[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M6CACYHSSHWXS98BRAFRCMVS":3,"skill-same:01M6CACYHSSHWXS98BRAFRCMVS":80},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":16,"categories":17,"keywords":23,"publishedAt":44,"linkOnly":45,"markdownContent":46,"markdownBody":47,"frontMatter":48,"refName":57,"commitSha":58,"skillDirectory":59,"forksCount":60,"repositoryHtmlUrl":61,"repositoryHomepageUrl":62,"ownerHtmlUrl":63,"ownerBlogUrl":64,"ownerDescription":65,"updatedAt":66,"install":67,"resources":79},"01M6CACYHSSHWXS98BRAFRCMVS","flow-discovery-track",null,"Orchestrate Discovery Track flow to prepare validated requirements and designs one iteration ahead of delivery","jmagly\u002Faiwg","jmagly","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F1159087?v=4","01M6C10AK8N2WCSQN11FYGTJWN","Joseph Magly","01M6C10AQ8A2RMED1Y1BSVY7NF",229,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjmagly\u002Faiwg\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fagentic\u002Fcode\u002Fplugins\u002Fsdlc\u002Fskills\u002Fflow-discovery-track\u002FSKILL.md",[18],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000023","Skill与智能体开发","SCENARIO","使用场景",[24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43],"flow","discovery","flow discovery track","track","standard","requirements","true","sonnet","delivery","number","project","iteration","interactive","coding","write","read","directory","text","orchestration","orchestrate","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nnamespace: aiwg\nname: flow-discovery-track\nplatforms: [all]\ndescription: Orchestrate Discovery Track flow to prepare validated requirements and designs one iteration ahead of delivery\ncommandHint:\n  argumentHint: \u003Citeration-number> [project-directory] [--guidance \"text\"] [--interactive]\n  allowedTools: Task, Read, Write, Glob, TodoWrite\n  model: sonnet\n  category: sdlc-orchestration\n  orchestration: true\n  modelRole: coding\n  modelTier: standard\n---\n\n> **Declarative Flow (#1539):** This flow's orchestration is now also expressed as a\n> declarative YAML Flow at `flows\u002Fflow-discovery-track.playbook.yaml` (source of truth for the step\n> sequence + gates). This SKILL.md remains the discoverable trigger surface and prose\n> reference. See epic #1534.\n\n# Discovery Track Flow\n\n**You are the Discovery Orchestrator** managing continuous requirements refinement and design preparation one iteration ahead of delivery.\n\n## Your Role\n\n**You orchestrate multi-agent workflows. You do NOT execute bash scripts.**\n\nWhen the user requests this flow (via natural language or explicit command):\n\n1. **Interpret the request** and confirm understanding\n2. **Read this template** as your orchestration guide\n3. **Extract agent assignments** and workflow steps\n4. **Delegate agents with the current provider-native orchestration mechanism** in the correct sequence\n5. **Synthesize results** and finalize artifacts\n6. **Report completion** with summary\n\n## Discovery Track Overview\n\n**Purpose**: Operate one iteration ahead of Delivery Track, ensuring a continuous supply of well-defined, validated work items\n\n**Key Activities**:\n- Gather and prioritize stakeholder requests\n- Author use-case briefs with acceptance criteria\n- Design data contracts and interfaces\n- Validate assumptions via spikes\u002FPOCs\n- Maintain ready backlog for Delivery\n\n**Success Criteria**:\n- Definition of Ready (DoR) met for all items\n- 1.5x-2x iteration capacity prepared\n- Traceability established\n- Handoff checklist complete\n\n**Expected Duration**: 1-2 week iteration, 30-45 minutes orchestration\n\n## Natural Language Triggers\n\nUsers may say:\n- \"Discovery for iteration 3\"\n- \"Start discovery track\"\n- \"Prepare next iteration\"\n- \"Refine backlog for iteration N\"\n- \"Run discovery cycle\"\n\nYou recognize these as requests for this orchestration flow.\n\n## Parameter Handling\n\n### --guidance Parameter\n\n**Purpose**: User provides upfront direction to tailor discovery focus\n\n**Examples**:\n```\n--guidance \"Focus on security requirements, payment processing is critical path\"\n--guidance \"UI\u002FUX designs needed, customer experience is priority\"\n--guidance \"Technical debt items, need architecture refactoring\"\n--guidance \"Performance optimization, sub-100ms response time required\"\n```\n\n**How to Apply**:\n- Parse guidance for keywords: security, performance, UI\u002FUX, technical debt\n- Adjust agent assignments (add security-architect for security focus)\n- Modify artifact depth (comprehensive vs. minimal based on complexity)\n- Influence priority ordering (feature vs. technical debt focus)\n\n### --interactive Parameter\n\n**Purpose**: You ask 6 strategic questions to understand iteration context\n\n**Questions to Ask** (if --interactive):\n\n```\nI'll ask 6 strategic questions to tailor this Discovery Track to your needs:\n\nQ1: What are your top priorities for this iteration?\n    (e.g., new features, technical debt, performance improvements)\n\nQ2: What are your biggest constraints?\n    (e.g., timeline, team capacity, technical limitations)\n\nQ3: What risks concern you most for this iteration?\n    (e.g., unclear requirements, technical uncertainty, dependencies)\n\nQ4: What's your team's experience level with this type of work?\n    (Helps me gauge how detailed documentation should be)\n\nQ5: What's your target timeline for Delivery?\n    (Influences discovery depth and validation scope)\n\nQ6: Are there compliance or regulatory requirements?\n    (e.g., HIPAA, GDPR, PCI - affects security and privacy focus)\n\nBased on your answers, I'll adjust:\n- Agent assignments (add specialized reviewers)\n- Artifact depth (comprehensive vs. streamlined)\n- Priority ordering (features vs. technical items)\n- Validation approach (spike scope and focus areas)\n```\n\n**Synthesize Guidance**: Combine answers into structured guidance string for execution\n\n## Artifacts to Generate\n\n**Primary Deliverables**:\n- **Stakeholder Request Cards**: Captured requirements → `.aiwg\u002Frequirements\u002Fstakeholder-requests\u002F`\n- **Use-Case Briefs**: Refined requirements → `.aiwg\u002Frequirements\u002Fuse-case-briefs\u002F`\n- **Acceptance Test Cards**: Testable criteria → `.aiwg\u002Ftesting\u002Facceptance-cards\u002F`\n- **Data Contract Cards**: Schema definitions → `.aiwg\u002Farchitecture\u002Fdata-contracts\u002F`\n- **Interface Cards**: API specifications → `.aiwg\u002Farchitecture\u002Finterfaces\u002F`\n- **Spike Results**: Risk validation → `.aiwg\u002Frisks\u002Fspikes\u002F`\n- **Architecture Decision Records**: Design decisions → `.aiwg\u002Farchitecture\u002Fadr\u002F`\n- **Discovery Report**: Iteration summary → `.aiwg\u002Freports\u002Fdiscovery-iteration-{N}-report.md`\n\n**Supporting Artifacts**:\n- Handoff checklist (validated DoR)\n- Risk updates (new risks, validations)\n- Traceability matrix (requirements → design → tests)\n\n## Multi-Agent Orchestration Workflow\n\n### Step 1: Gather Stakeholder Requests\n\n**Purpose**: Collect and prioritize new requirements from stakeholders\n\n**Your Actions**:\n\n1. **Initialize Discovery Workspace**:\n   ```\n   # You do this directly\n   mkdir -p .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002F{requests,briefs,designs,spikes}\n\n   # Create tracking metadata\n   Write to .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fmetadata.json:\n   {\n     \"iteration\": {N},\n     \"status\": \"IN_PROGRESS\",\n     \"start-date\": \"{current-date}\",\n     \"target-delivery-iteration\": {N-1}\n   }\n   ```\n\n2. **Launch Stakeholder Gathering Agents** (parallel):\n   ```\n   # Agent 1: Requirements Analyst\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"requirements-analyst\",\n       description=\"Gather and document stakeholder requests\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Iteration: {N}\n\n       Check for existing stakeholder inputs:\n       - .aiwg\u002Frequirements\u002Fstakeholder-requests\u002F*.md (unprocessed)\n       - .aiwg\u002Ffeedback\u002F*.md (user feedback)\n       - Project backlog or issue tracker references\n\n       For each request found or simulated (create 3-5 if none exist):\n\n       Use template: agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fstakeholder-request-card-template.md\n\n       Document:\n       - Request ID and title\n       - Stakeholder name and role\n       - Business value statement\n       - Desired outcome\n       - Priority (Must\u002FShould\u002FCould\u002FWon't)\n       - Acceptance criteria (initial, high-level)\n\n       Apply MoSCoW prioritization based on:\n       - Business value (revenue, cost savings, risk reduction)\n       - Strategic alignment (vision, roadmap)\n       - Dependencies (blocking other work)\n\n       Output cards to: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Frequests\u002F\n       Generate summary: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Frequests-summary.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n\n   # Agent 2: Product Strategist\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"product-strategist\",\n       description=\"Validate request alignment with vision\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read vision: .aiwg\u002Frequirements\u002Fvision-*.md\n       Read business case: .aiwg\u002Fplanning\u002Fbusiness-case-*.md\n\n       Review gathered requests in: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Frequests\u002F\n\n       For each request:\n       - Validate alignment with product vision\n       - Assess strategic value (1-10 score)\n       - Identify conflicts or overlaps\n       - Recommend priority adjustments\n\n       Create alignment report:\n       - Aligned requests (proceed to refinement)\n       - Misaligned requests (defer or reject with rationale)\n       - Strategic recommendations\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Falignment-assessment.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n3. **Prioritize Backlog**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"project-manager\",\n       description=\"Create prioritized backlog for iteration\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read requests: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Frequests\u002F\n       Read alignment: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Falignment-assessment.md\n\n       Create prioritized backlog:\n       1. Must Have (critical for iteration)\n       2. Should Have (important but not critical)\n       3. Could Have (nice to have if time permits)\n       4. Won't Have (explicitly out of scope)\n\n       Consider:\n       - Team velocity (estimate: 20-30 story points)\n       - Dependencies between items\n       - Risk factors\n\n       Select items for Discovery totaling 1.5x-2x velocity (30-60 points)\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fprioritized-backlog.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n**Communicate Progress**:\n```\n✓ Discovery workspace initialized for iteration {N}\n⏳ Gathering stakeholder requests...\n  ✓ Requirements Analyst: {count} requests documented\n  ✓ Product Strategist: Alignment validated\n  ✓ Project Manager: Backlog prioritized ({points} points selected)\n✓ Stakeholder gathering complete: {count} items for refinement\n```\n\n### Step 2: Author Use-Case Briefs and Acceptance Cards\n\n**Purpose**: Expand high-priority requests into detailed use cases with testable criteria\n\n**Your Actions**:\n\n1. **Launch Use-Case Development** (parallel for top items):\n   ```\n   # For each high-priority item (Must\u002FShould), launch:\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"requirements-analyst\",\n       description=\"Create use-case brief for {request-title}\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Request: {request-details from prioritized backlog}\n\n       Use template: $AIWG_ROOT\u002Fagentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fuse-case-brief-template.md\n\n       Develop comprehensive use-case brief:\n\n       1. Use Case Overview\n          - ID and name\n          - Business context and value\n          - Actors involved\n\n       2. Main Flow (Happy Path)\n          - Step-by-step user actions\n          - System responses\n          - Data transformations\n\n       3. Alternative Flows\n          - Error scenarios\n          - Edge cases\n          - Exception handling\n\n       4. Pre-conditions\n          - System state required\n          - User permissions\n          - Data prerequisites\n\n       5. Post-conditions\n          - System state after completion\n          - Data changes\n          - Notifications\u002Fevents triggered\n\n       6. Business Rules\n          - Validation rules\n          - Calculations\n          - Constraints\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fbriefs\u002Fuse-case-{id}.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n2. **Create Acceptance Test Cards** (parallel with briefs):\n   ```\n   # For each use-case brief being created:\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"system-analyst\",\n       description=\"Define acceptance criteria for {use-case}\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read use-case brief: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fbriefs\u002Fuse-case-{id}.md\n\n       Use template: agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fuse-case-acceptance-template.md\n\n       Create acceptance test card:\n\n       1. Test Scenarios\n          - Happy path validation\n          - Alternative flow tests\n          - Error condition tests\n          - Boundary\u002Fedge cases\n\n       2. Test Data Requirements\n          - Valid test data sets\n          - Invalid data for negative tests\n          - Edge case data\n\n       3. Expected Results\n          - Success criteria (measurable)\n          - Error messages expected\n          - Performance targets (if applicable)\n\n       4. Test Execution Approach\n          - Manual vs. automated\n          - Test environment needs\n          - Dependencies\n\n       Ensure all acceptance criteria are:\n       - Testable (can be verified)\n       - Measurable (quantifiable)\n       - Independent (no overlaps)\n       - Complete (cover all flows)\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fbriefs\u002Facceptance-{use-case-id}.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n**Communicate Progress**:\n```\n⏳ Authoring use-case briefs and acceptance cards...\n  ✓ Use-case briefs: {count}\u002F{total} complete\n  ✓ Acceptance cards: {count}\u002F{total} complete\n  ✓ Edge cases identified: {count}\n✓ Requirements refinement complete: {count} use cases ready\n```\n\n### Step 3: Draft Data Contracts and Interface Cards\n\n**Purpose**: Define data structures and API contracts for new\u002Fmodified functionality\n\n**Your Actions**:\n\n1. **Analyze Data Requirements**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"api-designer\",\n       description=\"Identify data and interface needs\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read use-case briefs: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fbriefs\u002F*.md\n\n       Analyze requirements to identify:\n       - New data entities needed\n       - Existing entities to modify\n       - Configuration, events, messages, files, imports\u002Fexports, and structured user input\n       - New API endpoints required\n       - Integration points with external systems\n\n       Create data\u002Finterface inventory:\n       - List of data contracts needed\n       - List of interface specifications needed\n       - Dependencies on existing contracts\n       - Every schema-bearing boundary and any explicit opt-out candidate\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdesigns\u002Finventory.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n2. **Create Canonical Schemas and Data Contract Cards** (parallel):\n   ```\n   # For each identified data entity:\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"api-designer\",\n       description=\"Define data contract for {entity}\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Entity: {entity-name}\n       Related use cases: {use-case-ids}\n\n       First invoke schema-intake from the schema-governance addon. Persistent,\n       exchanged, configured, queued, evented, imported\u002Fexported, or structured\n       user-authored data requires a governed schema by default. Do not ask the\n       user to know schema terminology. An opt-out requires an ephemeral internal\n       boundary, owner, rationale, and review date.\n\n       Use template: agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fdata-contract-template.md\n\n       Define data contract:\n\n       1. Entity Definition\n          - Name and purpose\n          - Relationships to other entities\n          - Business rules\n\n       2. Canonical Schema Specification\n          - Fields and data types\n          - Required vs. optional\n          - Validation rules\n          - Default values\n          - Stable catalog identity, version, owner, authority, consumers\n          - Valid and invalid executable fixtures\n\n       3. Example (JSON\u002FYAML)\n          ```json\n          {\n            \"id\": \"uuid\",\n            \"name\": \"string\",\n            \"status\": \"enum[active,inactive]\",\n            \"created_at\": \"timestamp\"\n          }\n          ```\n\n       4. Versioning Strategy\n          - Current version\n          - Migration approach\n          - Backward compatibility\n\n       Outputs:\n       - .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdesigns\u002Fdata-contract-{entity}.md\n       - Canonical schema under the project schema root\n       - Catalog\u002Fdomain-manifest registration and fixtures\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n3. **Create Interface Cards** (parallel):\n   ```\n   # For each identified API\u002Finterface:\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"architecture-designer\",\n       description=\"Define interface specification for {api}\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Interface: {api-name}\n       Related use cases: {use-case-ids}\n\n       Use template: agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Fanalysis-design\u002Finterface-contract-card.md\n\n       Define interface specification:\n\n       1. API Overview\n          - Purpose and scope\n          - Consumer systems\n          - Protocol (REST, GraphQL, gRPC)\n\n       2. Endpoints\n          - Path and method\n          - Request parameters\n          - Request body schema\n          - Response schema\n          - Error responses\n\n       3. Authentication\u002FAuthorization\n          - Auth mechanism (OAuth, JWT, API key)\n          - Required scopes\u002Fpermissions\n\n       4. Non-functional Requirements\n          - Rate limits\n          - Response time SLA\n          - Availability requirements\n\n       5. OpenAPI\u002FSwagger snippet (if REST)\n\n       Ensure backward compatibility if modifying existing interface.\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdesigns\u002Finterface-{api}.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n**Communicate Progress**:\n```\n⏳ Designing data contracts and interfaces...\n  ✓ Data contracts: {count} defined\n  ✓ Interface specifications: {count} defined\n  ✓ Backward compatibility: Validated\n✓ Design artifacts complete: Ready for validation\n```\n\n### Step 4: Spike\u002FPOC for High-Risk Assumptions\n\n**Purpose**: Validate technical assumptions and retire risks through time-boxed investigations\n\n**Your Actions**:\n\n1. **Identify High-Risk Assumptions**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"technical-researcher\",\n       description=\"Identify assumptions needing validation\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read use-case briefs: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fbriefs\u002F*.md\n       Read data\u002Finterface designs: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdesigns\u002F*.md\n       Read risk list: .aiwg\u002Frisks\u002Frisk-list.md\n\n       Identify high-risk assumptions:\n       - Technical feasibility unknowns\n       - Performance concerns\n       - Integration uncertainties\n       - Security vulnerabilities\n       - Scalability questions\n\n       For each assumption:\n       - Risk level (High\u002FMedium\u002FLow)\n       - Validation approach (Spike\u002FPOC\u002FAnalysis)\n       - Time box (4-8 hours typical)\n       - Success criteria\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fspikes\u002Fspike-plan.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n2. **Execute Spikes\u002FPOCs** (parallel for high-risk items):\n   ```\n   # For each high-risk assumption:\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"software-implementer\",\n       description=\"Conduct spike for {assumption}\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Assumption to validate: {assumption-description}\n       Time box: {hours} hours\n       Success criteria: {criteria}\n\n       Use the inline format: experiment fields in this skill\n\n       Conduct investigation:\n\n       1. Approach\n          - What will be tested\u002Fprototyped\n          - Tools\u002Ftechnologies to evaluate\n          - Metrics to collect\n\n       2. Implementation (if POC)\n          - Minimal code to prove concept\n          - Focus on risk validation, not production quality\n          - Document code snippets\n\n       3. Findings\n          - What worked\n          - What didn't work\n          - Performance measurements\n          - Limitations discovered\n\n       4. Recommendation\n          - GO: Assumption validated, proceed\n          - NO-GO: Assumption invalid, need alternative\n          - PIVOT: Partial success, adjust approach\n\n       5. Next Steps\n          - If GO: Implementation guidance\n          - If NO-GO: Alternative approaches\n          - If PIVOT: Additional investigation needed\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fspikes\u002Fspike-{id}-results.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n3. **Update Risk Register**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"project-manager\",\n       description=\"Update risks based on spike results\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read spike results: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fspikes\u002F*-results.md\n       Read current risks: .aiwg\u002Frisks\u002Frisk-list.md\n\n       Update risk list:\n       - Mark validated risks as RETIRED\n       - Update mitigation strategies based on spike findings\n       - Add new risks discovered during spikes\n       - Adjust risk priorities\n\n       Document:\n       - Risks retired this iteration\n       - New risks identified\n       - Updated mitigation plans\n\n       Output updated risk list: .aiwg\u002Frisks\u002Frisk-list.md\n       Output risk summary: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Frisk-updates.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n**Communicate Progress**:\n```\n⏳ Validating high-risk assumptions...\n  ✓ Spikes executed: {count}\n  ✓ POCs completed: {count}\n  ✓ Risks retired: {count}\n  ⚠️ New risks identified: {count}\n✓ Risk validation complete: {go-count} GO, {no-go-count} NO-GO, {pivot-count} PIVOT\n```\n\n### Step 5: Update Architecture Decision Records\n\n**Purpose**: Document architectural decisions made during discovery\n\n**Your Actions**:\n\n```\nTask(\n    subagent_type=\"architecture-designer\",\n    description=\"Create ADRs for discovery decisions\",\n    prompt=\"\"\"\n    Review discovery artifacts:\n    - Spike results: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fspikes\u002F*\n    - Data contracts: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdesigns\u002Fdata-*\n    - Interface specs: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdesigns\u002Finterface-*\n\n    Identify significant architectural decisions made:\n    - Technology choices from spikes\n    - API design patterns selected\n    - Data model decisions\n    - Integration approaches\n\n    For each significant decision:\n\n    Use template: agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Fgovernance\u002Fadr-template.md\n\n    Create ADR documenting:\n    1. Status: Proposed | Accepted\n    2. Context: Problem\u002Fissue faced\n    3. Decision: What we're doing\n    4. Consequences: Trade-offs and impacts\n    5. Alternatives: Options considered and why rejected\n\n    Link to relevant spike results as evidence.\n\n    Output: .aiwg\u002Farchitecture\u002Fadr\u002FADR-{number}-{title}.md\n    \"\"\"\n)\n```\n\n**Communicate Progress**:\n```\n✓ Architecture decisions documented: {count} ADRs created\n```\n\n### Step 6: Handoff to Delivery Track\n\n**Purpose**: Validate readiness and transfer work to Delivery team\n\n**Your Actions**:\n\n1. **Validate Definition of Ready**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"requirements-reviewer\",\n       description=\"Validate DoR for all backlog items\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read Definition of Ready criteria from template:\n       $AIWG_ROOT\u002Fagentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Fflows\u002Fhandoff-checklist-template.md\n\n       For each backlog item in iteration {N}:\n\n       Validate DoR Criteria:\n\n       Requirements Complete:\n       - [ ] Use-case brief authored and reviewed\n       - [ ] Acceptance criteria defined and testable\n       - [ ] Pre\u002Fpost-conditions documented\n       - [ ] Alternative flows identified\n\n       Design Complete:\n       - [ ] Data contracts defined (if applicable)\n       - [ ] Interface specs complete (if applicable)\n       - [ ] Integration points identified\n       - [ ] Backward compatibility validated\n\n       Risks Addressed:\n       - [ ] High-risk assumptions validated\n       - [ ] Technical risks documented\n       - [ ] Dependencies identified\n       - [ ] No blocking risks without mitigation\n\n       Traceability:\n       - [ ] Request → use-case linkage\n       - [ ] Use-case → acceptance criteria linkage\n       - [ ] Design artifacts linked to requirements\n\n       Stakeholder Approval:\n       - [ ] Product Owner approval\n       - [ ] Priority confirmed\n       - [ ] Business value validated\n\n       Mark each item: READY | NOT_READY (with reasons)\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdor-validation.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n2. **Package Artifacts for Handoff**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"project-manager\",\n       description=\"Package discovery artifacts for Delivery\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Copy validated artifacts from working to final locations:\n\n       From .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002F:\n       - briefs\u002F* → .aiwg\u002Frequirements\u002Fuse-case-briefs\u002F\n       - briefs\u002Facceptance-* → .aiwg\u002Ftesting\u002Facceptance-cards\u002F\n       - designs\u002Fdata-* → .aiwg\u002Farchitecture\u002Fdata-contracts\u002F\n       - designs\u002Finterface-* → .aiwg\u002Farchitecture\u002Finterfaces\u002F\n       - spikes\u002F*-results → .aiwg\u002Frisks\u002Fspikes\u002F\n\n       Create handoff package summary:\n       - List of all artifacts\n       - DoR status for each item\n       - Total story points ready\n       - Key decisions made\n       - Risks identified\u002Fretired\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fhandoffs\u002Fdiscovery-to-delivery-iteration-{N}.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n3. **Generate Discovery Report**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"documentation-synthesizer\",\n       description=\"Create Discovery iteration report\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Synthesize complete Discovery report for iteration {N}:\n\n       # Discovery Track Report - Iteration {N}\n\n       **Completion Date**: {date}\n       **Target Delivery Iteration**: {N-1}\n       **Status**: READY | PARTIAL | BLOCKED\n\n       ## Backlog Items Prepared\n       - Items Ready: {count} ({points} points)\n       - Items Not Ready: {count} (reasons listed)\n       - Story Points Ready: {points}\n       - Coverage: {ratio}x iteration capacity\n\n       ## Artifacts Created\n\n       ### Requirements\n       - Stakeholder Request Cards: {count}\n       - Use-Case Briefs: {count}\n       - Acceptance Test Cards: {count}\n\n       ### Design\n       - Data Contract Cards: {count}\n       - Interface Cards: {count}\n       - Architecture Decision Records: {count}\n\n       ### Risk Management\n       - Spikes Executed: {count}\n       - Risks Retired: {count}\n       - New Risks Identified: {count}\n\n       ## Definition of Ready Compliance\n       - DoR Pass Rate: {percentage}%\n       - Items failing DoR: {list with reasons}\n\n       ## Key Decisions\n       {list architectural decisions with ADR references}\n\n       ## Handoff Status\n       - Checklist Complete: YES | NO\n       - Artifacts Packaged: YES | NO\n       - Delivery Team Notified: YES | NO\n\n       ## Discovery Health Metrics\n\n       ### Lead Time\n       - Discovery ahead of Delivery: {iterations}\n       - Status: ON-TRACK | AT-RISK\n\n       ### Backlog Health\n       - Coverage Ratio: {ratio}x\n       - Status: HEALTHY | MARGINAL | STARVED\n\n       ### Quality\n       - DoR Pass Rate: {percentage}%\n       - Rework Rate: {percentage}%\n\n       ## Next Steps\n       - Handoff meeting: {date}\n       - Delivery kickoff: {date}\n       - Next Discovery iteration: {N+1}\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Freports\u002Fdiscovery-iteration-{N}-report.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n**Communicate Progress**:\n```\n⏳ Completing handoff to Delivery...\n  ✓ DoR validation: {percentage}% pass rate\n  ✓ Artifacts packaged: {count} items\n  ✓ Handoff checklist: Complete\n✓ Discovery iteration {N} complete: READY FOR DELIVERY\n```\n\n## Quality Gates\n\nBefore marking workflow complete, verify:\n- [ ] All high-priority requests refined into use cases\n- [ ] Acceptance criteria testable and complete\n- [ ] Data contracts and interfaces defined\n- [ ] High-risk assumptions validated\n- [ ] ADRs document key decisions\n- [ ] DoR met for ≥90% of items\n- [ ] 1.5x-2x iteration capacity prepared\n- [ ] Handoff checklist complete\n- [ ] Discovery report generated\n\n## User Communication\n\n**At start**: Confirm understanding and scope\n\n```\nUnderstood. I'll orchestrate the Discovery Track for iteration {N}.\n\nThis will prepare:\n- Use-case briefs with acceptance criteria\n- Data contracts and interface specifications\n- Risk validations via spikes\u002FPOCs\n- Architecture decision records\n- Complete handoff package for Delivery\n\nTarget: 1.5x-2x iteration capacity ({points} story points)\nExpected duration: 30-45 minutes\n\nStarting orchestration...\n```\n\n**During**: Update progress with clear indicators\n\n```\n✓ = Complete\n⏳ = In progress\n❌ = Error\u002Fblocked\n⚠️ = Warning\u002Fattention needed\n```\n\n**At end**: Summary report with metrics\n\n```\n─────────────────────────────────────────────\nDiscovery Track - Iteration {N} Complete\n─────────────────────────────────────────────\n\n**Status**: READY FOR DELIVERY\n**Items Prepared**: {count} ({points} story points)\n**DoR Compliance**: {percentage}%\n**Coverage Ratio**: {ratio}x iteration capacity\n\n**Artifacts Generated**:\n- Use-case briefs: {count}\n- Acceptance cards: {count}\n- Data contracts: {count}\n- Interface specs: {count}\n- ADRs: {count}\n- Spike results: {count}\n\n**Risk Status**:\n- Retired: {count}\n- New: {count}\n- Outstanding: {count}\n\n**Key Decisions**:\n{list top 3-5 architectural decisions}\n\n**Handoff Package**: .aiwg\u002Fhandoffs\u002Fdiscovery-to-delivery-iteration-{N}.md\n**Full Report**: .aiwg\u002Freports\u002Fdiscovery-iteration-{N}-report.md\n\n**Next Steps**:\n- Review generated artifacts\n- Schedule handoff meeting with Delivery team\n- Begin Discovery for iteration {N+1}\n\n─────────────────────────────────────────────\n```\n\n## Error Handling\n\n**If No Stakeholder Requests**:\n```\n⚠️ No stakeholder requests found\n\nCreating simulated requests based on:\n- Vision document priorities\n- Outstanding technical debt\n- Risk mitigation needs\n\nRecommendation: Engage stakeholders for input\n```\n\n**If DoR Not Met**:\n```\n❌ Items not meeting Definition of Ready\n\n{item}: {missing-criteria}\n\nActions required:\n- Complete missing artifacts\n- Obtain stakeholder approval\n- Validate acceptance criteria\n\nThese items cannot be handed to Delivery until DoR met.\n```\n\n**If Spike Failed**:\n```\n❌ Spike validation failed\n\nRisk: {description}\nResult: NO-GO - {reason}\n\nRecommendations:\n1. Alternative technical approach\n2. Adjust requirements\n3. Accept risk with mitigation\n\nEscalating to Architecture Designer for decision...\n```\n\n**If Capacity Insufficient**:\n```\n⚠️ Insufficient work prepared\n\nReady: {points} points\nTarget: {target} points (1.5x capacity)\nGap: {gap} points\n\nActions:\n- Add more items from backlog\n- Reduce scope of complex items\n- Carry over to next iteration\n```\n\n## Success Criteria\n\nThis orchestration succeeds when:\n- [ ] Stakeholder requests gathered and prioritized\n- [ ] Use-case briefs complete with acceptance criteria\n- [ ] Data contracts and interfaces defined\n- [ ] High-risk assumptions validated via spikes\n- [ ] Architecture decisions documented\n- [ ] Definition of Ready met for ≥90% of items\n- [ ] 1.5x-2x iteration capacity prepared\n- [ ] Traceability established (requirements → design → tests)\n- [ ] Handoff to Delivery complete\n\n## Metrics to Track\n\n**During orchestration, track**:\n- Requirements clarity: % with complete acceptance criteria\n- Design coverage: % of use cases with data\u002Finterface specs\n- Risk validation: % of high-risk items validated\n- DoR compliance: % meeting all criteria\n- Cycle time: Discovery duration (target: 1-2 weeks, orchestration: 30-45 min)\n\n## References\n\n**Templates** (via $AIWG_ROOT):\n- Stakeholder Request: `agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fstakeholder-request-card-template.md`\n- Use-Case Brief: `templates\u002Frequirements\u002Fuse-case-brief-template.md`\n- Acceptance Test: `agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fuse-case-acceptance-template.md`\n- Data Contract: `agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fdata-contract-template.md`\n- Interface Card: `agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Fanalysis-design\u002Finterface-contract-card.md`\n- Spike Card: experiment fields in this skill\n- ADR: `agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Fgovernance\u002Fadr-template.md`\n\n**Flows**:\n- Handoff Checklist: `flows\u002Fhandoff-checklist-template.md`\n- Dual-Track Synchronization: `flows\u002Fiteration-dual-track-template.md`\n\n**Definition of Ready**:\n- `flows\u002Fhandoff-checklist-template.md` (DoR section)\n\n**Discovery Best Practices**:\n- `docs\u002Fdiscovery-track-best-practices.md`\n","> **Declarative Flow (#1539):** This flow's orchestration is now also expressed as a\n> declarative YAML Flow at `flows\u002Fflow-discovery-track.playbook.yaml` (source of truth for the step\n> sequence + gates). This SKILL.md remains the discoverable trigger surface and prose\n> reference. See epic #1534.\n\n# Discovery Track Flow\n\n**You are the Discovery Orchestrator** managing continuous requirements refinement and design preparation one iteration ahead of delivery.\n\n## Your Role\n\n**You orchestrate multi-agent workflows. You do NOT execute bash scripts.**\n\nWhen the user requests this flow (via natural language or explicit command):\n\n1. **Interpret the request** and confirm understanding\n2. **Read this template** as your orchestration guide\n3. **Extract agent assignments** and workflow steps\n4. **Delegate agents with the current provider-native orchestration mechanism** in the correct sequence\n5. **Synthesize results** and finalize artifacts\n6. **Report completion** with summary\n\n## Discovery Track Overview\n\n**Purpose**: Operate one iteration ahead of Delivery Track, ensuring a continuous supply of well-defined, validated work items\n\n**Key Activities**:\n- Gather and prioritize stakeholder requests\n- Author use-case briefs with acceptance criteria\n- Design data contracts and interfaces\n- Validate assumptions via spikes\u002FPOCs\n- Maintain ready backlog for Delivery\n\n**Success Criteria**:\n- Definition of Ready (DoR) met for all items\n- 1.5x-2x iteration capacity prepared\n- Traceability established\n- Handoff checklist complete\n\n**Expected Duration**: 1-2 week iteration, 30-45 minutes orchestration\n\n## Natural Language Triggers\n\nUsers may say:\n- \"Discovery for iteration 3\"\n- \"Start discovery track\"\n- \"Prepare next iteration\"\n- \"Refine backlog for iteration N\"\n- \"Run discovery cycle\"\n\nYou recognize these as requests for this orchestration flow.\n\n## Parameter Handling\n\n### --guidance Parameter\n\n**Purpose**: User provides upfront direction to tailor discovery focus\n\n**Examples**:\n```\n--guidance \"Focus on security requirements, payment processing is critical path\"\n--guidance \"UI\u002FUX designs needed, customer experience is priority\"\n--guidance \"Technical debt items, need architecture refactoring\"\n--guidance \"Performance optimization, sub-100ms response time required\"\n```\n\n**How to Apply**:\n- Parse guidance for keywords: security, performance, UI\u002FUX, technical debt\n- Adjust agent assignments (add security-architect for security focus)\n- Modify artifact depth (comprehensive vs. minimal based on complexity)\n- Influence priority ordering (feature vs. technical debt focus)\n\n### --interactive Parameter\n\n**Purpose**: You ask 6 strategic questions to understand iteration context\n\n**Questions to Ask** (if --interactive):\n\n```\nI'll ask 6 strategic questions to tailor this Discovery Track to your needs:\n\nQ1: What are your top priorities for this iteration?\n    (e.g., new features, technical debt, performance improvements)\n\nQ2: What are your biggest constraints?\n    (e.g., timeline, team capacity, technical limitations)\n\nQ3: What risks concern you most for this iteration?\n    (e.g., unclear requirements, technical uncertainty, dependencies)\n\nQ4: What's your team's experience level with this type of work?\n    (Helps me gauge how detailed documentation should be)\n\nQ5: What's your target timeline for Delivery?\n    (Influences discovery depth and validation scope)\n\nQ6: Are there compliance or regulatory requirements?\n    (e.g., HIPAA, GDPR, PCI - affects security and privacy focus)\n\nBased on your answers, I'll adjust:\n- Agent assignments (add specialized reviewers)\n- Artifact depth (comprehensive vs. streamlined)\n- Priority ordering (features vs. technical items)\n- Validation approach (spike scope and focus areas)\n```\n\n**Synthesize Guidance**: Combine answers into structured guidance string for execution\n\n## Artifacts to Generate\n\n**Primary Deliverables**:\n- **Stakeholder Request Cards**: Captured requirements → `.aiwg\u002Frequirements\u002Fstakeholder-requests\u002F`\n- **Use-Case Briefs**: Refined requirements → `.aiwg\u002Frequirements\u002Fuse-case-briefs\u002F`\n- **Acceptance Test Cards**: Testable criteria → `.aiwg\u002Ftesting\u002Facceptance-cards\u002F`\n- **Data Contract Cards**: Schema definitions → `.aiwg\u002Farchitecture\u002Fdata-contracts\u002F`\n- **Interface Cards**: API specifications → `.aiwg\u002Farchitecture\u002Finterfaces\u002F`\n- **Spike Results**: Risk validation → `.aiwg\u002Frisks\u002Fspikes\u002F`\n- **Architecture Decision Records**: Design decisions → `.aiwg\u002Farchitecture\u002Fadr\u002F`\n- **Discovery Report**: Iteration summary → `.aiwg\u002Freports\u002Fdiscovery-iteration-{N}-report.md`\n\n**Supporting Artifacts**:\n- Handoff checklist (validated DoR)\n- Risk updates (new risks, validations)\n- Traceability matrix (requirements → design → tests)\n\n## Multi-Agent Orchestration Workflow\n\n### Step 1: Gather Stakeholder Requests\n\n**Purpose**: Collect and prioritize new requirements from stakeholders\n\n**Your Actions**:\n\n1. **Initialize Discovery Workspace**:\n   ```\n   # You do this directly\n   mkdir -p .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002F{requests,briefs,designs,spikes}\n\n   # Create tracking metadata\n   Write to .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fmetadata.json:\n   {\n     \"iteration\": {N},\n     \"status\": \"IN_PROGRESS\",\n     \"start-date\": \"{current-date}\",\n     \"target-delivery-iteration\": {N-1}\n   }\n   ```\n\n2. **Launch Stakeholder Gathering Agents** (parallel):\n   ```\n   # Agent 1: Requirements Analyst\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"requirements-analyst\",\n       description=\"Gather and document stakeholder requests\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Iteration: {N}\n\n       Check for existing stakeholder inputs:\n       - .aiwg\u002Frequirements\u002Fstakeholder-requests\u002F*.md (unprocessed)\n       - .aiwg\u002Ffeedback\u002F*.md (user feedback)\n       - Project backlog or issue tracker references\n\n       For each request found or simulated (create 3-5 if none exist):\n\n       Use template: agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fstakeholder-request-card-template.md\n\n       Document:\n       - Request ID and title\n       - Stakeholder name and role\n       - Business value statement\n       - Desired outcome\n       - Priority (Must\u002FShould\u002FCould\u002FWon't)\n       - Acceptance criteria (initial, high-level)\n\n       Apply MoSCoW prioritization based on:\n       - Business value (revenue, cost savings, risk reduction)\n       - Strategic alignment (vision, roadmap)\n       - Dependencies (blocking other work)\n\n       Output cards to: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Frequests\u002F\n       Generate summary: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Frequests-summary.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n\n   # Agent 2: Product Strategist\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"product-strategist\",\n       description=\"Validate request alignment with vision\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read vision: .aiwg\u002Frequirements\u002Fvision-*.md\n       Read business case: .aiwg\u002Fplanning\u002Fbusiness-case-*.md\n\n       Review gathered requests in: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Frequests\u002F\n\n       For each request:\n       - Validate alignment with product vision\n       - Assess strategic value (1-10 score)\n       - Identify conflicts or overlaps\n       - Recommend priority adjustments\n\n       Create alignment report:\n       - Aligned requests (proceed to refinement)\n       - Misaligned requests (defer or reject with rationale)\n       - Strategic recommendations\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Falignment-assessment.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n3. **Prioritize Backlog**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"project-manager\",\n       description=\"Create prioritized backlog for iteration\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read requests: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Frequests\u002F\n       Read alignment: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Falignment-assessment.md\n\n       Create prioritized backlog:\n       1. Must Have (critical for iteration)\n       2. Should Have (important but not critical)\n       3. Could Have (nice to have if time permits)\n       4. Won't Have (explicitly out of scope)\n\n       Consider:\n       - Team velocity (estimate: 20-30 story points)\n       - Dependencies between items\n       - Risk factors\n\n       Select items for Discovery totaling 1.5x-2x velocity (30-60 points)\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fprioritized-backlog.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n**Communicate Progress**:\n```\n✓ Discovery workspace initialized for iteration {N}\n⏳ Gathering stakeholder requests...\n  ✓ Requirements Analyst: {count} requests documented\n  ✓ Product Strategist: Alignment validated\n  ✓ Project Manager: Backlog prioritized ({points} points selected)\n✓ Stakeholder gathering complete: {count} items for refinement\n```\n\n### Step 2: Author Use-Case Briefs and Acceptance Cards\n\n**Purpose**: Expand high-priority requests into detailed use cases with testable criteria\n\n**Your Actions**:\n\n1. **Launch Use-Case Development** (parallel for top items):\n   ```\n   # For each high-priority item (Must\u002FShould), launch:\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"requirements-analyst\",\n       description=\"Create use-case brief for {request-title}\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Request: {request-details from prioritized backlog}\n\n       Use template: $AIWG_ROOT\u002Fagentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fuse-case-brief-template.md\n\n       Develop comprehensive use-case brief:\n\n       1. Use Case Overview\n          - ID and name\n          - Business context and value\n          - Actors involved\n\n       2. Main Flow (Happy Path)\n          - Step-by-step user actions\n          - System responses\n          - Data transformations\n\n       3. Alternative Flows\n          - Error scenarios\n          - Edge cases\n          - Exception handling\n\n       4. Pre-conditions\n          - System state required\n          - User permissions\n          - Data prerequisites\n\n       5. Post-conditions\n          - System state after completion\n          - Data changes\n          - Notifications\u002Fevents triggered\n\n       6. Business Rules\n          - Validation rules\n          - Calculations\n          - Constraints\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fbriefs\u002Fuse-case-{id}.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n2. **Create Acceptance Test Cards** (parallel with briefs):\n   ```\n   # For each use-case brief being created:\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"system-analyst\",\n       description=\"Define acceptance criteria for {use-case}\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read use-case brief: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fbriefs\u002Fuse-case-{id}.md\n\n       Use template: agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fuse-case-acceptance-template.md\n\n       Create acceptance test card:\n\n       1. Test Scenarios\n          - Happy path validation\n          - Alternative flow tests\n          - Error condition tests\n          - Boundary\u002Fedge cases\n\n       2. Test Data Requirements\n          - Valid test data sets\n          - Invalid data for negative tests\n          - Edge case data\n\n       3. Expected Results\n          - Success criteria (measurable)\n          - Error messages expected\n          - Performance targets (if applicable)\n\n       4. Test Execution Approach\n          - Manual vs. automated\n          - Test environment needs\n          - Dependencies\n\n       Ensure all acceptance criteria are:\n       - Testable (can be verified)\n       - Measurable (quantifiable)\n       - Independent (no overlaps)\n       - Complete (cover all flows)\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fbriefs\u002Facceptance-{use-case-id}.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n**Communicate Progress**:\n```\n⏳ Authoring use-case briefs and acceptance cards...\n  ✓ Use-case briefs: {count}\u002F{total} complete\n  ✓ Acceptance cards: {count}\u002F{total} complete\n  ✓ Edge cases identified: {count}\n✓ Requirements refinement complete: {count} use cases ready\n```\n\n### Step 3: Draft Data Contracts and Interface Cards\n\n**Purpose**: Define data structures and API contracts for new\u002Fmodified functionality\n\n**Your Actions**:\n\n1. **Analyze Data Requirements**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"api-designer\",\n       description=\"Identify data and interface needs\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read use-case briefs: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fbriefs\u002F*.md\n\n       Analyze requirements to identify:\n       - New data entities needed\n       - Existing entities to modify\n       - Configuration, events, messages, files, imports\u002Fexports, and structured user input\n       - New API endpoints required\n       - Integration points with external systems\n\n       Create data\u002Finterface inventory:\n       - List of data contracts needed\n       - List of interface specifications needed\n       - Dependencies on existing contracts\n       - Every schema-bearing boundary and any explicit opt-out candidate\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdesigns\u002Finventory.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n2. **Create Canonical Schemas and Data Contract Cards** (parallel):\n   ```\n   # For each identified data entity:\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"api-designer\",\n       description=\"Define data contract for {entity}\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Entity: {entity-name}\n       Related use cases: {use-case-ids}\n\n       First invoke schema-intake from the schema-governance addon. Persistent,\n       exchanged, configured, queued, evented, imported\u002Fexported, or structured\n       user-authored data requires a governed schema by default. Do not ask the\n       user to know schema terminology. An opt-out requires an ephemeral internal\n       boundary, owner, rationale, and review date.\n\n       Use template: agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fdata-contract-template.md\n\n       Define data contract:\n\n       1. Entity Definition\n          - Name and purpose\n          - Relationships to other entities\n          - Business rules\n\n       2. Canonical Schema Specification\n          - Fields and data types\n          - Required vs. optional\n          - Validation rules\n          - Default values\n          - Stable catalog identity, version, owner, authority, consumers\n          - Valid and invalid executable fixtures\n\n       3. Example (JSON\u002FYAML)\n          ```json\n          {\n            \"id\": \"uuid\",\n            \"name\": \"string\",\n            \"status\": \"enum[active,inactive]\",\n            \"created_at\": \"timestamp\"\n          }\n          ```\n\n       4. Versioning Strategy\n          - Current version\n          - Migration approach\n          - Backward compatibility\n\n       Outputs:\n       - .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdesigns\u002Fdata-contract-{entity}.md\n       - Canonical schema under the project schema root\n       - Catalog\u002Fdomain-manifest registration and fixtures\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n3. **Create Interface Cards** (parallel):\n   ```\n   # For each identified API\u002Finterface:\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"architecture-designer\",\n       description=\"Define interface specification for {api}\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Interface: {api-name}\n       Related use cases: {use-case-ids}\n\n       Use template: agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Fanalysis-design\u002Finterface-contract-card.md\n\n       Define interface specification:\n\n       1. API Overview\n          - Purpose and scope\n          - Consumer systems\n          - Protocol (REST, GraphQL, gRPC)\n\n       2. Endpoints\n          - Path and method\n          - Request parameters\n          - Request body schema\n          - Response schema\n          - Error responses\n\n       3. Authentication\u002FAuthorization\n          - Auth mechanism (OAuth, JWT, API key)\n          - Required scopes\u002Fpermissions\n\n       4. Non-functional Requirements\n          - Rate limits\n          - Response time SLA\n          - Availability requirements\n\n       5. OpenAPI\u002FSwagger snippet (if REST)\n\n       Ensure backward compatibility if modifying existing interface.\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdesigns\u002Finterface-{api}.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n**Communicate Progress**:\n```\n⏳ Designing data contracts and interfaces...\n  ✓ Data contracts: {count} defined\n  ✓ Interface specifications: {count} defined\n  ✓ Backward compatibility: Validated\n✓ Design artifacts complete: Ready for validation\n```\n\n### Step 4: Spike\u002FPOC for High-Risk Assumptions\n\n**Purpose**: Validate technical assumptions and retire risks through time-boxed investigations\n\n**Your Actions**:\n\n1. **Identify High-Risk Assumptions**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"technical-researcher\",\n       description=\"Identify assumptions needing validation\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read use-case briefs: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fbriefs\u002F*.md\n       Read data\u002Finterface designs: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdesigns\u002F*.md\n       Read risk list: .aiwg\u002Frisks\u002Frisk-list.md\n\n       Identify high-risk assumptions:\n       - Technical feasibility unknowns\n       - Performance concerns\n       - Integration uncertainties\n       - Security vulnerabilities\n       - Scalability questions\n\n       For each assumption:\n       - Risk level (High\u002FMedium\u002FLow)\n       - Validation approach (Spike\u002FPOC\u002FAnalysis)\n       - Time box (4-8 hours typical)\n       - Success criteria\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fspikes\u002Fspike-plan.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n2. **Execute Spikes\u002FPOCs** (parallel for high-risk items):\n   ```\n   # For each high-risk assumption:\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"software-implementer\",\n       description=\"Conduct spike for {assumption}\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Assumption to validate: {assumption-description}\n       Time box: {hours} hours\n       Success criteria: {criteria}\n\n       Use the inline format: experiment fields in this skill\n\n       Conduct investigation:\n\n       1. Approach\n          - What will be tested\u002Fprototyped\n          - Tools\u002Ftechnologies to evaluate\n          - Metrics to collect\n\n       2. Implementation (if POC)\n          - Minimal code to prove concept\n          - Focus on risk validation, not production quality\n          - Document code snippets\n\n       3. Findings\n          - What worked\n          - What didn't work\n          - Performance measurements\n          - Limitations discovered\n\n       4. Recommendation\n          - GO: Assumption validated, proceed\n          - NO-GO: Assumption invalid, need alternative\n          - PIVOT: Partial success, adjust approach\n\n       5. Next Steps\n          - If GO: Implementation guidance\n          - If NO-GO: Alternative approaches\n          - If PIVOT: Additional investigation needed\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fspikes\u002Fspike-{id}-results.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n3. **Update Risk Register**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"project-manager\",\n       description=\"Update risks based on spike results\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read spike results: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fspikes\u002F*-results.md\n       Read current risks: .aiwg\u002Frisks\u002Frisk-list.md\n\n       Update risk list:\n       - Mark validated risks as RETIRED\n       - Update mitigation strategies based on spike findings\n       - Add new risks discovered during spikes\n       - Adjust risk priorities\n\n       Document:\n       - Risks retired this iteration\n       - New risks identified\n       - Updated mitigation plans\n\n       Output updated risk list: .aiwg\u002Frisks\u002Frisk-list.md\n       Output risk summary: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Frisk-updates.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n**Communicate Progress**:\n```\n⏳ Validating high-risk assumptions...\n  ✓ Spikes executed: {count}\n  ✓ POCs completed: {count}\n  ✓ Risks retired: {count}\n  ⚠️ New risks identified: {count}\n✓ Risk validation complete: {go-count} GO, {no-go-count} NO-GO, {pivot-count} PIVOT\n```\n\n### Step 5: Update Architecture Decision Records\n\n**Purpose**: Document architectural decisions made during discovery\n\n**Your Actions**:\n\n```\nTask(\n    subagent_type=\"architecture-designer\",\n    description=\"Create ADRs for discovery decisions\",\n    prompt=\"\"\"\n    Review discovery artifacts:\n    - Spike results: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fspikes\u002F*\n    - Data contracts: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdesigns\u002Fdata-*\n    - Interface specs: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdesigns\u002Finterface-*\n\n    Identify significant architectural decisions made:\n    - Technology choices from spikes\n    - API design patterns selected\n    - Data model decisions\n    - Integration approaches\n\n    For each significant decision:\n\n    Use template: agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Fgovernance\u002Fadr-template.md\n\n    Create ADR documenting:\n    1. Status: Proposed | Accepted\n    2. Context: Problem\u002Fissue faced\n    3. Decision: What we're doing\n    4. Consequences: Trade-offs and impacts\n    5. Alternatives: Options considered and why rejected\n\n    Link to relevant spike results as evidence.\n\n    Output: .aiwg\u002Farchitecture\u002Fadr\u002FADR-{number}-{title}.md\n    \"\"\"\n)\n```\n\n**Communicate Progress**:\n```\n✓ Architecture decisions documented: {count} ADRs created\n```\n\n### Step 6: Handoff to Delivery Track\n\n**Purpose**: Validate readiness and transfer work to Delivery team\n\n**Your Actions**:\n\n1. **Validate Definition of Ready**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"requirements-reviewer\",\n       description=\"Validate DoR for all backlog items\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Read Definition of Ready criteria from template:\n       $AIWG_ROOT\u002Fagentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Fflows\u002Fhandoff-checklist-template.md\n\n       For each backlog item in iteration {N}:\n\n       Validate DoR Criteria:\n\n       Requirements Complete:\n       - [ ] Use-case brief authored and reviewed\n       - [ ] Acceptance criteria defined and testable\n       - [ ] Pre\u002Fpost-conditions documented\n       - [ ] Alternative flows identified\n\n       Design Complete:\n       - [ ] Data contracts defined (if applicable)\n       - [ ] Interface specs complete (if applicable)\n       - [ ] Integration points identified\n       - [ ] Backward compatibility validated\n\n       Risks Addressed:\n       - [ ] High-risk assumptions validated\n       - [ ] Technical risks documented\n       - [ ] Dependencies identified\n       - [ ] No blocking risks without mitigation\n\n       Traceability:\n       - [ ] Request → use-case linkage\n       - [ ] Use-case → acceptance criteria linkage\n       - [ ] Design artifacts linked to requirements\n\n       Stakeholder Approval:\n       - [ ] Product Owner approval\n       - [ ] Priority confirmed\n       - [ ] Business value validated\n\n       Mark each item: READY | NOT_READY (with reasons)\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002Fdor-validation.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n2. **Package Artifacts for Handoff**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"project-manager\",\n       description=\"Package discovery artifacts for Delivery\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Copy validated artifacts from working to final locations:\n\n       From .aiwg\u002Fworking\u002Fdiscovery\u002Fiteration-{N}\u002F:\n       - briefs\u002F* → .aiwg\u002Frequirements\u002Fuse-case-briefs\u002F\n       - briefs\u002Facceptance-* → .aiwg\u002Ftesting\u002Facceptance-cards\u002F\n       - designs\u002Fdata-* → .aiwg\u002Farchitecture\u002Fdata-contracts\u002F\n       - designs\u002Finterface-* → .aiwg\u002Farchitecture\u002Finterfaces\u002F\n       - spikes\u002F*-results → .aiwg\u002Frisks\u002Fspikes\u002F\n\n       Create handoff package summary:\n       - List of all artifacts\n       - DoR status for each item\n       - Total story points ready\n       - Key decisions made\n       - Risks identified\u002Fretired\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Fhandoffs\u002Fdiscovery-to-delivery-iteration-{N}.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n3. **Generate Discovery Report**:\n   ```\n   Task(\n       subagent_type=\"documentation-synthesizer\",\n       description=\"Create Discovery iteration report\",\n       prompt=\"\"\"\n       Synthesize complete Discovery report for iteration {N}:\n\n       # Discovery Track Report - Iteration {N}\n\n       **Completion Date**: {date}\n       **Target Delivery Iteration**: {N-1}\n       **Status**: READY | PARTIAL | BLOCKED\n\n       ## Backlog Items Prepared\n       - Items Ready: {count} ({points} points)\n       - Items Not Ready: {count} (reasons listed)\n       - Story Points Ready: {points}\n       - Coverage: {ratio}x iteration capacity\n\n       ## Artifacts Created\n\n       ### Requirements\n       - Stakeholder Request Cards: {count}\n       - Use-Case Briefs: {count}\n       - Acceptance Test Cards: {count}\n\n       ### Design\n       - Data Contract Cards: {count}\n       - Interface Cards: {count}\n       - Architecture Decision Records: {count}\n\n       ### Risk Management\n       - Spikes Executed: {count}\n       - Risks Retired: {count}\n       - New Risks Identified: {count}\n\n       ## Definition of Ready Compliance\n       - DoR Pass Rate: {percentage}%\n       - Items failing DoR: {list with reasons}\n\n       ## Key Decisions\n       {list architectural decisions with ADR references}\n\n       ## Handoff Status\n       - Checklist Complete: YES | NO\n       - Artifacts Packaged: YES | NO\n       - Delivery Team Notified: YES | NO\n\n       ## Discovery Health Metrics\n\n       ### Lead Time\n       - Discovery ahead of Delivery: {iterations}\n       - Status: ON-TRACK | AT-RISK\n\n       ### Backlog Health\n       - Coverage Ratio: {ratio}x\n       - Status: HEALTHY | MARGINAL | STARVED\n\n       ### Quality\n       - DoR Pass Rate: {percentage}%\n       - Rework Rate: {percentage}%\n\n       ## Next Steps\n       - Handoff meeting: {date}\n       - Delivery kickoff: {date}\n       - Next Discovery iteration: {N+1}\n\n       Output: .aiwg\u002Freports\u002Fdiscovery-iteration-{N}-report.md\n       \"\"\"\n   )\n   ```\n\n**Communicate Progress**:\n```\n⏳ Completing handoff to Delivery...\n  ✓ DoR validation: {percentage}% pass rate\n  ✓ Artifacts packaged: {count} items\n  ✓ Handoff checklist: Complete\n✓ Discovery iteration {N} complete: READY FOR DELIVERY\n```\n\n## Quality Gates\n\nBefore marking workflow complete, verify:\n- [ ] All high-priority requests refined into use cases\n- [ ] Acceptance criteria testable and complete\n- [ ] Data contracts and interfaces defined\n- [ ] High-risk assumptions validated\n- [ ] ADRs document key decisions\n- [ ] DoR met for ≥90% of items\n- [ ] 1.5x-2x iteration capacity prepared\n- [ ] Handoff checklist complete\n- [ ] Discovery report generated\n\n## User Communication\n\n**At start**: Confirm understanding and scope\n\n```\nUnderstood. I'll orchestrate the Discovery Track for iteration {N}.\n\nThis will prepare:\n- Use-case briefs with acceptance criteria\n- Data contracts and interface specifications\n- Risk validations via spikes\u002FPOCs\n- Architecture decision records\n- Complete handoff package for Delivery\n\nTarget: 1.5x-2x iteration capacity ({points} story points)\nExpected duration: 30-45 minutes\n\nStarting orchestration...\n```\n\n**During**: Update progress with clear indicators\n\n```\n✓ = Complete\n⏳ = In progress\n❌ = Error\u002Fblocked\n⚠️ = Warning\u002Fattention needed\n```\n\n**At end**: Summary report with metrics\n\n```\n─────────────────────────────────────────────\nDiscovery Track - Iteration {N} Complete\n─────────────────────────────────────────────\n\n**Status**: READY FOR DELIVERY\n**Items Prepared**: {count} ({points} story points)\n**DoR Compliance**: {percentage}%\n**Coverage Ratio**: {ratio}x iteration capacity\n\n**Artifacts Generated**:\n- Use-case briefs: {count}\n- Acceptance cards: {count}\n- Data contracts: {count}\n- Interface specs: {count}\n- ADRs: {count}\n- Spike results: {count}\n\n**Risk Status**:\n- Retired: {count}\n- New: {count}\n- Outstanding: {count}\n\n**Key Decisions**:\n{list top 3-5 architectural decisions}\n\n**Handoff Package**: .aiwg\u002Fhandoffs\u002Fdiscovery-to-delivery-iteration-{N}.md\n**Full Report**: .aiwg\u002Freports\u002Fdiscovery-iteration-{N}-report.md\n\n**Next Steps**:\n- Review generated artifacts\n- Schedule handoff meeting with Delivery team\n- Begin Discovery for iteration {N+1}\n\n─────────────────────────────────────────────\n```\n\n## Error Handling\n\n**If No Stakeholder Requests**:\n```\n⚠️ No stakeholder requests found\n\nCreating simulated requests based on:\n- Vision document priorities\n- Outstanding technical debt\n- Risk mitigation needs\n\nRecommendation: Engage stakeholders for input\n```\n\n**If DoR Not Met**:\n```\n❌ Items not meeting Definition of Ready\n\n{item}: {missing-criteria}\n\nActions required:\n- Complete missing artifacts\n- Obtain stakeholder approval\n- Validate acceptance criteria\n\nThese items cannot be handed to Delivery until DoR met.\n```\n\n**If Spike Failed**:\n```\n❌ Spike validation failed\n\nRisk: {description}\nResult: NO-GO - {reason}\n\nRecommendations:\n1. Alternative technical approach\n2. Adjust requirements\n3. Accept risk with mitigation\n\nEscalating to Architecture Designer for decision...\n```\n\n**If Capacity Insufficient**:\n```\n⚠️ Insufficient work prepared\n\nReady: {points} points\nTarget: {target} points (1.5x capacity)\nGap: {gap} points\n\nActions:\n- Add more items from backlog\n- Reduce scope of complex items\n- Carry over to next iteration\n```\n\n## Success Criteria\n\nThis orchestration succeeds when:\n- [ ] Stakeholder requests gathered and prioritized\n- [ ] Use-case briefs complete with acceptance criteria\n- [ ] Data contracts and interfaces defined\n- [ ] High-risk assumptions validated via spikes\n- [ ] Architecture decisions documented\n- [ ] Definition of Ready met for ≥90% of items\n- [ ] 1.5x-2x iteration capacity prepared\n- [ ] Traceability established (requirements → design → tests)\n- [ ] Handoff to Delivery complete\n\n## Metrics to Track\n\n**During orchestration, track**:\n- Requirements clarity: % with complete acceptance criteria\n- Design coverage: % of use cases with data\u002Finterface specs\n- Risk validation: % of high-risk items validated\n- DoR compliance: % meeting all criteria\n- Cycle time: Discovery duration (target: 1-2 weeks, orchestration: 30-45 min)\n\n## References\n\n**Templates** (via $AIWG_ROOT):\n- Stakeholder Request: `agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fstakeholder-request-card-template.md`\n- Use-Case Brief: `templates\u002Frequirements\u002Fuse-case-brief-template.md`\n- Acceptance Test: `agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fuse-case-acceptance-template.md`\n- Data Contract: `agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Frequirements\u002Fdata-contract-template.md`\n- Interface Card: `agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Fanalysis-design\u002Finterface-contract-card.md`\n- Spike Card: experiment fields in this skill\n- ADR: `agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsdlc-complete\u002Ftemplates\u002Fgovernance\u002Fadr-template.md`\n\n**Flows**:\n- Handoff Checklist: `flows\u002Fhandoff-checklist-template.md`\n- Dual-Track Synchronization: `flows\u002Fiteration-dual-track-template.md`\n\n**Definition of Ready**:\n- `flows\u002Fhandoff-checklist-template.md` (DoR section)\n\n**Discovery Best Practices**:\n- `docs\u002Fdiscovery-track-best-practices.md`\n",{"name":5,"namespace":49,"platforms":50,"commandHint":52,"description":7},"aiwg",[51],"all",{"model":31,"category":53,"modelRole":37,"modelTier":28,"allowedTools":54,"argumentHint":55,"orchestration":56},"sdlc-orchestration","Task, Read, Write, Glob, TodoWrite","\u003Citeration-number> [project-directory] [--guidance \"text\"] [--interactive]",true,"main","a602706fc62ff1cfcb18001358ac39647b08acf5","agentic\u002Fcode\u002Fplugins\u002Fsdlc\u002Fskills\u002Fflow-discovery-track",36,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjmagly\u002Faiwg","https:\u002F\u002Faiwg.io","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjmagly","https:\u002F\u002Fintegrolabs.io","ml\u002Fai, industrial automation, safety\u002Fsecurity, ssi\r\n\r\nmagly.net\r\nintegrolabs.io\r\naiwg.io\r\nfortemi.com\r\npagenary.com\r\nbytecask.com","2026-11-14 10:46:34",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":68,"prompt":78,"zipAvailable":56},[69,72,75],{"tool":70,"command":71},"npx","npx skills add jmagly\u002Faiwg --skill flow-discovery-track",{"tool":73,"command":74},"bunx","bunx skills add jmagly\u002Faiwg --skill flow-discovery-track",{"tool":76,"command":77},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add jmagly\u002Faiwg --skill flow-discovery-track","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjmagly\u002Faiwg\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fagentic\u002Fcode\u002Fplugins\u002Fsdlc\u002Fskills\u002Fflow-discovery-track\u002FSKILL.md",[],[81,108,131,137,144,156],{"skillNo":82,"name":83,"nameZh":6,"description":84,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":85,"categories":86,"keywords":88,"publishedAt":44},"01M70QA0BSYJ49EES9V4RE8QH1","host-hardening","Read-only system hardening baseline and plan-first host hardening recommendations for SSH, Docker bind addresses, firewall persistence, datastores, exporters and audit retention.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjmagly\u002Faiwg\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fagentic\u002Fcode\u002Fplugins\u002Fsecurity-engineering\u002Fskills\u002Fhost-hardening\u002FSKILL.md",[87],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[89,90,91,39,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107],"host","host hardening","hardening","re","recommendations","remediation","plan","port","verification","Bash","access","only","retention","audit","never","firewall","bind","secrets","request",{"skillNo":109,"name":110,"nameZh":6,"description":111,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":112,"categories":113,"keywords":118,"publishedAt":44},"01M70PNT2Z4HMZPRBTAF6073NN","exposure-analysis","Read-only firewall analysis and effective host exposure reconstruction for Docker published ports, UFW bypass, stale rules, CDN scope, IPv6 asymmetry and external probe allowlists.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjmagly\u002Faiwg\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fagentic\u002Fcode\u002Fplugins\u002Fforensics\u002Fskills\u002Fexposure-analysis\u002FSKILL.md",[114,117],{"categoryNo":115,"categoryName":116,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000011","运维与部署",{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[119,120,121,39,122,96,123,124,98,125,89,126,100,127,128,103,104,129,130,38],"exposure analysis","analysis","unknown","credentials","collection","ufw","ports","internet","local","scope","reconstruction","operator",{"skillNo":132,"name":83,"nameZh":6,"description":84,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":133,"categories":134,"keywords":136,"publishedAt":44},"01M70P8QATMPKA78E4FT5D2TNA","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjmagly\u002Faiwg\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fagentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fsecurity-engineering\u002Fskills\u002Fhost-hardening\u002FSKILL.md",[135],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[91,89,90,99,39,107,94,93,102,95,96,97,98,106,100,101,92,103,104,105],{"skillNo":138,"name":110,"nameZh":6,"description":111,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":139,"categories":140,"keywords":143,"publishedAt":44},"01M70NMPVJ5H0JH131P60FW4R8","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjmagly\u002Faiwg\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fagentic\u002Fcode\u002Fframeworks\u002Fforensics-complete\u002Fskills\u002Fexposure-analysis\u002FSKILL.md",[141,142],{"categoryNo":115,"categoryName":116,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[120,119,103,122,96,123,98,121,89,126,100,127,128,39,104,125,124,129,130,38],{"skillNo":145,"name":146,"nameZh":6,"description":147,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":148,"categories":149,"keywords":151,"publishedAt":44},"01M6CB4DDR0B4NNCFK7ZK7449H","fixture-skill","Exercise rule delivery.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjmagly\u002Faiwg\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Ftest\u002Ffixtures\u002Frule-delivery\u002Fskills\u002Ffixture-skill\u002FSKILL.md",[150],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[152,153,154,32,30,155],"fixture skill","fixture","rule","exercise",{"skillNo":157,"name":158,"nameZh":6,"description":159,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":160,"categories":161,"keywords":163,"publishedAt":44},"01M6CB4AVK1W76MFMPP0JP32CJ","pi-local","Pi-local duplicate-precedence fixture.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjmagly\u002Faiwg\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Ftest\u002Ffixtures\u002Fproviders\u002Fpi\u002Fproject\u002F.pi\u002Fskills\u002Fpi-local\u002FSKILL.md",[162],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[164,165,127,166,153],"pi","pi local","duplicate"]