feat(v4): add core-next & cli-next packages with integration/E2E test…

.agents/skills/continual-learning/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+---
+name: continual-learning
+description: Guide for implementing continual learning in AI coding agents — hooks, memory scoping, reflection patterns. Use when setting up learning infrastructure for agents.
+---
+
+# Continual Learning for AI Coding Agents
+
+Your agent forgets everything between sessions. Continual learning fixes that.
+
+## The Loop
+
+```
+Experience → Capture → Reflect → Persist → Apply
+     ↑                                       │
+     └───────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+## Quick Start
+
+Install the hook (one step):
+```bash
+cp -r hooks/continual-learning .github/hooks/
+```
+
+Auto-initializes on first session. No config needed.
+
+## Two-Tier Memory
+
+**Global** (`~/.copilot/learnings.db`) — follows you across all projects:
+- Tool patterns (which tools fail, which work)
+- Cross-project conventions
+- General coding preferences
+
+**Local** (`.copilot-memory/learnings.db`) — stays with this repo:
+- Project-specific conventions
+- Common mistakes for this codebase
+- Team preferences
+
+## How Learnings Get Stored
+
+### Automatic (via hooks)
+The hook observes tool outcomes and detects failure patterns:
+```
+Session 1: bash tool fails 4 times → learning stored: "bash frequently fails"
+Session 2: hook surfaces that learning at start → agent adjusts approach
+```
+
+### Agent-native (via store_memory / SQL)
+The agent can write learnings directly:
+```sql
+INSERT INTO learnings (scope, category, content, source)
+VALUES ('local', 'convention', 'This project uses Result<T> not exceptions', 'user_correction');
+```
+
+Categories: `pattern`, `mistake`, `preference`, `tool_insight`
+
+### Manual (memory files)
+For human-readable, version-controlled knowledge:
+```markdown
+# .copilot-memory/conventions.md
+- Use DefaultAzureCredential for all Azure auth
+- Parameter is semantic_configuration_name=, not semantic_configuration=
+```
+
+## Compaction
+
+Learnings decay over time:
+- Entries older than 60 days with low hit count are pruned
+- High-value learnings (frequently referenced) persist indefinitely
+- Tool logs are pruned after 7 days
+
+This prevents unbounded growth while preserving what matters.
+
+## Best Practices
+
+1. **One step to install** — if it takes more than `cp -r`, it won't get adopted
+2. **Scope correctly** — global for tool patterns, local for project conventions
+3. **Be specific** — `"Use semantic_configuration_name="` beats `"use the right parameter"`
+4. **Let it compound** — small improvements per session create exponential gains over weeks

.agents/skills/frontend-design-review/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,138 @@
+---
+name: frontend-design-review
+description: >
+  Review and create distinctive, production-grade frontend interfaces with high design quality and design system compliance.
+  Evaluates using three pillars: frictionless insight-to-action, quality craft, and trustworthy building.
+  USE FOR: PR reviews, design reviews, accessibility audits, design system compliance checks, creative frontend design,
+  UI code review, component reviews, responsive design checks, theme testing, and creating memorable UI.
+  DO NOT USE FOR: Backend API reviews, database schema reviews, infrastructure or DevOps work, pure business logic
+  without UI, or non-frontend code.
+acknowledgments: |
+  Design review principles and quality pillar framework created by @Quirinevwm (https://github.com/Quirinevwm).
+  Creative frontend guidance inspired by Anthropic's frontend-design skill
+  (https://github.com/anthropics/skills/tree/main/skills/frontend-design). Licensed under respective terms.
+---
+
+# Frontend Design Review
+
+Review UI implementations against design quality standards and your design system **OR** create distinctive, production-grade frontend interfaces from scratch.
+
+## Two Modes
+
+### Mode 1: Design Review
+Evaluate existing UI for design system compliance, three quality pillars (Frictionless, Quality Craft, Trustworthy), accessibility, and code quality.
+
+### Mode 2: Creative Frontend Design
+Create distinctive interfaces that avoid generic "AI slop" aesthetics, have clear conceptual direction, and execute with precision.
+
+---
+
+## Creative Frontend Design
+
+Before coding, commit to an aesthetic direction:
+- **Purpose**: What problem does this solve? Who uses it?
+- **Tone**: minimal, maximalist, retro-futuristic, organic, luxury, playful, editorial, brutalist, art deco, soft/pastel, industrial, etc.
+- **Constraints**: Framework, performance, accessibility requirements.
+- **Differentiation**: What makes this distinctive and context-appropriate?
+
+### Aesthetics Guidelines
+
+- **Typography**: Distinctive fonts that elevate aesthetics. Pair a display font with a refined body font. Avoid Inter, Roboto, Arial, Space Grotesk.
+- **Color & Theme**: Cohesive palette with CSS variables. Dominant colors + sharp accents > timid, evenly-distributed palettes.
+- **Motion**: CSS-only preferred. One well-orchestrated page load with staggered reveals > scattered micro-interactions.
+- **Spatial Composition**: Asymmetry, overlap, diagonal flow, grid-breaking elements, generous negative space OR controlled density.
+- **Backgrounds**: Gradient meshes, noise textures, geometric patterns, layered transparencies, dramatic shadows, grain overlays.
+
+**AVOID**: Overused fonts, cliched color schemes, predictable layouts, cookie-cutter design without context-specific character.
+
+Match implementation complexity to vision. Maximalist = elaborate code. Minimalist = restraint and precision.
+
+---
+
+## Design Review
+
+### Design System Workflow
+
+**Before implementing:**
+1. Review component in your Storybook / component library for API and usage
+2. Use Figma Dev Mode to get exact specs (spacing, tokens, properties)
+3. Implement using design system components + design tokens
+
+**During review:**
+1. Compare implementation to Figma design
+2. Verify design tokens are used (not hardcoded values)
+3. Check all variants/states are implemented correctly
+4. Flag deviations (needs design approval)
+
+**If component doesn't exist:**
+1. Check if existing component can be adapted
+2. Reach out to design for new component creation
+3. Document exception and rationale in code
+
+### Review Process
+
+1. Identify user task
+2. Check design system for matching patterns
+3. Evaluate aesthetic direction
+4. Identify scope (component, feature, or flow)
+5. Evaluate each pillar
+6. Score and prioritize issues (blocking/major/minor)
+7. Provide recommendations with design system examples
+
+### Core Principles
+
+- **Task completion**: Minimum clicks. Every screen answers "What can I do?" and "What happens next?"
+- **Action hierarchy**: 1-2 primary actions per view. Progressive disclosure for secondary.
+- **Onboarding**: Explain features on introduction. Smart defaults over configuration.
+- **Navigation**: Clear entry/exit points. Back/cancel always available. Breadcrumbs for deep flows.
+
+---
+
+## Quality Pillars
+
+### 1. Frictionless Insight to Action
+
+**Evaluate:** Task completable in ≤3 interactions? Primary action obvious and singular?
+
+**Red flags:** Excessive clicks, multiple competing primary buttons, buried actions, dead ends.
+
+### 2. Quality is Craft
+
+**Evaluate:**
+- Design system compliance: matches Figma specs, uses design tokens
+- Aesthetic direction: distinctive typography, cohesive colors, intentional motion
+- Accessibility: Grade C minimum (WCAG 2.1 A), Grade B ideal (WCAG 2.1 AA)
+
+**Red flags:** Generic AI aesthetics, hardcoded values, implementation doesn't match Figma, broken reflow, missing focus indicators.
+
+### 3. Trustworthy Building
+
+**Evaluate:**
+- AI transparency: disclaimer on AI-generated content
+- Error transparency: actionable error messages
+
+**Red flags:** Missing AI disclaimers, opaque errors without guidance.
+
+---
+
+## Review Output Format
+
+See [references/review-output-format.md](references/review-output-format.md) for the full review template.
+
+## Review Type Modifiers
+
+See [references/review-type-modifiers.md](references/review-type-modifiers.md) for context-specific review focus areas (PR, Creative, Design, Accessibility).
+
+## Quick Checklist
+
+See [references/quick-checklist.md](references/quick-checklist.md) for the pre-approval checklist covering design system compliance, aesthetic quality, frictionless, quality craft, and trustworthy pillars.
+
+## Pattern Examples
+
+See [references/pattern-examples.md](references/pattern-examples.md) for good/bad examples of creative frontend and design system review work.
+
+---
+
+## Acknowledgments
+
+Creative frontend principles inspired by [Anthropic's frontend-design skill](https://github.com/anthropics/skills/tree/main/skills/frontend-design). Design review principles and quality pillar framework created by [@Quirinevwm](https://github.com/Quirinevwm) for systematic UI evaluation.

.agents/skills/frontend-design-review/references/pattern-examples.md

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+# Pattern Examples
+
+## Creative Frontend (New Interfaces)
+
+### Good: Clear Aesthetic Direction
+- Landing page with brutalist aesthetic: Raw typography (Neue Haas Grotesk), stark black and white, asymmetric layouts
+- Dashboard with organic theme: Rounded forms, earth tones, flowing animations, textured backgrounds
+
+### Bad: Generic AI Aesthetic
+- Overused fonts, cliched color schemes, centered content, generic card layouts
+
+## Design System Review (Existing Work)
+
+### Good: Frictionless
+- Single primary button, clear task completion path
+
+### Good: Quality Craft
+- Uses design system with tokens, distinctive typography, keyboard accessible, tested in themes
+
+### Bad: Quality Craft
+- Hardcoded values, generic overused fonts, poor contrast in dark mode

.agents/skills/frontend-design-review/references/quick-checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+# Quick Checklist
+
+Before approving any UI work:
+
+## Design System Compliance
+- [ ] Component verified in your Figma Design System
+- [ ] Component implementation checked in your Component Library
+- [ ] Figma Dev Mode specs followed (spacing, tokens, typography)
+- [ ] Design tokens used (no hardcoded hex colors or pixel values)
+- [ ] Token imports verified in code
+- [ ] All variants/states implemented as designed in Figma
+- [ ] Spacing measurements match Figma Dev Mode exactly
+- [ ] Deviations documented with design approval
+
+## Aesthetic Quality (especially for new designs)
+- [ ] Clear conceptual direction (not generic overused fonts and cliched schemes)
+- [ ] Distinctive typography (avoid overused fonts)
+- [ ] Cohesive color palette with CSS variables
+- [ ] Intentional motion (staggered reveals, hover states)
+- [ ] Visual interest through composition (asymmetry, overlap, grid-breaking)
+- [ ] Atmosphere through backgrounds (gradients, textures, patterns)
+- [ ] Implementation complexity matches vision
+
+## Frictionless
+- [ ] Core task completable efficiently (≤3 interactions)
+- [ ] Single clear primary action per view
+
+## Quality Craft
+- [ ] Uses design system components (verified in Figma)
+- [ ] Design tokens used (no hardcoded values)
+- [ ] Distinctive aesthetic (not generic overused fonts/cliched schemes)
+- [ ] Accessible (Grade C minimum, Grade B ideal)
+- [ ] Keyboard navigation complete
+- [ ] Tested in light/dark/high contrast modes
+
+## Trustworthy
+- [ ] AI-generated content has disclaimer
+- [ ] Error messages are actionable

.agents/skills/frontend-design-review/references/review-output-format.md

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+# Review Output Format
+
+```
+## Frontend Design Review: [Component/Feature Name]
+
+### Context
+- **Purpose**: What problem does this solve? Who uses it?
+- **Aesthetic Direction**: [If new design: describe the bold conceptual direction]
+- **User Task**: What is the user trying to accomplish?
+
+### Summary
+[Pass/Needs Work/Blocked] - [One-line assessment]
+
+### Design System Compliance (if applicable)
+- [ ] Component exists in [Your Figma Design System]
+- [ ] Component usage verified in [Your Component Library]
+- [ ] Implementation matches Figma specs (spacing, colors, typography)
+- [ ] Uses design tokens (not hardcoded values) - verified in code
+- [ ] All variants match design system options
+- [ ] Spacing verified against Figma Dev Mode
+- [ ] Documented exception if deviating from design system
+
+### Aesthetic Quality (especially for new designs)
+- [ ] Clear conceptual direction (not generic AI aesthetic)
+- [ ] Distinctive typography choices
+- [ ] Cohesive color palette with CSS variables
+- [ ] Intentional motion and micro-interactions
+- [ ] Spatial composition creates visual interest
+- [ ] Backgrounds and visual details add atmosphere
+
+### Pillar Assessment
+
+| Pillar | Status | Notes |
+|--------|--------|-------|
+| Frictionless | 🟢/🟠/⚫ | Task completion efficient, primary action clear |
+| Quality Craft | 🟢/🟠/⚫ | Design system compliant, aesthetic distinctive, accessible |
+| Trustworthy | 🟢/🟠/⚫ | AI disclaimers present, errors actionable |
+
+**Legend:** 🟢 Pass | 🟠 Needs attention | ⚫ Blocking issue
+
+### Design Critique
+**Verdict:** [Pass / Needs work / Reach out to design for more support]
+
+**Rationale:** [Brief explanation based on pillar assessment, design system compliance, and aesthetic direction]
+
+**Criteria:**
+- **Pass**: All pillars 🟢 or minor 🟠 that don't block user tasks, design system compliant, clear aesthetic direction
+- **Needs work**: Multiple 🟠 or any critical workflow issues, design system deviations, or generic aesthetic choices
+- **Reach out to design for more support**: Any ⚫ blocking issues, fundamental pattern problems, major design system violations, or need for aesthetic direction
+
+### Issues
+
+**Blocking (must fix before merge):**
+1. [Pillar/Design System/Aesthetic] Issue description + recommendation with link
+
+**Major (should fix):**
+1. [Pillar/Design System/Aesthetic] Issue description + pattern suggestion with reference
+
+**Minor (consider for refinement):**
+1. [Pillar/Design System/Aesthetic] Issue description + optional improvement
+
+### Recommendations
+- [Design system component to use with link]
+- [Specific code change with design token reference]
+- [Typography recommendation for better aesthetic direction]
+- [Motion/animation suggestion]
+- [Link to design system in Figma]
+```

.agents/skills/frontend-design-review/references/review-type-modifiers.md

@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+# Review Type Modifiers
+
+Adjust focus based on review context:
+
+## PR Review
+- **Focus**: Code implementation, design system component usage, design token usage, accessibility in code
+- **Check**: Proper imports, design tokens used (not hardcoded), ARIA attributes present
+- **Verify**: Component matches Figma specs using Dev Mode
+
+## Creative Frontend Review
+- **Focus**: Aesthetic direction, typography choices, visual distinctiveness, motion design
+- **Check**: Clear conceptual intent, avoiding generic AI patterns, cohesive execution
+- **Verify**: Implementation complexity matches vision (maximalist needs elaborate code, minimalist needs precision)
+
+## Design Review
+- **Focus**: User flows, interaction patterns, visual hierarchy, navigation, design system alignment
+- **Check**: Task completion path, action hierarchy, progressive disclosure
+- **Verify**: All components exist in design system or have documented exceptions
+
+## Accessibility Audit
+- **Focus**: Deep dive Quality Craft pillar
+- **Check**: Keyboard testing, screen reader testing, contrast ratios, ARIA patterns
+- **Test with**: Screen readers (NVDA, JAWS, Narrator), keyboard only, 200% zoom
+- **Verify**: Design system accessibility features are properly implemented
+
+## Design System Compliance Audit
+- **Focus**: Deep dive design system usage
+- **Check**: All components match Figma specs, design tokens used throughout, no hardcoded values
+- **Test**: Compare implementation side-by-side with Figma using Dev Mode
+- **Verify**: Component variants, spacing, colors, typography all match design system
+- **Document**: Any deviations with rationale and plan to align