[verified] refactor: reference diagrams-drawio

Merge READY_FOR_DELIVERY architecture gate

.gitea/workflows/validate.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+name: Validate skill
+
+on:
+  push:
+  pull_request:
+
+jobs:
+  validate:
+    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
+    steps:
+      - uses: actions/checkout@11d5960a326750d5838078e36cf38b85af677262 # v4.4.0
+        with:
+          fetch-depth: 2
+      - name: Run policy tests
+        run: python3 -m unittest discover -s tests -v
+      - name: Validate whitespace
+        run: git diff --check HEAD^ HEAD

SKILL.md

@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
 ---
 name: corp-v1-channel-architecture
 description: "Use when operating or synchronizing a Corp v1 project's architecture channel. Maintains C4-based architecture documentation, Draw.io diagrams, architecture decisions, and requirements while correlating verified activity across the project's seven channels."
-version: 1.7.0
+version: 1.8.0
 author: Hermes Agent
 license: MIT
 metadata:
   hermes:
     tags: [corp-v1, discord, channel, architecture, c4, adr, requirements]
-    related_skills: [corp-v1--main, home-v1-discord, drawio-main, documentation-docusaurus, corp-v1--glossary]
+    related_skills: [corp-v1--main, home-v1-discord, diagrams-drawio, documentation-docusaurus, corp-v1--glossary]
 ---
 
 # Corp v1 Architecture Channel
@@ -16,13 +16,13 @@ metadata:
 
 This skill owns the solution phase and architecture coherence for a Corp v1 project. It monitors the project's `general`, `scope`, `architecture`, `ui-ux`, `kanban`, `delivery`, and `releases` channels, transforms human-approved Features into requirements and solution artifacts, breaks them into dependency-aware implementation tasks, assigns approved Features to versions, and maintains the Architecture section of the project documentation.
 
-The default architecture model is C4. Architecture diagrams must be authored and validated using the global `drawio-main` skill from:
+The default architecture model is C4. Architecture diagrams must be authored and validated using the global `diagrams-drawio` skill from:
 
 ```text
-https://gitea.lego-cloud.eu/home-v1-skills-code-agent/drawio-main
+https://gitea.lego-cloud.eu/home-v1-skills-code-agent/diagrams-drawio
 ```
 
-Do not duplicate `drawio-main` into each project by default. A project team may explicitly decide to adopt its own copy; that decision must also update the project's channel skills and steering record.
+Do not duplicate `diagrams-drawio` into each project by default. A project team may explicitly decide to adopt its own copy; that decision must also update the project's channel skills and steering record.
 
 Load the global `documentation-docusaurus` skill before changing project documentation structure, navigation, MDX, Draw.io embedding, or Docusaurus configuration. Its authoritative source is:
 
@@ -152,11 +152,11 @@ Every diagram must include a title, scope, element names, responsibilities, rela
 
 ## Draw.io Workflow
 
-1. Load global `drawio-main` before creating or modifying a diagram.
+1. Load global `diagrams-drawio` before creating or modifying a diagram.
 2. Load global `documentation-docusaurus` before changing the site or embedding a diagram.
 3. Store editable `.drawio` source in the documentation repository.
 4. Onboard the source through `docusaurus-plugin-drawio` using the MDX source-import workflow from `documentation-docusaurus`; do not publish only a static export.
-5. Export an additional review format only when `drawio-main` or project policy requires it.
+5. Export an additional review format only when `diagrams-drawio` or project policy requires it.
 6. Validate Draw.io source, Docusaurus build, source import, selected page/pageId, browser rendering, and console/network output.
 7. Link diagrams from Context, Overview, Container Registry entries, and FR/NFR pages as applicable.
 8. Commit source, MDX/configuration, lockfile, and any required rendered output together.
@@ -229,9 +229,22 @@ Use canonical Task IDs `TASK-<ZERO_PADDED_NUMBER>` and separate project-scoped d
 
 Maintain a version allocation registry linking Features to intended versions. Record target version, rationale, dependencies, readiness constraints, status, and human decision evidence. Hermes may analyze and propose allocation; the team decides which Feature goes into which version. Do not invent version assignments or treat a proposal as final.
 
+## Delivery Readiness State
+
+Architecture uses the task flow `IN_DESIGN → READY_FOR_DELIVERY → IN_PROGRESS`. `READY_FOR_DELIVERY` is a fail-closed, pre-execution readiness state: Architecture may emit it for an exact Task only when all of the following evidence is durable and linked to that Task:
+
+1. an exact item-specific `Approved for Implementation` decision from a human team member;
+2. complete task inputs, including implementation artifacts, concrete inputs and outputs, failure boundaries, exclusions, verification steps, and future acceptance-evidence requirements;
+3. evidence that all entry dependencies are satisfied; and
+4. for a Task that affects the user interface or user experience, exact approved UI/UX implementation-handoff evidence; otherwise the readiness record explicitly records UI/UX as not applicable with a rationale.
+
+`READY_FOR_DELIVERY` does not mean Focus admission, assignment, claim, implementation start, `delivery_started`, or `IN_PROGRESS`. Architecture records the satisfied gate and sends a handoff to Kanban for a separate exact-task Focus-admission decision; only the authorized delivery-flow owner may subsequently record `IN_PROGRESS` when implementation actually starts.
+
+Scope owns the canonical Task lifecycle schema. Architecture must not silently mutate or outrun Scope-owned canonical lifecycle schema: when the schema cannot represent `READY_FOR_DELIVERY`, return the handoff to Scope for canonicalization and keep the Task in its prior state. Never infer this state from solution-package completeness, UI/UX discussion, dependency expectations, CI success, or implementation activity.
+
 ## Kanban Handoff
 
-After human Feature implementation approval, Architecture sends dependency-ready task records to Kanban. Architecture does not place tasks into Focus `InBacklog`; Kanban records the separate human task-admission decision. Keep task dependencies and readiness evidence current when Kanban or Delivery reports drift.
+After human Feature implementation approval, Architecture applies the `READY_FOR_DELIVERY` gate to each exact Task and sends only qualifying task records to Kanban. Architecture does not place tasks into Focus `InBacklog`; Kanban records the separate human task-admission decision. Keep task dependencies and readiness evidence current when Kanban or Delivery reports drift.
 
 ## Proactive Iteration Requirement
 
@@ -248,7 +261,7 @@ Architecture supplies UI/UX with system boundaries, interfaces, data availabilit
 3. Identify changed assumptions, requirements, interfaces, constraints, infrastructure, deployment topology, or runtime behavior.
 4. Compare evidence with the required Architecture information architecture, C4 views, ADRs, FR/NFR registries and pages, Scope-hosted task records, dependencies, readiness, and version evidence.
 5. Add or materially improve at least one useful solution artifact for an eligible Feature.
-6. Use `drawio-main` for every diagram change and `documentation-docusaurus` for every documentation, navigation, MDX, plugin, or embedding change.
+6. Use `diagrams-drawio` for every diagram change and `documentation-docusaurus` for every documentation, navigation, MDX, plugin, or embedding change.
 7. Validate the exact Architecture sidebar, FR/NFR registries and reader pages, absence of Architecture Feature/task navigation, reciprocal Scope traceability, links, Draw.io source embedding, Docusaurus build, and browser rendering; then perform remote readback.
 8. Post a concise update with changed artifacts, implications, unresolved decisions, approval gate, and exact evidence.
 
@@ -270,12 +283,12 @@ Requires team approval for:
 - finalizing which Feature belongs to which version;
 - changing system boundaries, major technologies, security posture, data handling, or deployment topology;
 - resolving genuine contradictions in product requirements;
-- adopting a project-specific `drawio-main` copy;
+- adopting a project-specific `diagrams-drawio` copy;
 - irreversible or high-impact implementation/deployment work.
 
 ## Common Pitfalls
 
-1. Drawing architecture without loading `drawio-main`.
+1. Drawing architecture without loading `diagrams-drawio`.
 2. Duplicating the global Draw.io skill without a team decision.
 3. Treating every C4 level as mandatory regardless of value.
 4. Marking draft decisions or requirements as approved.
@@ -291,13 +304,14 @@ Requires team approval for:
 14. Publishing static diagram exports without onboarding the editable `.drawio` source into Docusaurus.
 15. Reintroducing Architecture Feature pages or task reader navigation instead of linking canonical Scope pages.
 16. Renaming task display IDs by rewriting historic canonical identities, evidence, or append-only hashes.
+17. Treating `READY_FOR_DELIVERY` as automatic Focus admission or `IN_PROGRESS`, or emitting it without exact implementation approval, complete task inputs, satisfied entry dependencies, and applicable approved UI/UX handoff evidence.
 
 ## Verification Checklist
 
 - [ ] Only the seven same-project channels were inspected.
 - [ ] Architecture documentation reflects verified status.
 - [ ] C4 scope and level are appropriate.
-- [ ] `drawio-main` governed every diagram change.
+- [ ] `diagrams-drawio` governed every diagram change.
 - [ ] `documentation-docusaurus` governed navigation, MDX, plugin, and source embedding changes.
 - [ ] Architecture has its dedicated sidebar ordered Context, Overview, Container Registry, Requirements - Functional → Registry + FR pages, Requirements - Non-Functional → Registry + NFR pages.
 - [ ] Architecture has no Features menu/pages and no task registry/reader navigation.
@@ -311,7 +325,8 @@ Requires team approval for:
 - [ ] Every Feature allocated to the planned release has a reviewed, non-placeholder Task breakdown covering every acceptance outcome and applicable requirement, with acyclic within-Feature and cross-Feature dependencies.
 - [ ] Task display IDs use `<UPPERCASE_PROJECT_CODE>-TS-<NUMBER>` without rewriting historic canonical identities, evidence, or append-only hashes.
 - [ ] Only a human team member moved a Feature to `Approved for Implementation` or finalized its version.
-- [ ] Tasks were proposed to Kanban with readiness/dependency evidence; Architecture did not self-admit them to Focus `InBacklog`.
+- [ ] Every emitted `READY_FOR_DELIVERY` Task has exact implementation approval, complete task inputs, satisfied entry dependencies, and applicable approved UI/UX handoff evidence (or an explicit not-applicable rationale).
+- [ ] `READY_FOR_DELIVERY` remained distinct from Focus admission, assignment, claim, `delivery_started`, and `IN_PROGRESS`; Architecture did not self-admit Tasks to Focus `InBacklog`.
 - [ ] At least one useful solution artifact was improved, or the exact human approval/clarification gate was documented.
 - [ ] Proposed items remain visibly proposed.
 - [ ] Documentation and diagram checks passed.

tests/test_task_breakdown_policy.py

@@ -11,6 +11,11 @@ def task_section(skill: str) -> str:
     return operative.split("## Task and Dependency Breakdown", 1)[1].split("## Version Allocation", 1)[0]
 
 
+def readiness_section(skill: str) -> str:
+    operative = COMMENT.sub("", skill)
+    return operative.split("## Delivery Readiness State", 1)[1].split("## Kanban Handoff", 1)[0]
+
+
 def policy_failures(section: str, approval_rule: str) -> list[str]:
     section = COMMENT.sub("", section)
     patterns = {
@@ -28,6 +33,22 @@ def policy_failures(section: str, approval_rule: str) -> list[str]:
     return [name for name, pattern in patterns.items() if re.search(pattern, section) is None]
 
 
+def readiness_failures(section: str) -> list[str]:
+    patterns = {
+        "sequence": r"`IN_DESIGN → READY_FOR_DELIVERY → IN_PROGRESS`",
+        "implementation-approval": r"exact item-specific `Approved for Implementation`",
+        "complete-inputs": r"complete task inputs",
+        "entry-dependencies": r"all entry dependencies are satisfied",
+        "ui-ux-evidence": r"approved UI/UX implementation-handoff evidence",
+        "ui-ux-not-applicable": r"explicitly records UI/UX as not applicable",
+        "not-execution": r"does not mean Focus admission, assignment, claim, implementation start, `delivery_started`, or `IN_PROGRESS`",
+        "kanban-admission": r"handoff to Kanban for a separate exact-task Focus-admission decision",
+        "scope-schema": r"must not silently mutate or outrun Scope-owned canonical lifecycle schema",
+        "scope-fallback": r"return the handoff to Scope for canonicalization and keep the Task in its prior state",
+    }
+    return [name for name, pattern in patterns.items() if re.search(pattern, section) is None]
+
+
 class TaskBreakdownPolicyTest(unittest.TestCase):
     @classmethod
     def setUpClass(cls):
@@ -38,7 +59,7 @@ class TaskBreakdownPolicyTest(unittest.TestCase):
         )
 
     def test_operational_policy_is_complete_and_structured(self):
-        self.assertIn("version: 1.7.0", self.skill)
+        self.assertIn("version: 1.8.0", self.skill)
         self.assertEqual(policy_failures(self.task_section, self.approval_rule), [])
 
     def test_comments_and_weakened_rules_cannot_satisfy_policy(self):
@@ -57,6 +78,28 @@ class TaskBreakdownPolicyTest(unittest.TestCase):
             with self.subTest(name=name):
                 self.assertTrue(policy_failures(self.task_section.replace(old, new), self.approval_rule))
 
+    def test_ready_for_delivery_is_a_fail_closed_pre_execution_state(self):
+        section = readiness_section(self.skill)
+        self.assertEqual(readiness_failures(section), [])
+
+    def test_ready_for_delivery_gate_cannot_be_weakened(self):
+        section = readiness_section(self.skill)
+        mutations = [
+            ("exact item-specific `Approved for Implementation`", "implementation is expected"),
+            ("complete task inputs", "partial task inputs"),
+            ("all entry dependencies are satisfied", "entry dependencies are expected to be satisfied"),
+            ("approved UI/UX implementation-handoff evidence", "a UI/UX discussion"),
+            ("explicitly records UI/UX as not applicable with a rationale", "assumes UI/UX is not applicable"),
+            ("separate exact-task Focus-admission decision", "automatic Focus admission"),
+            ("does not mean Focus admission", "means Focus admission"),
+            ("return the handoff to Scope for canonicalization and keep the Task in its prior state", "continue with a local readiness state"),
+        ]
+        for old, new in mutations:
+            with self.subTest(old=old):
+                changed = section.replace(old, new)
+                self.assertNotEqual(changed, section)
+                self.assertTrue(readiness_failures(changed))
+
 
 if __name__ == "__main__":
     unittest.main()