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>
26 KiB
26 KiB