epistemic-protocols

The user cannot yet see what a task needs them to decide, or which decisions to keep or entrust: map the whole task first, then open each decision to the depth needed.

The work needs several lines of thinking, and their order, independence, combination, stopping point, or where results go is not obvious: settle the method before starting.

A result may not fit where it lands: check every place it reaches and every intent it was meant to carry, show every misfit and omission on one sheet, and carry out the fixes the user settles.

The user knows roughly what they want but not which decisions it turns on: trace them from their own material (code, rules, past sessions) and the domain's usual decisions; ask until it settles.

This skill should be used when the user asks to "audit plugin encapsulation", "check self-containment semantics", "find contributor-knowledge assumptions", or invokes /encapsulation. Reviews LLM-facing prose in this project's plugin SKILL.md files and plugin description metadata for Plugin Encapsulation compliance: prose that assumes contributor documentation knowledge or rephrases banned references to bypass deterministic checks. Project-local contributor tooling.

Reference-grounded prompt-artifact formation. Reads a target reference doc, surfaces the under-determined contract coordinates, and projects a ready-to-use prompt or standing skill recipe.

This skill should be used when the user asks to "formal review", "formal lens review", or invokes /formal-review. A fixed-lens PR review for this repository's formally-structured protocol changes: it pins a Category Theory / Type Theory / Operational Semantics lens panel over only the files changed in a PR, analyzes each lens in isolation, adversarially cross-verifies the findings, and posts the survivors as a single consolidated PR comment. Project-local contributor tooling.

Multi-perspective framing. Fires when the right framework is absent: places analytical lenses, hands off lens↔substrate pairs. Type: (FrameworkAbsent, AI, DESIGN, Inquiry) → FramedInquiry

Advisor-checked decision gates. Freezes a drafted option set, has an independent external advisor rule it genuine / collapsed / malformed, then verifies the cited grounds before it reaches the user.

Delegate factual research to a Codex CLI session that uses Codex's builtin `goal` command and invokes Aitesis (`$inquire`) for Tavily-based external verification. User-invoked via /goal-research.

Something in play — code, a document, a result, quotable in context — needs to be actually understood; the user can't follow it yet or nods along unsure: verify understanding step by step.

A framework, analogy, or earlier design is carried to a case, or an abstraction tested against its own cases, and what it supports is unclear: back each conclusion with cited evidence, not assent.

The idea field is empty, narrowed too early, or thin in places: widen it in width and depth before any candidate is chosen; reads the user's words and what they name.

A task rests on missing context or unchecked assumptions: collect every piece of context the AI can reach on its own, then hand back what it cannot reach as the user's own unknown.

Quick protocol recommendation from recent sessions, or quest-based learning through scenario, trial, and quiz.

This skill should be used when the user asks to "run the outcome eval", "paired bare vs protocol", "which decisions did the protocol surface", "count what the AI asked or presented", "does /inquire surface what the request left out", or wants to see, from transcripts, which decisions reached the user as a question or something to recognize instead of having to be written into the opening prompt. Project-local contributor tooling.

Use when asked "where does this belong", "audit this instruction file", "why does this keep growing", or invokes /place. Read-only audit routing each clause of LLM-facing prose to a destination.

Deficit Recognition Probe — surface multiple deficit hypotheses for the user's current situation and route by user-constituted recognition (fit review, not protocol scoring).

Project guide direction line via three-horizon fusion. Invoke with /realign.

This skill should be used when the user asks to "run the eval", "test whether the protocol actually works at runtime", "check type realization", "measure protocol fulfillment", "run the type-realization suite", "does the gate actually stop", or wants runtime evidence that a protocol's formal transition contract is realized rather than an assessment of downstream artifact quality. Invoke explicitly with /realize and a skill argument.