34 added, 16 removed. Audit A to A.
---
name: align
description: Resolve intent, scope, consequential design choices, or important assumptions that need shared understanding before implementation. Use when requested or when an unresolved choice would materially change the result.
---
# Hope Align
Build shared understanding of the goal and consequential decisions. Use the
conversation's existing decisions, delegation, and implementation authorization.
Do not turn clear, authorized work into a new approval process.
Read `../write/references/writing-standard.md` for user-facing language.
## Resolve consequential choices
Start from the conversation, relevant code, and governing project sources.
Research facts and recommend a path. Keep evidence, user decisions, AI
proposals, assumptions, and uncertainty distinct.
- Track choices that could change the goal, observable result, future options,
- long-lived constraints, or material risk. Include architecture and data modeling
- when they have those effects. Leave routine, reversible mechanics to
- implementation. Surface omissions, contradictions, unsupported assumptions,
- and simpler approaches when they could change a consequential choice.
+ Build and maintain a decision tree of choices that could change the goal,
+ observable result, future options, long-lived constraints, or material risk.
+ Include architecture and data modeling when they have those effects. For every
+ possible branch, judge whether it needs the person's understanding and a
+ decision or explicit delegation before implementation. Leave routine,
+ reversible mechanics to implementation. Surface omissions, contradictions,
+ unsupported assumptions, edge cases, and simpler approaches when they could
+ change a material branch.
- Ask related, ready questions together in a manageable round. Explain the
- consequences, recommend a path, and offer realistic alternatives. Research what
- the AI can determine instead of asking the person for facts. Continue
- independent authorized work while answers are pending.
+ ## Work the complete decision frontier
- Close a choice through a decision, deliberate exclusion, or delegation. Reopen
- it only when evidence changes its basis. If the person is uncertain, gather
- useful evidence or recommend a probe. Read `references/design-directions.md`
- when a material visual choice needs comparison images.
+ The frontier contains every unresolved material branch whose prerequisites are
+ settled. Ask the whole frontier in each round; do not select only the easiest
+ or most obvious questions. Number the questions, explain their consequences,
+ recommend a path, and offer realistic alternatives. Research what the AI can
+ determine instead of asking the person for facts. Continue independent
+ authorized work while answers are pending, but keep dependent work behind its
+ unresolved choices.
+ After each answer, update the decision tree and recompute the entire frontier,
+ including newly ready branches. Reopen dependent choices when new evidence or
+ an earlier decision changes their basis. Close each material branch through a
+ decision, deliberate exclusion, or explicit delegation; do not silently settle
+ it through an assumption.
+
+ If the person is uncertain, gather useful evidence or recommend a probe. Keep
+ the branch open until they can decide, deliberately exclude it, or explicitly
+ delegate it. Read `references/design-directions.md` when a material visual
+ choice needs comparison images.
+
## Confirm and continue
- Once the material choices are settled, summarize the goal, how success will be
- recognized, consequential decisions, and relevant exclusions or assumptions.
+ Before confirmation, check the whole tree: every material branch must be
+ resolved, including dependent branches that became ready in later rounds.
+ An empty question list alone is not completion. When the frontier is empty and
+ no material branch remains unresolved, summarize the goal and problem model,
+ how success will be recognized, consequential decisions and their effects,
+ and every exclusion, delegation, or assumption that shaped the agreement.
Ask for confirmation of new shared understanding; do not ask the person to
reconfirm an unchanged agreement.
Confirmation of understanding and permission to implement are distinct. Use
implementation authorization already given, including a request to align and
then build. If none exists, leave implementation for the person's decision.
An alignment-only request ends with the confirmed understanding.
## Preserve understanding when needed
Read `references/artifact.md` when the person supplies an Align artifact, asks
for a durable record, or another session or worker will rely on the agreement.
Also use it when a material agreement or later human observation must survive
the conversation. Otherwise the conversation is sufficient.
The reference owns artifact authoring, revision, and handoff. Run its commands
through `node "<skill-dir>/scripts/cli.mjs"`, replacing `<skill-dir>` with the
absolute directory containing this file. In Claude Code it is
`${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/align`.
Report where the confirmed understanding remains. A receiving implementation
AI inspects the current project and uses the agreement for intent and decisions.
- The decision interview is informed by Matt Pocock's
+ The decision-tree and complete-frontier interview is informed by Matt Pocock's
[grill-me](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/docs/productivity/grill-me.md).