diff --git a/.beads/issues.jsonl b/.beads/issues.jsonl
index 06b0307..4885dfe 100644
--- a/.beads/issues.jsonl
+++ b/.beads/issues.jsonl
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@
 {"id":"skills-a50w","title":"review-gate: Post-merge verification and rollback","description":"**Raised by:** gpt\n\n**Problem:**\nWhat if merge succeeds but breaks master? CI fails after merge? No revert procedure defined.\n\n**gpt:**\n\u003e \"Add a 'post-merge verification' stage: Merge → CI required → only then 'bd close'. Define revert procedure and who owns it (HQ vs new worker). Optionally enable 'merge queue' semantics.\"\n\n**Suggested fixes:**\n1. merged_pending_ci status before done\n2. Post-merge CI verification required\n3. Revert playbook section\n4. \"fix-forward\" task spawning on breakage\n5. Consider merge queue semantics","status":"open","priority":3,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2026-01-12T09:24:12.120656389-08:00","created_by":"dan","updated_at":"2026-01-12T09:42:04.942124168-08:00","comments":[{"id":10,"issue_id":"skills-a50w","author":"dan","text":"[RECLASSIFY:2026-01-12T09:42:04-08:00] Moved from HQ to review-gate layer.\n\nPost-merge CI verification is quality enforcement. review-gate or CI should handle this, not HQ logic.","created_at":"2026-01-12T17:42:04Z"}]}
 {"id":"skills-a6mz","title":"Build property-based verification","description":"Verification checks that can be automated:\n- file_exists, dir_exists\n- function_defined (AST parsing)\n- tests_pass (run pytest/npm test/etc)\n- compiles (language-specific)\n- no_new_lint_errors\n- git_state (branch merged, worktree cleaned, etc)\n\nShould be composable and extensible.","status":"closed","priority":2,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2026-01-11T16:19:45.54512229-08:00","created_by":"dan","updated_at":"2026-01-11T16:38:26.547049098-08:00","closed_at":"2026-01-11T16:38:26.547049098-08:00","close_reason":"Pausing - need to validate approach with simpler spike first","dependencies":[{"issue_id":"skills-a6mz","depends_on_id":"skills-y0p0","type":"blocks","created_at":"2026-01-11T16:20:20.641495149-08:00","created_by":"dan"}]}
 {"id":"skills-al5","title":"Consider repo-setup-verification skill","description":"The dotfiles repo has a repo-setup-prompt.md verification checklist that could become a skill.\n\n**Source**: ~/proj/dotfiles/docs/repo-setup-prompt.md\n\n**What it does**:\n- Verifies .envrc has use_api_keys and skills loading\n- Checks .skills manifest exists with appropriate skills\n- Optionally checks beads setup\n- Verifies API keys are loaded\n\n**As a skill it could**:\n- Be invoked to audit any repo's agent setup\n- Offer to fix missing pieces\n- Provide consistent onboarding for new repos\n\n**Questions**:\n- Is this better as a skill vs a slash command?\n- Should it auto-fix or just report?\n- Does it belong in skills repo or dotfiles?","status":"closed","priority":2,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2025-12-06T12:38:32.561337354-08:00","updated_at":"2025-12-28T22:22:57.639520516-05:00","closed_at":"2025-12-28T22:22:57.639520516-05:00","close_reason":"Decided: keep as prompt doc in dotfiles, not a skill. Claude can read it when asked. No wrapper benefit, and it's dotfiles-specific setup (not general skill). ai-tools-doctor handles version checking separately."}
-{"id":"skills-ankb","title":"Define Intent/Approach/Work workflow","description":"Document the three-phase workflow for structured beads.\n\n## Phases\n\n### Intent (what)\n- Problem statement - what's broken or missing?\n- Proposed solution - high-level, not technical\n- Constraints - requirements, limits, must-haves\n- Why now? Why this way?\n\n### Approach (how)\n- Technical approach\n- Key decisions and trade-offs\n- Files to change\n- Dependencies and risks\n\n### Work (do)\n- Concrete steps as checkboxes\n- Each item small and testable\n- Check off as completed\n- Can spawn child beads if complex\n\n## Deliverable\n- Document phase definitions\n- When to use full structure vs lightweight\n- Examples of good intent/approach/work sections\n- Guidance on phase transitions","status":"open","priority":2,"issue_type":"task","owner":"dan@delpad","created_at":"2026-01-18T08:13:57.556869846-08:00","created_by":"dan","updated_at":"2026-01-18T08:53:55.39707337-08:00","dependencies":[{"issue_id":"skills-ankb","depends_on_id":"skills-oh8m","type":"blocks","created_at":"2026-01-18T08:14:32.423457925-08:00","created_by":"dan"},{"issue_id":"skills-ankb","depends_on_id":"skills-ya44","type":"blocks","created_at":"2026-01-18T08:14:44.502821773-08:00","created_by":"dan"}]}
+{"id":"skills-ankb","title":"Define Intent/Approach/Work workflow","description":"Document the three-phase workflow for structured beads.\n\n## Phases\n\n### Intent (what)\n- Problem statement - what's broken or missing?\n- Proposed solution - high-level, not technical\n- Constraints - requirements, limits, must-haves\n- Why now? Why this way?\n\n### Approach (how)\n- Technical approach\n- Key decisions and trade-offs\n- Files to change\n- Dependencies and risks\n\n### Work (do)\n- Concrete steps as checkboxes\n- Each item small and testable\n- Check off as completed\n\n## Workflow Mechanics\n\n### Human Gates\nHuman-in-the-loop at every phase transition:\n```\nIntent → [human approval] → Approach → [human approval] → Work → execute\n```\nAI proposes, human approves before moving forward.\n\n### Complexity Promotion\nWhen a Work item grows complex mid-implementation:\n- **Promote it** to its own bead with Intent/Approach/Work\n- Don't paper over complexity - dial in on it\n- Original checkbox becomes a reference to the new bead\n\n### When to Use Structure\n**Open question** - threshold for \"needs structure\" vs \"just do it\" is an active research area in agentic coding. For now: use judgment, err toward structure for anything non-trivial.\n\n## Deliverable\n- Document phase definitions\n- Human gate requirements\n- Complexity promotion rules\n- Examples at different scales","status":"open","priority":2,"issue_type":"task","owner":"dan@delpad","created_at":"2026-01-18T08:13:57.556869846-08:00","created_by":"dan","updated_at":"2026-01-18T11:34:54.169310788-08:00","dependencies":[{"issue_id":"skills-ankb","depends_on_id":"skills-oh8m","type":"blocks","created_at":"2026-01-18T08:14:32.423457925-08:00","created_by":"dan"},{"issue_id":"skills-ankb","depends_on_id":"skills-ya44","type":"blocks","created_at":"2026-01-18T08:14:44.502821773-08:00","created_by":"dan"}]}
 {"id":"skills-audh","title":"Use parseEnum for heartbeat status instead of case statement","description":"[SMELL] LOW worker.nim:276-280 - Status string parsed with case statement with silent fallback. Use parseEnum or direct HeartbeatStatus input, error on invalid.","status":"closed","priority":4,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2026-01-10T20:12:11.408603257-08:00","created_by":"dan","updated_at":"2026-01-11T15:46:39.025667838-08:00","closed_at":"2026-01-11T15:46:39.025667838-08:00","close_reason":"Closed"}
 {"id":"skills-bcu","title":"Design doc-review skill","description":"# doc-review skill\n\nFight documentation drift with a non-interactive review process that generates patchfiles for human review.\n\n## Problem\n- No consistent documentation system across repos\n- Stale content accumulates\n- Structural inconsistencies (docs not optimized for agents)\n\n## Envisioned Workflow\n\n```bash\n# Phase 1: Generate patches (non-interactive, use spare credits, test models)\ndoc-review scan ~/proj/foo --model claude-sonnet --output /tmp/foo-patches/\n\n# Phase 2: Review patches (interactive session)\ncd ~/proj/foo\nclaude  # human reviews patches, applies selectively\n```\n\n## Design Decisions Made\n\n- **Trigger**: Manual invocation (not CI). Use case includes burning extra LLM credits, testing models repeatably.\n- **Source of truth**: Style guide embedded in prompt template. Blessed defaults, overridable per-repo.\n- **Output**: Patchfiles for human review in interactive Claude session.\n- **Chunking**: Based on absolute size, not file count. Logical chunks easy for Claude to review.\n- **Scope detection**: Graph-based discovery starting from README.md or AGENTS.md, not glob-all-markdown.\n\n## Open Design Work\n\n### Agent-Friendly Doc Conventions (needs brainstorming)\nWhat makes docs agent-readable?\n- Explicit context (no \"as mentioned above\")\n- Clear section headers for navigation\n- Self-contained sections\n- Consistent terminology\n- Front-loaded summaries\n- ???\n\n### Prompt Content\nFull design round needed on:\n- What conventions to enforce\n- How to express them in prompt\n- Examples of \"good\" vs \"bad\"\n\n### Graph-Based Discovery\nHow does traversal work?\n- Parse links from README/AGENTS.md?\n- Follow relative markdown links?\n- Depth limit?\n\n## Skill Structure (tentative)\n```\nskills/doc-review/\n├── prompt.md           # Core review instructions + style guide\n├── scan.sh             # Orchestrates: find docs → invoke claude → emit patches\n└── README.md\n```\n\n## Out of Scope (for now)\n- Cross-repo standardization (broader than skills repo)\n- CI integration\n- Auto-apply without human review","status":"closed","priority":2,"issue_type":"feature","created_at":"2025-12-04T14:01:43.305653729-08:00","updated_at":"2025-12-04T16:44:03.468118288-08:00","closed_at":"2025-12-04T16:44:03.468118288-08:00","dependencies":[{"issue_id":"skills-bcu","depends_on_id":"skills-1ig","type":"blocks","created_at":"2025-12-04T14:02:17.144414636-08:00","created_by":"daemon","metadata":"{}"},{"issue_id":"skills-bcu","depends_on_id":"skills-53k","type":"blocks","created_at":"2025-12-04T14:02:17.164968463-08:00","created_by":"daemon","metadata":"{}"}]}
 {"id":"skills-be3","title":"Define trace security and redaction policy","description":"Wisps will leak secrets without explicit policy.\n\nRequired:\n- Default-deny for env vars (allowlist: PROJECT, USER, etc.)\n- Redaction rules for sensitive fields\n- No file contents by default\n- Classification field: internal|secret|public\n\nImplementation:\n- redact: [\"env.AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY\", \"inputs.token\"]\n- Sanitization before writing to disk\n- Block elevation if classification=secret\n\nFrom consensus: both models flagged as medium-high severity.","status":"closed","priority":2,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2025-12-23T19:49:31.041661947-05:00","updated_at":"2025-12-23T20:55:04.446363188-05:00","closed_at":"2025-12-23T20:55:04.446363188-05:00","close_reason":"ADRs revised with orch consensus feedback"}