The discuss-phase command file contained a 93-line detailed <process>
block that competed with the actual workflow file. The agent treated
this summary as complete instructions and never read the execution_context
files (discuss-phase.md, discuss-phase-assumptions.md, context.md template).
Root cause: Unlike execute-phase and plan-phase commands (which have short
2-line process blocks deferring to the workflow file), discuss-phase had
inline step-by-step instructions detailed enough to act on without reading
the referenced workflow files.
Changes:
- Replace discuss-phase command's <process> block with a short directive
that forces reading the workflow file, matching execute-phase/plan-phase
pattern
- Add MANDATORY instruction that execution_context files ARE the
instructions, not optional reading
- Register workflow.research_before_questions and workflow.discuss_mode
as valid config keys (were missing from VALID_CONFIG_KEYS)
- Fix config key mismatch: workflows referenced "research_questions"
but documented key is "workflow.research_before_questions"
- Move research_before_questions from hooks section to workflow section
in settings workflow
- Add research_before_questions default to config template and builder
- Add suggestion mapping for deprecated hooks.research_questions key
- Add 6 regression tests covering config keys and process block guard
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
3306a77a79