Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into garrytan/elegance

# Conflicts:
#	SKILL.md
#	cso/SKILL.md
#	cso/SKILL.md.tmpl
#	scripts/gen-skill-docs.ts

ship/SKILL.md

@@ -46,7 +46,8 @@ echo "TELEMETRY: ${_TEL:-off}"
 echo "TEL_PROMPTED: $_TEL_PROMPTED"
 mkdir -p ~/.gstack/analytics
 echo '{"skill":"ship","ts":"'$(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)'","repo":"'$(basename "$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null)" 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")'"}'  >> ~/.gstack/analytics/skill-usage.jsonl 2>/dev/null || true
-for _PF in ~/.gstack/analytics/.pending-*; do [ -f "$_PF" ] && ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-telemetry-log --event-type skill_run --skill _pending_finalize --outcome unknown --session-id "$_SESSION_ID" 2>/dev/null || true; break; done
+# zsh-compatible: use find instead of glob to avoid NOMATCH error
+for _PF in $(find ~/.gstack/analytics -maxdepth 1 -name '.pending-*' 2>/dev/null); do [ -f "$_PF" ] && ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-telemetry-log --event-type skill_run --skill _pending_finalize --outcome unknown --session-id "$_SESSION_ID" 2>/dev/null || true; break; done
 ```
 
 If `PROACTIVE` is `"false"`, do not proactively suggest gstack skills — only invoke
@@ -314,7 +315,7 @@ After completing the review, read the review log and config to display the dashb
 ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-review-read
 ```
 
-Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, plan-eng-review, plan-design-review, design-review-lite, adversarial-review, codex-review, codex-plan-review). Ignore entries with timestamps older than 7 days. For the Adversarial row, show whichever is more recent between `adversarial-review` (new auto-scaled) and `codex-review` (legacy). For Design Review, show whichever is more recent between `plan-design-review` (full visual audit) and `design-review-lite` (code-level check). Append "(FULL)" or "(LITE)" to the status to distinguish. Display:
+Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, plan-eng-review, review, plan-design-review, design-review-lite, adversarial-review, codex-review, codex-plan-review). Ignore entries with timestamps older than 7 days. For the Eng Review row, show whichever is more recent between `review` (diff-scoped pre-landing review) and `plan-eng-review` (plan-stage architecture review). Append "(DIFF)" or "(PLAN)" to the status to distinguish. For the Adversarial row, show whichever is more recent between `adversarial-review` (new auto-scaled) and `codex-review` (legacy). For Design Review, show whichever is more recent between `plan-design-review` (full visual audit) and `design-review-lite` (code-level check). Append "(FULL)" or "(LITE)" to the status to distinguish. Display:
 
 ```
 +====================================================================+
@@ -340,7 +341,7 @@ Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, pl
 - **Outside Voice (optional):** Independent plan review from a different AI model. Offered after all review sections complete in /plan-ceo-review and /plan-eng-review. Falls back to Claude subagent if Codex is unavailable. Never gates shipping.
 
 **Verdict logic:**
-- **CLEARED**: Eng Review has >= 1 entry within 7 days with status "clean" (or \`skip_eng_review\` is \`true\`)
+- **CLEARED**: Eng Review has >= 1 entry within 7 days from either \`review\` or \`plan-eng-review\` with status "clean" (or \`skip_eng_review\` is \`true\`)
 - **NOT CLEARED**: Eng Review missing, stale (>7 days), or has open issues
 - CEO, Design, and Codex reviews are shown for context but never block shipping
 - If \`skip_eng_review\` config is \`true\`, Eng Review shows "SKIPPED (global)" and verdict is CLEARED
@@ -363,7 +364,7 @@ If the Eng Review is NOT "CLEAR":
 2. **If no override exists,** use AskUserQuestion:
    - Show that Eng Review is missing or has open issues
    - RECOMMENDATION: Choose C if the change is obviously trivial (< 20 lines, typo fix, config-only); Choose B for larger changes
-   - Options: A) Ship anyway  B) Abort — run /plan-eng-review first  C) Change is too small to need eng review
+   - Options: A) Ship anyway  B) Abort — run /review or /plan-eng-review first  C) Change is too small to need eng review
    - If CEO Review is missing, mention as informational ("CEO Review not run — recommended for product changes") but do NOT block
    - For Design Review: run `source <(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-diff-scope <base> 2>/dev/null)`. If `SCOPE_FRONTEND=true` and no design review (plan-design-review or design-review-lite) exists in the dashboard, mention: "Design Review not run — this PR changes frontend code. The lite design check will run automatically in Step 3.5, but consider running /design-review for a full visual audit post-implementation." Still never block.
 

ship/SKILL.md.tmpl

@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ If the Eng Review is NOT "CLEAR":
 2. **If no override exists,** use AskUserQuestion:
    - Show that Eng Review is missing or has open issues
    - RECOMMENDATION: Choose C if the change is obviously trivial (< 20 lines, typo fix, config-only); Choose B for larger changes
-   - Options: A) Ship anyway  B) Abort — run /plan-eng-review first  C) Change is too small to need eng review
+   - Options: A) Ship anyway  B) Abort — run /review or /plan-eng-review first  C) Change is too small to need eng review
    - If CEO Review is missing, mention as informational ("CEO Review not run — recommended for product changes") but do NOT block
    - For Design Review: run `source <(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-diff-scope <base> 2>/dev/null)`. If `SCOPE_FRONTEND=true` and no design review (plan-design-review or design-review-lite) exists in the dashboard, mention: "Design Review not run — this PR changes frontend code. The lite design check will run automatically in Step 3.5, but consider running /design-review for a full visual audit post-implementation." Still never block.