Refine execution evidence review and skill curation

[WJiangH]

Deliverable manifest

Role: integrator — skill curator and author
Work item: REVIEWER-SKILLS-01 — execution-evidence review method and gradual skill curation
Delivery state: Merged — independent approval, required PR checks and main CI satisfied
Runtime requested: UNKNOWN (inherited; no override recorded)
Runtime observed: UNKNOWN / none / UNKNOWN
Provenance: registered commit attribution validated
Platform publisher: github.com/WJiangH, account45132014 (account record)
CI state: required PR boundaries/framework/gates SUCCESS; main CI SUCCESS for merge 53fc51747a305ba037f29c17e3b2e893293002ca.

Artifacts:

• .agents/skills/integrator/SKILL.md — nominate, independently review, apply on a new matching task, then retain/revise/retire with evidence.
• .agents/skills/integrator/references/execution-evidence.md — conditional checks for complete execution bindings and intent/start/exit reporting.
• .agents/skills/orchestrator/SKILL.md — route a subsequent matching task through prospective application.

Applicable checks:

• make framework-test — 51 tests OK; 20 tests OK; 16 boundary controls OK; docs: PASS (78 documents, 131 local links, 0 errors).
• Skill creator quick_validate.py on both changed skills — Skill is valid! for each (local packaging validation, not behavioral evaluation).
• python3 scripts/agent_attribution.py validate-commit --commit HEAD — PASS.
• git diff --check origin/main...HEAD — PASS.

Not run:

• New-task behavioral validation — pending; same-case correction does not establish skill effectiveness or maturity.
• Hardware build/simulation/formal/physical checks — inapplicable to this method-only change.

Spec / policy refs:

• AGENTS.md: Ownership and supervision, Publication boundary, Commit and manifest identity.
• Integrator method: citation-based review and skill curation.

Lifecycle impact:

• Framework method only; no product contracts, thresholds or silicon acceptance changed.
• No waiver or new execution authority. Domain methods remain with their assigned owners.

Publication audit:

• Public base: 07f040055385f382ba780d7cd647167e632593ff.
• Outgoing ancestry: one commit 5081db93c813daac455056a5c34517c1f6857dd4.
• Aggregate diff: exactly the three skill files above; no private cases, receipts, worker identities or local evidence.
• Registered Codex author and WJiangH committer/publisher are separate. Registry evidence maps commit identity only; it does not attest this runtime or a historical pusher.

Independent review:

• Substantive APPROVE for exact head 5081db93c813daac455056a5c34517c1f6857dd4, produced by a separate reviewer context and verified/published by the orchestrator; no method findings remain.
• Independent documentation/link checks, six documentation regressions, both skill validators, attribution, whitespace and aggregate ancestry/diff audit passed.
• Known-case local evaluation included valid controls and reproduced the relevant failure distinctions. It is retrospective evidence only, not prospective transfer, causal gain, production validation or maturity certification. Case details remain private.
• Automated status comment was a Draft-state snapshot, not the substantive approval above.

Integration / retirement:

• Merged at 53fc51747a305ba037f29c17e3b2e893293002ca by the configured integration app after the authorized Ready transition; integration verdict records its checks.
• Verified parents are public base 07f040055385f382ba780d7cd647167e632593ff and reviewed head 5081db93c813daac455056a5c34517c1f6857dd4; merge tree equals the reviewed tree. Main CI passed.
• Author worktree is clean. Local branch/worktree and required private evidence are retained; no author-owned jobs remain. Remote feature ref is absent; its deletion actor/mechanism is UNKNOWN. No evidence or worktree was deleted by this closeout.

Open items:

• None for this scoped method delivery.
• Prospective application on a subsequent naturally matching task remains a separate follow-up, not an unmet acceptance criterion for this scoped method PR; no maturity claim.

Friction: Initial documentation check rejected the new reference before staging; staging the intended file and rerunning the complete check passed.

Skill candidates: None beyond this scoped candidate method; prospective effectiveness remains pending.

[claude]

Integrator status check — no merge action taken.

• Reviewed head confirmed: live PR head 5081db93c813daac455056a5c34517c1f6857dd4 matches the recorded feature-head commit.
• Required checks (gh pr checks 39 --required): boundaries pass, framework pass, gates pass.
• PR state: Draft (manifest: "Delivery state: Draft — independent review and required CI pending"; no reviews recorded yet).

Per protocol, Draft state blocks merge regardless of required-check status. Exiting without merging. No follow-up watch is scheduled — re-review triggers automatically on further pushes or once this is marked Ready.

[WJiangH]

Independent review: APPROVE for exact head 5081db93c813daac455056a5c34517c1f6857dd4.

The orchestrator has checked the verdict and evidence produced by a separate reviewer context, independent of the method author. No blocking findings remain in the three-file diff.

• The integrator curation section preserves maintainer-approved or delegated authority, separates method authorship from independent review, and requires evidence from later naturally matching work before claiming effectiveness.
• The execution-evidence reference is conditional on binding or execution claims. It checks contract-defined identity relationships and observed launch/exit events without introducing authentication systems, new execution budgets, or product gates.
• The orchestrator hook routes future application and records outcomes; it does not declare skills mature from rule or finding counts.

Independent validation passed: documentation/link checks, six documentation regressions, both skill package validators, attribution, whitespace and aggregate ancestry/diff audit. Retrospective local controls exercised the method against raw execution-entry cases, including valid controls; this does not establish prospective transfer, causal improvement, production execution or silicon correctness.

Approval is scoped to the reusable method changes. The author retains final-manifest responsibility; exact-head required CI and authorized integration still apply. Prospective application remains a separate tracked follow-up.

[claude]

Verdict: clean — merged at reviewed head 5081db93c813daac455056a5c34517c1f6857dd4 (merge commit 53fc51747a305ba037f29c17e3b2e893293002ca).

Spot-check evidence (re-run on a fresh worktree of the exact reviewed head):

• Boundary: commit author INTEGRATOR_AGENT (role integrator per agent_attribution.py validate-commit); diff touches only .agents/skills/integrator/SKILL.md, .agents/skills/integrator/references/execution-evidence.md, .agents/skills/orchestrator/SKILL.md — all within the integrator's "skill curation" duty (AGENTS.md role table), no product code.
• Gate integrity: no changes to flow/gates.mk, .sdc, or any test file — nothing weakened.
• Spec conformance: cited AGENTS.md sections ("Ownership and supervision", "Publication boundary", "Commit and manifest identity") exist and support the manifest's claims.
• Evidence re-run: make framework-test → 51 tests OK / 20 tests OK / 16 boundary controls OK / docs: PASS (78 documents, 131 local links, 0 errors) — matches manifest. agent_attribution.py validate-commit --commit HEAD → PASS. git diff --check origin/main...HEAD → clean. Matches manifest claims exactly.
• Independent review: substantive APPROVE from WJiangH (owner) on exact head, no outstanding request-changes findings, no 3+ round pattern.
• Required checks (gh pr checks 39 --required): boundaries pass, framework pass, gates pass. (pr-review is non-required and was ignored per protocol.)