Sync generated provider output

.github/skills/impeccable/SKILL.md

@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ This skill gives you the tools and permission to create design that earns to be
 Core principles:
 - Go all out. No hedging, no shortcuts. The deliverable must be complete (except assets the user must provide).
 - Dream big and bold. Distinct, beautiful, outstanding and highly inspiring work.
-- Verify in bounded passes, not a loop, and the ceiling covers the whole cycle: screenshots, defect scans, micro-edits, and rebuilds alike. Build fully, inspect once with a batched round (desktop and mobile together), fix everything it shows in one batch, confirm with at most one more round, and stop polishing. Open-ended self-QA burns the user's money doing worse what the finish handoffs do better.
+- Verify in bounded passes, not a loop, and the ceiling covers the whole cycle: screenshots, defect scans, micro-edits, and rebuilds alike. Build fully, inspect once with a batched round (desktop and mobile together on the web; the shipped device classes on a native platform), fix everything it shows in one batch, confirm with at most one more round, and stop polishing. Open-ended self-QA burns the user's money doing worse what the finish handoffs do better.
 
 ## Setup
 

.github/skills/impeccable/reference/android.md

@@ -38,3 +38,9 @@ Would a fluent Android user trust this app, or trip on off-spec components? The
 - **One FAB, one primary action.** Never stack FABs or spend one on a secondary task.
 - **Snackbars for transient feedback** (actionable when useful, never a toast for that); dialogs only for decisions that must interrupt.
 - **Material motion patterns.** Container transform, shared-axis, fade-through, with standard easing and durations; honor the system Remove animations setting with a crossfade or instant cut.
+
+## Verifying the build
+
+- **Screenshots come from the emulator or a connected device, never a browser.** Build and install, then capture with `adb exec-out screencap -p > <path>` (pick a device with `adb -s <serial>` when several are attached). Capture every device class the app ships to, at least one phone and, when tablets are a target, one tablet, and write the files where the review flow expects them.
+- **Dark theme and font scale belong in the pass.** `adb shell cmd uimode night yes` flips the theme; `adb shell settings put system font_scale 1.3` (restore `1.0` after) catches the clipped labels a fixed layout hides; with several targets attached, the capture's `-s <serial>` goes on these commands too.
+- **Emulators give breadth; gestures, refresh rates, and performance need hardware.** Say which one produced the evidence.

.github/skills/impeccable/reference/degraded/finish-reviewer.md

@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ A hard turn ceiling ends the run without warning; a run that ends before the fiv
 
 ## Input Contract
 
-Expect: the original request; the confirmed user answers; the artifact path(s); the screenshots the parent captured, which live in `.impeccable/review/` (on the web, `desktop.png` and `mobile.png`); a screenshot path the calling brief names is authoritative when the file exists, and `.impeccable/review/` is where to look when the brief names none or a named path is missing, never a filename you invent; the direction contract (THESIS, OWN-WORLD, STORY, FIRST VIEWPORT, FORM); PRODUCT.md path; existing hook or detector findings; the chosen world's QUALITY BAR card paths and, on a comp-led build, the approved comp path (a code-led build has no approved comp; it passes the chosen decision comp as a separate critique-reference input, labeled as such, and nothing in this file that binds “the approved comp” binds it); and the skill's `reference/craft-floor.md` path. 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, which live in `.impeccable/review/` (on the web, `desktop.png` and `mobile.png`; on 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, and `.impeccable/review/` is where to look when the brief names none or a named path is missing, never a filename you invent; the direction contract (THESIS, OWN-WORLD, STORY, FIRST VIEWPORT, FORM); PRODUCT.md path; existing hook or detector findings; the chosen world's QUALITY BAR card paths and, on a comp-led build, the approved comp path (a code-led build has no approved comp; it passes the chosen decision comp as a separate critique-reference input, labeled as such, and nothing in this file 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 also carries 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 and judge every check in the platform's own conventions, the screenshots are device captures rather than browser viewports, and 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
 

.github/skills/impeccable/reference/ios.md

@@ -43,3 +43,9 @@ Would a fluent iPhone user trust this app, or pause at off-spec controls? The te
 
 - **System transitions.** Push slides, sheets rise, dismiss reverses the entrance. Custom transitions that fight the navigation model disorient.
 - **Honor Reduce Motion.** Crossfade instead of parallax and large slides.
+
+## Verifying the build
+
+- **Screenshots come from the Simulator, never a browser.** Build and run, then capture with `xcrun simctl io booted screenshot <path>` (with several running, replace `booted` with the target's UDID from `xcrun simctl list devices booted`; display names can collide, the UDID never does). Capture every device class the app ships to, at least one iPhone and, when iPad is a target, one iPad, and write the files where the review flow expects them.
+- **Dark Mode and Dynamic Type belong in the pass.** `xcrun simctl ui booted appearance dark` flips appearance, reusing the capture's UDID when several are booted; a check at a large Dynamic Type size catches the truncation a fixed layout hides.
+- **Simulators give breadth; posture, gestures, and performance need hardware.** Say which one produced the evidence.

.github/skills/impeccable/reference/new-work.md

@@ -103,8 +103,8 @@ Preserve semantics, accessibility, performance, responsiveness, project conventi
 
 ## 7. Inspect and finish
 
-Inspect desktop and mobile in one batched screenshot round, critique the render against the user's request and the direction contract, fix material gaps, and confirm with one final round; two rounds is the ceiling, and fixes batch between them rather than earning per-tweak screenshots. When an approved comp exists, the critique is a side-by-side: view the comp region and the build region together, the hero and each section as its own crop at legible scale, never one full-page thumbnail, which hides exactly the failures that matter, crude controls, wrong lettering character, flattened material, behind a superficially similar section order. On a Persuade surface, verify the mode did its job: a first-time visitor should know what this is, why it matters, and what to do within seconds, in the form's own vocabulary.
+Inspect the surface's target sizes in one batched screenshot round: desktop and mobile on the web; on a native platform (`ios` / `android` / `adaptive`), the shipped device classes per OS, captured from the simulator or emulator the way the platform reference's Verifying the build section describes. Critique the render against the user's request and the direction contract, fix material gaps, and confirm with one final round; two rounds is the ceiling, and fixes batch between them rather than earning per-tweak screenshots. When an approved comp exists, the critique is a side-by-side: view the comp region and the build region together, the hero and each section as its own crop at legible scale, never one full-page thumbnail, which hides exactly the failures that matter, crude controls, wrong lettering character, flattened material, behind a superficially similar section order. On a Persuade surface, verify the mode did its job: a first-time visitor should know what this is, why it matters, and what to do within seconds, in the form's own vocabulary.
 
-After the second inspection round the build thread's polishing is over: no further defect hunts, micro-edit scripts, or rebuilds here; whatever remains ships through the handoffs, where a fresh context does the finding better and cheaper. Where this harness runs no design hook, run `node .github/skills/impeccable/scripts/detect.mjs --json` on the changed targets once here, fix what is mechanical, and pass the remaining findings to the reviewer; a hookless build that skips this ships every tell the hook exists to catch. Capture the screenshots into `.impeccable/review/`, one file per captured viewport (on the web, `desktop.png` and `mobile.png`), creating that directory when the harness does not; the paths you pass the reviewer are its spec, and that directory is where it looks when a passed path is missing. Then spawn the shipped finish reviewer, `impeccable-finish-reviewer` (`impeccable_finish_reviewer` in codex; `/impeccable-finish-reviewer` in Cursor; on GitHub Copilot say "Use the impeccable-finish-reviewer agent"), with the original request, confirmed answers, the artifact path, the screenshot paths, its direction contract, existing hook findings, the QUALITY BAR card and approved comp paths (on a code-led build there is no approved comp; the chosen decision comp rides in that slot as the critique reference, named as such), and the craft-floor reference path. The reviewer has no browser; screenshots you fail to pass are checks it cannot run. Never read the shipped agents' definition files before spawning; the harness loads them at spawn, and you owe only the input packet. Wait on any agent with one long timeout rather than a loop of short polls, and spend the wait on the next independent step. Verify its return carries the five contract sections; on an empty or thrashed return, respawn once with the same inputs before doing anything else. This review never runs inside the build thread and never inherits it: spawn the reviewer fresh, with no forked conversation history (`fork_turns: 0` in codex); a reviewer that inherits your transcript inherits your framing, your optimism, and your abstractions, and everything it needs travels in the inputs above. Only a harness whose tool surface has no subagent capability at all substitutes a fresh in-thread pass after stepping fully out of the build context, run from [degraded/finish-reviewer.md](degraded/finish-reviewer.md), and a substituted or failed-and-replaced review is disclosed in one line at finish, never silently. When the reviewer's first material fix is a rebuild directive, fidelity failed wholesale rather than in patches, so skip the fix batch and execute the rebuild immediately: re-derive the named regions, produce the named assets, and send the result back for a verdict, telling the user what is happening rather than asking permission to fix a failure. The user is consulted only when a second rebuild directive arrives, both verdicts on the table, or when rebuilding would discard content the user approved. Otherwise apply the material fixes in one batch, rebuild once, and recapture the same viewports over the same files. A recapture measures positions, loading, and overflow; it cannot measure whether a fix reached the quality the finding named, so send the recaptured screenshots back to the same reviewer for a verdict scoring every material fix resolved, partial, or unresolved (through the harness's agent continuation; without one, run the scoring fresh from [degraded/finish-reviewer.md](degraded/finish-reviewer.md)'s Verdict Pass). Fixes scored partial or unresolved get another batch, recapture, and verdict. Two rounds is the budget an unattended run ends at; an attended session's ceiling belongs to the user, so when the second verdict still lists open items, put the table in front of them and let them choose between shipping as it stands and funding another round. Whoever is deciding, stop the moment a round resolves nothing, and the reviewer's findings are the only list you work from, never your own re-opened hunt. Report the final verdict table to the user as it stands, open items included, under the reviewer's own disposition word: a table with open material findings is never announced as a pass, and never under a softer label than the reviewer wrote. Do not run a second detector.
+After the second inspection round the build thread's polishing is over: no further defect hunts, micro-edit scripts, or rebuilds here; whatever remains ships through the handoffs, where a fresh context does the finding better and cheaper. On the web, where this harness runs no design hook, run `node .github/skills/impeccable/scripts/detect.mjs --json` on the changed targets once here, fix what is mechanical, and pass the remaining findings to the reviewer; a hookless web build that skips this ships every tell the hook exists to catch. A native platform skips the detector entirely: it reads HTML and CSS and has no verdict on native code, so the reviewer's floor check is the only slop gate and the input packet says so. Capture the screenshots into `.impeccable/review/`, one file per captured viewport (on the web, `desktop.png` and `mobile.png`; on native, one per device class, such as `phone.png` and `tablet.png`, suffixed per OS on adaptive), creating that directory when the harness does not; the paths you pass the reviewer are its spec, and that directory is where it looks when a passed path is missing. Then spawn the shipped finish reviewer, `impeccable-finish-reviewer` (`impeccable_finish_reviewer` in codex; `/impeccable-finish-reviewer` in Cursor; on GitHub Copilot say "Use the impeccable-finish-reviewer agent"), with the original request, confirmed answers, the artifact path, the screenshot paths, its direction contract, existing hook findings, the QUALITY BAR card and approved comp paths (on a code-led build there is no approved comp; the chosen decision comp rides in that slot as the critique reference, named as such), the craft-floor reference path, and on a native platform the platform reference path(s), [ios.md](ios.md) / [android.md](android.md), both on adaptive, plus one line saying no detector ran, so the reviewer judges in the platform's conventions rather than the web's. The reviewer has no browser; screenshots you fail to pass are checks it cannot run. Never read the shipped agents' definition files before spawning; the harness loads them at spawn, and you owe only the input packet. Wait on any agent with one long timeout rather than a loop of short polls, and spend the wait on the next independent step. Verify its return carries the five contract sections; on an empty or thrashed return, respawn once with the same inputs before doing anything else. This review never runs inside the build thread and never inherits it: spawn the reviewer fresh, with no forked conversation history (`fork_turns: 0` in codex); a reviewer that inherits your transcript inherits your framing, your optimism, and your abstractions, and everything it needs travels in the inputs above. Only a harness whose tool surface has no subagent capability at all substitutes a fresh in-thread pass after stepping fully out of the build context, run from [degraded/finish-reviewer.md](degraded/finish-reviewer.md), and a substituted or failed-and-replaced review is disclosed in one line at finish, never silently. When the reviewer's first material fix is a rebuild directive, fidelity failed wholesale rather than in patches, so skip the fix batch and execute the rebuild immediately: re-derive the named regions, produce the named assets, and send the result back for a verdict, telling the user what is happening rather than asking permission to fix a failure. The user is consulted only when a second rebuild directive arrives, both verdicts on the table, or when rebuilding would discard content the user approved. Otherwise apply the material fixes in one batch, rebuild once, and recapture the same viewports over the same files. A recapture measures positions, loading, and overflow; it cannot measure whether a fix reached the quality the finding named, so send the recaptured screenshots back to the same reviewer for a verdict scoring every material fix resolved, partial, or unresolved (through the harness's agent continuation; without one, run the scoring fresh from [degraded/finish-reviewer.md](degraded/finish-reviewer.md)'s Verdict Pass). Fixes scored partial or unresolved get another batch, recapture, and verdict. Two rounds is the budget an unattended run ends at; an attended session's ceiling belongs to the user, so when the second verdict still lists open items, put the table in front of them and let them choose between shipping as it stands and funding another round. Whoever is deciding, stop the moment a round resolves nothing, and the reviewer's findings are the only list you work from, never your own re-opened hunt. Report the final verdict table to the user as it stands, open items included, under the reviewer's own disposition word: a table with open material findings is never announced as a pass, and never under a softer label than the reviewer wrote. Do not run a second detector.
 
 Then spawn the shipped documenter, `impeccable-documenter` (`impeccable_documenter` in codex), with the project root, the artifact path, the direction contract, PRODUCT.md, the [document.md](document.md) reference path, and the boundary to write at; it records DESIGN.md and the sidecar from the built world, ground truth over intention; without subagents the pass runs from [degraded/documenter.md](degraded/documenter.md). A clean detector pass is not finished; finished is the contract kept, the comp honored, the review closed, and the system recorded.