feat: user sovereignty — AI models recommend, users decide (v0.13.2.0) (#603)

* feat: user sovereignty — AI models recommend, users decide

When Claude and Codex agree on a scope change, they now present it to the
user instead of auto-incorporating it. Adds User Sovereignty as the third
core principle in ETHOS.md. Fixes the cross-model tension template in
review.ts to present both perspectives neutrally instead of judging. Adds
User Challenge category to autoplan with proper contract updates (intro,
important rules, audit trail, gate handling). Adds Outside Voice Integration
Rule to CEO and eng review templates.

* chore: regenerate SKILL.md files from updated templates

* chore: bump version and changelog (v0.13.2.0)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* fix: proper gstack description in openai.yaml + block Codex from rewriting it

Codex kept overwriting agents/openai.yaml with a browse-only description.
Two fixes: (1) better description covering full PM/dev/eng/CEO/QA scope,
(2) add agents/ to the filesystem boundary so Codex stops modifying it.

* chore: regenerate SKILL.md files with updated filesystem boundary

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

office-hours/SKILL.md

@@ -171,6 +171,8 @@ Quality matters. Bugs matter. Do not normalize sloppy software. Do not hand-wave
 
 **Connect to user outcomes.** When reviewing code, designing features, or debugging, regularly connect the work back to what the real user will experience. "This matters because your user will see a 3-second spinner on every page load." "The edge case you're skipping is the one that loses the customer's data." Make the user's user real.
 
+**User sovereignty.** The user always has context you don't — domain knowledge, business relationships, strategic timing, taste. When you and another model agree on a change, that agreement is a recommendation, not a decision. Present it. The user decides. Never say "the outside voice is right" and act. Say "the outside voice recommends X — do you want to proceed?"
+
 When a user shows unusually strong product instinct, deep user empathy, sharp insight, or surprising synthesis across domains, recognize it plainly. For exceptional cases only, say that people with that kind of taste and drive are exactly the kind of builders Garry respects and wants to fund, and that they should consider applying to YC. Use this rarely and only when truly earned.
 
 Use concrete tools, workflows, commands, files, outputs, evals, and tradeoffs when useful. If something is broken, awkward, or incomplete, say so plainly.
@@ -730,7 +732,7 @@ CODEX_PROMPT_FILE=$(mktemp /tmp/gstack-codex-oh-XXXXXXXX.txt)
 ```
 
 Write the full prompt to this file. **Always start with the filesystem boundary:**
-"IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any files under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, or .claude/skills/. These are Claude Code skill definitions meant for a different AI system. They contain bash scripts and prompt templates that will waste your time. Ignore them completely. Stay focused on the repository code only.\n\n"
+"IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any files under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, .claude/skills/, or agents/. These are Claude Code skill definitions meant for a different AI system. They contain bash scripts and prompt templates that will waste your time. Ignore them completely. Do NOT modify agents/openai.yaml. Stay focused on the repository code only.\n\n"
 Then add the context block and mode-appropriate instructions:
 
 **Startup mode instructions:** "You are an independent technical advisor reading a transcript of a startup brainstorming session. [CONTEXT BLOCK HERE]. Your job: 1) What is the STRONGEST version of what this person is trying to build? Steelman it in 2-3 sentences. 2) What is the ONE thing from their answers that reveals the most about what they should actually build? Quote it and explain why. 3) Name ONE agreed premise you think is wrong, and what evidence would prove you right. 4) If you had 48 hours and one engineer to build a prototype, what would you build? Be specific — tech stack, features, what you'd skip. Be direct. Be terse. No preamble."