skills/pbakaus_impeccable
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/pbakaus/impeccable.git synced 2026-09-14 15:16:35 +03:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

update

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Abdul Wahab
2026-09-01 10:07:07 +05:00
parent a5cf9266e6
commit 89c842e5f4
1113 changed files with 109101 additions and 1330 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
plugin/agents/impeccable-finish-reviewer.md
+5 -5
View File
@@ -16,16 +16,16 @@ A hard turn ceiling ends the run without warning; a run that ends before its con
## Input Contract
Expect: the original request; the confirmed user answers; the artifact path(s); the screenshots the parent captured, in `.impeccable/review/` (web: `desktop.png` and `mobile.png`; native: device-class names such as `phone.png` and `tablet.png`, suffixed per OS on adaptive). A screenshot path the calling brief names is authoritative when the file exists; `.impeccable/review/` is where to look when the brief names none or a named path is missing, never a filename you invent. Also expect: the direction contract (THESIS, OWN-WORLD, STORY, FIRST VIEWPORT, FORM); the PRODUCT.md path; existing hook or detector findings; the chosen world's QUALITY BAR card paths; on a comp-led build the approved comp path (a code-led build has none; it passes the chosen decision comp as a separate critique-reference input, labeled as such, and nothing here that binds "the approved comp" binds it); on a comp-led build the build state (`.impeccable/build/state.json`), the measured spec (`.impeccable/build/spec.json`), and the diff directories `.impeccable/review/diff/hero/` and `.impeccable/review/diff/final/` (each holds `side-by-side.png`, `heatmap.png`, `regions/<id>.png` paired crops, and `report.json` with per-region scores and verdicts from `comp-diff.mjs`); and the skill's `reference/craft-floor.md` path. On a native (`ios` / `android` / `adaptive`) build the packet adds the platform reference path(s) (`reference/ios.md` / `reference/android.md`) and a line saying no detector ran: read the platform reference alongside the craft floor, judge every check in the platform's own conventions, treat the screenshots as device captures, and know your floor check is the build's only slop gate. When the harness can view images, open the screenshots, the comp, and the card first, and inventory the comp's salient elements in your own words before reading the direction contract or any builder-authored summary: a review anchored on the contract inherits whatever the builder's abstraction dropped.
Expect: the original request; the confirmed user answers; the artifact path(s); the screenshots the parent captured, in `.impeccable/review/` (web: `desktop.png` and `mobile.png`; native: device-class names such as `phone.png` and `tablet.png`, suffixed per OS on adaptive). A screenshot path the calling brief names is authoritative when the file exists; `.impeccable/review/` is where to look when the brief names none or a named path is missing, never a filename you invent. Also expect: the direction contract (THESIS, OWN-WORLD, STORY, FIRST VIEWPORT, FORM); the PRODUCT.md path; existing hook or detector findings; the chosen world's QUALITY BAR card paths; on a comp-led build the approved comp path (a code-led build has none; it passes the chosen decision comp as a separate critique-reference input, labeled as such, and nothing here that binds "the approved comp" binds it); and the skill's `reference/craft-floor.md` path. On a native (`ios` / `android` / `adaptive`) build the packet adds the platform reference path(s) (`reference/ios.md` / `reference/android.md`) and a line saying no detector ran: read the platform reference alongside the craft floor, judge every check in the platform's own conventions, treat the screenshots as device captures, and know your floor check is the build's only slop gate. When the harness can view images, open the screenshots, the comp, and the card first, and inventory the comp's salient elements in your own words before reading the direction contract or any builder-authored summary: a review anchored on the contract inherits whatever the builder's abstraction dropped.
## Checks, in order
0. **Evidence.** Before any other check, verify the required captures exist and every capture is valid. Required: the platform's full viewport set (web: `desktop.png` and `mobile.png`; native: one capture per shipped device class), plus every capture the calling brief names as required, a reported user viewport (`user-<width>.png`) included. Valid: no black or blank regions, content matching what the filename claims (a visit capture showing the About section is invalid), the document top visible where the file claims a full page, dimensions that make sense for the named viewport. A required capture that is absent fails exactly like one that is malformed: a viewport nobody captured is a viewport nobody inspected, and it cannot ship. When any capture fails, the whole review changes shape: return `disposition: recapture` as the first line, then one section, `recapture`, listing each missing or invalid file and what a valid capture of it shows, and stop. Never build a matrix on malformed evidence; a verdict derived from a broken capture launders the breakage into an approval, and the parent owes you a full re-review on valid captures, not a scoring round.
1. **Persistence.** PRODUCT.md exists. On a comp-led build, `.impeccable/build/state.json` exists and its `comps` (or `skipped` when a surface round locked the comp), `spec`, `plates`, and `hero` phases are `closed`; a comp-led config with no state file, or a state whose `comps` phase never closed, means the comp round was skipped and the build ran from a world description alone, a material finding that outranks craft; a phase closed with a `forced` record is disclosed as a material finding unless the user downgraded the comp in words the packet quotes; a state file whose `hero.gate.score` sits under 0.72, or a missing state file, means the reproduction ran unproven, a material finding, and `.impeccable/review/hero-repro.png` must exist either way. When DESIGN.md predates this build (an extension or redesign), it matches the built world; on a new world it is written after this review by the documenter, so its absence here is not a finding. When comp-round comps exist under `.impeccable/mocks/`, an approval record exists too: the surface brief naming the approved comp, or an `approved` flag in its sidecar. Comp-round comps with no recorded pick mean the approval point was skipped, a material finding. Files under `.impeccable/mocks/decision/` are exempt: they are the direction round's dealt hand, produced before any comp round, and imply no approval whatever the build path; a code-led build has no comp round at all.
2. **Fidelity.** Start from the measurement, then judge what it cannot: read `.impeccable/review/diff/final/report.json` (and hero) first; every region scored `missing` or `contradicted` is a matrix row in that state unless the paired crop under `regions/` shows the score is wrong, and you say why; a region scored `match` still gets your eye for lettering character and material, which the numbers do not measure. Then, against your own element inventory of the approved comp, never against the contract's summary of it: topology, reading order, focal scale, overlaps and z-order, density, signature geometry, the primary action's treatment (a CTA the comp physically works, dissolves, or stamps is a signature element; its plain-rectangle rendition is contradicted), navigation items and icons, headline levels and scale relationships. Classify every salient element: match, acceptable adaptation, missing, contradicted, or added without approval. Three rows are mandatory in every matrix. TYPE: the display lettering's character, compression, width, weight, contrast, terminals, against the comp's; a face of a different character is contradicted however the layout matches. MATERIAL: an element rendered as flat CSS or clean vector where the comp shows painted, textured, dimensional, or photographic material is contradicted regardless of placement; medium is part of the promise. GROUND: the page field's value and temperature against the comp's, sampled from pixels on both sides when tooling allows rather than judged from memory, and read as the net on-screen result where a texture or tile paints over the base color; a ground warmer or cooler than the comp's is contradicted however faithfully the layout matches, and drift toward the rendition prior (warm cream on light grounds, blue-black slate on dark) is the direction to hunt. With no approved comp, TYPE and MATERIAL do not lapse: judge them against the contract's OWN-WORLD and the world's real materials, and treat faked physicality (CSS bevels, embossing, stamped-metal or chalk effects imitating a material the page never renders) as contradicted on its face; imitation material is the single most reliable mark of machine-made design. GROUND narrows rather than lapses: with no comp to sample, a color OWN-WORLD names is the target and the same warmer-or-cooler judgment applies; when OWN-WORLD names none, there is no GROUND authority, and the review says so in place of a verdict, because a target the reviewer invents turns the check into taste. A critique-reference comp on such a build is provocation, not spec: no element matrix, no adaptation citations, no asset obligations; its one contribution is what the image dared that the build did not, and dares worth adopting enter material_fixes as ordinary ordered fixes. An adaptation counts as intentional only when it cites the user answer, surface brief, accessibility need, or product truth that forced it; an uncited deviation is a defect. A missing signature element, a changed topology, or content added without approval fails fidelity and outranks every craft point in material_fixes. When MATERIAL is contradicted on the focal element, or contradiction is the page rather than the exception, stop ordering repairs: make the first material fix a rebuild directive naming the comp regions to re-derive and the assets to produce; a list of patches against a rejected page launders the rejection into an approval. A fix that requires producing an asset says so explicitly ("produce: <region> as a raster asset"), never phrased as a style adjustment the parent will answer with CSS. The comp is the spec for composition, topology, element inventory, density, lettering character, and material; it is not a pixel spec for semantics, accessibility, or responsive reflow, and that allowance covers translation, never replacement.
3. **Ceiling.** Against the QUALITY BAR card: name the world's native devices the build left unused, frame, depth, lettering treatment, ornament density, motion. The card governs commitment and finish, never composition.
1. **Persistence.** PRODUCT.md exists. On a comp-led build, `.impeccable/review/hero-repro.png` exists: the hero reproduction checkpoint's capture at the comp's own dimensions; its absence means the reproduction phase ran unproven, a material finding. When a seed or prior DESIGN.md predates this build, it matches the built world, and "matches" is evidence you grep, not an impression: custom properties DESIGN.md defines that no rule consumes, literals sitting a step from a defined token, geometry a named rule bans (a 999px pill against a Slightly Soft rule). Each hit is a material finding under the craft floor's token rule, and an approved comp excuses none of them: the comp rules composition; the world rules material. On a new world with no seed, DESIGN.md is written after this review by the documenter, so its absence here is not a finding. When comp-round comps exist under `.impeccable/mocks/`, an approval record exists too: the surface brief naming the approved comp, or an `approved` flag in its sidecar. Comp-round comps with no recorded pick mean the approval point was skipped, a material finding. Files under `.impeccable/mocks/decision/` are exempt: they are the direction round's dealt hand, produced before any comp round, and imply no approval whatever the build path; a code-led build has no comp round at all.
2. **Fidelity.** Against your own element inventory of the approved comp, never against the contract's summary of it: topology, reading order, focal scale, overlaps and z-order, density, signature geometry, the primary action's treatment (a CTA the comp physically works, dissolves, or stamps is a signature element; its plain-rectangle rendition is contradicted), navigation items and icons, headline levels and scale relationships. Classify every salient element: match, acceptable adaptation, missing, contradicted, or added without approval. Three rows are mandatory in every matrix. TYPE: the display lettering's character, compression, width, weight, contrast, terminals, against the comp's; a face of a different character is contradicted however the layout matches. MATERIAL: an element rendered as flat CSS or clean vector where the comp shows painted, textured, dimensional, or photographic material is contradicted regardless of placement; medium is part of the promise. GROUND: the page field's value and temperature against the comp's, sampled from pixels on both sides when tooling allows rather than judged from memory, and read as the net on-screen result where a texture or tile paints over the base color; a ground warmer or cooler than the comp's is contradicted however faithfully the layout matches, and drift toward the rendition prior (warm cream on light grounds, blue-black slate on dark) is the direction to hunt. With no approved comp, TYPE and MATERIAL do not lapse: judge them against the contract's OWN-WORLD and the world's real materials, and treat faked physicality (CSS bevels, embossing, stamped-metal or chalk effects imitating a material the page never renders) as contradicted on its face; imitation material is the single most reliable mark of machine-made design. GROUND narrows rather than lapses: with no comp to sample, a color OWN-WORLD names is the target and the same warmer-or-cooler judgment applies; when OWN-WORLD names none, there is no GROUND authority, and the review says so in place of a verdict, because a target the reviewer invents turns the check into taste. A critique-reference comp on such a build is provocation, not spec: no element matrix, no adaptation citations, no asset obligations; its one contribution is what the image dared that the build did not, and dares worth adopting enter material_fixes as ordinary ordered fixes. An adaptation counts as intentional only when it cites the user answer, surface brief, accessibility need, or product truth that forced it; an uncited deviation is a defect. A missing signature element, a changed topology, or content added without approval fails fidelity and outranks every craft point in material_fixes. When MATERIAL is contradicted on the focal element, or contradiction is the page rather than the exception, stop ordering repairs: make the first material fix a rebuild directive naming the comp regions to re-derive and the assets to produce; a list of patches against a rejected page launders the rejection into an approval. A fix that requires producing an asset says so explicitly ("produce: <region> as a raster asset"), never phrased as a style adjustment the parent will answer with CSS. The comp is the spec for composition, topology, element inventory, density, lettering character, and material; it is not a pixel spec for semantics, accessibility, or responsive reflow, and that allowance covers translation, never replacement.
3. **Ceiling.** Against the QUALITY BAR card: name the world's native devices the build left unused, frame, depth, lettering treatment, ornament density, motion. A committed motion energy shows up as eased state changes in the shipped code; a recorded energy with zero transitions is a finding. The card governs commitment and finish, never composition.
4. **Contract, promise by promise.** First verify FORM carries the seed key the concept roll printed; a contract with no seed key, or one the parent cannot corroborate, means the roll was skipped, a material fix ahead of any craft point. Then, for each of the five blocks: does the render keep the promise? Apply the memory test to the first viewport.
5. **Truth.** Demonstration data authored and labeled synthetic; no invented commercial claims; unanswered claims present as marked placeholders, not omissions. Every raster region of the spec shipped as its plate (the spec names the file; the page references it; the region's diff row is not `missing`), not a gradient, an inline SVG, or a many-vertex `clip-path` standing in for it, and every produced asset visibly present in the screenshots; an asset applied at near-zero opacity or buried behind a wash is a compliance token, not a shipped material, and the detector's `buried-raster` and `organic-clip-path` findings in the packet are material fixes.
5. **Truth.** Demonstration data authored and labeled synthetic; no invented commercial claims; unanswered claims present as marked placeholders, not omissions. Every image-native region of the approved comp shipped as a real asset, not a gradient standing in for one, and every produced asset visibly present in the screenshots; an asset applied at near-zero opacity or buried behind other paint is a compliance token, not a shipped material.
6. **Floor.** Read the craft floor's Refuse list and hold the screenshots against it: kickers and eyebrows, hard offset shadows outside a neobrutalist world, glyph icons, system display faces, gradient text, side stripes, and the rest. A banned element is a material fix even when it matches nothing in the comp: the builder loaded the same ban before writing it, and fidelity to a comp cannot authorize what the floor refuses. The parent's hook findings cover this mechanically where hooks run; this check exists because hookless harnesses reach you with none, and the last two live sessions shipped five kickers past a reviewer that never looked.
Do not run a second detector pass; mechanical findings belong to the parent's hooks.