Update to fstack

{
  "description": "Design an auditable playbook when no narrower one fits: a large migration, an ambitious multi-part change, or work a human reviews after stepping away. Scales rigor to the task, runs a hypothesis loop, and logs decisions via show-me-your-work. Use for /figure-it-out, 'figure it out', a large migration, or when no narrower playbook applies.",
  "included_files": [],
  "name": "figure-it-out",
  "skill_md_contents": "---\r\nname: figure-it-out\r\ndescription: \"Design an auditable playbook when no narrower one fits: a large migration, an ambitious multi-part change, or work a human reviews after stepping away. Scales rigor to the task, runs a hypothesis loop, and logs decisions via show-me-your-work. Use for /figure-it-out, 'figure it out', a large migration, or when no narrower playbook applies.\"\r\nmenu-description: design a rigorous, auditable playbook for a task no bundled playbook fits\r\n---\r\n\r\n# Figure it out\r\n\r\nWhen the task matches no playbook, design one. The deliverable before any code is the workflow itself: a sequence of phases that scales rigor to the task, runs the scientific method, and leaves a decision trail a human can audit after stepping away. Bias toward more rigor. The cost of building the wrong thing dwarfs the cost of being careful.\r\n\r\nDon't reinvent a playbook you already have. A focused single-unit task that matches Bug fix, Perf, Feature, Visual parity, Eval, or Multi-phase plan routes there. But a large or cross-cutting version of one (a migration across many call sites, an ambitious multi-part change), or work the user reviews after stepping away, belongs here even though a single-unit version would be a Feature. The rigor and the audit trail are the point.\r\n\r\n## Start\r\n\r\nOpen a todolist with the phases below. Read a principle leaf only when you apply it. Cite only leaves you opened this session.\r\n\r\n## Phase A: Frame\r\n\r\nGround first, then commit. Don't start the run until you can state:\r\n\r\n- The definition of done as a falsifiable predicate (the **prove-it-works** principle skill). \"Done well\" has to be checkable.\r\n- Scope, quantified: rough units and effort, plus the blockers grounding surfaced. Raise them before spending hours, not after fifty doomed commits.\r\n- The rigor level, biased high. One-way doors and high blast radius get more; reversible low-stakes steps get less. Rigor is gates and artifacts, not \"try harder\".\r\n\r\nPresent the framing and tradeoffs before committing to a long run. Reversible work proceeds (the **never-block-on-the-human** principle skill), but a multi-hour run earns one checkpoint.\r\n\r\n## Phase B: Design the workflow\r\n\r\nDecompose into atomic, independently-landable units. Sequence riskiest-unknown-first so option value stays high. Scaffold and verification come before features (the **foundational-thinking** principle skill).\r\n\r\n- Build the verification harness before the work, with the baseline captured from the pre-change state, so the check reads as \"old value vs new value\".\r\n- For one-way-door design decisions, run the **architect** skill (it runs **arena**) with diverse, isolated, opinionated candidates and a read-only judge on a different model family. Skip it for mechanical work whose shape is already concrete. A second arena over a settled design is over-engineering (the **laziness-protocol** principle skill).\r\n- Decide what fans out. Parallelize only across genuine seams, and give each worker its own worktree or branch (the **separate-before-serializing-shared-state** principle skill). Don't over-fan.\r\n- Write the designed phase list down. That list is what the human reviews.\r\n\r\nThen put the design into motion. Add its steps to the todolist as concrete items, after the Phase C entry and before Phase D. Run each under the Phase C loop discipline, and weave the Phase D log through them, a row as each step lands, rather than saving the whole trail for the end.\r\n\r\n## Phase C: Run the loop\r\n\r\nEach unit is an experiment: state the hypothesis, make the smallest change, measure against the predicate on the real artifact, keep it if it advanced, revert it if it didn't.\r\nApply the **sequence-verifiable-units** principle skill, verifying each unit before starting the next instead of batching checks at the end.\r\n\r\n- Verify by inspecting the artifact, never a self-report. When something passes too easily, suspect the observation method before the system. A blank screenshot passes a lazy gate.\r\n- Pair delegated work with a judge and audit the delegates' artifacts yourself before trusting them. If a worker games the gate, reset and harden the contract. If the gate itself is wrong, fix the gate in its own change rather than routing around it.\r\n- A verdict is VERIFIED, NOT VERIFIED, or INCONCLUSIVE. Inconclusive is not a pass. Don't hide a negative.\r\n\r\n## Phase D: Keep the audit trail\r\n\r\nLog the run via the **show-me-your-work** skill, one canonical TSV with a row per decision and per unit, evidence as links. figure-it-out's work is usually ambitious enough to commit the trail so the reviewer can read it in the PR; commit it when confidence has to be shown. Prefer evidence produced by committed scripts so a reviewer can re-run it. The trail plus the diff is what lets the human come back and trust the work.\r\n\r\n## Phase E: Verify and hand back\r\n\r\nCheck the whole against the Phase A predicate on the real product, not just the harness. Encode any recurring correction as a gate, a lint rule, a check, or a script, so the win can't silently regress (the **encode-lessons-in-structure** principle skill).\r\n\r\n**Reply:** the playbook you designed, the rigor level and why, the decision-trail path, what's verified against the predicate, and what's still open.\r\n"
}