jsdlc-refine

# Refine cycle (指摘 → 修正 → 再レビュー) Request / arguments: $ARGUMENTS — the target document, optionally `max=<n>`. This skill owns the loop. It does not own the checks: at every step it uses the artifact's own skill, so detail-design rules apply to a detail design and test case rules to a test specification. Never inline those rules here. Read `docs-jsdlc/rules/review-checklist.md` §1 (severity) and §9 (defect feedback) before starting. ## Resolve the artifact skill | Target file prefix | Skill to use each cycle | |---|---| | `BD-` | `jsdlc-basic-design` | | `DD-` | `jsdlc-detail-design` | | `API-` | `jsdlc-api-spec` | | `UT-` / `IT-` / `ST-` | `jsdlc-test-case` | | source code | `jsdlc-implement` | | mixed or unclear | `jsdlc-review` for review, then the owning skill for each fix | ## The loop ``` cycle = 0 max = 3 unless the user gave max=<n> LOOP: 1. Run <artifact skill> in review mode. Count NG and 要確認. Record the checks run, and keep the 要確認 list itself — not just its length. 2. IF cycle > 0: reconcile this cycle's 要確認 against the last. Every one that is gone must be gone for a stated reason: it is now a `Q-NNN` in `open-questions.md`, or the user answered it in this session. A 要確認 that disappeared because the document now asserts an answer is a new NG — the loop answered a question that was not its to answer. Restore it, count it, and do not exit this cycle. 3. IF NG == 0 and step 2 found nothing: -> exit the loop, go to Report. (要確認 remaining is not a failure. It is a decision waiting for a human, and the loop must never resolve one.) 4. IF cycle >= max: -> STOP. Do not fix anything further. -> Report: "<max> cycles run, <n> NG still open." -> List each surviving NG with why it did not close. -> Ask the user to choose: keep going, accept with the NG recorded as risk, or abort. Never choose for them. 5. Run <artifact skill> in modify mode against the newest review report. Fix every NG. Apply the §9 follow-through for each NG class. 6. Re-check only the sections touched in step 5 before looping — a fix that creates a new NG must be caught in the same cycle, not the next one. 7. cycle++, LOOP ``` ## Rules that hold at every cycle 1. **A clean count is not a pass.** Zero NG only means zero NG *found*. If a cycle ran fewer checks than the previous cycle, say so — the drop is more interesting than the count. 2. **Never close an NG by lowering its severity.** Reclassifying an NG as 要確認 to end the loop is itself an NG, and the loop must report it. 3. **要確認 never blocks the exit and never gets decided.** They accumulate in the register with a provisional assumption and a named decider. Writing a confident answer into the document — a transaction scope, a cut-off time, a locking strategy the code does not show — is not closing the question, it is inventing the answer. Every 要確認 raised in any cycle appears in the final report and in `open-questions.md`; a run that ends with fewer questions than it raised has lost some, and must say which. 4. **Every cycle leaves a trace.** One review report per cycle, dated and numbered — `<target>-review-<YYYYMMDD>-c<n>.md` from the second cycle on. The client's reviewer reads the sequence, not just the last file. 5. **A cycle that changes nothing ends the loop.** If modify mode reports no edits, stop and escalate: the findings are not actionable as written. ## Report State, in this order: - Cycles run, and why the loop ended (clean / limit / no-change). - NG at cycle 1 → NG at exit. - Every NG closed, with the follow-through applied to each (§9). - Every 要確認 promoted, with its `Q-NNN` and decider. - Any NG still open, quoted, with what is blocking it. - Total checks run in the final cycle. Do not report a document as finished while an NG is open. Say plainly that it still fails, and what the client's reviewer will find.