Reorganize periodic table, remove validate skill

New categories that distinguish create-new vs improve-existing:
- Create: shape, impeccable craft, impeccable, onboard, overdrive
- Evaluate: critique, audit
- Refine: typeset, arrange, colorize, animate, delight, bolder, quieter
- Simplify: distill, clarify, adapt
- Harden: normalize, polish, optimize, harden
- System: impeccable teach, extract

Also: remove Dt (detect CLI) from table, remove validate skill,
split /impeccable into its sub-commands (craft, teach).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

source/skills/impeccable/reference/craft.md

@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ Iterate through these checks visually:
 
 1. **Does it match the brief?** Compare the live result against every section of the design brief. Fix discrepancies.
 2. **Does it pass the AI slop test?** If someone saw this and said "AI made this," would they believe it immediately? If yes, it needs more design intention.
-3. **Run {{command_prefix}}validate.** Fix any P0 or P1 issues.
+3. **Check against impeccable's DON'T guidelines.** Fix any anti-pattern violations.
 4. **Check every state.** Navigate through empty, error, loading, and edge case states. Each one should feel intentional, not like an afterthought.
 5. **Check responsive.** Resize the viewport. Does it adapt well or just shrink?
 6. **Check the details.** Spacing consistency, type hierarchy clarity, color contrast, interactive feedback, motion timing.

source/skills/validate/SKILL.md

@@ -1,91 +0,0 @@
----
-name: validate
-description: "Fast visual validation after UX/UI changes. Checks anti-patterns, spacing consistency, design system adherence, and copy quality in a single pass. Use after completing any UI work, when the user wants a quick quality check, or proactively after implementing a feature."
-argument-hint: "[area to validate]"
-user-invocable: true
----
-
-## MANDATORY PREPARATION
-
-Invoke {{command_prefix}}impeccable, which contains design principles, anti-patterns, and the **Context Gathering Protocol**. Follow the protocol before proceeding. If no design context exists yet, you MUST run {{command_prefix}}impeccable teach first.
-
----
-
-A fast, focused quality gate. Not a full audit or critique; this is the 2-minute check you run after every UI change to catch the most common and damaging issues before they ship.
-
-Think of this as a design linter: opinionated, fast, and actionable. Flag what's wrong, say how to fix it, move on.
-
-## When to Run
-
-Run {{command_prefix}}validate after:
-- Implementing or modifying any UI component
-- Completing a feature's visual design
-- Before requesting a design review from a human
-- Any time you're about to mark UI work as "done"
-
-## Validation Pass
-
-Read the changed files. If browser automation is available, take a screenshot for visual inspection. Then run through ALL of the following checks in a single pass. Be fast and direct.
-
-### 1. Anti-Pattern Scan
-
-Check against ALL **DON'T** guidelines in the impeccable skill. The most common offenders:
-- AI color palette (purple gradients, cyan-on-dark, neon glows)
-- Identical card grids, hero metric layouts
-- Overused fonts (Inter, Roboto, system defaults)
-- Glassmorphism, gradient text, dark-mode-by-default
-- Cards inside cards, everything centered, modals for everything
-
-**The test**: Would someone immediately guess an AI made this?
-
-### 2. Spacing & Rhythm
-
-- Are margins, paddings, and gaps consistent within the same visual context?
-- Is there varied rhythm (tight groupings vs generous separations), or is everything evenly spaced?
-- Do similar elements at the same hierarchy level use the same spacing?
-- Are spacing values from the design system tokens, or are there magic numbers?
-
-### 3. Design System Adherence
-
-- Are colors from the project's palette/tokens, or are there one-off hex values?
-- Are font sizes, weights, and families from the type scale?
-- Do border radii, shadows, and transitions match existing patterns?
-- Are interactive elements styled consistently with others of the same type?
-
-### 4. Visual Consistency
-
-- Do elements that should look the same actually look the same?
-- Is the visual hierarchy clear? (One primary action, clear reading order)
-- Are alignment and grid lines maintained across the section?
-- Do hover/focus/active states exist and feel consistent?
-
-### 5. Copy Quality
-
-- Is any text redundant with what's already visible? (Headers restating the page title, labels repeating obvious context)
-- Are labels, buttons, and messages concise? Every word should earn its place.
-- Is the tone consistent with the rest of the interface?
-- Are error/empty/loading states handled with helpful copy?
-
-## Output Format
-
-Report findings as a flat list, grouped by severity:
-
-**Severity levels:**
-- **P0 (Broken)**: Visually broken, inaccessible, or fundamentally wrong. Fix before shipping.
-- **P1 (Anti-pattern)**: Clear design anti-pattern that undermines quality. Fix now.
-- **P2 (Inconsistency)**: Spacing, token, or style drift from the design system. Fix soon.
-- **P3 (Polish)**: Minor refinement opportunity. Fix if time allows.
-
-For each finding:
-```
-[P0-P3] [Category] Short description of what's wrong
-  → Fix: Concrete action to take (file:line if applicable)
-```
-
-Keep the total list short. If everything looks good, say so. Don't invent issues.
-
-## After Validation
-
-If P0 or P1 issues are found, fix them immediately. For P2/P3 issues, {{ask_instruction}} whether the user wants them addressed now or noted for later.
-
-If the issues map cleanly to an existing command (e.g., spacing issues → {{command_prefix}}arrange, copy issues → {{command_prefix}}clarify), suggest that command instead of fixing manually.