git:20260724.ba2c70f to git:20260919.a9f7da5

- description: "Explain a diff, branch, PR, patch, or review packet; use after Full-path verification when the change teaches a useful business or technical concept."

- Transfer ownership of a change. Manual mode is repository-read-only; `--visual` may write only to the system temp directory.

-

- ## Establish the evidence

-

- Parse `--visual`; the rest is a working tree, branch, range, PR, patch, or packet. Default to the current worktree. Use the available request, plan, chronicle, verification, and details about what was not checked. Do not require a standard packet.

-

- In Full, require the request, plan or chronicle, diff, fresh Verify results, and details about what was not checked. Otherwise inspect read-only.

-

- State verification status. With absent or stale evidence, label **Unverified change** and separate code facts from unproved behavior.

-

- For `--visual`, read [visual mode](references/visual-mode.md). At the automatic Full checkpoint, name the dynamic concept a visual would clarify and ask **Continue in chat** or **Create visual**; only the latter activates it.

-

- ## Teach the change

-

- Assume no project knowledge. Present only what the change needs:

-

- 1. the minimum background and vocabulary needed;

- 2. the intuition and functional result;

- 3. concrete examples or sanitized toy data;

- 4. a guided diff ordered by concept, not file order;

- 5. decisions, trade-offs, failure modes, and evidence limits;

- 6. the comprehension dialogue below.

-

- Use a small diagram only when clearer than prose.

-

- ## Check understanding

-

- Merge overlapping concepts and omit filler. Zero questions is valid. Cover relevant business rules, invariants, flows, states, edge cases, architecture, lifecycle, concurrency, trade-offs, failure modes, and evidence—not syntax.

-

- Ask one applied free-response question at a time through `AskUserQuestion`. Show the text box with **I don't know — explain** and **Proceed without answering**, translated to the conversation language. Do not offer answer choices. In the question text, invite the user to answer in the free-text box; never name interface internals such as "Other".

-

- If the interface cannot show selectable actions, list those two actions beside the free-response prompt.

-

- - Correct: cite the evidence briefly and continue.

- - Incorrect or explain: reteach from first principles, then ask a different applied question.

- - Second unsuccessful attempt: expose the gap and offer more dialogue or conscious skip.

- - **Proceed without answering:** record a conscious decision in the chronicle as unverified, without raw dialogue; never count it as success.

-

- Set no question quota, score, or pass threshold.

-

- ## Resolve divergence without presuming fault

-

- When an answer conflicts with the current explanation:

-

- 1. show the answer's implication and what request, plan, code, and evidence support;

- 2. label the diagnosis as a hypothesis;

- 3. pause only that question while locating the gap in understanding, explanation, requirements, plan, implementation, or proof;

- 4. return to an earlier phase only after shared confirmation.

-

- If work is valid, explain the divergence and rephrase. If invalid, end the dialogue and return to the first agreed invalid phase.

-

- ## Preserve only durable understanding

-

- Persist a concept only when both parties confirm it, evidence supports it, it resolves a real ambiguity or decision, and it helps maintainers.

-

- When all four hold in the Full path:

-

- 1. update the source requirement, plan, acceptance criterion, or implementation first;

- 2. then add a faithful English paraphrase to `How the understanding evolved`, naming the ambiguity, evidence, and effect.

- The chronicle records evolution; it never replaces the source contract. In manual mode, propose edits without writing.

- In Full, record verified concepts, conscious skips, unresolved gaps, and resolved divergences, including empty categories and no raw dialogue.

- Do not store raw answers, scores, failed attempts, personal judgments, or disputed claims as facts.

- ## Hand off to review

- Summarize what was verified, what the user chose to skip, remaining gaps, known differences from the plan, and what was not checked. A conscious skip continues to Review. Evidence that disproves an earlier decision returns the work to the affected phase.

- Give Review the request, plan, diff, standards, and verification—not answers or this skill's interpretation.