
+function parseTextDescription(text) {
+  const result = { title: '', context: '' };
+  const sentences = text.split(/\.(?=\s|$)/);
+
+  result.title = sentences[0]?.trim().substring(0, 60) || 'Untitled';
+  result.context = text.substring(0, 500);
+
+  // Extract structured fields if present
+  const expected = text.match(/expected:?\s*([^.]+)/i);
+  const actual = text.match(/actual:?\s*([^.]+)/i);
+  const affects = text.match(/affects?:?\s*([^.]+)/i);
+
+  if (expected) result.expected_behavior = expected[1].trim();
+  if (actual) result.actual_behavior = actual[1].trim();
+  if (affects) {
+    result.affected_components = affects[1].split(/[,\s]+/).filter(c => c.includes('/') || c.includes('.'));
+  }
+
+  return result;
+}
+
+function parseMarkdownBody(body) {
+  if (!body) return {};
+  const result = {};
+
+  const problem = body.match(/##?\s*(problem|description)[:\s]*([\s\S]*?)(?=##|$)/i);
+  const expected = body.match(/##?\s*expected[:\s]*([\s\S]*?)(?=##|$)/i);
+  const actual = body.match(/##?\s*actual[:\s]*([\s\S]*?)(?=##|$)/i);
+
+  if (problem) result.context = problem[2].trim().substring(0, 500);
+  if (expected) result.expected_behavior = expected[2].trim();
+  if (actual) result.actual_behavior = actual[2].trim();
+
+  return result;
+}
+```
+
+## Examples
+
+### Clear Input (No Questions)
+
+```bash
+/issue:new https://github.com/org/repo/issues/42
+# → Fetches, parses, creates immediately
+
+/issue:new "Login fails with special chars. Expected: success. Actual: 500"
+# → Parses structure, creates immediately
+```
+
+### Vague Input (1 Question)
+
+```bash
+/issue:new "auth broken"
+# → Asks: "Input unclear. What is the issue about?"
+# → User provides details → saved to feedback[]
+# → Creates issue
+```
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/issue:plan` - Plan solution for issue
+

.claude/commands/issue/plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,335 @@
+---
+name: plan
+description: Batch plan issue resolution using issue-plan-agent (explore + plan closed-loop)
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] --all-pending <issue-id>[,<issue-id>,...] [--batch-size 3]"
+allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), SlashCommand(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Bash(*), Read(*), Write(*)
+---
+
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-bind solutions without confirmation, use recommended settings.
+
+# Issue Plan Command (/issue:plan)
+
+## Overview
+
+Unified planning command using **issue-plan-agent** that combines exploration and planning into a single closed-loop workflow.
+
+**Behavior:**
+- Single solution per issue → auto-bind
+- Multiple solutions → return for user selection
+- Agent handles file generation
+
+## Core Guidelines
+
+**⚠️ Data Access Principle**: Issues and solutions files can grow very large. To avoid context overflow:
+
+| Operation | Correct | Incorrect |
+|-----------|---------|-----------|
+| List issues (brief) | `ccw issue list --status pending --brief` | `Read('issues.jsonl')` |
+| Read issue details | `ccw issue status <id> --json` | `Read('issues.jsonl')` |
+| Update status | `ccw issue update <id> --status ...` | Direct file edit |
+| Bind solution | `ccw issue bind <id> <sol-id>` | Direct file edit |
+
+**Output Options**:
+- `--brief`: JSON with minimal fields (id, title, status, priority, tags)
+- `--json`: Full JSON (agent use only)
+
+**Orchestration vs Execution**:
+- **Command (orchestrator)**: Use `--brief` for minimal context
+- **Agent (executor)**: Fetch full details → `ccw issue status <id> --json`
+
+**ALWAYS** use CLI commands for CRUD operations. **NEVER** read entire `issues.jsonl` or `solutions/*.jsonl` directly. 
+
+## Usage
+
+```bash
+/issue:plan [<issue-id>[,<issue-id>,...]] [FLAGS]
+
+# Examples
+/issue:plan                           # Default: --all-pending
+/issue:plan GH-123                    # Single issue
+/issue:plan GH-123,GH-124,GH-125      # Batch (up to 3)
+/issue:plan --all-pending             # All pending issues (explicit)
+
+# Flags
+--batch-size <n>      Max issues per agent batch (default: 3)
+```
+
+## Execution Process
+
+```
+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)
+   └─ Intelligent grouping via Gemini (semantic similarity, max 3 per batch)
+
+Phase 2: Unified Explore + Plan (issue-plan-agent)
+   ├─ Launch issue-plan-agent per batch
+   ├─ Agent performs:
+   │   ├─ ACE semantic search for each issue
+   │   ├─ Codebase exploration (files, patterns, dependencies)
+   │   ├─ Solution generation with task breakdown
+   │   └─ Conflict detection across issues
+   └─ Output: solution JSON per issue
+
+Phase 3: Solution Registration & Binding
+   ├─ Append solutions to solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl
+   ├─ Single solution per issue → auto-bind
+   ├─ Multiple candidates → AskUserQuestion to select
+   └─ Update issues.jsonl with bound_solution_id
+
+Phase 4: Summary
+   ├─ Display bound solutions
+   ├─ Show task counts per issue
+   └─ Display next steps (/issue:queue)
+```
+
+## Implementation
+
+### Phase 1: Issue Loading (Brief Info Only)
+
+```javascript
+const batchSize = flags.batchSize || 3;
+let issues = [];  // {id, title, tags} - brief info for grouping only
+
+// Default to --all-pending if no input provided
+const useAllPending = flags.allPending || !userInput || userInput.trim() === '';
+
+if (useAllPending) {
+  // Get pending issues with brief metadata via CLI
+  const result = Bash(`ccw issue list --status pending,registered --json`).trim();
+  const parsed = result ? JSON.parse(result) : [];
+  issues = parsed.map(i => ({ id: i.id, title: i.title || '', tags: i.tags || [] }));
+
+  if (issues.length === 0) {
+    console.log('No pending issues found.');
+    return;
+  }
+  console.log(`Found ${issues.length} pending issues`);
+} else {
+  // Parse comma-separated issue IDs, fetch brief metadata
+  const ids = userInput.includes(',')
+    ? userInput.split(',').map(s => s.trim())
+    : [userInput.trim()];
+
+  for (const id of ids) {
+    Bash(`ccw issue init ${id} --title "Issue ${id}" 2>/dev/null || true`);
+    const info = Bash(`ccw issue status ${id} --json`).trim();
+    const parsed = info ? JSON.parse(info) : {};
+    issues.push({ id, title: parsed.title || '', tags: parsed.tags || [] });
+  }
+}
+// Note: Agent fetches full issue content via `ccw issue status <id> --json`
+
+// 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
+
+console.log(`Processing ${issues.length} issues in ${batches.length} batch(es)`);
+
+TodoWrite({
+  todos: batches.map((_, i) => ({
+    content: `Plan batch ${i+1}`,
+    status: 'pending',
+    activeForm: `Planning batch ${i+1}`
+  }))
+});
+```
+
+### Phase 2: Unified Explore + Plan (issue-plan-agent) - PARALLEL
+
+```javascript
+Bash(`mkdir -p .workflow/issues/solutions`);
+const pendingSelections = [];  // Collect multi-solution issues for user selection
+const agentResults = [];       // Collect all agent results for conflict aggregation
+
+// Build prompts for all batches
+const agentTasks = batches.map((batch, batchIndex) => {
+  const issueList = batch.map(i => `- ${i.id}: ${i.title}${i.tags.length ? ` [${i.tags.join(', ')}]` : ''}`).join('\n');
+  const batchIds = batch.map(i => i.id);
+
+  const issuePrompt = `
+## Plan Issues
+
+**Issues** (grouped by similarity):
+${issueList}
+
+**Project Root**: ${process.cwd()}
+
+### Project Context (MANDATORY)
+1. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (technology stack, architecture)
+2. Read: .workflow/project-guidelines.json (constraints and conventions)
+
+### Workflow
+1. Fetch issue details: ccw issue status <id> --json
+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}-{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
+
+### Return Summary
+{"bound":[{"issue_id":"...","solution_id":"...","task_count":N}],"pending_selection":[{"issue_id":"...","solutions":[{"id":"...","description":"...","task_count":N}]}]}
+`;
+
+  return { batchIndex, batchIds, issuePrompt, batch };
+});
+
+// Launch agents in parallel (max 10 concurrent)
+const MAX_PARALLEL = 10;
+for (let i = 0; i < agentTasks.length; i += MAX_PARALLEL) {
+  const chunk = agentTasks.slice(i, i + MAX_PARALLEL);
+  const taskIds = [];
+
+  // Launch chunk in parallel
+  for (const { batchIndex, batchIds, issuePrompt, batch } of chunk) {
+    updateTodo(`Plan batch ${batchIndex + 1}`, 'in_progress');
+    const taskId = Task(
+      subagent_type="issue-plan-agent",
+      run_in_background=true,
+      description=`Explore & plan ${batch.length} issues: ${batchIds.join(', ')}`,
+      prompt=issuePrompt
+    );
+    taskIds.push({ taskId, batchIndex });
+  }
+
+  console.log(`Launched ${taskIds.length} agents (batch ${i/MAX_PARALLEL + 1}/${Math.ceil(agentTasks.length/MAX_PARALLEL)})...`);
+
+  // Collect results from this chunk
+  for (const { taskId, batchIndex } of taskIds) {
+    const result = TaskOutput(task_id=taskId, block=true);
+
+    // Extract JSON from potential markdown code blocks (agent may wrap in ```json...```)
+    const jsonText = extractJsonFromMarkdown(result);
+    let summary;
+    try {
+      summary = JSON.parse(jsonText);
+    } catch (e) {
+      console.log(`⚠ Batch ${batchIndex + 1}: Failed to parse agent result, skipping`);
+      updateTodo(`Plan batch ${batchIndex + 1}`, 'completed');
+      continue;
+    }
+    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 || []) {
+      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 pending selections for Phase 3
+    for (const pending of summary.pending_selection || []) {
+      pendingSelections.push(pending);
+    }
+    updateTodo(`Plan batch ${batchIndex + 1}`, 'completed');
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 3: Solution Selection (if pending)
+
+```javascript
+// Handle multi-solution issues
+for (const pending of pendingSelections) {
+  if (pending.solutions.length === 0) continue;
+
+  const options = pending.solutions.slice(0, 4).map(sol => ({
+    label: `${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
+
+```javascript
+// Count planned issues via CLI
+const planned = JSON.parse(Bash(`ccw issue list --status planned --brief`) || '[]');
+const plannedCount = planned.length;
+
+console.log(`
+## Done: ${issues.length} issues → ${plannedCount} planned
+
+Next: \`/issue:queue\` → \`/issue:execute\`
+`);
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Resolution |
+|-------|------------|
+| Issue not found | Auto-create in issues.jsonl |
+| ACE search fails | Agent falls back to ripgrep |
+| No solutions generated | Display error, suggest manual planning |
+| User cancels selection | Skip issue, continue with others |
+| File conflicts | Agent detects and suggests resolution order |
+
+## Bash Compatibility
+
+**Avoid**: `$(cmd)`, `$var`, `for` loops — will be escaped incorrectly
+
+**Use**: Simple commands + `&&` chains, quote comma params `"pending,registered"`
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+Before completing, verify:
+
+- [ ] All input issues have solutions in `solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl`
+- [ ] Single solution issues are auto-bound (`bound_solution_id` set)
+- [ ] Multi-solution issues returned in `pending_selection` for user choice
+- [ ] Each solution has executable tasks with `modification_points`
+- [ ] Task acceptance criteria are quantified (not vague)
+- [ ] Conflicts detected and reported (if multiple issues touch same files)
+- [ ] Issue status updated to `planned` after binding
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/issue:queue` - Form execution queue from bound solutions
+- `ccw issue list` - List all issues
+- `ccw issue status` - View issue and solution details

.claude/commands/issue/queue.md

@@ -0,0 +1,445 @@
+---
+name: queue
+description: Form execution queue from bound solutions using issue-queue-agent (solution-level)
+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
+
+Queue formation command using **issue-queue-agent** that analyzes all bound solutions, resolves **inter-solution** conflicts, and creates an ordered execution queue at **solution level**.
+
+**Design Principle**: Queue items are **solutions**, not individual tasks. Each executor receives a complete solution with all its tasks.
+
+## Core Capabilities
+
+- **Agent-driven**: issue-queue-agent handles all ordering logic
+- **Solution-level granularity**: Queue items are solutions, not tasks
+- **Conflict clarification**: High-severity conflicts prompt user decision
+- Semantic priority calculation per solution (0.0-1.0)
+- Parallel/Sequential group assignment for solutions
+
+## Core Guidelines
+
+**⚠️ Data Access Principle**: Issues and queue files can grow very large. To avoid context overflow:
+
+| 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 (single) | `ccw issue solution <id> --brief` | `Read('solutions/*.jsonl')` |
+
+**Output Options**:
+- `--brief`: JSON with minimal fields (id, status, counts)
+- `--json`: Full JSON (agent use only)
+
+**Orchestration vs Execution**:
+- **Command (orchestrator)**: Use `--brief` for minimal context
+- **Agent (executor)**: Fetch full details → `ccw issue status <id> --json`
+
+**ALWAYS** use CLI commands for CRUD operations. **NEVER** read entire `issues.jsonl` or `queues/*.json` directly.
+
+
+
+## Usage
+
+```bash
+/issue:queue [FLAGS]
+
+# Examples
+/issue:queue                      # Form NEW queue from all bound solutions
+/issue:queue --queues 3           # Form 3 parallel queues (solutions distributed)
+/issue:queue --issue GH-123       # Form queue for specific issue only
+/issue:queue --append GH-124      # Append to active queue
+/issue:queue --list               # List all queues (history)
+/issue:queue --switch QUE-xxx     # Switch active queue
+/issue:queue --archive            # Archive completed active queue
+
+# Flags
+--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
+```
+
+## Execution Process
+
+```
+Phase 1: Solution Loading & Distribution
+   ├─ Load issues.jsonl, filter by status='planned' + bound_solution_id
+   ├─ Read solutions/{issue-id}.jsonl, find bound solution
+   ├─ Extract files_touched from task modification_points
+   ├─ Build solution objects array
+   └─ If --queues > 1: Partition solutions into N groups (minimize cross-group file conflicts)
+
+Phase 2-4: Agent-Driven Queue Formation (issue-queue-agent)
+   ├─ Generate N queue IDs (QUE-xxx-1, QUE-xxx-2, ...)
+   ├─ If --queues == 1: Launch single issue-queue-agent
+   ├─ If --queues > 1: Launch N issue-queue-agents IN PARALLEL
+   ├─ Each agent performs:
+   │   ├─ Conflict analysis (5 types via Gemini CLI)
+   │   ├─ Build dependency DAG from conflicts
+   │   ├─ Calculate semantic priority per solution
+   │   └─ Assign execution groups (parallel/sequential)
+   └─ Each agent writes: queue JSON + index update (NOT active yet)
+
+Phase 5: Conflict Clarification (if needed)
+   ├─ Collect `clarifications` arrays from all agents
+   ├─ If clarifications exist → AskUserQuestion (batched)
+   ├─ Pass user decisions back to respective agents (resume)
+   └─ Agents update queues with resolved conflicts
+
+Phase 6: Status Update & Summary
+   ├─ Update issue statuses to 'queued'
+   └─ 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
+
+### Phase 1: Solution Loading & Distribution
+
+**Data Loading:**
+- 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:**
+```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`):
+- Use `files_touched` from brief output for partitioning
+- Group solutions with overlapping files into same queue
+
+**Output:** Array of solution objects (or N arrays if multi-queue)
+
+### Phase 2-4: Agent-Driven Queue Formation
+
+**Generate Queue IDs** (command layer, pass to agent):
+```javascript
+const timestamp = new Date().toISOString().replace(/[-:T]/g, '').slice(0, 14);
+const numQueues = args.queues || 1;
+const queueIds = numQueues === 1
+  ? [`QUE-${timestamp}`]
+  : Array.from({length: numQueues}, (_, i) => `QUE-${timestamp}-${i + 1}`);
+```
+
+**Agent Prompt** (same for each queue, with assigned solutions):
+```
+## Order Solutions into Execution Queue
+
+**Queue ID**: ${queueId}
+**Solutions**: ${solutions.length} from ${issues.length} issues
+**Project Root**: ${cwd}
+**Queue Index**: ${queueIndex} of ${numQueues}
+
+### Input
+${JSON.stringify(solutions)}
+// Each object: { issue_id, solution_id, task_count, files_touched[], priority }
+
+### Workflow
+
+Step 1: Build dependency graph from solutions (nodes=solutions, edges=file conflicts via files_touched)
+Step 2: Use Gemini CLI for conflict analysis (5 types: file, API, data, dependency, architecture)
+Step 3: For high-severity conflicts without clear resolution → add to `clarifications`
+Step 4: Calculate semantic priority (base from issue priority + task_count boost)
+Step 5: Assign execution groups: P* (parallel, no overlaps) / S* (sequential, shared files)
+Step 6: Write queue JSON + update index
+
+### Output Requirements
+
+**Write files** (exactly 2):
+- `.workflow/issues/queues/${queueId}.json` - Full queue with solutions, conflicts, groups
+- `.workflow/issues/queues/index.json` - Update with new queue entry
+
+**Return JSON**:
+\`\`\`json
+{
+  "queue_id": "${queueId}",
+  "total_solutions": N,
+  "total_tasks": N,
+  "execution_groups": [{"id": "P1", "type": "parallel", "count": N}],
+  "issues_queued": ["ISS-xxx"],
+  "clarifications": [{"conflict_id": "CFT-1", "question": "...", "options": [...]}]
+}
+\`\`\`
+
+### Rules
+- Solution granularity (NOT individual tasks)
+- Queue Item ID format: S-1, S-2, S-3, ...
+- Use provided Queue ID (do NOT generate new)
+- `clarifications` only present if high-severity unresolved conflicts exist
+- Use `files_touched` from input (already extracted by orchestrator)
+
+### Done Criteria
+- [ ] Queue JSON written with all solutions ordered
+- [ ] Index updated with active_queue_id
+- [ ] No circular dependencies
+- [ ] Parallel groups have no file overlaps
+- [ ] Return JSON matches required shape
+```
+
+**Launch Agents** (parallel if multi-queue):
+```javascript
+const numQueues = args.queues || 1;
+
+if (numQueues === 1) {
+  // Single queue: single agent call
+  const result = Task(
+    subagent_type="issue-queue-agent",
+    prompt=buildPrompt(queueIds[0], solutions),
+    description=`Order ${solutions.length} solutions`
+  );
+} else {
+  // Multi-queue: parallel agent calls (single message with N Task calls)
+  const agentPromises = solutionGroups.map((group, i) =>
+    Task(
+      subagent_type="issue-queue-agent",
+      prompt=buildPrompt(queueIds[i], group, i + 1, numQueues),
+      description=`Queue ${i + 1}/${numQueues}: ${group.length} solutions`
+    )
+  );
+  // All agents launched in parallel via single message with multiple Task tool calls
+}
+```
+
+**Multi-Queue Index Update:**
+- First queue sets `active_queue_id`
+- All queues added to `queues` array with `queue_group` field linking them
+
+### Phase 5: Conflict Clarification
+
+**Collect Agent Results** (multi-queue):
+```javascript
+// Collect clarifications from all agents
+const allClarifications = results.flatMap((r, i) =>
+  (r.clarifications || []).map(c => ({ ...c, queue_id: queueIds[i], agent_id: agentIds[i] }))
+);
+```
+
+**Check Agent Return:**
+- Parse agent result JSON (or all results if multi-queue)
+- If any `clarifications` array exists and non-empty → user decision required
+
+**Clarification Flow:**
+```javascript
+if (allClarifications.length > 0) {
+  for (const clarification of allClarifications) {
+    // Present to user via AskUserQuestion
+    const answer = AskUserQuestion({
+      questions: [{
+        question: `[${clarification.queue_id}] ${clarification.question}`,
+        header: clarification.conflict_id,
+        options: clarification.options,
+        multiSelect: false
+      }]
+    });
+
+    // Resume respective agent with user decision
+    Task(
+      subagent_type="issue-queue-agent",
+      resume=clarification.agent_id,
+      prompt=`Conflict ${clarification.conflict_id} resolved: ${answer.selected}`
+    );
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Phase 6: Status Update & Summary
+
+**Status Update** (MUST use CLI command, NOT direct file operations):
+
+```bash
+# Option 1: Batch update from queue (recommended)
+ccw issue update --from-queue [queue-id] --json
+ccw issue update --from-queue --json              # Use active queue
+ccw issue update --from-queue QUE-xxx --json      # Use specific queue
+
+# Option 2: Individual issue update
+ccw issue update <issue-id> --status queued
+```
+
+**⚠️ IMPORTANT**: Do NOT directly modify `issues.jsonl`. Always use CLI command to ensure proper validation and history tracking.
+
+**Output** (JSON):
+```json
+{
+  "success": true,
+  "queue_id": "QUE-xxx",
+  "queued": ["ISS-001", "ISS-002"],
+  "queued_count": 2,
+  "unplanned": ["ISS-003"],
+  "unplanned_count": 1
+}
+```
+
+**Behavior:**
+- Updates issues in queue to `status: 'queued'` (skips already queued/executing/completed)
+- Identifies planned issues with `bound_solution_id` NOT in queue → `unplanned` array
+- Optional `queue-id`: defaults to active queue if omitted
+
+**Summary Output:**
+- Display queue ID, solution count, task count
+- 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)
+
+```
+.workflow/issues/
+├── issues.jsonl              # All issues (one per line)
+├── queues/                   # Queue history directory
+│   ├── index.json            # Queue index (active + history)
+│   ├── {queue-id}.json       # Individual queue files
+│   └── ...
+└── solutions/
+    ├── {issue-id}.jsonl      # Solutions for issue
+    └── ...
+```
+
+### Queue Index Schema
+
+```json
+{
+  "active_queue_id": "QUE-20251227-143000",
+  "active_queue_group": "QGR-20251227-143000",
+  "queues": [
+    {
+      "id": "QUE-20251227-143000-1",
+      "queue_group": "QGR-20251227-143000",
+      "queue_index": 1,
+      "total_queues": 3,
+      "status": "active",
+      "issue_ids": ["ISS-xxx", "ISS-yyy"],
+      "total_solutions": 3,
+      "completed_solutions": 1,
+      "created_at": "2025-12-27T14:30:00Z"
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+**Multi-Queue Fields:**
+- `queue_group`: Links queues created in same batch (format: `QGR-{timestamp}`)
+- `queue_index`: Position in group (1-based)
+- `total_queues`: Total queues in group
+- `active_queue_group`: Current active group (for multi-queue execution)
+
+**Note**: Queue file schema is produced by `issue-queue-agent`. See agent documentation for details.
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Resolution |
+|-------|------------|
+| No bound solutions | Display message, suggest /issue:plan |
+| Circular dependency | List cycles, abort queue formation |
+| High-severity conflict | Return `clarifications`, prompt user decision |
+| 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
+
+Before completing, verify:
+
+- [ ] All planned issues with `bound_solution_id` are included
+- [ ] Queue JSON written to `queues/{queue-id}.json` (N files if multi-queue)
+- [ ] Index updated in `queues/index.json` with `active_queue_id`
+- [ ] Multi-queue: All queues share same `queue_group`
+- [ ] No circular dependencies in solution DAG
+- [ ] All conflicts resolved (auto or via user clarification)
+- [ ] Parallel groups have no file overlaps
+- [ ] Cross-queue: No file overlaps between queues
+- [ ] Issue statuses updated to `queued`
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/issue:execute` - Execute queue with codex
+- `ccw issue queue list` - View current queue
+- `ccw issue update --from-queue [queue-id]` - Sync issue statuses from queue

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

@@ -0,0 +1,773 @@
+---
+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
+CONSTRAINTS: Strict RESTful standards | Identify all public endpoints | Document output language: {lang}
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-code-patterns --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 ${session_dir}/.process/swagger-planning-data.json)"
+        ],
+        "output_to": "api_analysis"
+      }
+    ],
+    "implementation_approach": [
+      {
+        "step": 1,
+        "title": "Generate OpenAPI spec file",
+        "description": "Create complete swagger.yaml specification file",
+        "cli_prompt": "PURPOSE: Generate OpenAPI 3.0.3 specification file from analyzed API structure\nTASK:\n• Define openapi version: 3.0.3\n• Define info: title, description, version, contact, license\n• Define servers: development, staging, production environments\n• Define tags: organized by business modules\n• Define paths: all API endpoints with complete specifications\n• Define components: schemas, securitySchemes, parameters, responses\nMODE: write\nCONTEXT: @[api_analysis]\nEXPECTED: Complete swagger.yaml file following OpenAPI 3.0.3 specification\nCONSTRAINTS: Use {lang} for all descriptions | Strict RESTful standards\n--rule documentation-swagger-api",
+        "output": "swagger.yaml"
+      }
+    ],
+    "target_files": [
+      ".workflow/docs/${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}\nCONSTRAINTS: Include code examples | Clear step-by-step instructions\n--rule development-feature",
+        "output": "{auth_doc_name}"
+      }
+    ],
+    "target_files": [
+      ".workflow/docs/${project_name}/api/{overview_dir}/{auth_doc_name}"
+    ]
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Level 1-3: Unified Error Code Specification
+
+```json
+{
+  "id": "IMPL-003",
+  "title": "Generate unified error code specification",
+  "status": "pending",
+  "meta": {
+    "type": "swagger-error-codes",
+    "agent": "@doc-generator",
+    "tool": "gemini"
+  },
+  "context": {
+    "requirements": [
+      "Define unified error response format",
+      "Create categorized error code system (auth, business, system)",
+      "Provide detailed description and examples for each error code"
+    ]
+  },
+  "flow_control": {
+    "implementation_approach": [
+      {
+        "step": 1,
+        "title": "Generate error code specification document",
+        "cli_prompt": "PURPOSE: Generate comprehensive error code specification for consistent API error handling\nTASK:\n• Define error response format: {code, message, details, timestamp}\n• Document authentication errors (AUTH_xxx): 401/403 series\n• Document parameter errors (PARAM_xxx): 400 series\n• Document business errors (BIZ_xxx): business logic errors\n• Document system errors (SYS_xxx): 500 series\n• For each error code: HTTP status, error message, possible causes, resolution suggestions\nMODE: write\nCONTEXT: @src/**/*.exception.ts @src/**/*.filter.ts\nEXPECTED: Complete error code specification in {lang} with tables and examples\nCONSTRAINTS: Include response examples | Clear categorization\n--rule development-feature",
+        "output": "{error_doc_name}"
+      }
+    ],
+    "target_files": [
+      ".workflow/docs/${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 ${module_name} module\nTASK:\n• Create module overview: purpose, use cases, prerequisites\n• Generate endpoint index: grouped by functionality\n• For each endpoint document:\n  - Functional description: purpose and business context\n  - Request method: GET/POST/PUT/DELETE\n  - URL path: complete API path\n  - Request headers: Authorization and other required headers\n  - Path parameters: {id} and other path variables\n  - Query parameters: pagination, filters, etc.\n  - Request body: JSON Schema format\n  - Response body: success and error responses\n  - Field description table: type, required, example, description\n• Add usage examples: cURL, JavaScript, Python\n• Add version info: v1.0.0, last updated date\nMODE: write\nCONTEXT: @[module_endpoints] @[source_code]\nEXPECTED: Complete module API documentation in {lang} with all endpoints fully documented\nCONSTRAINTS: RESTful standards | Include all response codes\n--rule documentation-swagger-api",
+        "output": "${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/${project_name}/api/swagger.yaml\nEXPECTED: Complete API overview in {lang} with navigation links\nCONSTRAINTS: Clear structure | Quick start focus\n--rule development-feature",
+        "output": "README.md"
+      }
+    ],
+    "target_files": [
+      ".workflow/docs/${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/${project_name}/api/swagger.yaml)",
+        "output_to": "swagger_spec"
+      }
+    ],
+    "implementation_approach": [
+      {
+        "step": 1,
+        "title": "Generate test report",
+        "cli_prompt": "PURPOSE: Generate comprehensive API test validation report\nTASK:\n• Document test environment configuration\n• Calculate endpoint coverage statistics\n• Report test results: pass/fail counts\n• Document boundary tests: parameter limits, null values, special characters\n• Document exception tests: auth failures, permission denied, resource not found\n• List issues found with recommendations\nMODE: write\nCONTEXT: @[swagger_spec]\nEXPECTED: Complete test report in {lang} with detailed results\nCONSTRAINTS: Include test cases | Clear pass/fail status\n--rule development-tests",
+        "output": "{test_doc_name}"
+      }
+    ],
+    "target_files": [
+      ".workflow/docs/${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

@@ -147,8 +147,8 @@ You are generating path-conditional rules for Claude Code.
 
 ## Instructions
 
-Read the agent prompt template for detailed instructions:
-$(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/rules/tech-rules-agent-prompt.txt)
+Read the agent prompt template for detailed instructions.
+Use --rule rules-tech-rules-agent-prompt to load the template automatically.
 
 ## Execution Steps
 

.claude/commands/task/breakdown.md

@@ -1,9 +1,13 @@
 ---
 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"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] task-id"
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-confirm breakdown, use recommended subtask structure.
+
 # Task Breakdown Command (/task:breakdown)
 
 ## Overview

.claude/commands/task/replan.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 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]"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] task-id [\"text\"|file.md] | --batch [verification-report.md]"
 allowed-tools: Read(*), Write(*), Edit(*), TodoWrite(*), Glob(*), Bash(*)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-confirm updates, use recommended changes.
+
 # Task Replan Command (/task:replan)
 
 > **⚠️ DEPRECATION NOTICE**: This command is maintained for backward compatibility. For new workflows, use `/workflow:replan` which provides:
@@ -353,7 +357,7 @@ 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
+Check report content or use /workflow:plan-verify first
 ```
 
 ## Batch Mode Integration

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

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-name: action-plan-verify
-description: Perform non-destructive cross-artifact consistency analysis between IMPL_PLAN.md and task JSONs with quality gate validation
+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(*), TodoWrite(*), Glob(*), Bash(*)
+allowed-tools: Read(*), Write(*), Glob(*), Bash(*)
 ---
 
 ## User Input
@@ -15,13 +15,26 @@ 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.
+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/ACTION_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**: 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).
+**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/ACTION_PLAN_VERIFICATION.md`
 
-**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.
+**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
 
@@ -47,6 +60,12 @@ ELSE:
 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)
@@ -54,7 +73,12 @@ 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
+# 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
+
 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"
@@ -73,12 +97,14 @@ IF TASK_FILES.count == 0:
 
 Load only minimal necessary context from each artifact:
 
-**From workflow-session.json** (NEW - PRIMARY REFERENCE):
+**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 role analysis documents**:
+**From role analysis documents** (AUTHORITATIVE SOURCE):
 - Functional Requirements (IDs, descriptions, acceptance criteria)
 - Non-Functional Requirements (IDs, targets)
 - Business Requirements (IDs, success metrics)
@@ -126,9 +152,21 @@ Create internal representations (do not include raw artifacts in output):
 
 ### 4. Detection Passes (Token-Efficient Analysis)
 
-Focus on high-signal findings. Limit to 50 findings total; aggregate remainder in overflow summary.
+**Token Budget Strategy**:
+- **Total Limit**: 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 priority checks
 
-#### A. User Intent Alignment (NEW - CRITICAL)
+**Execution Order** (Process in sequence; skip if token budget exhausted):
+
+1. **Tier 1 (CRITICAL Path)**: A, B, C - User intent, coverage, consistency (process fully)
+2. **Tier 2 (HIGH Priority)**: D, E - Dependencies, synthesis alignment (limit 15 findings total)
+3. **Tier 3 (MEDIUM Priority)**: F - Specification quality (limit 20 findings)
+4. **Tier 4 (LOW Priority)**: G, H - Duplication, feasibility (limit 15 findings total)
+
+---
+
+#### A. User Intent Alignment (CRITICAL - Tier 1)
 
 - **Goal Alignment**: IMPL_PLAN objectives match user's original intent
 - **Scope Drift**: Plan covers user's stated scope without unauthorized expansion

.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

@@ -1,19 +1,23 @@
 ---
 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]
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] topic or challenge description [--count N]"
 allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), 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
 
-**This command is a pure orchestrator**: Dispatches 3 phases in sequence (interactive framework → parallel role analysis → synthesis), coordinating specialized commands/agents through task attachment model.
+**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 dispatch **expands workflow** by attaching sub-tasks to current TodoWrite
-- Task agent dispatch **attaches analysis tasks** to orchestrator's TodoWrite
+- SlashCommand 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
 - Phase 3: synthesis command attaches its internal tasks
@@ -26,9 +30,9 @@ allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), Task(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Bash(*
 This workflow runs **fully autonomously** once triggered. Phase 1 (artifacts) handles user interaction, Phase 2 (role agents) runs in parallel.
 
 1. **User triggers**: `/workflow:brainstorm:auto-parallel "topic" [--count N]`
-2. **Dispatch Phase 1** → artifacts command (tasks ATTACHED) → Auto-continues
-3. **Dispatch Phase 2** → Parallel role agents (N tasks ATTACHED concurrently) → Auto-continues
-4. **Dispatch Phase 3** → Synthesis command (tasks ATTACHED) → Reports final summary
+2. **Execute Phase 1** → artifacts command (tasks ATTACHED) → Auto-continues
+3. **Execute Phase 2** → Parallel role agents (N tasks ATTACHED concurrently) → Auto-continues
+4. **Execute Phase 3** → Synthesis command (tasks ATTACHED) → Reports final summary
 
 **Auto-Continue Mechanism**:
 - TodoList tracks current phase status and dynamically manages task attachment/collapse
@@ -38,13 +42,13 @@ This workflow runs **fully autonomously** once triggered. Phase 1 (artifacts) ha
 
 ## Core Rules
 
-1. **Start Immediately**: First action is TodoWrite initialization, second action is dispatch Phase 1 command
+1. **Start Immediately**: First action is TodoWrite initialization, second action is execute Phase 1 command
 2. **No Preliminary Analysis**: Do not analyze topic before Phase 1 - artifacts handles all analysis
 3. **Parse Every Output**: Extract selected_roles from workflow-session.json after Phase 1
-4. **Auto-Continue via TodoList**: Check TodoList status to dispatch next pending phase automatically
+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 dispatches **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 dispatch next phase
+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
+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
 
 ## Usage
@@ -67,7 +71,7 @@ This workflow runs **fully autonomously** once triggered. Phase 1 (artifacts) ha
 
 ### Phase 1: Interactive Framework Generation
 
-**Step 1: Dispatch** - Interactive framework generation via artifacts command
+**Step 1: Execute** - Interactive framework generation via artifacts command
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:brainstorm:artifacts \"{topic}\" --count {N}")
@@ -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 dispatched - tasks attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 1 SlashCommand 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 dispatch **attaches** artifacts' 5 internal tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
+**Note**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** artifacts' 5 internal tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
 
 **Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 1.1-1.5** sequentially
 
@@ -167,7 +171,7 @@ TOPIC: {user-provided-topic}
 "
 ```
 
-**Parallel Dispatch**:
+**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
@@ -185,7 +189,7 @@ TOPIC: {user-provided-topic}
 - **FORBIDDEN**: `recommendations.md` or any non-`analysis` prefixed files
 - All N role analyses completed
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 2 agents dispatched - tasks attached in parallel)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 2 agents executed - tasks attached in parallel)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 0: Parameter Parsing", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Parsing count parameter"},
@@ -198,7 +202,7 @@ TOPIC: {user-provided-topic}
 ]
 ```
 
-**Note**: Multiple Task dispatches **attach** N role analysis tasks simultaneously. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks in parallel.
+**Note**: Multiple Task executes **attach** N role analysis tasks simultaneously. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks in parallel.
 
 **Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 2.1-2.N** concurrently
 
@@ -220,7 +224,7 @@ TOPIC: {user-provided-topic}
 
 ### Phase 3: Synthesis Generation
 
-**Step 3: Dispatch** - Synthesis integration via synthesis command
+**Step 3: Execute** - Synthesis integration via synthesis command
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:brainstorm:synthesis --session {sessionId}")
@@ -238,7 +242,7 @@ 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 dispatched - tasks attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 0: Parameter Parsing", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Parsing count parameter"},
@@ -251,7 +255,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:brainstorm:synthesis --session {sessionId}")
 ]
 ```
 
-**Note**: SlashCommand dispatch **attaches** synthesis' internal tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
+**Note**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** synthesis' internal tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
 
 **Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 3.1-3.3** sequentially
 
@@ -284,7 +288,7 @@ Synthesis: .workflow/active/WFS-{topic}/.brainstorming/synthesis-specification.m
 
 ### Key Principles
 
-1. **Task Attachment** (when SlashCommand/Task dispatched):
+1. **Task Attachment** (when SlashCommand/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
@@ -305,7 +309,7 @@ Synthesis: .workflow/active/WFS-{topic}/.brainstorming/synthesis-specification.m
    - No user intervention required between phases
    - TodoWrite dynamically reflects current execution state
 
-**Lifecycle Summary**: Initial pending tasks → Phase 1 dispatched (artifacts tasks ATTACHED) → Artifacts sub-tasks executed → Phase 1 completed (tasks COLLAPSED) → Phase 2 dispatched (N role tasks ATTACHED in parallel) → Role analyses executed concurrently → Phase 2 completed (tasks COLLAPSED) → Phase 3 dispatched (synthesis tasks ATTACHED) → Synthesis sub-tasks executed → Phase 3 completed (tasks COLLAPSED) → Workflow complete.
+**Lifecycle Summary**: Initial pending tasks → Phase 1 executed (artifacts tasks ATTACHED) → Artifacts sub-tasks executed → Phase 1 completed (tasks COLLAPSED) → Phase 2 executed (N role tasks ATTACHED in parallel) → Role analyses executed concurrently → Phase 2 completed (tasks COLLAPSED) → Phase 3 executed (synthesis tasks ATTACHED) → Synthesis sub-tasks executed → Phase 3 completed (tasks COLLAPSED) → Workflow complete.
 
 ### Brainstorming Workflow Specific Features
 
@@ -424,6 +428,17 @@ 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
 

.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/clean.md

@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
 ---
 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(*)
 ---
 
-# Clean Command (/clean)
+# Clean Command (/workflow:clean)
 
 ## Overview
 
@@ -20,9 +20,23 @@ Intelligent cleanup command that explores the codebase to identify the developme
 ## Usage
 
 ```bash
-/clean                          # Full intelligent cleanup (explore → analyze → confirm → execute)
-/clean --dry-run                # Explore and analyze only, no execution
-/clean "auth module"            # Focus cleanup on specific area
+/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 -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
 
@@ -321,7 +335,7 @@ if (flags.includes('--dry-run')) {
 **Dry-run mode**: No changes made.
 Manifest saved to: ${sessionFolder}/cleanup-manifest.json
 
-To execute cleanup: /clean
+To execute cleanup: /workflow:clean
 `)
   return
 }
@@ -329,39 +343,57 @@ To execute cleanup: /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/debug-with-file.md

@@ -0,0 +1,670 @@
+---
+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
+
+**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 logging instrumentation
+   └─ 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 Instrumentation**
+
+For each hypothesis, add logging (same as original debug command).
+
+**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 debug instrumentation (same as original command).
+
+---
+
+## 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 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
+
+Use `/workflow:debug-with-file` 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 `/workflow:debug` when:
+- Simple, quick bugs
+- One-off issues
+- Documentation overhead not needed

.claude/commands/workflow/debug.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: debug
 description: Interactive hypothesis-driven debugging with NDJSON logging, iterative until resolved
-argument-hint: "\"bug description or error message\""
+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 Command (/workflow:debug)
 
 ## Overview
@@ -311,6 +315,12 @@ Output:
    └─ .workflow/.debug/DBG-{slug}-{date}/debug.log
 ```
 
+## 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 |

.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\"]"
 ---
 
 # Workflow Execute Command
@@ -11,6 +11,30 @@ 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"
+```
+
+## 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`)
+
+**Flag Parsing**:
+```javascript
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
+```
+
 ## Performance Optimization Strategy
 
 **Lazy Loading**: Task JSONs read **on-demand** during execution, not upfront. TODO_LIST.md + IMPL_PLAN.md provide metadata for planning.
@@ -23,7 +47,7 @@ Orchestrates autonomous workflow execution through systematic task discovery, ag
 ## Core Rules
 **Complete entire workflow autonomously without user interruption, using TodoWrite for comprehensive progress tracking.**
 **Execute all discovered pending tasks until workflow completion or blocking dependency.**
-**Auto-complete session when all tasks finished: Call `/workflow:session:complete` upon workflow completion.**
+**User-choice completion: When all tasks finished, ask user to choose review or complete.**
 **ONE AGENT = ONE TASK JSON: Each agent instance executes exactly one task JSON file - never batch multiple tasks into single agent execution.**
 
 ## Core Responsibilities
@@ -33,7 +57,7 @@ Orchestrates autonomous workflow execution through systematic task discovery, ag
 - **Agent Orchestration**: Coordinate specialized agents with complete context
 - **Status Synchronization**: Update task JSON files and workflow state
 - **Autonomous Completion**: Continue execution until all tasks complete or reach blocking state
-- **Session Auto-Complete**: Call `/workflow:session:complete` when all workflow tasks finished
+- **Session User-Choice Completion**: Ask user to choose review or complete when all tasks finished
 
 ## Execution Philosophy
 - **Progress tracking**: Continuous TodoWrite updates throughout entire workflow execution
@@ -76,7 +100,9 @@ Phase 4: Execution Strategy & Task Execution
 Phase 5: Completion
    ├─ Update task statuses in JSON files
    ├─ Generate summaries
-   └─ Auto-call /workflow:session:complete
+   └─ AskUserQuestion: Choose next step
+      ├─ "Enter Review" → /workflow:review
+      └─ "Complete Session" → /workflow:session:complete
 
 Resume Mode (--resume-session):
    ├─ Skip Phase 1 & Phase 2
@@ -117,34 +143,41 @@ Auto-select and continue to Phase 2.
 
 List sessions with metadata and prompt user selection:
 ```bash
-bash(for dir in .workflow/active/WFS-*/; do
-  session=$(basename "$dir")
-  project=$(jq -r '.project // "Unknown"' "$dir/workflow-session.json" 2>/dev/null)
-  total=$(grep -c "^- \[" "$dir/TODO_LIST.md" 2>/dev/null || echo "0")
-  completed=$(grep -c "^- \[x\]" "$dir/TODO_LIST.md" 2>/dev/null || echo "0")
-  [ "$total" -gt 0 ] && progress=$((completed * 100 / total)) || progress=0
-  echo "${session} | ${project} | ${completed}/${total} tasks (${progress}%)"
-done)
+bash(for dir in .workflow/active/WFS-*/; do [ -d "$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**:
@@ -254,7 +287,45 @@ while (TODO_LIST.md has pending tasks) {
 3. **Update TodoWrite**: Mark current task complete, advance to next
 4. **Synchronize State**: Update session state and workflow status
 5. **Check Workflow Complete**: Verify all tasks are completed
-6. **Auto-Complete Session**: Call `/workflow:session:complete` when all tasks finished
+6. **User Choice**: When all tasks finished, ask user to choose next step:
+
+```javascript
+// 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`)
+  SlashCommand("/workflow:session:complete --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)
 
@@ -330,7 +401,7 @@ blocked → skip until dependencies clear
 - **Continuous Tracking**: Maintain TodoWrite throughout entire workflow execution until completion
 
 **Rule 4: Workflow Completion Check**
-- When all tasks marked `completed`, auto-call `/workflow:session:complete`
+- When all tasks marked `completed`, prompt user to choose review or complete session
 
 ### TodoWrite Tool Usage
 
@@ -388,40 +459,40 @@ TodoWrite({
 **Note**: Orchestrator does NOT execute flow control steps - Agent interprets and executes them autonomously.
 
 ### Agent Prompt Template
-**Dynamic Generation**: Before agent invocation, read task JSON and extract key requirements.
+**Path-Based Invocation**: Pass paths and trigger markers, let agent parse task JSON autonomously.
 
 ```bash
 Task(subagent_type="{meta.agent}",
      run_in_background=false,
-     prompt="Execute task: {task.title}
+     prompt="Implement task {task.id}: {task.title}
 
-     {[FLOW_CONTROL]}
+     [FLOW_CONTROL]
 
-     **Task Objectives** (from task JSON):
-     {task.context.objective}
-
-     **Expected Deliverables** (from task JSON):
-     {task.context.deliverables}
-
-     **Quality Standards** (from task JSON):
-     {task.context.acceptance_criteria}
-
-     **MANDATORY FIRST STEPS**:
-     1. Read complete task JSON: {session.task_json_path}
-     2. Load context package: {session.context_package_path}
-
-     Follow complete execution guidelines in @.claude/agents/{meta.agent}.md
-
-     **Session Paths**:
-     - Workflow Dir: {session.workflow_dir}
-     - TODO List: {session.todo_list_path}
-     - Summaries Dir: {session.summaries_dir}
+     **Input**:
+     - Task JSON: {session.task_json_path}
      - Context Package: {session.context_package_path}
 
-     **Success Criteria**: Complete all objectives, meet all quality standards, deliver all outputs as specified above.",
-     description="Executing: {task.title}")
+     **Output Location**:
+     - Workflow: {session.workflow_dir}
+     - 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",
+     description="Implement: {task.id}")
 ```
 
+**Key Markers**:
+- `Implement` keyword: Triggers tech stack detection and guidelines loading
+- `[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
+- Generates structured summary with integration points
+
+Embedding task content in prompt creates duplication and conflicts with agent's parsing logic.
+
 ### Agent Assignment Rules
 ```
 meta.agent specified → Use specified agent

.claude/commands/workflow/init.md

@@ -10,7 +10,11 @@ examples:
 # Workflow Init Command (/workflow:init)
 
 ## Overview
-Initialize `.workflow/project.json` with comprehensive project understanding by delegating analysis to **cli-explore-agent**.
+Initialize `.workflow/project-tech.json` and `.workflow/project-guidelines.json` with comprehensive project understanding by delegating analysis to **cli-explore-agent**.
+
+**Dual File System**:
+- `project-tech.json`: Auto-generated technical analysis (stack, architecture, components)
+- `project-guidelines.json`: User-maintained rules and constraints (created as scaffold)
 
 **Note**: This command may be called by other workflow commands. Upon completion, return immediately to continue the calling workflow without interrupting the task flow.
 
@@ -27,7 +31,7 @@ Input Parsing:
    └─ Parse --regenerate flag → regenerate = true | false
 
 Decision:
-   ├─ EXISTS + no --regenerate → Exit: "Already initialized"
+   ├─ BOTH_EXIST + no --regenerate → Exit: "Already initialized"
    ├─ EXISTS + --regenerate → Backup existing → Continue analysis
    └─ NOT_FOUND → Continue analysis
 
@@ -37,11 +41,14 @@ Analysis Flow:
    │   ├─ Structural scan (get_modules_by_depth.sh, find, wc)
    │   ├─ Semantic analysis (Gemini CLI)
    │   ├─ Synthesis and merge
-   │   └─ Write .workflow/project.json
+   │   └─ Write .workflow/project-tech.json
+   ├─ Create guidelines scaffold (if not exists)
+   │   └─ Write .workflow/project-guidelines.json (empty structure)
    └─ Display summary
 
 Output:
-   └─ .workflow/project.json (+ .backup if regenerate)
+   ├─ .workflow/project-tech.json (+ .backup if regenerate)
+   └─ .workflow/project-guidelines.json (scaffold if new)
 ```
 
 ## Implementation
@@ -56,13 +63,18 @@ const regenerate = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--regenerate')
 **Check existing state**:
 
 ```bash
-bash(test -f .workflow/project.json && echo "EXISTS" || echo "NOT_FOUND")
+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 EXISTS and no --regenerate**: Exit early
+**If BOTH_EXIST and no --regenerate**: Exit early
 ```
-Project already initialized at .workflow/project.json
-Use /workflow:init --regenerate to rebuild
+Project already initialized:
+- Tech analysis: .workflow/project-tech.json
+- Guidelines: .workflow/project-guidelines.json
+
+Use /workflow:init --regenerate to rebuild tech analysis
+Use /workflow:session:solidify to add guidelines
 Use /workflow:status --project to view state
 ```
 
@@ -78,7 +90,7 @@ bash(mkdir -p .workflow)
 
 **For --regenerate**: Backup and preserve existing data
 ```bash
-bash(cp .workflow/project.json .workflow/project.json.backup)
+bash(cp .workflow/project-tech.json .workflow/project-tech.json.backup)
 ```
 
 **Delegate analysis to agent**:
@@ -89,21 +101,31 @@ Task(
   run_in_background=false,
   description="Deep project analysis",
   prompt=`
-Analyze project for workflow initialization and generate .workflow/project.json.
+Analyze project for workflow initialization and generate .workflow/project-tech.json.
 
 ## MANDATORY FIRST STEPS
-1. Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/project-json-schema.json (get schema reference)
+1. Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/project-tech-schema.json (get schema reference)
 2. Execute: ccw tool exec get_modules_by_depth '{}' (get project structure)
 
 ## Task
-Generate complete project.json with:
-- project_name: ${projectName}
-- initialized_at: current ISO timestamp
-- overview: {description, technology_stack, architecture, key_components}
-- features: ${regenerate ? 'preserve from backup' : '[] (empty)'}
+Generate complete project-tech.json following the schema structure:
+- project_name: "${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}'}
-- _metadata: {initialized_by: "cli-explore-agent", analysis_timestamp, analysis_mode}
+- 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
 
@@ -123,8 +145,8 @@ Generate complete project.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 features/development_index/statistics from .workflow/project.json.backup' : ''}
-5. Write JSON: Write('.workflow/project.json', jsonContent)
+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
 
 Project root: ${projectRoot}
@@ -132,29 +154,66 @@ Project root: ${projectRoot}
 )
 ```
 
+### Step 3.5: Create Guidelines Scaffold (if not exists)
+
+```javascript
+// Only create if not exists (never overwrite user guidelines)
+if (!file_exists('.workflow/project-guidelines.json')) {
+  const guidelinesScaffold = {
+    conventions: {
+      coding_style: [],
+      naming_patterns: [],
+      file_structure: [],
+      documentation: []
+    },
+    constraints: {
+      architecture: [],
+      tech_stack: [],
+      performance: [],
+      security: []
+    },
+    quality_rules: [],
+    learnings: [],
+    _metadata: {
+      created_at: new Date().toISOString(),
+      version: "1.0.0"
+    }
+  };
+
+  Write('.workflow/project-guidelines.json', JSON.stringify(guidelinesScaffold, null, 2));
+}
+```
+
 ### Step 4: Display Summary
 
 ```javascript
-const projectJson = JSON.parse(Read('.workflow/project.json'));
+const projectTech = JSON.parse(Read('.workflow/project-tech.json'));
+const guidelinesExists = file_exists('.workflow/project-guidelines.json');
 
 console.log(`
 ✓ Project initialized successfully
 
 ## Project Overview
-Name: ${projectJson.project_name}
-Description: ${projectJson.overview.description}
+Name: ${projectTech.project_name}
+Description: ${projectTech.overview.description}
 
 ### Technology Stack
-Languages: ${projectJson.overview.technology_stack.languages.map(l => l.name).join(', ')}
-Frameworks: ${projectJson.overview.technology_stack.frameworks.join(', ')}
+Languages: ${projectTech.overview.technology_stack.languages.map(l => l.name).join(', ')}
+Frameworks: ${projectTech.overview.technology_stack.frameworks.join(', ')}
 
 ### Architecture
-Style: ${projectJson.overview.architecture.style}
-Components: ${projectJson.overview.key_components.length} core modules
+Style: ${projectTech.overview.architecture.style}
+Components: ${projectTech.overview.key_components.length} core modules
 
 ---
-Project state: .workflow/project.json
-${regenerate ? 'Backup: .workflow/project.json.backup' : ''}
+Files created:
+- Tech analysis: .workflow/project-tech.json
+- Guidelines: .workflow/project-guidelines.json ${guidelinesExists ? '(scaffold)' : ''}
+${regenerate ? '- Backup: .workflow/project-tech.json.backup' : ''}
+
+Next steps:
+- Use /workflow:session:solidify to add project guidelines
+- Use /workflow:plan to start planning
 `);
 ```
 

.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
@@ -307,6 +339,85 @@ for (const call of sequential) {
 }
 ```
 
+### Unified Task Prompt Builder
+
+**Task Formatting Principle**: Each task is a self-contained checklist. The executor only needs to know what THIS task requires. Same template for Agent and CLI.
+
+```javascript
+function buildExecutionPrompt(batch) {
+  // Task template (6 parts: Modification Points → Why → How → Reference → Risks → Done)
+  const formatTask = (t) => `
+## ${t.title}
+
+**Scope**: \`${t.scope}\`  |  **Action**: ${t.action}
+
+### Modification Points
+${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.verification?.success_metrics?.length > 0 ? `\n**Success metrics**: ${t.verification.success_metrics.join(', ')}` : ''}`
+
+  // Build prompt
+  const sections = []
+
+  if (originalUserInput) sections.push(`## Goal\n${originalUserInput}`)
+
+  sections.push(`## Tasks\n${batch.tasks.map(formatTask).join('\n\n---\n')}`)
+
+  // Context (reference only)
+  const context = []
+  if (previousExecutionResults.length > 0) {
+    context.push(`### Previous Work\n${previousExecutionResults.map(r => `- ${r.tasksSummary}: ${r.status}`).join('\n')}`)
+  }
+  if (clarificationContext) {
+    context.push(`### Clarifications\n${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.`)
+
+  return sections.join('\n\n')
+}
+```
+
 **Option A: Agent Execution**
 
 When to use:
@@ -314,113 +425,13 @@ When to use:
 - 或 `executionMethod = "Agent"` (全局 fallback)
 - 或 `executionMethod = "Auto" AND complexity = "Low"` (全局 fallback)
 
-**Task Formatting Principle**: Each task is a self-contained checklist. The agent only needs to know what THIS task requires, not its position or relation to other tasks.
-
-Agent call format:
 ```javascript
-// Format single task as self-contained checklist
-function formatTaskChecklist(task) {
-  return `
-## ${task.title}
-
-**Target**: \`${task.file}\`
-**Action**: ${task.action}
-
-### What to do
-${task.description}
-
-### How to do it
-${task.implementation.map(step => `- ${step}`).join('\n')}
-
-### Reference
-- Pattern: ${task.reference.pattern}
-- Examples: ${task.reference.files.join(', ')}
-- Notes: ${task.reference.examples}
-
-### Done when
-${task.acceptance.map(c => `- [ ] ${c}`).join('\n')}
-`
-}
-
-// For batch execution: aggregate tasks without numbering
-function formatBatchPrompt(batch) {
-  const tasksSection = batch.tasks.map(t => formatTaskChecklist(t)).join('\n---\n')
-
-  return `
-${originalUserInput ? `## Goal\n${originalUserInput}\n` : ''}
-
-## Tasks
-
-${tasksSection}
-
-${batch.context ? `## Context\n${batch.context}` : ''}
-
-Complete each task according to its "Done when" checklist.
-`
-}
-
 Task(
   subagent_type="code-developer",
   run_in_background=false,
   description=batch.taskSummary,
-  prompt=formatBatchPrompt({
-    tasks: batch.tasks,
-    context: buildRelevantContext(batch.tasks)
-  })
+  prompt=buildExecutionPrompt(batch)
 )
-
-// Helper: Build relevant context for batch
-// Context serves as REFERENCE ONLY - helps agent understand existing state
-function buildRelevantContext(tasks) {
-  const sections = []
-
-  // 1. Previous work completion - what's already done (reference for continuity)
-  if (previousExecutionResults.length > 0) {
-    sections.push(`### Previous Work (Reference)
-Use this to understand what's already completed. Avoid duplicating work.
-
-${previousExecutionResults.map(r => `**${r.tasksSummary}**
-- Status: ${r.status}
-- Outputs: ${r.keyOutputs || 'See git diff'}
-${r.notes ? `- Notes: ${r.notes}` : ''}`
-    ).join('\n\n')}`)
-  }
-
-  // 2. Related files - files that may need to be read/referenced
-  const relatedFiles = extractRelatedFiles(tasks)
-  if (relatedFiles.length > 0) {
-    sections.push(`### Related Files (Reference)
-These files may contain patterns, types, or utilities relevant to your tasks:
-
-${relatedFiles.map(f => `- \`${f}\``).join('\n')}`)
-  }
-
-  // 3. Clarifications from user
-  if (clarificationContext) {
-    sections.push(`### User Clarifications
-${Object.entries(clarificationContext).map(([q, a]) => `- **${q}**: ${a}`).join('\n')}`)
-  }
-
-  // 4. Artifact files (for deeper context if needed)
-  if (executionContext?.session?.artifacts?.plan) {
-    sections.push(`### Artifacts
-For detailed planning context, read: ${executionContext.session.artifacts.plan}`)
-  }
-
-  return sections.join('\n\n')
-}
-
-// Extract related files from task references
-function extractRelatedFiles(tasks) {
-  const files = new Set()
-  tasks.forEach(task => {
-    // Add reference example files
-    if (task.reference?.files) {
-      task.reference.files.forEach(f => files.add(f))
-    }
-  })
-  return [...files]
-}
 ```
 
 **Result Collection**: After completion, collect result following `executionResult` structure (see Data Structures section)
@@ -432,92 +443,14 @@ When to use:
 - 或 `executionMethod = "Codex"` (全局 fallback)
 - 或 `executionMethod = "Auto" AND complexity = "Medium/High"` (全局 fallback)
 
-**Task Formatting Principle**: Same as Agent - each task is a self-contained checklist. No task numbering or position awareness.
-
-Command format:
 ```bash
-// Format single task as compact checklist for CLI
-function formatTaskForCLI(task) {
-  return `
-## ${task.title}
-File: ${task.file}
-Action: ${task.action}
-
-What: ${task.description}
-
-How:
-${task.implementation.map(step => `- ${step}`).join('\n')}
-
-Reference: ${task.reference.pattern} (see ${task.reference.files.join(', ')})
-Notes: ${task.reference.examples}
-
-Done when:
-${task.acceptance.map(c => `- [ ] ${c}`).join('\n')}
-`
-}
-
-// Build CLI prompt for batch
-// Context provides REFERENCE information - not requirements to fulfill
-function buildCLIPrompt(batch) {
-  const tasksSection = batch.tasks.map(t => formatTaskForCLI(t)).join('\n---\n')
-
-  let prompt = `${originalUserInput ? `## Goal\n${originalUserInput}\n\n` : ''}`
-  prompt += `## Tasks\n\n${tasksSection}\n`
-
-  // Context section - reference information only
-  const contextSections = []
-
-  // 1. Previous work - what's already completed
-  if (previousExecutionResults.length > 0) {
-    contextSections.push(`### Previous Work (Reference)
-Already completed - avoid duplicating:
-${previousExecutionResults.map(r => `- ${r.tasksSummary}: ${r.status}${r.keyOutputs ? ` (${r.keyOutputs})` : ''}`).join('\n')}`)
-  }
-
-  // 2. Related files from task references
-  const relatedFiles = [...new Set(batch.tasks.flatMap(t => t.reference?.files || []))]
-  if (relatedFiles.length > 0) {
-    contextSections.push(`### Related Files (Reference)
-Patterns and examples to follow:
-${relatedFiles.map(f => `- ${f}`).join('\n')}`)
-  }
-
-  // 3. User clarifications
-  if (clarificationContext) {
-    contextSections.push(`### Clarifications
-${Object.entries(clarificationContext).map(([q, a]) => `- ${q}: ${a}`).join('\n')}`)
-  }
-
-  // 4. Plan artifact for deeper context
-  if (executionContext?.session?.artifacts?.plan) {
-    contextSections.push(`### Artifacts
-Detailed plan: ${executionContext.session.artifacts.plan}`)
-  }
-
-  if (contextSections.length > 0) {
-    prompt += `\n## Context\n${contextSections.join('\n\n')}\n`
-  }
-
-  prompt += `\nComplete each task according to its "Done when" checklist.`
-
-  return prompt
-}
-
-ccw cli -p "${buildCLIPrompt(batch)}" --tool codex --mode write
+ccw cli -p "${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"
 
@@ -526,19 +459,15 @@ const previousCliId = batch.resumeFromCliId || null
 
 // Build command with fixed ID (and optional resume for continuation)
 const cli_command = previousCliId
-  ? `ccw cli -p "${buildCLIPrompt(batch)}" --tool codex --mode write --id ${fixedExecutionId} --resume ${previousCliId}`
-  : `ccw cli -p "${buildCLIPrompt(batch)}" --tool codex --mode write --id ${fixedExecutionId}`
+  ? `ccw cli -p "${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):
@@ -564,8 +493,8 @@ if (bash_result.status === 'failed' || bash_result.status === 'timeout') {
 When to use: `getTaskExecutor(task) === "gemini"` (分析类任务)
 
 ```bash
-# 使用与 Option B 相同的 formatBatchPrompt，切换 tool 和 mode
-ccw cli -p "${formatBatchPrompt(batch)}" --tool gemini --mode analysis --id ${sessionId}-${batch.groupId}
+# 使用统一的 buildExecutionPrompt，切换 tool 和 mode
+ccw cli -p "${buildExecutionPrompt(batch)}" --tool gemini --mode analysis --id ${sessionId}-${batch.groupId}
 ```
 
 ### Step 4: Progress Tracking
@@ -576,32 +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):
@@ -620,8 +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**:
@@ -647,11 +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))
@@ -780,6 +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

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 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\""
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--hotfix] \"bug description or issue reference\""
 allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), SlashCommand(*), AskUserQuestion(*)
 ---
 
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ Intelligent lightweight bug fixing command with dynamic workflow adaptation base
 - Interactive clarification after diagnosis to gather missing information
 - Adaptive fix planning strategy (direct Claude vs cli-lite-planning-agent) based on complexity
 - Two-step confirmation: fix-plan display -> multi-dimensional input collection
-- Execution dispatch with complete context handoff to lite-execute
+- Execution execute with complete context handoff to lite-execute
 
 ## Usage
 
@@ -25,10 +25,32 @@ 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
+```
+
+## 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
@@ -62,7 +84,7 @@ Phase 4: Confirmation & Selection
       |- Execution: Agent / Codex / Auto
       +- Review: Gemini / Agent / Skip
 
-Phase 5: Dispatch
+Phase 5: Execute
    |- Build executionContext (fix-plan + diagnoses + clarifications + selections)
    +- SlashCommand("/workflow:lite-execute --in-memory --mode bugfix")
 ```
@@ -181,6 +203,8 @@ Execute **${angle}** diagnosis for bug root cause analysis. Analyze codebase fro
 1. Run: ccw tool exec get_modules_by_depth '{}' (project structure)
 2. Run: rg -l "{error_keyword_from_bug}" --type ts (locate relevant files)
 3. Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/diagnosis-json-schema.json (get output schema reference)
+4. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (technology stack and architecture context)
+5. Read: .workflow/project-guidelines.json (user-defined constraints and conventions)
 
 ## Diagnosis Strategy (${angle} focus)
 
@@ -330,9 +354,17 @@ 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)
 
@@ -378,6 +410,7 @@ 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: "...",
@@ -387,13 +420,67 @@ 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:
@@ -409,6 +496,12 @@ Generate fix plan and write fix-plan.json.
 ## Output Schema Reference
 Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/fix-plan-json-schema.json (get schema reference before generating plan)
 
+## Project Context (MANDATORY - Read Both Files)
+1. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (technology stack, architecture, key components)
+2. Read: .workflow/project-guidelines.json (user-defined constraints and conventions)
+
+**CRITICAL**: All fix tasks MUST comply with constraints in project-guidelines.json
+
 ## Bug Description
 ${bug_description}
 
@@ -443,11 +536,41 @@ 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
@@ -459,11 +582,21 @@ 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('${sessionFolder}/fix-plan.json', jsonContent)
-6. Return brief completion summary
+4. Generate fix-plan with:
+   - For High/Critical: REQUIRED new fields (rationale, verification, risks, code_skeleton, data_flow, design_decisions)
+   - Each task MUST have rationale (why this fix), verification (how to verify success), and risks (potential issues)
+5. Parse output and structure fix-plan
+6. Write JSON: Write('${sessionFolder}/fix-plan.json', jsonContent)
+7. 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)
 `
 )
 ```
@@ -497,45 +630,65 @@ ${fixPlan.tasks.map((t, i) => `${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" }
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  })
+}
 ```
 
 ---
 
-### Phase 5: Dispatch to Execution
+### Phase 5: Execute to Execution
 
 **CRITICAL**: lite-fix NEVER executes code directly. ALL execution MUST go through lite-execute.
 
@@ -557,7 +710,11 @@ 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,
@@ -580,7 +737,7 @@ executionContext = {
 }
 ```
 
-**Step 5.2: Dispatch**
+**Step 5.2: Execute**
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:lite-execute --in-memory --mode bugfix")

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

@@ -0,0 +1,465 @@
+---
+name: workflow:lite-lite-lite
+description: Ultra-lightweight multi-tool analysis and direct execution. No artifacts for simple tasks; auto-creates planning docs in .workflow/.scratchpad/ for complex tasks. Auto tool selection based on task analysis, user-driven iteration via AskUser.
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] <task description>"
+allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Write(*), mcp__ace-tool__search_context(*), mcp__ccw-tools__write_file(*)
+---
+
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Skip clarification questions, auto-select tools, execute directly with recommended settings.
+
+# Ultra-Lite Multi-Tool Workflow
+
+## Quick Start
+
+```bash
+/workflow:lite-lite-lite "Fix the login bug"
+/workflow:lite-lite-lite "Refactor payment module for multi-gateway support"
+```
+
+**Core Philosophy**: Minimal friction, maximum velocity. Simple tasks = no artifacts. Complex tasks = lightweight planning doc in `.workflow/.scratchpad/`.
+
+## Overview
+
+**Complexity-aware workflow**: Clarify → Assess Complexity → Select Tools → Multi-Mode Analysis → Decision → Direct Execution
+
+**vs multi-cli-plan**: No IMPL_PLAN.md, plan.json, synthesis.json - state in memory or lightweight scratchpad doc for complex tasks.
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+```
+Phase 1: Clarify Requirements → AskUser for missing details
+Phase 1.5: Assess Complexity → Determine if planning doc needed
+Phase 2: Select Tools (CLI → Mode → Agent) → 3-step selection
+Phase 3: Multi-Mode Analysis → Execute with --resume chaining
+Phase 4: User Decision → Execute / Refine / Change / Cancel
+Phase 5: Direct Execution → No plan files (simple) or scratchpad doc (complex)
+```
+
+## Phase 1: Clarify Requirements
+
+```javascript
+const taskDescription = $ARGUMENTS
+
+if (taskDescription.length < 20 || isAmbiguous(taskDescription)) {
+  AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "Please provide more details: target files/modules, expected behavior, constraints?",
+      header: "Details",
+      options: [
+        { label: "I'll provide more", description: "Add more context" },
+        { label: "Continue analysis", description: "Let tools explore autonomously" }
+      ],
+      multiSelect: false
+    }]
+  })
+}
+
+// Optional: Quick ACE Context for complex tasks
+mcp__ace-tool__search_context({
+  project_root_path: process.cwd(),
+  query: `${taskDescription} implementation patterns`
+})
+```
+
+## Phase 1.5: Assess Complexity
+
+| Level | Creates Plan Doc | Trigger Keywords |
+|-------|------------------|------------------|
+| **simple** | ❌ | (default) |
+| **moderate** | ✅ | module, system, service, integration, multiple |
+| **complex** | ✅ | refactor, migrate, security, auth, payment, database |
+
+```javascript
+// Complexity detection (after ACE query)
+const isComplex = /refactor|migrate|security|auth|payment|database/i.test(taskDescription)
+const isModerate = /module|system|service|integration|multiple/i.test(taskDescription) || aceContext?.relevant_files?.length > 2
+
+if (isComplex || isModerate) {
+  const planPath = `.workflow/.scratchpad/lite3-${taskSlug}-${dateStr}.md`
+  // Create planning doc with: Task, Status, Complexity, Analysis Summary, Execution Plan, Progress Log
+}
+```
+
+## Phase 2: Select Tools
+
+### Tool Definitions
+
+**CLI Tools** (from cli-tools.json):
+```javascript
+const cliConfig = JSON.parse(Read("~/.claude/cli-tools.json"))
+const cliTools = Object.entries(cliConfig.tools)
+  .filter(([_, config]) => config.enabled)
+  .map(([name, config]) => ({
+    name, type: 'cli',
+    tags: config.tags || [],
+    model: config.primaryModel,
+    toolType: config.type  // builtin, cli-wrapper, api-endpoint
+  }))
+```
+
+**Sub Agents**:
+
+| Agent | Strengths | canExecute |
+|-------|-----------|------------|
+| **code-developer** | Code implementation, test writing | ✅ |
+| **Explore** | Fast code exploration, pattern discovery | ❌ |
+| **cli-explore-agent** | Dual-source analysis (Bash+CLI) | ❌ |
+| **cli-discuss-agent** | Multi-CLI collaboration, cross-verification | ❌ |
+| **debug-explore-agent** | Hypothesis-driven debugging | ❌ |
+| **context-search-agent** | Multi-layer file discovery, dependency analysis | ❌ |
+| **test-fix-agent** | Test execution, failure diagnosis, code fixing | ✅ |
+| **universal-executor** | General execution, multi-domain adaptation | ✅ |
+
+**Analysis Modes**:
+
+| Mode | Pattern | Use Case | minCLIs |
+|------|---------|----------|---------|
+| **Parallel** | `A \|\| B \|\| C → Aggregate` | Fast multi-perspective | 1+ |
+| **Sequential** | `A → B(resume) → C(resume)` | Incremental deepening | 2+ |
+| **Collaborative** | `A → B → A → B → Synthesize` | Multi-round refinement | 2+ |
+| **Debate** | `A(propose) → B(challenge) → A(defend)` | Adversarial validation | 2 |
+| **Challenge** | `A(analyze) → B(challenge)` | Find flaws and risks | 2 |
+
+### Three-Step Selection Flow
+
+```javascript
+// Step 1: Select CLIs (multiSelect)
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "Select CLI tools for analysis (1-3 for collaboration modes)",
+    header: "CLI Tools",
+    options: cliTools.map(cli => ({
+      label: cli.name,
+      description: cli.tags.length > 0 ? cli.tags.join(', ') : cli.model || 'general'
+    })),
+    multiSelect: true
+  }]
+})
+
+// Step 2: Select Mode (filtered by CLI count)
+const availableModes = analysisModes.filter(m => selectedCLIs.length >= m.minCLIs)
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "Select analysis mode",
+    header: "Mode",
+    options: availableModes.map(m => ({
+      label: m.label,
+      description: `${m.description} [${m.pattern}]`
+    })),
+    multiSelect: false
+  }]
+})
+
+// Step 3: Select Agent for execution
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "Select Sub Agent for execution",
+    header: "Agent",
+    options: agents.map(a => ({ label: a.name, description: a.strength })),
+    multiSelect: false
+  }]
+})
+
+// Confirm selection
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "Confirm selection?",
+    header: "Confirm",
+    options: [
+      { label: "Confirm and continue", description: `${selectedMode.label} with ${selectedCLIs.length} CLIs` },
+      { label: "Re-select CLIs", description: "Choose different CLI tools" },
+      { label: "Re-select Mode", description: "Choose different analysis mode" },
+      { label: "Re-select Agent", description: "Choose different Sub Agent" }
+    ],
+    multiSelect: false
+  }]
+})
+```
+
+## Phase 3: Multi-Mode Analysis
+
+### Universal CLI Prompt Template
+
+```javascript
+// Unified prompt builder - used by all modes
+function buildPrompt({ purpose, tasks, expected, rules, taskDescription }) {
+  return `
+PURPOSE: ${purpose}: ${taskDescription}
+TASK: ${tasks.map(t => `• ${t}`).join(' ')}
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @**/*
+EXPECTED: ${expected}
+CONSTRAINTS: ${rules}
+`
+}
+
+// Execute CLI with prompt
+function execCLI(cli, prompt, options = {}) {
+  const { resume, background = false } = options
+  const resumeFlag = resume ? `--resume ${resume}` : ''
+  return Bash({
+    command: `ccw cli -p "${prompt}" --tool ${cli.name} --mode analysis ${resumeFlag}`,
+    run_in_background: background
+  })
+}
+```
+
+### Prompt Presets by Role
+
+| Role | PURPOSE | TASKS | EXPECTED | RULES |
+|------|---------|-------|----------|-------|
+| **initial** | Initial analysis | Identify files, Analyze approach, List changes | Root cause, files, changes, risks | Focus on actionable insights |
+| **extend** | Build on previous | Review previous, Extend, Add insights | Extended analysis building on findings | Build incrementally, avoid repetition |
+| **synthesize** | Refine and synthesize | Review, Identify gaps, Synthesize | Refined synthesis with new perspectives | Add value not repetition |
+| **propose** | Propose comprehensive analysis | Analyze thoroughly, Propose solution, State assumptions | Well-reasoned proposal with trade-offs | Be clear about assumptions |
+| **challenge** | Challenge and stress-test | Identify weaknesses, Question assumptions, Suggest alternatives | Critique with counter-arguments | Be adversarial but constructive |
+| **defend** | Respond to challenges | Address challenges, Defend valid aspects, Propose refined solution | Refined proposal incorporating feedback | Be open to criticism, synthesize |
+| **criticize** | Find flaws ruthlessly | Find logical flaws, Identify edge cases, Rate criticisms | Critique with severity: [CRITICAL]/[HIGH]/[MEDIUM]/[LOW] | Be ruthlessly critical |
+
+```javascript
+const PROMPTS = {
+  initial: { purpose: 'Initial analysis', tasks: ['Identify affected files', 'Analyze implementation approach', 'List specific changes'], expected: 'Root cause, files to modify, key changes, risks', rules: 'Focus on actionable insights' },
+  extend: { purpose: 'Build on previous analysis', tasks: ['Review previous findings', 'Extend analysis', 'Add new insights'], expected: 'Extended analysis building on previous', rules: 'Build incrementally, avoid repetition' },
+  synthesize: { purpose: 'Refine and synthesize', tasks: ['Review previous', 'Identify gaps', 'Add insights', 'Synthesize findings'], expected: 'Refined synthesis with new perspectives', rules: 'Build collaboratively, add value' },
+  propose: { purpose: 'Propose comprehensive analysis', tasks: ['Analyze thoroughly', 'Propose solution', 'State assumptions clearly'], expected: 'Well-reasoned proposal with trade-offs', rules: 'Be clear about assumptions' },
+  challenge: { purpose: 'Challenge and stress-test', tasks: ['Identify weaknesses', 'Question assumptions', 'Suggest alternatives', 'Highlight overlooked risks'], expected: 'Constructive critique with counter-arguments', rules: 'Be adversarial but constructive' },
+  defend: { purpose: 'Respond to challenges', tasks: ['Address each challenge', 'Defend valid aspects', 'Acknowledge valid criticisms', 'Propose refined solution'], expected: 'Refined proposal incorporating alternatives', rules: 'Be open to criticism, synthesize best ideas' },
+  criticize: { purpose: 'Stress-test and find weaknesses', tasks: ['Find logical flaws', 'Identify missed edge cases', 'Propose alternatives', 'Rate criticisms (High/Medium/Low)'], expected: 'Detailed critique with severity ratings', rules: 'Be ruthlessly critical, find every flaw' }
+}
+```
+
+### Mode Implementations
+
+```javascript
+// Parallel: All CLIs run simultaneously
+async function executeParallel(clis, task) {
+  return await Promise.all(clis.map(cli =>
+    execCLI(cli, buildPrompt({ ...PROMPTS.initial, taskDescription: task }), { background: true })
+  ))
+}
+
+// Sequential: Each CLI builds on previous via --resume
+async function executeSequential(clis, task) {
+  const results = []
+  let prevId = null
+  for (const cli of clis) {
+    const preset = prevId ? PROMPTS.extend : PROMPTS.initial
+    const result = await execCLI(cli, buildPrompt({ ...preset, taskDescription: task }), { resume: prevId })
+    results.push(result)
+    prevId = extractSessionId(result)
+  }
+  return results
+}
+
+// Collaborative: Multi-round synthesis
+async function executeCollaborative(clis, task, rounds = 2) {
+  const results = []
+  let prevId = null
+  for (let r = 0; r < rounds; r++) {
+    for (const cli of clis) {
+      const preset = !prevId ? PROMPTS.initial : PROMPTS.synthesize
+      const result = await execCLI(cli, buildPrompt({ ...preset, taskDescription: task }), { resume: prevId })
+      results.push({ cli: cli.name, round: r, result })
+      prevId = extractSessionId(result)
+    }
+  }
+  return results
+}
+
+// Debate: Propose → Challenge → Defend
+async function executeDebate(clis, task) {
+  const [cliA, cliB] = clis
+  const results = []
+
+  const propose = await execCLI(cliA, buildPrompt({ ...PROMPTS.propose, taskDescription: task }))
+  results.push({ phase: 'propose', cli: cliA.name, result: propose })
+
+  const challenge = await execCLI(cliB, buildPrompt({ ...PROMPTS.challenge, taskDescription: task }), { resume: extractSessionId(propose) })
+  results.push({ phase: 'challenge', cli: cliB.name, result: challenge })
+
+  const defend = await execCLI(cliA, buildPrompt({ ...PROMPTS.defend, taskDescription: task }), { resume: extractSessionId(challenge) })
+  results.push({ phase: 'defend', cli: cliA.name, result: defend })
+
+  return results
+}
+
+// Challenge: Analyze → Criticize
+async function executeChallenge(clis, task) {
+  const [cliA, cliB] = clis
+  const results = []
+
+  const analyze = await execCLI(cliA, buildPrompt({ ...PROMPTS.initial, taskDescription: task }))
+  results.push({ phase: 'analyze', cli: cliA.name, result: analyze })
+
+  const criticize = await execCLI(cliB, buildPrompt({ ...PROMPTS.criticize, taskDescription: task }), { resume: extractSessionId(analyze) })
+  results.push({ phase: 'challenge', cli: cliB.name, result: criticize })
+
+  return results
+}
+```
+
+### Mode Router & Result Aggregation
+
+```javascript
+async function executeAnalysis(mode, clis, taskDescription) {
+  switch (mode.name) {
+    case 'parallel': return await executeParallel(clis, taskDescription)
+    case 'sequential': return await executeSequential(clis, taskDescription)
+    case 'collaborative': return await executeCollaborative(clis, taskDescription)
+    case 'debate': return await executeDebate(clis, taskDescription)
+    case 'challenge': return await executeChallenge(clis, taskDescription)
+  }
+}
+
+function aggregateResults(mode, results) {
+  const base = { mode: mode.name, pattern: mode.pattern, tools_used: results.map(r => r.cli || 'unknown') }
+
+  switch (mode.name) {
+    case 'parallel':
+      return { ...base, findings: results.map(parseOutput), consensus: findCommonPoints(results), divergences: findDifferences(results) }
+    case 'sequential':
+      return { ...base, evolution: results.map((r, i) => ({ step: i + 1, analysis: parseOutput(r) })), finalAnalysis: parseOutput(results.at(-1)) }
+    case 'collaborative':
+      return { ...base, rounds: groupByRound(results), synthesis: extractSynthesis(results.at(-1)) }
+    case 'debate':
+      return { ...base, proposal: parseOutput(results.find(r => r.phase === 'propose')?.result),
+        challenges: parseOutput(results.find(r => r.phase === 'challenge')?.result),
+        resolution: parseOutput(results.find(r => r.phase === 'defend')?.result), confidence: calculateDebateConfidence(results) }
+    case 'challenge':
+      return { ...base, originalAnalysis: parseOutput(results.find(r => r.phase === 'analyze')?.result),
+        critiques: parseCritiques(results.find(r => r.phase === 'challenge')?.result), riskScore: calculateRiskScore(results) }
+  }
+}
+
+// If planPath exists: update Analysis Summary & Execution Plan sections
+```
+
+## Phase 4: User Decision
+
+```javascript
+function presentSummary(analysis) {
+  console.log(`## Analysis Result\n**Mode**: ${analysis.mode} (${analysis.pattern})\n**Tools**: ${analysis.tools_used.join(' → ')}`)
+
+  switch (analysis.mode) {
+    case 'parallel':
+      console.log(`### Consensus\n${analysis.consensus.map(c => `- ${c}`).join('\n')}\n### Divergences\n${analysis.divergences.map(d => `- ${d}`).join('\n')}`)
+      break
+    case 'sequential':
+      console.log(`### Evolution\n${analysis.evolution.map(e => `**Step ${e.step}**: ${e.analysis.summary}`).join('\n')}\n### Final\n${analysis.finalAnalysis.summary}`)
+      break
+    case 'collaborative':
+      console.log(`### Rounds\n${Object.entries(analysis.rounds).map(([r, a]) => `**Round ${r}**: ${a.map(x => x.cli).join(' + ')}`).join('\n')}\n### Synthesis\n${analysis.synthesis}`)
+      break
+    case 'debate':
+      console.log(`### Debate\n**Proposal**: ${analysis.proposal.summary}\n**Challenges**: ${analysis.challenges.points?.length || 0} points\n**Resolution**: ${analysis.resolution.summary}\n**Confidence**: ${analysis.confidence}%`)
+      break
+    case 'challenge':
+      console.log(`### Challenge\n**Original**: ${analysis.originalAnalysis.summary}\n**Critiques**: ${analysis.critiques.length} issues\n${analysis.critiques.map(c => `- [${c.severity}] ${c.description}`).join('\n')}\n**Risk Score**: ${analysis.riskScore}/100`)
+      break
+  }
+}
+
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "How to proceed?",
+    header: "Next Step",
+    options: [
+      { label: "Execute directly", description: "Implement immediately" },
+      { label: "Refine analysis", description: "Add constraints, re-analyze" },
+      { label: "Change tools", description: "Different tool combination" },
+      { label: "Cancel", description: "End workflow" }
+    ],
+    multiSelect: false
+  }]
+})
+// If planPath exists: record decision to Decisions Made table
+// Routing: Execute → Phase 5 | Refine → Phase 3 | Change → Phase 2 | Cancel → End
+```
+
+## Phase 5: Direct Execution
+
+```javascript
+// Simple tasks: No artifacts | Complex tasks: Update scratchpad doc
+const executionAgents = agents.filter(a => a.canExecute)
+const executionTool = selectedAgent.canExecute ? selectedAgent : selectedCLIs[0]
+
+if (executionTool.type === 'agent') {
+  Task({
+    subagent_type: executionTool.name,
+    run_in_background: false,
+    description: `Execute: ${taskDescription.slice(0, 30)}`,
+    prompt: `## Task\n${taskDescription}\n\n## Analysis Results\n${JSON.stringify(aggregatedAnalysis, null, 2)}\n\n## Instructions\n1. Apply changes to identified files\n2. Follow recommended approach\n3. Handle identified risks\n4. Verify changes work correctly`
+  })
+} else {
+  Bash({
+    command: `ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Implement solution: ${taskDescription}
+TASK: ${extractedTasks.join(' • ')}
+MODE: write
+CONTEXT: @${affectedFiles.join(' @')}
+EXPECTED: Working implementation with all changes applied
+CONSTRAINTS: Follow existing patterns
+" --tool ${executionTool.name} --mode write`,
+    run_in_background: false
+  })
+}
+// If planPath exists: update Status to completed/failed, append to Progress Log
+```
+
+## TodoWrite Structure
+
+```javascript
+TodoWrite({ todos: [
+  { content: "Phase 1: Clarify requirements", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Clarifying requirements" },
+  { content: "Phase 1.5: Assess complexity", status: "pending", activeForm: "Assessing complexity" },
+  { content: "Phase 2: Select tools", status: "pending", activeForm: "Selecting tools" },
+  { content: "Phase 3: Multi-mode analysis", status: "pending", activeForm: "Running analysis" },
+  { content: "Phase 4: User decision", status: "pending", activeForm: "Awaiting decision" },
+  { content: "Phase 5: Direct execution", status: "pending", activeForm: "Executing" }
+]})
+```
+
+## Iteration Patterns
+
+| Pattern | Flow |
+|---------|------|
+| **Direct** | Phase 1 → 2 → 3 → 4(execute) → 5 |
+| **Refinement** | Phase 3 → 4(refine) → 3 → 4 → 5 |
+| **Tool Adjust** | Phase 2(adjust) → 3 → 4 → 5 |
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Resolution |
+|-------|------------|
+| CLI timeout | Retry with secondary model |
+| No enabled tools | Ask user to enable tools in cli-tools.json |
+| Task unclear | Default to first CLI + code-developer |
+| Ambiguous task | Force clarification via AskUser |
+| Execution fails | Present error, ask user for direction |
+| Plan doc write fails | Continue without doc (degrade to zero-artifact mode) |
+| Scratchpad dir missing | Auto-create `.workflow/.scratchpad/` |
+
+## Comparison with multi-cli-plan
+
+| Aspect | lite-lite-lite | multi-cli-plan |
+|--------|----------------|----------------|
+| **Artifacts** | Conditional (scratchpad doc for complex tasks) | Always (IMPL_PLAN.md, plan.json, synthesis.json) |
+| **Session** | Stateless (--resume chaining) | Persistent session folder |
+| **Tool Selection** | 3-step (CLI → Mode → Agent) | Config-driven fixed tools |
+| **Analysis Modes** | 5 modes with --resume | Fixed synthesis rounds |
+| **Complexity** | Auto-detected (simple/moderate/complex) | Assumed complex |
+| **Best For** | Quick analysis, simple-to-moderate tasks | Complex multi-step implementations |
+
+## 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}"`
+
+## Related Commands
+
+```bash
+/workflow:multi-cli-plan "complex task"   # Full planning workflow
+/workflow:lite-plan "task"                # Single CLI planning
+/workflow:lite-execute --in-memory        # Direct execution
+```

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

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 name: lite-plan
-description: Lightweight interactive planning workflow with in-memory planning, code exploration, and execution dispatch to lite-execute after user confirmation
-argument-hint: "[-e|--explore] \"task description\"|file.md"
+description: Lightweight interactive planning workflow with in-memory planning, code exploration, and execution execute to lite-execute after user confirmation
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [-e|--explore] \"task description\"|file.md"
 allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Task(*), SlashCommand(*), AskUserQuestion(*)
 ---
 
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ Intelligent lightweight planning command with dynamic workflow adaptation based
 - Interactive clarification after exploration to gather missing information
 - Adaptive planning: Low complexity → Direct Claude; Medium/High → cli-lite-planning-agent
 - Two-step confirmation: plan display → multi-dimensional input collection
-- Execution dispatch with complete context handoff to lite-execute
+- Execution execute with complete context handoff to lite-execute
 
 ## Usage
 
@@ -25,10 +25,30 @@ 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
+```
+
+## 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
@@ -62,7 +82,7 @@ Phase 4: Confirmation & Selection
       ├─ Execution: Agent / Codex / Auto
       └─ Review: Gemini / Agent / Skip
 
-Phase 5: Dispatch
+Phase 5: Execute
    ├─ Build executionContext (plan + explorations + clarifications + selections)
    └─ SlashCommand("/workflow:lite-execute --in-memory")
 ```
@@ -184,6 +204,8 @@ Execute **${angle}** exploration for task planning context. Analyze codebase fro
 1. Run: ccw tool exec get_modules_by_depth '{}' (project structure)
 2. Run: rg -l "{keyword_from_task}" --type ts (locate relevant files)
 3. Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/explore-json-schema.json (get output schema reference)
+4. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (technology stack and architecture context)
+5. Read: .workflow/project-guidelines.json (user-defined constraints and conventions)
 
 ## Exploration Strategy (${angle} focus)
 
@@ -321,8 +343,16 @@ 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)
 
@@ -416,6 +446,12 @@ Generate implementation plan and write plan.json.
 ## Output Schema Reference
 Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/plan-json-schema.json (get schema reference before generating plan)
 
+## Project Context (MANDATORY - Read Both Files)
+1. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (technology stack, architecture, key components)
+2. Read: .workflow/project-guidelines.json (user-defined constraints and conventions)
+
+**CRITICAL**: All generated tasks MUST comply with constraints in project-guidelines.json
+
 ## Task Description
 ${task_description}
 
@@ -489,45 +525,67 @@ ${plan.tasks.map((t, i) => `${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" }
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  })
+}
 ```
 
 ---
 
-### Phase 5: Dispatch to Execution
+### Phase 5: Execute to Execution
 
 **CRITICAL**: lite-plan NEVER executes code directly. ALL execution MUST go through lite-execute.
 
@@ -574,7 +632,7 @@ executionContext = {
 }
 ```
 
-**Step 5.2: Dispatch**
+**Step 5.2: Execute**
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:lite-execute --in-memory")

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

@@ -0,0 +1,572 @@
+---
+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.
+
+**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
+SlashCommand("/workflow:lite-execute --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 +1,527 @@
+---
+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)
+
+# 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
+
+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 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 (Token-Efficient Analysis)
+
+**Token Budget Strategy**:
+- **Total Limit**: 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 priority checks
+
+**Execution Order** (Process in sequence; skip if token budget exhausted):
+
+1. **Tier 1 (CRITICAL Path)**: A, B, C - User intent, coverage, consistency (process fully)
+2. **Tier 2 (HIGH Priority)**: D, E - Dependencies, synthesis alignment (limit 15 findings total)
+3. **Tier 3 (MEDIUM Priority)**: F - Specification quality (limit 20 findings)
+4. **Tier 4 (LOW Priority)**: G, H - Duplication, feasibility (limit 15 findings total)
+
+---
+
+#### A. User Intent Alignment (CRITICAL - Tier 1)
+
+- **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
+# Plan Verification Report
+
+**Session**: WFS-{session-id}
+**Generated**: {timestamp}
+**Artifacts Analyzed**: role analysis documents, IMPL_PLAN.md, {N} task files
+**User Intent Analysis**: {user_intent_analysis or "SKIPPED: workflow-session.json not found"}
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+### Quality Gate Decision
+
+| Metric | Value | Status |
+|--------|-------|--------|
+| Overall Risk Level | CRITICAL \| HIGH \| MEDIUM \| LOW | {status_emoji} |
+| Critical Issues | {count} | 🔴 |
+| High Issues | {count} | 🟠 |
+| Medium Issues | {count} | 🟡 |
+| Low Issues | {count} | 🟢 |
+
+### Recommendation
+
+**{RECOMMENDATION}**
+
+**Decision Rationale**:
+{brief explanation based on severity criteria}
+
+**Quality Gate Criteria**:
+- **BLOCK_EXECUTION**: Critical issues > 0 (must fix before proceeding)
+- **PROCEED_WITH_FIXES**: Critical = 0, High > 0 (fix recommended before execution)
+- **PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION**: Critical = 0, High = 0, Medium > 0 (proceed with awareness)
+- **PROCEED**: Only Low issues or None (safe to execute)
+
+---
+
+## 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 |
+
+(Generate stable IDs prefixed by severity initial: C/H/M/L + number)
+
+---
+
+## User Intent Alignment Analysis
+
+{IF user_intent_analysis != "SKIPPED"}
+
+### Goal Alignment
+- **User Intent**: {user_original_intent}
+- **IMPL_PLAN Objectives**: {plan_objectives}
+- **Alignment Status**: {ALIGNED/MISALIGNED/PARTIAL}
+- **Findings**: {specific alignment issues}
+
+### Scope Verification
+- **User Scope**: {user_defined_scope}
+- **Plan Scope**: {plan_actual_scope}
+- **Drift Detection**: {NONE/MINOR/MAJOR}
+- **Findings**: {specific scope issues}
+
+{ELSE}
+> ⚠️ User intent alignment analysis was skipped because workflow-session.json was not found.
+
+{END IF}
+
+---
+
+## Requirements Coverage Analysis
+
+### Functional Requirements
+
+| 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** |
+
+### Non-Functional Requirements
+
+| Requirement ID | Requirement Summary | Has Task? | Task IDs | Notes |
+|----------------|---------------------|-----------|----------|-------|
+| NFR-01 | Response time <200ms | No | - | **HIGH: No performance tasks** |
+| NFR-02 | Security compliance | Yes | IMPL-4.1 | Complete |
+
+### Business Requirements
+
+| Requirement ID | Requirement Summary | Has Task? | Task IDs | Notes |
+|----------------|---------------------|-----------|----------|-------|
+| BR-01 | Launch by Q2 | Yes | IMPL-1.* through IMPL-5.* | Timeline realistic |
+
+### Coverage Metrics
+
+| Requirement Type | Total | Covered | Coverage % |
+|------------------|-------|---------|------------|
+| Functional | {count} | {count} | {percent}% |
+| Non-Functional | {count} | {count} | {percent}% |
+| Business | {count} | {count} | {percent}% |
+| **Overall** | **{total}** | **{covered}** | **{percent}%** |
+
+---
+
+## Dependency Integrity
+
+### Dependency Graph Analysis
+
+**Circular Dependencies**: {None or List}
+
+**Broken Dependencies**:
+- IMPL-2.3 depends on "IMPL-2.4" (non-existent)
+
+**Missing Dependencies**:
+- IMPL-5.1 (integration test) has no dependency on IMPL-1.* (implementation tasks)
+
+**Logical Ordering Issues**:
+{List or "None detected"}
+
+---
+
+## 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
+
+### Aggregate Statistics
+
+| Quality Dimension | Tasks Affected | Percentage |
+|-------------------|----------------|------------|
+| Missing Artifacts References | {count} | {percent}% |
+| Weak Flow Control | {count} | {percent}% |
+| Missing Target Files | {count} | {percent}% |
+| Ambiguous Focus Paths | {count} | {percent}% |
+
+### 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 |
+
+---
+
+## Detailed Findings by Severity
+
+### CRITICAL Issues ({count})
+
+{Detailed breakdown of each critical issue with location, impact, and recommendation}
+
+### HIGH Issues ({count})
+
+{Detailed breakdown of each high issue with location, impact, and recommendation}
+
+### MEDIUM Issues ({count})
+
+{Detailed breakdown of each medium issue with location, impact, and recommendation}
+
+### LOW Issues ({count})
+
+{Detailed breakdown of each low issue with location, impact, and recommendation}
+
+---
+
+## Metrics Summary
+
+| Metric | Value |
+|--------|-------|
+| Total Requirements | {count} ({functional} functional, {nonfunctional} non-functional, {business} business) |
+| Total Tasks | {count} |
+| Overall Coverage | {percent}% ({covered}/{total} requirements with ≥1 task) |
+| Critical Issues | {count} |
+| High Issues | {count} |
+| Medium Issues | {count} |
+| Low Issues | {count} |
+| Total Findings | {total_findings} |
+
+---
+
+## Remediation Recommendations
+
+### Priority Order
+
+1. **CRITICAL** - Must fix before proceeding
+2. **HIGH** - Fix before execution
+3. **MEDIUM** - Fix during or after implementation
+4. **LOW** - Optional improvements
+
+### Next Steps
+
+Based on the quality gate recommendation ({RECOMMENDATION}):
+
+{IF BLOCK_EXECUTION}
+**🛑 BLOCK EXECUTION**
+
+You must resolve all CRITICAL issues before proceeding with implementation:
+
+1. Review each critical issue in detail
+2. Determine remediation approach (modify IMPL_PLAN.md, update task.json, or add new tasks)
+3. Apply fixes systematically
+4. Re-run verification to confirm resolution
+
+{ELSE IF PROCEED_WITH_FIXES}
+**⚠️ PROCEED WITH FIXES RECOMMENDED**
+
+No critical issues detected, but HIGH issues exist. Recommended workflow:
+
+1. Review high-priority issues
+2. Apply fixes before execution for optimal results
+3. Re-run verification (optional)
+
+{ELSE IF PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION}
+**✅ PROCEED WITH CAUTION**
+
+Only MEDIUM issues detected. You may proceed with implementation:
+
+- Address medium issues during or after implementation
+- Maintain awareness of identified concerns
+
+{ELSE}
+**✅ PROCEED**
+
+No significant issues detected. Safe to execute implementation workflow.
+
+{END IF}
+
+---
+
+**Report End**
+```
+
+### 7. Save and Display Report
+
+**Step 7.1: Save Report**:
+```bash
+report_path = ".workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.process/PLAN_VERIFICATION.md"
+Write(report_path, full_report_content)
+```
+
+**Step 7.2: Display Summary to User**:
+```bash
+# Display executive summary in terminal
+echo "=== Plan Verification Complete ==="
+echo "Report saved to: {report_path}"
+echo ""
+echo "Quality Gate: {RECOMMENDATION}"
+echo "Critical: {count} | High: {count} | Medium: {count} | Low: {count}"
+echo ""
+echo "Next: Review full report for detailed findings and recommendations"
+```
+
+**Step 7.3: Completion**:
+- Report is saved to `.process/PLAN_VERIFICATION.md`
+- User can review findings and decide on remediation approach
+- No automatic modifications are made to source artifacts
+- User can manually apply fixes or use separate remediation command (if available)

.claude/commands/workflow/plan.md

@@ -1,15 +1,19 @@
 ---
 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"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] \"text description\"|file.md"
 allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Auto-continue all phases (skip confirmations), use recommended conflict resolutions.
+
 # Workflow Plan Command (/workflow:plan)
 
 ## Coordinator Role
 
-**This command is a pure orchestrator**: Dispatch 5 slash commands in sequence (including a quality gate), parse their outputs, pass context between them, and ensure complete execution through **automatic continuation**.
+**This command is a pure orchestrator**: Execute 5 slash commands in sequence (including a quality gate), parse their outputs, pass context between them, and ensure complete execution through **automatic continuation**.
 
 **Execution Model - Auto-Continue Workflow with Quality Gate**:
 
@@ -17,14 +21,14 @@ This workflow runs **fully autonomously** once triggered. Phase 3 (conflict reso
 
 
 1. **User triggers**: `/workflow:plan "task"`
-2. **Phase 1 dispatches** → Session discovery → Auto-continues
-3. **Phase 2 dispatches** → Context gathering → Auto-continues
-4. **Phase 3 dispatches** (optional, if conflict_risk ≥ medium) → Conflict resolution → Auto-continues
-5. **Phase 4 dispatches** → Task generation (task-generate-agent) → Reports final summary
+2. **Phase 1 executes** → Session discovery → Auto-continues
+3. **Phase 2 executes** → Context gathering → Auto-continues
+4. **Phase 3 executes** (optional, if conflict_risk ≥ medium) → Conflict resolution → Auto-continues
+5. **Phase 4 executes** → Task generation (task-generate-agent) → Reports final summary
 
 **Task Attachment Model**:
-- SlashCommand dispatch **expands workflow** by attaching sub-tasks to current TodoWrite
-- When a sub-command is dispatched (e.g., `/workflow:tools:context-gather`), its internal tasks are attached to the orchestrator's TodoWrite
+- SlashCommand 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
 - This is **task expansion**, not external delegation
@@ -43,7 +47,7 @@ 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 dispatch **attaches** sub-tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **executes** these attached tasks itself, then **collapses** them after completion
+6. **Task Attachment Model**: SlashCommand 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
@@ -80,7 +84,7 @@ Return:
 
 ### Phase 1: Session Discovery
 
-**Step 1.1: Dispatch** - Create or discover workflow session
+**Step 1.1: Execute** - Create or discover workflow session
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:session:start --auto \"[structured-task-description]\"")
@@ -117,7 +121,7 @@ CONTEXT: Existing user database schema, REST API endpoints
 
 ### Phase 2: Context Gathering
 
-**Step 2.1: Dispatch** - Gather project context and analyze codebase
+**Step 2.1: Execute** - Gather project context and analyze codebase
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"[structured-task-description]\"")
@@ -135,9 +139,9 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"[st
 - Context package path extracted
 - File exists and is valid JSON
 
-<!-- TodoWrite: When context-gather dispatched, INSERT 3 context-gather tasks, mark first as in_progress -->
+<!-- TodoWrite: When context-gather executed, INSERT 3 context-gather tasks, mark first as in_progress -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 2 SlashCommand dispatched - tasks attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 2 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 1: Session Discovery", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing session discovery"},
@@ -149,7 +153,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"[st
 ]
 ```
 
-**Note**: SlashCommand dispatch **attaches** context-gather's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
+**Note**: SlashCommand 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 -->
 
@@ -172,7 +176,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"[st
 
 **Trigger**: Only execute when context-package.json indicates conflict_risk is "medium" or "high"
 
-**Step 3.1: Dispatch** - Detect and resolve conflicts with CLI analysis
+**Step 3.1: Execute** - Detect and resolve conflicts with CLI analysis
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId] --context [contextPath]")
@@ -196,7 +200,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 
 <!-- TodoWrite: If conflict_risk ≥ medium, INSERT 3 conflict-resolution tasks -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 SlashCommand dispatched - tasks attached, if conflict_risk ≥ medium)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached, if conflict_risk ≥ medium)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 1: Session Discovery", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing session discovery"},
@@ -209,7 +213,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 ]
 ```
 
-**Note**: SlashCommand dispatch **attaches** conflict-resolution's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks sequentially.
+**Note**: SlashCommand 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 -->
 
@@ -231,7 +235,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 - Evaluate current context window usage and memory state
 - If memory usage is high (>120K tokens or approaching context limits):
 
-  **Step 3.2: Dispatch** - Optimize memory before proceeding
+  **Step 3.2: Execute** - Optimize memory before proceeding
 
   ```javascript
   SlashCommand(command="/compact")
@@ -270,7 +274,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 - Task generation translates high-level role analyses into concrete, actionable work items
 - **Intent priority**: Current user prompt > role analysis.md files > guidance-specification.md
 
-**Step 4.1: Dispatch** - Generate implementation plan and task JSONs
+**Step 4.1: Execute** - Generate implementation plan and task JSONs
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:task-generate-agent --session [sessionId]")
@@ -285,9 +289,9 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:task-generate-agent --session [sessionId]"
 - `.workflow/active/[sessionId]/.task/IMPL-*.json` exists (at least one)
 - `.workflow/active/[sessionId]/TODO_LIST.md` exists
 
-<!-- TodoWrite: When task-generate-agent dispatched, ATTACH 1 agent task -->
+<!-- TodoWrite: When task-generate-agent executed, ATTACH 1 agent task -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 4 SlashCommand dispatched - agent task attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 4 SlashCommand executed - agent task attached)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Phase 1: Session Discovery", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Executing session discovery"},
@@ -318,11 +322,11 @@ Tasks generated: [count]
 Plan: .workflow/active/[sessionId]/IMPL_PLAN.md
 
 Recommended Next Steps:
-1. /workflow:action-plan-verify --session [sessionId]  # Verify plan quality before execution
+1. /workflow:plan-verify --session [sessionId]  # Verify plan quality before execution
 2. /workflow:status  # Review task breakdown
 3. /workflow:execute  # Start implementation (after verification)
 
-Quality Gate: Consider running /workflow:action-plan-verify to catch issues early
+Quality Gate: Consider running /workflow:plan-verify to catch issues early
 ```
 
 ## TodoWrite Pattern
@@ -331,7 +335,7 @@ Quality Gate: Consider running /workflow:action-plan-verify to catch issues earl
 
 ### Key Principles
 
-1. **Task Attachment** (when SlashCommand dispatched):
+1. **Task Attachment** (when SlashCommand 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")
@@ -350,7 +354,7 @@ Quality Gate: Consider running /workflow:action-plan-verify to catch issues earl
    - No user intervention required between phases
    - TodoWrite dynamically reflects current execution state
 
-**Lifecycle Summary**: Initial pending tasks → Phase dispatched (tasks ATTACHED) → Sub-tasks executed sequentially → Phase completed (tasks COLLAPSED to summary for Phase 2/3, or marked completed for Phase 4) → Next phase begins → Repeat until all phases complete.
+**Lifecycle Summary**: Initial pending tasks → Phase executed (tasks ATTACHED) → Sub-tasks executed sequentially → Phase completed (tasks COLLAPSED to summary for Phase 2/3, or marked completed for Phase 4) → Next phase begins → Repeat until all phases complete.
 
 
 
@@ -442,7 +446,7 @@ User triggers: /workflow:plan "Build authentication system"
 Phase 1: Session Discovery
   → sessionId extracted
   ↓
-Phase 2: Context Gathering (SlashCommand dispatched)
+Phase 2: Context Gathering (SlashCommand executed)
   → ATTACH 3 sub-tasks: ← ATTACHED
     - → Analyze codebase structure
     - → Identify integration points
@@ -453,7 +457,7 @@ Phase 2: Context Gathering (SlashCommand dispatched)
   ↓
 Conditional Branch: Check conflict_risk
   ├─ IF conflict_risk ≥ medium:
-  │   Phase 3: Conflict Resolution (SlashCommand dispatched)
+  │   Phase 3: Conflict Resolution (SlashCommand executed)
   │     → ATTACH 3 sub-tasks: ← ATTACHED
   │       - → Detect conflicts with CLI analysis
   │       - → Present conflicts to user
@@ -463,7 +467,7 @@ Conditional Branch: Check conflict_risk
   │
   └─ ELSE: Skip Phase 3, proceed to Phase 4
   ↓
-Phase 4: Task Generation (SlashCommand dispatched)
+Phase 4: Task Generation (SlashCommand executed)
   → Single agent task (no sub-tasks)
   → Agent autonomously completes internally:
     (discovery → planning → output)
@@ -473,12 +477,12 @@ Return summary to user
 ```
 
 **Key Points**:
-- **← ATTACHED**: Tasks attached to TodoWrite when SlashCommand dispatched
+- **← ATTACHED**: Tasks attached to TodoWrite when SlashCommand executed
   - Phase 2, 3: Multiple sub-tasks
   - Phase 4: Single agent task
 - **← COLLAPSED**: Sub-tasks collapsed to summary after completion (Phase 2, 3 only)
 - **Phase 4**: Single agent task, no collapse (just mark completed)
-- **Conditional Branch**: Phase 3 only dispatches if conflict_risk ≥ medium
+- **Conditional Branch**: Phase 3 only executes if conflict_risk ≥ medium
 - **Continuous Flow**: No user intervention between phases
 
 ## Error Handling
@@ -546,6 +550,6 @@ 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(*)
 ---
 
@@ -117,10 +117,48 @@ const taskId = taskIdMatch?.[1]
 
 ---
 
+### 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).
+
+---
+
 ### Phase 2: Interactive Requirement Clarification
 
 **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 +266,29 @@ 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

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

@@ -585,6 +585,10 @@ TodoWrite({
 - 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. **Trust AI Planning**: Planning agent's grouping and execution strategy are based on dependency analysis
@@ -601,6 +605,4 @@ Use `ccw view` to open the workflow dashboard in browser:
 
 ```bash
 ccw view
-```
-
-
+```

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

@@ -409,6 +409,8 @@ Task(
     2. Get target files: Read resolved_files from review-state.json
     3. Validate file access: bash(ls -la ${targetFiles.join(' ')})
     4. Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/review-dimension-results-schema.json (get output schema reference)
+    5. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (technology stack and architecture context)
+    6. Read: .workflow/project-guidelines.json (user-defined constraints and conventions to validate against)
 
     ## Review Context
     - Review Type: module (independent)
@@ -511,6 +513,8 @@ Task(
     3. Identify related code: bash(grep -r "import.*${basename(file)}" ${projectDir}/src --include="*.ts")
     4. Read test files: bash(find ${projectDir}/tests -name "*${basename(file, '.ts')}*" -type f)
     5. Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/review-deep-dive-results-schema.json (get output schema reference)
+    6. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (technology stack and architecture context)
+    7. Read: .workflow/project-guidelines.json (user-defined constraints for remediation compliance)
 
     ## CLI Configuration
     - Tool Priority: gemini → qwen → codex

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

@@ -420,6 +420,8 @@ Task(
     3. Get changed files: bash(cd ${workflowDir} && git log --since="${sessionCreatedAt}" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u)
     4. Read review state: ${reviewStateJsonPath}
     5. Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/review-dimension-results-schema.json (get output schema reference)
+    6. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (technology stack and architecture context)
+    7. Read: .workflow/project-guidelines.json (user-defined constraints and conventions to validate against)
 
     ## Session Context
     - Session ID: ${sessionId}
@@ -522,6 +524,8 @@ Task(
     3. Identify related code: bash(grep -r "import.*${basename(file)}" ${workflowDir}/src --include="*.ts")
     4. Read test files: bash(find ${workflowDir}/tests -name "*${basename(file, '.ts')}*" -type f)
     5. Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/review-deep-dive-results-schema.json (get output schema reference)
+    6. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (technology stack and architecture context)
+    7. Read: .workflow/project-guidelines.json (user-defined constraints for remediation compliance)
 
     ## CLI Configuration
     - Tool Priority: gemini → qwen → codex

.claude/commands/workflow/review.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 name: review
 description: Post-implementation review with specialized types (security/architecture/action-items/quality) using analysis agents and Gemini
-argument-hint: "[--type=security|architecture|action-items|quality] [optional: session-id]"
+argument-hint: "[--type=security|architecture|action-items|quality] [--archived] [optional: session-id]"
 ---
 
 ## Command Overview: /workflow:review
@@ -34,15 +34,17 @@ argument-hint: "[--type=security|architecture|action-items|quality] [optional: s
 ```
 Input Parsing:
    ├─ Parse --type flag (default: quality)
+   ├─ Parse --archived flag (search in archives)
    └─ Parse session-id argument (optional)
 
 Step 1: Session Resolution
    └─ Decision:
-      ├─ session-id provided → Use provided session
+      ├─ session-id provided + --archived → Search .workflow/archives/
+      ├─ session-id provided → Search .workflow/active/ first, then archives
       └─ Not provided → Auto-detect from .workflow/active/
 
 Step 2: Validation
-   ├─ Check session directory exists
+   ├─ Check session directory exists (active or archived)
    └─ Check for completed implementation (.summaries/IMPL-*.md exists)
 
 Step 3: Type Check
@@ -68,21 +70,29 @@ Step 5: Generate Report
 #!/bin/bash
 # Optional specialized review for completed implementation
 
-# Step 1: Session ID resolution
+# Step 1: Session ID resolution and location detection
 if [ -n "$SESSION_ARG" ]; then
     sessionId="$SESSION_ARG"
 else
     sessionId=$(find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d | head -1 | xargs basename)
 fi
 
-# Step 2: Validation
-if [ ! -d ".workflow/active/${sessionId}" ]; then
-    echo "Session ${sessionId} not found"
+# Step 2: Resolve session path (active or archived)
+# Priority: --archived flag → active → archives
+if [ -n "$ARCHIVED_FLAG" ]; then
+    sessionPath=".workflow/archives/${sessionId}"
+elif [ -d ".workflow/active/${sessionId}" ]; then
+    sessionPath=".workflow/active/${sessionId}"
+elif [ -d ".workflow/archives/${sessionId}" ]; then
+    sessionPath=".workflow/archives/${sessionId}"
+    echo "Note: Session found in archives, running review on archived session"
+else
+    echo "Session ${sessionId} not found in active or archives"
     exit 1
 fi
 
 # Check for completed tasks
-if [ ! -d ".workflow/active/${sessionId}/.summaries" ] || [ -z "$(find .workflow/active/${sessionId}/.summaries/ -name "IMPL-*.md" -type f 2>/dev/null)" ]; then
+if [ ! -d "${sessionPath}/.summaries" ] || [ -z "$(find ${sessionPath}/.summaries/ -name "IMPL-*.md" -type f 2>/dev/null)" ]; then
     echo "No completed implementation found. Complete implementation first"
     exit 1
 fi
@@ -113,17 +123,17 @@ After bash validation, the model takes control to:
 1. **Load Context**: Read completed task summaries and changed files
    ```bash
    # Load implementation summaries (iterate through .summaries/ directory)
-   for summary in .workflow/active/${sessionId}/.summaries/*.md; do
+   for summary in ${sessionPath}/.summaries/*.md; do
      cat "$summary"
    done
 
    # Load test results (if available)
-   for test_summary in .workflow/active/${sessionId}/.summaries/TEST-FIX-*.md 2>/dev/null; do
+   for test_summary in ${sessionPath}/.summaries/TEST-FIX-*.md 2>/dev/null; do
      cat "$test_summary"
    done
 
    # Get changed files
-   git log --since="$(cat .workflow/active/${sessionId}/workflow-session.json | jq -r .created_at)" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u
+   git log --since="$(cat ${sessionPath}/workflow-session.json | jq -r .created_at)" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u
    ```
 
 2. **Perform Specialized Review**: Based on `review_type`
@@ -139,10 +149,10 @@ After bash validation, the model takes control to:
      ccw cli -p "
      PURPOSE: Security audit of completed implementation
      TASK: Review code for security vulnerabilities, insecure patterns, auth/authz issues
-     CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../CLAUDE.md
+     CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../project-tech.json @../../project-guidelines.json
      EXPECTED: Security findings report with severity levels
      RULES: Focus on OWASP Top 10, authentication, authorization, data validation, injection risks
-     " --tool gemini --mode write --cd .workflow/active/${sessionId}
+     " --tool gemini --mode write --cd ${sessionPath}
      ```
 
    **Architecture Review** (`--type=architecture`):
@@ -151,10 +161,10 @@ After bash validation, the model takes control to:
      ccw cli -p "
      PURPOSE: Architecture compliance review
      TASK: Evaluate adherence to architectural patterns, identify technical debt, review design decisions
-     CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../CLAUDE.md
+     CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../project-tech.json @../../project-guidelines.json
      EXPECTED: Architecture assessment with recommendations
      RULES: Check for patterns, separation of concerns, modularity, scalability
-     " --tool qwen --mode write --cd .workflow/active/${sessionId}
+     " --tool qwen --mode write --cd ${sessionPath}
      ```
 
    **Quality Review** (`--type=quality`):
@@ -163,17 +173,17 @@ After bash validation, the model takes control to:
      ccw cli -p "
      PURPOSE: Code quality and best practices review
      TASK: Assess code readability, maintainability, adherence to best practices
-     CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../CLAUDE.md
+     CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../project-tech.json @../../project-guidelines.json
      EXPECTED: Quality assessment with improvement suggestions
      RULES: Check for code smells, duplication, complexity, naming conventions
-     " --tool gemini --mode write --cd .workflow/active/${sessionId}
+     " --tool gemini --mode write --cd ${sessionPath}
      ```
 
    **Action Items Review** (`--type=action-items`):
    - Verify all requirements and acceptance criteria met:
      ```bash
      # Load task requirements and acceptance criteria
-     for task_file in .workflow/active/${sessionId}/.task/*.json; do
+     for task_file in ${sessionPath}/.task/*.json; do
        cat "$task_file" | jq -r '
          "Task: " + .id + "\n" +
          "Requirements: " + (.context.requirements | join(", ")) + "\n" +
@@ -185,7 +195,7 @@ After bash validation, the model takes control to:
      ccw cli -p "
      PURPOSE: Verify all requirements and acceptance criteria are met
      TASK: Cross-check implementation summaries against original requirements
-     CONTEXT: @.task/IMPL-*.json,.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../CLAUDE.md
+     CONTEXT: @.task/IMPL-*.json,.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../project-tech.json @../../project-guidelines.json
      EXPECTED:
      - Requirements coverage matrix
      - Acceptance criteria verification
@@ -196,7 +206,7 @@ After bash validation, the model takes control to:
      - Verify all acceptance criteria are met
      - Flag any incomplete or missing action items
      - Assess deployment readiness
-     " --tool gemini --mode write --cd .workflow/active/${sessionId}
+     " --tool gemini --mode write --cd ${sessionPath}
      ```
 
 
@@ -234,7 +244,7 @@ After bash validation, the model takes control to:
 4. **Output Files**:
    ```bash
    # Save review report
-   Write(.workflow/active/${sessionId}/REVIEW-${review_type}.md)
+   Write(${sessionPath}/REVIEW-${review_type}.md)
 
    # Update session metadata
    # (optional) Update workflow-session.json with review status
@@ -261,6 +271,12 @@ After bash validation, the model takes control to:
 # Architecture review for specific session
 /workflow:review --type=architecture WFS-payment-integration
 
+# Review an archived session (auto-detects if not in active)
+/workflow:review --type=security WFS-old-feature
+
+# Explicitly review archived session
+/workflow:review --archived --type=quality WFS-completed-feature
+
 # Documentation review
 /workflow:review --type=docs
 ```
@@ -270,6 +286,7 @@ After bash validation, the model takes control to:
 - **Simple Validation**: Check session exists and has completed tasks
 - **No Complex Orchestration**: Direct analysis, no multi-phase pipeline
 - **Specialized Reviews**: Different prompts and tools for different review types
+- **Archived Session Support**: Review archived sessions with `--archived` flag or auto-detection
 - **MCP Integration**: Fast code search for security and architecture patterns
 - **CLI Tool Integration**: Gemini for analysis, Qwen for architecture
 - **Structured Output**: Markdown reports with severity levels and action items
@@ -295,3 +312,11 @@ Optional Review (when needed):
 - Regular development (tests are sufficient)
 - Simple bug fixes (test-fix-agent handles it)
 - Minor changes (update-memory-related is enough)
+
+## Post-Review Action
+
+After review completion, prompt user:
+```
+Review complete. Would you like to complete and archive this session?
+→ Run /workflow:session:complete to archive with lessons learned
+```

.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

@@ -0,0 +1,303 @@
+---
+name: solidify
+description: Crystallize session learnings and user-defined constraints into permanent project guidelines
+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 -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
+
+Crystallizes ephemeral session context (insights, decisions, constraints) into permanent project guidelines stored in `.workflow/project-guidelines.json`. This ensures valuable learnings persist across sessions and inform future planning.
+
+## Use Cases
+
+1. **During Session**: Capture important decisions as they're made
+2. **After Session**: Reflect on lessons learned before archiving
+3. **Proactive**: Add team conventions or architectural rules
+
+## Parameters
+
+| Parameter | Type | Required | Description |
+|-----------|------|----------|-------------|
+| `rule` | string | ✅ (unless --interactive) | The rule, convention, or insight to solidify |
+| `--type` | enum | ❌ | Type: `convention`, `constraint`, `learning` (default: auto-detect) |
+| `--category` | string | ❌ | Category for organization (see categories below) |
+| `--interactive` | flag | ❌ | Launch guided wizard for adding rules |
+
+### Type Categories
+
+**convention** → Coding style preferences (goes to `conventions` section)
+- Subcategories: `coding_style`, `naming_patterns`, `file_structure`, `documentation`
+
+**constraint** → Hard rules that must not be violated (goes to `constraints` section)
+- Subcategories: `architecture`, `tech_stack`, `performance`, `security`
+
+**learning** → Session-specific insights (goes to `learnings` array)
+- Subcategories: `architecture`, `performance`, `security`, `testing`, `process`, `other`
+
+## Execution Process
+
+```
+Input Parsing:
+   ├─ Parse: rule text (required unless --interactive)
+   ├─ Parse: --type (convention|constraint|learning)
+   ├─ Parse: --category (subcategory)
+   └─ Parse: --interactive (flag)
+
+Step 1: Ensure Guidelines File Exists
+   └─ If not exists → Create with empty structure
+
+Step 2: Auto-detect Type (if not specified)
+   └─ Analyze rule text for keywords
+
+Step 3: Validate and Format Entry
+   └─ Build entry object based on type
+
+Step 4: Update Guidelines File
+   └─ Add entry to appropriate section
+
+Step 5: Display Confirmation
+   └─ Show what was added and where
+```
+
+## Implementation
+
+### Step 1: Ensure Guidelines File Exists
+
+```bash
+bash(test -f .workflow/project-guidelines.json && echo "EXISTS" || echo "NOT_FOUND")
+```
+
+**If NOT_FOUND**, create scaffold:
+
+```javascript
+const scaffold = {
+  conventions: {
+    coding_style: [],
+    naming_patterns: [],
+    file_structure: [],
+    documentation: []
+  },
+  constraints: {
+    architecture: [],
+    tech_stack: [],
+    performance: [],
+    security: []
+  },
+  quality_rules: [],
+  learnings: [],
+  _metadata: {
+    created_at: new Date().toISOString(),
+    version: "1.0.0"
+  }
+};
+
+Write('.workflow/project-guidelines.json', JSON.stringify(scaffold, null, 2));
+```
+
+### Step 2: Auto-detect Type (if not specified)
+
+```javascript
+function detectType(ruleText) {
+  const text = ruleText.toLowerCase();
+
+  // Constraint indicators
+  if (/\b(no|never|must not|forbidden|prohibited|always must)\b/.test(text)) {
+    return 'constraint';
+  }
+
+  // Learning indicators
+  if (/\b(learned|discovered|realized|found that|turns out)\b/.test(text)) {
+    return 'learning';
+  }
+
+  // Default to convention
+  return 'convention';
+}
+
+function detectCategory(ruleText, type) {
+  const text = ruleText.toLowerCase();
+
+  if (type === 'constraint' || type === 'learning') {
+    if (/\b(architecture|layer|module|dependency|circular)\b/.test(text)) return 'architecture';
+    if (/\b(security|auth|permission|sanitize|xss|sql)\b/.test(text)) return 'security';
+    if (/\b(performance|cache|lazy|async|sync|slow)\b/.test(text)) return 'performance';
+    if (/\b(test|coverage|mock|stub)\b/.test(text)) return 'testing';
+  }
+
+  if (type === 'convention') {
+    if (/\b(name|naming|prefix|suffix|camel|pascal)\b/.test(text)) return 'naming_patterns';
+    if (/\b(file|folder|directory|structure|organize)\b/.test(text)) return 'file_structure';
+    if (/\b(doc|comment|jsdoc|readme)\b/.test(text)) return 'documentation';
+    return 'coding_style';
+  }
+
+  return type === 'constraint' ? 'tech_stack' : 'other';
+}
+```
+
+### Step 3: Build Entry
+
+```javascript
+function buildEntry(rule, type, category, sessionId) {
+  if (type === 'learning') {
+    return {
+      date: new Date().toISOString().split('T')[0],
+      session_id: sessionId || null,
+      insight: rule,
+      category: category,
+      context: null
+    };
+  }
+
+  // For conventions and constraints, just return the rule string
+  return rule;
+}
+```
+
+### Step 4: Update Guidelines File
+
+```javascript
+const guidelines = JSON.parse(Read('.workflow/project-guidelines.json'));
+
+if (type === 'convention') {
+  if (!guidelines.conventions[category]) {
+    guidelines.conventions[category] = [];
+  }
+  if (!guidelines.conventions[category].includes(rule)) {
+    guidelines.conventions[category].push(rule);
+  }
+} else if (type === 'constraint') {
+  if (!guidelines.constraints[category]) {
+    guidelines.constraints[category] = [];
+  }
+  if (!guidelines.constraints[category].includes(rule)) {
+    guidelines.constraints[category].push(rule);
+  }
+} else if (type === 'learning') {
+  guidelines.learnings.push(buildEntry(rule, type, category, sessionId));
+}
+
+guidelines._metadata.updated_at = new Date().toISOString();
+guidelines._metadata.last_solidified_by = sessionId;
+
+Write('.workflow/project-guidelines.json', JSON.stringify(guidelines, null, 2));
+```
+
+### Step 5: Display Confirmation
+
+```
+✓ Guideline solidified
+
+Type: ${type}
+Category: ${category}
+Rule: "${rule}"
+
+Location: .workflow/project-guidelines.json → ${type}s.${category}
+
+Total ${type}s in ${category}: ${count}
+```
+
+## Interactive Mode
+
+When `--interactive` flag is provided:
+
+```javascript
+AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [
+    {
+      question: "What type of guideline are you adding?",
+      header: "Type",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: "Convention", description: "Coding style preference (e.g., use functional components)" },
+        { label: "Constraint", description: "Hard rule that must not be violated (e.g., no direct DB access)" },
+        { label: "Learning", description: "Insight from this session (e.g., cache invalidation needs events)" }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+});
+
+// Follow-up based on type selection...
+```
+
+## Examples
+
+### Add a Convention
+```bash
+/workflow:session:solidify "Use async/await instead of callbacks" --type convention --category coding_style
+```
+
+Result in `project-guidelines.json`:
+```json
+{
+  "conventions": {
+    "coding_style": ["Use async/await instead of callbacks"]
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Add an Architectural Constraint
+```bash
+/workflow:session:solidify "No direct DB access from controllers" --type constraint --category architecture
+```
+
+Result:
+```json
+{
+  "constraints": {
+    "architecture": ["No direct DB access from controllers"]
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Capture a Session Learning
+```bash
+/workflow:session:solidify "Cache invalidation requires event sourcing for consistency" --type learning
+```
+
+Result:
+```json
+{
+  "learnings": [
+    {
+      "date": "2024-12-28",
+      "session_id": "WFS-auth-feature",
+      "insight": "Cache invalidation requires event sourcing for consistency",
+      "category": "architecture"
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+## Integration with Planning
+
+The `project-guidelines.json` is consumed by:
+
+1. **`/workflow:tools:context-gather`**: Loads guidelines into context-package.json
+2. **`/workflow:plan`**: Passes guidelines to task generation agent
+3. **`task-generate-agent`**: Includes guidelines as "CRITICAL CONSTRAINTS" in system prompt
+
+This ensures all future planning respects solidified rules without users needing to re-state them.
+
+## Error Handling
+
+- **Duplicate Rule**: Warn and skip if exact rule already exists
+- **Invalid Category**: Suggest valid categories for the type
+- **File Corruption**: Backup existing file before modification
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/workflow:session:start` - Start a session (may prompt for solidify at end)
+- `/workflow:session:complete` - Complete session (prompts for learnings to solidify)
+- `/workflow:init` - Creates project-guidelines.json scaffold if missing

.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
@@ -38,26 +38,29 @@ ERROR: Invalid session type. Valid types: workflow, review, tdd, test, docs
 
 ## Step 0: Initialize Project State (First-time Only)
 
-**Executed before all modes** - Ensures project-level state file exists by calling `/workflow:init`.
+**Executed before all modes** - Ensures project-level state files exist by calling `/workflow:init`.
 
 ### Check and Initialize
 ```bash
-# Check if project state exists
-bash(test -f .workflow/project.json && echo "EXISTS" || echo "NOT_FOUND")
+# Check if project state exists (both files required)
+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 NOT_FOUND**, delegate to `/workflow:init`:
+**If either NOT_FOUND**, delegate to `/workflow:init`:
 ```javascript
 // Call workflow:init for intelligent project analysis
 SlashCommand({command: "/workflow:init"});
 
 // Wait for init completion
-// project.json will be created with comprehensive project overview
+// project-tech.json and project-guidelines.json will be created
 ```
 
 **Output**:
-- If EXISTS: `PROJECT_STATE: initialized`
-- If NOT_FOUND: Calls `/workflow:init` → creates `.workflow/project.json` with full project analysis
+- If BOTH_EXIST: `PROJECT_STATE: initialized`
+- If NOT_FOUND: Calls `/workflow:init` → creates:
+  - `.workflow/project-tech.json` with full technical analysis
+  - `.workflow/project-guidelines.json` with empty scaffold
 
 **Note**: `/workflow:init` uses cli-explore-agent to build comprehensive project understanding (technology stack, architecture, key components). This step runs once per project. Subsequent executions skip initialization.
 

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

@@ -9,39 +9,77 @@ allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
 
 ## Coordinator Role
 
-**This command is a pure orchestrator**: Dispatches 6 slash commands in sequence, parse outputs, pass context, and ensure complete TDD workflow creation with Red-Green-Refactor task generation.
+**This command is a pure orchestrator**: Executes 6 slash commands in sequence, parse outputs, pass context, and ensure complete TDD workflow creation with Red-Green-Refactor task generation.
 
 **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 dispatch **expands workflow** by attaching sub-tasks to current TodoWrite
-- When dispatching a sub-command (e.g., `/workflow:tools:test-context-gather`), its internal tasks are attached to the orchestrator's TodoWrite
+- SlashCommand 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
 - 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 dispatch next pending phase
+- 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
 
 ## Core Rules
 
-1. **Start Immediately**: First action is TodoWrite initialization, second action is dispatch Phase 1
+1. **Start Immediately**: First action is TodoWrite initialization, second action is execute Phase 1
 2. **No Preliminary Analysis**: Do not read files before Phase 1
 3. **Parse Every Output**: Extract required data for next phase
-4. **Auto-Continue via TodoList**: Check TodoList status to dispatch next pending phase automatically
+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 dispatch **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 dispatch next phase
+7. **Task Attachment Model**: SlashCommand 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
 
-**Step 1.1: Dispatch** - Session discovery and initialization
+**Step 1.1: Execute** - Session discovery and initialization
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:session:start --type tdd --auto \"TDD: [structured-description]\"")
@@ -66,7 +104,7 @@ TEST_FOCUS: [Test scenarios]
 
 ### Phase 2: Context Gathering
 
-**Step 2.1: Dispatch** - Context gathering and analysis
+**Step 2.1: Execute** - Context gathering and analysis
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"TDD: [structured-description]\"")
@@ -92,7 +130,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [sessionId] \"TDD
 
 ### Phase 3: Test Coverage Analysis
 
-**Step 3.1: Dispatch** - Test coverage analysis and framework detection
+**Step 3.1: Execute** - Test coverage analysis and framework detection
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-context-gather --session [sessionId]")
@@ -108,9 +146,9 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-context-gather --session [sessionId]"
 
 
 
-<!-- TodoWrite: When test-context-gather dispatched, INSERT 3 test-context-gather tasks -->
+<!-- TodoWrite: When test-context-gather executed, INSERT 3 test-context-gather tasks -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 SlashCommand dispatched - tasks attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 SlashCommand 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 dispatch **attaches** test-context-gather's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks.
+**Note**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** test-context-gather's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks.
 
 **Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 3.1-3.3** sequentially
 
@@ -151,7 +189,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-context-gather --session [sessionId]"
 
 **Trigger**: Only execute when context-package.json indicates conflict_risk is "medium" or "high"
 
-**Step 4.1: Dispatch** - Conflict detection and resolution
+**Step 4.1: Execute** - Conflict detection and resolution
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId] --context [contextPath]")
@@ -173,9 +211,9 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 - If conflict_risk is "none" or "low", skip directly to Phase 5
 - Display: "No significant conflicts detected, proceeding to TDD task generation"
 
-<!-- TodoWrite: If conflict_risk ≥ medium, INSERT 3 conflict-resolution tasks when dispatched -->
+<!-- TodoWrite: If conflict_risk ≥ medium, INSERT 3 conflict-resolution tasks when executed -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 4 SlashCommand dispatched - tasks attached, if conflict_risk ≥ medium)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 4 SlashCommand 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 dispatch **attaches** conflict-resolution's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks.
+**Note**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** conflict-resolution's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks.
 
 **Next Action**: Tasks attached → **Execute Phase 4.1-4.3** sequentially
 
@@ -216,7 +254,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 - Evaluate current context window usage and memory state
 - If memory usage is high (>110K tokens or approaching context limits):
 
-  **Step 4.5: Dispatch** - Memory compaction
+  **Step 4.5: Execute** - Memory compaction
 
   ```javascript
   SlashCommand(command="/compact")
@@ -230,15 +268,19 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:conflict-resolution --session [sessionId]
 
 ### Phase 5: TDD Task Generation
 
-**Step 5.1: Dispatch** - 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]")
 ```
 
-**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)
 
-<!-- TodoWrite: When task-generate-tdd dispatched, INSERT 3 task-generate-tdd tasks -->
+**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`
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 5 SlashCommand dispatched - tasks attached)**:
+**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)**:
 ```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 dispatch **attaches** task-generate-tdd's 3 tasks. Orchestrator **executes** these tasks. Each generated IMPL task will contain internal Red-Green-Refactor cycle.
+**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.
 
 **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 dispatched):
+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 3.1, 3.2, 3.3)
    - First attached task marked as `in_progress`, others as `pending`
@@ -364,7 +479,7 @@ Quality Gate: Consider running /workflow:action-plan-verify to validate TDD task
    - No user intervention required between phases
    - TodoWrite dynamically reflects current execution state
 
-**Lifecycle Summary**: Initial pending tasks → Phase dispatched (tasks ATTACHED) → Sub-tasks executed sequentially → Phase completed (tasks COLLAPSED to summary) → Next phase begins (conditional Phase 4 if conflict_risk ≥ medium) → Repeat until all phases complete.
+**Lifecycle Summary**: Initial pending tasks → Phase executed (tasks ATTACHED) → Sub-tasks executed sequentially → Phase completed (tasks COLLAPSED to summary) → Next phase begins (conditional Phase 4 if conflict_risk ≥ medium) → Repeat until all phases complete.
 
 ### TDD-Specific Features
 
@@ -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:
@@ -416,7 +531,7 @@ 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
@@ -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: SlashCommand(*), 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
+SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:tdd-coverage-analysis --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

@@ -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-fix-gen.md

@@ -59,8 +59,8 @@ This command is a **pure planning coordinator**:
 - **All execution delegated to `/workflow:test-cycle-execute`**
 
 **Task Attachment Model**:
-- SlashCommand dispatch **expands workflow** by attaching sub-tasks to current TodoWrite
-- When dispatching a sub-command (e.g., `/workflow:tools:test-context-gather`), its internal tasks are attached to the orchestrator's TodoWrite
+- SlashCommand 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
 - This is **task expansion**, not external delegation
@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ This command is a **pure planning coordinator**:
 
 ### Core Execution Rules
 
-1. **Start Immediately**: First action is TodoWrite, second is dispatch Phase 1 session creation
+1. **Start Immediately**: First action is TodoWrite, second is execute Phase 1 session creation
 2. **No Preliminary Analysis**: Do not read files 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
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ This command is a **pure planning coordinator**:
 6. **Track Progress**: Update TodoWrite dynamically with task attachment/collapse pattern
 7. **Automatic Detection**: Mode auto-detected from input pattern
 8. **Semantic CLI Detection**: CLI tool usage determined from user's task description for Phase 4
-9. **Task Attachment Model**: SlashCommand dispatch **attaches** sub-tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **executes** these attached tasks itself, then **collapses** them after completion
+9. **Task Attachment Model**: SlashCommand execute **attaches** sub-tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **executes** these attached tasks itself, then **collapses** them after completion
 10. **⚠️ CRITICAL: DO NOT STOP**: Continuous multi-phase workflow. After executing all attached tasks, immediately collapse them and execute next phase
 
 ### 5-Phase Execution
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ Read(".workflow/active/[sourceSessionId]/.process/context-package.json")
 // This preserves user's CLI tool preferences (e.g., "use Codex for fixes")
 ```
 
-**Step 1.1: Dispatch** - Create test workflow session with preserved intent
+**Step 1.1: Execute** - Create test workflow session with preserved intent
 
 ```javascript
 // Session Mode - Include original task description to enable semantic CLI selection
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:session:start --type test --new \"Test generatio
 
 #### Phase 2: Gather Test Context
 
-**Step 2.1: Dispatch** - Gather test context via appropriate method
+**Step 2.1: Execute** - Gather test context via appropriate method
 
 ```javascript
 // Session Mode
@@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:context-gather --session [testSessionId] \
 
 #### Phase 3: Test Generation Analysis
 
-**Step 3.1: Dispatch** - Generate test requirements using Gemini
+**Step 3.1: Execute** - Generate test requirements using Gemini
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-concept-enhanced --session [testSessionId] --context [contextPath]")
@@ -284,7 +284,7 @@ For each targeted file/function, Gemini MUST generate:
 
 #### Phase 4: Generate Test Tasks
 
-**Step 4.1: Dispatch** - Generate test task JSONs
+**Step 4.1: Execute** - Generate test task JSONs
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-task-generate --session [testSessionId]")
@@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ CRITICAL - Next Steps:
 
 #### Key Principles
 
-1. **Task Attachment** (when SlashCommand dispatched):
+1. **Task Attachment** (when SlashCommand executed):
    - Sub-command's internal tasks are **attached** to orchestrator's TodoWrite
    - Example - Phase 2 with sub-tasks:
    ```json
@@ -416,7 +416,7 @@ CRITICAL - Next Steps:
    - No user intervention required between phases
    - TodoWrite dynamically reflects current execution state
 
-**Lifecycle Summary**: Initial pending tasks → Phase dispatched (tasks ATTACHED with mode-specific context gathering) → Sub-tasks executed sequentially → Phase completed (tasks COLLAPSED to summary) → Next phase begins → Repeat until all phases complete.
+**Lifecycle Summary**: Initial pending tasks → Phase executed (tasks ATTACHED with mode-specific context gathering) → Sub-tasks executed sequentially → Phase completed (tasks COLLAPSED to summary) → Next phase begins → Repeat until all phases complete.
 
 #### Test-Fix-Gen Specific Features
 

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

@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*)
 
 **Task Attachment Model**:
 - SlashCommand dispatch **expands workflow** by attaching sub-tasks to current TodoWrite
-- When a sub-command is dispatched (e.g., `/workflow:tools:test-context-gather`), its internal tasks are attached to the orchestrator's 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
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ Read(".workflow/active/[sourceSessionId]/.process/context-package.json")
 // This preserves user's CLI tool preferences (e.g., "use Codex for fixes")
 ```
 
-**Step 1.1: Dispatch** - Create new test workflow session with preserved intent
+**Step 1.1: Execute** - Create new test workflow session with preserved intent
 
 ```javascript
 // Include original task description to enable semantic CLI selection
@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:session:start --new \"Test validation for [sourc
 
 ### Phase 2: Gather Test Context
 
-**Step 2.1: Dispatch** - Gather test coverage context from source session
+**Step 2.1: Execute** - Gather test coverage context from source session
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-context-gather --session [testSessionId]")
@@ -130,9 +130,9 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-context-gather --session [testSession
 - Test framework detected
 - Test conventions documented
 
-<!-- TodoWrite: When test-context-gather dispatched, INSERT 3 test-context-gather tasks -->
+<!-- TodoWrite: When test-context-gather executed, INSERT 3 test-context-gather tasks -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 2 SlashCommand dispatched - tasks attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 2 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Create independent test session", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Creating test session"},
@@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-context-gather --session [testSession
 
 ### Phase 3: Test Generation Analysis
 
-**Step 3.1: Dispatch** - Analyze test requirements with Gemini
+**Step 3.1: Execute** - Analyze test requirements with Gemini
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-concept-enhanced --session [testSessionId] --context [testContextPath]")
@@ -199,9 +199,9 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-concept-enhanced --session [testSessi
   - Implementation Targets (test files to create)
   - Success Criteria
 
-<!-- TodoWrite: When test-concept-enhanced dispatched, INSERT 3 concept-enhanced tasks -->
+<!-- TodoWrite: When test-concept-enhanced executed, INSERT 3 concept-enhanced tasks -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 SlashCommand dispatched - tasks attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 3 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Create independent test session", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Creating test session"},
@@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-concept-enhanced --session [testSessi
 
 ### Phase 4: Generate Test Tasks
 
-**Step 4.1: Dispatch** - Generate test task JSON files and planning documents
+**Step 4.1: Execute** - Generate test task JSON files and planning documents
 
 ```javascript
 SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-task-generate --session [testSessionId]")
@@ -287,9 +287,9 @@ SlashCommand(command="/workflow:tools:test-task-generate --session [testSessionI
   - 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 dispatched, INSERT 3 test-task-generate tasks -->
+<!-- TodoWrite: When test-task-generate executed, INSERT 3 test-task-generate tasks -->
 
-**TodoWrite Update (Phase 4 SlashCommand dispatched - tasks attached)**:
+**TodoWrite Update (Phase 4 SlashCommand executed - tasks attached)**:
 ```json
 [
   {"content": "Create independent test session", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Creating test session"},
@@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ Ready for execution. Use appropriate workflow commands to proceed.
 
 ### Key Principles
 
-1. **Task Attachment** (when SlashCommand dispatched):
+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`
@@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ Ready for execution. Use appropriate workflow commands to proceed.
    - No user intervention required between phases
    - TodoWrite dynamically reflects current execution state
 
-**Lifecycle Summary**: Initial pending tasks → Phase dispatched (tasks ATTACHED) → Sub-tasks executed sequentially → Phase completed (tasks COLLAPSED to summary) → Next phase begins → Repeat until all phases complete.
+**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
 
@@ -517,7 +517,7 @@ See `/workflow:tools:test-task-generate` for complete JSON schemas.
 **Prerequisite Commands**:
 - `/workflow:plan` or `/workflow:execute` - Complete implementation session that needs test validation
 
-**Dispatched by This Command** (4 phases):
+**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

.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
@@ -124,6 +128,9 @@ Task(subagent_type="cli-execution-agent", run_in_background=false, prompt=`
 
   ## Analysis Steps
 
+  ### 0. Load Output Schema (MANDATORY)
+  Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/conflict-resolution-schema.json
+
   ### 1. Load Context
   - Read existing files from conflict_detection.existing_files
   - Load plan from .workflow/active/{session_id}/.process/context-package.json
@@ -151,8 +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)
 
@@ -171,123 +178,14 @@ Task(subagent_type="cli-execution-agent", run_in_background=false, prompt=`
 
   ⚠️ Output to conflict-resolution.json (generated in Phase 4)
 
-  Return JSON format for programmatic processing:
+  **Schema Reference**: Execute \`cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/conflict-resolution-schema.json\` to get full schema
 
-  \`\`\`json
-  {
-    "conflicts": [
-      {
-        "id": "CON-001",
-        "brief": "一行中文冲突摘要",
-        "severity": "Critical|High|Medium",
-        "category": "Architecture|API|Data|Dependency|ModuleOverlap",
-        "affected_files": [
-          ".workflow/active/{session}/.brainstorm/guidance-specification.md",
-          ".workflow/active/{session}/.brainstorm/system-architect/analysis.md"
-        ],
-        "description": "详细描述冲突 - 什么不兼容",
-        "impact": {
-          "scope": "影响的模块/组件",
-          "compatibility": "Yes|No|Partial",
-          "migration_required": true|false,
-          "estimated_effort": "人天估计"
-        },
-        "overlap_analysis": {
-          "// NOTE": "仅当 category=ModuleOverlap 时需要此字段",
-          "new_module": {
-            "name": "新模块名称",
-            "scenarios": ["场景1", "场景2", "场景3"],
-            "responsibilities": "职责描述"
-          },
-          "existing_modules": [
-            {
-              "file": "src/existing/module.ts",
-              "name": "现有模块名称",
-              "scenarios": ["场景A", "场景B"],
-              "overlap_scenarios": ["重叠场景1", "重叠场景2"],
-              "responsibilities": "现有模块职责"
-            }
-          ]
-        },
-        "strategies": [
-          {
-            "name": "策略名称（中文）",
-            "approach": "实现方法简述",
-            "complexity": "Low|Medium|High",
-            "risk": "Low|Medium|High",
-            "effort": "时间估计",
-            "pros": ["优点1", "优点2"],
-            "cons": ["缺点1", "缺点2"],
-            "clarification_needed": [
-              "// NOTE: 仅当需要用户进一步澄清时需要此字段（尤其是 ModuleOverlap）",
-              "新模块的核心职责边界是什么？",
-              "如何与现有模块 X 协作？",
-              "哪些场景应该由新模块处理？"
-            ],
-            "modifications": [
-              {
-                "file": ".workflow/active/{session}/.brainstorm/guidance-specification.md",
-                "section": "## 2. System Architect Decisions",
-                "change_type": "update",
-                "old_content": "原始内容片段（用于定位）",
-                "new_content": "修改后的内容",
-                "rationale": "为什么这样改"
-              },
-              {
-                "file": ".workflow/active/{session}/.brainstorm/system-architect/analysis.md",
-                "section": "## Design Decisions",
-                "change_type": "update",
-                "old_content": "原始内容片段",
-                "new_content": "修改后的内容",
-                "rationale": "修改理由"
-              }
-            ]
-          },
-          {
-            "name": "策略2名称",
-            "approach": "...",
-            "complexity": "Medium",
-            "risk": "Low",
-            "effort": "1-2天",
-            "pros": ["优点"],
-            "cons": ["缺点"],
-            "modifications": [...]
-          }
-        ],
-        "recommended": 0,
-        "modification_suggestions": [
-          "建议1：具体的修改方向或注意事项",
-          "建议2：可能需要考虑的边界情况",
-          "建议3：相关的最佳实践或模式"
-        ]
-      }
-    ],
-    "summary": {
-      "total": 2,
-      "critical": 1,
-      "high": 1,
-      "medium": 0
-    }
-  }
-  \`\`\`
-
-  ⚠️ CRITICAL Requirements for modifications field:
-  - old_content: Must be exact text from target file (20-100 chars for unique match)
-  - new_content: Complete replacement text (maintains formatting)
-  - change_type: "update" (replace), "add" (insert), "remove" (delete)
-  - file: Full path relative to project root
-  - section: Markdown heading for context (helps locate position)
+  Return JSON following the schema above. Key requirements:
   - Minimum 2 strategies per conflict, max 4
-  - All text in Chinese for user-facing fields (brief, name, pros, cons)
-  - modification_suggestions: 2-5 actionable suggestions for custom handling (Chinese)
-
-  Quality Standards:
-  - Each strategy must have actionable modifications
-  - old_content must be precise enough for Edit tool matching
-  - new_content preserves markdown formatting and structure
-  - Recommended strategy (index) based on lowest complexity + risk
-  - modification_suggestions must be specific, actionable, and context-aware
-  - Each suggestion should address a specific aspect (compatibility, migration, testing, etc.)
+  - All text in Chinese for user-facing fields (brief, name, pros, cons, modification_suggestions)
+  - 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
 `)
 ```
 
@@ -312,143 +210,93 @@ Task(subagent_type="cli-execution-agent", run_in_background=false, prompt=`
 8. Return execution log path
 ```
 
-### Phase 3: Iterative User Interaction with Clarification Loop
+### Phase 3: User Interaction Loop
 
-**Execution Flow**:
-```
-FOR each conflict (逐个处理，无数量限制):
-  clarified = false
-  round = 0
-  userClarifications = []
+```javascript
+const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
 
-  WHILE (!clarified && round < 10):
-    round++
+FOR each conflict:
+  round = 0, clarified = false, userClarifications = []
 
-    // 1. Display conflict (包含所有关键字段)
-    - category, id, brief, severity, description
-    - IF ModuleOverlap: 展示 overlap_analysis
-      * new_module: {name, scenarios, responsibilities}
-      * existing_modules[]: {file, name, scenarios, overlap_scenarios, responsibilities}
+  WHILE (!clarified && round++ < 10):
+    // 1. Display conflict info (text output for context)
+    displayConflictSummary(conflict)  // id, brief, severity, overlap_analysis if ModuleOverlap
 
-    // 2. Display strategies (2-4个策略 + 自定义选项)
-    - FOR each strategy: {name, approach, complexity, risk, effort, pros, cons}
-      * IF clarification_needed: 展示待澄清问题列表
-    - 自定义选项: {suggestions: modification_suggestions[]}
-
-    // 3. User selects strategy
-    userChoice = readInput()
-
-    IF userChoice == "自定义":
-      customConflicts.push({id, brief, category, suggestions, overlap_analysis})
-      clarified = true
-      BREAK
-
-    selectedStrategy = strategies[userChoice]
-
-    // 4. Clarification loop
-    IF selectedStrategy.clarification_needed.length > 0:
-      // 收集澄清答案
-      FOR each question:
-        answer = readInput()
-        userClarifications.push({question, answer})
-
-      // Agent 重新分析
-      reanalysisResult = Task(cli-execution-agent, prompt={
-        冲突信息: {id, brief, category, 策略}
-        用户澄清: userClarifications[]
-        场景分析: overlap_analysis (if ModuleOverlap)
-
-        输出: {
-          uniqueness_confirmed: bool,
-          rationale: string,
-          updated_strategy: {name, approach, complexity, risk, effort, modifications[]},
-          remaining_questions: [] (如果仍有歧义)
-        }
+    // 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",
+        multiSelect: false,
+        options: [
+          ...conflict.strategies.map((s, i) => ({
+            label: `${s.name}${i === conflict.recommended ? ' (推荐)' : ''}`,
+            description: `${s.complexity}复杂度 | ${s.risk}风险${s.clarification_needed?.length ? ' | ⚠️需澄清' : ''}`
+          })),
+          { label: "自定义修改", description: `建议: ${conflict.modification_suggestions?.slice(0,2).join('; ')}` }
+        ]
+      }]
       })
 
-      IF reanalysisResult.uniqueness_confirmed:
-        selectedStrategy = updated_strategy
-        selectedStrategy.clarifications = userClarifications
-        clarified = true
-      ELSE:
-        // 更新澄清问题，继续下一轮
-        selectedStrategy.clarification_needed = remaining_questions
-    ELSE:
-      clarified = true
+      // 3. Handle selection
+      if (userChoice === "自定义修改") {
+        customConflicts.push({ id, brief, category, suggestions, overlap_analysis })
+        break
+      }
 
-    resolvedConflicts.push({conflict, strategy: selectedStrategy})
+      selectedStrategy = findStrategyByName(userChoice)
+    }
+
+    // 4. Clarification (if needed) - batched max 4 per call
+    if (!autoYes && selectedStrategy.clarification_needed?.length > 0) {
+      for (batch of chunk(selectedStrategy.clarification_needed, 4)) {
+        AskUserQuestion({
+          questions: batch.map((q, i) => ({
+            question: q, header: `澄清${i+1}`, multiSelect: false,
+            options: [{ label: "详细说明", description: "提供答案" }]
+          }))
+        })
+        userClarifications.push(...collectAnswers(batch))
+      }
+
+      // 5. Agent re-analysis
+      reanalysisResult = Task({
+        subagent_type: "cli-execution-agent",
+        run_in_background: false,
+        prompt: `Conflict: ${conflict.id}, Strategy: ${selectedStrategy.name}
+User Clarifications: ${JSON.stringify(userClarifications)}
+Output: { uniqueness_confirmed, rationale, updated_strategy, remaining_questions }`
+      })
+
+      if (reanalysisResult.uniqueness_confirmed) {
+        selectedStrategy = { ...reanalysisResult.updated_strategy, clarifications: userClarifications }
+        clarified = true
+      } else {
+        selectedStrategy.clarification_needed = reanalysisResult.remaining_questions
+      }
+    } else {
+      clarified = true
+    }
+
+    if (clarified) resolvedConflicts.push({ conflict, strategy: selectedStrategy })
   END WHILE
 END FOR
 
-// Build output
 selectedStrategies = resolvedConflicts.map(r => ({
-  conflict_id, strategy, clarifications[]
+  conflict_id: r.conflict.id, strategy: r.strategy, clarifications: r.strategy.clarifications || []
 }))
 ```
 
-**Key Data Structures**:
-
-```javascript
-// Custom conflict tracking
-customConflicts[] = {
-  id, brief, category,
-  suggestions: modification_suggestions[],
-  overlap_analysis: { new_module{}, existing_modules[] }  // ModuleOverlap only
-}
-
-// Agent re-analysis prompt output
-{
-  uniqueness_confirmed: bool,
-  rationale: string,
-  updated_strategy: {
-    name, approach, complexity, risk, effort,
-    modifications: [{file, section, change_type, old_content, new_content, rationale}]
-  },
-  remaining_questions: string[]
-}
-```
-
-**Text Output Example** (展示关键字段):
-
-```markdown
-============================================================
-冲突 1/3 - 第 1 轮
-============================================================
-【ModuleOverlap】CON-001: 新增用户认证服务与现有模块功能重叠
-严重程度: High | 描述: 计划中的 UserAuthService 与现有 AuthManager 场景重叠
-
---- 场景重叠分析 ---
-新模块: UserAuthService | 场景: 登录, Token验证, 权限, MFA
-现有模块: AuthManager (src/auth/AuthManager.ts) | 重叠: 登录, Token验证
-
---- 解决策略 ---
-1) 合并 (Low复杂度 | Low风险 | 2-3天)
-   ⚠️ 需澄清: AuthManager是否能承担MFA？
-
-2) 拆分边界 (Medium复杂度 | Medium风险 | 4-5天)
-   ⚠️ 需澄清: 基础/高级认证边界? Token验证归谁?
-
-3) 自定义修改
-   建议: 评估扩展性; 策略模式分离; 定义接口边界
-
-请选择 (1-3): > 2
-
---- 澄清问答 (第1轮) ---
-Q: 基础/高级认证边界?
-A: 基础=密码登录+token验证, 高级=MFA+OAuth+SSO
-
-Q: Token验证归谁?
-A: 统一由 AuthManager 负责
-
-🔄 重新分析...
-✅ 唯一性已确认 | 理由: 边界清晰 - AuthManager(基础+token), UserAuthService(MFA+OAuth+SSO)
-
-============================================================
-冲突 2/3 - 第 1 轮 [下一个冲突]
-============================================================
-```
-
-**Loop Characteristics**: 逐个处理 | 无限轮次(max 10) | 动态问题生成 | Agent重新分析判断唯一性 | ModuleOverlap场景边界澄清
+**Key Points**:
+- AskUserQuestion: max 4 questions/call, batch if more
+- Strategy options: 2-4 strategies + "自定义修改"
+- Clarification loop: max 10 rounds, agent判断 uniqueness_confirmed
+- Custom conflicts: 记录 overlap_analysis 供后续手动处理
 
 ### Phase 4: Apply Modifications
 

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

@@ -15,7 +15,6 @@ allowed-tools: Task(*), Read(*), Glob(*)
 
 Orchestrator command that invokes `context-search-agent` to gather comprehensive project context for implementation planning. Generates standardized `context-package.json` with codebase analysis, dependencies, and conflict detection.
 
-**Agent**: `context-search-agent` (`.claude/agents/context-search-agent.md`)
 
 ## Core Philosophy
 
@@ -237,7 +236,10 @@ Task(
 Execute complete context-search-agent workflow for implementation planning:
 
 ### Phase 1: Initialization & Pre-Analysis
-1. **Project State Loading**: Read and parse `.workflow/project.json`. Use its `overview` section as the foundational `project_context`. This is your primary source for architecture, tech stack, and key components. If file doesn't exist, proceed with fresh analysis.
+1. **Project State Loading**:
+   - 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)
 3. **Foundation**: Initialize CodexLens, get project structure, load docs
 4. **Analysis**: Extract keywords, determine scope, classify complexity based on task description and project state
@@ -252,17 +254,19 @@ 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.json`** for architecture and tech stack unless code analysis reveals it's outdated.
-3. **Populate `project_context`**: Directly use the `overview` from `project.json` to fill the `project_context` section of the output `context-package.json`. Include description, technology_stack, architecture, and key_components.
-4. Integrate brainstorm artifacts (if .brainstorming/ exists, read content)
-5. Perform conflict detection with risk assessment
-6. **Inject historical conflicts** from archive analysis into conflict_detection
-7. Generate and validate context-package.json
+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 `overview` 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
 
 ## Output Requirements
 Complete context-package.json with:
 - **metadata**: task_description, keywords, complexity, tech_stack, session_id
-- **project_context**: description, technology_stack, architecture, key_components (sourced from `project.json` overview)
+- **project_context**: description, technology_stack, architecture, key_components (sourced from `project-tech.json`)
+- **project_guidelines**: {conventions, constraints, quality_rules, learnings} (sourced from `project-guidelines.json`)
 - **assets**: {documentation[], source_code[], config[], tests[]} with relevance scores
 - **dependencies**: {internal[], external[]} with dependency graph
 - **brainstorm_artifacts**: {guidance_specification, role_analyses[], synthesis_output} with content
@@ -315,7 +319,8 @@ Refer to `context-search-agent.md` Phase 3.7 for complete `context-package.json`
 
 **Key Sections**:
 - **metadata**: Session info, keywords, complexity, tech stack
-- **project_context**: Architecture patterns, conventions, tech stack (populated from `project.json` overview)
+- **project_context**: Architecture patterns, conventions, tech stack (populated from `project-tech.json`)
+- **project_guidelines**: Conventions, constraints, quality rules, learnings (populated from `project-guidelines.json`)
 - **assets**: Categorized files with relevance scores (documentation, source_code, config, tests)
 - **dependencies**: Internal and external dependency graphs
 - **brainstorm_artifacts**: Brainstorm documents with full content (if exists)
@@ -430,7 +435,7 @@ if (historicalConflicts.length > 0 && currentRisk === "low") {
 ## Notes
 
 - **Detection-first**: Always check for existing package before invoking agent
-- **Project.json integration**: Agent reads `.workflow/project.json` as primary source for project context, avoiding redundant analysis
-- **Agent autonomy**: Agent handles all discovery logic per `.claude/agents/context-search-agent.md`
+- **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
 - **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
@@ -67,9 +72,25 @@ 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 +125,10 @@ 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: [{
@@ -354,19 +374,20 @@ Generate task JSON files for ${module.name} module within workflow session
 IMPORTANT: This is PLANNING ONLY - generate task JSONs, NOT implementing code.
 IMPORTANT: Generate Task JSONs ONLY. IMPL_PLAN.md and TODO_LIST.md by Phase 3 Coordinator.
 
-CRITICAL: Follow progressive loading strategy in agent specification
+CRITICAL: Follow the progressive loading strategy defined in agent specification (load analysis.md files incrementally due to file size)
 
 ## MODULE SCOPE
 - Module: ${module.name} (${module.type})
 - Focus Paths: ${module.paths.join(', ')}
 - Task ID Prefix: IMPL-${module.prefix}
-- Task Limit: ≤9 tasks
-- Other Modules: ${otherModules.join(', ')}
+- Task Limit: ≤9 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
   - Context Package: .workflow/active/{session-id}/.process/context-package.json
+
 Output:
   - Task Dir: .workflow/active/{session-id}/.task/
 
@@ -374,21 +395,93 @@ Output:
 Session ID: {session-id}
 MCP Capabilities: {exa_code, exa_web, code_index}
 
+## 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}
+
+## 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
+
+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
+
+## EXPLORATION CONTEXT (from context-package.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
+- Reference aggregated_insights.all_patterns applicable to ${module.name}
+- Use aggregated_insights.all_integration_points for precise modification locations within module scope
+- 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 relevant to ${module.name} as task constraints
+  - Reference resolved_conflicts affecting ${module.name} for implementation approach alignment
+  - Handle custom_conflicts with explicit task notes
+
 ## CROSS-MODULE DEPENDENCIES
-- Use placeholder: depends_on: ["CROSS::{module}::{pattern}"]
-- Example: depends_on: ["CROSS::B::api-endpoint"]
+- For dependencies ON other modules: Use placeholder depends_on: ["CROSS::{module}::{pattern}"]
+- Example: depends_on: ["CROSS::B::api-endpoint"] (this module depends on B's api-endpoint task)
 - Phase 3 Coordinator resolves to actual task IDs
+- For dependencies FROM other modules: Document in task context as "provides_for" annotation
 
 ## EXPECTED DELIVERABLES
 Task JSON Files (.task/IMPL-${module.prefix}*.json):
-  - 6-field schema per agent specification
+  - 6-field schema (id, title, status, context_package_path, meta, context, flow_control)
   - Task ID format: IMPL-${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)
+  - **CLI Execution IDs and strategies (MANDATORY)**
   - Focus ONLY on ${module.name} module scope
 
+## CLI EXECUTION ID REQUIREMENTS (MANDATORY)
+Each task JSON MUST include:
+- **cli_execution_id**: Unique ID for CLI execution (format: `{session_id}-IMPL-${module.prefix}{seq}`)
+- **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", "merge_from": ["id1", "id2", ...] }`
+  - Cross-module dep → `{ "strategy": "cross_module_fork", "resume_from": "CROSS::{module}::{pattern}" }`
+
+**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
+5. **cross_module_fork**: Task depends on task from another module - Phase 3 resolves placeholder
+
+**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 [merge_from.join(',')] --id [cli_execution_id] --tool [tool] --mode write`
+- cross_module_fork: (Phase 3 resolves placeholder, then uses fork pattern)
+
+## QUALITY STANDARDS
+Hard Constraints:
+  - Task count <= 9 for this module (hard limit - coordinate with Phase 3 if exceeded)
+  - All requirements quantified (explicit counts and enumerated lists)
+  - Acceptance criteria measurable (include verification commands)
+  - Artifact references mapped from context package (module-scoped filter)
+  - Focus paths use absolute paths or clear relative paths from project root
+  - Cross-module dependencies use CROSS:: placeholder format
+
 ## SUCCESS CRITERIA
 - Task JSONs saved to .task/ with IMPL-${module.prefix}* naming
-- Cross-module dependencies use CROSS:: placeholder format
-- Return task count and brief summary
+- All task JSONs include cli_execution_id and cli_execution strategy
+- 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)
     `
   )
 );

.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)
    }
    ```
 
@@ -180,74 +317,84 @@ 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
+## CLI TOOL SELECTION
+Based on userConfig.executionMethod:
+- "agent": No command field in implementation_approach steps
+- "hybrid": Add command field to complex steps only (Red/Green phases recommended for CLI)
+- "cli": Add command field to ALL Red-Green-Refactor steps
 
-### 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
+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
 
-### MCP Analysis Results (Optional)
-**Code Structure**: {mcp_code_index_results}
-**External Research**: {mcp_exa_research_results}
+## 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
 
-## Phase 2: TDD Document Generation Task
+## 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.
 
-Refer to: @.claude/agents/action-planning-agent.md for:
-- TDD Task Decomposition Standards
-- Red-Green-Refactor Cycle Requirements
-- Quantification Requirements (MANDATORY)
-- 5-Field Task JSON Schema
-- IMPL_PLAN.md Structure (TDD variant)
-- TODO_LIST.md Format
-- TDD Execution Flow & Quality Validation
-
 ### TDD-Specific Requirements Summary
 
 #### Task Structure Philosophy
@@ -265,31 +412,61 @@ Refer to: @.claude/agents/action-planning-agent.md for:
 #### 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
+  - CLI tool usage based on userConfig (add `command` field per executionMethod)
 - **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**:
@@ -311,6 +488,7 @@ Refer to: @.claude/agents/action-planning-agent.md for:
 - [ ] 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
 
@@ -326,20 +504,34 @@ Refer to: @.claude/agents/action-planning-agent.md for:
 - ✓ 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
 `
 )
@@ -347,50 +539,64 @@ 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.
@@ -398,14 +604,31 @@ 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
+- Command field: Added per `userConfig.executionMethod` (agent/hybrid/cli)
 - 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/
@@ -441,9 +664,9 @@ 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
@@ -463,7 +686,7 @@ 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 |
@@ -521,6 +744,6 @@ 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)
+- **meta.max_iterations**: Number of fix attempts in Green phase (default: 3)
 - **CLI tool usage**: Determined semantically from user's task description via `command` field in implementation_approach
 

.claude/commands/workflow/tools/test-concept-enhanced.md

@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ Template: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/test/test-concept-analysis.t
 
 ## EXECUTION STEPS
 1. Execute Gemini analysis:
-   ccw cli -p "$(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/test/test-concept-analysis.txt)" --tool gemini --mode write --cd .workflow/active/{test_session_id}/.process
+   ccw cli -p "..." --tool gemini --mode write --rule test-test-concept-analysis --cd .workflow/active/{test_session_id}/.process
 
 2. Generate TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md:
    Synthesize gemini-test-analysis.md into standardized format for task generation

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

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ allowed-tools: Task(*), Read(*), Glob(*)
 
 Orchestrator command that invokes `test-context-search-agent` to gather comprehensive test coverage context for test generation workflows. Generates standardized `test-context-package.json` with coverage analysis, framework detection, and source implementation context.
 
-**Agent**: `test-context-search-agent` (`.claude/agents/test-context-search-agent.md`)
+
 
 ## Core Philosophy
 
@@ -89,7 +89,6 @@ Task(
   run_in_background=false,
   description="Gather test coverage context",
   prompt=`
-You are executing as test-context-search-agent (.claude/agents/test-context-search-agent.md).
 
 ## Execution Mode
 **PLAN MODE** (Comprehensive) - Full Phase 1-3 execution
@@ -229,7 +228,7 @@ Refer to `test-context-search-agent.md` Phase 3.2 for complete `test-context-pac
 ## Notes
 
 - **Detection-first**: Always check for existing test-context-package before invoking agent
-- **Agent autonomy**: Agent handles all coverage analysis logic per `.claude/agents/test-context-search-agent.md`
+
 - **No redundancy**: This command is a thin orchestrator, all logic in agent
 - **Framework agnostic**: Supports Jest, Mocha, pytest, RSpec, Go testing, etc.
 - **Coverage focus**: Primary goal is identifying implementation files without tests

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

@@ -107,8 +107,6 @@ CRITICAL:
 - Follow the progressive loading strategy defined in your agent specification (load context incrementally from memory-first approach)
 
 ## AGENT CONFIGURATION REFERENCE
-All test task generation rules, schemas, and quality standards are defined in your agent specification:
-@.claude/agents/action-planning-agent.md
 
 Refer to your specification for:
 - Test Task JSON Schema (6-field structure with test-specific metadata)

.claude/commands/workflow/ui-design/animation-extract.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: animation-extract
 description: Extract animation and transition patterns from prompt inference and image references for design system documentation
-argument-hint: "[--design-id <id>] [--session <id>] [--images "<glob>"] [--focus "<types>"] [--interactive] [--refine]"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--design-id <id>] [--session <id>] [--images "<glob>"] [--focus "<types>"] [--interactive] [--refine]"
 allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Glob(*), Bash(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Task(ui-design-agent)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Skip all clarification questions, use AI-inferred animation decisions.
+
 # Animation Extraction Command
 
 ## Overview

.claude/commands/workflow/ui-design/explore-auto.md

@@ -27,8 +27,8 @@ allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Glob(*), Write(*
 6. **Phase 10 (ui-assembly)** → **Attach tasks → Execute → Collapse** → Workflow complete
 
 **Phase Transition Mechanism**:
-- **Phase 5 (User Interaction)**: User confirms targets → IMMEDIATELY dispatches Phase 7
-- **Phase 7-10 (Autonomous)**: SlashCommand dispatch **ATTACHES** tasks to current workflow
+- **Phase 5 (User Interaction)**: User confirms targets → IMMEDIATELY executes Phase 7
+- **Phase 7-10 (Autonomous)**: SlashCommand execute **ATTACHES** tasks to current workflow
 - **Task Execution**: Orchestrator **EXECUTES** these attached tasks itself
 - **Task Collapse**: After tasks complete, collapse them into phase summary
 - **Phase Transition**: Automatically execute next phase after collapsing
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Glob(*), Write(*
 
 **Auto-Continue Mechanism**: TodoWrite tracks phase status with dynamic task attachment/collapse. After executing all attached tasks, you MUST immediately collapse them, restore phase summary, and execute the next phase. No user intervention required. The workflow is NOT complete until Phase 10 (UI assembly) finishes.
 
-**Task Attachment Model**: SlashCommand dispatch is NOT delegation - it's task expansion. The orchestrator executes these attached tasks itself, not waiting for external completion.
+**Task Attachment Model**: SlashCommand execute is NOT delegation - it's task expansion. The orchestrator executes these attached tasks itself, not waiting for external completion.
 
 **Target Type Detection**: Automatically inferred from prompt/targets, or explicitly set via `--target-type`.
 
@@ -63,26 +63,26 @@ Phase 5: Unified Target Inference
 
 Phase 6: Code Import (Conditional)
    └─ Decision (design_source):
-      ├─ code_only | hybrid → Dispatch /workflow:ui-design:import-from-code
+      ├─ code_only | hybrid → Execute /workflow:ui-design:import-from-code
       └─ visual_only → Skip to Phase 7
 
 Phase 7: Style Extraction
    └─ Decision (needs_visual_supplement):
-      ├─ visual_only OR supplement needed → Dispatch /workflow:ui-design:style-extract
+      ├─ visual_only OR supplement needed → Execute /workflow:ui-design:style-extract
       └─ code_only AND style_complete → Use code import
 
 Phase 8: Animation Extraction
    └─ Decision (should_extract_animation):
-      ├─ visual_only OR incomplete OR regenerate → Dispatch /workflow:ui-design:animation-extract
+      ├─ visual_only OR incomplete OR regenerate → Execute /workflow:ui-design:animation-extract
       └─ code_only AND animation_complete → Use code import
 
 Phase 9: Layout Extraction
    └─ Decision (needs_visual_supplement OR NOT layout_complete):
-      ├─ True → Dispatch /workflow:ui-design:layout-extract
+      ├─ True → Execute /workflow:ui-design:layout-extract
       └─ False → Use code import
 
 Phase 10: UI Assembly
-   └─ Dispatch /workflow:ui-design:generate → Workflow complete
+   └─ Execute /workflow:ui-design:generate → Workflow complete
 ```
 
 ## Core Rules
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ Phase 10: UI Assembly
 3. **Parse & Pass**: Extract data from each output for next phase
 4. **Default to All**: When selecting variants/prototypes, use ALL generated items
 5. **Track Progress**: Update TodoWrite dynamically with task attachment/collapse pattern
-6. **⚠️ CRITICAL: Task Attachment Model** - SlashCommand dispatch **ATTACHES** tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **EXECUTES** these attached tasks itself, not waiting for external completion. This is NOT delegation - it's task expansion.
+6. **⚠️ CRITICAL: Task Attachment Model** - SlashCommand execute **ATTACHES** tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **EXECUTES** these attached tasks itself, not waiting for external completion. This is NOT delegation - it's task expansion.
 7. **⚠️ CRITICAL: DO NOT STOP** - This is a continuous multi-phase workflow. After executing all attached tasks, you MUST immediately collapse them and execute the next phase. Workflow is NOT complete until Phase 10 (UI assembly) finishes.
 
 ## Parameter Requirements
@@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ detect_target_type(target_list):
 
 ### Phase 6: Code Import & Completeness Assessment (Conditional)
 
-**Step 6.1: Dispatch** - Import design system from code files
+**Step 6.1: Execute** - Import design system from code files
 
 ```javascript
 IF design_source IN ["code_only", "hybrid"]:
@@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ IF design_source IN ["code_only", "hybrid"]:
     command = "/workflow:ui-design:import-from-code --design-id \"{design_id}\" --source \"{code_base_path}\""
 
     TRY:
-        # SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES import-from-code's tasks to current workflow
+        # SlashCommand execute ATTACHES import-from-code's tasks to current workflow
         # Orchestrator will EXECUTE these attached tasks itself:
         #   - Phase 0: Discover and categorize code files
         #   - Phase 1.1-1.3: Style/Animation/Layout Agent extraction
@@ -469,7 +469,7 @@ IF design_source IN ["code_only", "hybrid"]:
 
 ### Phase 7: Style Extraction
 
-**Step 7.1: Dispatch** - Extract style design systems
+**Step 7.1: Execute** - Extract style design systems
 
 ```javascript
 IF design_source == "visual_only" OR needs_visual_supplement:
@@ -479,7 +479,7 @@ IF design_source == "visual_only" OR needs_visual_supplement:
               (prompt_text ? "--prompt \"{prompt_text}\" " : "") +
               "--variants {style_variants} --interactive"
 
-    # SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES style-extract's tasks to current workflow
+    # SlashCommand execute ATTACHES style-extract's tasks to current workflow
     # Orchestrator will EXECUTE these attached tasks itself
     SlashCommand(command)
 
@@ -490,7 +490,7 @@ ELSE:
 
 ### Phase 8: Animation Extraction
 
-**Step 8.1: Dispatch** - Extract animation patterns
+**Step 8.1: Execute** - Extract animation patterns
 
 ```javascript
 # Determine if animation extraction is needed
@@ -522,7 +522,7 @@ IF should_extract_animation:
 
     command = " ".join(command_parts)
 
-    # SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES animation-extract's tasks to current workflow
+    # SlashCommand execute ATTACHES animation-extract's tasks to current workflow
     # Orchestrator will EXECUTE these attached tasks itself
     SlashCommand(command)
 
@@ -536,7 +536,7 @@ ELSE:
 
 ### Phase 9: Layout Extraction
 
-**Step 9.1: Dispatch** - Extract layout templates
+**Step 9.1: Execute** - Extract layout templates
 
 ```javascript
 targets_string = ",".join(inferred_target_list)
@@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ IF (design_source == "visual_only" OR needs_visual_supplement) OR (NOT layout_co
               (prompt_text ? "--prompt \"{prompt_text}\" " : "") +
               "--targets \"{targets_string}\" --variants {layout_variants} --device-type \"{device_type}\" --interactive"
 
-    # SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES layout-extract's tasks to current workflow
+    # SlashCommand execute ATTACHES layout-extract's tasks to current workflow
     # Orchestrator will EXECUTE these attached tasks itself
     SlashCommand(command)
 
@@ -559,7 +559,7 @@ ELSE:
 
 ### Phase 10: UI Assembly
 
-**Step 10.1: Dispatch** - Assemble UI prototypes from design tokens and layout templates
+**Step 10.1: Execute** - Assemble UI prototypes from design tokens and layout templates
 
 ```javascript
 command = "/workflow:ui-design:generate --design-id \"{design_id}\"" + (--session ? " --session {session_id}" : "")
@@ -571,7 +571,7 @@ REPORT: "   → Pure assembly: Combining layout templates + design tokens"
 REPORT: "   → Device: {device_type} (from layout templates)"
 REPORT: "   → Assembly tasks: {total} combinations"
 
-# SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES generate's tasks to current workflow
+# SlashCommand execute ATTACHES generate's tasks to current workflow
 # Orchestrator will EXECUTE these attached tasks itself
 SlashCommand(command)
 
@@ -596,10 +596,10 @@ TodoWrite({todos: [
 
 // ⚠️ CRITICAL: Dynamic TodoWrite task attachment strategy:
 //
-// **Key Concept**: SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES tasks to current workflow.
+// **Key Concept**: SlashCommand execute ATTACHES tasks to current workflow.
 // Orchestrator EXECUTES these attached tasks itself, not waiting for external completion.
 //
-// Phase 7-10 SlashCommand Dispatch Pattern (when tasks are attached):
+// Phase 7-10 SlashCommand Execute Pattern (when tasks are attached):
 // Example - Phase 7 with sub-tasks:
 // [
 //   {"content": "Phase 7: Style Extraction", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Executing style extraction"},

.claude/commands/workflow/ui-design/imitate-auto.md

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Bash(*)
 7. Phase 4: Design system integration → **Execute orchestrator task** → Reports completion
 
 **Phase Transition Mechanism**:
-- **Task Attachment**: SlashCommand dispatch **ATTACHES** tasks to current workflow
+- **Task Attachment**: SlashCommand execute **ATTACHES** tasks to current workflow
 - **Task Execution**: Orchestrator **EXECUTES** these attached tasks itself
 - **Task Collapse**: After tasks complete, collapse them into phase summary
 - **Phase Transition**: Automatically execute next phase after collapsing
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ allowed-tools: SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Bash(*)
 
 **Auto-Continue Mechanism**: TodoWrite tracks phase status with dynamic task attachment/collapse. After executing all attached tasks, you MUST immediately collapse them, restore phase summary, and execute the next phase. No user intervention required. The workflow is NOT complete until reaching Phase 4.
 
-**Task Attachment Model**: SlashCommand dispatch is NOT delegation - it's task expansion. The orchestrator executes these attached tasks itself, not waiting for external completion.
+**Task Attachment Model**: SlashCommand execute is NOT delegation - it's task expansion. The orchestrator executes these attached tasks itself, not waiting for external completion.
 
 ## Execution Process
 
@@ -53,30 +53,30 @@ Phase 0: Parameter Parsing & Input Detection
 
 Phase 0.5: Code Import (Conditional)
    └─ Decision (design_source):
-      ├─ hybrid → Dispatch /workflow:ui-design:import-from-code
+      ├─ hybrid → Execute /workflow:ui-design:import-from-code
       └─ Other → Skip to Phase 2
 
 Phase 2: Style Extraction
    └─ Decision (skip_style):
       ├─ code_only AND style_complete → Use code import
-      └─ Otherwise → Dispatch /workflow:ui-design:style-extract
+      └─ Otherwise → Execute /workflow:ui-design:style-extract
 
 Phase 2.3: Animation Extraction
    └─ Decision (skip_animation):
       ├─ code_only AND animation_complete → Use code import
-      └─ Otherwise → Dispatch /workflow:ui-design:animation-extract
+      └─ Otherwise → Execute /workflow:ui-design:animation-extract
 
 Phase 2.5: Layout Extraction
    └─ Decision (skip_layout):
       ├─ code_only AND layout_complete → Use code import
-      └─ Otherwise → Dispatch /workflow:ui-design:layout-extract
+      └─ Otherwise → Execute /workflow:ui-design:layout-extract
 
 Phase 3: UI Assembly
-   └─ Dispatch /workflow:ui-design:generate
+   └─ Execute /workflow:ui-design:generate
 
 Phase 4: Design System Integration
    └─ Decision (session_id):
-      ├─ Provided → Dispatch /workflow:ui-design:update
+      ├─ Provided → Execute /workflow:ui-design:update
       └─ Not provided → Standalone completion
 ```
 
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ Phase 4: Design System Integration
 2. **No Preliminary Validation**: Sub-commands handle their own validation
 3. **Parse & Pass**: Extract data from each output for next phase
 4. **Track Progress**: Update TodoWrite dynamically with task attachment/collapse pattern
-5. **⚠️ CRITICAL: Task Attachment Model** - SlashCommand dispatch **ATTACHES** tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **EXECUTES** these attached tasks itself, not waiting for external completion. This is NOT delegation - it's task expansion.
+5. **⚠️ CRITICAL: Task Attachment Model** - SlashCommand execute **ATTACHES** tasks to current workflow. Orchestrator **EXECUTES** these attached tasks itself, not waiting for external completion. This is NOT delegation - it's task expansion.
 6. **⚠️ CRITICAL: DO NOT STOP** - This is a continuous multi-phase workflow. After executing all attached tasks, you MUST immediately collapse them and execute the next phase. Workflow is NOT complete until Phase 4.
 
 ## Parameter Requirements
@@ -276,7 +276,7 @@ TodoWrite({todos: [
 
 ### Phase 0.5: Code Import & Completeness Assessment (Conditional)
 
-**Step 0.5.1: Dispatch** - Import design system from code files
+**Step 0.5.1: Execute** - Import design system from code files
 
 ```javascript
 # Only execute if code files detected
@@ -291,7 +291,7 @@ IF design_source == "hybrid":
               "--source \"{code_base_path}\""
 
     TRY:
-        # SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES import-from-code's tasks to current workflow
+        # SlashCommand execute ATTACHES import-from-code's tasks to current workflow
         # Orchestrator will EXECUTE these attached tasks itself:
         #   - Phase 0: Discover and categorize code files
         #   - Phase 1.1-1.3: Style/Animation/Layout Agent extraction
@@ -382,7 +382,7 @@ TodoWrite(mark_completed: "Initialize and detect design source",
 
 ### Phase 2: Style Extraction
 
-**Step 2.1: Dispatch** - Extract style design system
+**Step 2.1: Execute** - Extract style design system
 
 ```javascript
 # Determine if style extraction needed
@@ -409,7 +409,7 @@ ELSE:
 
     extract_command = " ".join(command_parts)
 
-    # SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES style-extract's tasks to current workflow
+    # SlashCommand execute ATTACHES style-extract's tasks to current workflow
     # Orchestrator will EXECUTE these attached tasks itself
     SlashCommand(extract_command)
 
@@ -419,7 +419,7 @@ ELSE:
 
 ### Phase 2.3: Animation Extraction
 
-**Step 2.3.1: Dispatch** - Extract animation patterns
+**Step 2.3.1: Execute** - Extract animation patterns
 
 ```javascript
 skip_animation = (design_source == "code_only" AND animation_complete)
@@ -442,7 +442,7 @@ ELSE:
 
     animation_extract_command = " ".join(command_parts)
 
-    # SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES animation-extract's tasks to current workflow
+    # SlashCommand execute ATTACHES animation-extract's tasks to current workflow
     # Orchestrator will EXECUTE these attached tasks itself
     SlashCommand(animation_extract_command)
 
@@ -452,7 +452,7 @@ ELSE:
 
 ### Phase 2.5: Layout Extraction
 
-**Step 2.5.1: Dispatch** - Extract layout templates
+**Step 2.5.1: Execute** - Extract layout templates
 
 ```javascript
 skip_layout = (design_source == "code_only" AND layout_complete)
@@ -477,7 +477,7 @@ ELSE:
 
     layout_extract_command = " ".join(command_parts)
 
-    # SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES layout-extract's tasks to current workflow
+    # SlashCommand execute ATTACHES layout-extract's tasks to current workflow
     # Orchestrator will EXECUTE these attached tasks itself
     SlashCommand(layout_extract_command)
 
@@ -487,13 +487,13 @@ ELSE:
 
 ### Phase 3: UI Assembly
 
-**Step 3.1: Dispatch** - Assemble UI prototypes from design tokens and layout templates
+**Step 3.1: Execute** - Assemble UI prototypes from design tokens and layout templates
 
 ```javascript
 REPORT: "🚀 Phase 3: UI Assembly"
 generate_command = f"/workflow:ui-design:generate --design-id \"{design_id}\""
 
-# SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES generate's tasks to current workflow
+# SlashCommand execute ATTACHES generate's tasks to current workflow
 # Orchestrator will EXECUTE these attached tasks itself
 SlashCommand(generate_command)
 
@@ -503,14 +503,14 @@ TodoWrite(mark_completed: "Assemble UI", mark_in_progress: session_id ? "Integra
 
 ### Phase 4: Design System Integration
 
-**Step 4.1: Dispatch** - Integrate design system into workflow session
+**Step 4.1: Execute** - Integrate design system into workflow session
 
 ```javascript
 IF session_id:
     REPORT: "🚀 Phase 4: Design System Integration"
     update_command = f"/workflow:ui-design:update --session {session_id}"
 
-    # SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES update's tasks to current workflow
+    # SlashCommand execute ATTACHES update's tasks to current workflow
     # Orchestrator will EXECUTE these attached tasks itself
     SlashCommand(update_command)
 
@@ -636,10 +636,10 @@ TodoWrite({todos: [
 
 // ⚠️ CRITICAL: Dynamic TodoWrite task attachment strategy:
 //
-// **Key Concept**: SlashCommand dispatch ATTACHES tasks to current workflow.
+// **Key Concept**: SlashCommand execute ATTACHES tasks to current workflow.
 // Orchestrator EXECUTES these attached tasks itself, not waiting for external completion.
 //
-// Phase 2-4 SlashCommand Dispatch Pattern (when tasks are attached):
+// Phase 2-4 SlashCommand Execute Pattern (when tasks are attached):
 // Example - Phase 2 with sub-tasks:
 // [
 //   {"content": "Phase 0: Initialize and Detect Design Source", "status": "completed", "activeForm": "Initializing"},
@@ -702,7 +702,7 @@ TodoWrite({todos: [
 
 - **Input**: `--images` (glob pattern) and/or `--prompt` (text/file paths) + optional `--session`
 - **Output**: Complete design system in `{base_path}/` (style-extraction, layout-extraction, prototypes)
-- **Sub-commands Dispatched**:
+- **Sub-commands Executeed**:
   1. `/workflow:ui-design:import-from-code` (Phase 0.5, conditional - if code files detected)
   2. `/workflow:ui-design:style-extract` (Phase 2 - complete design systems)
   3. `/workflow:ui-design:animation-extract` (Phase 2.3 - animation tokens)

.claude/commands/workflow/ui-design/layout-extract.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: layout-extract
 description: Extract structural layout information from reference images or text prompts using Claude analysis with variant generation or refinement mode
-argument-hint: [--design-id <id>] [--session <id>] [--images "<glob>"] [--prompt "<desc>"] [--targets "<list>"] [--variants <count>] [--device-type <desktop|mobile|tablet|responsive>] [--interactive] [--refine]
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--design-id <id>] [--session <id>] [--images "<glob>"] [--prompt "<desc>"] [--targets "<list>"] [--variants <count>] [--device-type <desktop|mobile|tablet|responsive>] [--interactive] [--refine]"
 allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Glob(*), Bash(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Task(ui-design-agent), mcp__exa__web_search_exa(*)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Skip all clarification questions, use AI-inferred layout decisions.
+
 # Layout Extraction Command
 
 ## Overview

.claude/commands/workflow/ui-design/style-extract.md

@@ -1,10 +1,14 @@
 ---
 name: style-extract
 description: Extract design style from reference images or text prompts using Claude analysis with variant generation or refinement mode
-argument-hint: "[--design-id <id>] [--session <id>] [--images "<glob>"] [--prompt "<desc>"] [--variants <count>] [--interactive] [--refine]"
+argument-hint: "[-y|--yes] [--design-id <id>] [--session <id>] [--images "<glob>"] [--prompt "<desc>"] [--variants <count>] [--interactive] [--refine]"
 allowed-tools: TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Write(*), Glob(*), AskUserQuestion(*)
 ---
 
+## Auto Mode
+
+When `--yes` or `-y`: Skip all clarification questions, use AI-inferred design decisions.
+
 # Style Extraction Command
 
 ## Overview

.claude/skills/_shared/SKILL-DESIGN-SPEC.md

@@ -0,0 +1,693 @@
+# Skill 设计规范 v1.0
+
+> 基于 `software-manual` 和 `copyright-docs` 两个成熟 Skill 的设计模式提炼
+
+---
+
+## 目录
+
+1. [设计理念](#1-设计理念)
+2. [目录结构规范](#2-目录结构规范)
+3. [核心组件定义](#3-核心组件定义)
+4. [SKILL.md 入口规范](#4-skillmd-入口规范)
+5. [Phase 阶段设计规范](#5-phase-阶段设计规范)
+6. [Specs 规范文件设计](#6-specs-规范文件设计)
+7. [Templates 模板设计](#7-templates-模板设计)
+8. [Scripts 脚本规范](#8-scripts-脚本规范)
+9. [Prompt 工程规范](#9-prompt-工程规范)
+10. [质量控制规范](#10-质量控制规范)
+11. [最佳实践清单](#11-最佳实践清单)
+12. [示例模板](#12-示例模板)
+
+---
+
+## 1. 设计理念
+
+### 1.1 核心原则
+
+| 原则 | 说明 | 实践 |
+|------|------|------|
+| **阶段化执行** | 复杂任务分解为有序阶段 | 使用 `phases/` 目录，数字前缀控制顺序 |
+| **关注点分离** | 逻辑、配置、视图分离 | `phases/`(逻辑) + `specs/`(配置) + `templates/`(视图) |
+| **简要返回** | Agent 返回路径+摘要，避免上下文溢出 | 返回 JSON 简要信息，文件存储完整内容 |
+| **配置驱动** | 规范作为"配置文件"，易于调整行为 | 修改 `specs/` 无需触及 `phases/` |
+| **模板复用** | 提取通用片段，确保一致性 | `templates/` 存放可复用内容 |
+
+### 1.2 架构模式
+
+```
+┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│  Context-Optimized Architecture                                  │
+├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+│                                                                  │
+│  SKILL.md (入口)  →  描述目标、定义阶段、链接资源                 │
+│       ↓                                                          │
+│  Phase 1: 收集    →  用户输入 + 自动检测 → config.json            │
+│       ↓                                                          │
+│  Phase 2: 分析    →  并行 Agent → sections/*.md                  │
+│       ↓                                                          │
+│  Phase N: 汇总    →  交叉检查 → summary.md                       │
+│       ↓                                                          │
+│  Phase N+1: 组装  →  合并文件 → 最终产物                          │
+│       ↓                                                          │
+│  Phase N+2: 迭代  →  用户反馈 → 优化                              │
+│                                                                  │
+└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+---
+
+## 2. 目录结构规范
+
+### 2.1 标准目录结构
+
+```
+[skill-name]/
+├── SKILL.md                     # 【必需】技能入口：元数据 + 架构 + 执行流程
+├── phases/                      # 【必需】执行阶段 Prompt
+│   ├── 01-{first-step}.md       #   数字前缀定义顺序
+│   ├── 02-{second-step}.md
+│   ├── 02.5-{sub-step}.md       #   小数点用于插入子步骤
+│   └── ...
+├── specs/                       # 【必需】规范与约束
+│   ├── {domain}-requirements.md #   领域特定要求
+│   ├── quality-standards.md     #   质量标准
+│   └── writing-style.md         #   写作风格（如适用）
+├── templates/                   # 【推荐】可复用模板
+│   ├── agent-base.md            #   Agent 基础 Prompt 模板
+│   ├── output-shell.{ext}       #   输出外壳模板（html/md）
+│   └── css/                     #   样式文件（如适用）
+├── scripts/                     # 【可选】辅助脚本
+│   ├── {tool}.py                #   Python 脚本
+│   └── {tool}-runner.md         #   脚本使用说明
+└── outputs/                     # 【运行时】执行产物（不纳入版本控制）
+```
+
+### 2.2 命名约定
+
+| 类型 | 规则 | 示例 |
+|------|------|------|
+| Skill 目录 | 小写-连字符 | `software-manual`, `copyright-docs` |
+| Phase 文件 | `NN-{动作}.md` | `01-metadata-collection.md` |
+| Spec 文件 | `{领域}-{类型}.md` | `cpcc-requirements.md` |
+| Template 文件 | `{用途}-{类型}.{ext}` | `agent-base.md`, `tiddlywiki-shell.html` |
+| 输出文件 | `section-{N}-{名称}.md` | `section-2-architecture.md` |
+
+---
+
+## 3. 核心组件定义
+
+### 3.1 组件职责矩阵
+
+| 组件 | 职责 | 内容类型 | 修改频率 |
+|------|------|----------|----------|
+| `SKILL.md` | 入口 + 编排 | 元数据、架构图、执行流程 | 低（结构稳定） |
+| `phases/*.md` | 执行逻辑 | 步骤说明、Prompt、代码示例 | 中（优化迭代） |
+| `specs/*.md` | 约束配置 | 规则、标准、检查清单 | 中（需求变更） |
+| `templates/*` | 可复用片段 | Prompt 模板、输出格式 | 低（通用稳定） |
+| `scripts/*` | 自动化 | Python/JS 脚本 | 高（功能增强） |
+
+### 3.2 组件依赖关系
+
+```mermaid
+graph TD
+    SKILL[SKILL.md] --> P1[phases/01-*]
+    P1 --> P2[phases/02-*]
+    P2 --> PN[phases/N-*]
+    
+    P1 -.->|引用| SPEC[specs/*]
+    P2 -.->|引用| SPEC
+    PN -.->|引用| SPEC
+    
+    P1 -.->|使用| TPL[templates/*]
+    PN -.->|使用| TPL
+    
+    P2 -->|调用| SCR[scripts/*]
+    
+    style SKILL fill:#e1f5fe
+    style SPEC fill:#fff3e0
+    style TPL fill:#e8f5e9
+    style SCR fill:#fce4ec
+```
+
+---
+
+## 4. SKILL.md 入口规范
+
+### 4.1 必需结构
+
+```markdown
+---
+name: {skill-name}
+description: {一句话描述}. {触发关键词}. Triggers on "{关键词1}", "{关键词2}".
+allowed-tools: Task, AskUserQuestion, Read, Bash, Glob, Grep, Write, {其他MCP工具}
+---
+
+# {Skill 标题}
+
+{一段话描述 Skill 的用途和产出}
+
+## Architecture Overview
+
+{ASCII 或 Mermaid 架构图}
+
+## Key Design Principles
+
+1. **原则1**: 说明
+2. **原则2**: 说明
+...
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+{阶段执行流程图}
+
+## Agent Configuration (如适用)
+
+| Agent | Role | Output File | Focus Areas |
+|-------|------|-------------|-------------|
+| ... | ... | ... | ... |
+
+## Directory Setup
+
+{工作目录创建代码}
+
+## Output Structure
+
+{输出目录结构}
+
+## Reference Documents
+
+| Document | Purpose |
+|----------|---------|
+| [phases/01-xxx.md](phases/01-xxx.md) | ... |
+| ... | ... |
+```
+
+### 4.2 Front Matter 规范
+
+```yaml
+---
+name: skill-name              # 必需：Skill 唯一标识
+description: |                # 必需：描述 + 触发词
+  Generate XXX documents. 
+  Triggers on "keyword1", "keyword2".
+allowed-tools: |              # 必需：允许使用的工具
+  Task, AskUserQuestion, Read, Bash, 
+  Glob, Grep, Write, mcp__chrome__*
+---
+```
+
+---
+
+## 5. Phase 阶段设计规范
+
+### 5.1 Phase 文件结构
+
+```markdown
+# Phase N: {阶段名称}
+
+{一句话描述此阶段目标}
+
+## Objective
+
+{详细目标说明}
+- 目标1
+- 目标2
+
+## Execution Steps
+
+### Step 1: {步骤名称}
+
+{代码或说明}
+
+### Step 2: {步骤名称}
+
+{代码或说明}
+
+## Output
+
+- **File**: `{输出文件名}`
+- **Location**: `{输出路径}`
+- **Format**: {JSON/Markdown/HTML}
+
+## Next Phase
+
+Proceed to [Phase N+1: xxx](0N+1-xxx.md) with the generated {产出}.
+```
+
+### 5.2 Phase 类型
+
+| 类型 | 特点 | 示例 |
+|------|------|------|
+| **收集型** | 用户交互 + 自动检测 | `01-requirements-discovery.md` |
+| **探索型** | 代码分析 + 结构识别 | `02-project-exploration.md` |
+| **并行型** | 多 Agent 并行执行 | `03-parallel-analysis.md` |
+| **汇总型** | 交叉检查 + 质量验证 | `03.5-consolidation.md` |
+| **组装型** | 合并产出 + 格式化 | `04-document-assembly.md` |
+| **迭代型** | 用户反馈 + 优化 | `05-iterative-refinement.md` |
+
+### 5.3 Phase 编号规则
+
+```
+01-xxx.md      # 主阶段
+02-xxx.md      # 主阶段
+02.5-xxx.md    # 子阶段（插入 02 和 03 之间）
+03-xxx.md      # 主阶段
+```
+
+---
+
+## 6. Specs 规范文件设计
+
+### 6.1 Specs 类型
+
+| 类型 | 用途 | 示例 |
+|------|------|------|
+| **领域要求** | 领域特定合规性 | `cpcc-requirements.md` |
+| **质量标准** | 输出质量评估 | `quality-standards.md` |
+| **写作风格** | 内容风格指南 | `writing-style.md` |
+| **模板规范** | 输出格式定义 | `html-template.md` |
+
+### 6.2 Specs 结构模板
+
+```markdown
+# {规范名称}
+
+{规范用途说明}
+
+## When to Use
+
+| Phase | Usage | Section |
+|-------|-------|---------|
+| Phase N | {使用场景} | {引用章节} |
+| ... | ... | ... |
+
+---
+
+## Requirements
+
+### Category 1
+
+- [ ] 检查项1
+- [ ] 检查项2
+
+### Category 2
+
+| 项目 | 要求 | 检查方式 |
+|------|------|----------|
+| ... | ... | ... |
+
+## Validation Function
+
+{验证函数代码}
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Recovery |
+|-------|----------|
+| ... | ... |
+```
+
+### 6.3 质量标准示例结构
+
+```markdown
+# Quality Standards
+
+## Quality Dimensions
+
+### 1. Completeness (25%)
+{评分标准}
+
+### 2. Consistency (25%)
+{评分标准}
+
+### 3. Depth (25%)
+{评分标准}
+
+### 4. Readability (25%)
+{评分标准}
+
+## Quality Gates
+
+| Gate | Threshold | Action |
+|------|-----------|--------|
+| Pass | ≥ 80% | 继续执行 |
+| Review | 60-79% | 处理警告后继续 |
+| Fail | < 60% | 必须修复 |
+
+## Issue Classification
+
+### Errors (Must Fix)
+- ...
+
+### Warnings (Should Fix)
+- ...
+
+### Info (Nice to Have)
+- ...
+```
+
+---
+
+## 7. Templates 模板设计
+
+### 7.1 Agent 基础模板
+
+```markdown
+# Agent Base Template
+
+## 通用提示词结构
+
+[ROLE] 你是{角色}，专注于{职责}。
+
+[TASK]
+{任务描述}
+- 输出: {output_path}
+- 格式: {format}
+- 范围: {scope}
+
+[CONSTRAINTS]
+- 约束1
+- 约束2
+
+[OUTPUT_FORMAT]
+1. 直接写入文件
+2. 返回 JSON 简要信息
+
+[QUALITY_CHECKLIST]
+- [ ] 检查项1
+- [ ] 检查项2
+
+## 变量说明
+
+| 变量 | 来源 | 示例 |
+|------|------|------|
+| {output_dir} | Phase 1 | .workflow/.scratchpad/xxx |
+| ... | ... | ... |
+
+## Agent 配置映射
+
+{AGENT_ROLES, AGENT_SECTIONS, AGENT_FILES, AGENT_FOCUS}
+```
+
+### 7.2 输出模板规范
+
+```html
+<!-- output-shell.html 示例 -->
+<!DOCTYPE html>
+<html>
+<head>
+    <meta charset="UTF-8">
+    <title>{{title}}</title>
+    <style>
+        /* 内嵌 CSS */
+        {{styles}}
+    </style>
+</head>
+<body>
+    <div id="app">
+        {{content}}
+    </div>
+    <script>
+        /* 内嵌 JS */
+        {{scripts}}
+    </script>
+</body>
+</html>
+```
+
+### 7.3 占位符规范
+
+| 占位符格式 | 用途 | 示例 |
+|------------|------|------|
+| `{{variable}}` | 简单变量替换 | `{{title}}` |
+| `${variable}` | JavaScript 模板字符串 | `${workDir}` |
+| `{placeholder}` | Prompt 占位 | `{intro}`, `{diagram}` |
+
+---
+
+## 8. Scripts 脚本规范
+
+### 8.1 脚本类型
+
+| 类型 | 用途 | 命名 |
+|------|------|------|
+| **提取器** | 从代码提取信息 | `extract_*.py` |
+| **组装器** | 合并/转换文件 | `assemble_*.py` |
+| **验证器** | 检查合规性 | `validate_*.py` |
+| **辅助器** | 工具函数 | `*_helper.py` |
+
+### 8.2 脚本使用说明文件
+
+每个脚本应有对应的 `.md` 说明文件：
+
+```markdown
+# {Script Name} Runner
+
+## Purpose
+
+{脚本用途}
+
+## Usage
+
+{命令行使用方式}
+
+## Parameters
+
+| 参数 | 说明 | 默认值 |
+|------|------|--------|
+| ... | ... | ... |
+
+## Output
+
+{输出说明}
+
+## Example
+
+{使用示例}
+```
+
+---
+
+## 9. Prompt 工程规范
+
+### 9.1 Prompt 结构标准
+
+```
+[ROLE] {角色定义}
+
+[PROJECT CONTEXT]
+项目类型: {type}
+语言: {language}
+名称: {name}
+
+[TASK]
+{任务描述}
+输出: {output_path}
+
+[INPUT]
+- 配置: {config_path}
+- 扫描路径: {scan_paths}
+
+[CONTENT REQUIREMENTS]
+- 标题层级: # ## ### (最多3级)
+- 代码块: ```language ... ``` (必须标注语言)
+- 表格: | col1 | col2 | 格式
+- 列表: 有序 1. 2. 3. / 无序 - - -
+
+[FOCUS]
+{重点关注项}
+
+[OUTPUT FORMAT]
+{输出格式说明}
+
+[RETURN JSON]
+{返回结构}
+```
+
+### 9.2 效率优化原则
+
+| 原则 | Before (冗余) | After (精简) |
+|------|---------------|--------------|
+| **角色简化** | "你是一个专业的系统架构师，具有丰富的软件设计经验..." | `[ROLE] 系统架构师，专注于分层设计和模块依赖` |
+| **模板驱动** | "请按照以下格式输出: 首先写一个二级标题..." | `[TEMPLATE] ## 2. 标题 {content}` |
+| **焦点明确** | "分析项目的各个方面，包括架构、模块、依赖等" | `[FOCUS] 1. 分层 2. 模块 3. 依赖 4. 数据流` |
+| **返回简洁** | "请返回详细的分析结果，包括所有发现的问题..." | `[RETURN] {"status":"completed","output_file":"xxx.md","summary":"<50字"}` |
+
+### 9.3 Agent 返回格式标准
+
+```typescript
+interface AgentReturn {
+  status: "completed" | "partial" | "failed";
+  output_file: string;           // 输出文件路径
+  summary: string;               // 最多 50 字摘要
+  cross_module_notes?: string[]; // 跨模块备注
+  stats?: {                      // 统计信息
+    diagrams?: number;
+    words?: number;
+  };
+  screenshots_needed?: Array<{   // 截图需求（如适用）
+    id: string;
+    url: string;
+    description: string;
+  }>;
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## 10. 质量控制规范
+
+### 10.1 质量维度
+
+| 维度 | 权重 | 检查项 |
+|------|------|--------|
+| **完整性** | 25% | 所有必需章节存在且有实质内容 |
+| **一致性** | 25% | 术语、格式、风格统一 |
+| **深度** | 25% | 内容详尽、示例充分 |
+| **可读性** | 25% | 结构清晰、语言简洁 |
+
+### 10.2 质量门控
+
+```javascript
+const QUALITY_GATES = {
+  pass: { threshold: 80, action: "继续执行" },
+  review: { threshold: 60, action: "处理警告后继续" },
+  fail: { threshold: 0, action: "必须修复后重试" }
+};
+```
+
+### 10.3 问题分类
+
+| 级别 | 前缀 | 含义 | 处理方式 |
+|------|------|------|----------|
+| **Error** | E | 阻塞性问题 | 必须修复 |
+| **Warning** | W | 影响质量 | 建议修复 |
+| **Info** | I | 可改进项 | 可选修复 |
+
+### 10.4 自动化检查函数模板
+
+```javascript
+function runQualityChecks(workDir) {
+  const results = {
+    completeness: checkCompleteness(workDir),
+    consistency: checkConsistency(workDir),
+    depth: checkDepth(workDir),
+    readability: checkReadability(workDir)
+  };
+
+  results.overall = Object.values(results).reduce((a, b) => a + b) / 4;
+  
+  return {
+    score: results.overall,
+    gate: results.overall >= 80 ? 'pass' : 
+          results.overall >= 60 ? 'review' : 'fail',
+    details: results
+  };
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## 11. 最佳实践清单
+
+### 11.1 Skill 设计
+
+- [ ] **单一职责**: 每个 Skill 专注一个领域
+- [ ] **清晰入口**: SKILL.md 完整描述目标和流程
+- [ ] **阶段分解**: 复杂任务拆分为 3-7 个阶段
+- [ ] **顺序命名**: 使用数字前缀控制执行顺序
+
+### 11.2 Phase 设计
+
+- [ ] **明确目标**: 每个 Phase 有清晰的输入输出
+- [ ] **独立可测**: 每个 Phase 可单独调试
+- [ ] **链接下一步**: 明确说明后续阶段
+
+### 11.3 Prompt 设计
+
+- [ ] **角色明确**: 使用 `[ROLE]` 定义 Agent 身份
+- [ ] **任务具体**: 使用 `[TASK]` 明确执行目标
+- [ ] **约束清晰**: 使用 `[CONSTRAINTS]` 定义边界
+- [ ] **返回简洁**: Agent 返回路径+摘要，非完整内容
+
+### 11.4 质量控制
+
+- [ ] **规范驱动**: 使用 `specs/` 定义可验证的标准
+- [ ] **汇总检查**: 设置 Consolidation 阶段交叉验证
+- [ ] **问题分级**: 区分 Error/Warning/Info
+- [ ] **迭代优化**: 支持用户反馈循环
+
+---
+
+## 12. 示例模板
+
+### 12.1 新 Skill 快速启动模板
+
+```bash
+# 创建 Skill 目录结构
+mkdir -p my-skill/{phases,specs,templates,scripts}
+
+# 创建核心文件
+touch my-skill/SKILL.md
+touch my-skill/phases/{01-collection,02-analysis,03-assembly}.md
+touch my-skill/specs/{requirements,quality-standards}.md
+touch my-skill/templates/agent-base.md
+```
+
+### 12.2 SKILL.md 最小模板
+
+```markdown
+---
+name: my-skill
+description: Generate XXX. Triggers on "keyword1", "keyword2".
+allowed-tools: Task, AskUserQuestion, Read, Bash, Glob, Grep, Write
+---
+
+# My Skill
+
+Generate XXX through multi-phase analysis.
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+1. Phase 1: Collection → config.json
+2. Phase 2: Analysis → sections/*.md
+3. Phase 3: Assembly → output.md
+
+## Reference Documents
+
+| Document | Purpose |
+|----------|---------|
+| [phases/01-collection.md](phases/01-collection.md) | 信息收集 |
+| [phases/02-analysis.md](phases/02-analysis.md) | 代码分析 |
+| [phases/03-assembly.md](phases/03-assembly.md) | 文档组装 |
+```
+
+---
+
+## 附录 A: 设计对比
+
+| 设计点 | software-manual | copyright-docs |
+|--------|-----------------|----------------|
+| 阶段数 | 6 | 5 |
+| 并行 Agent | 6 | 6 |
+| 输出格式 | HTML | Markdown |
+| 质量检查 | 4 维度评分 | CPCC 合规检查 |
+| 截图支持 | Chrome MCP | 无 |
+| 迭代优化 | 用户反馈循环 | 合规验证循环 |
+
+## 附录 B: 工具依赖
+
+| 工具 | 用途 | 适用 Skill |
+|------|------|------------|
+| `Task` | 启动子 Agent | 所有 |
+| `AskUserQuestion` | 用户交互 | 所有 |
+| `Read/Write/Glob/Grep` | 文件操作 | 所有 |
+| `Bash` | 脚本执行 | 需要自动化 |
+| `mcp__chrome__*` | 浏览器截图 | UI 相关 |
+
+---
+
+*规范版本: 1.0*  
+*基于: software-manual, copyright-docs*  
+*最后更新: 2026-01-03*

.claude/skills/_shared/mermaid-utils.md

@@ -0,0 +1,584 @@
+# Mermaid Utilities Library
+
+Shared utilities for generating and validating Mermaid diagrams across all analysis skills.
+
+## Sanitization Functions
+
+### sanitizeId
+
+Convert any text to a valid Mermaid node ID.
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * Sanitize text to valid Mermaid node ID
+ * - Only alphanumeric and underscore allowed
+ * - Cannot start with number
+ * - Truncates to 50 chars max
+ * 
+ * @param {string} text - Input text
+ * @returns {string} - Valid Mermaid ID
+ */
+function sanitizeId(text) {
+  if (!text) return '_empty';
+  return text
+    .replace(/[^a-zA-Z0-9_\u4e00-\u9fa5]/g, '_')  // Allow Chinese chars
+    .replace(/^[0-9]/, '_$&')                      // Prefix number with _
+    .replace(/_+/g, '_')                           // Collapse multiple _
+    .substring(0, 50);                             // Limit length
+}
+
+// Examples:
+// sanitizeId("User-Service") → "User_Service"
+// sanitizeId("3rdParty") → "_3rdParty"
+// sanitizeId("用户服务") → "用户服务"
+```
+
+### escapeLabel
+
+Escape special characters for Mermaid labels.
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * Escape special characters in Mermaid labels
+ * Uses HTML entity encoding for problematic chars
+ * 
+ * @param {string} text - Label text
+ * @returns {string} - Escaped label
+ */
+function escapeLabel(text) {
+  if (!text) return '';
+  return text
+    .replace(/"/g, "'")                            // Avoid quote issues
+    .replace(/\(/g, '#40;')                        // (
+    .replace(/\)/g, '#41;')                        // )
+    .replace(/\{/g, '#123;')                       // {
+    .replace(/\}/g, '#125;')                       // }
+    .replace(/\[/g, '#91;')                        // [
+    .replace(/\]/g, '#93;')                        // ]
+    .replace(/</g, '#60;')                         // <
+    .replace(/>/g, '#62;')                         // >
+    .replace(/\|/g, '#124;')                       // |
+    .substring(0, 80);                             // Limit length
+}
+
+// Examples:
+// escapeLabel("Process(data)") → "Process#40;data#41;"
+// escapeLabel("Check {valid?}") → "Check #123;valid?#125;"
+```
+
+### sanitizeType
+
+Sanitize type names for class diagrams.
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * Sanitize type names for Mermaid classDiagram
+ * Removes generics syntax that causes issues
+ * 
+ * @param {string} type - Type name
+ * @returns {string} - Sanitized type
+ */
+function sanitizeType(type) {
+  if (!type) return 'any';
+  return type
+    .replace(/<[^>]*>/g, '')           // Remove generics <T>
+    .replace(/\|/g, ' or ')            // Union types
+    .replace(/&/g, ' and ')            // Intersection types
+    .replace(/\[\]/g, 'Array')         // Array notation
+    .substring(0, 30);
+}
+
+// Examples:
+// sanitizeType("Array<string>") → "Array"
+// sanitizeType("string | number") → "string or number"
+```
+
+## Diagram Generation Functions
+
+### generateFlowchartNode
+
+Generate a flowchart node with proper shape.
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * Generate flowchart node with shape
+ * 
+ * @param {string} id - Node ID
+ * @param {string} label - Display label
+ * @param {string} type - Node type: start|end|process|decision|io|subroutine
+ * @returns {string} - Mermaid node definition
+ */
+function generateFlowchartNode(id, label, type = 'process') {
+  const safeId = sanitizeId(id);
+  const safeLabel = escapeLabel(label);
+  
+  const shapes = {
+    start: `${safeId}(["${safeLabel}"])`,           // Stadium shape
+    end: `${safeId}(["${safeLabel}"])`,             // Stadium shape
+    process: `${safeId}["${safeLabel}"]`,           // Rectangle
+    decision: `${safeId}{"${safeLabel}"}`,          // Diamond
+    io: `${safeId}[/"${safeLabel}"/]`,              // Parallelogram
+    subroutine: `${safeId}[["${safeLabel}"]]`,      // Subroutine
+    database: `${safeId}[("${safeLabel}")]`,        // Cylinder
+    manual: `${safeId}[/"${safeLabel}"\\]`          // Trapezoid
+  };
+  
+  return shapes[type] || shapes.process;
+}
+```
+
+### generateFlowchartEdge
+
+Generate a flowchart edge with optional label.
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * Generate flowchart edge
+ * 
+ * @param {string} from - Source node ID
+ * @param {string} to - Target node ID
+ * @param {string} label - Edge label (optional)
+ * @param {string} style - Edge style: solid|dashed|thick
+ * @returns {string} - Mermaid edge definition
+ */
+function generateFlowchartEdge(from, to, label = '', style = 'solid') {
+  const safeFrom = sanitizeId(from);
+  const safeTo = sanitizeId(to);
+  const safeLabel = label ? `|"${escapeLabel(label)}"|` : '';
+  
+  const arrows = {
+    solid: '-->',
+    dashed: '-.->',
+    thick: '==>'
+  };
+  
+  const arrow = arrows[style] || arrows.solid;
+  return `    ${safeFrom} ${arrow}${safeLabel} ${safeTo}`;
+}
+```
+
+### generateAlgorithmFlowchart (Enhanced)
+
+Generate algorithm flowchart with branch/loop support.
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * Generate algorithm flowchart with decision support
+ * 
+ * @param {Object} algorithm - Algorithm definition
+ *   - name: Algorithm name
+ *   - inputs: [{name, type}]
+ *   - outputs: [{name, type}]
+ *   - steps: [{id, description, type, next: [id], conditions: [text]}]
+ * @returns {string} - Complete Mermaid flowchart
+ */
+function generateAlgorithmFlowchart(algorithm) {
+  let mermaid = 'flowchart TD\n';
+  
+  // Start node
+  mermaid += `    START(["开始: ${escapeLabel(algorithm.name)}"])\n`;
+  
+  // Input node (if has inputs)
+  if (algorithm.inputs?.length > 0) {
+    const inputList = algorithm.inputs.map(i => `${i.name}: ${i.type}`).join(', ');
+    mermaid += `    INPUT[/"输入: ${escapeLabel(inputList)}"/]\n`;
+    mermaid += `    START --> INPUT\n`;
+  }
+  
+  // Process nodes
+  const steps = algorithm.steps || [];
+  for (const step of steps) {
+    const nodeId = sanitizeId(step.id || `STEP_${step.step_num}`);
+    
+    if (step.type === 'decision') {
+      mermaid += `    ${nodeId}{"${escapeLabel(step.description)}"}\n`;
+    } else if (step.type === 'io') {
+      mermaid += `    ${nodeId}[/"${escapeLabel(step.description)}"/]\n`;
+    } else if (step.type === 'loop_start') {
+      mermaid += `    ${nodeId}[["循环: ${escapeLabel(step.description)}"]]\n`;
+    } else {
+      mermaid += `    ${nodeId}["${escapeLabel(step.description)}"]\n`;
+    }
+  }
+  
+  // Output node
+  const outputDesc = algorithm.outputs?.map(o => o.name).join(', ') || '结果';
+  mermaid += `    OUTPUT[/"输出: ${escapeLabel(outputDesc)}"/]\n`;
+  mermaid += `    END_(["结束"])\n`;
+  
+  // Connect first step to input/start
+  if (steps.length > 0) {
+    const firstStep = sanitizeId(steps[0].id || 'STEP_1');
+    if (algorithm.inputs?.length > 0) {
+      mermaid += `    INPUT --> ${firstStep}\n`;
+    } else {
+      mermaid += `    START --> ${firstStep}\n`;
+    }
+  }
+  
+  // Connect steps based on next array
+  for (const step of steps) {
+    const nodeId = sanitizeId(step.id || `STEP_${step.step_num}`);
+    
+    if (step.next && step.next.length > 0) {
+      step.next.forEach((nextId, index) => {
+        const safeNextId = sanitizeId(nextId);
+        const condition = step.conditions?.[index];
+        
+        if (condition) {
+          mermaid += `    ${nodeId} -->|"${escapeLabel(condition)}"| ${safeNextId}\n`;
+        } else {
+          mermaid += `    ${nodeId} --> ${safeNextId}\n`;
+        }
+      });
+    } else if (!step.type?.includes('end')) {
+      // Default: connect to next step or output
+      const stepIndex = steps.indexOf(step);
+      if (stepIndex < steps.length - 1) {
+        const nextStep = sanitizeId(steps[stepIndex + 1].id || `STEP_${stepIndex + 2}`);
+        mermaid += `    ${nodeId} --> ${nextStep}\n`;
+      } else {
+        mermaid += `    ${nodeId} --> OUTPUT\n`;
+      }
+    }
+  }
+  
+  // Connect output to end
+  mermaid += `    OUTPUT --> END_\n`;
+  
+  return mermaid;
+}
+```
+
+## Diagram Validation
+
+### validateMermaidSyntax
+
+Comprehensive Mermaid syntax validation.
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * Validate Mermaid diagram syntax
+ * 
+ * @param {string} content - Mermaid diagram content
+ * @returns {Object} - {valid: boolean, issues: string[]}
+ */
+function validateMermaidSyntax(content) {
+  const issues = [];
+  
+  // Check 1: Diagram type declaration
+  if (!content.match(/^(graph|flowchart|classDiagram|sequenceDiagram|stateDiagram|erDiagram|gantt|pie|mindmap)/m)) {
+    issues.push('Missing diagram type declaration');
+  }
+  
+  // Check 2: Undefined values
+  if (content.includes('undefined') || content.includes('null')) {
+    issues.push('Contains undefined/null values');
+  }
+  
+  // Check 3: Invalid arrow syntax
+  if (content.match(/-->\s*-->/)) {
+    issues.push('Double arrow syntax error');
+  }
+  
+  // Check 4: Unescaped special characters in labels
+  const labelMatches = content.match(/\["[^"]*[(){}[\]<>][^"]*"\]/g);
+  if (labelMatches?.some(m => !m.includes('#'))) {
+    issues.push('Unescaped special characters in labels');
+  }
+  
+  // Check 5: Node ID starts with number
+  if (content.match(/\n\s*[0-9][a-zA-Z0-9_]*[\[\({]/)) {
+    issues.push('Node ID cannot start with number');
+  }
+  
+  // Check 6: Nested subgraph syntax error
+  if (content.match(/subgraph\s+\S+\s*\n[^e]*subgraph/)) {
+    // This is actually valid, only flag if brackets don't match
+    const subgraphCount = (content.match(/subgraph/g) || []).length;
+    const endCount = (content.match(/\bend\b/g) || []).length;
+    if (subgraphCount > endCount) {
+      issues.push('Unbalanced subgraph/end blocks');
+    }
+  }
+  
+  // Check 7: Invalid arrow type for diagram type
+  const diagramType = content.match(/^(graph|flowchart|classDiagram|sequenceDiagram)/m)?.[1];
+  if (diagramType === 'classDiagram' && content.includes('-->|')) {
+    issues.push('Invalid edge label syntax for classDiagram');
+  }
+  
+  // Check 8: Empty node labels
+  if (content.match(/\[""\]|\{\}|\(\)/)) {
+    issues.push('Empty node labels detected');
+  }
+  
+  // Check 9: Reserved keywords as IDs
+  const reserved = ['end', 'graph', 'subgraph', 'direction', 'class', 'click'];
+  for (const keyword of reserved) {
+    const pattern = new RegExp(`\\n\\s*${keyword}\\s*[\\[\\(\\{]`, 'i');
+    if (content.match(pattern)) {
+      issues.push(`Reserved keyword "${keyword}" used as node ID`);
+    }
+  }
+  
+  // Check 10: Line length (Mermaid has issues with very long lines)
+  const lines = content.split('\n');
+  for (let i = 0; i < lines.length; i++) {
+    if (lines[i].length > 500) {
+      issues.push(`Line ${i + 1} exceeds 500 characters`);
+    }
+  }
+  
+  return {
+    valid: issues.length === 0,
+    issues
+  };
+}
+```
+
+### validateDiagramDirectory
+
+Validate all diagrams in a directory.
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * Validate all Mermaid diagrams in directory
+ * 
+ * @param {string} diagramDir - Path to diagrams directory
+ * @returns {Object[]} - Array of {file, valid, issues}
+ */
+function validateDiagramDirectory(diagramDir) {
+  const files = Glob(`${diagramDir}/*.mmd`);
+  const results = [];
+
+  for (const file of files) {
+    const content = Read(file);
+    const validation = validateMermaidSyntax(content);
+    
+    results.push({
+      file: file.split('/').pop(),
+      path: file,
+      valid: validation.valid,
+      issues: validation.issues,
+      lines: content.split('\n').length
+    });
+  }
+
+  return results;
+}
+```
+
+## Class Diagram Utilities
+
+### generateClassDiagram
+
+Generate class diagram with relationships.
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * Generate class diagram from analysis data
+ * 
+ * @param {Object} analysis - Data structure analysis
+ *   - entities: [{name, type, properties, methods}]
+ *   - relationships: [{from, to, type, label}]
+ * @param {Object} options - Generation options
+ *   - maxClasses: Max classes to include (default: 15)
+ *   - maxProperties: Max properties per class (default: 8)
+ *   - maxMethods: Max methods per class (default: 6)
+ * @returns {string} - Mermaid classDiagram
+ */
+function generateClassDiagram(analysis, options = {}) {
+  const maxClasses = options.maxClasses || 15;
+  const maxProperties = options.maxProperties || 8;
+  const maxMethods = options.maxMethods || 6;
+  
+  let mermaid = 'classDiagram\n';
+
+  const entities = (analysis.entities || []).slice(0, maxClasses);
+  
+  // Generate classes
+  for (const entity of entities) {
+    const className = sanitizeId(entity.name);
+    mermaid += `    class ${className} {\n`;
+
+    // Properties
+    for (const prop of (entity.properties || []).slice(0, maxProperties)) {
+      const vis = {public: '+', private: '-', protected: '#'}[prop.visibility] || '+';
+      const type = sanitizeType(prop.type);
+      mermaid += `        ${vis}${type} ${prop.name}\n`;
+    }
+
+    // Methods
+    for (const method of (entity.methods || []).slice(0, maxMethods)) {
+      const vis = {public: '+', private: '-', protected: '#'}[method.visibility] || '+';
+      const params = (method.params || []).map(p => p.name).join(', ');
+      const returnType = sanitizeType(method.returnType || 'void');
+      mermaid += `        ${vis}${method.name}(${params}) ${returnType}\n`;
+    }
+
+    mermaid += '    }\n';
+    
+    // Add stereotype if applicable
+    if (entity.type === 'interface') {
+      mermaid += `    <<interface>> ${className}\n`;
+    } else if (entity.type === 'abstract') {
+      mermaid += `    <<abstract>> ${className}\n`;
+    }
+  }
+
+  // Generate relationships
+  const arrows = {
+    inheritance: '--|>',
+    implementation: '..|>',
+    composition: '*--',
+    aggregation: 'o--',
+    association: '-->',
+    dependency: '..>'
+  };
+
+  for (const rel of (analysis.relationships || [])) {
+    const from = sanitizeId(rel.from);
+    const to = sanitizeId(rel.to);
+    const arrow = arrows[rel.type] || '-->';
+    const label = rel.label ? ` : ${escapeLabel(rel.label)}` : '';
+    
+    // Only include if both entities exist
+    if (entities.some(e => sanitizeId(e.name) === from) && 
+        entities.some(e => sanitizeId(e.name) === to)) {
+      mermaid += `    ${from} ${arrow} ${to}${label}\n`;
+    }
+  }
+
+  return mermaid;
+}
+```
+
+## Sequence Diagram Utilities
+
+### generateSequenceDiagram
+
+Generate sequence diagram from scenario.
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * Generate sequence diagram from scenario
+ * 
+ * @param {Object} scenario - Sequence scenario
+ *   - name: Scenario name
+ *   - actors: [{id, name, type}]
+ *   - messages: [{from, to, description, type}]
+ *   - blocks: [{type, condition, messages}]
+ * @returns {string} - Mermaid sequenceDiagram
+ */
+function generateSequenceDiagram(scenario) {
+  let mermaid = 'sequenceDiagram\n';
+
+  // Title
+  if (scenario.name) {
+    mermaid += `    title ${escapeLabel(scenario.name)}\n`;
+  }
+
+  // Participants
+  for (const actor of scenario.actors || []) {
+    const actorType = actor.type === 'external' ? 'actor' : 'participant';
+    mermaid += `    ${actorType} ${sanitizeId(actor.id)} as ${escapeLabel(actor.name)}\n`;
+  }
+
+  mermaid += '\n';
+
+  // Messages
+  for (const msg of scenario.messages || []) {
+    const from = sanitizeId(msg.from);
+    const to = sanitizeId(msg.to);
+    const desc = escapeLabel(msg.description);
+    
+    let arrow;
+    switch (msg.type) {
+      case 'async': arrow = '->>'; break;
+      case 'response': arrow = '-->>'; break;
+      case 'create': arrow = '->>+'; break;
+      case 'destroy': arrow = '->>-'; break;
+      case 'self': arrow = '->>'; break;
+      default: arrow = '->>';
+    }
+
+    mermaid += `    ${from}${arrow}${to}: ${desc}\n`;
+
+    // Activation
+    if (msg.activate) {
+      mermaid += `    activate ${to}\n`;
+    }
+    if (msg.deactivate) {
+      mermaid += `    deactivate ${from}\n`;
+    }
+
+    // Notes
+    if (msg.note) {
+      mermaid += `    Note over ${to}: ${escapeLabel(msg.note)}\n`;
+    }
+  }
+
+  // Blocks (loops, alt, opt)
+  for (const block of scenario.blocks || []) {
+    switch (block.type) {
+      case 'loop':
+        mermaid += `    loop ${escapeLabel(block.condition)}\n`;
+        break;
+      case 'alt':
+        mermaid += `    alt ${escapeLabel(block.condition)}\n`;
+        break;
+      case 'opt':
+        mermaid += `    opt ${escapeLabel(block.condition)}\n`;
+        break;
+    }
+    
+    for (const m of block.messages || []) {
+      mermaid += `        ${sanitizeId(m.from)}->>${sanitizeId(m.to)}: ${escapeLabel(m.description)}\n`;
+    }
+    
+    mermaid += '    end\n';
+  }
+
+  return mermaid;
+}
+```
+
+## Usage Examples
+
+### Example 1: Algorithm with Branches
+
+```javascript
+const algorithm = {
+  name: "用户认证流程",
+  inputs: [{name: "credentials", type: "Object"}],
+  outputs: [{name: "token", type: "JWT"}],
+  steps: [
+    {id: "validate", description: "验证输入格式", type: "process"},
+    {id: "check_user", description: "用户是否存在?", type: "decision", 
+     next: ["verify_pwd", "error_user"], conditions: ["是", "否"]},
+    {id: "verify_pwd", description: "验证密码", type: "process"},
+    {id: "pwd_ok", description: "密码正确?", type: "decision",
+     next: ["gen_token", "error_pwd"], conditions: ["是", "否"]},
+    {id: "gen_token", description: "生成 JWT Token", type: "process"},
+    {id: "error_user", description: "返回用户不存在", type: "io"},
+    {id: "error_pwd", description: "返回密码错误", type: "io"}
+  ]
+};
+
+const flowchart = generateAlgorithmFlowchart(algorithm);
+```
+
+### Example 2: Validate Before Output
+
+```javascript
+const diagram = generateClassDiagram(analysis);
+const validation = validateMermaidSyntax(diagram);
+
+if (!validation.valid) {
+  console.log("Diagram has issues:", validation.issues);
+  // Fix issues or regenerate
+} else {
+  Write(`${outputDir}/class-diagram.mmd`, diagram);
+}
+```

.claude/skills/ccw-help/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
+---
+name: ccw-help
+description: CCW command help system. Search, browse, recommend commands. Triggers "ccw-help", "ccw-issue".
+allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, AskUserQuestion
+version: 7.0.0
+---
+
+# CCW-Help Skill
+
+CCW 命令帮助系统，提供命令搜索、推荐、文档查看功能。
+
+## Trigger Conditions
+
+- 关键词: "ccw-help", "ccw-issue", "帮助", "命令", "怎么用"
+- 场景: 询问命令用法、搜索命令、请求下一步建议
+
+## Operation Modes
+
+### Mode 1: Command Search
+
+**Triggers**: "搜索命令", "find command", "search"
+
+**Process**:
+1. Query `command.json` commands array
+2. Filter by name, description, category
+3. Present top 3-5 relevant commands
+
+### Mode 2: Smart Recommendations
+
+**Triggers**: "下一步", "what's next", "推荐"
+
+**Process**:
+1. Query command's `flow.next_steps` in `command.json`
+2. Explain WHY each recommendation fits
+
+### Mode 3: Documentation
+
+**Triggers**: "怎么用", "how to use", "详情"
+
+**Process**:
+1. Locate command in `command.json`
+2. Read source file via `source` path
+3. Provide context-specific examples
+
+### Mode 4: Beginner Onboarding
+
+**Triggers**: "新手", "getting started", "常用命令"
+
+**Process**:
+1. Query `essential_commands` array
+2. Guide appropriate workflow entry point
+
+### Mode 5: Issue Reporting
+
+**Triggers**: "ccw-issue", "报告 bug"
+
+**Process**:
+1. Use AskUserQuestion to gather context
+2. Generate structured issue template
+
+## Data Source
+
+Single source of truth: **[command.json](command.json)**
+
+| Field | Purpose |
+|-------|---------|
+| `commands[]` | Flat command list with metadata |
+| `commands[].flow` | Relationships (next_steps, prerequisites) |
+| `commands[].essential` | Essential flag for onboarding |
+| `agents[]` | Agent directory |
+| `essential_commands[]` | Core commands list |
+
+### Source Path Format
+
+`source` 字段是相对路径（从 `skills/ccw-help/` 目录）：
+
+```json
+{
+  "name": "lite-plan",
+  "source": "../../../commands/workflow/lite-plan.md"
+}
+```
+
+## Slash Commands
+
+```bash
+/ccw-help                    # 通用帮助入口
+/ccw-help search <keyword>   # 搜索命令
+/ccw-help next <command>     # 获取下一步建议
+/ccw-issue                   # 问题报告
+```
+
+## Maintenance
+
+### Update Index
+
+```bash
+cd D:/Claude_dms3/.claude/skills/ccw-help
+python scripts/analyze_commands.py
+```
+
+脚本功能：扫描 commands/ 和 agents/ 目录，生成统一的 command.json
+
+## Statistics
+
+- **Commands**: 88+
+- **Agents**: 16
+- **Essential**: 10 核心命令
+
+## Core Principle
+
+**智能整合，非模板复制**
+
+- 理解用户具体情况
+- 整合多个来源信息
+- 定制示例和说明

.claude/skills/ccw-help/command.json

@@ -0,0 +1,520 @@
+{
+  "_metadata": {
+    "version": "2.0.0",
+    "total_commands": 45,
+    "total_agents": 16,
+    "description": "Unified CCW-Help command index"
+  },
+
+  "essential_commands": [
+    "/workflow:lite-plan",
+    "/workflow:lite-fix",
+    "/workflow:plan",
+    "/workflow:execute",
+    "/workflow:session:start",
+    "/workflow:review-session-cycle",
+    "/memory:docs",
+    "/workflow:brainstorm:artifacts",
+    "/workflow:plan-verify",
+    "/version"
+  ],
+
+  "commands": [
+    {
+      "name": "lite-plan",
+      "command": "/workflow:lite-plan",
+      "description": "Lightweight interactive planning with in-memory plan, dispatches to lite-execute",
+      "arguments": "[-e|--explore] \"task\"|file.md",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "essential": true,
+      "flow": {
+        "next_steps": ["/workflow:lite-execute"],
+        "alternatives": ["/workflow:plan"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/lite-plan.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "lite-execute",
+      "command": "/workflow:lite-execute",
+      "description": "Execute based on in-memory plan or prompt",
+      "arguments": "[--in-memory] \"task\"|file-path",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "flow": {
+        "prerequisites": ["/workflow:lite-plan", "/workflow:lite-fix"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/lite-execute.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "lite-fix",
+      "command": "/workflow:lite-fix",
+      "description": "Lightweight bug diagnosis and fix with optional hotfix mode",
+      "arguments": "[--hotfix] \"bug description\"",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "essential": true,
+      "flow": {
+        "next_steps": ["/workflow:lite-execute"],
+        "alternatives": ["/workflow:lite-plan"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/lite-fix.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "plan",
+      "command": "/workflow:plan",
+      "description": "5-phase planning with task JSON generation",
+      "arguments": "\"description\"|file.md",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "essential": true,
+      "flow": {
+        "next_steps": ["/workflow:plan-verify", "/workflow:execute"],
+        "alternatives": ["/workflow:tdd-plan"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/plan.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "execute",
+      "command": "/workflow:execute",
+      "description": "Coordinate agent execution with DAG parallel processing",
+      "arguments": "[--resume-session=\"session-id\"]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "essential": true,
+      "flow": {
+        "prerequisites": ["/workflow:plan", "/workflow:tdd-plan"],
+        "next_steps": ["/workflow:review"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/execute.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "plan-verify",
+      "command": "/workflow:plan-verify",
+      "description": "Cross-artifact consistency analysis",
+      "arguments": "[--session session-id]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "essential": true,
+      "flow": {
+        "prerequisites": ["/workflow:plan"],
+        "next_steps": ["/workflow:execute"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/plan-verify.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "init",
+      "command": "/workflow:init",
+      "description": "Initialize project-level state",
+      "arguments": "[--regenerate]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/init.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "clean",
+      "command": "/workflow:clean",
+      "description": "Intelligent code cleanup with stale artifact discovery",
+      "arguments": "[--dry-run] [\"focus\"]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/clean.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "debug",
+      "command": "/workflow:debug",
+      "description": "Hypothesis-driven debugging with NDJSON logging",
+      "arguments": "\"bug description\"",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/debug.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "replan",
+      "command": "/workflow:replan",
+      "description": "Interactive workflow replanning",
+      "arguments": "[--session id] [task-id] \"requirements\"",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/replan.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "session:start",
+      "command": "/workflow:session:start",
+      "description": "Start or discover workflow sessions",
+      "arguments": "[--type <workflow|review|tdd>] [--auto|--new]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "subcategory": "session",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "essential": true,
+      "flow": {
+        "next_steps": ["/workflow:plan", "/workflow:execute"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/session/start.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "session:list",
+      "command": "/workflow:session:list",
+      "description": "List all workflow sessions",
+      "arguments": "",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "subcategory": "session",
+      "difficulty": "Beginner",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/session/list.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "session:resume",
+      "command": "/workflow:session:resume",
+      "description": "Resume paused workflow session",
+      "arguments": "",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "subcategory": "session",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/session/resume.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "session:complete",
+      "command": "/workflow:session:complete",
+      "description": "Mark session complete and archive",
+      "arguments": "",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "subcategory": "session",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/session/complete.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "brainstorm:auto-parallel",
+      "command": "/workflow:brainstorm:auto-parallel",
+      "description": "Parallel brainstorming with multi-role analysis",
+      "arguments": "\"topic\" [--count N]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "subcategory": "brainstorm",
+      "difficulty": "Advanced",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/brainstorm/auto-parallel.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "brainstorm:artifacts",
+      "command": "/workflow:brainstorm:artifacts",
+      "description": "Interactive clarification with guidance specification",
+      "arguments": "\"topic\" [--count N]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "subcategory": "brainstorm",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "essential": true,
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/brainstorm/artifacts.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "brainstorm:synthesis",
+      "command": "/workflow:brainstorm:synthesis",
+      "description": "Refine role analyses through Q&A",
+      "arguments": "[--session session-id]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "subcategory": "brainstorm",
+      "difficulty": "Advanced",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/brainstorm/synthesis.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "tdd-plan",
+      "command": "/workflow:tdd-plan",
+      "description": "TDD planning with Red-Green-Refactor cycles",
+      "arguments": "\"feature\"|file.md",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Advanced",
+      "flow": {
+        "next_steps": ["/workflow:execute", "/workflow:tdd-verify"],
+        "alternatives": ["/workflow:plan"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/tdd-plan.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "tdd-verify",
+      "command": "/workflow:tdd-verify",
+      "description": "Verify TDD compliance with coverage analysis",
+      "arguments": "[session-id]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Advanced",
+      "flow": {
+        "prerequisites": ["/workflow:execute"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/tdd-verify.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "review",
+      "command": "/workflow:review",
+      "description": "Post-implementation review (security/architecture/quality)",
+      "arguments": "[--type=<type>] [session-id]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/review.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "review-session-cycle",
+      "command": "/workflow:review-session-cycle",
+      "description": "Multi-dimensional code review across 7 dimensions",
+      "arguments": "[session-id] [--dimensions=...]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "essential": true,
+      "flow": {
+        "prerequisites": ["/workflow:execute"],
+        "next_steps": ["/workflow:review-fix"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/review-session-cycle.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "review-module-cycle",
+      "command": "/workflow:review-module-cycle",
+      "description": "Module-based multi-dimensional review",
+      "arguments": "<path-pattern> [--dimensions=...]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/review-module-cycle.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "review-fix",
+      "command": "/workflow:review-fix",
+      "description": "Automated fixing of review findings",
+      "arguments": "<export-file|review-dir>",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "flow": {
+        "prerequisites": ["/workflow:review-session-cycle", "/workflow:review-module-cycle"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/review-fix.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "test-gen",
+      "command": "/workflow:test-gen",
+      "description": "Generate test session from implementation",
+      "arguments": "source-session-id",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/test-gen.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "test-fix-gen",
+      "command": "/workflow:test-fix-gen",
+      "description": "Create test-fix session with strategy",
+      "arguments": "session-id|\"description\"|file",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/test-fix-gen.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "test-cycle-execute",
+      "command": "/workflow:test-cycle-execute",
+      "description": "Execute test-fix with iterative cycles",
+      "arguments": "[--resume-session=id] [--max-iterations=N]",
+      "category": "workflow",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/workflow/test-cycle-execute.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "issue:new",
+      "command": "/issue:new",
+      "description": "Create issue from GitHub URL or text",
+      "arguments": "<url|text> [--priority 1-5]",
+      "category": "issue",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/issue/new.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "issue:discover",
+      "command": "/issue:discover",
+      "description": "Discover issues from multiple perspectives",
+      "arguments": "<path> [--perspectives=...]",
+      "category": "issue",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/issue/discover.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "issue:plan",
+      "command": "/issue:plan",
+      "description": "Batch plan issue resolution",
+      "arguments": "--all-pending|<ids>",
+      "category": "issue",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "flow": {
+        "next_steps": ["/issue:queue"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/issue/plan.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "issue:queue",
+      "command": "/issue:queue",
+      "description": "Form execution queue from solutions",
+      "arguments": "[--rebuild]",
+      "category": "issue",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "flow": {
+        "prerequisites": ["/issue:plan"],
+        "next_steps": ["/issue:execute"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/issue/queue.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "issue:execute",
+      "command": "/issue:execute",
+      "description": "Execute queue with DAG parallel",
+      "arguments": "[--worktree]",
+      "category": "issue",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "flow": {
+        "prerequisites": ["/issue:queue"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/issue/execute.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "docs",
+      "command": "/memory:docs",
+      "description": "Plan documentation workflow",
+      "arguments": "[path] [--tool <tool>]",
+      "category": "memory",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "essential": true,
+      "flow": {
+        "next_steps": ["/workflow:execute"]
+      },
+      "source": "../../../commands/memory/docs.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "update-related",
+      "command": "/memory:update-related",
+      "description": "Update docs for git-changed modules",
+      "arguments": "[--tool <tool>]",
+      "category": "memory",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/memory/update-related.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "update-full",
+      "command": "/memory:update-full",
+      "description": "Update all CLAUDE.md files",
+      "arguments": "[--tool <tool>]",
+      "category": "memory",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/memory/update-full.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "skill-memory",
+      "command": "/memory:skill-memory",
+      "description": "Generate SKILL.md with loading index",
+      "arguments": "[path] [--regenerate]",
+      "category": "memory",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/memory/skill-memory.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "load-skill-memory",
+      "command": "/memory:load-skill-memory",
+      "description": "Activate SKILL package for task",
+      "arguments": "[skill_name] \"task intent\"",
+      "category": "memory",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/memory/load-skill-memory.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "load",
+      "command": "/memory:load",
+      "description": "Load project context via CLI",
+      "arguments": "[--tool <tool>] \"context\"",
+      "category": "memory",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/memory/load.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "compact",
+      "command": "/memory:compact",
+      "description": "Compact session memory for recovery",
+      "arguments": "[description]",
+      "category": "memory",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/memory/compact.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "task:create",
+      "command": "/task:create",
+      "description": "Generate task JSON from description",
+      "arguments": "\"task title\"",
+      "category": "task",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/task/create.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "task:execute",
+      "command": "/task:execute",
+      "description": "Execute task JSON with agent",
+      "arguments": "task-id",
+      "category": "task",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/task/execute.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "task:breakdown",
+      "command": "/task:breakdown",
+      "description": "Decompose task into subtasks",
+      "arguments": "task-id",
+      "category": "task",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/task/breakdown.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "task:replan",
+      "command": "/task:replan",
+      "description": "Update task with new requirements",
+      "arguments": "task-id [\"text\"|file]",
+      "category": "task",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/task/replan.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "version",
+      "command": "/version",
+      "description": "Display version and check updates",
+      "arguments": "",
+      "category": "general",
+      "difficulty": "Beginner",
+      "essential": true,
+      "source": "../../../commands/version.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "enhance-prompt",
+      "command": "/enhance-prompt",
+      "description": "Transform prompts with session memory",
+      "arguments": "user input",
+      "category": "general",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/enhance-prompt.md"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "cli-init",
+      "command": "/cli:cli-init",
+      "description": "Initialize CLI tool configurations (.gemini/, .qwen/) with technology-aware ignore rules",
+      "arguments": "[--tool gemini|qwen|all] [--preview] [--output path]",
+      "category": "cli",
+      "difficulty": "Intermediate",
+      "source": "../../../commands/cli/cli-init.md"
+    }
+  ],
+
+  "agents": [
+    { "name": "action-planning-agent", "description": "Task planning and generation", "source": "../../../agents/action-planning-agent.md" },
+    { "name": "cli-execution-agent", "description": "CLI tool execution", "source": "../../../agents/cli-execution-agent.md" },
+    { "name": "cli-explore-agent", "description": "Codebase exploration", "source": "../../../agents/cli-explore-agent.md" },
+    { "name": "cli-lite-planning-agent", "description": "Lightweight planning", "source": "../../../agents/cli-lite-planning-agent.md" },
+    { "name": "cli-planning-agent", "description": "CLI-based planning", "source": "../../../agents/cli-planning-agent.md" },
+    { "name": "code-developer", "description": "Code implementation", "source": "../../../agents/code-developer.md" },
+    { "name": "conceptual-planning-agent", "description": "Conceptual analysis", "source": "../../../agents/conceptual-planning-agent.md" },
+    { "name": "context-search-agent", "description": "Context discovery", "source": "../../../agents/context-search-agent.md" },
+    { "name": "doc-generator", "description": "Documentation generation", "source": "../../../agents/doc-generator.md" },
+    { "name": "issue-plan-agent", "description": "Issue planning", "source": "../../../agents/issue-plan-agent.md" },
+    { "name": "issue-queue-agent", "description": "Issue queue formation", "source": "../../../agents/issue-queue-agent.md" },
+    { "name": "memory-bridge", "description": "Documentation coordination", "source": "../../../agents/memory-bridge.md" },
+    { "name": "test-context-search-agent", "description": "Test context collection", "source": "../../../agents/test-context-search-agent.md" },
+    { "name": "test-fix-agent", "description": "Test execution and fixing", "source": "../../../agents/test-fix-agent.md" },
+    { "name": "ui-design-agent", "description": "UI design and prototyping", "source": "../../../agents/ui-design-agent.md" },
+    { "name": "universal-executor", "description": "Universal task execution", "source": "../../../agents/universal-executor.md" }
+  ],
+
+  "categories": ["workflow", "issue", "memory", "task", "general", "cli"]
+}

.claude/skills/ccw-help/scripts/analyze_commands.py

@@ -0,0 +1,337 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env python3
+"""
+Analyze all command/agent files and generate index files for ccw-help skill.
+Outputs relative paths pointing to source files (no reference folder duplication).
+"""
+
+import os
+import re
+import json
+from pathlib import Path
+from collections import defaultdict
+from typing import Dict, List, Any
+
+# Base paths
+BASE_DIR = Path("D:/Claude_dms3/.claude")
+COMMANDS_DIR = BASE_DIR / "commands"
+AGENTS_DIR = BASE_DIR / "agents"
+SKILL_DIR = BASE_DIR / "skills" / "ccw-help"
+INDEX_DIR = SKILL_DIR / "index"
+
+def parse_frontmatter(content: str) -> Dict[str, Any]:
+    """Extract YAML frontmatter from markdown content."""
+    frontmatter = {}
+    if content.startswith('---'):
+        lines = content.split('\n')
+        for i, line in enumerate(lines[1:], 1):
+            if line.strip() == '---':
+                break
+            if ':' in line:
+                key, value = line.split(':', 1)
+                frontmatter[key.strip()] = value.strip().strip('"')
+    return frontmatter
+
+def categorize_command(file_path: Path) -> tuple:
+    """Determine category and subcategory from file path."""
+    parts = file_path.relative_to(COMMANDS_DIR).parts
+
+    if len(parts) == 1:
+        return "general", None
+
+    category = parts[0]  # cli, memory, task, workflow
+    subcategory = parts[1].replace('.md', '') if len(parts) > 2 else None
+
+    return category, subcategory
+
+def determine_usage_scenario(name: str, description: str, category: str) -> str:
+    """Determine primary usage scenario for command."""
+    name_lower = name.lower()
+
+    if any(word in name_lower for word in ['plan', 'design', 'breakdown', 'brainstorm']):
+        return "planning"
+    if any(word in name_lower for word in ['implement', 'execute', 'generate', 'create', 'write']):
+        return "implementation"
+    if any(word in name_lower for word in ['test', 'tdd', 'verify', 'coverage']):
+        return "testing"
+    if any(word in name_lower for word in ['docs', 'documentation', 'memory']):
+        return "documentation"
+    if any(word in name_lower for word in ['session', 'resume', 'status', 'complete']):
+        return "session-management"
+    if any(word in name_lower for word in ['analyze', 'review', 'diagnosis']):
+        return "analysis"
+    return "general"
+
+def determine_difficulty(name: str, description: str, category: str) -> str:
+    """Determine difficulty level."""
+    name_lower = name.lower()
+
+    beginner_keywords = ['status', 'list', 'chat', 'analyze', 'version']
+    if any(word in name_lower for word in beginner_keywords):
+        return "Beginner"
+
+    advanced_keywords = ['tdd', 'conflict', 'agent', 'auto-parallel', 'coverage', 'synthesis']
+    if any(word in name_lower for word in advanced_keywords):
+        return "Advanced"
+
+    return "Intermediate"
+
+def analyze_command_file(file_path: Path) -> Dict[str, Any]:
+    """Analyze a single command file and extract metadata."""
+    with open(file_path, 'r', encoding='utf-8') as f:
+        content = f.read()
+
+    frontmatter = parse_frontmatter(content)
+
+    name = frontmatter.get('name', file_path.stem)
+    description = frontmatter.get('description', '')
+    argument_hint = frontmatter.get('argument-hint', '')
+
+    category, subcategory = categorize_command(file_path)
+    usage_scenario = determine_usage_scenario(name, description, category)
+    difficulty = determine_difficulty(name, description, category)
+
+    # Build relative path from INDEX_DIR (need to go up 3 levels: index -> ccw-help -> skills -> .claude)
+    # e.g., "../../../commands/workflow/lite-plan.md"
+    rel_from_base = file_path.relative_to(BASE_DIR)
+    rel_path = "../../../" + str(rel_from_base).replace('\\', '/')
+
+    # Build full command name
+    if ':' in name:
+        command_name = f"/{name}"
+    elif category == "general":
+        command_name = f"/{name}"
+    else:
+        if subcategory:
+            command_name = f"/{category}:{subcategory}:{name}"
+        else:
+            command_name = f"/{category}:{name}"
+
+    return {
+        "name": name,
+        "command": command_name,
+        "description": description,
+        "arguments": argument_hint,
+        "category": category,
+        "subcategory": subcategory,
+        "usage_scenario": usage_scenario,
+        "difficulty": difficulty,
+        "source": rel_path  # Relative from index/ dir (e.g., "../../../commands/workflow/...")
+    }
+
+def analyze_agent_file(file_path: Path) -> Dict[str, Any]:
+    """Analyze a single agent file and extract metadata."""
+    with open(file_path, 'r', encoding='utf-8') as f:
+        content = f.read()
+
+    frontmatter = parse_frontmatter(content)
+
+    name = frontmatter.get('name', file_path.stem)
+    description = frontmatter.get('description', '')
+
+    # Build relative path from INDEX_DIR (need to go up 3 levels)
+    # e.g., "../../../agents/code-developer.md"
+    rel_from_base = file_path.relative_to(BASE_DIR)
+    rel_path = "../../../" + str(rel_from_base).replace('\\', '/')
+
+    return {
+        "name": name,
+        "description": description,
+        "source": rel_path  # Relative from index/ dir (e.g., "../../../agents/...")
+    }
+
+def build_command_relationships() -> Dict[str, Any]:
+    """Build command relationship mappings."""
+    return {
+        "workflow:plan": {
+            "calls_internally": ["workflow:session:start", "workflow:tools:context-gather", "workflow:tools:conflict-resolution", "workflow:tools:task-generate-agent"],
+            "next_steps": ["workflow:plan-verify", "workflow:status", "workflow:execute"],
+            "alternatives": ["workflow:tdd-plan"],
+            "prerequisites": []
+        },
+        "workflow:tdd-plan": {
+            "calls_internally": ["workflow:session:start", "workflow:tools:context-gather", "workflow:tools:task-generate-tdd"],
+            "next_steps": ["workflow:tdd-verify", "workflow:status", "workflow:execute"],
+            "alternatives": ["workflow:plan"],
+            "prerequisites": []
+        },
+        "workflow:execute": {
+            "prerequisites": ["workflow:plan", "workflow:tdd-plan"],
+            "related": ["workflow:status", "workflow:resume"],
+            "next_steps": ["workflow:review", "workflow:tdd-verify"]
+        },
+        "workflow:plan-verify": {
+            "prerequisites": ["workflow:plan"],
+            "next_steps": ["workflow:execute"],
+            "related": ["workflow:status"]
+        },
+        "workflow:tdd-verify": {
+            "prerequisites": ["workflow:execute"],
+            "related": ["workflow:tools:tdd-coverage-analysis"]
+        },
+        "workflow:session:start": {
+            "next_steps": ["workflow:plan", "workflow:execute"],
+            "related": ["workflow:session:list", "workflow:session:resume"]
+        },
+        "workflow:session:resume": {
+            "alternatives": ["workflow:resume"],
+            "related": ["workflow:session:list", "workflow:status"]
+        },
+        "workflow:lite-plan": {
+            "calls_internally": ["workflow:lite-execute"],
+            "next_steps": ["workflow:lite-execute", "workflow:status"],
+            "alternatives": ["workflow:plan"],
+            "prerequisites": []
+        },
+        "workflow:lite-fix": {
+            "next_steps": ["workflow:lite-execute", "workflow:status"],
+            "alternatives": ["workflow:lite-plan"],
+            "related": ["workflow:test-cycle-execute"]
+        },
+        "workflow:lite-execute": {
+            "prerequisites": ["workflow:lite-plan", "workflow:lite-fix"],
+            "related": ["workflow:execute", "workflow:status"]
+        },
+        "workflow:review-session-cycle": {
+            "prerequisites": ["workflow:execute"],
+            "next_steps": ["workflow:review-fix"],
+            "related": ["workflow:review-module-cycle"]
+        },
+        "workflow:review-fix": {
+            "prerequisites": ["workflow:review-module-cycle", "workflow:review-session-cycle"],
+            "related": ["workflow:test-cycle-execute"]
+        },
+        "memory:docs": {
+            "calls_internally": ["workflow:session:start", "workflow:tools:context-gather"],
+            "next_steps": ["workflow:execute"]
+        },
+        "memory:skill-memory": {
+            "next_steps": ["workflow:plan", "cli:analyze"],
+            "related": ["memory:load-skill-memory"]
+        }
+    }
+
+def identify_essential_commands(all_commands: List[Dict]) -> List[Dict]:
+    """Identify the most essential commands for beginners."""
+    essential_names = [
+        "workflow:lite-plan", "workflow:lite-fix", "workflow:plan",
+        "workflow:execute", "workflow:status", "workflow:session:start",
+        "workflow:review-session-cycle", "cli:analyze", "cli:chat",
+        "memory:docs", "workflow:brainstorm:artifacts",
+        "workflow:plan-verify", "workflow:resume", "version"
+    ]
+
+    essential = []
+    for cmd in all_commands:
+        cmd_name = cmd['command'].lstrip('/')
+        if cmd_name in essential_names:
+            essential.append(cmd)
+
+    essential.sort(key=lambda x: essential_names.index(x['command'].lstrip('/')) if x['command'].lstrip('/') in essential_names else 999)
+    return essential[:14]
+
+def main():
+    """Main analysis function."""
+    import sys
+    import io
+
+    if sys.platform == 'win32':
+        sys.stdout = io.TextIOWrapper(sys.stdout.buffer, encoding='utf-8')
+
+    print("=== CCW-Help Index Rebuild ===\n")
+
+    # Analyze command files
+    print("=== Analyzing Command Files ===")
+    command_files = list(COMMANDS_DIR.rglob("*.md"))
+    print(f"Found {len(command_files)} command files")
+
+    all_commands = []
+    for cmd_file in sorted(command_files):
+        try:
+            metadata = analyze_command_file(cmd_file)
+            all_commands.append(metadata)
+            print(f"  OK {metadata['command']}")
+        except Exception as e:
+            print(f"  ERROR analyzing {cmd_file}: {e}")
+
+    # Analyze agent files
+    print("\n=== Analyzing Agent Files ===")
+    agent_files = list(AGENTS_DIR.rglob("*.md"))
+    print(f"Found {len(agent_files)} agent files")
+
+    all_agents = []
+    for agent_file in sorted(agent_files):
+        try:
+            metadata = analyze_agent_file(agent_file)
+            all_agents.append(metadata)
+            print(f"  OK {metadata['name']}")
+        except Exception as e:
+            print(f"  ERROR analyzing {agent_file}: {e}")
+
+    print(f"\nAnalyzed {len(all_commands)} commands, {len(all_agents)} agents")
+
+    # Generate index files
+    INDEX_DIR.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
+
+    # 1. all-commands.json
+    all_commands_path = INDEX_DIR / "all-commands.json"
+    with open(all_commands_path, 'w', encoding='utf-8') as f:
+        json.dump(all_commands, f, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False)
+    print(f"\nOK Generated {all_commands_path.name} ({os.path.getsize(all_commands_path)} bytes)")
+
+    # 2. all-agents.json
+    all_agents_path = INDEX_DIR / "all-agents.json"
+    with open(all_agents_path, 'w', encoding='utf-8') as f:
+        json.dump(all_agents, f, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False)
+    print(f"OK Generated {all_agents_path.name} ({os.path.getsize(all_agents_path)} bytes)")
+
+    # 3. by-category.json
+    by_category = defaultdict(lambda: defaultdict(list))
+    for cmd in all_commands:
+        cat = cmd['category']
+        subcat = cmd['subcategory'] or '_root'
+        by_category[cat][subcat].append(cmd)
+
+    by_category_path = INDEX_DIR / "by-category.json"
+    with open(by_category_path, 'w', encoding='utf-8') as f:
+        json.dump(dict(by_category), f, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False)
+    print(f"OK Generated {by_category_path.name} ({os.path.getsize(by_category_path)} bytes)")
+
+    # 4. by-use-case.json
+    by_use_case = defaultdict(list)
+    for cmd in all_commands:
+        by_use_case[cmd['usage_scenario']].append(cmd)
+
+    by_use_case_path = INDEX_DIR / "by-use-case.json"
+    with open(by_use_case_path, 'w', encoding='utf-8') as f:
+        json.dump(dict(by_use_case), f, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False)
+    print(f"OK Generated {by_use_case_path.name} ({os.path.getsize(by_use_case_path)} bytes)")
+
+    # 5. essential-commands.json
+    essential = identify_essential_commands(all_commands)
+    essential_path = INDEX_DIR / "essential-commands.json"
+    with open(essential_path, 'w', encoding='utf-8') as f:
+        json.dump(essential, f, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False)
+    print(f"OK Generated {essential_path.name} ({os.path.getsize(essential_path)} bytes)")
+
+    # 6. command-relationships.json
+    relationships = build_command_relationships()
+    relationships_path = INDEX_DIR / "command-relationships.json"
+    with open(relationships_path, 'w', encoding='utf-8') as f:
+        json.dump(relationships, f, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False)
+    print(f"OK Generated {relationships_path.name} ({os.path.getsize(relationships_path)} bytes)")
+
+    # Print summary
+    print("\n=== Summary ===")
+    print(f"Commands: {len(all_commands)}")
+    print(f"Agents: {len(all_agents)}")
+    print(f"Essential: {len(essential)}")
+    print(f"\nBy category:")
+    for cat in sorted(by_category.keys()):
+        total = sum(len(cmds) for cmds in by_category[cat].values())
+        print(f"  {cat}: {total}")
+
+    print(f"\nIndex: {INDEX_DIR}")
+    print("=== Complete ===")
+
+if __name__ == '__main__':
+    main()

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,303 @@
+# CCW Loop Skill
+
+无状态迭代开发循环工作流，支持开发 (Develop)、调试 (Debug)、验证 (Validate) 三个阶段，每个阶段都有独立的文件记录进展。
+
+## Overview
+
+CCW Loop 是一个自主模式 (Autonomous) 的 Skill，通过文件驱动的无状态循环，帮助开发者系统化地完成开发任务。
+
+### 核心特性
+
+1. **无状态循环**: 每次执行从文件读取状态，不依赖内存
+2. **文件驱动**: 所有进度记录在 Markdown 文件中，可审计、可回顾
+3. **Gemini 辅助**: 关键决策点使用 CLI 工具进行深度分析
+4. **可恢复**: 任何时候中断后可继续
+5. **双模式**: 支持交互式和自动循环
+
+### 三大阶段
+
+- **Develop**: 任务分解 → 代码实现 → 进度记录
+- **Debug**: 假设生成 → 证据收集 → 根因分析 → 修复验证
+- **Validate**: 测试执行 → 覆盖率检查 → 质量评估
+
+## Installation
+
+已包含在 `.claude/skills/ccw-loop/`，无需额外安装。
+
+## Usage
+
+### 基本用法
+
+```bash
+# 启动新循环
+/ccw-loop "实现用户认证功能"
+
+# 继续现有循环
+/ccw-loop --resume LOOP-auth-2026-01-22
+
+# 自动循环模式
+/ccw-loop --auto "修复登录bug并添加测试"
+```
+
+### 交互式流程
+
+```
+1. 启动: /ccw-loop "任务描述"
+2. 初始化: 自动分析任务并生成子任务列表
+3. 显示菜单:
+   - 📝 继续开发 (Develop)
+   - 🔍 开始调试 (Debug)
+   - ✅ 运行验证 (Validate)
+   - 📊 查看详情 (Status)
+   - 🏁 完成循环 (Complete)
+   - 🚪 退出 (Exit)
+4. 执行选择的动作
+5. 重复步骤 3-4 直到完成
+```
+
+### 自动循环流程
+
+```
+Develop (所有任务) → Debug (如有需要) → Validate → 完成
+```
+
+## Directory Structure
+
+```
+.workflow/.loop/{session-id}/
+├── meta.json              # 会话元数据 (不可修改)
+├── state.json             # 当前状态 (每次更新)
+├── summary.md             # 完成报告 (结束时生成)
+├── develop/
+│   ├── progress.md        # 开发进度时间线
+│   ├── tasks.json         # 任务列表
+│   └── changes.log        # 代码变更日志 (NDJSON)
+├── debug/
+│   ├── understanding.md   # 理解演变文档
+│   ├── hypotheses.json    # 假设历史
+│   └── debug.log          # 调试日志 (NDJSON)
+└── validate/
+    ├── validation.md      # 验证报告
+    ├── test-results.json  # 测试结果
+    └── coverage.json      # 覆盖率数据
+```
+
+## Action Reference
+
+| Action | 描述 | 触发条件 |
+|--------|------|----------|
+| action-init | 初始化会话 | 首次启动 |
+| action-menu | 显示操作菜单 | 交互模式下每次循环 |
+| action-develop-with-file | 执行开发任务 | 有待处理任务 |
+| action-debug-with-file | 假设驱动调试 | 需要调试 |
+| action-validate-with-file | 运行测试验证 | 需要验证 |
+| action-complete | 完成并生成报告 | 所有任务完成 |
+
+详细说明见 [specs/action-catalog.md](specs/action-catalog.md)
+
+## CLI Integration
+
+CCW Loop 在关键决策点集成 CLI 工具:
+
+### 任务分解 (action-init)
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: 分解开发任务..."
+  --tool gemini
+  --mode analysis
+  --rule planning-breakdown-task-steps
+```
+
+### 代码实现 (action-develop)
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: 实现功能代码..."
+  --tool gemini
+  --mode write
+  --rule development-implement-feature
+```
+
+### 假设生成 (action-debug - 探索)
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Generate debugging hypotheses..."
+  --tool gemini
+  --mode analysis
+  --rule analysis-diagnose-bug-root-cause
+```
+
+### 证据分析 (action-debug - 分析)
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Analyze debug log evidence..."
+  --tool gemini
+  --mode analysis
+  --rule analysis-diagnose-bug-root-cause
+```
+
+### 质量评估 (action-validate)
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Analyze test results and coverage..."
+  --tool gemini
+  --mode analysis
+  --rule analysis-review-code-quality
+```
+
+## State Management
+
+### State Schema
+
+参见 [phases/state-schema.md](phases/state-schema.md)
+
+### State Transitions
+
+```
+pending → running → completed
+              ↓
+         user_exit
+              ↓
+            failed
+```
+
+### State Recovery
+
+如果 `state.json` 损坏，可从其他文件重建:
+- develop/tasks.json → develop.*
+- debug/hypotheses.json → debug.*
+- validate/test-results.json → validate.*
+
+## Examples
+
+### Example 1: 功能开发
+
+```bash
+# 1. 启动循环
+/ccw-loop "Add user profile page"
+
+# 2. 系统初始化，生成任务:
+#    - task-001: Create profile component
+#    - task-002: Add API endpoints
+#    - task-003: Implement tests
+
+# 3. 选择 "继续开发"
+#    → 执行 task-001 (Gemini 辅助实现)
+#    → 更新 progress.md
+
+# 4. 重复开发直到所有任务完成
+
+# 5. 选择 "运行验证"
+#    → 运行测试
+#    → 检查覆盖率
+#    → 生成 validation.md
+
+# 6. 选择 "完成循环"
+#    → 生成 summary.md
+#    → 询问是否扩展为 Issue
+```
+
+### Example 2: Bug 修复
+
+```bash
+# 1. 启动循环
+/ccw-loop "Fix login timeout issue"
+
+# 2. 选择 "开始调试"
+#    → 输入 bug 描述: "Login times out after 30s"
+#    → Gemini 生成假设 (H1, H2, H3)
+#    → 添加 NDJSON 日志
+#    → 提示复现 bug
+
+# 3. 复现 bug (在应用中操作)
+
+# 4. 再次选择 "开始调试"
+#    → 解析 debug.log
+#    → Gemini 分析证据
+#    → H2 确认为根因
+#    → 生成修复代码
+#    → 更新 understanding.md
+
+# 5. 选择 "运行验证"
+#    → 测试通过
+
+# 6. 完成
+```
+
+## Templates
+
+- [progress-template.md](templates/progress-template.md): 开发进度文档模板
+- [understanding-template.md](templates/understanding-template.md): 调试理解文档模板
+- [validation-template.md](templates/validation-template.md): 验证报告模板
+
+## Specifications
+
+- [loop-requirements.md](specs/loop-requirements.md): 循环需求规范
+- [action-catalog.md](specs/action-catalog.md): 动作目录
+
+## Integration
+
+### Dashboard Integration
+
+CCW Loop 与 Dashboard Loop Monitor 集成:
+- Dashboard 创建 Loop → 触发此 Skill
+- state.json → Dashboard 实时显示
+- 任务列表双向同步
+- 控制按钮映射到 actions
+
+### Issue System Integration
+
+完成后可扩展为 Issue:
+- 维度: test, enhance, refactor, doc
+- 自动调用 `/issue:new`
+- 上下文自动填充
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| 情况 | 处理 |
+|------|------|
+| Session 不存在 | 创建新会话 |
+| state.json 损坏 | 从文件重建 |
+| CLI 工具失败 | 回退到手动模式 |
+| 测试失败 | 循环回到 develop/debug |
+| >10 迭代 | 警告用户，建议拆分 |
+
+## Limitations
+
+1. **单会话限制**: 同一时间只能有一个活跃会话
+2. **迭代限制**: 建议不超过 10 次迭代
+3. **CLI 依赖**: 部分功能依赖 Gemini CLI 可用性
+4. **测试框架**: 需要 package.json 中定义测试脚本
+
+## Troubleshooting
+
+### Q: 如何查看当前会话状态？
+
+A: 在菜单中选择 "查看详情 (Status)"
+
+### Q: 如何恢复中断的会话？
+
+A: 使用 `--resume` 参数:
+```bash
+/ccw-loop --resume LOOP-xxx-2026-01-22
+```
+
+### Q: 如果 CLI 工具失败怎么办？
+
+A: Skill 会自动降级到手动模式，提示用户手动输入
+
+### Q: 如何添加自定义 action？
+
+A: 参见 [specs/action-catalog.md](specs/action-catalog.md) 的 "Action Extensions" 部分
+
+## Contributing
+
+添加新功能:
+1. 创建 action 文件在 `phases/actions/`
+2. 更新 orchestrator 决策逻辑
+3. 添加到 action-catalog.md
+4. 更新 action-menu.md
+
+## License
+
+MIT
+
+---
+
+**Version**: 1.0.0
+**Last Updated**: 2026-01-22
+**Author**: CCW Team

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,259 @@
+---
+name: ccw-loop
+description: Stateless iterative development loop workflow with documented progress. Supports develop, debug, and validate phases with file-based state tracking. Triggers on "ccw-loop", "dev loop", "development loop", "开发循环", "迭代开发".
+allowed-tools: Task(*), AskUserQuestion(*), Read(*), Grep(*), Glob(*), Bash(*), Edit(*), Write(*), TodoWrite(*)
+---
+
+# CCW Loop - Stateless Iterative Development Workflow
+
+无状态迭代开发循环工作流，支持开发 (develop)、调试 (debug)、验证 (validate) 三个阶段，每个阶段都有独立的文件记录进展。
+
+## Arguments
+
+| Arg | Required | Description |
+|-----|----------|-------------|
+| task | No | Task description (for new loop, mutually exclusive with --loop-id) |
+| --loop-id | No | Existing loop ID to continue (from API or previous session) |
+| --auto | No | Auto-cycle mode (develop → debug → validate → complete) |
+
+## Unified Architecture (API + Skill Integration)
+
+```
+┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│                     Dashboard (UI)                              │
+│  [Create] [Start] [Pause] [Resume] [Stop] [View Progress]       │
+└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+                              │
+                              ▼
+┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│              loop-v2-routes.ts (Control Plane)                  │
+│                                                                 │
+│  State: .loop/{loopId}.json (MASTER)                            │
+│  Tasks: .loop/{loopId}.tasks.jsonl                              │
+│                                                                 │
+│  /start → Trigger ccw-loop skill with --loop-id                 │
+│  /pause → Set status='paused' (skill checks before action)      │
+│  /stop  → Set status='failed' (skill terminates)                │
+│  /resume → Set status='running' (skill continues)               │
+└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+                              │
+                              ▼
+┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│               ccw-loop Skill (Execution Plane)                  │
+│                                                                 │
+│  Reads/Writes: .loop/{loopId}.json (unified state)              │
+│  Writes: .loop/{loopId}.progress/* (progress files)             │
+│                                                                 │
+│  BEFORE each action:                                            │
+│    → Check status: paused/stopped → exit gracefully             │
+│    → running → continue with action                             │
+│                                                                 │
+│  Actions: init → develop → debug → validate → complete          │
+└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+## Key Design Principles
+
+1. **统一状态**: API 和 Skill 共享 `.loop/{loopId}.json` 状态文件
+2. **控制信号**: Skill 每个 Action 前检查 status 字段 (paused/stopped)
+3. **文件驱动**: 所有进度、理解、结果都记录在 `.loop/{loopId}.progress/`
+4. **可恢复**: 任何时候可以继续之前的循环 (`--loop-id`)
+5. **双触发**: 支持 API 触发 (`--loop-id`) 和直接调用 (task description)
+6. **Gemini 辅助**: 使用 CLI 工具进行深度分析和假设验证
+
+## Execution Modes
+
+### Mode 1: Interactive (交互式)
+
+用户手动选择每个动作，适合复杂任务。
+
+```
+用户 → 选择动作 → 执行 → 查看结果 → 选择下一动作
+```
+
+### Mode 2: Auto-Loop (自动循环)
+
+按预设顺序自动执行，适合标准开发流程。
+
+```
+Develop → Debug → Validate → (如有问题) → Develop → ...
+```
+
+## Session Structure (Unified Location)
+
+```
+.loop/
+├── {loopId}.json              # 主状态文件 (API + Skill 共享)
+├── {loopId}.tasks.jsonl       # 任务列表 (API 管理)
+└── {loopId}.progress/         # Skill 进度文件
+    ├── develop.md             # 开发进度记录
+    ├── debug.md               # 理解演变文档
+    ├── validate.md            # 验证报告
+    ├── changes.log            # 代码变更日志 (NDJSON)
+    └── debug.log              # 调试日志 (NDJSON)
+```
+
+## Directory Setup
+
+```javascript
+// loopId 来源:
+// 1. API 触发时: 从 --loop-id 参数获取
+// 2. 直接调用时: 生成新的 loop-v2-{timestamp}-{random}
+
+const loopId = args['--loop-id'] || generateLoopId()
+const loopFile = `.loop/${loopId}.json`
+const progressDir = `.loop/${loopId}.progress`
+
+// 创建进度目录
+Bash(`mkdir -p "${progressDir}"`)
+```
+
+## Action Catalog
+
+| Action | Purpose | Output Files | CLI Integration |
+|--------|---------|--------------|-----------------|
+| [action-init](phases/actions/action-init.md) | 初始化循环会话 | meta.json, state.json | - |
+| [action-develop-with-file](phases/actions/action-develop-with-file.md) | 开发任务执行 | progress.md, tasks.json | gemini --mode write |
+| [action-debug-with-file](phases/actions/action-debug-with-file.md) | 假设驱动调试 | understanding.md, hypotheses.json | gemini --mode analysis |
+| [action-validate-with-file](phases/actions/action-validate-with-file.md) | 测试与验证 | validation.md, test-results.json | gemini --mode analysis |
+| [action-complete](phases/actions/action-complete.md) | 完成循环 | summary.md | - |
+| [action-menu](phases/actions/action-menu.md) | 显示操作菜单 | - | - |
+
+## Usage
+
+```bash
+# 启动新循环 (直接调用)
+/ccw-loop "实现用户认证功能"
+
+# 继续现有循环 (API 触发或手动恢复)
+/ccw-loop --loop-id loop-v2-20260122-abc123
+
+# 自动循环模式
+/ccw-loop --auto "修复登录bug并添加测试"
+
+# API 触发自动循环
+/ccw-loop --loop-id loop-v2-20260122-abc123 --auto
+```
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+```
+┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│  /ccw-loop [<task> | --loop-id <id>] [--auto]                    │
+├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+│                                                                  │
+│  1. Parameter Detection:                                         │
+│     ├─ IF --loop-id provided:                                    │
+│     │   ├─ Read .loop/{loopId}.json                              │
+│     │   ├─ Validate status === 'running'                         │
+│     │   └─ Continue from skill_state.current_action              │
+│     └─ ELSE (task description):                                  │
+│         ├─ Generate new loopId                                   │
+│         ├─ Create .loop/{loopId}.json                            │
+│         └─ Initialize with action-init                           │
+│                                                                  │
+│  2. Orchestrator Loop:                                           │
+│     ├─ Read state from .loop/{loopId}.json                       │
+│     ├─ Check control signals:                                    │
+│     │   ├─ status === 'paused' → Exit (wait for resume)          │
+│     │   ├─ status === 'failed' → Exit with error                 │
+│     │   └─ status === 'running' → Continue                       │
+│     ├─ Show menu / auto-select next action                       │
+│     ├─ Execute action                                            │
+│     ├─ Update .loop/{loopId}.progress/{action}.md                │
+│     ├─ Update .loop/{loopId}.json (skill_state)                  │
+│     └─ Loop or exit based on user choice / completion            │
+│                                                                  │
+│  3. Action Execution:                                            │
+│     ├─ BEFORE: checkControlSignals() → exit if paused/stopped    │
+│     ├─ Develop: Plan → Implement → Document progress             │
+│     ├─ Debug: Hypothesize → Instrument → Analyze → Fix           │
+│     ├─ Validate: Test → Check → Report                           │
+│     └─ AFTER: Update skill_state in .loop/{loopId}.json          │
+│                                                                  │
+│  4. Termination:                                                 │
+│     ├─ Control signal: paused (graceful exit, wait resume)       │
+│     ├─ Control signal: stopped (failed state)                    │
+│     ├─ User exits (interactive mode)                             │
+│     ├─ All tasks completed (status → completed)                  │
+│     └─ Max iterations reached                                    │
+│                                                                  │
+└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+## Reference Documents
+
+| Document | Purpose |
+|----------|---------|
+| [phases/orchestrator.md](phases/orchestrator.md) | 编排器：状态读取 + 动作选择 |
+| [phases/state-schema.md](phases/state-schema.md) | 状态结构定义 |
+| [specs/loop-requirements.md](specs/loop-requirements.md) | 循环需求规范 |
+| [specs/action-catalog.md](specs/action-catalog.md) | 动作目录 |
+| [templates/progress-template.md](templates/progress-template.md) | 进度文档模板 |
+| [templates/understanding-template.md](templates/understanding-template.md) | 理解文档模板 |
+
+## Integration with Loop Monitor (Dashboard)
+
+此 Skill 与 CCW Dashboard 的 Loop Monitor 实现 **控制平面 + 执行平面** 分离架构：
+
+### Control Plane (Dashboard/API → loop-v2-routes.ts)
+
+1. **创建循环**: `POST /api/loops/v2` → 创建 `.loop/{loopId}.json`
+2. **启动执行**: `POST /api/loops/v2/:loopId/start` → 触发 `/ccw-loop --loop-id {loopId} --auto`
+3. **暂停执行**: `POST /api/loops/v2/:loopId/pause` → 设置 `status='paused'` (Skill 下次检查时退出)
+4. **恢复执行**: `POST /api/loops/v2/:loopId/resume` → 设置 `status='running'` → 重新触发 Skill
+5. **停止执行**: `POST /api/loops/v2/:loopId/stop` → 设置 `status='failed'`
+
+### Execution Plane (ccw-loop Skill)
+
+1. **读取状态**: 从 `.loop/{loopId}.json` 读取 API 设置的状态
+2. **检查控制**: 每个 Action 前检查 `status` 字段
+3. **执行动作**: develop → debug → validate → complete
+4. **更新进度**: 写入 `.loop/{loopId}.progress/*.md` 和更新 `skill_state`
+5. **状态同步**: Dashboard 通过读取 `.loop/{loopId}.json` 获取进度
+
+## CLI Integration Points
+
+### Develop Phase
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Implement {task}...
+TASK: • Analyze requirements • Write code • Update progress
+MODE: write
+CONTEXT: @progress.md @tasks.json
+EXPECTED: Implementation + updated progress.md
+" --tool gemini --mode write --rule development-implement-feature
+```
+
+### Debug Phase
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Generate debugging hypotheses...
+TASK: • Analyze error • Generate hypotheses • Add instrumentation
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @understanding.md @debug.log
+EXPECTED: Hypotheses + instrumentation plan
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-diagnose-bug-root-cause
+```
+
+### Validate Phase
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Validate implementation...
+TASK: • Run tests • Check coverage • Verify requirements
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @validation.md @test-results.json
+EXPECTED: Validation report
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-review-code-quality
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Situation | Action |
+|-----------|--------|
+| Session not found | Create new session |
+| State file corrupted | Rebuild from file contents |
+| CLI tool fails | Fallback to manual analysis |
+| Tests fail | Loop back to develop/debug |
+| >10 iterations | Warn user, suggest break |
+
+## 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}"`

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/phases/actions/action-complete.md

@@ -0,0 +1,320 @@
+# Action: Complete
+
+完成 CCW Loop 会话，生成总结报告。
+
+## Purpose
+
+- 生成完成报告
+- 汇总所有阶段成果
+- 提供后续建议
+- 询问是否扩展为 Issue
+
+## Preconditions
+
+- [ ] state.initialized === true
+- [ ] state.status === 'running'
+
+## Execution
+
+### Step 1: 汇总统计
+
+```javascript
+const getUtc8ISOString = () => new Date(Date.now() + 8 * 60 * 60 * 1000).toISOString()
+
+const sessionFolder = `.workflow/.loop/${state.session_id}`
+
+const stats = {
+  // 时间统计
+  duration: Date.now() - new Date(state.created_at).getTime(),
+  iterations: state.iteration_count,
+
+  // 开发统计
+  develop: {
+    total_tasks: state.develop.total_count,
+    completed_tasks: state.develop.completed_count,
+    completion_rate: state.develop.total_count > 0
+      ? (state.develop.completed_count / state.develop.total_count * 100).toFixed(1)
+      : 0
+  },
+
+  // 调试统计
+  debug: {
+    iterations: state.debug.iteration,
+    hypotheses_tested: state.debug.hypotheses.length,
+    root_cause_found: state.debug.confirmed_hypothesis !== null
+  },
+
+  // 验证统计
+  validate: {
+    runs: state.validate.test_results.length,
+    passed: state.validate.passed,
+    coverage: state.validate.coverage,
+    failed_tests: state.validate.failed_tests.length
+  }
+}
+
+console.log('\n生成完成报告...')
+```
+
+### Step 2: 生成总结报告
+
+```javascript
+const summaryReport = `# CCW Loop Session Summary
+
+**Session ID**: ${state.session_id}
+**Task**: ${state.task_description}
+**Started**: ${state.created_at}
+**Completed**: ${getUtc8ISOString()}
+**Duration**: ${formatDuration(stats.duration)}
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+${state.validate.passed
+  ? '✅ **任务成功完成** - 所有测试通过，验证成功'
+  : state.develop.completed_count === state.develop.total_count
+    ? '⚠️ **开发完成，验证未通过** - 需要进一步调试'
+    : '⏸️ **任务部分完成** - 仍有待处理项'}
+
+---
+
+## Development Phase
+
+| Metric | Value |
+|--------|-------|
+| Total Tasks | ${stats.develop.total_tasks} |
+| Completed | ${stats.develop.completed_tasks} |
+| Completion Rate | ${stats.develop.completion_rate}% |
+
+### Completed Tasks
+
+${state.develop.tasks.filter(t => t.status === 'completed').map(t => `
+- ✅ ${t.description}
+  - Files: ${t.files_changed?.join(', ') || 'N/A'}
+  - Completed: ${t.completed_at}
+`).join('\n')}
+
+### Pending Tasks
+
+${state.develop.tasks.filter(t => t.status !== 'completed').map(t => `
+- ⏳ ${t.description}
+`).join('\n') || '_None_'}
+
+---
+
+## Debug Phase
+
+| Metric | Value |
+|--------|-------|
+| Iterations | ${stats.debug.iterations} |
+| Hypotheses Tested | ${stats.debug.hypotheses_tested} |
+| Root Cause Found | ${stats.debug.root_cause_found ? 'Yes' : 'No'} |
+
+${stats.debug.root_cause_found ? `
+### Confirmed Root Cause
+
+**${state.debug.confirmed_hypothesis}**: ${state.debug.hypotheses.find(h => h.id === state.debug.confirmed_hypothesis)?.description || 'N/A'}
+` : ''}
+
+### Hypothesis Summary
+
+${state.debug.hypotheses.map(h => `
+- **${h.id}**: ${h.status.toUpperCase()}
+  - ${h.description}
+`).join('\n') || '_No hypotheses tested_'}
+
+---
+
+## Validation Phase
+
+| Metric | Value |
+|--------|-------|
+| Test Runs | ${stats.validate.runs} |
+| Status | ${stats.validate.passed ? 'PASSED' : 'FAILED'} |
+| Coverage | ${stats.validate.coverage || 'N/A'}% |
+| Failed Tests | ${stats.validate.failed_tests} |
+
+${stats.validate.failed_tests > 0 ? `
+### Failed Tests
+
+${state.validate.failed_tests.map(t => `- ❌ ${t}`).join('\n')}
+` : ''}
+
+---
+
+## Files Modified
+
+${listModifiedFiles(sessionFolder)}
+
+---
+
+## Key Learnings
+
+${state.debug.iteration > 0 ? `
+### From Debugging
+
+${extractLearnings(state.debug.hypotheses)}
+` : ''}
+
+---
+
+## Recommendations
+
+${generateRecommendations(stats, state)}
+
+---
+
+## Session Artifacts
+
+| File | Description |
+|------|-------------|
+| \`develop/progress.md\` | Development progress timeline |
+| \`develop/tasks.json\` | Task list with status |
+| \`debug/understanding.md\` | Debug exploration and learnings |
+| \`debug/hypotheses.json\` | Hypothesis history |
+| \`validate/validation.md\` | Validation report |
+| \`validate/test-results.json\` | Test execution results |
+
+---
+
+*Generated by CCW Loop at ${getUtc8ISOString()}*
+`
+
+Write(`${sessionFolder}/summary.md`, summaryReport)
+console.log(`\n报告已保存: ${sessionFolder}/summary.md`)
+```
+
+### Step 3: 询问后续扩展
+
+```javascript
+console.log('\n' + '═'.repeat(60))
+console.log('  任务已完成')
+console.log('═'.repeat(60))
+
+const expansionResponse = await AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "是否将发现扩展为 Issue？",
+    header: "扩展选项",
+    multiSelect: true,
+    options: [
+      { label: "测试 (Test)", description: "添加更多测试用例" },
+      { label: "增强 (Enhance)", description: "功能增强建议" },
+      { label: "重构 (Refactor)", description: "代码重构建议" },
+      { label: "文档 (Doc)", description: "文档更新需求" },
+      { label: "否，直接完成", description: "不创建 Issue" }
+    ]
+  }]
+})
+
+const selectedExpansions = expansionResponse["扩展选项"]
+
+if (selectedExpansions && !selectedExpansions.includes("否，直接完成")) {
+  for (const expansion of selectedExpansions) {
+    const dimension = expansion.split(' ')[0].toLowerCase()
+    const issueSummary = `${state.task_description} - ${dimension}`
+
+    console.log(`\n创建 Issue: ${issueSummary}`)
+
+    // 调用 /issue:new 创建 issue
+    await Bash({
+      command: `/issue:new "${issueSummary}"`,
+      run_in_background: false
+    })
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Step 4: 最终输出
+
+```javascript
+console.log(`
+═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
+  ✅ CCW Loop 会话完成
+═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
+
+  会话 ID: ${state.session_id}
+  用时: ${formatDuration(stats.duration)}
+  迭代: ${stats.iterations}
+
+  开发: ${stats.develop.completed_tasks}/${stats.develop.total_tasks} 任务完成
+  调试: ${stats.debug.iterations} 次迭代
+  验证: ${stats.validate.passed ? '通过 ✅' : '未通过 ❌'}
+
+  报告: ${sessionFolder}/summary.md
+
+═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
+`)
+```
+
+## State Updates
+
+```javascript
+return {
+  stateUpdates: {
+    status: 'completed',
+    completed_at: getUtc8ISOString(),
+    summary: stats
+  },
+  continue: false,
+  message: `会话 ${state.session_id} 已完成`
+}
+```
+
+## Helper Functions
+
+```javascript
+function formatDuration(ms) {
+  const seconds = Math.floor(ms / 1000)
+  const minutes = Math.floor(seconds / 60)
+  const hours = Math.floor(minutes / 60)
+
+  if (hours > 0) {
+    return `${hours}h ${minutes % 60}m`
+  } else if (minutes > 0) {
+    return `${minutes}m ${seconds % 60}s`
+  } else {
+    return `${seconds}s`
+  }
+}
+
+function generateRecommendations(stats, state) {
+  const recommendations = []
+
+  if (stats.develop.completion_rate < 100) {
+    recommendations.push('- 完成剩余开发任务')
+  }
+
+  if (!stats.validate.passed) {
+    recommendations.push('- 修复失败的测试')
+  }
+
+  if (stats.validate.coverage && stats.validate.coverage < 80) {
+    recommendations.push(`- 提高测试覆盖率 (当前: ${stats.validate.coverage}%)`)
+  }
+
+  if (stats.debug.iterations > 3 && !stats.debug.root_cause_found) {
+    recommendations.push('- 考虑代码重构以简化调试')
+  }
+
+  if (recommendations.length === 0) {
+    recommendations.push('- 考虑代码审查')
+    recommendations.push('- 更新相关文档')
+    recommendations.push('- 准备部署')
+  }
+
+  return recommendations.join('\n')
+}
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error Type | Recovery |
+|------------|----------|
+| 报告生成失败 | 显示基本统计，跳过文件写入 |
+| Issue 创建失败 | 记录错误，继续完成 |
+
+## Next Actions
+
+- 无 (终止状态)
+- 如需继续: 使用 `ccw-loop --resume {session-id}` 重新打开会话

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/phases/actions/action-debug-with-file.md

@@ -0,0 +1,485 @@
+# Action: Debug With File
+
+假设驱动调试，记录理解演变到 understanding.md，支持 Gemini 辅助分析和假设生成。
+
+## Purpose
+
+执行假设驱动的调试流程，包括：
+- 定位错误源
+- 生成可测试假设
+- 添加 NDJSON 日志
+- 分析日志证据
+- 纠正错误理解
+- 应用修复
+
+## Preconditions
+
+- [ ] state.initialized === true
+- [ ] state.status === 'running'
+
+## Session Setup
+
+```javascript
+const getUtc8ISOString = () => new Date(Date.now() + 8 * 60 * 60 * 1000).toISOString()
+
+const sessionFolder = `.workflow/.loop/${state.session_id}`
+const debugFolder = `${sessionFolder}/debug`
+const understandingPath = `${debugFolder}/understanding.md`
+const hypothesesPath = `${debugFolder}/hypotheses.json`
+const debugLogPath = `${debugFolder}/debug.log`
+```
+
+---
+
+## Mode Detection
+
+```javascript
+// 自动检测模式
+const understandingExists = fs.existsSync(understandingPath)
+const logHasContent = fs.existsSync(debugLogPath) && fs.statSync(debugLogPath).size > 0
+
+const debugMode = logHasContent ? 'analyze' : (understandingExists ? 'continue' : 'explore')
+
+console.log(`Debug mode: ${debugMode}`)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Explore Mode (首次调试)
+
+### Step 1.1: 定位错误源
+
+```javascript
+if (debugMode === 'explore') {
+  // 询问用户 bug 描述
+  const bugInput = await AskUserQuestion({
+    questions: [{
+      question: "请描述遇到的 bug 或错误信息：",
+      header: "Bug 描述",
+      multiSelect: false,
+      options: [
+        { label: "手动输入", description: "输入错误描述或堆栈" },
+        { label: "从测试失败", description: "从验证阶段的失败测试中获取" }
+      ]
+    }]
+  })
+
+  const bugDescription = bugInput["Bug 描述"]
+
+  // 提取关键词并搜索
+  const searchResults = await Task({
+    subagent_type: 'Explore',
+    run_in_background: false,
+    prompt: `Search codebase for error patterns related to: ${bugDescription}`
+  })
+
+  // 分析搜索结果，识别受影响的位置
+  const affectedLocations = analyzeSearchResults(searchResults)
+}
+```
+
+### Step 1.2: 记录初始理解
+
+```javascript
+// 创建 understanding.md
+const initialUnderstanding = `# Understanding Document
+
+**Session ID**: ${state.session_id}
+**Bug Description**: ${bugDescription}
+**Started**: ${getUtc8ISOString()}
+
+---
+
+## Exploration Timeline
+
+### Iteration 1 - Initial Exploration (${getUtc8ISOString()})
+
+#### 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.files.join(', ')}
+- Key findings: ${r.insights}
+`).join('\n')}
+
+#### Next Steps
+
+- Generate testable hypotheses
+- Add instrumentation
+- Await reproduction
+
+---
+
+## Current Consolidated Understanding
+
+${initialConsolidatedUnderstanding}
+`
+
+Write(understandingPath, initialUnderstanding)
+```
+
+### Step 1.3: Gemini 辅助假设生成
+
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Generate debugging hypotheses for: ${bugDescription}
+Success criteria: Testable hypotheses with clear evidence criteria
+
+TASK:
+• Analyze error pattern and code search results
+• Identify 3-5 most likely root causes
+• For each hypothesis, specify:
+  - What might be wrong
+  - What evidence would confirm/reject it
+  - Where to add instrumentation
+• Rank by likelihood
+
+MODE: analysis
+
+CONTEXT: @${understandingPath} | 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
+```
+
+### Step 1.4: 保存假设
+
+```javascript
+const hypotheses = {
+  iteration: 1,
+  timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(),
+  bug_description: bugDescription,
+  hypotheses: [
+    {
+      id: "H1",
+      description: "...",
+      testable_condition: "...",
+      logging_point: "file.ts:func:42",
+      evidence_criteria: {
+        confirm: "...",
+        reject: "..."
+      },
+      likelihood: 1,
+      status: "pending"
+    }
+    // ...
+  ],
+  gemini_insights: "...",
+  corrected_assumptions: []
+}
+
+Write(hypothesesPath, JSON.stringify(hypotheses, null, 2))
+```
+
+### Step 1.5: 添加 NDJSON 日志
+
+```javascript
+// 为每个假设添加日志点
+for (const hypothesis of hypotheses.hypotheses) {
+  const [file, func, line] = hypothesis.logging_point.split(':')
+
+  const logStatement = `console.log(JSON.stringify({
+    hid: "${hypothesis.id}",
+    ts: Date.now(),
+    func: "${func}",
+    data: { /* 相关数据 */ }
+  }))`
+
+  // 使用 Edit 工具添加日志
+  // ...
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Analyze Mode (有日志后)
+
+### Step 2.1: 解析调试日志
+
+```javascript
+if (debugMode === 'analyze') {
+  // 读取 NDJSON 日志
+  const logContent = Read(debugLogPath)
+  const entries = logContent.split('\n')
+    .filter(l => l.trim())
+    .map(l => JSON.parse(l))
+
+  // 按假设分组
+  const byHypothesis = groupBy(entries, 'hid')
+}
+```
+
+### Step 2.2: Gemini 辅助证据分析
+
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Analyze debug log evidence to validate/correct hypotheses for: ${bugDescription}
+Success criteria: Clear verdict per hypothesis + corrected understanding
+
+TASK:
+• Parse log entries by hypothesis
+• Evaluate evidence against expected criteria
+• Determine verdict: confirmed | rejected | inconclusive
+• Identify incorrect assumptions from previous understanding
+• Suggest corrections to understanding
+
+MODE: analysis
+
+CONTEXT:
+@${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: 更新理解文档
+
+```javascript
+// 追加新迭代到 understanding.md
+const iteration = state.debug.iteration + 1
+
+const analysisEntry = `
+### Iteration ${iteration} - Evidence Analysis (${getUtc8ISOString()})
+
+#### 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)
+
+### What We Know
+
+- ${validUnderstanding1}
+- ${validUnderstanding2}
+
+### What Was Disproven
+
+- ~~${wrongAssumption}~~ (Evidence: ${disproofEvidence})
+
+### Current Investigation Focus
+
+${currentFocus}
+
+### Remaining Questions
+
+- ${openQuestion1}
+- ${openQuestion2}
+`
+
+const existingContent = Read(understandingPath)
+Write(understandingPath, existingContent + analysisEntry)
+```
+
+### Step 2.4: 更新假设状态
+
+```javascript
+const hypothesesData = JSON.parse(Read(hypothesesPath))
+
+// 更新假设状态
+hypothesesData.hypotheses = hypothesesData.hypotheses.map(h => ({
+  ...h,
+  status: results.find(r => r.id === h.id)?.verdict || h.status,
+  evidence: results.find(r => r.id === h.id)?.evidence || h.evidence,
+  verdict_reason: results.find(r => r.id === h.id)?.reason || h.verdict_reason
+}))
+
+hypothesesData.iteration++
+hypothesesData.timestamp = getUtc8ISOString()
+
+Write(hypothesesPath, JSON.stringify(hypothesesData, null, 2))
+```
+
+---
+
+## Fix & Verification
+
+### Step 3.1: 应用修复
+
+```javascript
+if (confirmedHypothesis) {
+  console.log(`\n根因确认: ${confirmedHypothesis.description}`)
+  console.log('准备应用修复...')
+
+  // 使用 Gemini 生成修复代码
+  const fixPrompt = `
+PURPOSE: Fix the identified root cause
+Root Cause: ${confirmedHypothesis.description}
+Evidence: ${confirmedHypothesis.supportingEvidence}
+
+TASK:
+• Generate fix code
+• Ensure backward compatibility
+• Add tests if needed
+
+MODE: write
+
+CONTEXT: @${confirmedHypothesis.logging_point.split(':')[0]}
+
+EXPECTED: Fixed code + verification steps
+`
+
+  await Bash({
+    command: `ccw cli -p "${fixPrompt}" --tool gemini --mode write --rule development-debug-runtime-issues`,
+    run_in_background: false
+  })
+}
+```
+
+### Step 3.2: 记录解决方案
+
+```javascript
+const resolutionEntry = `
+### Resolution (${getUtc8ISOString()})
+
+#### Fix Applied
+
+- Modified files: ${modifiedFiles.join(', ')}
+- Fix description: ${fixDescription}
+- Root cause addressed: ${rootCause}
+
+#### Verification Results
+
+${verificationResults}
+
+#### Lessons Learned
+
+1. ${lesson1}
+2. ${lesson2}
+
+#### Key Insights for Future
+
+- ${insight1}
+- ${insight2}
+`
+
+const existingContent = Read(understandingPath)
+Write(understandingPath, existingContent + resolutionEntry)
+```
+
+### Step 3.3: 清理日志
+
+```javascript
+// 移除调试日志
+// (可选，根据用户选择)
+```
+
+---
+
+## State Updates
+
+```javascript
+return {
+  stateUpdates: {
+    debug: {
+      current_bug: bugDescription,
+      hypotheses: hypothesesData.hypotheses,
+      confirmed_hypothesis: confirmedHypothesis?.id || null,
+      iteration: hypothesesData.iteration,
+      last_analysis_at: getUtc8ISOString(),
+      understanding_updated: true
+    },
+    last_action: 'action-debug-with-file'
+  },
+  continue: true,
+  message: confirmedHypothesis
+    ? `根因确认: ${confirmedHypothesis.description}\n修复已应用，请验证`
+    : `分析完成，需要更多证据\n请复现 bug 后再次执行`
+}
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error Type | Recovery |
+|------------|----------|
+| 空 debug.log | 提示用户复现 bug |
+| 所有假设被否定 | 使用 Gemini 生成新假设 |
+| 修复无效 | 记录失败尝试，迭代 |
+| >5 迭代 | 建议升级到 /workflow:lite-fix |
+| Gemini 不可用 | 回退到手动分析 |
+
+## Understanding Document Template
+
+参考 [templates/understanding-template.md](../../templates/understanding-template.md)
+
+## CLI Integration
+
+### 假设生成
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Generate debugging hypotheses..." --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-diagnose-bug-root-cause
+```
+
+### 证据分析
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Analyze debug log evidence..." --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-diagnose-bug-root-cause
+```
+
+### 生成修复
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Fix the identified root cause..." --tool gemini --mode write --rule development-debug-runtime-issues
+```
+
+## Next Actions (Hints)
+
+- 根因确认: `action-validate-with-file` (验证修复)
+- 需要更多证据: 等待用户复现，再次执行此动作
+- 所有假设否定: 重新执行此动作生成新假设
+- 用户选择: `action-menu` (返回菜单)

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/phases/actions/action-develop-with-file.md

@@ -0,0 +1,365 @@
+# Action: Develop With File
+
+增量开发任务执行，记录进度到 progress.md，支持 Gemini 辅助实现。
+
+## Purpose
+
+执行开发任务并记录进度，包括：
+- 分析任务需求
+- 使用 Gemini/CLI 实现代码
+- 记录代码变更
+- 更新进度文档
+
+## Preconditions
+
+- [ ] state.status === 'running'
+- [ ] state.skill_state !== null
+- [ ] state.skill_state.develop.tasks.some(t => t.status === 'pending')
+
+## Session Setup (Unified Location)
+
+```javascript
+const getUtc8ISOString = () => new Date(Date.now() + 8 * 60 * 60 * 1000).toISOString()
+
+// 统一位置: .loop/{loopId}
+const loopId = state.loop_id
+const loopFile = `.loop/${loopId}.json`
+const progressDir = `.loop/${loopId}.progress`
+const progressPath = `${progressDir}/develop.md`
+const changesLogPath = `${progressDir}/changes.log`
+```
+
+---
+
+## Execution
+
+### Step 0: Check Control Signals (CRITICAL)
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * CRITICAL: 每个 Action 必须在开始时检查控制信号
+ * 如果 API 设置了 paused/stopped，Skill 应立即退出
+ */
+function checkControlSignals(loopId) {
+  const state = JSON.parse(Read(`.loop/${loopId}.json`))
+
+  switch (state.status) {
+    case 'paused':
+      console.log('⏸️ Loop paused by API. Exiting action.')
+      return { continue: false, reason: 'paused' }
+
+    case 'failed':
+      console.log('⏹️ Loop stopped by API. Exiting action.')
+      return { continue: false, reason: 'stopped' }
+
+    case 'running':
+      return { continue: true, reason: 'running' }
+
+    default:
+      return { continue: false, reason: 'unknown_status' }
+  }
+}
+
+// Execute check
+const control = checkControlSignals(loopId)
+if (!control.continue) {
+  return {
+    skillStateUpdates: { current_action: null },
+    continue: false,
+    message: `Action terminated: ${control.reason}`
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Step 1: 加载任务列表
+
+```javascript
+// 读取任务列表 (从 skill_state)
+let tasks = state.skill_state?.develop?.tasks || []
+
+// 如果任务列表为空，询问用户创建
+if (tasks.length === 0) {
+  // 使用 Gemini 分析任务描述，生成任务列表
+  const analysisPrompt = `
+PURPOSE: 分析开发任务并分解为可执行步骤
+Success: 生成 3-7 个具体、可验证的子任务
+
+TASK:
+• 分析任务描述: ${state.task_description}
+• 识别关键功能点
+• 分解为独立子任务
+• 为每个子任务指定工具和模式
+
+MODE: analysis
+
+CONTEXT: @package.json @src/**/*.ts | Memory: 项目结构
+
+EXPECTED:
+JSON 格式:
+{
+  "tasks": [
+    {
+      "id": "task-001",
+      "description": "任务描述",
+      "tool": "gemini",
+      "mode": "write",
+      "files": ["src/xxx.ts"]
+    }
+  ]
+}
+`
+
+  const result = await Task({
+    subagent_type: 'cli-execution-agent',
+    run_in_background: false,
+    prompt: `Execute Gemini CLI with prompt: ${analysisPrompt}`
+  })
+
+  tasks = JSON.parse(result).tasks
+}
+
+// 找到第一个待处理任务
+const currentTask = tasks.find(t => t.status === 'pending')
+
+if (!currentTask) {
+  return {
+    skillStateUpdates: {
+      develop: { ...state.skill_state.develop, current_task: null }
+    },
+    continue: true,
+    message: '所有开发任务已完成'
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Step 2: 执行开发任务
+
+```javascript
+console.log(`\n执行任务: ${currentTask.description}`)
+
+// 更新任务状态
+currentTask.status = 'in_progress'
+
+// 使用 Gemini 实现
+const implementPrompt = `
+PURPOSE: 实现开发任务
+Task: ${currentTask.description}
+Success criteria: 代码实现完成，测试通过
+
+TASK:
+• 分析现有代码结构
+• 实现功能代码
+• 添加必要的类型定义
+• 确保代码风格一致
+
+MODE: write
+
+CONTEXT: @${currentTask.files?.join(' @') || 'src/**/*.ts'}
+
+EXPECTED:
+- 完整的代码实现
+- 代码变更列表
+- 简要实现说明
+
+CONSTRAINTS: 遵循现有代码风格 | 不破坏现有功能
+`
+
+const implementResult = await Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "${implementPrompt}" --tool gemini --mode write --rule development-implement-feature`,
+  run_in_background: false
+})
+
+// 记录代码变更
+const timestamp = getUtc8ISOString()
+const changeEntry = {
+  timestamp,
+  task_id: currentTask.id,
+  description: currentTask.description,
+  files_changed: currentTask.files || [],
+  result: 'success'
+}
+
+// 追加到 changes.log (NDJSON 格式)
+const changesContent = Read(changesLogPath) || ''
+Write(changesLogPath, changesContent + JSON.stringify(changeEntry) + '\n')
+```
+
+### Step 3: 更新进度文档
+
+```javascript
+const timestamp = getUtc8ISOString()
+const iteration = state.develop.completed_count + 1
+
+// 读取现有进度文档
+let progressContent = Read(progressPath) || ''
+
+// 如果是新文档，添加头部
+if (!progressContent) {
+  progressContent = `# Development Progress
+
+**Session ID**: ${state.session_id}
+**Task**: ${state.task_description}
+**Started**: ${timestamp}
+
+---
+
+## Progress Timeline
+
+`
+}
+
+// 追加本次进度
+const progressEntry = `
+### Iteration ${iteration} - ${currentTask.description} (${timestamp})
+
+#### Task Details
+
+- **ID**: ${currentTask.id}
+- **Tool**: ${currentTask.tool}
+- **Mode**: ${currentTask.mode}
+
+#### Implementation Summary
+
+${implementResult.summary || '实现完成'}
+
+#### Files Changed
+
+${currentTask.files?.map(f => `- \`${f}\``).join('\n') || '- No files specified'}
+
+#### Status: COMPLETED
+
+---
+
+`
+
+Write(progressPath, progressContent + progressEntry)
+
+// 更新任务状态
+currentTask.status = 'completed'
+currentTask.completed_at = timestamp
+```
+
+### Step 4: 更新任务列表文件
+
+```javascript
+// 更新 tasks.json
+const updatedTasks = tasks.map(t =>
+  t.id === currentTask.id ? currentTask : t
+)
+
+Write(tasksPath, JSON.stringify(updatedTasks, null, 2))
+```
+
+## State Updates
+
+```javascript
+return {
+  stateUpdates: {
+    develop: {
+      tasks: updatedTasks,
+      current_task_id: null,
+      completed_count: state.develop.completed_count + 1,
+      total_count: updatedTasks.length,
+      last_progress_at: getUtc8ISOString()
+    },
+    last_action: 'action-develop-with-file'
+  },
+  continue: true,
+  message: `任务完成: ${currentTask.description}\n进度: ${state.develop.completed_count + 1}/${updatedTasks.length}`
+}
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error Type | Recovery |
+|------------|----------|
+| Gemini CLI 失败 | 提示用户手动实现，记录到 progress.md |
+| 文件写入失败 | 重试一次，失败则记录错误 |
+| 任务解析失败 | 询问用户手动输入任务 |
+
+## Progress Document Template
+
+```markdown
+# Development Progress
+
+**Session ID**: LOOP-xxx-2026-01-22
+**Task**: 实现用户认证功能
+**Started**: 2026-01-22T10:00:00+08:00
+
+---
+
+## Progress Timeline
+
+### Iteration 1 - 分析登录组件 (2026-01-22T10:05:00+08:00)
+
+#### Task Details
+
+- **ID**: task-001
+- **Tool**: gemini
+- **Mode**: analysis
+
+#### Implementation Summary
+
+分析了现有登录组件结构，识别了需要修改的文件和依赖关系。
+
+#### Files Changed
+
+- `src/components/Login.tsx`
+- `src/hooks/useAuth.ts`
+
+#### Status: COMPLETED
+
+---
+
+### Iteration 2 - 实现登录 API (2026-01-22T10:15:00+08:00)
+
+...
+
+---
+
+## Current Statistics
+
+| Metric | Value |
+|--------|-------|
+| Total Tasks | 5 |
+| Completed | 2 |
+| In Progress | 1 |
+| Pending | 2 |
+| Progress | 40% |
+
+---
+
+## Next Steps
+
+- [ ] 完成剩余任务
+- [ ] 运行测试
+- [ ] 代码审查
+```
+
+## CLI Integration
+
+### 任务分析
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: 分解开发任务为子任务
+TASK: • 分析任务描述 • 识别功能点 • 生成任务列表
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @package.json @src/**/*
+EXPECTED: JSON 任务列表
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule planning-breakdown-task-steps
+```
+
+### 代码实现
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: 实现功能代码
+TASK: • 分析需求 • 编写代码 • 添加类型
+MODE: write
+CONTEXT: @src/xxx.ts
+EXPECTED: 完整实现
+" --tool gemini --mode write --rule development-implement-feature
+```
+
+## Next Actions (Hints)
+
+- 所有任务完成: `action-debug-with-file` (开始调试)
+- 任务失败: `action-develop-with-file` (重试或下一个任务)
+- 用户选择: `action-menu` (返回菜单)

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/phases/actions/action-init.md

@@ -0,0 +1,200 @@
+# Action: Initialize
+
+初始化 CCW Loop 会话，创建目录结构和初始状态。
+
+## Purpose
+
+- 创建会话目录结构
+- 初始化状态文件
+- 分析任务描述生成初始任务列表
+- 准备执行环境
+
+## Preconditions
+
+- [ ] state.status === 'pending'
+- [ ] state.initialized === false
+
+## Execution
+
+### Step 1: 创建目录结构
+
+```javascript
+const getUtc8ISOString = () => new Date(Date.now() + 8 * 60 * 60 * 1000).toISOString()
+
+const taskSlug = state.task_description.toLowerCase().replace(/[^a-z0-9]+/g, '-').substring(0, 30)
+const dateStr = getUtc8ISOString().substring(0, 10)
+const sessionId = `LOOP-${taskSlug}-${dateStr}`
+const sessionFolder = `.workflow/.loop/${sessionId}`
+
+Bash(`mkdir -p "${sessionFolder}/develop"`)
+Bash(`mkdir -p "${sessionFolder}/debug"`)
+Bash(`mkdir -p "${sessionFolder}/validate"`)
+
+console.log(`Session created: ${sessionId}`)
+console.log(`Location: ${sessionFolder}`)
+```
+
+### Step 2: 创建元数据文件
+
+```javascript
+const meta = {
+  session_id: sessionId,
+  task_description: state.task_description,
+  created_at: getUtc8ISOString(),
+  mode: state.mode || 'interactive'
+}
+
+Write(`${sessionFolder}/meta.json`, JSON.stringify(meta, null, 2))
+```
+
+### Step 3: 分析任务生成开发任务列表
+
+```javascript
+// 使用 Gemini 分析任务描述
+console.log('\n分析任务描述...')
+
+const analysisPrompt = `
+PURPOSE: 分析开发任务并分解为可执行步骤
+Success: 生成 3-7 个具体、可验证的子任务
+
+TASK:
+• 分析任务描述: ${state.task_description}
+• 识别关键功能点
+• 分解为独立子任务
+• 为每个子任务指定工具和模式
+
+MODE: analysis
+
+CONTEXT: @package.json @src/**/*.ts (如存在)
+
+EXPECTED:
+JSON 格式:
+{
+  "tasks": [
+    {
+      "id": "task-001",
+      "description": "任务描述",
+      "tool": "gemini",
+      "mode": "write",
+      "priority": 1
+    }
+  ],
+  "estimated_complexity": "low|medium|high",
+  "key_files": ["file1.ts", "file2.ts"]
+}
+
+CONSTRAINTS: 生成实际可执行的任务
+`
+
+const result = await Bash({
+  command: `ccw cli -p "${analysisPrompt}" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule planning-breakdown-task-steps`,
+  run_in_background: false
+})
+
+const analysis = JSON.parse(result.stdout)
+const tasks = analysis.tasks.map((t, i) => ({
+  ...t,
+  id: t.id || `task-${String(i + 1).padStart(3, '0')}`,
+  status: 'pending',
+  created_at: getUtc8ISOString(),
+  completed_at: null,
+  files_changed: []
+}))
+
+// 保存任务列表
+Write(`${sessionFolder}/develop/tasks.json`, JSON.stringify(tasks, null, 2))
+```
+
+### Step 4: 初始化进度文档
+
+```javascript
+const progressInitial = `# Development Progress
+
+**Session ID**: ${sessionId}
+**Task**: ${state.task_description}
+**Started**: ${getUtc8ISOString()}
+**Estimated Complexity**: ${analysis.estimated_complexity}
+
+---
+
+## Task List
+
+${tasks.map((t, i) => `${i + 1}. [ ] ${t.description}`).join('\n')}
+
+## Key Files
+
+${analysis.key_files?.map(f => `- \`${f}\``).join('\n') || '- To be determined'}
+
+---
+
+## Progress Timeline
+
+`
+
+Write(`${sessionFolder}/develop/progress.md`, progressInitial)
+```
+
+### Step 5: 显示初始化结果
+
+```javascript
+console.log(`\n✅ 会话初始化完成`)
+console.log(`\n任务列表 (${tasks.length} 项):`)
+tasks.forEach((t, i) => {
+  console.log(`  ${i + 1}. ${t.description} [${t.tool}/${t.mode}]`)
+})
+console.log(`\n预估复杂度: ${analysis.estimated_complexity}`)
+console.log(`\n执行 'develop' 开始开发，或 'menu' 查看更多选项`)
+```
+
+## State Updates
+
+```javascript
+return {
+  stateUpdates: {
+    session_id: sessionId,
+    status: 'running',
+    initialized: true,
+    develop: {
+      tasks: tasks,
+      current_task_id: null,
+      completed_count: 0,
+      total_count: tasks.length,
+      last_progress_at: null
+    },
+    debug: {
+      current_bug: null,
+      hypotheses: [],
+      confirmed_hypothesis: null,
+      iteration: 0,
+      last_analysis_at: null,
+      understanding_updated: false
+    },
+    validate: {
+      test_results: [],
+      coverage: null,
+      passed: false,
+      failed_tests: [],
+      last_run_at: null
+    },
+    context: {
+      estimated_complexity: analysis.estimated_complexity,
+      key_files: analysis.key_files
+    }
+  },
+  continue: true,
+  message: `会话 ${sessionId} 已初始化\n${tasks.length} 个开发任务待执行`
+}
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error Type | Recovery |
+|------------|----------|
+| 目录创建失败 | 检查权限，重试 |
+| Gemini 分析失败 | 提示用户手动输入任务 |
+| 任务解析失败 | 使用默认任务列表 |
+
+## Next Actions
+
+- 成功: `action-menu` (显示操作菜单) 或 `action-develop-with-file` (直接开始开发)
+- 失败: 报错退出

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/phases/actions/action-menu.md

@@ -0,0 +1,192 @@
+# Action: Menu
+
+显示交互式操作菜单，让用户选择下一步操作。
+
+## Purpose
+
+- 显示当前状态摘要
+- 提供操作选项
+- 接收用户选择
+- 返回下一个动作
+
+## Preconditions
+
+- [ ] state.initialized === true
+- [ ] state.status === 'running'
+
+## Execution
+
+### Step 1: 生成状态摘要
+
+```javascript
+const getUtc8ISOString = () => new Date(Date.now() + 8 * 60 * 60 * 1000).toISOString()
+
+// 开发进度
+const developProgress = state.develop.total_count > 0
+  ? `${state.develop.completed_count}/${state.develop.total_count} (${(state.develop.completed_count / state.develop.total_count * 100).toFixed(0)}%)`
+  : '未开始'
+
+// 调试状态
+const debugStatus = state.debug.confirmed_hypothesis
+  ? `✅ 已确认根因`
+  : state.debug.iteration > 0
+    ? `🔍 迭代 ${state.debug.iteration}`
+    : '未开始'
+
+// 验证状态
+const validateStatus = state.validate.passed
+  ? `✅ 通过`
+  : state.validate.test_results.length > 0
+    ? `❌ ${state.validate.failed_tests.length} 个失败`
+    : '未运行'
+
+const statusSummary = `
+═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
+  CCW Loop - ${state.session_id}
+═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
+
+  任务: ${state.task_description}
+  迭代: ${state.iteration_count}
+
+  ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+  │  开发 (Develop)  │  ${developProgress.padEnd(20)}      │
+  │  调试 (Debug)    │  ${debugStatus.padEnd(20)}      │
+  │  验证 (Validate) │  ${validateStatus.padEnd(20)}      │
+  └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+
+═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
+`
+
+console.log(statusSummary)
+```
+
+### Step 2: 显示操作选项
+
+```javascript
+const options = [
+  {
+    label: "📝 继续开发 (Develop)",
+    description: state.develop.completed_count < state.develop.total_count
+      ? `执行下一个开发任务`
+      : "所有任务已完成，可添加新任务",
+    action: "action-develop-with-file"
+  },
+  {
+    label: "🔍 开始调试 (Debug)",
+    description: state.debug.iteration > 0
+      ? "继续假设驱动调试"
+      : "开始新的调试会话",
+    action: "action-debug-with-file"
+  },
+  {
+    label: "✅ 运行验证 (Validate)",
+    description: "运行测试并检查覆盖率",
+    action: "action-validate-with-file"
+  },
+  {
+    label: "📊 查看详情 (Status)",
+    description: "查看详细进度和文件",
+    action: "action-status"
+  },
+  {
+    label: "🏁 完成循环 (Complete)",
+    description: "结束当前循环",
+    action: "action-complete"
+  },
+  {
+    label: "🚪 退出 (Exit)",
+    description: "保存状态并退出",
+    action: "exit"
+  }
+]
+
+const response = await AskUserQuestion({
+  questions: [{
+    question: "选择下一步操作：",
+    header: "操作",
+    multiSelect: false,
+    options: options.map(o => ({
+      label: o.label,
+      description: o.description
+    }))
+  }]
+})
+
+const selectedLabel = response["操作"]
+const selectedOption = options.find(o => o.label === selectedLabel)
+const nextAction = selectedOption?.action || 'action-menu'
+```
+
+### Step 3: 处理特殊选项
+
+```javascript
+if (nextAction === 'exit') {
+  console.log('\n保存状态并退出...')
+  return {
+    stateUpdates: {
+      status: 'user_exit'
+    },
+    continue: false,
+    message: '会话已保存，使用 --resume 可继续'
+  }
+}
+
+if (nextAction === 'action-status') {
+  // 显示详细状态
+  const sessionFolder = `.workflow/.loop/${state.session_id}`
+
+  console.log('\n=== 开发进度 ===')
+  const progress = Read(`${sessionFolder}/develop/progress.md`)
+  console.log(progress?.substring(0, 500) + '...')
+
+  console.log('\n=== 调试状态 ===')
+  if (state.debug.hypotheses.length > 0) {
+    state.debug.hypotheses.forEach(h => {
+      console.log(`  ${h.id}: ${h.status} - ${h.description.substring(0, 50)}...`)
+    })
+  } else {
+    console.log('  尚未开始调试')
+  }
+
+  console.log('\n=== 验证结果 ===')
+  if (state.validate.test_results.length > 0) {
+    const latest = state.validate.test_results[state.validate.test_results.length - 1]
+    console.log(`  最近运行: ${latest.timestamp}`)
+    console.log(`  通过率: ${latest.summary.pass_rate}%`)
+  } else {
+    console.log('  尚未运行验证')
+  }
+
+  // 返回菜单
+  return {
+    stateUpdates: {},
+    continue: true,
+    nextAction: 'action-menu',
+    message: ''
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## State Updates
+
+```javascript
+return {
+  stateUpdates: {
+    // 不更新状态，仅返回下一个动作
+  },
+  continue: true,
+  nextAction: nextAction,
+  message: `执行: ${selectedOption?.label || nextAction}`
+}
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error Type | Recovery |
+|------------|----------|
+| 用户取消 | 返回菜单 |
+| 无效选择 | 重新显示菜单 |
+
+## Next Actions
+
+根据用户选择动态决定下一个动作。

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/phases/actions/action-validate-with-file.md

@@ -0,0 +1,307 @@
+# Action: Validate With File
+
+运行测试并验证实现，记录结果到 validation.md，支持 Gemini 辅助分析测试覆盖率和质量。
+
+## Purpose
+
+执行测试验证流程，包括:
+- 运行单元测试
+- 运行集成测试
+- 检查代码覆盖率
+- 生成验证报告
+- 分析失败原因
+
+## Preconditions
+
+- [ ] state.initialized === true
+- [ ] state.status === 'running'
+- [ ] state.develop.completed_count > 0 || state.debug.confirmed_hypothesis !== null
+
+## Session Setup
+
+```javascript
+const getUtc8ISOString = () => new Date(Date.now() + 8 * 60 * 60 * 1000).toISOString()
+
+const sessionFolder = `.workflow/.loop/${state.session_id}`
+const validateFolder = `${sessionFolder}/validate`
+const validationPath = `${validateFolder}/validation.md`
+const testResultsPath = `${validateFolder}/test-results.json`
+const coveragePath = `${validateFolder}/coverage.json`
+```
+
+---
+
+## Execution
+
+### Step 1: 运行测试
+
+```javascript
+console.log('\n运行测试...')
+
+// 检测测试框架
+const packageJson = JSON.parse(Read('package.json'))
+const testScript = packageJson.scripts?.test || 'npm test'
+
+// 运行测试并捕获输出
+const testResult = await Bash({
+  command: testScript,
+  timeout: 300000  // 5分钟
+})
+
+// 解析测试输出
+const testResults = parseTestOutput(testResult.stdout)
+```
+
+### Step 2: 检查覆盖率
+
+```javascript
+// 运行覆盖率检查
+let coverageData = null
+
+if (packageJson.scripts?.['test:coverage']) {
+  const coverageResult = await Bash({
+    command: 'npm run test:coverage',
+    timeout: 300000
+  })
+
+  // 解析覆盖率报告
+  coverageData = parseCoverageReport(coverageResult.stdout)
+
+  Write(coveragePath, JSON.stringify(coverageData, null, 2))
+}
+```
+
+### Step 3: Gemini 辅助分析
+
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "
+PURPOSE: Analyze test results and coverage
+Success criteria: Identify quality issues and suggest improvements
+
+TASK:
+• Analyze test execution results
+• Review code coverage metrics
+• Identify missing test cases
+• Suggest quality improvements
+• Verify requirements coverage
+
+MODE: analysis
+
+CONTEXT:
+@${testResultsPath}
+@${coveragePath}
+@${sessionFolder}/develop/progress.md
+
+EXPECTED:
+- Quality assessment report
+- Failed tests analysis
+- Coverage gaps identification
+- Improvement recommendations
+- Pass/Fail decision with rationale
+
+CONSTRAINTS: Evidence-based quality assessment
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-review-code-quality
+```
+
+### Step 4: 生成验证报告
+
+```javascript
+const timestamp = getUtc8ISOString()
+const iteration = (state.validate.test_results?.length || 0) + 1
+
+const validationReport = `# Validation Report
+
+**Session ID**: ${state.session_id}
+**Task**: ${state.task_description}
+**Validated**: ${timestamp}
+
+---
+
+## Iteration ${iteration} - Validation Run
+
+### Test Execution Summary
+
+| Metric | Value |
+|--------|-------|
+| Total Tests | ${testResults.total} |
+| Passed | ${testResults.passed} |
+| Failed | ${testResults.failed} |
+| Skipped | ${testResults.skipped} |
+| Duration | ${testResults.duration_ms}ms |
+| **Pass Rate** | **${(testResults.passed / testResults.total * 100).toFixed(1)}%** |
+
+### Coverage Report
+
+${coverageData ? `
+| File | Statements | Branches | Functions | Lines |
+|------|------------|----------|-----------|-------|
+${coverageData.files.map(f => `| ${f.path} | ${f.statements}% | ${f.branches}% | ${f.functions}% | ${f.lines}% |`).join('\n')}
+
+**Overall Coverage**: ${coverageData.overall.statements}%
+` : '_No coverage data available_'}
+
+### Failed Tests
+
+${testResults.failed > 0 ? `
+${testResults.failures.map(f => `
+#### ${f.test_name}
+
+- **Suite**: ${f.suite}
+- **Error**: ${f.error_message}
+- **Stack**:
+\`\`\`
+${f.stack_trace}
+\`\`\`
+`).join('\n')}
+` : '_All tests passed_'}
+
+### Gemini Quality Analysis
+
+${geminiAnalysis}
+
+### Recommendations
+
+${recommendations.map(r => `- ${r}`).join('\n')}
+
+---
+
+## Validation Decision
+
+**Result**: ${testResults.passed === testResults.total ? '✅ PASS' : '❌ FAIL'}
+
+**Rationale**: ${validationDecision}
+
+${testResults.passed !== testResults.total ? `
+### Next Actions
+
+1. Review failed tests
+2. Debug failures using action-debug-with-file
+3. Fix issues and re-run validation
+` : `
+### Next Actions
+
+1. Consider code review
+2. Prepare for deployment
+3. Update documentation
+`}
+`
+
+// 写入验证报告
+Write(validationPath, validationReport)
+```
+
+### Step 5: 保存测试结果
+
+```javascript
+const testResultsData = {
+  iteration,
+  timestamp,
+  summary: {
+    total: testResults.total,
+    passed: testResults.passed,
+    failed: testResults.failed,
+    skipped: testResults.skipped,
+    pass_rate: (testResults.passed / testResults.total * 100).toFixed(1),
+    duration_ms: testResults.duration_ms
+  },
+  tests: testResults.tests,
+  failures: testResults.failures,
+  coverage: coverageData?.overall || null
+}
+
+Write(testResultsPath, JSON.stringify(testResultsData, null, 2))
+```
+
+---
+
+## State Updates
+
+```javascript
+const validationPassed = testResults.failed === 0 && testResults.passed > 0
+
+return {
+  stateUpdates: {
+    validate: {
+      test_results: [...(state.validate.test_results || []), testResultsData],
+      coverage: coverageData?.overall.statements || null,
+      passed: validationPassed,
+      failed_tests: testResults.failures.map(f => f.test_name),
+      last_run_at: getUtc8ISOString()
+    },
+    last_action: 'action-validate-with-file'
+  },
+  continue: true,
+  message: validationPassed
+    ? `验证通过 ✅\n测试: ${testResults.passed}/${testResults.total}\n覆盖率: ${coverageData?.overall.statements || 'N/A'}%`
+    : `验证失败 ❌\n失败: ${testResults.failed}/${testResults.total}\n建议进入调试模式`
+}
+```
+
+## Test Output Parsers
+
+### Jest/Vitest Parser
+
+```javascript
+function parseJestOutput(stdout) {
+  const testPattern = /Tests:\s+(\d+) passed.*?(\d+) failed.*?(\d+) total/
+  const match = stdout.match(testPattern)
+
+  return {
+    total: parseInt(match[3]),
+    passed: parseInt(match[1]),
+    failed: parseInt(match[2]),
+    // ... parse individual test results
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### Pytest Parser
+
+```javascript
+function parsePytestOutput(stdout) {
+  const summaryPattern = /(\d+) passed.*?(\d+) failed.*?(\d+) error/
+  // ... implementation
+}
+```
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error Type | Recovery |
+|------------|----------|
+| Tests don't run | 检查测试脚本配置，提示用户 |
+| All tests fail | 建议进入 debug 模式 |
+| Coverage tool missing | 跳过覆盖率检查，仅运行测试 |
+| Timeout | 增加超时时间或拆分测试 |
+
+## Validation Report Template
+
+参考 [templates/validation-template.md](../../templates/validation-template.md)
+
+## CLI Integration
+
+### 质量分析
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Analyze test results and coverage...
+TASK: • Review results • Identify gaps • Suggest improvements
+MODE: analysis
+CONTEXT: @test-results.json @coverage.json
+EXPECTED: Quality assessment
+" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-review-code-quality
+```
+
+### 测试生成 (如覆盖率低)
+```bash
+ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Generate missing test cases...
+TASK: • Analyze uncovered code • Write tests
+MODE: write
+CONTEXT: @coverage.json @src/**/*
+EXPECTED: Test code
+" --tool gemini --mode write --rule development-generate-tests
+```
+
+## Next Actions (Hints)
+
+- 验证通过: `action-complete` (完成循环)
+- 验证失败: `action-debug-with-file` (调试失败测试)
+- 覆盖率低: `action-develop-with-file` (添加测试)
+- 用户选择: `action-menu` (返回菜单)

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/phases/orchestrator.md

@@ -0,0 +1,486 @@
+# Orchestrator
+
+根据当前状态选择并执行下一个动作，实现无状态循环工作流。与 API (loop-v2-routes.ts) 协作实现控制平面/执行平面分离。
+
+## Role
+
+检查控制信号 → 读取文件状态 → 选择动作 → 执行 → 更新文件 → 循环，直到完成或被外部暂停/停止。
+
+## State Management (Unified Location)
+
+### 读取状态
+
+```javascript
+const getUtc8ISOString = () => new Date(Date.now() + 8 * 60 * 60 * 1000).toISOString()
+
+/**
+ * 读取循环状态 (统一位置)
+ * @param loopId - Loop ID (e.g., "loop-v2-20260122-abc123")
+ */
+function readLoopState(loopId) {
+  const stateFile = `.loop/${loopId}.json`
+
+  if (!fs.existsSync(stateFile)) {
+    return null
+  }
+
+  const state = JSON.parse(Read(stateFile))
+  return state
+}
+```
+
+### 更新状态
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * 更新循环状态 (只更新 skill_state 部分，不修改 API 字段)
+ * @param loopId - Loop ID
+ * @param updates - 更新内容 (skill_state 字段)
+ */
+function updateLoopState(loopId, updates) {
+  const stateFile = `.loop/${loopId}.json`
+  const currentState = readLoopState(loopId)
+
+  if (!currentState) {
+    throw new Error(`Loop state not found: ${loopId}`)
+  }
+
+  // 只更新 skill_state 和 updated_at
+  const newState = {
+    ...currentState,
+    updated_at: getUtc8ISOString(),
+    skill_state: {
+      ...currentState.skill_state,
+      ...updates
+    }
+  }
+
+  Write(stateFile, JSON.stringify(newState, null, 2))
+  return newState
+}
+```
+
+### 创建新循环状态 (直接调用时)
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * 创建新的循环状态 (仅在直接调用时使用，API 触发时状态已存在)
+ */
+function createLoopState(loopId, taskDescription) {
+  const stateFile = `.loop/${loopId}.json`
+  const now = getUtc8ISOString()
+
+  const state = {
+    // API 兼容字段
+    loop_id: loopId,
+    title: taskDescription.substring(0, 100),
+    description: taskDescription,
+    max_iterations: 10,
+    status: 'running',  // 直接调用时设为 running
+    current_iteration: 0,
+    created_at: now,
+    updated_at: now,
+
+    // Skill 扩展字段
+    skill_state: null  // 由 action-init 初始化
+  }
+
+  // 确保目录存在
+  Bash(`mkdir -p ".loop"`)
+  Bash(`mkdir -p ".loop/${loopId}.progress"`)
+
+  Write(stateFile, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2))
+  return state
+}
+```
+
+## Control Signal Checking
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * 检查 API 控制信号
+ * 必须在每个 Action 开始前调用
+ * @returns { continue: boolean, reason: string }
+ */
+function checkControlSignals(loopId) {
+  const state = readLoopState(loopId)
+
+  if (!state) {
+    return { continue: false, reason: 'state_not_found' }
+  }
+
+  switch (state.status) {
+    case 'paused':
+      // API 暂停了循环，Skill 应退出等待 resume
+      console.log(`⏸️ Loop paused by API. Waiting for resume...`)
+      return { continue: false, reason: 'paused' }
+
+    case 'failed':
+      // API 停止了循环 (用户手动停止)
+      console.log(`⏹️ Loop stopped by API.`)
+      return { continue: false, reason: 'stopped' }
+
+    case 'completed':
+      // 已完成
+      console.log(`✅ Loop already completed.`)
+      return { continue: false, reason: 'completed' }
+
+    case 'created':
+      // API 创建但未启动 (不应该走到这里)
+      console.log(`⚠️ Loop not started by API.`)
+      return { continue: false, reason: 'not_started' }
+
+    case 'running':
+      // 正常继续
+      return { continue: true, reason: 'running' }
+
+    default:
+      console.log(`⚠️ Unknown status: ${state.status}`)
+      return { continue: false, reason: 'unknown_status' }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## Decision Logic
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * 选择下一个 Action (基于 skill_state)
+ */
+function selectNextAction(state, mode = 'interactive') {
+  const skillState = state.skill_state
+
+  // 1. 终止条件检查 (API status)
+  if (state.status === 'completed') return null
+  if (state.status === 'failed') return null
+  if (state.current_iteration >= state.max_iterations) {
+    console.warn(`已达到最大迭代次数 (${state.max_iterations})`)
+    return 'action-complete'
+  }
+
+  // 2. 初始化检查
+  if (!skillState || !skillState.current_action) {
+    return 'action-init'
+  }
+
+  // 3. 模式判断
+  if (mode === 'interactive') {
+    return 'action-menu'  // 显示菜单让用户选择
+  }
+
+  // 4. 自动模式：基于状态自动选择
+  if (mode === 'auto') {
+    // 按优先级：develop → debug → validate
+
+    // 如果有待开发任务
+    const hasPendingDevelop = skillState.develop?.tasks?.some(t => t.status === 'pending')
+    if (hasPendingDevelop) {
+      return 'action-develop-with-file'
+    }
+
+    // 如果开发完成但未调试
+    if (skillState.last_action === 'action-develop-with-file') {
+      const needsDebug = skillState.develop?.completed < skillState.develop?.total
+      if (needsDebug) {
+        return 'action-debug-with-file'
+      }
+    }
+
+    // 如果调试完成但未验证
+    if (skillState.last_action === 'action-debug-with-file' ||
+        skillState.debug?.confirmed_hypothesis) {
+      return 'action-validate-with-file'
+    }
+
+    // 如果验证失败，回到开发
+    if (skillState.last_action === 'action-validate-with-file') {
+      if (!skillState.validate?.passed) {
+        return 'action-develop-with-file'
+      }
+    }
+
+    // 全部通过，完成
+    if (skillState.validate?.passed && !hasPendingDevelop) {
+      return 'action-complete'
+    }
+
+    // 默认：开发
+    return 'action-develop-with-file'
+  }
+
+  // 5. 默认完成
+  return 'action-complete'
+}
+```
+
+## Execution Loop
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * 运行编排器
+ * @param options.loopId - 现有 Loop ID (API 触发时)
+ * @param options.task - 任务描述 (直接调用时)
+ * @param options.mode - 'interactive' | 'auto'
+ */
+async function runOrchestrator(options = {}) {
+  const { loopId: existingLoopId, task, mode = 'interactive' } = options
+
+  console.log('=== CCW Loop Orchestrator Started ===')
+
+  // 1. 确定 loopId
+  let loopId
+  let state
+
+  if (existingLoopId) {
+    // API 触发：使用现有 loopId
+    loopId = existingLoopId
+    state = readLoopState(loopId)
+
+    if (!state) {
+      console.error(`Loop not found: ${loopId}`)
+      return { status: 'error', message: 'Loop not found' }
+    }
+
+    console.log(`Resuming loop: ${loopId}`)
+    console.log(`Status: ${state.status}`)
+
+  } else if (task) {
+    // 直接调用：创建新 loopId
+    const timestamp = getUtc8ISOString().replace(/[-:]/g, '').split('.')[0]
+    const random = Math.random().toString(36).substring(2, 10)
+    loopId = `loop-v2-${timestamp}-${random}`
+
+    console.log(`Creating new loop: ${loopId}`)
+    console.log(`Task: ${task}`)
+
+    state = createLoopState(loopId, task)
+
+  } else {
+    console.error('Either --loop-id or task description is required')
+    return { status: 'error', message: 'Missing loopId or task' }
+  }
+
+  const progressDir = `.loop/${loopId}.progress`
+
+  // 2. 主循环
+  let iteration = state.current_iteration || 0
+
+  while (iteration < state.max_iterations) {
+    iteration++
+
+    // ========================================
+    // CRITICAL: Check control signals first
+    // ========================================
+    const control = checkControlSignals(loopId)
+    if (!control.continue) {
+      console.log(`\n🛑 Loop terminated: ${control.reason}`)
+      break
+    }
+
+    // 重新读取状态 (可能被 API 更新)
+    state = readLoopState(loopId)
+
+    console.log(`\n[Iteration ${iteration}] Status: ${state.status}`)
+
+    // 选择下一个动作
+    const actionId = selectNextAction(state, mode)
+
+    if (!actionId) {
+      console.log('No action selected, terminating.')
+      break
+    }
+
+    console.log(`[Iteration ${iteration}] Executing: ${actionId}`)
+
+    // 更新 current_iteration
+    state = {
+      ...state,
+      current_iteration: iteration,
+      updated_at: getUtc8ISOString()
+    }
+    Write(`.loop/${loopId}.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2))
+
+    // 执行动作
+    try {
+      const actionPromptFile = `.claude/skills/ccw-loop/phases/actions/${actionId}.md`
+
+      if (!fs.existsSync(actionPromptFile)) {
+        console.error(`Action file not found: ${actionPromptFile}`)
+        continue
+      }
+
+      const actionPrompt = Read(actionPromptFile)
+
+      // 构建 Agent 提示
+      const agentPrompt = `
+[LOOP CONTEXT]
+Loop ID: ${loopId}
+State File: .loop/${loopId}.json
+Progress Dir: ${progressDir}
+
+[CURRENT STATE]
+${JSON.stringify(state, null, 2)}
+
+[ACTION INSTRUCTIONS]
+${actionPrompt}
+
+[TASK]
+You are executing ${actionId} for loop: ${state.title || state.description}
+
+[CONTROL SIGNALS]
+Before executing, check if status is still 'running'.
+If status is 'paused' or 'failed', exit gracefully.
+
+[RETURN]
+Return JSON with:
+- skillStateUpdates: Object with skill_state fields to update
+- continue: Boolean indicating if loop should continue
+- message: String with user message
+`
+
+      const result = await Task({
+        subagent_type: 'universal-executor',
+        run_in_background: false,
+        description: `Execute ${actionId}`,
+        prompt: agentPrompt
+      })
+
+      // 解析结果
+      const actionResult = JSON.parse(result)
+
+      // 更新状态 (只更新 skill_state)
+      updateLoopState(loopId, {
+        current_action: null,
+        last_action: actionId,
+        completed_actions: [
+          ...(state.skill_state?.completed_actions || []),
+          actionId
+        ],
+        ...actionResult.skillStateUpdates
+      })
+
+      // 显示消息
+      if (actionResult.message) {
+        console.log(`\n${actionResult.message}`)
+      }
+
+      // 检查是否继续
+      if (actionResult.continue === false) {
+        console.log('Action requested termination.')
+        break
+      }
+
+    } catch (error) {
+      console.error(`Error executing ${actionId}: ${error.message}`)
+
+      // 错误处理
+      updateLoopState(loopId, {
+        current_action: null,
+        errors: [
+          ...(state.skill_state?.errors || []),
+          {
+            action: actionId,
+            message: error.message,
+            timestamp: getUtc8ISOString()
+          }
+        ]
+      })
+    }
+  }
+
+  if (iteration >= state.max_iterations) {
+    console.log(`\n⚠️ Reached maximum iterations (${state.max_iterations})`)
+    console.log('Consider breaking down the task or taking a break.')
+  }
+
+  console.log('\n=== CCW Loop Orchestrator Finished ===')
+
+  // 返回最终状态
+  const finalState = readLoopState(loopId)
+  return {
+    status: finalState.status,
+    loop_id: loopId,
+    iterations: iteration,
+    final_state: finalState
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## Action Catalog
+
+| Action | Purpose | Preconditions | Effects |
+|--------|---------|---------------|---------|
+| [action-init](actions/action-init.md) | 初始化会话 | status=pending | initialized=true |
+| [action-menu](actions/action-menu.md) | 显示操作菜单 | initialized=true | 用户选择下一动作 |
+| [action-develop-with-file](actions/action-develop-with-file.md) | 开发任务 | initialized=true | 更新 progress.md |
+| [action-debug-with-file](actions/action-debug-with-file.md) | 假设调试 | initialized=true | 更新 understanding.md |
+| [action-validate-with-file](actions/action-validate-with-file.md) | 测试验证 | initialized=true | 更新 validation.md |
+| [action-complete](actions/action-complete.md) | 完成循环 | validation_passed=true | status=completed |
+
+## Termination Conditions
+
+1. **API 暂停**: `state.status === 'paused'` (Skill 退出，等待 resume)
+2. **API 停止**: `state.status === 'failed'` (Skill 终止)
+3. **任务完成**: `state.status === 'completed'`
+4. **迭代限制**: `state.current_iteration >= state.max_iterations`
+5. **Action 请求终止**: `actionResult.continue === false`
+
+## Error Recovery
+
+| Error Type | Recovery Strategy |
+|------------|-------------------|
+| 动作执行失败 | 记录错误，增加 error_count，继续下一动作 |
+| 状态文件损坏 | 从其他文件重建状态 (progress.md, understanding.md 等) |
+| 用户中止 | 保存当前状态，允许 --resume 恢复 |
+| CLI 工具失败 | 回退到手动分析模式 |
+
+## Mode Strategies
+
+### Interactive Mode (默认)
+
+每次显示菜单，让用户选择动作：
+
+```
+当前状态: 开发中
+可用操作:
+  1. 继续开发 (develop)
+  2. 开始调试 (debug)
+  3. 运行验证 (validate)
+  4. 查看进度 (status)
+  5. 退出 (exit)
+
+请选择:
+```
+
+### Auto Mode (自动循环)
+
+按预设流程自动执行：
+
+```
+Develop → Debug → Validate →
+  ↓ (如验证失败)
+Develop (修复) → Debug → Validate → 完成
+```
+
+## State Machine (API Status)
+
+```mermaid
+stateDiagram-v2
+    [*] --> created: API creates loop
+    created --> running: API /start → Trigger Skill
+    running --> paused: API /pause → Set status
+    running --> completed: action-complete
+    running --> failed: API /stop OR error
+    paused --> running: API /resume → Re-trigger Skill
+    completed --> [*]
+    failed --> [*]
+
+    note right of paused
+      Skill checks status before each action
+      If paused, Skill exits gracefully
+    end note
+
+    note right of running
+      Skill executes: init → develop → debug → validate
+    end note
+```

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/phases/state-schema.md

@@ -0,0 +1,474 @@
+# State Schema
+
+CCW Loop 的状态结构定义（统一版本）。
+
+## 状态文件
+
+**位置**: `.loop/{loopId}.json` (统一位置，API + Skill 共享)
+
+**旧版本位置** (仅向后兼容): `.workflow/.loop/{session-id}/state.json`
+
+## 结构定义
+
+### 统一状态接口 (Unified Loop State)
+
+```typescript
+/**
+ * Unified Loop State - API 和 Skill 共享的状态结构
+ * API (loop-v2-routes.ts) 拥有状态的主控权
+ * Skill (ccw-loop) 读取和更新此状态
+ */
+interface LoopState {
+  // =====================================================
+  // API FIELDS (from loop-v2-routes.ts)
+  // 这些字段由 API 管理，Skill 只读
+  // =====================================================
+
+  loop_id: string                // Loop ID, e.g., "loop-v2-20260122-abc123"
+  title: string                  // Loop 标题
+  description: string            // Loop 描述
+  max_iterations: number         // 最大迭代次数
+  status: 'created' | 'running' | 'paused' | 'completed' | 'failed'
+  current_iteration: number      // 当前迭代次数
+  created_at: string             // 创建时间 (ISO8601)
+  updated_at: string             // 最后更新时间 (ISO8601)
+  completed_at?: string          // 完成时间 (ISO8601)
+  failure_reason?: string        // 失败原因
+
+  // =====================================================
+  // SKILL EXTENSION FIELDS
+  // 这些字段由 Skill 管理，API 只读
+  // =====================================================
+
+  skill_state?: {
+    // 当前执行动作
+    current_action: 'init' | 'develop' | 'debug' | 'validate' | 'complete' | null
+    last_action: string | null
+    completed_actions: string[]
+    mode: 'interactive' | 'auto'
+
+    // === 开发阶段 ===
+    develop: {
+      total: number
+      completed: number
+      current_task?: string
+      tasks: DevelopTask[]
+      last_progress_at: string | null
+    }
+
+    // === 调试阶段 ===
+    debug: {
+      active_bug?: string
+      hypotheses_count: number
+      hypotheses: Hypothesis[]
+      confirmed_hypothesis: string | null
+      iteration: number
+      last_analysis_at: string | null
+    }
+
+    // === 验证阶段 ===
+    validate: {
+      pass_rate: number           // 测试通过率 (0-100)
+      coverage: number            // 覆盖率 (0-100)
+      test_results: TestResult[]
+      passed: boolean
+      failed_tests: string[]
+      last_run_at: string | null
+    }
+
+    // === 错误追踪 ===
+    errors: Array<{
+      action: string
+      message: string
+      timestamp: string
+    }>
+  }
+}
+
+interface DevelopTask {
+  id: string
+  description: string
+  tool: 'gemini' | 'qwen' | 'codex' | 'bash'
+  mode: 'analysis' | 'write'
+  status: 'pending' | 'in_progress' | 'completed' | 'failed'
+  files_changed: string[]
+  created_at: string
+  completed_at: string | null
+}
+
+interface Hypothesis {
+  id: string                    // H1, H2, ...
+  description: string
+  testable_condition: string
+  logging_point: string
+  evidence_criteria: {
+    confirm: string
+    reject: string
+  }
+  likelihood: number            // 1 = 最可能
+  status: 'pending' | 'confirmed' | 'rejected' | 'inconclusive'
+  evidence: Record<string, any> | null
+  verdict_reason: string | null
+}
+
+interface TestResult {
+  test_name: string
+  suite: string
+  status: 'passed' | 'failed' | 'skipped'
+  duration_ms: number
+  error_message: string | null
+  stack_trace: string | null
+}
+```
+
+## 初始状态
+
+### 由 API 创建时 (Dashboard 触发)
+
+```json
+{
+  "loop_id": "loop-v2-20260122-abc123",
+  "title": "Implement user authentication",
+  "description": "Add login/logout functionality",
+  "max_iterations": 10,
+  "status": "created",
+  "current_iteration": 0,
+  "created_at": "2026-01-22T10:00:00+08:00",
+  "updated_at": "2026-01-22T10:00:00+08:00"
+}
+```
+
+### 由 Skill 初始化后 (action-init)
+
+```json
+{
+  "loop_id": "loop-v2-20260122-abc123",
+  "title": "Implement user authentication",
+  "description": "Add login/logout functionality",
+  "max_iterations": 10,
+  "status": "running",
+  "current_iteration": 0,
+  "created_at": "2026-01-22T10:00:00+08:00",
+  "updated_at": "2026-01-22T10:00:05+08:00",
+
+  "skill_state": {
+    "current_action": "init",
+    "last_action": null,
+    "completed_actions": [],
+    "mode": "auto",
+
+    "develop": {
+      "total": 3,
+      "completed": 0,
+      "current_task": null,
+      "tasks": [
+        { "id": "task-001", "description": "Create auth component", "status": "pending" }
+      ],
+      "last_progress_at": null
+    },
+
+    "debug": {
+      "active_bug": null,
+      "hypotheses_count": 0,
+      "hypotheses": [],
+      "confirmed_hypothesis": null,
+      "iteration": 0,
+      "last_analysis_at": null
+    },
+
+    "validate": {
+      "pass_rate": 0,
+      "coverage": 0,
+      "test_results": [],
+      "passed": false,
+      "failed_tests": [],
+      "last_run_at": null
+    },
+
+    "errors": []
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## 控制信号检查 (Control Signals)
+
+Skill 在每个 Action 开始前必须检查控制信号：
+
+```javascript
+/**
+ * 检查 API 控制信号
+ * @returns { continue: boolean, action: 'pause_exit' | 'stop_exit' | 'continue' }
+ */
+function checkControlSignals(loopId) {
+  const state = JSON.parse(Read(`.loop/${loopId}.json`))
+
+  switch (state.status) {
+    case 'paused':
+      // API 暂停了循环，Skill 应退出等待 resume
+      return { continue: false, action: 'pause_exit' }
+
+    case 'failed':
+      // API 停止了循环 (用户手动停止)
+      return { continue: false, action: 'stop_exit' }
+
+    case 'running':
+      // 正常继续
+      return { continue: true, action: 'continue' }
+
+    default:
+      // 异常状态
+      return { continue: false, action: 'stop_exit' }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### 在 Action 中使用
+
+```markdown
+## Execution
+
+### Step 1: Check Control Signals
+
+\`\`\`javascript
+const control = checkControlSignals(loopId)
+if (!control.continue) {
+  // 输出退出原因
+  console.log(`Loop ${control.action}: status = ${state.status}`)
+
+  // 如果是 pause_exit，保存当前进度
+  if (control.action === 'pause_exit') {
+    updateSkillState(loopId, { current_action: 'paused' })
+  }
+
+  return  // 退出 Action
+}
+\`\`\`
+
+### Step 2: Execute Action Logic
+...
+```
+
+## 状态转换规则
+
+### 1. 初始化 (action-init)
+
+```javascript
+// Skill 初始化后
+{
+  // API 字段更新
+  status: 'created' → 'running',  // 或保持 'running' 如果 API 已设置
+  updated_at: timestamp,
+
+  // Skill 字段初始化
+  skill_state: {
+    current_action: 'init',
+    mode: 'auto',
+    develop: {
+      tasks: [...parsed_tasks],
+      total: N,
+      completed: 0
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### 2. 开发进行中 (action-develop-with-file)
+
+```javascript
+// 开发任务执行后
+{
+  updated_at: timestamp,
+  current_iteration: state.current_iteration + 1,
+
+  skill_state: {
+    current_action: 'develop',
+    last_action: 'action-develop-with-file',
+    completed_actions: [...state.skill_state.completed_actions, 'action-develop-with-file'],
+    develop: {
+      current_task: 'task-xxx',
+      completed: N+1,
+      last_progress_at: timestamp
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### 3. 调试进行中 (action-debug-with-file)
+
+```javascript
+// 调试执行后
+{
+  updated_at: timestamp,
+  current_iteration: state.current_iteration + 1,
+
+  skill_state: {
+    current_action: 'debug',
+    last_action: 'action-debug-with-file',
+    debug: {
+      active_bug: '...',
+      hypotheses_count: N,
+      hypotheses: [...new_hypotheses],
+      iteration: N+1,
+      last_analysis_at: timestamp
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### 4. 验证完成 (action-validate-with-file)
+
+```javascript
+// 验证执行后
+{
+  updated_at: timestamp,
+  current_iteration: state.current_iteration + 1,
+
+  skill_state: {
+    current_action: 'validate',
+    last_action: 'action-validate-with-file',
+    validate: {
+      test_results: [...results],
+      pass_rate: 95.5,
+      coverage: 85.0,
+      passed: true | false,
+      failed_tests: ['test1', 'test2'],
+      last_run_at: timestamp
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+### 5. 完成 (action-complete)
+
+```javascript
+// 循环完成后
+{
+  status: 'running' → 'completed',
+  completed_at: timestamp,
+  updated_at: timestamp,
+
+  skill_state: {
+    current_action: 'complete',
+    last_action: 'action-complete'
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## 状态派生字段
+
+以下字段可从状态计算得出，不需要存储：
+
+```javascript
+// 开发完成度
+const developProgress = state.develop.total_count > 0
+  ? (state.develop.completed_count / state.develop.total_count) * 100
+  : 0
+
+// 是否有待开发任务
+const hasPendingDevelop = state.develop.tasks.some(t => t.status === 'pending')
+
+// 调试是否完成
+const debugCompleted = state.debug.confirmed_hypothesis !== null
+
+// 验证是否通过
+const validationPassed = state.validate.passed && state.validate.test_results.length > 0
+
+// 整体进度
+const overallProgress = (
+  (developProgress * 0.5) +
+  (debugCompleted ? 25 : 0) +
+  (validationPassed ? 25 : 0)
+)
+```
+
+## 文件同步
+
+### 统一位置 (Unified Location)
+
+状态与文件的对应关系：
+
+| 状态字段 | 同步文件 | 同步时机 |
+|----------|----------|----------|
+| 整个 LoopState | `.loop/{loopId}.json` | 每次状态变更 (主文件) |
+| `skill_state.develop` | `.loop/{loopId}.progress/develop.md` | 每次开发操作后 |
+| `skill_state.debug` | `.loop/{loopId}.progress/debug.md` | 每次调试操作后 |
+| `skill_state.validate` | `.loop/{loopId}.progress/validate.md` | 每次验证操作后 |
+| 代码变更日志 | `.loop/{loopId}.progress/changes.log` | 每次文件修改 (NDJSON) |
+| 调试日志 | `.loop/{loopId}.progress/debug.log` | 每次调试日志 (NDJSON) |
+
+### 文件结构示例
+
+```
+.loop/
+├── loop-v2-20260122-abc123.json         # 主状态文件 (API + Skill)
+├── loop-v2-20260122-abc123.tasks.jsonl  # 任务列表 (API 管理)
+└── loop-v2-20260122-abc123.progress/    # Skill 进度文件
+    ├── develop.md                       # 开发进度
+    ├── debug.md                         # 调试理解
+    ├── validate.md                      # 验证报告
+    ├── changes.log                      # 代码变更 (NDJSON)
+    └── debug.log                        # 调试日志 (NDJSON)
+```
+
+## 状态恢复
+
+如果主状态文件 `.loop/{loopId}.json` 损坏，可以从进度文件重建 skill_state:
+
+```javascript
+function rebuildSkillStateFromProgress(loopId) {
+  const progressDir = `.loop/${loopId}.progress`
+
+  // 尝试从进度文件解析状态
+  const skill_state = {
+    develop: parseProgressFile(`${progressDir}/develop.md`),
+    debug: parseProgressFile(`${progressDir}/debug.md`),
+    validate: parseProgressFile(`${progressDir}/validate.md`)
+  }
+
+  return skill_state
+}
+
+// 解析进度 Markdown 文件
+function parseProgressFile(filePath) {
+  const content = Read(filePath)
+  if (!content) return null
+
+  // 从 Markdown 表格和结构中提取数据
+  // ... implementation
+}
+```
+
+### 恢复策略
+
+1. **API 字段**: 无法恢复 - 需要从 API 重新获取或用户手动输入
+2. **skill_state 字段**: 可以从 `.progress/` 目录的 Markdown 文件解析
+3. **任务列表**: 从 `.loop/{loopId}.tasks.jsonl` 恢复
+
+## 状态验证
+
+```javascript
+function validateState(state) {
+  const errors = []
+
+  // 必需字段
+  if (!state.session_id) errors.push('Missing session_id')
+  if (!state.task_description) errors.push('Missing task_description')
+
+  // 状态一致性
+  if (state.initialized && state.status === 'pending') {
+    errors.push('Inconsistent: initialized but status is pending')
+  }
+
+  if (state.status === 'completed' && !state.validate.passed) {
+    errors.push('Inconsistent: completed but validation not passed')
+  }
+
+  // 开发任务一致性
+  const completedTasks = state.develop.tasks.filter(t => t.status === 'completed').length
+  if (completedTasks !== state.develop.completed_count) {
+    errors.push('Inconsistent: completed_count mismatch')
+  }
+
+  return { valid: errors.length === 0, errors }
+}
+```

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/specs/action-catalog.md

@@ -0,0 +1,300 @@
+# Action Catalog
+
+CCW Loop 所有可用动作的目录和说明。
+
+## Available Actions
+
+| Action | Purpose | Preconditions | Effects | CLI Integration |
+|--------|---------|---------------|---------|-----------------|
+| [action-init](../phases/actions/action-init.md) | 初始化会话 | status=pending, initialized=false | status→running, initialized→true, 创建目录和任务列表 | Gemini 任务分解 |
+| [action-menu](../phases/actions/action-menu.md) | 显示操作菜单 | initialized=true, status=running | 返回用户选择的动作 | - |
+| [action-develop-with-file](../phases/actions/action-develop-with-file.md) | 执行开发任务 | initialized=true, pending tasks > 0 | 更新 progress.md, 完成一个任务 | Gemini 代码实现 |
+| [action-debug-with-file](../phases/actions/action-debug-with-file.md) | 假设驱动调试 | initialized=true | 更新 understanding.md, hypotheses.json | Gemini 假设生成和证据分析 |
+| [action-validate-with-file](../phases/actions/action-validate-with-file.md) | 运行测试验证 | initialized=true, develop > 0 or debug confirmed | 更新 validation.md, test-results.json | Gemini 质量分析 |
+| [action-complete](../phases/actions/action-complete.md) | 完成循环 | initialized=true | status→completed, 生成 summary.md | - |
+
+## Action Dependencies Graph
+
+```mermaid
+graph TD
+    START([用户启动 /ccw-loop]) --> INIT[action-init]
+    INIT --> MENU[action-menu]
+
+    MENU --> DEVELOP[action-develop-with-file]
+    MENU --> DEBUG[action-debug-with-file]
+    MENU --> VALIDATE[action-validate-with-file]
+    MENU --> STATUS[action-status]
+    MENU --> COMPLETE[action-complete]
+    MENU --> EXIT([退出])
+
+    DEVELOP --> MENU
+    DEBUG --> MENU
+    VALIDATE --> MENU
+    STATUS --> MENU
+    COMPLETE --> END([结束])
+    EXIT --> END
+
+    style INIT fill:#e1f5fe
+    style MENU fill:#fff3e0
+    style DEVELOP fill:#e8f5e9
+    style DEBUG fill:#fce4ec
+    style VALIDATE fill:#f3e5f5
+    style COMPLETE fill:#c8e6c9
+```
+
+## Action Execution Matrix
+
+### Interactive Mode
+
+| State | Auto-Selected Action | User Options |
+|-------|---------------------|--------------|
+| pending | action-init | - |
+| running, !initialized | action-init | - |
+| running, initialized | action-menu | All actions |
+
+### Auto Mode
+
+| Condition | Selected Action |
+|-----------|----------------|
+| pending_develop_tasks > 0 | action-develop-with-file |
+| last_action=develop, !debug_completed | action-debug-with-file |
+| last_action=debug, !validation_completed | action-validate-with-file |
+| validation_failed | action-develop-with-file (fix) |
+| validation_passed, no pending | action-complete |
+
+## Action Inputs/Outputs
+
+### action-init
+
+**Inputs**:
+- state.task_description
+- User input (optional)
+
+**Outputs**:
+- meta.json
+- state.json (初始化)
+- develop/tasks.json
+- develop/progress.md
+
+**State Changes**:
+```javascript
+{
+  status: 'pending' → 'running',
+  initialized: false → true,
+  develop.tasks: [] → [task1, task2, ...]
+}
+```
+
+### action-develop-with-file
+
+**Inputs**:
+- state.develop.tasks
+- User selection (如有多个待处理任务)
+
+**Outputs**:
+- develop/progress.md (追加)
+- develop/tasks.json (更新)
+- develop/changes.log (追加)
+
+**State Changes**:
+```javascript
+{
+  develop.current_task_id: null → 'task-xxx' → null,
+  develop.completed_count: N → N+1,
+  last_action: X → 'action-develop-with-file'
+}
+```
+
+### action-debug-with-file
+
+**Inputs**:
+- Bug description (用户输入或从测试失败获取)
+- debug.log (如已有)
+
+**Outputs**:
+- debug/understanding.md (追加)
+- debug/hypotheses.json (更新)
+- Code changes (添加日志或修复)
+
+**State Changes**:
+```javascript
+{
+  debug.current_bug: null → 'bug description',
+  debug.hypotheses: [...updated],
+  debug.iteration: N → N+1,
+  debug.confirmed_hypothesis: null → 'H1' (如确认)
+}
+```
+
+### action-validate-with-file
+
+**Inputs**:
+- 测试脚本 (从 package.json)
+- 覆盖率工具 (可选)
+
+**Outputs**:
+- validate/validation.md (追加)
+- validate/test-results.json (更新)
+- validate/coverage.json (更新)
+
+**State Changes**:
+```javascript
+{
+  validate.test_results: [...new results],
+  validate.coverage: null → 85.5,
+  validate.passed: false → true,
+  validate.failed_tests: ['test1', 'test2'] → []
+}
+```
+
+### action-complete
+
+**Inputs**:
+- state (完整状态)
+- User choices (扩展选项)
+
+**Outputs**:
+- summary.md
+- Issues (如选择扩展)
+
+**State Changes**:
+```javascript
+{
+  status: 'running' → 'completed',
+  completed_at: null → timestamp
+}
+```
+
+## Action Sequences
+
+### Typical Happy Path
+
+```
+action-init
+  → action-develop-with-file (task 1)
+  → action-develop-with-file (task 2)
+  → action-develop-with-file (task 3)
+  → action-validate-with-file
+    → PASS
+  → action-complete
+```
+
+### Debug Iteration Path
+
+```
+action-init
+  → action-develop-with-file (task 1)
+  → action-validate-with-file
+    → FAIL
+  → action-debug-with-file (探索)
+  → action-debug-with-file (分析)
+    → Root cause found
+  → action-validate-with-file
+    → PASS
+  → action-complete
+```
+
+### Multi-Iteration Path
+
+```
+action-init
+  → action-develop-with-file (task 1)
+  → action-debug-with-file
+  → action-develop-with-file (task 2)
+  → action-validate-with-file
+    → FAIL
+  → action-debug-with-file
+  → action-validate-with-file
+    → PASS
+  → action-complete
+```
+
+## Error Scenarios
+
+### CLI Tool Failure
+
+```
+action-develop-with-file
+  → Gemini CLI fails
+  → Fallback to manual implementation
+  → Prompt user for code
+  → Continue
+```
+
+### Test Failure
+
+```
+action-validate-with-file
+  → Tests fail
+  → Record failed tests
+  → Suggest action-debug-with-file
+  → User chooses debug or manual fix
+```
+
+### Max Iterations Reached
+
+```
+state.iteration_count >= 10
+  → Warning message
+  → Suggest break or task split
+  → Allow continue or exit
+```
+
+## Action Extensions
+
+### Adding New Actions
+
+To add a new action:
+
+1. Create `phases/actions/action-{name}.md`
+2. Define preconditions, execution, state updates
+3. Add to this catalog
+4. Update orchestrator.md decision logic
+5. Add to action-menu.md options
+
+### Action Template
+
+```markdown
+# Action: {Name}
+
+{Brief description}
+
+## Purpose
+
+{Detailed purpose}
+
+## Preconditions
+
+- [ ] condition1
+- [ ] condition2
+
+## Execution
+
+### Step 1: {Step Name}
+
+\`\`\`javascript
+// code
+\`\`\`
+
+## State Updates
+
+\`\`\`javascript
+return {
+  stateUpdates: {
+    // updates
+  },
+  continue: true,
+  message: "..."
+}
+\`\`\`
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error Type | Recovery |
+|------------|----------|
+| ... | ... |
+
+## Next Actions (Hints)
+
+- condition: next_action
+```

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/specs/loop-requirements.md

@@ -0,0 +1,192 @@
+# Loop Requirements Specification
+
+CCW Loop 的核心需求和约束定义。
+
+## Core Requirements
+
+### 1. 无状态循环
+
+**Requirement**: 每次执行从文件读取状态，执行后写回文件，不依赖内存状态。
+
+**Rationale**: 支持随时中断和恢复，状态持久化。
+
+**Validation**:
+- [ ] 每个 action 开始时从文件读取状态
+- [ ] 每个 action 结束时将状态写回文件
+- [ ] 无全局变量或内存状态依赖
+
+### 2. 文件驱动进度
+
+**Requirement**: 所有进度、理解、验证结果都记录在专用 Markdown 文件中。
+
+**Rationale**: 可审计、可回顾、团队可见。
+
+**Validation**:
+- [ ] develop/progress.md 记录开发进度
+- [ ] debug/understanding.md 记录理解演变
+- [ ] validate/validation.md 记录验证结果
+- [ ] 所有文件使用 Markdown 格式，易读
+
+### 3. CLI 工具集成
+
+**Requirement**: 关键决策点使用 Gemini/CLI 进行深度分析。
+
+**Rationale**: 利用 LLM 能力提高质量。
+
+**Validation**:
+- [ ] 任务分解使用 Gemini
+- [ ] 假设生成使用 Gemini
+- [ ] 证据分析使用 Gemini
+- [ ] 质量评估使用 Gemini
+
+### 4. 用户控制循环
+
+**Requirement**: 支持交互式和自动循环两种模式，用户可随时介入。
+
+**Rationale**: 灵活性，适应不同场景。
+
+**Validation**:
+- [ ] 交互模式：每步显示菜单
+- [ ] 自动模式：按预设流程执行
+- [ ] 用户可随时退出
+- [ ] 状态可恢复
+
+### 5. 可恢复性
+
+**Requirement**: 任何时候中断后，可以从上次位置继续。
+
+**Rationale**: 长时间任务支持，意外中断恢复。
+
+**Validation**:
+- [ ] 状态保存在 state.json
+- [ ] 使用 --resume 可继续
+- [ ] 历史记录完整保留
+
+## Quality Standards
+
+### Completeness
+
+| Dimension | Threshold |
+|-----------|-----------|
+| 进度文档完整性 | 每个任务都有记录 |
+| 理解文档演变 | 每次迭代都有更新 |
+| 验证报告详尽 | 包含所有测试结果 |
+
+### Consistency
+
+| Dimension | Threshold |
+|-----------|-----------|
+| 文件格式一致 | 所有 Markdown 文件使用相同模板 |
+| 状态同步一致 | state.json 与文件内容匹配 |
+| 时间戳格式 | 统一使用 ISO8601 格式 |
+
+### Usability
+
+| Dimension | Threshold |
+|-----------|-----------|
+| 菜单易用性 | 选项清晰，描述准确 |
+| 进度可见性 | 随时可查看当前状态 |
+| 错误提示 | 错误消息清晰，提供恢复建议 |
+
+## Constraints
+
+### 1. 文件结构约束
+
+```
+.workflow/.loop/{session-id}/
+├── meta.json           # 只写一次，不再修改
+├── state.json          # 每次 action 后更新
+├── develop/
+│   ├── progress.md     # 只追加，不删除
+│   ├── tasks.json      # 任务状态更新
+│   └── changes.log     # NDJSON 格式，只追加
+├── debug/
+│   ├── understanding.md   # 只追加，记录时间线
+│   ├── hypotheses.json    # 更新假设状态
+│   └── debug.log          # NDJSON 格式
+└── validate/
+    ├── validation.md      # 每次验证追加
+    ├── test-results.json  # 累积测试结果
+    └── coverage.json      # 最新覆盖率
+```
+
+### 2. 命名约束
+
+- Session ID: `LOOP-{slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}`
+- Task ID: `task-{NNN}` (三位数字)
+- Hypothesis ID: `H{N}` (单字母+数字)
+
+### 3. 状态转换约束
+
+```
+pending → running → completed
+              ↓
+         user_exit
+              ↓
+            failed
+```
+
+Only allow: `pending→running`, `running→completed/user_exit/failed`
+
+### 4. 错误限制约束
+
+- 最大错误次数: 3
+- 超过 3 次错误 → 自动终止
+- 每次错误 → 记录到 state.errors[]
+
+### 5. 迭代限制约束
+
+- 最大迭代次数: 10 (警告)
+- 超过 10 次 → 警告用户，但不强制停止
+- 建议拆分任务或休息
+
+## Integration Requirements
+
+### 1. Dashboard 集成
+
+**Requirement**: 与 CCW Dashboard Loop Monitor 无缝集成。
+
+**Specification**:
+- Dashboard 创建 Loop → 调用此 Skill
+- state.json → Dashboard 实时显示
+- 任务列表双向同步
+- 状态控制按钮映射到 actions
+
+### 2. Issue 系统集成
+
+**Requirement**: 完成后可扩展为 Issue。
+
+**Specification**:
+- 支持维度: test, enhance, refactor, doc
+- 调用 `/issue:new "{summary} - {dimension}"`
+- 自动填充上下文
+
+### 3. CLI 工具集成
+
+**Requirement**: 使用 CCW CLI 工具进行分析和实现。
+
+**Specification**:
+- 任务分解: `--rule planning-breakdown-task-steps`
+- 代码实现: `--rule development-implement-feature`
+- 根因分析: `--rule analysis-diagnose-bug-root-cause`
+- 质量评估: `--rule analysis-review-code-quality`
+
+## Non-Functional Requirements
+
+### Performance
+
+- Session 初始化: < 5s
+- Action 执行: < 30s (不含 CLI 调用)
+- 状态读写: < 1s
+
+### Reliability
+
+- 状态文件损坏恢复: 支持从其他文件重建
+- CLI 工具失败降级: 回退到手动模式
+- 错误重试: 支持一次自动重试
+
+### Maintainability
+
+- 文档化: 所有 action 都有清晰说明
+- 模块化: 每个 action 独立可测
+- 可扩展: 易于添加新 action

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/templates/progress-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,175 @@
+# Progress Document Template
+
+开发进度文档的标准模板。
+
+## Template Structure
+
+```markdown
+# Development Progress
+
+**Session ID**: {{session_id}}
+**Task**: {{task_description}}
+**Started**: {{started_at}}
+**Estimated Complexity**: {{complexity}}
+
+---
+
+## Task List
+
+{{#each tasks}}
+{{@index}}. [{{#if completed}}x{{else}} {{/if}}] {{description}}
+{{/each}}
+
+## Key Files
+
+{{#each key_files}}
+- `{{this}}`
+{{/each}}
+
+---
+
+## Progress Timeline
+
+{{#each iterations}}
+### Iteration {{@index}} - {{task_name}} ({{timestamp}})
+
+#### Task Details
+
+- **ID**: {{task_id}}
+- **Tool**: {{tool}}
+- **Mode**: {{mode}}
+
+#### Implementation Summary
+
+{{summary}}
+
+#### Files Changed
+
+{{#each files_changed}}
+- `{{this}}`
+{{/each}}
+
+#### Status: {{status}}
+
+---
+{{/each}}
+
+## Current Statistics
+
+| Metric | Value |
+|--------|-------|
+| Total Tasks | {{total_tasks}} |
+| Completed | {{completed_tasks}} |
+| In Progress | {{in_progress_tasks}} |
+| Pending | {{pending_tasks}} |
+| Progress | {{progress_percentage}}% |
+
+---
+
+## Next Steps
+
+{{#each next_steps}}
+- [ ] {{this}}
+{{/each}}
+```
+
+## Template Variables
+
+| Variable | Type | Source | Description |
+|----------|------|--------|-------------|
+| `session_id` | string | state.session_id | 会话 ID |
+| `task_description` | string | state.task_description | 任务描述 |
+| `started_at` | string | state.created_at | 开始时间 |
+| `complexity` | string | state.context.estimated_complexity | 预估复杂度 |
+| `tasks` | array | state.develop.tasks | 任务列表 |
+| `key_files` | array | state.context.key_files | 关键文件 |
+| `iterations` | array | 从文件解析 | 迭代历史 |
+| `total_tasks` | number | state.develop.total_count | 总任务数 |
+| `completed_tasks` | number | state.develop.completed_count | 已完成数 |
+
+## Usage Example
+
+```javascript
+const progressTemplate = Read('.claude/skills/ccw-loop/templates/progress-template.md')
+
+function renderProgress(state) {
+  let content = progressTemplate
+
+  // 替换简单变量
+  content = content.replace('{{session_id}}', state.session_id)
+  content = content.replace('{{task_description}}', state.task_description)
+  content = content.replace('{{started_at}}', state.created_at)
+  content = content.replace('{{complexity}}', state.context?.estimated_complexity || 'unknown')
+
+  // 替换任务列表
+  const taskList = state.develop.tasks.map((t, i) => {
+    const checkbox = t.status === 'completed' ? 'x' : ' '
+    return `${i + 1}. [${checkbox}] ${t.description}`
+  }).join('\n')
+  content = content.replace('{{#each tasks}}...{{/each}}', taskList)
+
+  // 替换统计
+  content = content.replace('{{total_tasks}}', state.develop.total_count)
+  content = content.replace('{{completed_tasks}}', state.develop.completed_count)
+  // ...
+
+  return content
+}
+```
+
+## Section Templates
+
+### Task Entry
+
+```markdown
+### Iteration {{N}} - {{task_name}} ({{timestamp}})
+
+#### Task Details
+
+- **ID**: {{task_id}}
+- **Tool**: {{tool}}
+- **Mode**: {{mode}}
+
+#### Implementation Summary
+
+{{summary}}
+
+#### Files Changed
+
+{{#each files}}
+- `{{this}}`
+{{/each}}
+
+#### Status: COMPLETED
+
+---
+```
+
+### Statistics Table
+
+```markdown
+## Current Statistics
+
+| Metric | Value |
+|--------|-------|
+| Total Tasks | {{total}} |
+| Completed | {{completed}} |
+| In Progress | {{in_progress}} |
+| Pending | {{pending}} |
+| Progress | {{percentage}}% |
+```
+
+### Next Steps
+
+```markdown
+## Next Steps
+
+{{#if all_completed}}
+- [ ] Run validation tests
+- [ ] Code review
+- [ ] Update documentation
+{{else}}
+- [ ] Complete remaining {{pending}} tasks
+- [ ] Review completed work
+{{/if}}
+```

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/templates/understanding-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,303 @@
+# Understanding Document Template
+
+调试理解演变文档的标准模板。
+
+## Template Structure
+
+```markdown
+# Understanding Document
+
+**Session ID**: {{session_id}}
+**Bug Description**: {{bug_description}}
+**Started**: {{started_at}}
+
+---
+
+## Exploration Timeline
+
+{{#each iterations}}
+### Iteration {{number}} - {{title}} ({{timestamp}})
+
+{{#if is_exploration}}
+#### Current Understanding
+
+Based on bug description and initial code search:
+
+- Error pattern: {{error_pattern}}
+- Affected areas: {{affected_areas}}
+- Initial hypothesis: {{initial_thoughts}}
+
+#### Evidence from Code Search
+
+{{#each search_results}}
+**Keyword: "{{keyword}}"**
+- Found in: {{files}}
+- Key findings: {{insights}}
+{{/each}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if has_hypotheses}}
+#### Hypotheses Generated (Gemini-Assisted)
+
+{{#each hypotheses}}
+**{{id}}** (Likelihood: {{likelihood}}): {{description}}
+- Logging at: {{logging_point}}
+- Testing: {{testable_condition}}
+- Evidence to confirm: {{confirm_criteria}}
+- Evidence to reject: {{reject_criteria}}
+{{/each}}
+
+**Gemini Insights**: {{gemini_insights}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if is_analysis}}
+#### Log Analysis Results
+
+{{#each results}}
+**{{id}}**: {{verdict}}
+- Evidence: {{evidence}}
+- Reasoning: {{reason}}
+{{/each}}
+
+#### Corrected Understanding
+
+Previous misunderstandings identified and corrected:
+
+{{#each corrections}}
+- ~~{{wrong}}~~ → {{corrected}}
+  - Why wrong: {{reason}}
+  - Evidence: {{evidence}}
+{{/each}}
+
+#### New Insights
+
+{{#each insights}}
+- {{this}}
+{{/each}}
+
+#### Gemini Analysis
+
+{{gemini_analysis}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if root_cause_found}}
+#### Root Cause Identified
+
+**{{hypothesis_id}}**: {{description}}
+
+Evidence supporting this conclusion:
+{{supporting_evidence}}
+{{else}}
+#### Next Steps
+
+{{next_steps}}
+{{/if}}
+
+---
+{{/each}}
+
+## Current Consolidated Understanding
+
+### What We Know
+
+{{#each valid_understandings}}
+- {{this}}
+{{/each}}
+
+### What Was Disproven
+
+{{#each disproven}}
+- ~~{{assumption}}~~ (Evidence: {{evidence}})
+{{/each}}
+
+### Current Investigation Focus
+
+{{current_focus}}
+
+### Remaining Questions
+
+{{#each questions}}
+- {{this}}
+{{/each}}
+```
+
+## Template Variables
+
+| Variable | Type | Source | Description |
+|----------|------|--------|-------------|
+| `session_id` | string | state.session_id | 会话 ID |
+| `bug_description` | string | state.debug.current_bug | Bug 描述 |
+| `iterations` | array | 从文件解析 | 迭代历史 |
+| `hypotheses` | array | state.debug.hypotheses | 假设列表 |
+| `valid_understandings` | array | 从 Gemini 分析 | 有效理解 |
+| `disproven` | array | 从假设状态 | 被否定的假设 |
+
+## Section Templates
+
+### Exploration Section
+
+```markdown
+### Iteration {{N}} - Initial Exploration ({{timestamp}})
+
+#### Current Understanding
+
+Based on bug description and initial code search:
+
+- Error pattern: {{pattern}}
+- Affected areas: {{areas}}
+- Initial hypothesis: {{thoughts}}
+
+#### Evidence from Code Search
+
+{{#each search_results}}
+**Keyword: "{{keyword}}"**
+- Found in: {{files}}
+- Key findings: {{insights}}
+{{/each}}
+
+#### Next Steps
+
+- Generate testable hypotheses
+- Add instrumentation
+- Await reproduction
+```
+
+### Hypothesis Section
+
+```markdown
+#### Hypotheses Generated (Gemini-Assisted)
+
+| ID | Description | Likelihood | Status |
+|----|-------------|------------|--------|
+{{#each hypotheses}}
+| {{id}} | {{description}} | {{likelihood}} | {{status}} |
+{{/each}}
+
+**Details:**
+
+{{#each hypotheses}}
+**{{id}}**: {{description}}
+- Logging at: `{{logging_point}}`
+- Testing: {{testable_condition}}
+- Confirm: {{evidence_criteria.confirm}}
+- Reject: {{evidence_criteria.reject}}
+{{/each}}
+```
+
+### Analysis Section
+
+```markdown
+### Iteration {{N}} - Evidence Analysis ({{timestamp}})
+
+#### Log Analysis Results
+
+{{#each results}}
+**{{id}}**: **{{verdict}}**
+- Evidence: \`{{evidence}}\`
+- Reasoning: {{reason}}
+{{/each}}
+
+#### Corrected Understanding
+
+| Previous Assumption | Corrected To | Reason |
+|---------------------|--------------|--------|
+{{#each corrections}}
+| ~~{{wrong}}~~ | {{corrected}} | {{reason}} |
+{{/each}}
+
+#### Gemini Analysis
+
+{{gemini_analysis}}
+```
+
+### Consolidated Understanding Section
+
+```markdown
+## Current Consolidated Understanding
+
+### What We Know
+
+{{#each valid}}
+- {{this}}
+{{/each}}
+
+### What Was Disproven
+
+{{#each disproven}}
+- ~~{{this.assumption}}~~ (Evidence: {{this.evidence}})
+{{/each}}
+
+### Current Investigation Focus
+
+{{focus}}
+
+### Remaining Questions
+
+{{#each questions}}
+- {{this}}
+{{/each}}
+```
+
+### Resolution Section
+
+```markdown
+### Resolution ({{timestamp}})
+
+#### Fix Applied
+
+- Modified files: {{files}}
+- Fix description: {{description}}
+- Root cause addressed: {{root_cause}}
+
+#### Verification Results
+
+{{verification}}
+
+#### Lessons Learned
+
+{{#each lessons}}
+{{@index}}. {{this}}
+{{/each}}
+
+#### Key Insights for Future
+
+{{#each insights}}
+- {{this}}
+{{/each}}
+```
+
+## Consolidation Rules
+
+更新 "Current Consolidated Understanding" 时遵循以下规则:
+
+1. **简化被否定项**: 移到 "What Was Disproven"，只保留单行摘要
+2. **保留有效见解**: 将确认的发现提升到 "What We Know"
+3. **避免重复**: 不在合并部分重复时间线细节
+4. **关注当前状态**: 描述现在知道什么，而不是过程
+5. **保留关键纠正**: 保留重要的 wrong→right 转换供学习
+
+## Anti-Patterns
+
+**错误示例 (冗余)**:
+```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...
+```
+
+**正确示例 (精简)**:
+```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?
+```

.claude/skills/ccw-loop/templates/validation-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,258 @@
+# Validation Report Template
+
+验证报告的标准模板。
+
+## Template Structure
+
+```markdown
+# Validation Report
+
+**Session ID**: {{session_id}}
+**Task**: {{task_description}}
+**Validated**: {{timestamp}}
+
+---
+
+## Iteration {{iteration}} - Validation Run
+
+### Test Execution Summary
+
+| Metric | Value |
+|--------|-------|
+| Total Tests | {{total_tests}} |
+| Passed | {{passed_tests}} |
+| Failed | {{failed_tests}} |
+| Skipped | {{skipped_tests}} |
+| Duration | {{duration}}ms |
+| **Pass Rate** | **{{pass_rate}}%** |
+
+### Coverage Report
+
+{{#if has_coverage}}
+| File | Statements | Branches | Functions | Lines |
+|------|------------|----------|-----------|-------|
+{{#each coverage_files}}
+| {{path}} | {{statements}}% | {{branches}}% | {{functions}}% | {{lines}}% |
+{{/each}}
+
+**Overall Coverage**: {{overall_coverage}}%
+{{else}}
+_No coverage data available_
+{{/if}}
+
+### Failed Tests
+
+{{#if has_failures}}
+{{#each failures}}
+#### {{test_name}}
+
+- **Suite**: {{suite}}
+- **Error**: {{error_message}}
+- **Stack**:
+\`\`\`
+{{stack_trace}}
+\`\`\`
+{{/each}}
+{{else}}
+_All tests passed_
+{{/if}}
+
+### Gemini Quality Analysis
+
+{{gemini_analysis}}
+
+### Recommendations
+
+{{#each recommendations}}
+- {{this}}
+{{/each}}
+
+---
+
+## Validation Decision
+
+**Result**: {{#if passed}}✅ PASS{{else}}❌ FAIL{{/if}}
+
+**Rationale**: {{rationale}}
+
+{{#if not_passed}}
+### Next Actions
+
+1. Review failed tests
+2. Debug failures using action-debug-with-file
+3. Fix issues and re-run validation
+{{else}}
+### Next Actions
+
+1. Consider code review
+2. Prepare for deployment
+3. Update documentation
+{{/if}}
+```
+
+## Template Variables
+
+| Variable | Type | Source | Description |
+|----------|------|--------|-------------|
+| `session_id` | string | state.session_id | 会话 ID |
+| `task_description` | string | state.task_description | 任务描述 |
+| `timestamp` | string | 当前时间 | 验证时间 |
+| `iteration` | number | 从文件计算 | 验证迭代次数 |
+| `total_tests` | number | 测试输出 | 总测试数 |
+| `passed_tests` | number | 测试输出 | 通过数 |
+| `failed_tests` | number | 测试输出 | 失败数 |
+| `pass_rate` | number | 计算得出 | 通过率 |
+| `coverage_files` | array | 覆盖率报告 | 文件覆盖率 |
+| `failures` | array | 测试输出 | 失败测试详情 |
+| `gemini_analysis` | string | Gemini CLI | 质量分析 |
+| `recommendations` | array | Gemini CLI | 建议列表 |
+
+## Section Templates
+
+### Test Summary
+
+```markdown
+### Test Execution Summary
+
+| Metric | Value |
+|--------|-------|
+| Total Tests | {{total}} |
+| Passed | {{passed}} |
+| Failed | {{failed}} |
+| Skipped | {{skipped}} |
+| Duration | {{duration}}ms |
+| **Pass Rate** | **{{rate}}%** |
+```
+
+### Coverage Table
+
+```markdown
+### Coverage Report
+
+| File | Statements | Branches | Functions | Lines |
+|------|------------|----------|-----------|-------|
+{{#each files}}
+| `{{path}}` | {{statements}}% | {{branches}}% | {{functions}}% | {{lines}}% |
+{{/each}}
+
+**Overall Coverage**: {{overall}}%
+
+**Coverage Thresholds**:
+- ✅ Good: ≥ 80%
+- ⚠️ Warning: 60-79%
+- ❌ Poor: < 60%
+```
+
+### Failed Test Details
+
+```markdown
+### Failed Tests
+
+{{#each failures}}
+#### ❌ {{test_name}}
+
+| Field | Value |
+|-------|-------|
+| Suite | {{suite}} |
+| Error | {{error_message}} |
+| Duration | {{duration}}ms |
+
+**Stack Trace**:
+\`\`\`
+{{stack_trace}}
+\`\`\`
+
+**Possible Causes**:
+{{#each possible_causes}}
+- {{this}}
+{{/each}}
+
+---
+{{/each}}
+```
+
+### Quality Analysis
+
+```markdown
+### Gemini Quality Analysis
+
+#### Code Quality Assessment
+
+| Dimension | Score | Status |
+|-----------|-------|--------|
+| Correctness | {{correctness}}/10 | {{correctness_status}} |
+| Completeness | {{completeness}}/10 | {{completeness_status}} |
+| Reliability | {{reliability}}/10 | {{reliability_status}} |
+| Maintainability | {{maintainability}}/10 | {{maintainability_status}} |
+
+#### Key Findings
+
+{{#each findings}}
+- **{{severity}}**: {{description}}
+{{/each}}
+
+#### Recommendations
+
+{{#each recommendations}}
+{{@index}}. {{this}}
+{{/each}}
+```
+
+### Decision Section
+
+```markdown
+## Validation Decision
+
+**Result**: {{#if passed}}✅ PASS{{else}}❌ FAIL{{/if}}
+
+**Rationale**:
+{{rationale}}
+
+**Confidence Level**: {{confidence}}
+
+### Decision Matrix
+
+| Criteria | Status | Weight | Score |
+|----------|--------|--------|-------|
+| All tests pass | {{tests_pass}} | 40% | {{tests_score}} |
+| Coverage ≥ 80% | {{coverage_pass}} | 30% | {{coverage_score}} |
+| No critical issues | {{no_critical}} | 20% | {{critical_score}} |
+| Quality analysis pass | {{quality_pass}} | 10% | {{quality_score}} |
+| **Total** | | 100% | **{{total_score}}** |
+
+**Threshold**: 70% to pass
+
+### Next Actions
+
+{{#if passed}}
+1. ✅ Code review (recommended)
+2. ✅ Update documentation
+3. ✅ Prepare for deployment
+{{else}}
+1. ❌ Review failed tests
+2. ❌ Debug failures
+3. ❌ Fix issues and re-run
+{{/if}}
+```
+
+## Historical Comparison
+
+```markdown
+## Validation History
+
+| Iteration | Date | Pass Rate | Coverage | Status |
+|-----------|------|-----------|----------|--------|
+{{#each history}}
+| {{iteration}} | {{date}} | {{pass_rate}}% | {{coverage}}% | {{status}} |
+{{/each}}
+
+### Trend Analysis
+
+{{#if improving}}
+📈 **Improving**: Pass rate increased from {{previous_rate}}% to {{current_rate}}%
+{{else if declining}}
+📉 **Declining**: Pass rate decreased from {{previous_rate}}% to {{current_rate}}%
+{{else}}
+➡️ **Stable**: Pass rate remains at {{current_rate}}%
+{{/if}}
+```

.claude/skills/command-guide/SKILL.md

@@ -1,388 +0,0 @@
----
-name: command-guide
-description: Workflow command guide for Claude Code Workflow (78 commands). Search/browse commands, get next-step recommendations, view documentation, report issues. Triggers "CCW-help", "CCW-issue", "ccw-help", "ccw-issue", "ccw"
-allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, AskUserQuestion
-version: 5.8.0
----
-
-# Command Guide Skill
-
-Comprehensive command guide for Claude Code Workflow (CCW) system covering 78 commands across 5 categories (workflow, cli, memory, task, general).
-
-## 🆕 What's New in v5.8.0
-
-### Major Features
-
-**🎨 UI Design Style Memory Workflow** (Primary Focus)
-- **`/memory:style-skill-memory`** - Generate reusable SKILL packages from design systems
-- **`/workflow:ui-design:codify-style`** - Extract design tokens from code with automatic file discovery
-- **`/workflow:ui-design:reference-page-generator`** - Generate multi-component reference pages
-- **Workflow**: Design extraction → Token documentation → SKILL package → Easy loading
-
-**⚡ `/workflow:lite-plan`** - Intelligent Planning & Execution (Testing Phase)
-- Dynamic workflow adaptation (smart exploration, adaptive planning, progressive clarification)
-- Two-dimensional confirmation (task approval + execution method selection)
-- Direct execution with live TodoWrite progress tracking
-- Faster than `/workflow:plan` (1-3 min vs 5-10 min) for simple to medium tasks
-
-**🗺️ `/memory:code-map-memory`** - Code Flow Mapping Generator (Testing Phase)
-- Uses cli-explore-agent for deep code flow analysis with dual-source strategy
-- Generates Mermaid diagrams for architecture, functions, data flow, conditional paths
-- Creates feature-specific SKILL packages for code understanding
-- Progressive loading (2K → 30K tokens) for efficient context management
-
-### Agent 
-
-- **cli-explore-agent**  - Specialized code exploration with Deep Scan mode (Bash + Gemini)
-- **cli-planning-agent** - Enhanced task generation with improved context handling
-- **ui-design-agent** - Major refactoring for better design system extraction
-
-### Additional Improvements
-- Enhanced brainstorming workflows with parallel execution
-- Improved test workflow documentation and task attachment models
-- Updated CLI tool default models (Gemini 2.5-pro)
-
-## 🧠 Core Principle: Intelligent Integration
-
-**⚠️ IMPORTANT**: This SKILL provides **reference materials** for intelligent integration, NOT templates for direct copying.
-
-**Response Strategy**:
-1. **Analyze user's specific context** - Understand their exact need, workflow stage, and technical level
-2. **Extract relevant information** - Select only the pertinent parts from reference guides
-3. **Synthesize and customize** - Combine multiple sources, add context-specific examples
-4. **Deliver targeted response** - Provide concise, actionable guidance tailored to the user's situation
-
-**Never**:
-- ❌ Copy-paste entire template sections verbatim
-- ❌ Return raw reference documentation without processing
-- ❌ Provide generic responses that ignore user context
-
-**Always**:
-- ✅ Understand the user's specific situation first
-- ✅ Integrate information from multiple sources (indexes, guides, reference docs)
-- ✅ Customize examples and explanations to match user's use case
-- ✅ Provide progressive depth - brief answers with "more detail available" prompts
-
----
-
-## 🎯 Operation Modes
-
-### Mode 1: Command Search 🔍
-
-**When**: User searches by keyword, category, or use-case
-
-**Triggers**: "搜索命令", "find command", "planning 相关", "search"
-
-**Process**:
-1. Identify search type (keyword/category/use-case)
-2. Query appropriate index (all-commands/by-category/by-use-case)
-3. **Intelligently filter and rank** results based on user's implied context
-4. **Synthesize concise response** with command names, brief descriptions, and use-case fit
-5. **Suggest next steps** - related commands or workflow patterns
-
-**Example**: "搜索 planning 命令" → Analyze user's likely goal → Present top 3-5 most relevant planning commands with context-specific usage hints, NOT raw JSON dump
-
----
-
-### Mode 2: Smart Recommendations 🤖
-
-**When**: User asks for next steps after a command
-
-**Triggers**: "下一步", "what's next", "after /workflow:plan", "推荐"
-
-**Process**:
-1. **Analyze workflow context** - Understand where user is in their development cycle
-2. Query `index/command-relationships.json` for possible next commands
-3. **Evaluate and prioritize** recommendations based on:
-   - User's stated goals
-   - Common workflow patterns
-   - Project complexity indicators
-4. **Craft contextual guidance** - Explain WHY each recommendation fits, not just WHAT to run
-5. **Provide workflow examples** - Show complete flow, not isolated commands
-
-**Example**: "执行完 /workflow:plan 后做什么？" → Analyze plan output quality → Recommend `/workflow:action-plan-verify` (if complex) OR `/workflow:execute` (if straightforward) with reasoning for each choice
-
----
-
-### Mode 3: Full Documentation 📖
-
-**When**: User requests command details
-
-**Triggers**: "参数说明", "怎么用", "how to use", "详情"
-
-**Process**:
-1. Locate command in `index/all-commands.json`
-2. Read original command file for full details
-3. **Extract user-relevant sections** - Focus on what they asked about (parameters OR examples OR workflow)
-4. **Enhance with context** - Add use-case specific examples if user's scenario is clear
-5. **Progressive disclosure** - Provide core info first, offer "need more details?" prompts
-
-**Example**: "/workflow:plan 的参数是什么？" → Identify user's experience level → Present parameters with context-appropriate explanations (beginner: verbose + examples; advanced: concise + edge cases), NOT raw documentation dump
-
----
-
-### Mode 4: Beginner Onboarding 🎓
-
-**When**: New user needs guidance
-
-**Triggers**: "新手", "getting started", "如何开始", "常用命令", **"从0到1"**, **"全新项目"**
-
-**Process**:
-1. **Assess user background** - Ask clarifying questions if needed (coding experience? project type?)
-2. **⚠️ Identify project stage** - FROM-ZERO-TO-ONE vs FEATURE-ADDITION:
-   - **从0到1场景** (全新项目/产品/架构决策) → **MUST START with brainstorming workflow**
-   - **功能新增场景** (已有项目中添加功能) → Start with planning workflow
-3. **Design personalized learning path** based on their goals and stage
-4. **Curate essential commands** from `index/essential-commands.json` - Select 3-5 most relevant for their use case
-5. **Provide guided first example** - Walk through ONE complete workflow with explanation, **emphasizing brainstorming for 0-to-1 scenarios**
-6. **Set clear next steps** - What to try next, where to get help
-
-**Example 1 (从0到1)**: "我是新手，如何开始全新项目？" → Identify as FROM-ZERO-TO-ONE → Emphasize brainstorming workflow (`/workflow:brainstorm:artifacts`) as mandatory first step → Explain brainstorm → plan → execute flow
-
-**Example 2 (功能新增)**: "我是新手，如何在已有项目中添加功能？" → Identify as FEATURE-ADDITION → Guide to planning workflow (`/workflow:plan`) → Explain plan → execute → test flow
-
-**Example 3 (探索)**: "我是新手，如何开始？" → Ask clarifying question: "是全新项目启动（从0到1）还是在已有项目中添加功能？" → Based on answer, route to appropriate workflow
-
----
-
-### Mode 5: Issue Reporting 📝
-
-**When**: User wants to report issue or request feature
-
-**Triggers**: **"CCW-issue"**, **"CCW-help"**, **"ccw-issue"**, **"ccw-help"**, **"ccw"**, "报告 bug", "功能建议", "问题咨询", "交互式诊断"
-
-**Process**:
-1. **Understand issue context** - Use AskUserQuestion to confirm type AND gather initial context
-2. **Intelligently guide information collection**:
-   - Adapt questions based on previous answers
-   - Skip irrelevant sections
-   - Probe for missing critical details
-3. **Select and customize template**:
-   - `issue-diagnosis.md`, `issue-bug.md`, `issue-feature.md`, or `issue-question.md`
-   - **Adapt template sections** to match user's specific scenario
-4. **Synthesize coherent issue report**:
-   - Integrate collected information with appropriate template sections
-   - **Highlight key details** - Don't bury critical info in boilerplate
-   - Add privacy-protected command history
-5. **Provide actionable next steps** - Immediate troubleshooting OR submission guidance
-
-**Example**: "CCW-issue" → Detect user frustration level → For urgent: fast-track to critical info collection; For exploratory: comprehensive diagnostic flow, NOT one-size-fits-all questionnaire
-
-**🆕 Enhanced Features**:
-- Complete command history with privacy protection
-- Interactive diagnostic checklists
-- Decision tree navigation (diagnosis template)
-- Execution environment capture
-
----
-
-### Mode 6: Deep Command Analysis 🔬
-
-**When**: User asks detailed questions about specific commands or agents
-
-**Triggers**: "详细说明", "命令原理", "agent 如何工作", "实现细节", specific command/agent name mentioned
-
-**Data Sources**:
-- `reference/agents/*.md` - All agent documentation (11 agents)
-- `reference/commands/**/*.md` - All command documentation (69 commands)
-
-**Process**:
-
-**Simple Query** (direct documentation lookup):
-1. Identify target command/agent from user query
-2. Locate corresponding markdown file in `reference/`
-3. **Extract contextually relevant sections** - Not entire document
-4. **Synthesize focused explanation**:
-   - Address user's specific question
-   - Add context-appropriate examples
-   - Link related concepts
-5. **Offer progressive depth** - "Want to know more about X?"
-
-**Complex Query** (CLI-assisted analysis):
-1. **Detect complexity indicators** (多个命令对比、工作流程分析、最佳实践)
-2. **Design targeted analysis prompt** for gemini/qwen via CCW:
-   - Frame user's question precisely
-   - Specify required analysis depth
-   - Request structured comparison/synthesis
-   ```bash
-   ccw cli -p "
-   PURPOSE: Analyze command documentation to answer user query
-   TASK: • [extracted user question with context]
-   MODE: analysis
-   CONTEXT: @**/*
-   EXPECTED: Comprehensive answer with examples and recommendations
-   RULES: $(cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/analysis/02-analyze-code-patterns.txt) | Focus on practical usage | analysis=READ-ONLY
-   " --tool gemini --cd ~/.claude/skills/command-guide/reference
-   ```
-   Note: Use `--cd` with absolute path `~/.claude/skills/command-guide/reference` for reference documentation access
-3. **Process and integrate CLI analysis**:
-   - Extract key insights from CLI output
-   - Add context-specific examples
-   - Synthesize actionable recommendations
-4. **Deliver tailored response** - Not raw CLI output
-
-**Query Classification**:
-- **Simple**: Single command explanation, parameter list, basic usage
-- **Complex**: Cross-command workflows, performance comparison, architectural analysis, best practices across multiple commands
-
-**Examples**:
-
-*Simple Query*:
-```
-User: "action-planning-agent 如何工作？"
-→ Read reference/agents/action-planning-agent.md
-→ **Identify user's knowledge gap** (mechanism? inputs/outputs? when to use?)
-→ **Extract relevant sections** addressing their need
-→ **Synthesize focused explanation** with examples
-→ NOT: Dump entire agent documentation
-```
-
-*Complex Query*:
-```
-User: "对比 workflow:plan 和 workflow:tdd-plan 的使用场景和最佳实践"
-→ Detect: 多命令对比 + 最佳实践
-→ **Design comparison framework** (when to use, trade-offs, workflow integration)
-→ Use gemini to analyze both commands with structured comparison prompt
-→ **Synthesize insights** into decision matrix and usage guidelines
-→ NOT: Raw command documentation side-by-side
-```
-
----
-
-## 📚 Index Files
-
-All command metadata is stored in JSON indexes for fast querying:
-
-- **all-commands.json** - Complete catalog (69 commands) with full metadata
-- **by-category.json** - Hierarchical organization (workflow/cli/memory/task)
-- **by-use-case.json** - Grouped by scenario (planning/implementation/testing/docs/session)
-- **essential-commands.json** - Top 14 most-used commands
-- **command-relationships.json** - Next-step recommendations and dependencies
-
-📖 Detailed structure: [Index Structure Reference](guides/index-structure.md)
-
----
-
-## 🗂️ Supporting Guides
-
-- **[Getting Started](guides/getting-started.md)** - 5-minute quickstart for beginners
-- **[Workflow Patterns](guides/workflow-patterns.md)** - Common workflow examples (Plan→Execute, TDD, UI design)
-- **[CLI Tools Guide](guides/cli-tools-guide.md)** - Gemini/Qwen/Codex usage
-- **[Troubleshooting](guides/troubleshooting.md)** - Common issues and solutions
-- **[Implementation Details](guides/implementation-details.md)** - Detailed logic for each mode
-- **[Usage Examples](guides/examples.md)** - Example dialogues and edge cases
-
-## 📦 Reference Documentation
-
-Complete backup of all command and agent documentation for deep analysis:
-
-- **[reference/agents/](reference/agents/)** - 14 agent markdown files with implementation details
-  - **New in v5.8**: cli-explore-agent (code exploration), cli-planning-agent (enhanced)
-- **[reference/commands/](reference/commands/)** - 78 command markdown files organized by category
-  - `cli/` - CLI tool commands (10 files) - **New**: document-analysis mode
-  - `memory/` - Memory management commands (12 files) - **New**: docs-full-cli, docs-related-cli, code-map-memory, style-skill-memory
-  - `task/` - Task management commands (4 files)
-  - `workflow/` - Workflow commands (50 files) - **New**: lite-plan, lite-fix, ui-design enhancements
-
-**Installation Path**: `~/.claude/skills/command-guide/` (skill designed for global installation)
-
-**Absolute Reference Path**: `~/.claude/skills/command-guide/reference/`
-
-**Usage**: Mode 6 queries these files directly for detailed command/agent analysis, or uses CLI tools (gemini/qwen) with absolute paths for complex cross-command analysis.
-
----
-
-## 🛠️ Issue Templates
-
-Generate standardized GitHub issue templates with **execution flow emphasis**:
-
-- **[Interactive Diagnosis](templates/issue-diagnosis.md)** - 🆕 Comprehensive diagnostic workflow with decision tree, checklists, and full command history
-- **[Bug Report](templates/issue-bug.md)** - Report command errors with complete execution flow and environment details
-- **[Feature Request](templates/issue-feature.md)** - Suggest improvements with current workflow analysis and pain points
-- **[Question](templates/issue-question.md)** - Ask usage questions with detailed attempt history and context
-
-**All templates now include**:
-- ✅ Complete command history sections (with privacy protection)
-- ✅ Execution environment details
-- ✅ Interactive problem-locating checklists
-- ✅ Structured troubleshooting guidance
-
-Templates are auto-populated during Mode 5 (Issue Reporting) interaction.
-
----
-
-## 📊 System Statistics
-
-- **Total Commands**: 78
-- **Total Agents**: 14
-- **Categories**: 5 (workflow: 50, cli: 10, memory: 12, task: 4, general: 2)
-- **Use Cases**: 7 (planning, implementation, testing, documentation, session-management, analysis, general)
-- **Difficulty Levels**: 3 (Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced)
-- **Essential Commands**: 13
-- **Reference Docs**: 92 markdown files (14 agents + 78 commands)
-
----
-
-## 🔧 Maintenance
-
-### Updating Indexes
-
-When commands are added/modified/removed:
-
-```bash
-cd /d/Claude_dms3/.claude/skills/command-guide
-python scripts/analyze_commands.py
-```
-
-This script:
-1. Scans all command files in `../../commands/`
-2. Extracts metadata from YAML frontmatter
-3. Analyzes command relationships
-4. Regenerates all 5 index files
-
-### Committing Updates
-
-```bash
-git add .claude/skills/command-guide/
-git commit -m "docs: update command indexes"
-git push
-```
-
-Team members get latest indexes via `git pull`.
-
----
-
-## 📖 Related Documentation
-
-- [Workflow Architecture](../../workflows/workflow-architecture.md) - System design overview
-- [Intelligent Tools Strategy](../../workflows/intelligent-tools-strategy.md) - CLI tool selection
-- [Context Search Strategy](../../workflows/context-search-strategy.md) - Search patterns
-- [Task Core](../../workflows/task-core.md) - Task system fundamentals
-
----
-
-## 🔄 Maintenance
-
-### Documentation Updates
-
-This SKILL documentation is kept in sync with command implementations through a standardized update process.
-
-**Update Guideline**: See [UPDATE-GUIDELINE.md](UPDATE-GUIDELINE.md) for the complete documentation maintenance process.
-
-**Update Process**:
-1. **Analyze**: Identify changed commands/agents from git commits
-2. **Extract**: Gather change information and impact assessment
-3. **Update**: Sync reference docs, guides, and examples
-4. **Regenerate**: Run `scripts/analyze_commands.py` to rebuild indexes
-5. **Validate**: Test examples and verify consistency
-6. **Commit**: Follow standardized commit message format
-
-**Key Capabilities**:
-- 6 operation modes (Search, Recommendations, Full Docs, Onboarding, Issue Reporting, Deep Analysis)
-- 80 reference documentation files (11 agents + 69 commands)
-- 5 JSON indexes for fast command lookup
-- 8 comprehensive guides covering all workflow patterns
-- 4 issue templates for standardized problem reporting
-- CLI-assisted complex query analysis with gemini/qwen integration
-
-**Maintainer**: CCW Team

.claude/skills/command-guide/UPDATE-GUIDELINE.md

@@ -1,592 +0,0 @@
-# Command Guide Update Guideline
-
-## 📋 Purpose
-
-This document defines a **standardized, repeatable process** for updating command-guide documentation when command changes are detected. Use this guideline every time you need to update command-guide SKILL documentation to ensure consistency and completeness.
-
----
-
-## 🎯 Update Trigger Conditions
-
-Execute this update process when ANY of the following conditions are met:
-
-1. **New commands added** to `.claude/commands/`
-2. **Command parameters changed** (new flags, modified behavior)
-3. **Command architecture refactored** (workflow reorganization)
-4. **Agent implementations updated** in `.claude/agents/`
-5. **User explicitly requests** command-guide update
-
----
-
-## 📊 Phase 1: Analysis & Discovery
-
-### Step 1.1: Identify Changed Files
-
-**Objective**: Discover what has changed since last update
-
-**Actions**:
-```bash
-# Find recent commits affecting commands/agents
-git log --oneline --since="<last-update-date>" --grep="command\|agent\|workflow" -20
-
-# Show detailed changes
-git diff <last-commit>..<current-commit> --stat .claude/commands/ .claude/agents/
-
-# Identify modified command files
-git diff <last-commit>..<current-commit> --name-only .claude/commands/
-```
-
-**Output**: List of changed files and commit messages
-
-**Document**:
-- Changed command files
-- Changed agent files
-- Key commit messages
-- Change patterns (new features, refactoring, fixes)
-
----
-
-### Step 1.2: Analyze Change Scope
-
-**Objective**: Understand the nature and impact of changes
-
-**Questions to Answer**:
-1. **What changed?** (parameters, workflow, architecture, behavior)
-2. **Why changed?** (new feature, optimization, bug fix, refactoring)
-3. **Impact scope?** (single command, workflow pattern, system-wide)
-4. **User-facing?** (affects user commands, internal only)
-
-**Analysis Matrix**:
-
-| Change Type | Detection Method | Impact Level |
-|-------------|--------------------|--------------|
-| **New Parameter** | Diff `argument-hint` field | Medium |
-| **Workflow Reorganization** | Multiple command changes | High |
-| **Architecture Change** | Agent file changes + command changes | High |
-| **Bug Fix** | Single file, small change | Low |
-| **New Command** | New file in `.claude/commands/` | Medium-High |
-
-**Output**: Change classification and impact assessment
-
----
-
-### Step 1.3: Map Affected Documentation
-
-**Objective**: Identify which documentation files need updates
-
-**Mapping Rules**:
-
-**Command Changes** → Affects:
-- `reference/commands/<category>/<command-name>.md` (copy from source)
-- `index/all-commands.json` (regenerate)
-- `index/by-category.json` (if new category)
-- `guides/ui-design-workflow-guide.md` (if UI workflow affected)
-- `guides/workflow-patterns.md` (if workflow pattern changed)
-
-**Agent Changes** → Affects:
-- `reference/agents/<agent-name>.md` (copy from source)
-- `guides/implementation-details.md` (if agent behavior changed)
-
-**Workflow Reorganization** → Affects:
-- All related command references
-- Workflow guides
-- Examples in guides
-
-**Output**: Checklist of files to update
-
----
-
-## 🔧 Phase 2: Content Preparation
-
-### Step 2.1: Extract Key Information
-
-**Objective**: Gather information needed for documentation updates
-
-**Extract from Git Commits**:
-```bash
-# Get commit details
-git show <commit-hash> --stat
-
-# Extract commit message
-git log --format=%B -n 1 <commit-hash>
-```
-
-**Information to Extract**:
-1. **Feature Name** (from commit message)
-2. **Change Description** (what was added/modified/removed)
-3. **Rationale** (why the change was made)
-4. **New Parameters** (from diff)
-5. **Breaking Changes** (backward compatibility impact)
-6. **Usage Examples** (from commit or command file)
-
-**Output**: Structured data for documentation
-
----
-
-### Step 2.2: Categorize Changes
-
-**Objective**: Organize changes into logical categories
-
-**Categories**:
-
-1. **Major Features**
-   - New commands
-   - New workflows
-   - Architecture changes
-   - User-facing feature additions
-
-2. **Enhancements**
-   - New parameters
-   - Improved behavior
-   - Performance optimizations
-   - Better error handling
-
-3. **Refactoring**
-   - Code reorganization (no user impact)
-   - Internal structure changes
-   - Consistency improvements
-
-4. **Bug Fixes**
-   - Corrected behavior
-   - Fixed edge cases
-   - Parameter validation fixes
-
-5. **Documentation**
-   - Updated descriptions
-   - New examples
-   - Clarified usage
-
-**Output**: Changes grouped by category with priority
-
----
-
-### Step 2.3: Analyze User Impact
-
-**Objective**: Determine what users need to know
-
-**User Impact Questions**:
-1. **Do existing workflows break?** → Migration guide needed
-2. **Are new features optional?** → Enhancement documentation
-3. **Is behavior significantly different?** → Usage pattern updates
-4. **Do examples need updates?** → Example refresh required
-
-**Impact Levels**:
-- **Critical** (Breaking changes, migration required)
-- **Important** (New features users should adopt)
-- **Nice-to-have** (Enhancements, optional)
-- **Internal** (No user action needed)
-
-**Output**: User-facing change summary with impact levels
-
----
-
-## 📝 Phase 3: Documentation Updates
-
-### Step 3.1: Update Reference Documentation
-
-**Objective**: Sync reference docs with source command files
-
-**Actions**:
-
-1. **Run Python Script to Sync & Rebuild**:
-   ```bash
-   cd /d/Claude_dms3/.claude/skills/command-guide
-   python scripts/analyze_commands.py
-   ```
-
-   This script automatically:
-   - Deletes existing `reference/` directory
-   - Copies all agent files from `.claude/agents/` to `reference/agents/`
-   - Copies all command files from `.claude/commands/` to `reference/commands/`
-   - Regenerates all 5 index files with updated metadata
-
-2. **Verify Completeness**:
-   - Check sync output for file counts (11 agents + 70 commands)
-   - Verify all 5 index files regenerated successfully
-   - Ensure YAML frontmatter integrity in copied files
-
-**Output**: Updated reference documentation matching source + regenerated indexes
-
----
-
-### Step 3.2: Update Workflow Guides
-
-**Objective**: Reflect changes in user-facing workflow guides
-
-**Workflow Guide Update Pattern**:
-
-**IF** (UI workflow commands changed):
-1. Open `guides/ui-design-workflow-guide.md`
-2. Locate affected workflow pattern sections
-3. Update examples to use new parameters/behavior
-4. Add "New!" badges for new features
-5. Update performance metrics if applicable
-6. Add troubleshooting entries for new issues
-
-**IF** (General workflow patterns changed):
-1. Open `guides/workflow-patterns.md`
-2. Update affected workflow examples
-3. Add new pattern sections if applicable
-
-**Update Template for New Features**:
-```markdown
-### [Feature Name] (New!)
-
-**Purpose**: [What this feature enables]
-
-**Usage**:
-```bash
-[Example command with new feature]
-```
-
-**Benefits**:
-- [Benefit 1]
-- [Benefit 2]
-
-**When to Use**:
-- [Use case 1]
-- [Use case 2]
-```
-
-**Output**: Updated workflow guides with new features documented
-
----
-
-### Step 3.3: Update Examples and Best Practices
-
-**Objective**: Ensure examples reflect current best practices
-
-**Example Update Checklist**:
-- [ ] Remove deprecated parameter usage
-- [ ] Add examples for new parameters
-- [ ] Update command syntax if changed
-- [ ] Verify all examples are runnable
-- [ ] Add "Note" sections for common pitfalls
-
-**Best Practices Update**:
-- [ ] Add recommendations for new features
-- [ ] Update "When to Use" guidelines
-- [ ] Revise performance optimization tips
-- [ ] Update troubleshooting entries
-
-**Output**: Current, runnable examples
-
----
-
-### Step 3.4: Update SKILL.md Metadata
-
-**Objective**: Keep SKILL.md current without version-specific details
-
-**Update Sections**:
-
-1. **Supporting Guides** (if new guide added):
-   ```markdown
-   - **[New Guide Name](guides/new-guide.md)** - Description
-   ```
-
-2. **System Statistics** (if counts changed):
-   ```markdown
-   - **Total Commands**: <new-count>
-   - **Total Agents**: <new-count>
-   ```
-
-3. **Remove Old Changelog Entries**:
-   - Keep only last 3 changelog entries
-   - Archive older entries to separate file if needed
-
-**DO NOT**:
-- Add version numbers
-- Add specific dates
-- Create time-based changelog entries
-
-**Output**: Updated SKILL.md metadata
-
----
-
-## 🧪 Phase 4: Validation
-
-### Step 4.1: Consistency Check
-
-**Objective**: Ensure documentation is internally consistent
-
-**Checklist**:
-- [ ] All command references use correct names
-- [ ] Parameter descriptions match command files
-- [ ] Examples use valid parameter combinations
-- [ ] Links between documents are not broken
-- [ ] Index files reflect current command count
-
-**Validation Commands**:
-```bash
-# Check for broken internal links
-grep -r "\[.*\](.*\.md)" guides/ reference/ | grep -v "http"
-
-# Verify command count consistency
-actual=$(find ../../commands -name "*.md" | wc -l)
-indexed=$(jq '.commands | length' index/all-commands.json)
-echo "Actual: $actual, Indexed: $indexed"
-```
-
-**Output**: Validation report
-
----
-
-### Step 4.2: Example Testing
-
-**Objective**: Verify all examples are runnable
-
-**Test Cases**:
-- [ ] Copy example commands from guides
-- [ ] Run in test environment
-- [ ] Verify expected output
-- [ ] Document any prerequisites
-
-**Note**: Some examples may be illustrative only; mark these clearly
-
-**Output**: Tested examples
-
----
-
-### Step 4.3: Peer Review Checklist
-
-**Objective**: Prepare documentation for review
-
-**Review Points**:
-- [ ] Is the change clearly explained?
-- [ ] Are examples helpful and clear?
-- [ ] Is migration guidance complete (if breaking)?
-- [ ] Are troubleshooting tips adequate?
-- [ ] Is the documentation easy to scan?
-
-**Output**: Review-ready documentation
-
----
-
-## 📤 Phase 5: Commit & Distribution
-
-### Step 5.1: Git Commit Structure
-
-**Objective**: Create clear, traceable commits
-
-**Commit Pattern**:
-```bash
-git add .claude/skills/command-guide/
-
-# Commit message format
-git commit -m "docs(command-guide): update for <feature-name> changes
-
-- Update reference docs for <changed-commands>
-- Enhance <guide-name> with <feature> documentation
-- Regenerate indexes (new count: <count>)
-- Add troubleshooting for <new-issues>
-
-Refs: <commit-hashes-of-source-changes>
-"
-```
-
-**Commit Message Rules**:
-- **Type**: `docs(command-guide)`
-- **Scope**: Always `command-guide`
-- **Summary**: Concise, imperative mood
-- **Body**: Bullet points for each change type
-- **Refs**: Link to source change commits
-
-**Output**: Clean commit history
-
----
-
-### Step 5.2: Update Distribution
-
-**Objective**: Make updates available to users
-
-**Actions**:
-```bash
-# Push to remote
-git push origin main
-
-# Verify GitHub reflects changes
-# Check: https://github.com/<org>/<repo>/tree/main/.claude/skills/command-guide
-```
-
-**User Notification** (if breaking changes):
-- Update project README
-- Add note to main documentation
-- Consider announcement in team channels
-
-**Output**: Published updates
-
----
-
-## 🔄 Phase 6: Iteration & Improvement
-
-### Step 6.1: Gather Feedback
-
-**Objective**: Improve documentation based on usage
-
-**Feedback Sources**:
-- User questions about changed commands
-- Confusion points in examples
-- Missing information requests
-- Error reports
-
-**Track**:
-- Common questions → Add to troubleshooting
-- Confusing examples → Simplify or expand
-- Missing use cases → Add to guides
-
-**Output**: Improvement backlog
-
----
-
-### Step 6.2: Continuous Refinement
-
-**Objective**: Keep documentation evolving
-
-**Regular Tasks**:
-- [ ] Review index statistics monthly
-- [ ] Update examples with real-world usage
-- [ ] Consolidate redundant sections
-- [ ] Expand troubleshooting based on issues
-- [ ] Refresh screenshots/outputs if UI changed
-
-**Output**: Living documentation
-
----
-
-## 📐 Update Decision Matrix
-
-Use this matrix to determine update depth:
-
-| Change Scope | Reference Docs | Workflow Guides | Examples | Indexes | Migration Guide |
-|--------------|----------------|-----------------|----------|---------|-----------------|
-| **New Parameter** | Update command file | Add parameter note | Add usage example | Regenerate | No |
-| **Workflow Refactor** | Update all affected | Major revision | Update all examples | Regenerate | If breaking |
-| **New Command** | Copy new file | Add workflow pattern | Add examples | Regenerate | No |
-| **Architecture Change** | Update all affected | Major revision | Comprehensive update | Regenerate | Yes |
-| **Bug Fix** | Update description | Add note if user-visible | Fix incorrect examples | No change | No |
-| **New Feature** | Update affected files | Add feature section | Add feature examples | Regenerate | No |
-
----
-
-## 🎯 Quality Gates
-
-Before considering documentation update complete, verify:
-
-### Gate 1: Completeness
-- [ ] All changed commands have updated reference docs
-- [ ] All new features are documented in guides
-- [ ] All examples are current and correct
-- [ ] Indexes reflect current state
-
-### Gate 2: Clarity
-- [ ] Non-expert can understand changes
-- [ ] Examples demonstrate key use cases
-- [ ] Migration path is clear (if breaking)
-- [ ] Troubleshooting covers common issues
-
-### Gate 3: Consistency
-- [ ] Terminology is consistent across docs
-- [ ] Parameter descriptions match everywhere
-- [ ] Cross-references are accurate
-- [ ] Formatting follows established patterns
-
-### Gate 4: Accessibility
-- [ ] Table of contents is current
-- [ ] Search/navigation works
-- [ ] Related docs are linked
-- [ ] Issue templates reference new content
-
----
-
-## 🚀 Quick Start Template
-
-When updates are needed, follow this abbreviated workflow:
-
-```bash
-# 1. ANALYZE (5 min)
-git log --oneline --since="<last-update>" --grep="command\|agent" -20
-# → Identify what changed
-
-# 2. EXTRACT (10 min)
-git show <commit-hash> --stat
-git diff <commit>..HEAD --stat .claude/commands/
-# → Understand changes
-
-# 3. UPDATE (30 min)
-# - Update affected guide sections (ui-design-workflow-guide.md, etc.)
-# - Add examples for new features
-# - Document parameter changes
-
-# 4. SYNC & REGENERATE (2 min)
-cd /d/Claude_dms3/.claude/skills/command-guide
-python scripts/analyze_commands.py
-# → Syncs reference docs + regenerates all 5 indexes
-
-# 5. VALIDATE (10 min)
-# - Test examples
-# - Check consistency
-# - Verify links
-
-# 6. COMMIT (5 min)
-git add .claude/skills/command-guide/
-git commit -m "docs(command-guide): update for <feature> changes"
-git push origin main
-```
-
-**Total Time**: ~1 hour for typical update
-
----
-
-## 🔗 Related Resources
-
-- **Python Index Script**: `.claude/skills/command-guide/scripts/analyze_commands.py`
-- **Issue Templates**: `.claude/skills/command-guide/templates/`
-- **SKILL Entry Point**: `.claude/skills/command-guide/SKILL.md`
-- **Reference Source**: `.claude/commands/` and `.claude/agents/`
-
----
-
-## 📌 Appendix: Common Patterns
-
-### Pattern 1: New Parameter Addition
-
-**Example**: `--interactive` flag added to `explore-auto`
-
-**Update Sequence**:
-1. Update `guides/ui-design-workflow-guide.md` with interactive examples
-2. Add "When to Use" guidance
-3. Run Python script to sync reference docs and regenerate indexes
-4. Update argument-hint in examples
-
----
-
-### Pattern 2: Workflow Reorganization
-
-**Example**: Layout extraction split into concept generation + selection
-
-**Update Sequence**:
-1. Major revision of workflow guide section
-2. Update all workflow examples
-3. Add migration notes for existing users
-4. Update troubleshooting
-5. Run Python script to sync and regenerate indexes
-
----
-
-### Pattern 3: Architecture Change
-
-**Example**: Agent execution model changed
-
-**Update Sequence**:
-1. Update `guides/implementation-details.md`
-2. Revise all workflow patterns using affected agents
-3. Create migration guide
-4. Update examples comprehensively
-5. Run Python script to sync and regenerate indexes
-6. Add extensive troubleshooting
-
----
-
-**End of Update Guideline**
-
-This guideline is a living document. Improve it based on update experience.