Release 1.1.2 — the default path works end to end

Fix release for 1.1.1: the minimal path end to end, engine commands that
run on Godot, Unity and Unreal, hook warnings you can see, and verdicts
that say when they could not check. Details in CHANGELOG.md; upgrade
steps in UPGRADING.md (v1.1.1 → v1.1.2).

Fixes #67
Fixes #131

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WuJn2FdynEybfL5KC697nJ

CCGS Skill Testing Framework/agents/specialists/gameplay-programmer.md

@@ -3,7 +3,6 @@
 ## Agent Summary
 Domain: Game mechanics code, player systems, combat implementation, and interactive features.
 Does NOT own: UI implementation (ui-programmer), AI behavior trees (ai-programmer), engine/rendering systems (engine-programmer).
-Model tier: Sonnet (default).
 No gate IDs assigned.
 
 ---
@@ -11,8 +10,8 @@ No gate IDs assigned.
 ## Static Assertions (Structural)
 
 - [ ] `description:` field is present and domain-specific (references game mechanics / player systems)
-- [ ] `allowed-tools:` list includes Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep — excludes tools only needed by orchestration agents
-- [ ] Model tier is Sonnet (default for specialists)
+- [ ] `tools:` list includes Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep — excludes tools only needed by orchestration agents
+- [ ] Model tier is `inherit` — frontmatter `model:` reads exactly `inherit` (tiers: `.claude/docs/model-tiers.md`)
 - [ ] Agent definition does not claim authority over UI, AI behavior, or engine/rendering code
 
 ---
@@ -23,9 +22,9 @@ No gate IDs assigned.
 **Input:** "Implement a melee combo system where three consecutive light attacks chain into a finisher."
 **Expected behavior:**
 - Produces code or a code scaffold following the project's language (GDScript/C#) and coding standards
-- Defines combo state tracking, input window timing, and finisher trigger logic as separate, testable methods
+- Models the combo as a state machine with an explicit transition table, and keeps the input-window check and finisher trigger as logic unit tests can drive without the full game running (logic separated from presentation)
 - References the relevant GDD section if one is provided in context
-- Does NOT implement UI feedback (delegates to ui-programmer) or AI reaction (delegates to ai-programmer)
+- Does NOT implement UI feedback or enemy reactions: emits events/signals for them instead of referencing UI code, leaving the UI side to `ui-programmer` and enemy reactions to `ai-programmer`
 - Output includes doc comments on all public methods per coding standards
 
 ### Case 2: Out-of-domain request — redirects correctly
@@ -34,14 +33,14 @@ No gate IDs assigned.
 - Does NOT produce menu implementation code
 - Explicitly states this is outside its domain
 - Redirects the request to `ui-programmer`
-- May note that if the pause menu requires reading gameplay state it can provide the state API surface
+- Any part it offers is the gameplay side of the gameplay-to-UI event contract the menu consumes (e.g., pause-state events), agreed with `ui-programmer` — never menu code
 
 ### Case 3: Domain boundary — threading flag
 **Input:** "The combo system is causing frame stutters; can you add threading to spread the input processing?"
 **Expected behavior:**
 - Does NOT unilaterally implement threading or async systems
 - Flags the threading concern to `engine-programmer` with a clear description of the hot path
-- May produce a non-threaded refactor to reduce work per frame as a safe interim step
+- Any interim step it offers stays single-threaded (less work per frame in the combo code it owns) and is proposed for approval before any code changes
 - Documents the escalation so lead-programmer is aware
 
 ### Case 4: Conflict with an Accepted ADR
@@ -50,7 +49,7 @@ No gate IDs assigned.
 - Identifies that the proposed change violates ADR-003 (Accepted status)
 - Does NOT silently implement the violation
 - Flags the conflict to `lead-programmer` with the ADR reference and the trade-off described
-- Will implement only after explicit override decision from lead-programmer or technical-director
+- Implements the change only after ADR-003 is superseded by a new ADR through `/architecture-decision` — which only the user, or technical-director on the user's confirmation, moves to Accepted — never on the original request alone, and not on lead-programmer's approval alone
 
 ### Case 5: Context pass — implements to GDD spec
 **Input:** GDD for "PlayerCombat" provided in context. Request: "Implement the stamina drain formula from the combat GDD."
@@ -67,9 +66,10 @@ No gate IDs assigned.
 - [ ] Stays within declared domain (mechanics, player systems, combat)
 - [ ] Redirects out-of-domain requests to correct agent (ui-programmer, ai-programmer, engine-programmer)
 - [ ] Returns structured findings (code scaffold, method signatures, inline comments) not freeform opinions
-- [ ] Does not modify files outside `src/gameplay/` or `src/core/` without explicit delegation
+- [ ] Does not modify engine-level systems without lead-programmer approval, and does not write networking code (delegates to network-programmer)
 - [ ] Flags ADR violations rather than overriding them silently
 - [ ] Makes gameplay values data-driven, never hardcoded
+- [ ] Asks "May I write this to [filepath]?" naming the file before writing
 
 ---