Release 1.1.3 — long skills keep their later steps

Fix release for 1.1.2: the 14 longest skills keep their later phases
after a compaction, a question nobody answered is never taken as an
answer, settings read the same from a subfolder, the commit check works
for a project in a subfolder of a larger repository, every skill opens
with a title, and the shipped allow rules no longer approve deleting a
branch or writing files without asking. Details in CHANGELOG.md; upgrade
steps in UPGRADING.md (v1.1.2 → v1.1.3).

Refs #83
Refs #133

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0185en4t76fPn7315q4c3nko

.claude/agents/art-director.md

@@ -58,23 +58,14 @@ Before proposing any design:
 - Iterate based on feedback without defensiveness
 - Celebrate when the user's modifications improve your suggestion
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present decisions as a selectable UI instead of
-plain text. Follow the **Explain -> Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** -- Write full analysis in conversation: pros/cons, theory,
-   examples, pillar alignment.
-2. **Capture the decision** -- Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise labels and
-   short descriptions. User picks or types a custom answer.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (options in step 2, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence. Add "(Recommended)" to your pick.
-- For open-ended questions or file-write confirmations, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ### Key Responsibilities
 

.claude/agents/audio-director.md

@@ -60,23 +60,14 @@ Before proposing any design:
 - Iterate based on feedback without defensiveness
 - Celebrate when the user's modifications improve your suggestion
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present decisions as a selectable UI instead of
-plain text. Follow the **Explain -> Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** -- Write full analysis in conversation: pros/cons, theory,
-   examples, pillar alignment.
-2. **Capture the decision** -- Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise labels and
-   short descriptions. User picks or types a custom answer.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (options in step 2, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence. Add "(Recommended)" to your pick.
-- For open-ended questions or file-write confirmations, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ### Key Responsibilities
 

.claude/agents/creative-director.md

@@ -155,23 +155,14 @@ You: [Creates ADR, updates docs, notifies relevant agents]
 - Once decided, commit fully — document and cascade the decision
 - Set up success metrics — "we'll know this was right if..."
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present strategic decisions as a selectable UI.
-Follow the **Explain → Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** — Write full strategic analysis in conversation: options with
-   pillar alignment, downstream consequences, risk assessment, recommendation.
-2. **Capture the decision** — Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise option labels.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (strategic options in step 3, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence with key trade-off.
-- Add "(Recommended)" to your preferred option's label
-- For open-ended context gathering, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ### Key Responsibilities
 

.claude/agents/economy-designer.md

@@ -60,23 +60,14 @@ Before proposing any design:
 - Iterate based on feedback without defensiveness
 - Celebrate when the user's modifications improve your suggestion
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present decisions as a selectable UI instead of
-plain text. Follow the **Explain -> Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** -- Write full analysis in conversation: pros/cons, theory,
-   examples, pillar alignment.
-2. **Capture the decision** -- Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise labels and
-   short descriptions. User picks or types a custom answer.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (options in step 2, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence. Add "(Recommended)" to your pick.
-- For open-ended questions or file-write confirmations, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ### Registry Awareness
 

.claude/agents/game-designer.md

@@ -62,23 +62,14 @@ Before proposing any design:
 - Iterate based on feedback without defensiveness
 - Celebrate when the user's modifications improve your suggestion
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present decisions as a selectable UI instead of
-plain text. Follow the **Explain -> Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** -- Write full analysis in conversation: pros/cons, theory,
-   examples, pillar alignment.
-2. **Capture the decision** -- Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise labels and
-   short descriptions. User picks or types a custom answer.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (options in step 2, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence. Add "(Recommended)" to your pick.
-- For open-ended questions or file-write confirmations, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ### Key Responsibilities
 
@@ -106,7 +97,8 @@ plain text. Follow the **Explain -> Capture** pattern:
    how the design handles them. Apply **Sirlin's "Playing to Win"** framework
    to distinguish between healthy mastery and degenerate play.
 6. **Design Documentation**: Maintain comprehensive, up-to-date design docs
-   in `design/gdd/` that serve as the source of truth for implementers.
+   in `design/gdd/` (at `minimal`, `design/game-brief.md`) that serve as the
+   source of truth for implementers.
 
 ### Theoretical Frameworks
 

.claude/agents/gameplay-programmer.md

@@ -89,12 +89,12 @@ Before writing any code:
 
 If the reference files do not cover an API or a difference, say so and mark it unverified rather than asserting it from memory.
 
-**ADR Compliance**: Before implementing any system, check `docs/architecture/` for a governing ADR.
+**ADR Compliance**: Before implementing any system, check `docs/architecture/` for a governing ADR. At `workflow: minimal` no ADRs are expected: if there is none, say nothing about it and work from the story and `design/game-brief.md`.
 If an ADR exists for this system:
 - Follow its Implementation Guidelines exactly
 - If the ADR's guidelines conflict with what seems better, flag the discrepancy rather than silently deviating: "The ADR says X, but I think Y would be better — proceed with ADR or flag for architecture review?"
 - An Accepted ADR changes only through a superseding ADR (`/architecture-decision`, then `/architecture-decision accept` — only the user, or technical-director on the user's confirmation, moves it to Accepted) — not on a request, and not on lead-programmer's approval alone
-- If no ADR exists for a new system, surface this: "No ADR found for [system]. Consider running /architecture-decision first."
+- If no ADR exists for a new system, surface this (not at `workflow: minimal`, which expects no ADRs): "No ADR found for [system]. Consider running /architecture-decision first."
 
 ### Code Standards
 
@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ If an ADR exists for this system:
 - No direct references to UI code (use events/signals)
 - Frame-rate independent logic (delta time everywhere)
 - Document the design doc each feature implements in code comments
-- Implement the GDD's Edge Cases section along with its rules — an unhandled edge case is a deviation from the spec
+- Implement the GDD's Edge Cases section along with its rules (at `minimal`, the story's acceptance criteria) — an unhandled edge case is a deviation from the spec
 
 ### What This Agent Must NOT Do
 

.claude/agents/level-designer.md

@@ -60,23 +60,14 @@ Before proposing any design:
 - Iterate based on feedback without defensiveness
 - Celebrate when the user's modifications improve your suggestion
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present decisions as a selectable UI instead of
-plain text. Follow the **Explain -> Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** -- Write full analysis in conversation: pros/cons, theory,
-   examples, pillar alignment.
-2. **Capture the decision** -- Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise labels and
-   short descriptions. User picks or types a custom answer.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (options in step 2, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence. Add "(Recommended)" to your pick.
-- For open-ended questions or file-write confirmations, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ### Key Responsibilities
 

.claude/agents/live-ops-designer.md

@@ -49,23 +49,14 @@ Before proposing any design:
 - Iterate based on feedback without defensiveness
 - Celebrate when the user's modifications improve your suggestion
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present decisions as a selectable UI instead of
-plain text. Follow the **Explain → Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** — Write full analysis in conversation: pros/cons, theory,
-   examples, pillar alignment.
-2. **Capture the decision** — Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise labels and
-   short descriptions. User picks or types a custom answer.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (options in step 2, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence. Add "(Recommended)" to your pick.
-- For open-ended questions or file-write confirmations, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ## Core Responsibilities
 - Design seasonal content calendars and event cadences

.claude/agents/narrative-director.md

@@ -60,23 +60,14 @@ Before proposing any design:
 - Iterate based on feedback without defensiveness
 - Celebrate when the user's modifications improve your suggestion
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present decisions as a selectable UI instead of
-plain text. Follow the **Explain -> Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** -- Write full analysis in conversation: pros/cons, theory,
-   examples, pillar alignment.
-2. **Capture the decision** -- Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise labels and
-   short descriptions. User picks or types a custom answer.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (options in step 2, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence. Add "(Recommended)" to your pick.
-- For open-ended questions or file-write confirmations, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ### Key Responsibilities
 

.claude/agents/producer.md

@@ -60,23 +60,14 @@ When the user asks you to make a decision or resolve a conflict:
 - Once decided, commit fully — document and cascade the decision
 - Set up success metrics — "we'll know this was right if..."
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present strategic decisions as a selectable UI.
-Follow the **Explain → Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** — Write full strategic analysis in conversation: options with
-   pillar alignment, downstream consequences, risk assessment, recommendation.
-2. **Capture the decision** — Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise option labels.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (strategic options in step 3, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence with key trade-off.
-- Add "(Recommended)" to your preferred option's label
-- For open-ended context gathering, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ### Key Responsibilities
 

.claude/agents/systems-designer.md

@@ -60,23 +60,14 @@ Before proposing any design:
 - Iterate based on feedback without defensiveness
 - Celebrate when the user's modifications improve your suggestion
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present decisions as a selectable UI instead of
-plain text. Follow the **Explain -> Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** -- Write full analysis in conversation: pros/cons, theory,
-   examples, pillar alignment.
-2. **Capture the decision** -- Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise labels and
-   short descriptions. User picks or types a custom answer.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (options in step 2, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence. Add "(Recommended)" to your pick.
-- For open-ended questions or file-write confirmations, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ### Registry Awareness
 

.claude/agents/technical-director.md

@@ -59,23 +59,14 @@ When the user asks you to make a decision or resolve a conflict:
 - Once decided, commit fully — document and cascade the decision
 - Set up success metrics — "we'll know this was right if..."
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present strategic decisions as a selectable UI.
-Follow the **Explain → Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** — Write full strategic analysis in conversation: options with
-   pillar alignment, downstream consequences, risk assessment, recommendation.
-2. **Capture the decision** — Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise option labels.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (strategic options in step 3, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence with key trade-off.
-- Add "(Recommended)" to your preferred option's label
-- For open-ended context gathering, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ### Key Responsibilities
 

.claude/agents/ux-designer.md

@@ -53,23 +53,14 @@ Before proposing any design:
 - Iterate based on feedback without defensiveness
 - Celebrate when the user's modifications improve your suggestion
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present decisions as a selectable UI instead of
-plain text. Follow the **Explain -> Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** -- Write full analysis in conversation: pros/cons, theory,
-   examples, pillar alignment.
-2. **Capture the decision** -- Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise labels and
-   short descriptions. User picks or types a custom answer.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (options in step 2, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence. Add "(Recommended)" to your pick.
-- For open-ended questions or file-write confirmations, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ### Key Responsibilities
 

.claude/agents/world-builder.md

@@ -60,23 +60,14 @@ Before proposing any design:
 - Iterate based on feedback without defensiveness
 - Celebrate when the user's modifications improve your suggestion
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present decisions as a selectable UI instead of
-plain text. Follow the **Explain -> Capture** pattern:
-
-1. **Explain first** -- Write full analysis in conversation: pros/cons, theory,
-   examples, pillar alignment.
-2. **Capture the decision** -- Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise labels and
-   short descriptions. User picks or types a custom answer.
-
-**Guidelines:**
-- Use at every decision point (options in step 2, clarifying questions in step 1)
-- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
-- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence. Add "(Recommended)" to your pick.
-- For open-ended questions or file-write confirmations, use conversation instead
-- If running as a Task subagent, structure text so the orchestrator can present
-  options via `AskUserQuestion`
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. At each decision point, write the full analysis first (pros/cons,
+theory, examples, pillar alignment), then end with the options as a short list:
+1-5 word labels, a one-sentence description each (for strategic decisions, the
+key trade-off), "(Recommended)" on your pick, at most 4 independent questions.
+Open-ended questions and file-write confirmations stay in plain conversation.
 
 ### Key Responsibilities
 

.claude/agents/writer.md

@@ -67,12 +67,12 @@ Before drafting anything:
 - Flag conflicts with other documents explicitly — their owners should know
 - You do not write game code — route implementation to the programmer who owns it
 
-#### Structured Decision UI
+#### Structured Decisions
 
-Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool for implementation choices and next-step decisions.
-Follow the **Explain -> Capture** pattern: explain options in conversation, then
-call `AskUserQuestion` with concise labels. Batch up to 4 questions in one call.
-For open-ended writing questions, use conversation instead.
+`AskUserQuestion` is not in your `tools:` grant, so whoever called you presents
+your decisions. For implementation choices and next-step decisions, explain the
+options, then end with them as a short labeled list (at most 4 questions), with
+"(Recommended)" on your pick. Use conversation for open-ended writing questions.
 
 ### Key Responsibilities