Closes#24.
**The review node ran nothing.** Both templates declared
`/superpowers:requesting-code-review` — the skill about how to HAND OVER a
review, not one that reviews anything — so `agenthub lanes node review`
performed no review at all. They now declare the bare `/code-review`, Claude
Code's own. It carries no `plugin:` prefix, so `requiredSkillPlugins` skips it
and the doctor's required-plugin row is unchanged (verified against the live
function: still exactly the five superpowers skills the templates name).
**The rest is the brainstorm → implement → review span, made cheaper to run and
harder to lose track of.** `ship-feature` gains four sections it never had:
- **Right-size the run.** The pipeline is not free — every dispatching phase
costs a model call and minutes, and the fix-loop pays it again each lap. A
typo does not enter the pipeline at all; a small single-layer change skips the
plan-debate, independent-test and gate agents and lets the user's acceptance
be the gate; medium/large runs everything. Sizing is a claim made out loud,
and a task that grows re-sizes upward.
- **Dispatching a judgement.** The fresh-context/FOREGROUND/never-`fork`/
hand-only-verifiable-artifacts/one-parseable-line contract, written once
instead of re-argued in three phases — plus the rule that was missing
entirely: never dispatch what a command answers. An agent is for judgement,
not for typing.
- **Resuming after a compaction.** Long runs outlive the context window; the
lane skill had this and this one did not. Re-derive position from the declared
stage and the diff, and treat a phase whose evidence you cannot find as one
that did not happen.
- **A `Leave when:` line on every phase.** Objective exit criteria are what stop
both the silent skip and the endless polish: intake leaves when the answers
are in hand, review leaves when the latest pass over the CURRENT diff is
clean, the gate leaves when verification really ran AND the user said yes.
And, narrower: intake asks only what the repo cannot answer (a question the code
could have answered spends the user's round and earns a worse answer);
implement works the approved plan task by task, re-checks each acceptance
criterion, heartbeats on long work, and treats a plan that turns out wrong as a
return to `plan` rather than a quiet substitution; tests runs the suite the diff
needs rather than both by reflex.
nntrivi2001
eab7c437df