0fca71eaae
* enhance(#2529): cover every workflow with response-language directives + CI lint Every workflow now carries response-language coverage in one of three forms, and a CI lint keeps it that way. - 43 workflows load the new shared reference, `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, by eager `@`-import. - Lazy-loaded modes/steps/templates, which cannot rely on an eager import, carry an exact inline directive; 35 such paths are pinned by exact path. - Fragments dispatched by a covered parent inherit coverage, proven per file rather than granted per directory. The 45 workflows whose directive covered only "questions, prompts, and explanations" now name inter-tool narration, which is the defect #2529 reports: the running commentary between tool calls stayed English while the answers around it were translated. `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` enforces it and fails closed on three independent discovery failures (unreadable catalog, empty catalog, unfollowed symlink). It resolves which reference a workflow imports and applies the same four-predicate test to that file, so a weakened shared reference uncovers its importers instead of passing silently, reported once as a systemic failure rather than 43 times. The walk follows symlinked subtrees with a realpath cycle bound. `lint:ci` invokes it by name. REQ-LANG-03 and REQ-LANG-04 state the contract in docs/FEATURES.md; REQ-LANG-04 names the two forms that satisfy it ("narration", "between tool calls") rather than enumerating class members an author cannot use verbatim, and a test pins that text to what the matcher accepts. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * chore(#2529): register the coverage test in the docs-guard lane `107eb8c1` (#3787) landed the docs-guard lane on `next` while this PR was open: a test that reads a `docs/` path must be named in `scripts/docs-guard-registry.cjs` or carry a `docs-guard-exempt` marker, so the guards that read a doc run on the PR that changes it. `tests/response-language-coverage.test.cjs` reads `docs/FEATURES.md` -- it extracts every form REQ-LANG-04 offers an author and runs each through the matcher that enforces it. Registration, not exemption, is the correct side of that gate: a reword of the requirement with no code change is precisely the diff this test exists to catch, and it is the diff the lane would otherwise skip. Registered narrowly (`['docs/FEATURES.md']`) rather than with the `'*'` sentinel, so an unrelated docs change does not pull this test into the lane. Verified: lint-docs-guard-registration 0 violations, tests/ci-docs-guard-registry.test.cjs 51/51, lint:ci exit 0. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * chore(#2529): consolidate this PR's emitted-growth acks into its own fragment This PR ripples emitted bytes across 85 workflow paths. Until now each ripple was acknowledged by appending to whichever live fragment owned that path, because two ack sources may never name the same path. `a84f7563` (#3078) swept all 45 fully-spent fragments off `next`. Forty-two of the paths this PR grows were owned by swept fragments, so those keys are now unowned and this PR's own fragment declares them directly -- one path, one source, and no dependence on a fragment that no longer exists. Each adopted entry keeps its measurement and records where it came from. Two paths are handled differently, because the sweep did not free them: - `review.md` is now owned by `3034-parallel-reviewer-lanes.json`, which landed on `next` after the sweep. Its entry is live, so the old route still applies: this PR's note is appended to that entry rather than declared a second time. - `plan-review-convergence.md` keeps the arrangement made in round 24. Result: 3 fragments in the directory, 85 keys in this PR's own, 0 cross-source duplicates. `lint-emitted-drift-ack` exit 0, `tests/emitted-attribution.test.cjs` green. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(#2529): move REQ-LANG-03/04 into the feature fragment that now generates them `36375513` (#3845) made docs/FEATURES.md a generated projection of docs/features/*.md, marked "do not edit by hand". This PR wrote REQ-LANG-03 and REQ-LANG-04 straight into the generated file, so the rebase left the requirement present in the projection and absent from its source -- the next regeneration would have deleted both, and `tests/features-index-gate.test.cjs` was already red on the mismatch. Both requirements now live in docs/features/response-language-config.md alongside REQ-LANG-01 and -02. Regenerating produces a docs/FEATURES.md that is byte-identical to the committed one, so the text this PR shipped is unchanged -- only its source of truth moved to where #3840 put it. The docs-guard registration is widened to name the fragment as well as the projection. The requirement's source is the fragment now, and an edit there that skips regeneration would otherwise reach this guard through neither path. Verified: features-index-gate 68/68, lint-docs-guard-registration 0 violations, ci-docs-guard-registry + response-language-coverage 142/142. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * chore(#2529): hand the plan-phase ack back to its new live owner `c933184b` (#3825) landed `3172-stated-failing-direction.json` on `next` after fragment had adopted that path when the sweep left it unowned, so the merged tree named it from two sources -- a hard failure in `scripts/lint-emitted-drift-ack.cjs`. The path has a live owner again, so the append route applies: this PR's note joins that entry, carrying its own measurement, and the key is dropped from this PR's fragment (84 keys left, the others untouched). The provenance sentence written for the swept-fragment case is removed rather than reused -- this path was never orphaned, so that account of it would be false. Same shape as `review.md` and `plan-review-convergence.md`: ownership is a property of the merged tree, and a fragment landing upstream after a push can reclaim a key no local check would have flagged. Verified: lint-emitted-drift-ack exit 0, lint:ci exit 0. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(#2529): state byte figures that are true against the tree The reference claimed `execute-phase.md` has "2 bytes of headroom under the ceiling named below". That was true when the sentence was written -- the file sat at 93398 against the 93400 comfort assert -- and upstream has since shrunk it to 91493 against a 93600 hard ceiling, so the figure now understates the headroom by three orders of magnitude. The rationale the sentence supports does not depend on the number, so the number is gone rather than refreshed: a restated figure would go stale again on the next upstream edit, and nothing parses it. Audited every other numeric claim this PR ships the same way, mechanically against the merge base: all 82 FILE-delta claims in the ack fragment match the real per-file delta exactly, and the 1,629-byte reference and 63-byte import line check out. One class was imprecise: the 41 notes for workflows whose inline directive was rewritten in place quoted the conversion counterfactual as "+1,692 bytes more loaded context", which is the reference form's whole weight, not the increase over the inline directive those files already carry. Each now names both quantities and the net (+1,605 / +1,609 / +1,584). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(#2529): one rule for pinned vs inherited coverage, and the docs to pick it Review measured that 14 of the 35 pinned fragments would pass by inheritance anyway, and that the PR asserted both readings at once: inheritance is real coverage (so those 14 pins are noise) or it is not (so 30 inheriting fragments are green-but-uncovered). Only one can be true. Inheritance is real: the predicate proves it per file -- the parent must dispatch this exact path from a read/execute context AND be covered itself -- so the parent's directive is in the loaded context by the time the fragment is read. The 14 pins are therefore removed along with the directive lines they pinned, and those files inherit like the 30 structurally identical ones. The rule is now stated where the set is declared, and enforced from the other side by a test: no member of the pinned set may be one that would have inherited. That is what decides the form for the next fragment. - pinned set 35 -> 21; 14 workflow files revert to their base content - `findViolations` no longer returns early on a pinned path: a file that becomes eagerly loaded and takes the shared reference is strictly better off, and the gate must not red that. The reference form is admitted because its own wording is validated in turn; an arbitrary reworded inline line still fails. - the reference-directive cache is keyed by size and mtime, not by path alone, so a rewritten reference re-asked in one process no longer returns the stale verdict - `carriesInlineDirective` names its negation blindness: four independent hits read vocabulary, not polarity - the real-tree scan asserts each source produced files instead of `> 152`, a constant that read as the workflow count and would have passed a scan that lost one of its two directories - the pinned-set size assertion goes the same way: the size follows from the rule, so the rule is what the suite asserts Docs, for the gate that now governs every future workflow: - `docs/contributing/response-language-coverage.md` -- why the narration class is the discriminator, the four coverage forms, the decision order that picks one, the pinned line, and what each failure message means - a row in CONTRIBUTING.md's CI checks table, matching the docs-guard row - `docs/CONFIGURATION.md` points at it from the `response_language` entry Also: the changeset said 45 reworded workflows; it is 44 (42 @-reference + 21 pinned + 44 rewritten = 107 touched). That text ships to CHANGELOG.md. `3707-parse-gap-reporting.json` landed on `next` reclaiming `audit-uat.md` and `progress.md`; both handed back by the append route, leaving 82 keys here. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(#2529): correct the reference-taker count, 43 -> 42 The ack notes said the import line is byte-identical "in each of the 43 workflows that take the reference" and that the alternative would be "43 inline copies". The shared reference has 42 importers; the 43rd file in review's table is `execute-phase.md`, which imports the OTHER reference. Corrected in all 41 notes that carry the sentence, across this PR's fragment and the two it appends to. Found by re-running the numeric audit from the previous round after the rebase, which also re-verified all 84 FILE-delta claims against the new base -- all exact. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * chore(#2529): migrate the emitted-drift ack from a fragment to commit trailers ADR-3942 (#3954) landed while this PR was open: the acknowledgment is now a commit trailer and tests/emitted-drift-acks/ no longer exists. The fragment is deleted and each key it declared becomes one trailer, reasons unchanged. The four keys this PR had handed to 3034-*, 3172-* and 3707-* under the one-source rule come home here. That rule was the whole reason for the hand-backs, and the trailer model has no shared namespace to collide in -- five of this PR's rounds were spent on exactly those collisions. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: add-backlog.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: add-phase.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: add-tests.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: add-todo.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: ai-integration-phase.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Re-homed in round 16: the fragment that carried this sentence (`3423-required-reading.json`) was retired on `next` byddf85287(fix(#3357), #3513), and no fragment on `next` declares this path now. The ack therefore returns to this PR's own fragment, which is the only live source for it — the change to the path is this PR's. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: analyze-dependencies.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: audit-fix.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Re-homed in round 19: this PR declared the path in its own fragment, and `3602-workflow-subagent-model-resolution.json` landed on `next` declaring it too. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence moves here and the key leaves ours. Re-homed from `3602-workflow-subagent-model-resolution.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: audit-milestone.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Re-homed from `2962-zsh-nomatch-for-glob-portability.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: audit-uat.md — A live/archived split was added and then reverted on this branch (see `$comment`): the split's extra rule in `initialize`, the narrowed Unparsed-table filter, and the separate 'Unparsed UAT Files in Archived Milestones' informational section are all removed, so the file settles at origin/next 5582 -> 7124 bytes (+1542, final). #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: autonomous.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Re-homed in round 16: `3210-autonomous-precondition-gate.json` landed on `next` in8fc88f66(fix(#3210), #3528) and declares this path today. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence moves here and the key leaves this PR's fragment. Re-homed from `3210-autonomous-precondition-gate.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: check-todos.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: cleanup.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Re-homed in round 18: this PR declared the path in its own fragment, and `2142-quick-task-archival.json` landed on `next` declaring it too. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence moves here and the key leaves ours. Re-homed from `2142-quick-task-archival.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: code-review-fix.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Re-homed in round 13: `3190-code-review-fix-auto-rewrite-review.json` landed on `next` in1d5d7795(fix(#3190), #3434) and declares this path too. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence moves here and the key leaves this PR's fragment. Re-homed from `3190-code-review-fix-auto-rewrite-review.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: code-review.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Re-homed in round 19: the fragment that carried this sentence (`3503-diff-base-scope-anchor.json`) was retired on `next` by2fca0e17(enhance(#2554), #3695), and `2554-code-review-depth-overrides.json` declares this path today. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence follows the path to its live owner. Re-homed from `2554-code-review-depth-overrides.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: complete-milestone.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Re-homed in round 15: the fragment carrying it (`3458-audit-open-acknowledge-wiring.json`) was retired on `next` and the path is declared by `3409-unreachable-guard-arms.json` today. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence follows the path to its live owner. Re-homed from `3409-unreachable-guard-arms.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: debug.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Re-homed in round 14: the fragment that carried this sentence (`3149-init-debug-entry-point.json`) was retired on `next` by26f8015c(fix(#3448), #3476), and `3448-debug-autoresume-next-action.json` declares the path today. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence follows the path to its live owner rather than being dropped or re-armed under a retired number. Re-homed from `3448-debug-autoresume-next-action.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: diagnose-issues.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: an inline copy in every workflow would be that many places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Re-homed in round 19: this PR declared the path in its own fragment, and `3602-workflow-subagent-model-resolution.json` landed on `next` declaring it too. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence moves here and the key leaves ours. Re-homed from `3602-workflow-subagent-model-resolution.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: discuss-phase.md — #2529 round 36: this workflow's inline directive was rewritten in round 10 to name inter-tool narration, but in the compressed form, and that rewrite came to −1 byte against `next` — so it declared no growth and this key was absent from this PR's ack set until now. Round 36 replaces the compressed clause with the same enumeration the other rewordings carry — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings, questions, prompts, and explanations — because `discuss-phase.md` started from the identical upstream sentence as `verify-work.md` and `new-milestone.md` and those two took the full list, so the shorthand was an inconsistency rather than a decision. +87 bytes against `next`, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. The directive stays INLINE rather than becoming an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have cost 1,692 bytes of loaded context against the 87 this sentence costs. `commands/gsd/discuss-phase.md` dispatches this workflow lazily (`Read and execute ...`) rather than `@`-importing it, so the 87 bytes land in the installed file and are read once the workflow is dispatched, not on every command invocation. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: discuss-phase-assumptions.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Re-homed in round 15: `3409-unreachable-guard-arms.json` landed on `next` in #3558 and declares this path too. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence moves here and the key leaves this PR's fragment. Re-homed from `3409-unreachable-guard-arms.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: discuss-phase-power.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: do.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: docs-update.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +83 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +83 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 83 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,609. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,609 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Re-homed in round 19: this PR declared the path in its own fragment, and `3602-workflow-subagent-model-resolution.json` landed on `next` declaring it too. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence moves here and the key leaves ours. Re-homed from `3602-workflow-subagent-model-resolution.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: edit-phase.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Re-homed in round 13: `3262-editphase-milestone-scope-guard.json` landed on `next` infd4715f8(fix(#3262), #3446) and declares this path too. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence moves here and the key leaves this PR's fragment. Re-homed from `3262-editphase-milestone-scope-guard.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: eval-review.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Re-homed in round 16: the fragment that carried this sentence (`3423-required-reading.json`) was retired on `next` byddf85287(fix(#3357), #3513), and no fragment on `next` declares this path now. The ack therefore returns to this PR's own fragment, which is the only live source for it — the change to the path is this PR's. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: execute-plan.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Re-homed in round 14: the fragment that carried this sentence (`2652-quick-diagnose-dispatch-isolation.json`) was retired on `next` by362d0434(fix(#3370), #3478), and `3370-execute-phase-gate-conflation.json` declares the path today. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence follows the path to its live owner rather than being dropped or re-armed under a retired number. Re-homed from `3370-execute-phase-gate-conflation.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: explore.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Re-homed from `2229-explore-claim-disposition.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: extract-learnings.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: fast.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Re-homed in round 18: this PR declared the path in its own fragment, and `3585-planning-commit-guard.json` landed on `next` declaring it too. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence moves here and the key leaves ours. Re-homed from `3585-planning-commit-guard.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: forensics.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: graduation.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: health.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Re-homed in round 13: the fragment that carried this sentence (`2573-state-head-freshness.json`) was retired on `next` by7ddcc198(fix(#3309)), and `3309-health-docs-generated.json` declares the path today. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence follows the path to its live owner rather than being dropped or re-armed under a retired number. Re-homed from `3309-health-docs-generated.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: help.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: import.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Re-homed in round 18: this PR declared the path in its own fragment, and `3576-references-canonical-cites.json` landed on `next` declaring it too. One path takes exactly one ack source, so the sentence moves here and the key leaves ours. Re-homed from `3576-references-canonical-cites.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: inbox.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: ingest-docs.md — #2529 MAJOR 1 (round 10): the workflow's pre-existing inline response-language directive is rewritten IN PLACE so the sentence names inter-tool NARRATION explicitly — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings — instead of only "questions, prompts, and explanations". That older wording is the defect #2529 reports (it leaves the running commentary between tool calls in English while the answers around it are translated), and `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` had been certifying it as coverage, so the gate legitimised the bug. +87 bytes, prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. FILE delta and LOADED-CONTEXT delta are both +87 here, and that identity is the point — the directive was deliberately NOT converted to an `@`-reference, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"), so the conversion would have bought a smaller measured file at a cost of 1,692 bytes of loaded context per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629-byte reference — against the 87 bytes this inline directive costs, a net +1,605. Stated plainly because the gates cannot state it: the repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so an `@`-reference conversion would have READ as a smaller change to every gate in the repo while costing 1,605 bytes more loaded context per invocation. Re-homed from `2658-trae-instruction-file-path.json` in round 26: `a84f7563` (#3078) swept that fragment as all-spent, so this path is unowned and this PR's own fragment declares it directly. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: insert-phase.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: list-phase-assumptions.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: list-seeds.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. The eager import is accepted on its merits, not hidden: 42 inline copies would be 43 places for the wording to drift, and the reference is the one place it is maintained. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: list-workspaces.md — #2529 — RESTATED in round 10, superseding this PR's earlier "+63 bytes, prose only" wording, which reported a file delta as if it were the whole cost. The workflow gains the shared response-language directive as a single `@`-reference line. FILE delta: +63 bytes, byte-identical in each of the 42 workflows that take the reference. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,692 bytes per workflow — the 63-byte import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates — the tier hard caps in `tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs` and this size ratchet — measure the FILE, not the transitive inline, so they see 63 of those 1,692 … * fix(#2529): read the catalog-relative dispatch spelling, and the plural of "output" Two false positives in the coverage lint, both surfaced by this round's work rather than by a red gate finding them for us. #3552 landed `execute-phase/steps/protected-branch.md` on next while this PR was open, dispatched from execute-phase.md's `"none"` arm with the path written RELATIVE to the catalog. `namesFragmentAsEntryPoint` only ever looked for the `gsd-core/workflows/`-rooted spelling, so it read a live dispatch as no dispatch and the new fragment as uncovered. It now accepts both spellings and matches the relative one on a path boundary, so `vendor/<path>` cannot vouch for `<path>`. Recognizing that spelling makes one pin redundant: execute-phase.md dispatches executor-isolation-dispatch.md the same way, so the fragment inherits and its own copy of the sentence comes back out. That is the rule round 29 encoded, enforced by the test that measures it rather than by hand. `output` was the one term in USER_OUTPUT_RE without an `s?`, so "translate all outputs, including narration between tool calls" read as uncovered. The new property tests caught it on their first run. Those properties pin the rule the hand-written cases are instances of: four signals on ONE line accept, dropping any one rejects, spreading them across lines rejects. The vocabulary is written out in the test rather than read back from the script's regexes, per CONTRIBUTING.md "Fixture provenance (#2371)" -- a generator seeded from the matcher can only re-derive what the matcher already believes, and that independence is what caught the plural. Both new properties are mutation-verified: dropping the narration predicate reds the necessity property, and collapsing the document to a single line reds the cross-line one. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * enhance(#2529): spell the narration enumeration out in the last two shorthand directives discuss-phase.md and plan-phase.md were the only two of this PR's 44 rewordings that abbreviated the inserted clause to "narration between tool calls included" instead of naming the output classes the way the rest of them do. Both forms satisfy the lint's four predicates, so nothing was broken -- but the point of #2529 is that an author reading one workflow should not have to infer what the neighbouring one means by "included". Both abbreviations were size decisions rather than wording ones, and both reasons have since expired because next shrank the files. discuss-phase.md sat 25 bytes under the 32,000-byte #717 dispatcher budget and now has 1,825; plan-phase.md sat 87 bytes under the 94,519-byte ADR-857 capstone ratchet against a +108 clause and now has 3,180. Neither budget is raised here and no unrelated prose is trimmed; workflow-size-budget and phase6-capstone-conformance both pass. discuss-phase.md started from the identical upstream sentence as verify-work.md and new-milestone.md ("All user-facing questions, prompts, and explanations in this workflow"), and those two received the full enumeration; it now matches them exactly. plan-phase.md keeps its own scope word ("orchestrator output") and its subagent pass-through instruction, both upstream's, and only trades the shorthand for the enumeration. The shorthand now appears nowhere in the catalog. The two remaining variants (plan-review-convergence.md, spec-phase.md) keep upstream's own verb and scope and end on "report prose", which is what those workflows actually emit -- rewriting those would change a directive's strength, not its wording. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(#2529): match the workflow extension case-insensitively in coverage discovery `findMarkdownFilesRecursive` filtered on `entry.name.endsWith('.md')`, so `SETTINGS.MD` — the same file to Windows and macOS, a different one to Linux — was skipped on the only platform whose verdict gates the merge. The direction of that failure is the problem: a workflow the walk declines to see is a workflow this lint certifies by omission, which is the same vacuous pass `main()` already refuses when discovery returns nothing at all. The filter is now an allowlist keyed on the lowercased `path.extname`. `.mdx` stays out on purpose: admitting an extension states what a workflow IS, and that claim has a second half — `inheritsParentCoverage` resolves a fragment's parent as `<workflow>.md`. An `.mdx` entry belongs here next to the parent resolution it would have to move with, not ahead of it. Two tests: an uppercase-extension file is discovered AND lands as a violation rather than an exemption, and every admitted extension is spelled so the lowercasing match can reach it (an uppercase or dotless entry would be dead configuration that reads like coverage). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * enhance(#2529): cover the quick-batch workflow that #3676 landed uncovered `next` gained `quick-batch.md` and nine step fragments in2f64e6230(#3676, PR #4212) with no response-language directive, so the merge result reds this PR's own lint with 10 violations. The lint is doing exactly what it exists to do; the coverage is what has to move. `quick-batch.md` takes the shared @-reference on line 1, the same as the other 42 top-level workflows, and eight of the nine fragments then inherit through its `read and execute` stubs. The ninth does not: `quick-batch/steps/plan-checker-loop.md` is dispatched by a SIBLING fragment (`planner-wave.md:134`) and named in the parent only inside a parenthetical with no dispatch verb, which is the shape round 29's rule already covers for `execute-phase/steps/regression-gate-run.md` and `plan-phase/steps/prd-express-path.md`. It carries the pinned inline directive and joins `EXACT_INLINE_DIRECTIVE_WORKFLOWS`; the comment above that set now names four such fragments instead of three. Coverage: 163 workflows. `FULL_BUDGET` in tests/skill-frontmatter-contract.test.cjs moves 844 -> 846. The same commit grew `help/modes/full.md` from 834 to 844 lines, landing it exactly on the ceiling with zero slack, and the two lines this PR adds there are its pinned directive and the blank separating it. That is a coverage contract every workflow carries, not the content creep the budget guards. The #597 ratchet rule holds: actualMax 846, slack 0, well inside LARGE_GRACE. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Emitted-Drift-Ack-Growth: quick-batch.md — #2529: the workflow arrived on `next` in2f64e6230(#3676, PR #4212) with no response-language directive, so this PR's lint reds on the merge result; covering it is the PR's whole contract, not an optional extra. It gains the shared directive as a single eager `@`-reference line, the identical form the other 42 top-level workflows take. FILE delta: +62 bytes, as the gate measures it. LOADED-CONTEXT delta: +1,691 bytes — the import line plus the 1,629 bytes of `gsd-core/references/response-language-directive.md`, because an `@`-import in this repo is EAGER (ADR-1610 Decision point 4; docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: moving prose into a file that is still eagerly `@`-imported "shrinks the measured file without shrinking loaded context"). The repo's size gates read the FILE and not the transitive inline, so they see 62 of those 1,691 bytes; the remaining 1,629 are declared here because no gate reads them. Prose only: no step, gate, tool invocation, or subagent dispatch shape changed. Nine `quick-batch/steps/*` fragments are covered without a byte of their own — eight inherit through the parent's dispatch stubs, and the ninth takes the pinned inline sentence, which the emitted surface does not measure. * fix(#2529): scope row 48 by what a diff says, not by which paths it names `tests/gsd-quick-batch-quick-regression.test.cjs` treats any branch touching a `quick-batch` path as #3676 phase work, then forbids it from editing ordinary `quick.md`. This PR covers EVERY workflow with the shared response-language directive — quick-batch.md and its fragments included — so the scope check turned true, and the row read this PR's one-line directive on `quick.md` as a phase violation. That is the false positive the row's own #3730 note already scoped away from, arriving by the other door: not an unrelated branch that misses the surface, but a catalog-wide sweep that touches all of it. A path now counts as phase work only when its diff says something other than the coverage contract, and the two accepted directive forms are read from `scripts/lint-response-language-coverage.cjs` rather than restated, so a reworded contract cannot leave the carve-out matching prose the lint no longer recognizes. A file the branch ADDED still counts — every line is new, which is what a real #3676-phase branch looks like. The invariant is unweakened in the direction that matters: a phase branch that edits `commands/gsd/quick.md`, `gsd-core/workflows/quick.md` or anything under `quick/steps/` for any reason other than the directive still fails the row. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Tom Boucher <trekkie@nomorestars.com>
17 KiB
17 KiB
Triage and review all open GitHub issues and PRs against project contribution templates.
Produces a structured report showing compliance status for each item, flags missing
required fields, identifies label gaps, and optionally takes action (label, comment, close).
Skip if REVIEW_PRS=false.
```
---
<required_reading> Before starting, read these project files to understand the review criteria:
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yml— required fields for feature issues.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/enhancement.yml— required fields for enhancement issues.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/chore.yml— required fields for chore issues.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml— required fields for bug reports.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE/feature.md— required checklist for feature PRs.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE/enhancement.md— required checklist for enhancement PRs.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE/fix.md— required checklist for fix PRsCONTRIBUTING.md— the issue-first rule and approval gates </required_reading>
If response_language is set: All user-facing output of this workflow — narration between tool calls, status updates, progress notes, findings, questions, prompts, and explanations — MUST be presented in {response_language}. Technical terms, code, file paths, and subagent prompts stay in English — only user-facing output is translated.
-
ghCLI available and authenticated?which gh && gh auth status 2>&1If not available: print setup instructions and exit.
-
Detect repository: If
--repoflag provided, use that. Otherwise:gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q '.nameWithOwner' 2>/dev/nullIf no repo detected: error — must be in a git repo with a GitHub remote.
-
Parse flags:
--issues→ set REVIEW_ISSUES=true, REVIEW_PRS=false--prs→ set REVIEW_ISSUES=false, REVIEW_PRS=true--label→ set AUTO_LABEL=true--close-incomplete→ set AUTO_CLOSE=true- Default (no flags): review both issues and PRs, report only (no auto-actions)
Fetch all open issues:
gh issue list --state open --json number,title,labels,body,author,createdAt,updatedAt --limit 100
For each issue, classify by labels and body content:
| Label/Pattern | Type | Template |
|---|---|---|
feature-request |
Feature | feature_request.yml |
enhancement |
Enhancement | enhancement.yml |
bug |
Bug | bug_report.yml |
type: chore |
Chore | chore.yml |
| No matching label | Unknown | Flag for manual triage |
If an issue has no type label, attempt to classify from the body content:
- Contains "### Feature name" → likely Feature
- Contains "### What existing feature" → likely Enhancement
- Contains "### What happened?" → likely Bug
- Contains "### What is the maintenance task?" → likely Chore
- Cannot determine → mark as
needs-triage
For each classified issue, review against its template requirements.
Feature Request Review Checklist:
- Pre-submission checklist present (4 checkboxes)
- Feature name provided
- Type of addition selected
- Problem statement filled (not placeholder text)
- What is being added described with examples
- Full scope of changes listed (files created/modified/systems)
- User stories present (minimum 2)
- Acceptance criteria present (testable conditions)
- Applicable runtimes selected
- Breaking changes assessment present
- Maintenance burden described
- Alternatives considered (not empty)
- Label check: Has
needs-reviewlabel? Hasapproved-featurelabel? - Gate check: If PR exists linking this issue, does issue have
approved-feature?
Enhancement Review Checklist:
- Pre-submission checklist present (4 checkboxes)
- What is being improved identified
- Current behavior described with examples
- Proposed behavior described with examples
- Reason and benefit articulated (not vague)
- Scope of changes listed
- Breaking changes assessed
- Alternatives considered
- Area affected selected
- Label check: Has
needs-reviewlabel? Hasapproved-enhancementlabel? - Gate check: If PR exists linking this issue, does issue have
approved-enhancement?
Bug Report Review Checklist:
- GSD Version provided
- Runtime selected
- OS selected
- Node.js version provided
- Description of what happened
- Expected behavior described
- Steps to reproduce provided
- Frequency selected
- Severity/impact selected
- PII checklist confirmed
- Label check: Has
needs-triageorconfirmed-buglabel?
Chore Review Checklist:
- Pre-submission checklist confirmed (no user-facing changes)
- Maintenance task described
- Type of maintenance selected
- Current state described with specifics
- Proposed work listed
- Acceptance criteria present
- Area affected selected
- Label check: Has
needs-triagelabel?
Scoring: For each issue, calculate a completeness percentage:
- Count required fields present vs. total required fields
- Score = (present / total) * 100
- Status: COMPLETE (100%), MOSTLY COMPLETE (75-99%), INCOMPLETE (50-74%), REJECT (<50%)
Fetch all open PRs:
gh pr list --state open --json number,title,labels,body,author,headRefName,baseRefName,isDraft,createdAt,reviewDecision,statusCheckRollup --limit 100
For each PR, classify by body content and linked issue:
| Body Pattern | Type | Template |
|---|---|---|
| Contains "## Feature PR" or "## Feature summary" | Feature PR | feature.md |
| Contains "## Enhancement PR" or "## What this enhancement improves" | Enhancement PR | enhancement.md |
| Contains "## Fix PR" or "## What was broken" | Fix PR | fix.md |
| Uses default template | Wrong Template | Flag — must use typed template |
| Cannot determine | Unknown | Flag for manual review |
Also check for linked issues:
gh pr view {number} --json body -q '.body' | grep -oE '(Closes|Fixes|Resolves) #[0-9]+'
For each classified PR, review against its template requirements.
Feature PR Review Checklist:
- Uses feature PR template (not default)
- Issue linked with
Closes #NNN - Linked issue exists and has
approved-featurelabel - Feature summary present
- New files table filled
- Modified files table filled
- Implementation notes present
- Spec compliance checklist present (acceptance criteria from issue)
- Test coverage described
- Platforms tested checked (macOS, Windows, Linux)
- Runtimes tested checked
- Scope confirmation checked
- Full checklist completed
- Breaking changes section filled
- CI check: All status checks passing?
- Review check: Has review approval?
Enhancement PR Review Checklist:
- Uses enhancement PR template (not default)
- Issue linked with
Closes #NNN - Linked issue exists and has
approved-enhancementlabel - What is improved described
- Before/after provided
- Implementation approach described
- Verification method described
- Platforms tested checked
- Runtimes tested checked
- Scope confirmation checked
- Full checklist completed
- Breaking changes section filled
- CI check: All status checks passing?
Fix PR Review Checklist:
- Uses fix PR template (not default)
- Issue linked with
Fixes #NNN - Linked issue exists and has
confirmed-buglabel - What was broken described
- What the fix does described
- Root cause explained
- Verification method described
- Regression test added (or explained why not)
- Platforms tested checked
- Runtimes tested checked
- Full checklist completed
- Breaking changes section filled
- CI check: All status checks passing?
Cross-cutting PR Checks (all types):
- PR title is descriptive (not just "fix" or "update")
- One concern per PR (not mixing fix + enhancement)
- No unrelated formatting changes visible in diff
.changeset/*.mdfragment added for user-facing changes (orno-changeloglabel applied)- Not using
--no-verifyor skipping hooks
Scoring: Same as issues — completeness percentage per PR.
Cross-reference issues and PRs to enforce the issue-first rule:For each open PR:
- Extract linked issue number from body
- If no linked issue: GATE VIOLATION — PR has no issue
- If linked issue exists, check its labels:
- Feature PR → issue must have
approved-feature - Enhancement PR → issue must have
approved-enhancement - Fix PR → issue must have
confirmed-bug
- Feature PR → issue must have
- If label is missing: GATE VIOLATION — PR opened before approval
Report gate violations prominently — these are the most important findings because the project auto-closes PRs without proper approval gates.
Produce a structured triage report:===================================================================
GSD INBOX TRIAGE — {repo} — {date}
===================================================================
SUMMARY
-------
Open issues: {count} Open PRs: {count}
Features: {n} Feature PRs: {n}
Enhancements:{n} Enhancement PRs: {n}
Bugs: {n} Fix PRs: {n}
Chores: {n} Wrong template: {n}
Unclassified:{n} No linked issue: {n}
GATE VIOLATIONS (action required)
---------------------------------
{For each violation:}
PR #{number}: {title}
Problem: {description — e.g., "No approved-feature label on linked issue #45"}
Action: {what to do — e.g., "Close PR or approve issue #45 first"}
ISSUES NEEDING ATTENTION
------------------------
{For each issue sorted by completeness score, lowest first:}
#{number} [{type}] {title}
Score: {percentage}% complete
Missing: {list of missing required fields}
Labels: {current labels} → Suggested: {recommended labels}
Age: {days since created}
PRS NEEDING ATTENTION
---------------------
{For each PR sorted by completeness score, lowest first:}
#{number} [{type}] {title}
Score: {percentage}% complete
Missing: {list of missing checklist items}
CI: {passing/failing/pending}
Review: {approved/changes_requested/none}
Linked issue: #{issue_number} ({issue_status})
Age: {days since created}
READY TO MERGE
--------------
{PRs that are 100% complete, CI passing, approved:}
#{number} {title} — ready
STALE ITEMS (>30 days, no activity)
------------------------------------
{Issues and PRs with no updates in 30+ days}
===================================================================
Write this report to .planning/INBOX-TRIAGE.md if a .planning/ directory exists,
otherwise print to console only.
If --label: For each issue/PR where labels are missing or incorrect:
gh issue edit {number} --add-label "{label}"
Or:
gh pr edit {number} --add-label "{label}"
Label recommendations:
- Unclassified issues → add
needs-triage - Feature issues without review → add
needs-review - Enhancement issues without review → add
needs-review - Bug reports without triage → add
needs-triage - PRs with gate violations → add
gate-violation
If --close-incomplete: For issues scoring below 50% completeness:
gh issue close {number} --comment "Closed by GSD inbox triage: this issue is missing required fields per the issue template. Missing: {list}. Please reopen with a complete submission. See CONTRIBUTING.md for requirements."
For PRs with gate violations:
gh pr close {number} --comment "Closed by GSD inbox triage: this PR does not meet the issue-first requirement. {specific violation}. See CONTRIBUTING.md for the correct process."
Always confirm with the user before closing anything:
Text mode (workflow.text_mode: true in config or --text flag): Set TEXT_MODE=true if --text is present in $ARGUMENTS OR text_mode from init JSON is true. When TEXT_MODE is active, replace every AskUserQuestion call with a plain-text numbered list and ask the user to type their choice number. This is required for non-Claude runtimes (OpenAI Codex, Gemini CLI, etc.) where AskUserQuestion is not available.
AskUserQuestion:
question: "Found {N} items to close. Review the list above — proceed with closing?"
options:
- label: "Close all"
description: "Close all {N} non-compliant items with explanation comments"
- label: "Let me pick"
description: "I'll choose which ones to close"
- label: "Skip"
description: "Don't close anything — report only"
Inbox Triage Complete
Reviewed: {issue_count} issues, {pr_count} PRs Gate violations: {violation_count} Ready to merge: {ready_count} Needing attention: {attention_count} Stale (30+ days): {stale_count} {If report saved: "Report saved to .planning/INBOX-TRIAGE.md"}
Next steps:
- Review gate violations first — these block the contribution pipeline
- Address incomplete submissions (comment or close)
- Merge ready PRs
- Triage unclassified issues
</step>
</process>
<offer_next>
After triage:
- /gsd:review — Run cross-AI peer review on a specific phase plan
- /gsd:ship — Create a PR from completed work
- /gsd:progress — See overall project state
- /gsd:inbox --label — Re-run with auto-labeling enabled
</offer_next>
<success_criteria>
- [ ] All open issues fetched and classified by type
- [ ] Each issue reviewed against its template requirements
- [ ] All open PRs fetched and classified by type
- [ ] Each PR reviewed against its template checklist
- [ ] Issue-first gate violations identified
- [ ] Structured report generated with scores and action items
- [ ] Auto-actions executed only when flagged and user-confirmed
</success_criteria>