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/skills/utility/soak-test.md

@@ -2,29 +2,35 @@
 
 ## Skill Summary
 
-`/soak-test` generates a structured soak test protocol — an extended runtime
-test plan designed to surface memory leaks, performance drift, and stability
-issues that only appear under sustained gameplay. The skill produces a document
-specifying the test duration, system under test, monitoring checkpoints (e.g.,
-memory sample every 30 minutes), pass/fail thresholds, and conditions for early
-termination.
+`/soak-test [duration] [focus]` generates an observation protocol for an
+extended play session — the human plays, the skill writes the plan. Duration is
+`30m`, `1h`, `2h` or `4h` (default `1h`); focus is `memory`, `stability`,
+`balance` or `all` (default `all`). It reads `engine.name` and `performance.*`
+from `project.yaml` (falling back to `technical-preferences.md`), the game
+concept or brief, the latest playtest and QA plan, then builds timed
+checkpoints for the duration and engine-specific memory guidance whose alert
+thresholds are relative to the session's own T+0 baseline, in units recorded as
+displayed. The engine tool and counter names it gives are not covered by
+`docs/engine-reference/`, so they are marked NOT SOURCEABLE — pointers the
+tester confirms at T+0, recording the tool actually used.
 
-The skill asks "May I write to `production/qa/soak-[slug]-[date].md`?" before
-persisting. If a previous soak test for the same system exists, the skill offers
-to extend the duration or add new conditions. No director gates apply. The verdict
-is COMPLETE when the soak test protocol is written.
+The protocol document carries a Verdict section with PASS / PASS WITH CONCERNS /
+NOT ASSESSED / FAIL for the tester to fill in after the session; a short soak
+cannot return PASS. The skill asks "May I write this soak test protocol to
+`production/qa/soak-test-[date]-[duration].md`?" before writing, and never runs
+the soak itself. No director gates apply.
 
 ---
 
 ## Static Assertions (Structural)
 
-Verified automatically by `/skill-test static` — no fixture needed.
+Checked against the SKILL.md by `/skill-test spec` — no fixture needed.
 
 - [ ] Has required frontmatter fields: `name`, `description`, `argument-hint`, `user-invocable`, `allowed-tools`
 - [ ] Has ≥2 phase headings
-- [ ] Contains verdict keyword: COMPLETE
+- [ ] Contains verdict keywords: PASS, PASS WITH CONCERNS, NOT ASSESSED, FAIL
 - [ ] Contains "May I write" collaborative protocol language before writing the protocol
-- [ ] Has a next-step handoff (e.g., `/regression-suite` or `/release-checklist`)
+- [ ] Has a next-step handoff (`/bug-triage sprint` after the session; `/smoke-check` after fixing a FAIL)
 
 ---
 
@@ -36,113 +42,120 @@ None. `/soak-test` is a QA planning utility. No director gates apply.
 
 ## Test Cases
 
-### Case 1: Happy Path — Online gameplay feature, 2-hour soak protocol
+### Case 1: Happy Path — 2-hour, all-focus soak on Godot
 
 **Fixture:**
-- User specifies: system = "online multiplayer lobby", duration = "2 hours"
-- `technical-preferences.md` has engine configured
+- `project.yaml` has `engine.name: Godot` and `performance.target_framerate: 60`
+- `design/gdd/game-concept.md` states the intended session length
+- The user approves the write
 
-**Input:** `/soak-test online-lobby 2h`
+**Input:** `/soak-test 2h all`
 
 **Expected behavior:**
-1. Skill generates a 2-hour soak test protocol for the online lobby system
-2. Protocol includes: monitoring checkpoints every 30 minutes, metrics to track
-   (memory usage, connection count, packet loss), pass thresholds, early termination
-   conditions (crash or >20% memory growth)
-3. Networking-specific checks are included (session drop rate, reconnect handling)
-4. Skill asks "May I write to `production/qa/soak-online-lobby-2026-04-06.md`?"
-5. File is written on approval; verdict is COMPLETE
+1. Skill loads context: engine, performance budgets, concept, latest playtest and QA plan
+2. Checkpoints for `2h`: T+0, T+20, T+40, T+60, T+80, T+100, T+120
+3. Godot memory items: the Debugger's memory monitors, Static Memory (unit as
+   displayed), Object Count, Orphan Nodes — names marked NOT SOURCEABLE, since
+   `docs/engine-reference/godot/` does not cover them, for the tester to confirm
+   at T+0; alert when memory grows > 20% from T+0 after the first 15 minutes;
+   Orphan Nodes must return to its T+0 value after a scene unload
+4. Stability items (60 fps target) and balance/fatigue items are both included
+5. Protocol document has Pre-Session Setup, Baseline (T+0), a Checkpoint Log per
+   checkpoint, Post-Session Analysis, and a Verdict section left for the tester
+6. Skill asks "May I write this soak test protocol to
+   `production/qa/soak-test-[date]-2h.md`?"
+7. After writing, prints the run steps ending with `/bug-triage sprint`
 
 **Assertions:**
-- [ ] Protocol duration matches the requested 2 hours
-- [ ] Monitoring checkpoints are at reasonable intervals (e.g., every 30 minutes)
-- [ ] Network-specific checks are included (not just generic memory checks)
-- [ ] "May I write" is asked with the correct file path
-- [ ] Verdict is COMPLETE
+- [ ] Checkpoints are exactly T+0, T+20, T+40, T+60, T+80, T+100, T+120
+- [ ] Memory thresholds are relative to T+0, and the unit is recorded as displayed (no unit assumed)
+- [ ] The Godot tool and counter names are marked NOT SOURCEABLE, not presented as verified, and Pre-Session Setup asks for the tool actually used
+- [ ] Memory, stability and balance observation items are all present (focus `all`)
+- [ ] "May I write" is asked with `production/qa/soak-test-[date]-2h.md`
+- [ ] The skill issues no verdict itself — the protocol's Verdict section is left for the tester
 
 ---
 
-### Case 2: No Target Defined — Prompts for system, duration, and conditions
+### Case 2: No Arguments — Defaults applied
 
 **Fixture:**
-- No arguments provided
-- No soak test config in session state
+- No arguments provided; engine configured
 
 **Input:** `/soak-test`
 
 **Expected behavior:**
-1. Skill detects no target system or duration specified
-2. Skill asks: "What system or feature should be soak-tested?"
-3. After user responds with system: Skill asks: "What duration? (e.g., 1h, 4h, 8h)"
-4. After user responds with duration: Skill asks for specific conditions or
-   uses defaults (normal gameplay loop, default player count)
-5. Skill generates protocol from collected inputs and asks "May I write"
+1. Duration defaults to `1h`, focus to `all` — no questions are needed to start
+2. Checkpoints: T+0, T+15, T+30, T+45, T+60
+3. Protocol header records `Duration: 1h` and `Focus: all`
+4. Skill asks "May I write this soak test protocol to `production/qa/soak-test-[date]-1h.md`?"
 
 **Assertions:**
-- [ ] At minimum 2 follow-up questions are asked (system + duration)
-- [ ] Default conditions are applied when user doesn't specify custom ones
-- [ ] Protocol is not generated until system and duration are known
-- [ ] Verdict is COMPLETE after file is written
+- [ ] Duration `1h` and focus `all` are used when no argument is given
+- [ ] Checkpoints are exactly T+0, T+15, T+30, T+45, T+60
+- [ ] The output path ends `-1h.md`
+- [ ] Nothing is written before the "May I write" approval
 
 ---
 
-### Case 3: Previous Soak Test Exists — Offers to extend or add conditions
+### Case 3: Narrow Focus on Unreal — 4-hour memory soak
 
 **Fixture:**
-- `production/qa/soak-online-lobby-2026-03-15.md` exists with a 1-hour protocol
-- User wants to extend to 4 hours with new memory threshold conditions
+- `project.yaml` has `engine.name: Unreal`
 
-**Input:** `/soak-test online-lobby 4h`
+**Input:** `/soak-test 4h memory`
 
 **Expected behavior:**
-1. Skill finds existing soak test for online-lobby
-2. Skill reports: "Previous soak test found: soak-online-lobby-2026-03-15.md (1h)"
-3. Skill presents options: create new protocol (4h standalone), or extend the
-   existing protocol to 4h and add new conditions
-4. User selects extend; existing checkpoints are preserved, new ones added
-5. Skill asks "May I write to `production/qa/soak-online-lobby-2026-04-06.md`?"
-   (new file, not overwriting old one)
+1. Checkpoints for `4h`: T+0, T+30, T+60, T+90, T+120, T+180, T+240
+2. Unreal memory items: a memory readout at each checkpoint — `stat memory`,
+   marked NOT SOURCEABLE since `docs/engine-reference/unreal/` does not cover
+   it; record Physical Memory Used and Available (units as displayed)
+3. Alert threshold: Physical Memory Used growth > 20% over the full soak,
+   against this run's T+0 — no absolute MB threshold
+4. Balance/fatigue observation items are not generated (focus is `memory`)
+5. Output path `production/qa/soak-test-[date]-4h.md`
 
 **Assertions:**
-- [ ] Existing soak test is surfaced and referenced
-- [ ] User is offered extend vs. new options
-- [ ] New file is created (old file is not overwritten)
-- [ ] Extended protocol includes both old and new checkpoints
-- [ ] Verdict is COMPLETE
+- [ ] Checkpoints are exactly T+0, T+30, T+60, T+90, T+120, T+180, T+240
+- [ ] The Unreal threshold is a relative > 20% growth, not an absolute size
+- [ ] `stat memory` is marked NOT SOURCEABLE, a pointer to confirm rather than a verified command
+- [ ] Balance/fatigue items are omitted for focus `memory`
+- [ ] "May I write" names the `-4h.md` path
 
 ---
 
-### Case 4: Mobile Target Platform — Memory-specific checkpoints added
+### Case 4: No Performance Budgets — "not set", never invented
 
 **Fixture:**
-- `technical-preferences.md` specifies target platform: Mobile
-- User requests soak test for "gameplay session" at 30 minutes
+- `project.yaml` has `engine.name: Unity` and no `performance` block
+- `technical-preferences.md` Performance Budgets are `[TO BE CONFIGURED]`
 
-**Input:** `/soak-test gameplay 30m`
+**Input:** `/soak-test 30m memory`
 
 **Expected behavior:**
-1. Skill reads `technical-preferences.md` and detects mobile target platform
-2. Soak test protocol includes mobile-specific memory checkpoints:
-   - Check heap memory growth vs. device baseline
-   - Check texture memory at checkpoint intervals
-   - Add warning threshold at 300MB (mobile ceiling)
-3. Protocol also includes thermal/battery drain advisory notes
-4. Skill asks "May I write?" and writes on approval; verdict is COMPLETE
+1. Skill falls back from `project.yaml` to `technical-preferences.md` for budgets
+2. Budget notes read `Memory ceiling: not set`, `Target FPS: not set`,
+   `Frame budget: not set` — no number is supplied in their place
+3. Checkpoints: T+0, T+10, T+20, T+30
+4. Unity memory items: a memory profiler, marked NOT SOURCEABLE (not covered by
+   `docs/engine-reference/unity/`); record Total Reserved Memory, GC Allocated,
+   Object Count (units as displayed); alert when GC Allocated grows
+   monotonically across 3+ checkpoints
+5. Skill asks "May I write" before writing `production/qa/soak-test-[date]-30m.md`
 
 **Assertions:**
-- [ ] Mobile platform is detected from technical-preferences.md
-- [ ] Memory checkpoints include mobile-appropriate thresholds (not desktop)
-- [ ] Thermal/battery notes are present in the protocol
-- [ ] Verdict is COMPLETE
+- [ ] Missing budgets are recorded as "not set", not filled with defaults
+- [ ] Checkpoints are exactly T+0, T+10, T+20, T+30
+- [ ] The Unity threshold is the unit-free monotonic-growth check
+- [ ] "May I write" is asked before the file is written
 
 ---
 
 ### Case 5: Director Gate Check — No gate; soak-test is a planning utility
 
 **Fixture:**
-- Valid system and duration provided
+- Engine configured; valid duration and focus provided
 
-**Input:** `/soak-test combat 1h`
+**Input:** `/soak-test 1h stability`
 
 **Expected behavior:**
 1. Skill generates and writes the soak test protocol
@@ -152,27 +165,27 @@ None. `/soak-test` is a QA planning utility. No director gates apply.
 **Assertions:**
 - [ ] No director gate is invoked
 - [ ] No gate skip messages appear
-- [ ] Skill reaches COMPLETE without any gate check
+- [ ] The run ends at "Protocol written." with the run steps — no gate verdict, and no soak verdict issued by the skill
 
 ---
 
 ## Protocol Compliance
 
-- [ ] Collects system, duration, and conditions before generating protocol
-- [ ] Includes monitoring checkpoints at regular intervals
-- [ ] Includes pass/fail thresholds and early termination conditions
-- [ ] Adapts checkpoints to target platform (mobile vs. desktop)
-- [ ] Asks "May I write" before creating the protocol file
-- [ ] Verdict is COMPLETE when file is written
+- [ ] Parses `[duration] [focus]`, defaulting to `1h` and `all`
+- [ ] Uses the Phase 3 checkpoint table for the chosen duration
+- [ ] Memory alert thresholds are ratios or deltas against T+0; units are recorded as displayed
+- [ ] Engine tool names not covered by `docs/engine-reference/` are marked NOT SOURCEABLE; a memory tool the tester cannot find leaves the verdict NOT ASSESSED
+- [ ] The protocol's Verdict section offers PASS / PASS WITH CONCERNS / NOT ASSESSED / FAIL and states a short soak cannot return PASS
+- [ ] Asks "May I write" before creating `production/qa/soak-test-[date]-[duration].md`
+- [ ] Never attempts to run the soak itself
 
 ---
 
 ## Coverage Notes
 
-- Soak tests for specific engine subsystems (rendering pipeline, physics
-  simulation) follow the same protocol structure and are not separately tested.
-- The case where the user provides a duration shorter than the minimum useful
-  soak period (e.g., 5 minutes) is not tested; the skill would note this is
-  too short for meaningful results.
-- Automated execution of the soak test protocol is outside this skill's scope —
-  this skill generates the plan, not the runner.
+- The `stability` and `balance` focus values follow Case 3's pattern with the
+  other observation groups; not separately tested.
+- At `rigor: minimal` the skill reads `design/game-brief.md` instead of the
+  game concept; not separately tested.
+- Executing the protocol is outside this skill's scope — it generates the plan,
+  a human runs it.