Release: working-process 0.14.0–0.16.0, project-memory 0.5.0

.claude-plugin/marketplace.json

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
     {
       "name": "working-process",
       "source": "./plugins/working-process",
-      "description": "Spec-driven working process on top of superpowers: grilling-session, architect-session, system-designer-session and sync-rules skills, architect and plan-adversary review agents, architect-consult and system-designer-consult consultation agents, plus distributed process rules"
+      "description": "Spec-driven working process on top of superpowers: grilling-session, architect-session, system-designer-session, process-status and sync-rules skills, architect and plan-adversary verdict agents, architect-consult and system-designer-consult consultation agents, propagation-auditor and integrity-auditor audit agents, plus distributed process rules"
     },
     {
       "name": "python-standards",

.claude/rules/plugin-authoring.md

@@ -13,8 +13,9 @@ paths:
 - Names are kebab-case. Skills whose content is an open-ended
   conversation are named `*-session`; formal reviews that end in a verdict
   are agents; verdict-free consultation agents — one briefing in, one
-  contribution out, from a fresh isolated context — are named `*-consult`.
-  Operational skills may prompt for decisions without being
+  contribution out, from a fresh isolated context — are named `*-consult`;
+  audit agents returning material for the dispatcher's disposition are named
+  `*-auditor`. Operational skills may prompt for decisions without being
   sessions — they are named for what they do (e.g. `sync-rules`).
 - Author skills with the `skill-creator` skill when it is available —
   scaffolding, `description:` tuning, and evals; it complements

.claude/rules/standards-rule-tags.md

@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+---
+paths:
+  - "plugins/**"
+---
+
 # Standards plugins — rule tags and severity
 
 Binding for every Standards plugin in this repo (`salesforce-standards`,

README.md

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ Marketplace of [Claude Code](https://code.claude.com) plugins by Missing Bits.
 
 | Plugin | Docs | Description |
 |--------|------|-------------|
-| `working-process` | [README](plugins/working-process/README.md) | Spec-driven working process: grilling-session, architect-session, system-designer-session and sync-rules skills, architect and plan-adversary review agents, two verdict-free consultation agents, distributed process rules |
+| `working-process` | [README](plugins/working-process/README.md) | Spec-driven working process: grilling-session, architect-session, system-designer-session, process-status and sync-rules skills, architect and plan-adversary verdict agents, two verdict-free consultation agents, propagation-auditor and integrity-auditor audit agents, distributed process rules |
 | `python-standards` | [README](plugins/python-standards/README.md) | Python coding standards for uv + ruff + pytest + pyright: area skills, code-review stack, plan-review checklist, distributed toolchain rule |
 | `salesforce-standards` | [README](plugins/salesforce-standards/README.md) | Salesforce coding standards for the sf CLI toolchain: area skills (Apex, LWC, Flow, data/security model, legacy UI), code-review stack, plan-review checklist, distributed toolchain rule |
 | `project-memory` | [README](plugins/project-memory/README.md) | In-repo project memory: committed Team memory (`docs/memory/`) and per-user Private memory (`.claude/memory/`), with `memory-review-session`, `migrate-memory`, and `redirect-memory` skills, distributed as a Rules payload |

docs/audits/2026-08-29-autonomous-review-loop-integrity-audit.md

@@ -0,0 +1,170 @@
+---
+ticket: none
+date: 2026-08-29
+agent: integrity-auditor
+model: claude-opus-5
+target: ../specs/2026-08-17-autonomous-review-loop-design.md
+coverage: 429/429
+---
+
+# Integrity audit — the autonomous review loop spec
+
+An `integrity-auditor` dispatch read
+`docs/specs/2026-08-17-autonomous-review-loop-design.md` on a fresh
+context and returned eleven defects and ten ranked implementer
+questions at full coverage. The spec had already closed five architect
+rounds, and the plan implementing it had closed thirteen plan-adversary
+rounds. The audit therefore measures what a closed review loop leaves
+behind, which is the claim the two-lens fresh-context design rests on.
+
+This file is the report's home. The report lived only in the
+dispatching session's transcript, so `process-status` read the repo
+clean while nine of the eleven defects waited on a decision.
+
+## Provenance
+
+The dispatch disabled the installed `working-process` plugin and ran
+the unreleased agent from the working tree:
+
+```
+claude -p --plugin-dir plugins/working-process --agent integrity-auditor \
+  --model opus \
+  "Audit target: docs/specs/2026-08-17-autonomous-review-loop-design.md — this
+   bundle's most churned document (a restored draft plus five architect rounds
+   and thirteen plan-adversary waves in two days). Its sibling is
+   docs/specs/2026-08-27-audit-agents-design.md; the shipped surfaces are under
+   plugins/working-process/. Run both lenses and report."
+```
+
+- Ran 2026-08-29 at 14:22 UTC on branch `feature/review-loop-audits`,
+  working tree clean.
+- The same run's `propagation-auditor` returned CLEAN on the sibling
+  spec and one contested hit, verified false, on the target.
+- The dispatched string records what ran. The agent's self-report holds
+  at the rung and fails at the version, so it settles nothing finer.
+- Local transcript: session `60d835b8-2000-46ad-9e24-81abca81b4d6`.
+
+## Dispositions
+
+The auditor clustered the eleven defects into five decisions. The
+release applied D and E in `a998161`, which edited the spec and the
+glossary. A, B and C stay open — they are design questions the audit
+raised, not defects the release carries.
+
+| # | Defect, in the order reported below | Cluster | State |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| 1 | `resolved <date>` closes a `held` line the document never writes | A | open |
+| 2 | `blocking` rounds record `fixed`, which the same section forbids | A | open |
+| 3 | The propagation gate raises a held line after the only delivery moment | C | fixed on `feature/audit-errata` |
+| 4 | The all-Minor signal prescribes fixing by grade | B | fixed on `feature/audit-errata` |
+| 5 | `concerns (resolved <date>)` is autonomous in one passage, offered in the next | B | fixed on `feature/audit-errata` |
+| 6 | `held` carries no slot for the counter-evidence two passages require | A | slot landed on `feature/audit-errata`; the fuller `held` contract stays open |
+| 7 | The closed grammar carries no deviation marker | A | open |
+| 8 | The confirming round's durable marker has no anchor and no command | D | applied in `a998161` |
+| 9 | The new Unfinished-work class contradicts a recorded property of the list | E | applied in `a998161` |
+| 10 | The reviewer's stop signal covers all-Minor rounds only | B | fixed on `feature/audit-errata` |
+| 11 | `resolved (declined)` appears in two forms | A | open |
+
+The three open clusters read: **A** — the ledger grammar does not cover
+what the loop does, five defects. **B** — three termination passages
+contradict Triage and each other, three defects. **C** — the gate breaks
+the one-interruption contract, one defect.
+
+Four of the ten questions remain spec gaps rather than reading errors:
+1, 2, 3 and 5. Question 1 closed with the errata below; 2, 3 and 5 stay
+open.
+
+Wave one landed on `feature/audit-errata`: all three B defects, the C
+defect, the `counter:` slot of defect 6, and question 1's answer — the
+previous round's `fixed` lines and their `<what changed>` clauses are
+what a diff-scoped brief is taken against. Dropping the `[hit]` ledger
+variant narrows a published convention, so the release carrying it is a
+minor bump. Cluster A's remaining five defects belong to a follow-up
+spec that treats the ledger as loop state.
+
+## The report
+
+Verbatim, as returned.
+
+---
+
+Preconditions: working tree is clean (`git status --porcelain` empty), so every conversation edit is on disk. The brief does not state a propagation-audit result; nothing in it reports hits, so I proceeded rather than stopping.
+
+---
+
+model: claude opus 5
+
+---
+
+## Defects
+
+**"The disposition ledger", ledger grammar vs. `## Review rounds` — the `resolved <date>` token is defined for one state and used for another, leaving `fixed` and `resolved` interchangeable with no stated rule.**
+  quote A: "`resolved <date>` — closes a held line once the answer lands. The answer's substance goes into the document's design text; the ledger line points at it and never duplicates it."
+  quote B: "- resolved 2026-08-27 — [Important] the ledger anchors joined the Unfinished-work list whose shipped invariant counts frontmatter hits only; landed in "The disposition ledger" (section-scoped match semantics, hardened command, one entry naming both owners)"
+  *(No `held` line exists anywhere in the document, so no `resolved` line can be closing one; round 2 then carries `fixed` and `resolved 2026-08-27` side by side for the same class of session-applied fix.)*
+
+**"Termination" vs. `## Review rounds` — the grammar has no token for a developer-directed fix, so the document's own `blocking` rounds record `fixed` (defined as self-fixed) lines, which the same section forbids.**
+  quote A: "`blocking` suspends autonomy entirely: relay, stamp, stop — no self-fixes from a blocking round."
+  quote B: "### 2026-08-27 — architect, fable 5, blocking (round 2, diff-scoped)" … "- fixed — [Important] the document state between a plan's diff-scoped LGTM and its confirming round was undefined, each reading breaking a recorded convention; license: this spec's own recovery philosophy"
+  *(`fixed` is defined at "The disposition ledger" as "self-fixed"; rounds 1, 2 and 3 are all `blocking`.)*
+
+**"Sequencing" — the propagation gate runs after the relay turn but can produce a held line, and the only stated delivery moment for held questions is the relay turn that has already passed.**
+  quote A: "Held set non-empty: batch the held questions into one message at the relay turn — per item: a one-line claim, why it is held, the question, and options with the session's recommendation — and wait."
+  quote B: "Before any re-dispatch — held set empty or developer-ordered — the propagation-auditor (audit-agents spec) gates the round when it is available … a hit the session believes is wrong escalates as held, like any contested finding — its held line carries the marker `[hit]` in the severity slot"
+  *(The same section states "the developer is interrupted exactly once per round"; a gate escalation is a second interruption in the same round, or none.)*
+
+**"Termination" vs. "Triage" — the all-Minor bullet prescribes fixing findings by grade, which the license test explicitly rules out as the basis for a fix.**
+  quote A: "All-Minor signal: two consecutive rounds whose findings are all Minor end the unattended run — fix the residue, annotate `concerns (resolved <date>)`, and escalate with a fresh-round offer instead of dispatching again."
+  quote B: "Severity is not the line. A Minor finding can be decision-shaped (a naming call the developer already ruled on); a Critical can be self-fixable (a contradiction with a recorded ADR — the ADR is the license). Triage reads the fix's license, never the finding's grade."
+
+**"Termination" vs. "Termination" (loop closure) — the `concerns (resolved <date>)` annotation is an autonomous act in one passage and an offered choice in the next.**
+  quote A: "All-Minor signal: two consecutive rounds whose findings are all Minor end the unattended run — fix the residue, annotate `concerns (resolved <date>)`, and escalate with a fresh-round offer instead of dispatching again."
+  quote B: "Loop closure reuses existing machinery: after answers land, the session offers a fresh round (replacing the verdict as usual) or the lifecycle rule's `concerns (resolved <date>)` annotation with its body note"
+  *(Under "Re-dispatch briefs" an annotation close also "ends the loop", so the difference decides whether a session may close a loop without the developer.)*
+
+**"The disposition ledger" vs. the grammar block — the `held` shape has no slot for the counter-evidence two other passages require it to carry.**
+  quote A: "`held` — needs the developer; the line carries the concrete question (or the dispute plus counter-evidence), phrased so one short answer resolves it."
+  quote B: "    - held — [<severity>] <claim>; question: <one short question>"
+  *("Triage" states the same requirement independently: "A finding the session believes is wrong is held with the session's counter-evidence attached".)*
+
+**"Re-dispatch briefs" vs. the grammar block — the next round's brief must read deviations back out of the ledger, but the closed grammar carries no deviation marker.**
+  quote A: "When the ledger records a deviation from a reviewer's suggestion, the next round's brief invites refutation of the recorded rationale — the rationale is not a defence to be protected."
+  quote B: "    - fixed — [<severity>] <claim>; license: <citation>; <what changed>"
+  *(The grammar's variants are enumerated as closed: "the grammar's one severity-token variant" and "the grammar's one heading annotation".)*
+
+**"Re-dispatch briefs" vs. "The disposition ledger" — the heading that marks a plan's owed confirming round is named the durable marker, but no anchor or command detects it.**
+  quote A: "the `### <ISO date> — <agent>, <model self-report>, LGTM (round N, diff-scoped)` heading is the durable marker that a confirming round is owed"
+  quote B: "Two greppable anchors join the lifecycle rule's unfinished-work discipline: `open` lines (a stamped round whose remediation never ran) and `held` lines (pending developer questions)."
+  *(The mandated command is `rg -n --no-ignore --crlf '^- (open|held) —' docs/`, which matches no heading; the recovery clause itself concedes "an annotation-closed or previously-approved document is grep-clean there".)*
+
+**"The disposition ledger" / "Changes by file" vs. the glossary's Unfinished-work list entry — the new class is given non-frontmatter match semantics and costs a consumer edit, contradicting a recorded property of the list, and no glossary edit is routed.**
+  quote A: "The entry deliberately re-scopes the list's frontmatter-only invariant for itself: its hits count inside a `## Review rounds` section and nowhere else" … "`plugins/working-process/skills/process-status/SKILL.md` — the hit-confirmation step takes an entry's own published match scope when the entry re-scopes it"
+  quote B (`docs/domain/glossary.md`, **Unfinished-work list**): "the single definition site for which classes exist, so a new class costs one edit in the rule and none in the consumers that run it. A command's output is hits to confirm against the frontmatter block, never Findings."
+
+**"Re-dispatch briefs" vs. `## Review rounds` closing paragraph — the reviewer's stop signal is defined only for an all-Minor round, and the document's own loop closes on it after a round whose single finding is Important.**
+  quote A: "asks the reviewer for its own stop signal: when the round's remaining findings are all Minor wording residue, say so and judge whether another round is worth its cost."
+  quote B: "Loop closed 2026-08-27 by the resolution annotation, on round 5's own alternative: the single finding was a two-clause routing edit with no design content, fixed as suggested, and the whole-text backstop is the consumption gate's integrity audit this release ships"
+  *(Round 5's only line reads "- fixed — [Important] the round-4 gate behavior was fully designed in the body and routed to no file edit".)*
+
+**"The disposition ledger" — the declined-resolution token is given two forms, one dated and one not, in the same section that calls the shape canonical.**
+  quote A: "`resolved (declined)` records the developer keeping the document as it was."
+  quote B: "    - resolved <date> (declined) — [<severity>] <claim>; <why the document stands>"
+
+---
+
+## Ranked implementer questions
+
+1. **What is a diff-scoped brief's diff taken against?** "briefed on what changed since the round it follows" names no source for the previous state — no snapshot, no commit, no recorded hash — and the lifecycle rule keeps these documents deliberately uncommitted through the review rounds. Without an answer the central mechanism of "Re-dispatch briefs" cannot be built.
+2. **How do the two release-mates' consumption-gate offers compose in `workflow.md`?** The audit-agents spec fires the integrity-audit offer only on an `integrity:` body-hash mismatch ("a match meaning the standing stamp satisfies the gate"); this spec fires the pair question on any diff-scoped-chain LGTM. Which governs a spec carrying both a matching stamp and a diff-chain LGTM?
+3. **Is the confirming full-document round after a plan's diff-scoped LGTM autonomous, and does it count against the three-round cap?** It is prescribed as mandatory ("one full-document confirming round follows"), which sits oddly with both the cap and the every-step-is-an-offer ethos.
+4. **When a contested `[hit]` escalates at the propagation gate, does the round wait for the answer, and does that escalation reset the cap count?** The gate is specified to "repeat until the audit comes back clean", a state a contested hit never reaches.
+5. **What counts as "developer contact" for the cap reset?** A held batch the developer has not yet answered, a relay the developer read silently, and the cap escalation itself are all candidates, and the choice decides whether the cap can ever bind.
+6. **What is the exact vocabulary and case of the `[<severity>]` slot?** The glossary fixes `critical | important | minor` in lowercase; the document's own ledger writes `[Important]` and `[Minor]`, and the one variant `[hit]` is lowercase. The deferred grammar lint depends on this.
+7. **What shape does a single Unfinished-work entry with two owners take?** The list's entry format is "class name, grep command, and the owner of the next move" (singular); this spec routes one entry "whose entry text names both owners", and `process-status` must render it.
+8. **What distinguishes "not now" from "not in this session" in the consent question,** given the same sentence says the session "asks once per Claude Code session … and honours the answer without re-asking"?
+9. **What closes the loop when a held answer lands and the developer accepts neither the fresh round nor the annotation?** Both arms are offers; the document names no third state and no `resolved` line can be written without one of them.
+10. **Are ledger lines flush-left or indented?** The canonical block is presented indented four spaces while the mandated command anchors on `^-`; the difference decides whether the document's own grammar block is self-matching.
+
+---
+
+coverage: 429 lines; highest line cited 429