* docs(#2904): how-to for listing a reviewer lane in the registry
#2912 shipped the Reviewer Lane Registry, which lands in 1.9.1. Two docs
consequences.
New: docs/how-to/list-your-reviewer-lane.md. A Diataxis how-to for the
publish task -- which of the three catalogs applies (and why a runtime
carrying a reviewer body lists under its primary install shape instead),
opening the required discussion thread BEFORE the PR, the three fields
that reject entries most often (slug grammar differs from id, flags stay
kebab when the slug is snake, install/uninstall must be copy-pasteable),
regenerate-don't-hand-edit, and register-once-then-Releases. Links the
registry README for the field table rather than duplicating it -- the
spec is reference, this is the task flow.
Corrected: ship-a-reviewer-lane.md said "Listing your lane is not wired
yet" and pointed at #2904 as future work. #2906 merged at 11:25Z and
#2912 at 12:11Z, so that section shipped false the moment the registry
landed. Replaced with the publish pointer.
Indexed the new guide and the generated catalog in docs/README.md, and
added the guide to develop-a-capability.md's ecosystem list.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* docs(#2904): caveat credential-bearing configKeys in both the guide and the spec
Isolated security review found the worked entry's `configKeys:
["acme.api_key"]` modelled storing a live credential with no note on
where that value ends up.
Verified: config values are written in plaintext to
.planning/config.json (docs/CONFIGURATION.md:227 -- masking is
display-only, "that file is the security boundary"), and
planning.commit_docs defaults to true (:466). So a credential declared
that way lands in the installing user's git repository unless they have
gitignored .planning/. None of the twelve first-party lanes does this --
they own only review.models.*, host, and prompt-budget keys.
The pattern originates in docs/registries/README.md:221, shipped by
#2912, so the caveat goes on BOTH surfaces rather than only on the copy
that inherited it -- the spec's example is what future authors will read
first.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* chore(#2915): backfill changeset PR number
pr: 0 -> 2917.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: sim <sim@local>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* docs(#2782): how-to for declaring a reviewer lane in a capability
ADR-2782 shipped the Reviewer Lane capability surface in 1.9.0, but the
only documentation was reference (capability-manifest.md) and rationale
(ADR-2782). A capability author had no task-oriented path from "I have a
review CLI" to "/gsd:review invokes it".
Adds docs/how-to/ship-a-reviewer-lane.md: role selection, the spawn and
openai-http worked examples, federated config ownership, the
review-lane query surface as the verification step, what the install
disclosure and egress-host re-verification mean for the author, and the
data-only boundary with the two named CLIs that do not fit today.
Also corrects the manifest reference's `invoke` row, which understated
three enums against the shipped validator: promptChannel omitted `argv`,
effortChannel omitted `env`, and the openai-http sub-shape plus the
required-with-file-arg `outputArg` were undocumented entirely.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* docs(#2782): correct four claims found by the two orthogonal reviews
Security review (1 major, 2 minor):
- "a reserved slug" implied the gsd-/anthropic- namespace rule, which
guards the capability id, not reviewer.slug. The slug guard is
isReservedName (__proto__/constructor/prototype), a prototype-pollution
barrier. Both rules are now stated and kept apart.
- Added ADR-2782 D5's own caveat verbatim: disclosure and host pinning
make the channel visible, pinned and revocable, not safe, and
consent-at-install is a weaker gate for a standing egress channel than
for a hook.
- Named integrity/SHA pinning and engines.gsd as the controls that make
the disclosure tamper-evident and the version range enforceable.
Correctness review (1 major, 1 minor):
- Claimed a name collision is "a hard failure at install". It is not.
installCapability never runs validateCrossCapability; the check runs in
loadRegistry, and a colliding overlay is dropped from acceptedMap with a
warning while the install reports success. Documented as the quiet
failure mode it is, with the symptom to look for.
- The feature-only field list omitted hooks and activationKey, both of
which FEATURE_FIELDS_FORBIDDEN_ON_REVIEWER rejects.
Both worked examples re-validated against validateCapability() -> [].
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* docs(#2782): restore Kimi Code to the cross-AI reviewer list
set-up-cross-ai-review.md named eleven reviewers; twelve lanes ship. The
kimi-code lane (added by #2718, declared as manifest data by #2798) was
never added here — the same roster-drift class as #2781, which #2800's
parity gate covers for COMMANDS.md and FEATURES.md but not for how-to
prose.
Also points readers at the declared-lane model rather than a static list:
the roster is now generated, a capability can ship its own lane, and
`gsd-tools review-lane sections` answers "what do I actually have".
Verified against the twelve declared bodies in capabilities/*/capability.json.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* docs(#2782): use the invocation form the runtime descriptors actually declare
The new guide used /gsd:review. Nothing in this repo produces that form.
- capability-validator VALID_COMMAND_STYLES is {slash-hyphen, shell-var};
there is no colon/namespaced style in the vocabulary at all.
- 18 of 19 runtime capabilities declare commandStyle "slash-hyphen",
claude included; codex is "shell-var". Every artifactLayout prefix is
"gsd-".
- A plain-file command install never namespaces, so .claude/commands/
gsd-review.md is typed /gsd-review.
- The Claude Code plugin surface would namespace on plugin.json "name",
which is "gsd-core" -- so the plugin form would be /gsd-core:review.
The commands/gsd/ subdirectory is cosmetic and contributes nothing to
the invoked name.
So /gsd:review is neither the installed form nor the plugin form. Uses
/gsd-review, matching set-up-cross-ai-review.md and the 18 descriptors.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* docs(#2782): state that lane listing is not wired yet
The guide could describe authoring, validating, and installing a lane but
implied a publishing path that does not exist. Neither discoverability
catalog can accept one: a Community Capability Registry entry requires a
non-empty loopExtensionPoints plus hookKinds, and a role:"reviewer"
capability is forbidden from declaring steps/contributions/gates, so both
fields are unsatisfiable rather than merely unset. The EoS Registry is
ADR-1239 host integrations, which a lane is not.
The registry schema predates the reviewer role by 17 days (#2182 Jul 11,
ADR-2782 Jul 28) and registry-schema.cjs has zero occurrences of
"reviewer". Tracked for a 1.9.x point release by #2904.
Says so explicitly, and tells authors NOT to file a loop extension point
they do not use to get past validation -- a schema satisfiable only by
lying is one that will be lied to.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* chore(#2782): backfill PR number and fix the changeset invocation form
pr: 0 -> 2906.
Also corrects /gsd:review -> /gsd-review in the fragment body. The
fragment renders into CHANGELOG.md, which is a reader-facing docs surface
and is never passed through the install-time converter -- so the colon
form would ship the #2903 drift into a permanent release artifact.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* docs(#2907): propagate the invocation-form fix and restore lane order
Two findings from an isolated review of the post-review delta.
- docs/README.md and develop-a-capability.md still said /gsd:review in
the cross-links added for the new guide. The form was corrected in the
guide itself but not in the two entries pointing at it, leaving three
docs making the same claim in two different forms.
- set-up-cross-ai-review.md inserted Kimi Code between Antigravity and
Ollama. REVIEWER_LANES is ordered by write_reviews order and kimi-code
is 12th, appended after llama_cpp; the prose list mirrored declaration
order before this change and now does again.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Test <test@example.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* feat(#1928): remove sunset gemini cli runtime, redirect to antigravity
Google sunset Gemini CLI on 2026-06-18; Antigravity CLI is its official successor (already a first-class GSD runtime). Remove the gemini runtime from the enum (16->15), aliases, labels, config-home fragment, install path, converters (convertClaudeToGemini{Markdown,Toml,Agent}, convertSlashCommandsToGeminiMentions), capability descriptor, gemini-extension.json, RULESET.GEMINI.*, and the interactive menu (renumbered, no gap).
--gemini now prints an explicit deprecation notice citing the 2026-06-18 sunset and redirects to --antigravity (no silent alias, per the issue's Hyrum's-Law rejection). Antigravity is preserved throughout: its GEMINI.md contextFileName, .gemini/antigravity config home, the shared convertGeminiToolName/claudeToGeminiTools tool vocabulary, and the 'gemini' hookEvents dialect it declares. GEMINI.md retargeted as Antigravity's context file.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* chore(#1928): backfill changeset PR number (#1996)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* chore(#1928): drop Gemini CLI from issue templates (review nit)
Removes the sunset Gemini CLI runtime from the two GitHub issue-template
runtime lists that the removal PR missed, per @davesienkowski's review nit:
- feature_request.yml: 'Applicable runtimes' checkbox (a user could otherwise
request a feature for a runtime GSD no longer supports)
- bug_report.yml: 'Runtime' dropdown + the stale ~/.gemini/settings.json
retrieval-help line
Leaves the post-removal templates fully consistent with the Antigravity redirect.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
