Sync generated provider output

Author: github-actions[bot]

.agents/skills/impeccable/agents/impeccable_finish_reviewer.toml

@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ Expect: the original request; the confirmed user answers; the artifact path(s);
 ## Checks, in order
 
 1. **Persistence.** PRODUCT.md exists. When DESIGN.md predates this build (an extension or redesign), it matches the built world; on a new world it is written after this review by the documenter, so its absence here is not a finding. When comps exist under `.impeccable/mocks/`, an approval record exists too, the surface brief naming the approved comp or an `approved` flag in its sidecar; comps with no recorded pick mean the approval point was skipped, and that is a material finding.
-2. **Fidelity.** Against your own element inventory of the approved comp, never against the contract's summary of it: topology, reading order, focal scale, overlaps and z-order, density, signature geometry, navigation items and icons, headline levels and scale relationships. Classify every salient element: match, acceptable adaptation, missing, contradicted, or added without approval. Two rows are mandatory in every matrix. TYPE: the display lettering's character, compression, width, weight, contrast, terminals, against the comp's; a face of a different character is contradicted however the layout matches. MATERIAL: an element rendered as flat CSS or clean vector where the comp shows painted, textured, dimensional, or photographic material is contradicted regardless of placement, because medium is part of the promise. When no approved comp was supplied, TYPE and MATERIAL do not lapse: judge them against the contract's OWN-WORLD and the world's real materials, and treat faked physicality, CSS bevels, embossing, stamped-metal or chalk effects imitating a material the page never actually renders, as contradicted on its face; imitation material is the single most reliable mark of machine-made design. An adaptation counts as intentional only when it cites the user answer, surface brief, accessibility need, or product truth that forced it; an uncited deviation is a defect. A missing signature element, a changed topology, or content added without approval fails fidelity and outranks every craft point in material_fixes. When MATERIAL is contradicted on the focal element, or contradiction is the page rather than the exception, stop ordering repairs: make the first material fix a rebuild directive naming the comp regions to re-derive and the assets to produce; a list of patches against a rejected page launders the rejection into an approval. In every material_fixes list, a fix that requires producing an asset says so explicitly ("produce: <region> as a raster asset"), never phrased as a style adjustment the parent will answer with CSS. The comp is the spec for composition, topology, element inventory, density, lettering character, and material; it is not a pixel spec for semantics, accessibility, or responsive reflow, and that allowance covers translation, never replacement.
+2. **Fidelity.** Against your own element inventory of the approved comp, never against the contract's summary of it: topology, reading order, focal scale, overlaps and z-order, density, signature geometry, the primary action's treatment (a CTA the comp physically works, dissolves, or stamps is a signature element, and its plain-rectangle rendition is contradicted), navigation items and icons, headline levels and scale relationships. Classify every salient element: match, acceptable adaptation, missing, contradicted, or added without approval. Two rows are mandatory in every matrix. TYPE: the display lettering's character, compression, width, weight, contrast, terminals, against the comp's; a face of a different character is contradicted however the layout matches. MATERIAL: an element rendered as flat CSS or clean vector where the comp shows painted, textured, dimensional, or photographic material is contradicted regardless of placement, because medium is part of the promise. When no approved comp was supplied, TYPE and MATERIAL do not lapse: judge them against the contract's OWN-WORLD and the world's real materials, and treat faked physicality, CSS bevels, embossing, stamped-metal or chalk effects imitating a material the page never actually renders, as contradicted on its face; imitation material is the single most reliable mark of machine-made design. An adaptation counts as intentional only when it cites the user answer, surface brief, accessibility need, or product truth that forced it; an uncited deviation is a defect. A missing signature element, a changed topology, or content added without approval fails fidelity and outranks every craft point in material_fixes. When MATERIAL is contradicted on the focal element, or contradiction is the page rather than the exception, stop ordering repairs: make the first material fix a rebuild directive naming the comp regions to re-derive and the assets to produce; a list of patches against a rejected page launders the rejection into an approval. In every material_fixes list, a fix that requires producing an asset says so explicitly ("produce: <region> as a raster asset"), never phrased as a style adjustment the parent will answer with CSS. The comp is the spec for composition, topology, element inventory, density, lettering character, and material; it is not a pixel spec for semantics, accessibility, or responsive reflow, and that allowance covers translation, never replacement.
 3. **Ceiling.** Against the QUALITY BAR card: name the world's native devices the build left unused, frame, depth, lettering treatment, ornament density, motion. The card governs commitment and finish, never composition.
 4. **Contract, promise by promise.** First verify FORM carries the seed key the concept roll printed; a contract with no seed key, or one the parent cannot corroborate, means the roll was skipped and that is a material fix ahead of any craft point. Then, for each of the five blocks, does the render keep the promise? Apply the memory test to the first viewport.
 5. **Truth.** Demonstration data authored and labeled synthetic; no invented commercial claims; unanswered claims present as marked placeholders, not omissions. Every image-native region of the approved comp shipped as a real asset, not a gradient standing in for one, and every produced asset visibly present in the screenshots; an asset applied at near-zero opacity or buried behind other paint is a compliance token, not a shipped material.

.agents/skills/impeccable/reference/degraded/finish-reviewer.md

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ Expect: the original request; the confirmed user answers; the artifact path(s);
 ## Checks, in order
 
 1. **Persistence.** PRODUCT.md exists. When DESIGN.md predates this build (an extension or redesign), it matches the built world; on a new world it is written after this review by the documenter, so its absence here is not a finding. When comps exist under `.impeccable/mocks/`, an approval record exists too, the surface brief naming the approved comp or an `approved` flag in its sidecar; comps with no recorded pick mean the approval point was skipped, and that is a material finding.
-2. **Fidelity.** Against your own element inventory of the approved comp, never against the contract's summary of it: topology, reading order, focal scale, overlaps and z-order, density, signature geometry, navigation items and icons, headline levels and scale relationships. Classify every salient element: match, acceptable adaptation, missing, contradicted, or added without approval. Two rows are mandatory in every matrix. TYPE: the display lettering's character, compression, width, weight, contrast, terminals, against the comp's; a face of a different character is contradicted however the layout matches. MATERIAL: an element rendered as flat CSS or clean vector where the comp shows painted, textured, dimensional, or photographic material is contradicted regardless of placement, because medium is part of the promise. When no approved comp was supplied, TYPE and MATERIAL do not lapse: judge them against the contract's OWN-WORLD and the world's real materials, and treat faked physicality, CSS bevels, embossing, stamped-metal or chalk effects imitating a material the page never actually renders, as contradicted on its face; imitation material is the single most reliable mark of machine-made design. An adaptation counts as intentional only when it cites the user answer, surface brief, accessibility need, or product truth that forced it; an uncited deviation is a defect. A missing signature element, a changed topology, or content added without approval fails fidelity and outranks every craft point in material_fixes. When MATERIAL is contradicted on the focal element, or contradiction is the page rather than the exception, stop ordering repairs: make the first material fix a rebuild directive naming the comp regions to re-derive and the assets to produce; a list of patches against a rejected page launders the rejection into an approval. In every material_fixes list, a fix that requires producing an asset says so explicitly ("produce: <region> as a raster asset"), never phrased as a style adjustment the parent will answer with CSS. The comp is the spec for composition, topology, element inventory, density, lettering character, and material; it is not a pixel spec for semantics, accessibility, or responsive reflow, and that allowance covers translation, never replacement.
+2. **Fidelity.** Against your own element inventory of the approved comp, never against the contract's summary of it: topology, reading order, focal scale, overlaps and z-order, density, signature geometry, the primary action's treatment (a CTA the comp physically works, dissolves, or stamps is a signature element, and its plain-rectangle rendition is contradicted), navigation items and icons, headline levels and scale relationships. Classify every salient element: match, acceptable adaptation, missing, contradicted, or added without approval. Two rows are mandatory in every matrix. TYPE: the display lettering's character, compression, width, weight, contrast, terminals, against the comp's; a face of a different character is contradicted however the layout matches. MATERIAL: an element rendered as flat CSS or clean vector where the comp shows painted, textured, dimensional, or photographic material is contradicted regardless of placement, because medium is part of the promise. When no approved comp was supplied, TYPE and MATERIAL do not lapse: judge them against the contract's OWN-WORLD and the world's real materials, and treat faked physicality, CSS bevels, embossing, stamped-metal or chalk effects imitating a material the page never actually renders, as contradicted on its face; imitation material is the single most reliable mark of machine-made design. An adaptation counts as intentional only when it cites the user answer, surface brief, accessibility need, or product truth that forced it; an uncited deviation is a defect. A missing signature element, a changed topology, or content added without approval fails fidelity and outranks every craft point in material_fixes. When MATERIAL is contradicted on the focal element, or contradiction is the page rather than the exception, stop ordering repairs: make the first material fix a rebuild directive naming the comp regions to re-derive and the assets to produce; a list of patches against a rejected page launders the rejection into an approval. In every material_fixes list, a fix that requires producing an asset says so explicitly ("produce: <region> as a raster asset"), never phrased as a style adjustment the parent will answer with CSS. The comp is the spec for composition, topology, element inventory, density, lettering character, and material; it is not a pixel spec for semantics, accessibility, or responsive reflow, and that allowance covers translation, never replacement.
 3. **Ceiling.** Against the QUALITY BAR card: name the world's native devices the build left unused, frame, depth, lettering treatment, ornament density, motion. The card governs commitment and finish, never composition.
 4. **Contract, promise by promise.** First verify FORM carries the seed key the concept roll printed; a contract with no seed key, or one the parent cannot corroborate, means the roll was skipped and that is a material fix ahead of any craft point. Then, for each of the five blocks, does the render keep the promise? Apply the memory test to the first viewport.
 5. **Truth.** Demonstration data authored and labeled synthetic; no invented commercial claims; unanswered claims present as marked placeholders, not omissions. Every image-native region of the approved comp shipped as a real asset, not a gradient standing in for one, and every produced asset visibly present in the screenshots; an asset applied at near-zero opacity or buried behind other paint is a compliance token, not a shipped material.

.agents/skills/impeccable/reference/visualize.md

@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ After approval, record the choice where tools can find it: the approved comp's p
 
 ## Inventory implementation fidelity
 
-Before building, inventory the approved comp's major visible ingredients in writing (a short table in the surface brief or working notes; the finish reviewer audits shipped assets against it) and choose an implementation medium for each: semantic HTML/CSS/SVG, existing project asset, generated raster, sourced raster, icon library, canvas/WebGL, or accepted omission. The same written inventory names the comp's compositional commitments: navigation items and icons, headline levels and their scale relationship, signature geometry such as seams, masks, and overlaps, and each section's arrangement and density. An element never written down is the element the build silently drops, and the direction contract's 150 words cannot carry this list, so this inventory is where it lives.
+Before building, inventory the approved comp's major visible ingredients in writing (a short table in the surface brief or working notes; the finish reviewer audits shipped assets against it) and choose an implementation medium for each: semantic HTML/CSS/SVG, existing project asset, generated raster, sourced raster, icon library, canvas/WebGL, or accepted omission. The same written inventory names the comp's compositional commitments: navigation items and icons, headline levels and their scale relationship, signature geometry such as seams, masks, and overlaps, and each section's arrangement and density. The primary action gets its own row with its own medium: when the comp dissolves, stamps, erodes, or otherwise physically works the main CTA, that treatment is signature material on the page's most important element, and shrinking it to a border trick or a few decorative pixels is the compliance-token version of commitment. An element never written down is the element the build silently drops, and the direction contract's 150 words cannot carry this list, so this inventory is where it lives.
 
 The medium column is where an approved design most often dies, so it obeys a gate: the medium is decided by what the comp region shows, never by what feels buildable in the current stack. A human figure, a product object, machinery, or any material with lighting and depth is raster whatever the stack; writing "silhouette" for a photographic figure, or "CSS" for a sculpted panel's finish, is not a medium choice, it is the quiet deletion of the approved design, and it is how a comp full of physical material becomes a flat page with the same section order. Style does not move this boundary: a comp region with perspective, shading, figure drawing, or dense mechanical detail is illustration however line-drawn it looks, and no build session can author illustration as vectors, so it regenerates as raster like any photograph. Authored SVG covers what a session can specify exactly, diagrams with countable elements, controls, flat shape systems, and it ends where drawing skill begins; an instruction-manual world does not convert its illustrations into diagrams, it makes them line-art illustrations. Produce such regions by regenerating them cleanly, with the approved comp and its embedded prompt as the reference for a fresh render at asset resolution; never crop pixels out of the comp itself, whose effective resolution sits far below asset grade. Dropping an image-native region instead of producing it is a scope decision the user makes at the approval point, never a silent flattening after it. Generated imagery is a material, not a claim: evidence rules bind assertions, specs, testimonials, and photographs presented as real, never render fidelity, so "no photography on hand" forbids fake proof, not an illustrated hero.