git:20261004.4a578c5 to git:20261016.a9f63fc

- description: Develop greenfield project context through a layered interview, preserve decisions, and initialize only after the required gates.

- > continue with the unchanged greenfield workflow below.

- Spec the project before a line of code exists. Routed to at greenfield startup, or by `/decompose`.

-

- ## Pre-flight

-

- Run these ordered checks. Each passes silently or hard-stops with a routing action — never guess:

-

- 1. Read `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/CONTEXT.md`. If it already carries the `<!--INITIALIZED-->` body marker on its own line, STOP — context exists. Route to normal operation.

- 2. Scan for meaningful source code: any file outside `.git/`, `.codearbiter/`, `.claude/`, `arbiter.md`, `AGENTS.md`, `CLAUDE.md`, `README.md`, `LICENSE`, `.gitignore`, `.gitmodules`, and standard tooling dotfiles. If any exist, STOP and route to `/create-context`.

- 3. Confirm `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/` exists and is writable. If not, surface the gap and STOP.

-

- All three pass → proceed to Phase 1. Later phases consume this pass-status; they do not re-run it.

-

- ## Phase 1 — Persona adoption · gate: BLOCK

-

- Announce the role switch to the user, verbatim:

-

- > "Switching to decomposition mode. For this session I operate as a senior software architect and technical lead, decomposing your project vision into a complete, unambiguous specification before any code is written. Vague language will be challenged, hidden complexity surfaced, and trade-offs forced. This is a thorough interview — typically 60–110 questions across six layers; every layer persists to disk, so you can stop at any point and resume in a later session. Orchestrator mode resumes when this decomposition is locked."

-

- State the Rules of Engagement, verbatim:

-

- > **Rules of Engagement**

- >

- > - **Pacing:** ONE LAYER AT A TIME. One focused question at a time within a layer (cluster only when tightly coupled). Never advance until the current layer is solid — no hand-wavy answers, no deferred decisions, no unchallenged vague language.

- > - **Three lenses on every answer:**

- > 1. **Vague requirements** — Challenge hand-wavy language. Force concrete nouns, numbers, and verbs. "Manage" is not a verb. "We'll figure that out later" is not acceptable; every "later" becomes a `[CONFIRM-NN]` placeholder.

- > 2. **Hidden complexity** — After each layer, name what the user assumes is easy but is hard: state management, real-time sync, edge cases, data migration, multi-tenancy, role matrices, offline behavior, failure modes — anything that grows non-linearly with scale.

- > 3. **Trade-off forcing** — When a real architectural or product decision exists, frame it: "X gives you A but costs B; Y gives you C but costs D — choose." Record every forced choice as a DRAFT ADR.

- > - **Suggestions calibrated to confidence:** HIGH → recommend one option, one-line justification. MEDIUM → present 2–3 options with trade-offs, ask the deciding question. LOW → flag the gap, explain why it matters, ask the unlocking question. Never skip a gap silently; never suggest an integration without stating why.

-

- No interview question is asked yet — the Layer 1 question is asked at the end of Phase 2, after draft persistence exists, so the first answer lands on disk.

-

- Gate: persona and Rules of Engagement stated. Advance to Phase 2, never directly to Phase 3.

-

- ## Phase 2 — Draft persistence (or resume) · gate: BLOCK

-

- The Phase 3 interview accumulates 60–110 Q/A turns across six layers. Without per-layer disk persistence, an auto-compaction event silently destroys earlier reasoning and any DRAFT ADRs. This phase plus the per-layer write rule in Phase 3 plus the disk re-read in Phase 4/5 make the skill compaction-resilient: every layer is durable the moment its gate clears.

-

- Check for an existing draft directory at `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/.decompose-draft/`.

-

- **If it exists with `_session.md` and one or more `layer-N-*.md` files — Resume mode:**

-

- - Read `_session.md` and every `layer-*.md` present. Read every `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/decisions/*.md` with `status: draft` (prior-session draft ADRs to carry forward).

- - Present a numbered summary: prior-session timestamp, captured layers by name, count of DRAFT ADRs.

- - Ask the user to choose: **(a) Resume** — continue from the next unfinished layer, treating captured layers as solid; **(b) Restart** — delete the draft directory and every `status: draft` ADR, begin fresh; **(c) Abort** — exit the skill, leave draft directory and DRAFT ADRs intact.

- - On Resume: re-establish each captured layer as solid, then enter Phase 3 at the next unfinished layer. On Restart: delete `.decompose-draft/` and every DRAFT ADR, then fresh-init below. On Abort: exit cleanly; never silently delete.

-

- **If no draft directory exists (or after Restart) — fresh init:**

-

- - Create `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/.decompose-draft/`.

- - Write `_session.md` recording the ISO-8601 start timestamp, the invoking identity (`git config user.email`), `Status: in-progress`, and a note that this directory is session state, auto-deleted on Phase 6 completion, and that re-invoking `/decompose` after interruption enters Resume mode.

- - Ensure `.codearbiter/.decompose-draft/` is gitignored — append the entry to `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.gitignore` if absent.

- Then ask the first Layer 1 question to open the interview:

- > "Describe your solution vision in your own words. What problem does it solve, and for whom?"

- Gate: Phase 3 does not begin until either (a) the draft directory exists with `_session.md` and is otherwise empty (fresh start), or (b) prior layers are replayed and the user explicitly chose Resume.

- ## Phase 3 — Layered interview · gate: BLOCK

- Run the six layers in strict sequence. Never skip a layer. Never advance until the current layer is solid — no open "later" items unless recorded as `[CONFIRM-NN]`, no unchallenged vague language, no forced trade-off left unresolved.

- **Per-layer disk write (compaction contract):** when a layer's "advance when" checklist is satisfied, BEFORE the first question of the next layer, write the completed layer's full Q/A record to disk:

- | Layer | Draft file |

- | 1 — Vision & Problem | `.decompose-draft/layer-1-vision.md` |

- | 2 — Users & Flows | `.decompose-draft/layer-2-flows.md` |

- | 3 — Functional Scope | `.decompose-draft/layer-3-functional-scope.md` |

- | 4 — Technical Shape | `.decompose-draft/layer-4-tech-shape.md` |

- | 5 — Integrations & Infrastructure | `.decompose-draft/layer-5-integrations.md` |

- | 6 — Risks & Unknowns | `.decompose-draft/layer-6-risks.md` |

-

- (All under `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/`.) Each file holds every question asked, the user's verbatim answer (or a faithful paraphrase), every challenge made under the three lenses, every `[CONFIRM-NN]` raised, and every DRAFT-ADR title generated. These files are the authoritative record — Phases 4 and 5 read from them, not from conversation context. The next layer does not begin until the prior layer's file exists on disk and is non-empty; if a write fails, surface the error and do not advance.

-

- **Layer 4 immediate ADR drafts:** each forced architectural choice in Layer 4 is written at the moment it is made as `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/decisions/NNNN-<slug>.md`, numbered sequentially across the existing `decisions/` directory. Do not batch the writes. Author each using the canonical ADR template — `{{PLUGIN_ROOT}}/skills/decision-lifecycle/references/adr-template.md` (the single source of truth, shared with `decision-lifecycle`) — with frontmatter `status: draft` and `decided-by:` set to the user (or "user" if anonymous). Fill `## Context`, `## Decision`, and `## Consequences` from the forced choice; leave `## Alternatives considered` and `## Risks` populated where the interview surfaced them, or as `<none recorded>`. Phase 5 promotes each to `status: accepted`.

-

- **Layer 1 — Vision & Problem.** Unlock: the specific problem and the evidence it is real (not assumed); the primary user and any conflicting user types (name and resolve the conflict, or flag it); the demo-to-a-skeptic definition of "working"; what this project explicitly is NOT building. Advance when: problem concrete, primary user named, "working" demonstrable, NOT-building list explicit.

-

- **Layer 2 — Users & Flows.** Unlock: the core user journey from first touch to value delivered, in specific steps; every non-human actor at MVP (scheduled jobs, webhooks, callbacks, external triggers); failure-mode UX (concrete, not "we'll show an error"); admin/ops/internal privilege model. Advance when: end-to-end journey specific, non-human actors named, failure UX defined, privilege model sketched.

-

- **Layer 3 — Functional Scope.** Unlock: every capability, challenged individually — what it does (concrete verbs), who initiates it, inputs and outputs; each capability classified MVP / v1 / later; the hardest user-facing problem (the one that invalidates the product if wrong); every "later" forced to closure or recorded as `[CONFIRM-NN]`. Advance when: capability list complete and every item classified; no unresolved "later" except as `[CONFIRM-NN]`.

-

- **Layer 4 — Technical Shape.** Unlock: components and ownership (what each owns, where the boundaries are); core data entities, relationships, cardinality; where state lives and how it changes (write paths); the hardest technical problem; hard constraints (stack, runtime, cloud, compliance, budget, team size and skill); the copyright holder for new-file headers (record in `coding-standards.md`; if undecided, record as `[CONFIRM-NN]`); a forced trade-off for every major architectural decision (e.g. monolith vs. services, sync vs. async); **release intent** — the tag prefix the user wants (e.g. `v`), and whether a `CHANGELOG.md` is kept at all. Each forced choice is written immediately as a `status: draft` ADR per the rule above. Advance when: all components named, all entities sketched, all hard constraints recorded, every major trade-off resolved or deferred as `[CONFIRM-NN]`, release intent captured, AND `layer-4-tech-shape.md` is on disk with one DRAFT ADR per forced choice.

-

- **Release intent is elicited here, but no `.codearbiter/release-targets.md` row is ever written by this skill.** This lane runs before any manifest or tag exists — greenfield has no `package.json` version field, no `Cargo.toml`, no committed tag to anchor a `prefix` against — so there is nothing yet to substantiate a full row (`manifest`, `payload`, an actual declared file `load_targets` could parse). Record the two answers (tag prefix preference; changelog kept y/n) in `layer-4-tech-shape.md` alongside the rest of the layer's Q/A, for `context-creation`'s back-fill (once source exists) or `/release`'s own back-fill lane (once a manifest and tag exist) to substantiate later. Writing a guessed row now, ahead of anything to check it against, is exactly the invented-shape failure both of those later lanes exist to refuse.

-

- **Layer 5 — Integrations & Infrastructure.** Unlock: every external dependency (APIs, services, data sources, auth providers, payment processors, notification services), each named; commodity vs. differentiator for each; actual API contracts, data formats, and auth mechanisms for any system being integrated with; integration risks per dependency (rate limits, reliability and fallback, data ownership and portability, cost at scale). Advance when: all dependencies named, commodity/differentiator classified, integration risks surfaced for each.

-

- **Layer 6 — Risks & Unknowns.** Unlock: the top three build-killing risks, each with probability, impact, mitigation; the lowest-confidence areas; spike candidates (what question each answers, cost of being wrong, time-box); the signals and decision points that would force a major architecture change mid-build. Advance when: top three risks named with mitigations, spike candidates identified, architecture-change triggers named.

- Gate: all six layers complete (no open "later" except as `[CONFIRM-NN]`); all six `layer-*-*.md` files on disk and non-empty; at least one `status: draft` ADR present if any Layer 4 trade-off was forced — a Layer 4 with zero forced trade-offs is suspicious and is re-examined before advancing.

- ## Phase 4 — Synthesis · gate: BLOCK

- Begin by re-reading every `layer-*-*.md` and every `status: draft` ADR from disk. Do NOT rely on conversation context — by now an auto-compaction may have erased the original Q/A. The on-disk drafts are authoritative; this re-read makes the phase idempotent across compaction. If any expected layer file is missing, BLOCK and surface the gap rather than synthesizing from incomplete context.

- Produce three artifacts and write each to disk under `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/plans/` BEFORE asking for review (the user reviews from disk, which survives a session restart):

- 1. `01-architecture-breakdown.md` — every component with responsibility and connections; a text/ASCII system diagram; every integration with its type (sync/async), protocol, and owner; every open architectural decision flagged with a `[CONFIRM-NN]` marker (numbered sequentially with `open-questions.md`).

- 2. `02-phased-build-plan.md` — MVP → v1 → v2 phases; per phase a one-sentence goal, what is included, what is deferred and why (explicit rationale), key risks, and a measurable definition of done.

- 3. `03-task-backlog.md` — a flat prioritized task list; each task estimable (1–5 days), assignable to one role (frontend/backend/infra/etc.), phase-grouped (MVP first), with dependencies flagged and spikes time-boxed.

- Present all three. Request explicit review:

- > "These three artifacts are written to `.codearbiter/plans/`. Open and review each one. Tell me what is wrong, incomplete, or misrepresents your intent. They are on disk now and survive a session restart, but Phase 5 will not run until you confirm they are correct."

- Iterate on the on-disk files in place until the user explicitly approves.

- Gate: all three artifact files on disk AND the user explicitly approves all three, with no unresolved objections.

- ## Phase 5 — project-state population · gate: BLOCK

- Re-read every input from disk — the three approved artifacts, all six `layer-*-*.md` files, and every `status: draft` ADR. This makes population idempotent across compaction: a user may approve Phase 4, suffer a compaction, re-invoke `/decompose` (Phase 2 enters Resume, Phase 4 sees its artifacts already approved on disk), and Phase 5 proceeds from disk.

- Promote each `status: draft` ADR to `status: accepted` — an in-place edit of the frontmatter `status:` line (and its `## Status` body mirror) only; do not duplicate or rewrite the ADR body.

- Then write the surviving project-state docs. Every file holds actual content derived from the interview — no template boilerplate left unfilled:

- | Source | Destination |

- |---|---|

- | Layer 1 problem + users + NOT-building, with `arbiter: enabled` and `stage:` frontmatter | `CONTEXT.md` |

- | Layer 4 stack + hard constraints + tracker command (e.g. `gh issue create`) | `tech-stack.md` |

- | Layer 4 lint, format, naming + copyright holder | `coding-standards.md` |

- | Layer 4 compliance + crypto + trust-boundary notes (thin — banned-primitive posture only) | `security-controls.md` |

- | Layer 6 unknowns + spike candidates | `open-questions.md` (`[CONFIRM-NN]` format) |

- | Task backlog | `open-tasks.md` |

- | Carried from the `{{CMD:init}}` scaffold — confirm present, create empty if absent | `overrides.log` (append-only audit sink, with its audit header), `last-checkpoint` (`0`) |

- | Each Layer 4 forced choice | `decisions/000N-<slug>.md` — already written in Layer 4; Phase 5 only promotes Status to Accepted |

- | The three Phase 4 artifacts | `plans/01-…`, `plans/02-…`, `plans/03-…` — already written and approved; Phase 5 only verifies they exist |

- (All under `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/`.) Set the `stage:` frontmatter value in `CONTEXT.md` to the maturity number for the MVP phase of the build plan (a single number — there is no promotion ladder).

- **Provenance stubs and code-map stub:** once the project-state docs above are on disk, write a provenance stub per derived doc to `.codearbiter/.provenance/<doc>.json` via `_provenancelib.write_stub` (`interview_derived: true`, empty `entries`) — one stub for each scout/source-derived doc (`CONTEXT`, `tech-stack`, `coding-standards`, `security-controls`). Also write a `.codearbiter/code-map.md` stub — a placeholder empty coarse map. WHY: greenfield has no source code yet, so real provenance entries and code-map contents populate on the first commit-gate auto-heal (or `{{CMD:context-check}}`) once code exists.

- After initialization, the first real package manifest is acquired through the

- normal `{{CMD:context-check}}` route, not another decomposition interview. An

- empty interview-derived `tech-stack` stub is intended context only. At task

- time, use a source/target snapshot with root `manifests` membership and call

- `_provenancelib.assess_context_provenance` for the selected document. Its

- `first_input_pending` state names the newly observed manifest paths and only

- `tech-stack` as a bounded refresh candidate. Inspect those real files through

- the selected refresh, reconcile facts with the intended architecture, and use

- the existing owner preview and receipt before any update. An empty membership

- or an uninspected boundary supplies no package command, dependency, database

- claim, or nested guidance. Preserve the initialized marker and interview

- history; the first input is not authority to rewrite them.

- Gate: every project-state doc written with real content; no `status: draft` ADRs remain in `decisions/`; `[CONFIRM-NN]` items are acceptable in `open-questions.md` for genuinely unresolved items; provenance stubs and code-map stub written.

- ## Phase 6 — Initialization lock & cleanup · gate: BLOCK

- 1. Write the `<!--INITIALIZED-->` body marker on its own line in `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/CONTEXT.md`. A marker embedded in a template instruction comment does not satisfy the gate.

- 2. List `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/` and show the populated tree to the user.

- 3. Confirm each required file is present and non-empty: `CONTEXT.md` (with `arbiter: enabled` + `stage:` frontmatter and `<!--INITIALIZED-->` body), `tech-stack.md`, `coding-standards.md`, `security-controls.md`, `open-questions.md`, `open-tasks.md`, `overrides.log` (append-only audit sink — create with its audit header if the scaffold left it absent), `last-checkpoint`, `decisions/` (at least one ADR, all `status: accepted`, none `status: draft`), and `plans/01-…`, `plans/02-…`, `plans/03-…`.

- 4. Delete `{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/.decompose-draft/` and all its contents. This is mandatory — a leftover draft directory signals a still-in-progress decomposition to Phase 2 of any future `/decompose`.

- 5. Announce return to normal operation:

- > "Decomposition complete. Project state is initialized and locked, draft directory removed. Returning to codeArbiter orchestrator mode. Use `{{CMD:feature}}` to begin implementation, or any other command. Open questions are recorded in `.codearbiter/open-questions.md`."

- Gate: `<!--INITIALIZED-->` present on its own line in `CONTEXT.md`; all required files present and non-empty; no `status: draft` ADRs in `decisions/`; `.decompose-draft/` no longer exists on disk.

- ## Hard rules

- - MUST NOT write any project-state file before all six layers are solid and on disk.

- - MUST NOT scaffold any cut doc — see `{{PLUGIN_ROOT}}/includes/cut-docs.md` for the canonical never-scaffold list. Maturity is the single `stage:` value in `CONTEXT.md` frontmatter.

- - MUST NOT advance a layer until its draft file exists on disk and is non-empty.

- - MUST NOT advance past a layer holding an unresolved "later" item unless it is recorded as `[CONFIRM-NN]`.

- - MUST NOT resolve a `[CONFIRM-NN]` by guessing — surface the question and record it in `open-questions.md`.

- - MUST NOT synthesize artifacts (Phase 4) or populate context (Phase 5) from conversation context — re-read the on-disk drafts first.

- - MUST NOT proceed past Phase 4 without explicit user approval of all three artifacts.

- - MUST NOT leave any `status: draft` ADR in `decisions/` after Phase 5.

- - MUST NOT close the skill while `.decompose-draft/` still exists, or while `CONTEXT.md` lacks the `<!--INITIALIZED-->` body marker on its own line.

- - MUST NOT silently delete a draft directory on Resume — the user chooses Resume, Restart, or Abort.