| name | release-archivist |
| description | Close out a spec-superflow change with verification, summary, and archive readiness. Invoke when implementation is complete, verification is underway, or the user asks for a final wrap-up. |
Release Archivist
Finish a spec-superflow change cleanly with verification evidence.
The Iron Law: Verification Before Completion
Claiming work is complete without verification is dishonesty, not efficiency. Before claiming any status:
- IDENTIFY the command that proves the claim
- RUN the full command fresh
- READ output, check exit code
- VERIFY output confirms the claim
- Only THEN make the claim
Forbidden before evidence: "should", "probably", "seems to", expressions of satisfaction without output.
| Claim | Requires | Not Sufficient |
|---|
| Tests pass | Test output: 0 failures | Previous run, "should pass" |
| Linter clean | Linter output: 0 errors | Partial check |
| Build succeeds | Build exit 0 | Linter passing |
| Bug fixed | Original symptom passes | Code changed |
| Requirements met | Line-by-line checklist | Tests passing |
Verification Steps
Step 1: Test Suite
Run full test suite. Record total/passed/failed/skipped. Zero failures = PASS.
Step 2: Completeness
Compare contract batches against actual diff. Every SHALL/MUST must have implementation evidence. Missing = Critical severity.
Step 3: Coherence
Compare design decisions against code. Check naming consistency. Inconsistencies = IMPORTANT.
Step 4: Unintended Scope
Check for files modified outside scope fence, new dependencies not in design. Unplanned = WARN.
Step 5: Report
| Dimension | Status | Findings |
|---|
| Completeness | PASS/FAIL/WARN | [list] |
| Correctness | PASS/FAIL/WARN | [list] |
| Coherence | PASS/FAIL/WARN | [list] |
Verdict: PASS (all PASS) / CONDITIONAL (WARN only) / FAIL (any FAIL).
- FAIL → fix issues or route back to build-executor
- CONDITIONAL → present WARNs, proceed only with user acceptance
- PASS → proceed to final checks
Final Checks
- Tests passing? (cite command and output)
- All batches complete? (cite batch status)
- Scope added without artifact updates?
- Unresolved blockers or known risks?
- Delta specs exist that need merging?
- Run
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/spec-superflow.mjs" audit <change-dir> — include decision-point-audit.md in archive
DP-6 (Verification Outcome)
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/spec-superflow.mjs" state set <change-dir> dp_6_result "<pass|conditional|fail>: <summary>"
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/spec-superflow.mjs" state set <change-dir> dp_6_timestamp $(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)
If FAIL, do NOT proceed to DP-7. Route back or ask about abandonment.
After recording a PASS outcome, also record it as the verification gate so the
executing → closing transition is allowed (the guard accepts either
test_result: pass or a dp_6_result starting with pass):
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/spec-superflow.mjs" state set <change-dir> test_result pass
DP-7 (Archive Confirmation)
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/spec-superflow.mjs" state set <change-dir> dp_7_result "confirmed: <archive summary>"
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/spec-superflow.mjs" state set <change-dir> dp_7_timestamp $(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)
Verify DP-0 through DP-6 are recorded before DP-7.
Archive Rule
If implementation diverged from the contract, return to bridging before closure.
Post-Verification
Run node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/spec-superflow.mjs" state transition <change-dir> closing. If delta specs exist, route to spec-merger.
Lightweight Closure (hotfix/tweak)
Verify files exist and are non-empty, run node --check on code files, skip 5-step verification. Still record DP-6 and DP-7.
Exception Handling
- Parse failures: Report exact file and section
- Missing files: If audit can't generate, run
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/spec-superflow.mjs" audit manually
- User interruption: Re-run verification from the beginning on resume
- DP gaps: Flag missing DPs during DP-6; ask user whether to proceed or return
