Intake

Intake — Bootstrap the Curated Context Baseline

Owns the brownfield bootstrap of the agent workflow (CONCEPT.md §3). Produces the ONE curated docs baseline that every later phase injects into implementers — as early as possible, while the codebase is small and the interview is cheap. After the seal, P7 curation owns ALL updates; this skill is re-run only as a deliberate drift audit, never automatically.

The core principle: extraction and interview are two different sources, and this skill needs both. Code tells what IS. Only the developer tells what is INTENDED — product scope and non-goals, security requirements, which of two inconsistent conventions is the rule going forward. This is a collaborative session, not a batch job.

Output (the baseline — all eight files)

docs/DESIGN-SYSTEM.md and docs/components.md are only required to seal when the repo has a component directory (src/components or src/features/*/components); backend-only repos skip both (see scripts/intake-seal-check.sh).

Existing AGENTS.md (or other curated docs) are baseline truth, never overwritten. If a file already exists, the draft is a MERGE: every existing rule/statement is kept unless an interview decision explicitly retires it (recorded in decisions.md); new content is appended with provenance markers like everything else. The drift-audit variant works the same way — deltas, not rewrites.

Workflow

0. Precondition

• No curated baseline yet (docs/PRODUCT.md missing), OR the user explicitly asked for a drift audit of the existing baseline.
• Working space: specs/intake/ (drafts + decision log). This is pre-PROJ — there is NO state.json; state.json is born at CP1.
• Drift audit variant: draft the delta against the existing docs instead of from scratch; everything else (interview, checkpoint, seal) is the same path.

1. Scan & draft (automated, provenance-marked)

Run three read passes over the repo (spawn Explore agents where useful — they locate, you judge):

• Arch Hat: entry points, module boundaries, data flow, persistence, integrations → ARCHITECTURE draft (+ docs/architecture/ for detail).
• QA Hat: test setup, error-handling patterns, validation, auth → test-conventions + security-baseline drafts.
• component-scout: run node scripts/gen-component-registry.mjs, then write the missing doc blocks into the components it reports as undocumented (purpose + "not for" are interview material, not extractable) and regenerate → components.md registry; design tokens (tailwind config, CSS custom properties) → DESIGN-SYSTEM draft. If no real tokens exist, write a pointer to the frontend-design skill (1c) instead of inventing a design system.

Draft ALL eight files into specs/intake/ with a provenance marker on EVERY statement:

• [extracted: <file:line evidence>] — derived from code/README/git history, with the evidence reference
• [assumed] — plausible inference that needs developer confirmation
• [gap: <question>] — cannot be derived from code; must be asked

While drafting, collect every detected inconsistency (e.g. "errors via Result type in ~60% of modules, thrown exceptions in ~40%") into the interview queue — never silently pick a winner.

Near-greenfield variant: almost no code → extraction is thin and sourced from concept/PRDs; the interview carries the weight. Same files, same markers, same path.

2. Developer interview (point by point)

Build ONE numbered queue: every [gap], every [assumed], every detected inconsistency. Work through it point by point with AskUserQuestion — grouped by topic, never as one wall of questions.

• Every answer becomes a GUIDELINES rule (or a PRODUCT/ARCHITECTURE statement, wherever it belongs).
• For inconsistencies: the developer picks the rule going forward; the LOSING pattern becomes a Known Debt note in GUIDELINES — recorded, not silently rewritten.
• [assumed] items the developer confirms lose their marker; corrected ones are rewritten from the answer.

3. Reconcile via checkpoint (4a, Bootstrap Variant)

Route to the checkpoint skill's Bootstrap Variant: the generated docs are HYPOTHESES, not truth. Same point-by-point pattern — every review point ends in exactly one of adopt / change / reject / defer, recorded in specs/intake/decisions.md (D-BOOTSTRAP-<NN> ids, templates/decisions.md.tmpl frame) BEFORE the next point. Cascade every decision into the affected draft(s).

4. Seal

1. Move the reconciled drafts to their final locations (docs/*, root AGENTS.md) and STRIP all provenance markers — they are working syntax, the sealed baseline never carries them.
2. bash scripts/intake-seal-check.sh (copy from ~/.claude/skills/0b_intake/scripts/ together with curation-caps.sh if missing). It verifies: all eight files exist, zero residual markers, specs/intake/decisions.md carries D-BOOTSTRAP reconcile decisions (undiscussed drafts never seal), file caps hold. Red → fix, re-run; NEVER seal past a red check.
3. Commit: docs: intake baseline — initial curated docs (include specs/intake/decisions.md).

From here on, P7 curation owns every docs/ update.

→ NEXT ACTION: start the first PROJ through the chain (chain-guide routes it); at P0 the setup skill compiles this baseline into the context bundles.

Failure Behavior

• The interview cannot proceed (developer unavailable) → leave the marked drafts in specs/intake/, write one line to specs/intake/ README noting the open queue — the drafts are resumable; nothing is half-sealed into docs/.
• intake-seal-check.sh red → the baseline stays uncommitted; fix and re-run. The check is idempotent.