Source profileQuality 98/100

vasilyu1983/AI-Agents-public/frameworks/shared-skills/skills/research-git/SKILL.md

research-git

Scans public GitHub repos for agent skills, dev practices, and code patterns. Use when enriching skills, setting team policy, or researching a build domain.

Source repository stars
80
Declared platforms
2
Static risk flags
2
Last source update
2026-08-21
Source checked
2026-08-25

Decision brief

What it does: where it fits

Scan public GitHub repos for agent skills (SKILL.md ecosystem), dev practices (git/PR/CI workflows from real teams), or code patterns (framework idioms, config layouts) — then merge validated insights into the local catalog with full attribution.

Best for

  • Enriching a skill: you have software-ios-native and want to steal what other operators learned
  • Pre-build audit: you're about to author a new skill — has the work already been done?
  • Policy redesign: your team's PR workflow is breaking — scan how 5 leading OSS repos handle it

Not for

  • Web articles, papers, blog posts → ai-deep-research
  • Library/package selection or upgrade path → dev-dependency-management

Compatibility matrix

Platform support, with evidence labels

PlatformStatusEvidenceWhat to check
CodexDeclaredSource recordInstall path and trigger
Claude CodeDeclaredSource recordInstall path and trigger
CursorNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Gemini CLINot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Open the compatibility checker

Installation

Inspect first. Install second.

The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.

Source-detected install commandSource
npx skills add https://github.com/vasilyu1983/AI-Agents-public --skill "frameworks/shared-skills/skills/research-git"
Safe inspection promptEditorial

Inspect the Agent Skill "research-git" from https://github.com/vasilyu1983/AI-Agents-public/blob/53f6cb73ea53a2646e3e7d4665062ad66f3683ac/frameworks/shared-skills/skills/research-git/SKILL.md at commit 53f6cb73ea53a2646e3e7d4665062ad66f3683ac. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.

Workflow

What the source asks the agent to do

  1. 01

    Default Workflow

    Before fetching anything from GitHub:

    Prior research packs: ls docs/research/-scan.md — if a recent pack covers this domain + mode, read it firstCached extractions: ls docs/research//raw// — if a repo was extracted in the last 30 days, reuse unless HEAD advancedTarget skill's data/sources.json: if a source is already tracked, compare its commitsha to the current repo to decide refresh vs reuse
  2. 02

    Phase 0 — Context Check (always run first)

    Before fetching anything from GitHub:

    Prior research packs: ls docs/research/-scan.md — if a recent pack covers this domain + mode, read it firstCached extractions: ls docs/research//raw// — if a repo was extracted in the last 30 days, reuse unless HEAD advancedTarget skill's data/sources.json: if a source is already tracked, compare its commitsha to the current repo to decide refresh vs reuse
  3. 03

    Phase 1–9 — Active Research

    1. Frame the goal: "Enrich software-ios-native with novel patterns from the iOS skill ecosystem" or "Redesign release workflow using practices from 3 active monorepos" or "Improve React i18n patterns in software-localisation" 2. Discover: scripts/searchrepos.sh --kind → ranked s…

    Frame the goal: "Enrich software-ios-native with novel patterns from the iOS skill ecosystem" or "Redesign release workflow using practices from 3 active monorepos" or "Improve React i18n patterns in software-localisati…Discover: scripts/searchrepos.sh --kind → ranked shortlistTriage: pick 3–5 repos using signals in references/discovery-protocol.md — applies to all modes
  4. 04

    auto-assignment rules, review SLA signals

    Review the “auto-assignment rules, review SLA signals” section in the pinned source before continuing.

    Review and apply the “auto-assignment rules, review SLA signals” source section.
  5. 05

    Output feeds dev-git-workflow, not this skill

    bash scripts/searchrepos.sh --kind killer-feature firebase

    bash scripts/searchrepos.sh --kind killer-feature firebase

Permission review

Static risk signals and limitations

Reads files

low · line 121

The documentation asks the agent to read local files, directories, or repositories.

**Diff**: `scripts/diff_against_local.sh docs/research/<scan-id>/raw/<repo>/ <target-local-skill>/`

Network access

medium · line 211

The documentation includes network, browsing, or remote request actions.

| GitHub **Search API** has its own much lower limits, **separate from** the 5,000/hr core budget — **9 req/min** for code search specifically, **30 req/min** for repo/issue/user search (verified against GitHub REST docs, 2026-07-11) | A co

Evidence record

Why each signal appears

EvidenceSourceComputedTestedEditorial
SignalValueEvidence typeMeaning
Quality score98/100ComputedDocumentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules
Repository stars80SourceRepository attention, not individual Skill quality
Compatibility2 platformsSourceDeclared in the catalog source record
Usage guideautomated source guideEditorialGenerated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level

Pinned source

Provenance and original SKILL.md

Repository
vasilyu1983/AI-Agents-public
Skill path
frameworks/shared-skills/skills/research-git/SKILL.md
Commit
53f6cb73ea53a2646e3e7d4665062ad66f3683ac
License
MIT
Collected
2026-08-25
Default branch
main
View the original SKILL.md

Repo Research

Scan public GitHub repos for agent skills (SKILL.md ecosystem), dev practices (git/PR/CI workflows from real teams), or code patterns (framework idioms, config layouts) — then merge validated insights into the local catalog with full attribution.

Manual extraction is unsustainable. The agent-skill ecosystem alone has 1,400+ repos as of April 2026, and that's before counting the repos worth scanning for their CI, testing, or i18n setups. This skill makes the scan repeatable and the merge auditable.

Navigation

Quick Reference

NeedModeEntry point
Find SKILL.md repos for a domainskillscripts/search_repos.sh --kind skill <domain>
Find teams with strong git/CI practice to copypracticescripts/search_repos.sh --kind practice <topic>
Find framework idioms in high-signal OSScodescripts/search_repos.sh --kind code <language>/<framework>
Find OSS clones of a commercial product (killer-feature signal)killer-featurescripts/search_repos.sh --kind killer-feature <commercial-product>
Fetch assets from a known repoanyscripts/fetch_repo_assets.sh <owner>/<repo> <out> --kind <mode>
Compare external to local equivalentanyscripts/diff_against_local.sh <external> <local>
Verify a claimed practice/pattern against real git history (not just static files)practice, codereferences/git-history-forensics.md
License/attribution rulesanyreferences/attribution-rules.md
Registries + high-signal authorsanydata/sources.json

Four Modes

Mode A — Skill Discovery

Target: repos containing SKILL.md + references/ (the agent-skill ecosystem). Fetch: SKILL.md, references/, optionally scripts/. Output: research pack → feeds existing software-*, data-*, ai-*, ops-* skills in your catalog. Use when: enriching an existing skill, or auditing what already exists before building one.

Mode B — Practice Scan

Target: real production repos (not skill repos) with strong process signals. Fetch: .github/ (workflows, PR/issue templates, CODEOWNERS), CONTRIBUTING.md, SECURITY.md, release notes cadence, docs/adr/ (architecture decisions). Output: research pack → feeds dev-git-workflow, qa-*, ops-* skills. Use when: redesigning team policy (branching, PR review, CI gates, release cadence) and you want evidence from real teams, not just framework docs.

Mode C — Code Pattern Extraction

Target: high-signal OSS repos in a specific language/framework. Fetch: configs (tsconfig, biome, eslint, ruff, cargo), representative source modules, test layouts, scripts/ or Makefile. Output: patterns → feeds software-* skills. Use when: a local skill covers a domain where mature OSS implementations exist and the team's patterns are better than anything in docs (think: React Query's cache patterns, tRPC's type-safety tricks, Turborepo's build graph).

Mode D — Killer-Feature Mining

Target: OSS clones of a specific commercial product (e.g., supabase/supabase clones Firebase, plausible/analytics clones Google Analytics). Fetch: README.md, CHANGELOG.md, docs/, landing pages — the marketing surface that reveals which features the OSS author chose to replicate (and which they explicitly didn't). Output: rows on the shared pay-trigger-ledger.tsv with signal_type=oss_clone_focus → contributes to the bundle's Killer-Feature Convergence Protocol owned by research-review-mining. Use when: the bundle is hunting a killer feature for a commercial product, OR you want to know what the OSS world considers the load-bearing feature(s) of a category leader. Premise: OSS authors only reimplement what they think matters. That choice is revealed preference under cost — a strong proxy for monetizable core. Reference: references/killer-feature-mining.md — full extraction protocol + LLM prompts.

When to Use

  • Enriching a skill: you have software-ios-native and want to steal what other operators learned
  • Pre-build audit: you're about to author a new skill — has the work already been done?
  • Policy redesign: your team's PR workflow is breaking — scan how 5 leading OSS repos handle it
  • Framework adoption: you're committing to a new framework — pull idioms from the repos that stress-test it
  • Periodic refresh: quarterly re-scan of a domain to catch new patterns from active maintainers
  • Bundle handoff — killer-feature scan: research-review-mining Killer-Feature Mode asks Mode D for the OSS clone signal on a target commercial product

When NOT to Use

  • Web articles, papers, blog posts → ai-deep-research
  • Library/package selection or upgrade path → dev-dependency-management
  • Cross-repo code context for your own portfolio → dev-context-multi-repo
  • Per-commit message generation or commit-policy implementationdev-git-commit-message
  • Branching-model design in isolation (no evidence-gathering needed) → dev-git-workflow
  • One-off lookup of a specific file → plain WebFetch
  • Cloning to fork → plain git clone
  • Validated Q&A answers or known-error solutions → the Stack Overflow corpus (community MCP or the emerging Stack Overflow for Agents exchange), via qa-debugging — not repo mining

Default Workflow

ASCII Flow

public repo research request
  -> Choose mode: skill, practice, or code
  -> Check prior packs, cached raw extracts, and target sources.json
  -> Discover and shortlist 3-5 high-signal repos
  -> Fetch only mode-specific assets and pin source commit SHAs
  -> Diff external material against the local target
  -> Mine novel patterns and write an attributed research pack
  -> Wait for explicit approval before merging changes

Phase 0 — Context Check (always run first)

Before fetching anything from GitHub:

  1. Prior research packs: ls docs/research/*-scan.md — if a recent pack covers this domain + mode, read it first
  2. Cached extractions: ls docs/research/*/raw/<owner>__<repo>/ — if a repo was extracted in the last 30 days, reuse unless HEAD advanced
  3. Target skill's data/sources.json: if a source is already tracked, compare its commit_sha to the current repo to decide refresh vs reuse
  4. Existing pack as Level 1 input — only re-fetch the delta

Mirrors the context-first protocol: use prepared artifacts before raw fetches.

Phase 1–9 — Active Research

  1. Frame the goal: "Enrich software-ios-native with novel patterns from the iOS skill ecosystem" or "Redesign release workflow using practices from 3 active monorepos" or "Improve React i18n patterns in software-localisation"
  2. Discover: scripts/search_repos.sh --kind <mode> <domain> → ranked shortlist
  3. Triage: pick 3–5 repos using signals in references/discovery-protocol.md — applies to all modes
  4. Extract (only what's missing or stale): scripts/fetch_repo_assets.sh <owner>/<repo> docs/research/<scan-id>/raw/ --kind <mode>
  5. Diff: scripts/diff_against_local.sh docs/research/<scan-id>/raw/<repo>/ <target-local-skill>/
  6. Mine insights: follow mode-specific guidance
  7. Synthesize: research pack at docs/research/<scan-id>.md
  8. User reviews: present the pack, wait for approval on what to merge
  9. Apply (opt-in): follow references/apply-protocol.md

Output Contract

Research pack at docs/research/YYYY-MM-DD-<mode>-<domain>-scan.md:

# <Mode> Scan: <Domain> — <Date>

## Mode
skill | practice | code | killer-feature

## Sources Reviewed
| Repo | Stars | Last commit | License | Scorecard | Quality | Action |
|------|-------|-------------|---------|-----------|---------|--------|

## Insights Extracted
For each insight:
- Source: <repo URL + commit SHA>
- Mode: skill | practice | code
- Pattern: <name and 1-line description>
- Why it matters: <evidence from the source>
- Where it goes: <target skill + reference file>
- Novel vs local: <new / extends existing / duplicates existing>
- Confidence: <high / medium / low + rationale>

## Recommended Merges
| Pattern | Target skill | Action | Approved? |

## Skipped
<insights reviewed and rejected, with reason>

## Attribution Pack
<full source list with URLs, commit SHAs, licenses, extraction dates>

Attribution Rules

Mandatory before any merge:

  1. Check the source repo's LICENSE — MIT / Apache-2.0 / BSD / CC-BY-4.0 permit derived work with attribution
  2. Never copy SKILL.md, reference files, or source files verbatim — extract patterns, rewrite in local voice
  3. Cite source URL + commit SHA + extraction date + license on every merged insight
  4. Add the source to the target skill's data/sources.json
  5. Pin to commit SHA, never main — supply-chain drift is real

Full rules: references/attribution-rules.md

Patterns

PatternWhy it works
Pin every fetch to commit SHAMakes extractions reproducible; survives repo renames, branch deletions, force-pushes
Filter by OpenSSF Scorecard ≥ 5 (Mode B/C)Strong proxy for maintenance quality; weeds out abandoned and risky repos
Require CODEOWNERS for practice-scan targetsRepos without ownership signals usually have ad-hoc process — nothing to steal
Shortlist to 3–5 repos, not 20Extraction is the bottleneck; wide scans dilute signal
Apply one skill at a time, one commit per skillMakes merges reviewable and revertable
Always diff-against-local before extractingPrevents duplication, surfaces real novelty
Re-scan quarterly (not weekly, not yearly)Best-practice drift is slow; weekly scans pay cache costs without new signal
Verify high-value practice/pattern claims against real git history, not just static filesCODEOWNERS, CONTRIBUTING.md, and merge-queue config describe policy; blame -w -C -M, range-diff, and bisect run show whether it's actually followed — see references/git-history-forensics.md

Anti-Patterns

Anti-patternWhy it failsFix
Auto-applying insights without user reviewMerges stale or wrong patternsAlways present research pack first
Cloning entire repos by defaultWastes context; most value is in ≤10 filesDefault to mode-specific asset list
Copying content verbatimLicense violation + voice driftAlways rewrite in local voice
Extracting without diff-against-localDuplicates content, creates contradictionsAlways run diff first
Trusting stars aloneLLM-spam repos farm stars via mutual-follow networksCross-check commit signing, Scorecard, contributor count
Trusting LLM-generated awesome-listsMany April-2026 awesome-lists are LLM-synthesized and list dead reposSpot-check 3 random entries before using the list as a registry
Fetching main branch without pinningContent drifts; citations become unverifiableAlways capture commit SHA, cite it
Scanning repos flagged as mirrors/vendorsDuplicates upstream; wastes triage timeFilter fork=false, archived=false, check for mirror in description
Treating topic agent-skills as a quality signalTopic is now noisy (>5000 repos, ~60% stale or LLM-generated)Prefer claude-skills, codex-skills, or author-curated lists
Research pack with no attributionCannot re-verify, breaks audit trailEvery insight gets source URL + commit SHA + license
Re-fetching repos extracted in the last 30 daysWastes API quota + duplicates contextPhase 0: check docs/research/*/raw/ first
Ignoring prior research packsLoses prior synthesis, agents do duplicate analysisPhase 0: read existing packs as Level 1 context input

Known Issues (July 2026)

IssueImpactWorkaround
gh api rate limit: 5000 req/hr authenticatedBulk scans of 50+ repos blow the budgetBatch, pause, or use GraphQL (single call, deeper data) for listings
GitHub Search API has its own much lower limits, separate from the 5,000/hr core budget — 9 req/min for code search specifically, 30 req/min for repo/issue/user search (verified against GitHub REST docs, 2026-07-11)A code-search sweep (e.g. path:.github/workflows) throttles in well under a minute even with core budget freeBudget code search at ≤9 calls/min, general search at ≤30 calls/min; pause between pages; prefer one wide query + local filtering over many narrow ones; never parallelise code search — see references/code-search-syntax.md
GitHub still hosts only SHA-1 repos as of mid-2026 — Git itself has shipped experimental SHA-1/SHA-256 "compat" object-format support since 2.45, and Git 3.0 (targeted late 2026) defaults new repos to the reftable ref backend, but no major forge (GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket) serves SHA-256 repos yetDon't assume a scanned repo's local git internals (hash algo, ref backend) match what git version on your machine defaults toTreat SHA-256/reftable claims about a target repo as forge-side metadata, not inferable from clone behavior; re-verify at git-scm.com/docs before citing a specific version's default
Papers with Code is dead (Meta shutdown Jul 2025)Any inherited workflow that used PwC for reproducibility signal is brokenresearch-git is the replacement reproducibility-signal channel (repo/reimplementation inspection); do not add PwC back as a source
Topic agent-skills is noisy since late 2025~60% of results are LLM-generated shells with no real contentPrefer --owner filter on known authors; cross-check with awesome-lists
LLM-generated SKILL.md repos are visually convincingWastes extraction budget on zero-signal contentRed flags: no commit history before 2025-09, single-author, uniform file sizes, no issues/PRs, description ends in "...for Claude"
GitHub Search skips archived repos inconsistentlyDead repos appear in ranked outputAlways pass archived:false in gh search; double-check in triage
gh search star threshold sorts but doesn't filterStars<100 repos appear on page 2+Use --limit 30 --sort stars and truncate manually
Some high-signal repos use nested skill dirs (skill/, <name>-pro/)Default fetch misses SKILL.mdAlways recursive-tree lookup, not root-only
OpenSSF Scorecard not present for private-forked public reposCan't use Scorecard signalFall back to CODEOWNERS + commit-signing ratio
gh api GraphQL tree recursion caps at ~100k entriesHuge monorepos return empty treeFor monorepos, fetch the specific subtree by path, not the whole repo
Attribution strings break when source repo is renamedLinks 404Pin commit SHA; GitHub resolves old-name URLs at the SHA but not at branch refs

Scenarios

Scenario 1 — Skill Discovery (Mode A)

Goal: enrich software-kafka with patterns from the agent-skill ecosystem.

scripts/search_repos.sh --kind skill kafka
# → ranked shortlist: confluentinc/kafka-agent-skill, redpanda-data/skills, ...

# Triage: keep 3, drop LLM-generated candidates
scripts/fetch_repo_assets.sh confluentinc/kafka-agent-skill \
  docs/research/2026-04-23-skill-kafka/raw/ --kind skill

scripts/diff_against_local.sh \
  docs/research/2026-04-23-skill-kafka/raw/confluentinc__kafka-agent-skill/ \
  frameworks/shared-skills/skills/software-kafka/
# → diff shows 2 new reference files, 1 new quick-reference row

# Mine, synthesize, present research pack, apply with attribution

Scenario 2 — Practice Scan (Mode B)

Goal: redesign the team's PR workflow; harvest practices from 3 active monorepos.

scripts/search_repos.sh --kind practice monorepo
# → vercel/next.js, microsoft/vscode, nrwl/nx

scripts/fetch_repo_assets.sh vercel/next.js \
  docs/research/2026-04-23-practice-pr/raw/ --kind practice
# fetches .github/workflows/, CONTRIBUTING.md, CODEOWNERS, PR template, release-please config

# Mine via practice-scan-targets.md rubric: merge queue config, required checks,
# auto-assignment rules, review SLA signals

# Output feeds dev-git-workflow, not this skill

Scenario 4 — Killer-Feature Mining (Mode D)

Goal: contribute the OSS clone signal to the bundle's killer-feature hunt for Firebase.

scripts/search_repos.sh --kind killer-feature firebase
# → supabase/supabase, appwrite/appwrite, nhost/nhost, pocketbase/pocketbase

# Triage: keep 3 with distinct owners; reject any that ship a paid hosted tier
# (their feature choices are biased by what they want to monetize)

scripts/fetch_repo_assets.sh supabase/supabase \
  docs/research/2026-05-26-killer-feature-firebase/raw/ --kind killer-feature
# fetches README, CHANGELOG, docs/, website/, package.json

# Feed README + landing pages to LLM prompt §1 in references/killer-feature-mining.md
# → JSONL of replicated features with monetization framing

# Feed "Limitations vs Firebase" section to LLM prompt §2
# → JSONL of explicitly-omitted features (inverse signal — these are the
#   parts of Firebase that OSS authors think aren't paid for)

# Append rows to ../research-review-mining/assets/pay-trigger-ledger.tsv
#   signal_type = oss_clone_focus
# Run ../research-review-mining/scripts/converge_killer_features.py
# Convergence Rule decides which feature_ids cross the 3-of-6 threshold

Scenario 3 — Code Pattern Extraction (Mode C)

Goal: improve software-localisation with real React i18n patterns.

scripts/search_repos.sh --kind code react i18n
# → lingui-js/js-lingui, formatjs/formatjs, i18next/i18next

scripts/fetch_repo_assets.sh lingui-js/js-lingui \
  docs/research/2026-04-23-code-react-i18n/raw/ --kind code
# fetches: package.json, tsconfig, representative source modules, test layout

# Mine via code-pattern-mining.md: ICU plurals handling, runtime vs build-time,
# type-safe message catalogs

# Output feeds software-localisation

Resources

Workflow references:

Scripts:

Sources:

Related Skills

Fact-Checking

Verify repo activity, license, and Scorecard against current GitHub before citing findings. Repo research drifts fast — re-check before merging insights. Always confirm the repo is not LLM-generated (commit history, issue activity, real contributors) before trusting any pattern from it.

GitHub API rate limits and git-version facts cited in this skill (Known Issues table, references/code-search-syntax.md, references/git-history-forensics.md) were verified against docs.github.com and git-scm.com on 2026-07-11 — re-verify at those sources before citing a specific number or version in a research pack, since both move faster than this skill's revision cadence.

Learnings Loop

Before applying this skill on a non-trivial task, read learnings.consolidated.md in this directory (and learnings.md if present).

After applying it, if you encountered a pattern worth remembering, a mistake worth preventing, or a domain fact that surprised you, append one dated bullet to learnings.md via agents-skills-feedback-loop/scripts/append_learning.py. Do not modify SKILL.md itself.

Frequently asked questions

What to verify before installation and use

What does the research-git source document cover?

Scan public GitHub repos for agent skills (SKILL.md ecosystem), dev practices (git/PR/CI workflows from real teams), or code patterns (framework idioms, config layouts) — then merge validated insights into the local catalog with full attribution.

How do I install research-git?

The source record exposes this install command: npx skills add https://github.com/vasilyu1983/AI-Agents-public --skill "frameworks/shared-skills/skills/research-git". Inspect the command and pinned source before running it.

Which Agent platforms does the source record declare?

The pinned source record declares support for: codex, claude code.

Which permission-related actions were detected?

Static rules flagged read-files, network in the source; the page lists the matching lines and excerpts.

Alternatives

Compare before choosing

Computed 923,337

synthetic-sciences/openscience

protocolsio-integration

Integration with protocols.io API for managing scientific protocols. This skill should be used when working with protocols.io to search, create, update, or publish protocols; manage protocol steps and materials; handle discussions and comments; organize workspaces; upload and manage files; or integrate protocols.io functionality into workflows. Applicable for protocol discovery, collaborative protocol development, experiment tracking, lab protocol management, and scientific documentation.

Computed 913,337

synthetic-sciences/openscience

pyhealth

Comprehensive healthcare AI toolkit for developing, testing, and deploying machine learning models with clinical data. This skill should be used when working with electronic health records (EHR), clinical prediction tasks (mortality, readmission, drug recommendation), medical coding systems (ICD, NDC, ATC), physiological signals (EEG, ECG), healthcare datasets (MIMIC-III/IV, eICU, OMOP), or implementing deep learning models for healthcare applications (RETAIN, SafeDrug, Transformer, GNN).

Computed 9620

upex-galaxy/agentic-qa-boilerplate

regression-testing

Execute regression test suites via CI/CD, analyze results, classify failures, and produce GO/NO-GO release decisions. Use when running regression, smoke, or sanity suites through GitHub Actions, monitoring workflow runs, downloading Allure or Playwright artifacts, classifying failures (REGRESSION vs FLAKY vs KNOWN vs ENVIRONMENT vs NEW TEST), computing pass-rate and trend metrics, deciding release readiness, generating executive quality reports, or creating regression issues. Triggers on: run re

Computed 9420

upex-galaxy/agentic-qa-boilerplate

test-documentation

Analyze, prioritize, and document test cases in TMS (Jira/Xray), or repair an existing Story-ATS-ATP-ATR-TC cascade through a sealed explicit mode. Use for Test/ATP/ATR artifacts, ROI and automation verdicts, maintaining traceability, fix-traceability, or broken TMS links. The repair-traceability mode audits, plans, waits for explicit approval, applies, and verifies without launching the general documentation workflow. Do NOT use for writing test code (test-automation) or running suites (regress