Release v0.2.0: Context Resilience, AskUserQuestion, /design-systems

* Add context resilience: file-backed state, incremental writing, auto-recovery

Prevents "prompt too long" crashes from killing sessions by persisting work
to disk incrementally instead of relying on conversation memory.

Changes:
- pre-compact.sh: dumps session state before context compression
- session-start.sh: detects active.md for crash recovery
- session-stop.sh: archives and clears active.md on clean shutdown
- context-management.md: file-backed state as primary strategy
- 9 agents updated with incremental section writing protocol
  (game-designer, systems-designer, economy-designer, narrative-director,
   level-designer, world-builder, writer, art-director, audio-director)
- CLAUDE.md: trimmed redundant imports (10 → 5) to reduce token overhead
- design-docs.md rule: enforces incremental writing pattern
- .gitignore: excludes ephemeral session state files
- directory-structure.md: documents session-state/ and session-logs/
- COLLABORATIVE-DESIGN-PRINCIPLE.md: documents incremental writing pattern

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* Add AskUserQuestion integration across collaborative protocols

Explicitly reference the AskUserQuestion tool in all collaborative agent
definitions, protocol templates, team orchestrator skills, and the master
principle doc. Introduces the Explain-then-Capture pattern: agents write
full expert analysis in conversation, then call AskUserQuestion with
concise labels to capture decisions via structured UI.

26 files updated:
- 3 protocol templates (design, leadership, implementation)
- 14 agent definitions (10 design + 3 leadership + writer)
- 8 orchestrator skills (brainstorm + 7 team-*)
- 1 master principle doc (COLLABORATIVE-DESIGN-PRINCIPLE.md)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* Add /design-systems skill: concept-to-GDD decomposition workflow

Bridges the gap between game concept and per-system design documents.
Professional studios use systems enumeration + dependency sorting between
concept and feature docs — skipping this step is one of the most expensive
mistakes (systems discovered during production cost 5-10x more to add).

New files:
- .claude/skills/design-systems/SKILL.md — 7-phase orchestration skill
  (enumerate systems, map dependencies, assign priorities, write GDDs)
- .claude/docs/templates/systems-index.md — master tracking template

Flow integration (7 existing skills updated):
- brainstorm, start, setup-engine, design-review, gate-check,
  project-stage-detect, game-concept template all reference /design-systems
  at the appropriate workflow touchpoints

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* Fix cross-platform bugs, add missing tool permissions, and update docs for v0.2.0

Hooks: fix \s → [[:space:]] in grep -E fallbacks (3 files), fix detect-gaps.sh
empty-variable bug, fix log-agent.sh field name (agent_name → agent_type),
harden validate-push.sh with explicit $MATCHED_BRANCH, convert for-in loops
to while-read for space-safe iteration, add POSIX head -n syntax, increase
PreCompact timeout, widen session-stop log window.

Skills: add AskUserQuestion to 10 skills and TodoWrite to 8 multi-phase skills.
Fix project-stage-detect template/output paths, tech-artist → technical-artist.

Docs: add /design-systems to all references (README, quick-start, workflow guide,
skills-reference), update skill count 35 → 36, remove stale AI artifacts from
COLLABORATIVE-DESIGN-PRINCIPLE.md, add AskUserQuestion note to examples README.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

.claude/docs/templates/collaborative-protocols/design-agent-protocol.md

@@ -16,12 +16,14 @@ Before proposing any design:
    - What are the constraints (scope, complexity, existing systems)?
    - Any reference games or mechanics the user loves/hates?
    - How does this connect to the game's pillars?
+   - *Use `AskUserQuestion` to batch up to 4 constrained questions at once*
 
 2. **Present 2-4 options with reasoning:**
    - Explain pros/cons for each option
    - Reference game design theory (MDA, SDT, Bartle, etc.)
    - Align each option with the user's stated goals
    - Make a recommendation, but explicitly defer the final decision to the user
+   - *After the full explanation, use `AskUserQuestion` to capture the decision*
 
 3. **Draft based on user's choice:**
    - Create sections iteratively (show one section, get feedback, refine)
@@ -102,4 +104,54 @@ You: [uses Write tool]
 - Explain WHY you recommend something (theory, examples, pillar alignment)
 - Iterate based on feedback without defensiveness
 - Celebrate when the user's modifications improve your suggestion
+
+#### Structured Decision UI
+
+Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool to present decisions as a selectable UI instead of
+plain text. Follow the **Explain → Capture** pattern:
+
+1. **Explain first** — Write your full analysis in conversation text: detailed
+   pros/cons, theory references, example games, pillar alignment. This is where
+   the expert reasoning lives — don't try to fit it into the tool.
+
+2. **Capture the decision** — Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise option labels
+   and short descriptions. The user picks from the UI or types a custom answer.
+
+**When to use it:**
+- Every decision point where you present 2-4 options (step 2)
+- Initial clarifying questions that have constrained answers (step 1)
+- Batch up to 4 independent questions in a single `AskUserQuestion` call
+- Next-step choices ("Draft formulas section or refine rules first?")
+
+**When NOT to use it:**
+- Open-ended discovery questions ("What excites you about roguelikes?")
+- Single yes/no confirmations ("May I write to file?")
+- When running as a Task subagent (tool may not be available) — structure your
+  text output so the orchestrator can present options via AskUserQuestion
+
+**Format guidelines:**
+- Labels: 1-5 words (e.g., "Hybrid Discovery", "Full Randomized")
+- Descriptions: 1 sentence summarizing the approach and key trade-off
+- Add "(Recommended)" to your preferred option's label
+- Use `markdown` previews for comparing code structures or formulas side-by-side
+
+**Example — multi-question batch for clarifying questions:**
+
+  AskUserQuestion with questions:
+    1. question: "Should crafting recipes be discovered or learned?"
+       header: "Discovery"
+       options: "Experimentation", "NPC/Book Learning", "Tiered Hybrid"
+    2. question: "How punishing should failed crafts be?"
+       header: "Failure"
+       options: "Materials Lost", "Partial Recovery", "No Loss"
+
+**Example — capturing a design decision (after full analysis in conversation):**
+
+  AskUserQuestion with questions:
+    1. question: "Which crafting approach fits your vision?"
+       header: "Approach"
+       options:
+         "Hybrid Discovery (Recommended)" — balances exploration and accessibility
+         "Full Discovery" — maximum mystery, risk of frustration
+         "Hint System" — accessible but less surprise
 ```

.claude/docs/templates/collaborative-protocols/implementation-agent-protocol.md

@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ Before writing any code:
    - "Where should [data] live? (CharacterStats? Equipment class? Config file?)"
    - "The design doc doesn't specify [edge case]. What should happen when...?"
    - "This will require changes to [other system]. Should I coordinate with that first?"
+   - *Use `AskUserQuestion` to batch constrained architecture questions*
 
 3. **Propose architecture before implementing:**
    - Show class structure, file organization, data flow
@@ -119,4 +120,33 @@ You: [creates tests/combat/test_damage_calculator.gd]
 - Flag deviations from design docs explicitly — designer should know if implementation differs
 - Rules are your friend — when they flag issues, they're usually right
 - Tests prove it works — offer to write them proactively
+
+#### Structured Decision UI
+
+Use the `AskUserQuestion` tool for architecture decisions and next-step choices.
+Follow the **Explain → Capture** pattern:
+
+1. **Explain first** — Describe the architectural options and trade-offs in
+   conversation text.
+2. **Capture the decision** — Call `AskUserQuestion` with concise option labels.
+
+**When to use it:**
+- Architecture questions with constrained answers (step 2)
+- Next-step choices ("Write tests, review code, or run code-review?")
+- Batch up to 4 independent architecture questions in one call
+
+**When NOT to use it:**
+- Open-ended spec clarifications — use conversation
+- Single confirmations ("May I write to file?")
+- When running as a Task subagent — structure text for orchestrator
+
+**Example — architecture questions (batch):**
+
+  AskUserQuestion with questions:
+    1. question: "Where should DamageCalculator live?"
+       header: "Architecture"
+       options: "Static Utility (Recommended)", "Autoload Singleton", "Scene Node"
+    2. question: "How should damage be rounded?"
+       header: "Rounding"
+       options: "Floor to Int (Recommended)", "Round to Int", "Keep Decimal"
 ```

.claude/docs/templates/collaborative-protocols/leadership-agent-protocol.md

@@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ When the user asks you to make a decision or resolve a conflict:
    - Ask questions to understand all perspectives
    - Review relevant docs (pillars, constraints, prior decisions)
    - Identify what's truly at stake (often deeper than the surface question)
+   - *Use `AskUserQuestion` to batch up to 4 constrained questions at once*
 
 2. **Frame the decision:**
    - State the core question clearly
@@ -28,6 +29,7 @@ When the user asks you to make a decision or resolve a conflict:
      - Downstream consequences (technical, creative, schedule, scope)
      - Risks and mitigation strategies
      - Real-world examples (how other games handled similar decisions)
+   - *After the full analysis, use `AskUserQuestion` to capture the decision*
 
 4. **Make a clear recommendation:**
    - "I recommend Option [X] because..."
@@ -141,4 +143,39 @@ You: [Creates ADR, updates docs, notifies relevant agents]
 - Use theory and precedent, but defer to user's contextual knowledge
 - Once decided, commit fully — document and cascade the decision
 - Set up success metrics — "we'll know this was right if..."
+
+#### Structured Decision UI
+
+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.
+
+**When to use it:**
+- Every strategic decision point (options in step 3, context questions in step 1)
+- Batch up to 4 independent questions in one call
+- Next-step choices after a decision is made
+
+**When NOT to use it:**
+- Open-ended context gathering ("Tell me about the investor relationship")
+- Single confirmations ("May I document this decision?")
+- When running as a Task subagent — structure text for orchestrator
+
+**Format guidelines:**
+- Labels: 1-5 words. Descriptions: 1 sentence with key trade-off.
+- Add "(Recommended)" to your preferred option's label
+- Use `markdown` previews for comparing architectural approaches
+
+**Example — strategic decision (after full analysis in conversation):**
+
+  AskUserQuestion with questions:
+    1. question: "How should we handle crafting scope for Alpha?"
+       header: "Scope"
+       options:
+         "Simplify to Core (Recommended)" — makes deadline, pillar visible
+         "Full Implementation" — slips Alpha by 1 week
+         "Cut Entirely" — deadline met, pillar missing
 ```