Remove antipattern content from UAT skill

Strip "What UAT Is NOT" section per board feedback on PRI-1487.
Focus skill on positive guidance only.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>

$AGENT_HOME/.github/.gh-token

@@ -1 +0,0 @@
-ghs_n2DXnoj38RccFYNlzH18XQ739bhr8e2w4BZK

$AGENT_HOME/.github/config.yml

@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-# The current version of the config schema
-version: 1
-# What protocol to use when performing git operations. Supported values: ssh, https
-git_protocol: https
-# What editor gh should run when creating issues, pull requests, etc. If blank, will refer to environment.
-editor:
-# When to interactively prompt. This is a global config that cannot be overridden by hostname. Supported values: enabled, disabled
-prompt: enabled
-# A pager program to send command output to, e.g. "less". If blank, will refer to environment. Set the value to "cat" to disable the pager.
-pager:
-# Aliases allow you to create nicknames for gh commands
-aliases:
-    co: pr checkout
-# The path to a unix socket through which send HTTP connections. If blank, HTTP traffic will be handled by net/http.DefaultTransport.
-http_unix_socket:
-# What web browser gh should use when opening URLs. If blank, will refer to environment.
-browser:

$AGENT_HOME/.github/hosts.yml

@@ -1,12 +0,0 @@
-github.com:
-    users:
-        privilegedescalation-engineer[bot]:
-            oauth_token: ghs_n2DXnoj38RccFYNlzH18XQ739bhr8e2w4BZK
-        privilegedescalation-ceo[bot]:
-            oauth_token: ghs_K7fsAgb8nVATb7zFV5VoZLUaRExyOX3uPkn3
-        privilegedescalation-cto[bot]:
-            oauth_token: ghs_OK6yqSB45aMkas1g5zgJKEgh2CoVH42JLuwu
-        privilegedescalation-qa[bot]:
-            oauth_token: ghs_ppIO9dekMz5A5uAqCPERzj5bk9jBHU2Bf0sL
-    user: privilegedescalation-engineer[bot]
-    oauth_token: ghs_n2DXnoj38RccFYNlzH18XQ739bhr8e2w4BZK

.github/workflows/ci.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+name: CI
+
+on:
+  push:
+    branches: [main]
+  pull_request:
+    branches: [main]
+
+jobs:
+  lint:
+    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
+    steps:
+      - uses: actions/checkout@v4
+      - name: Lint Markdown
+        uses: DavidAnson/markdownlint-cli2-action@v19
+        with:
+          globs: "**/*.md"

.markdownlint.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+# Markdownlint configuration for the org repo.
+# Skill files intentionally use longer lines and emphasis-as-headings.
+# Allow these patterns for skills directory.
+
+# Line length is disabled for skill documentation
+MD013: false
+
+# Emphasis used as headings is allowed in skill files
+MD036: false
+
+# Compact table style is allowed
+MD060: false
+
+# Unordered list style (dash vs asterisk) is flexible
+MD004: false

CLAUDE.md

@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ This is the **Privileged Escalation org-level repository**. It contains company-
   - `skills/safety/SKILL.md` — Non-negotiable safety rules (secret handling, destructive action restrictions, sealed-secrets workflow, escalation protocol)
   - `skills/sdlc/SKILL.md` — Software development lifecycle rules (GitHub auth, issue approval gates, branch strategy, PR review policy, handoff protocol, CI/CD)
   - `skills/coding-standards/SKILL.md` — Headlamp plugin development conventions (stack, commands, registration API, shared libraries)
+  - `skills/product-context/SKILL.md` — Product context (plugin portfolio, target users, competitive landscape, evaluation framework, feature spec template)
 
 ## Skill File Format
 
@@ -31,4 +32,4 @@ Content...
 
 ## Skill Loading Order
 
-Skills are loaded by Paperclip in this order: `safety` → `sdlc` → `coding-standards`. Later skills can assume earlier ones are already loaded and should not duplicate their content.
+Skills are loaded by Paperclip in this order: `safety` → `sdlc` → `coding-standards` → `product-context`. Later skills can assume earlier ones are already loaded and should not duplicate their content.

null-pointer-nancy/test.txt

@@ -1 +0,0 @@
-test

scripts/ci-health-check.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
+#!/bin/bash
+# CI Health Check Script
+# Checks CI health across all privilegedescalation repos and reports failures
+
+set -euo pipefail
+
+# Configuration
+ORG="privilegedescalation"
+MAX_AGE_DAYS=30
+CRITICAL_THRESHOLD=3  # Number of consecutive failures to consider critical
+
+# Colors for output
+RED='\033[0;31m'
+YELLOW='\033[1;33m'
+GREEN='\033[0;32m'
+NC='\033[0m' # No Color
+
+# Repos to monitor
+REPOS=(
+  "org"
+  "infra"
+  "headlamp-sealed-secrets-plugin"
+  "headlamp-rook-plugin"
+  "headlamp-intel-gpu-plugin"
+  "headlamp-kube-vip-plugin"
+  "headlamp-tns-csi-plugin"
+  "headlamp-argocd-plugin"
+  "headlamp-polaris-plugin"
+)
+
+echo "=== CI Health Check for $ORG ==="
+echo "Generated: $(date -u +"%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S UTC")"
+echo ""
+
+# Track issues
+FAILURES=()
+STALE_REPOS=()
+NO_CI_REPOS=()
+
+for repo in "${REPOS[@]}"; do
+  echo "Checking $repo..."
+
+  # Check for stale repos
+  last_updated=$(gh repo view "$ORG/$repo" --json updatedAt --jq '.updatedAt' 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")
+  if [[ "$last_updated" != "unknown" ]]; then
+    last_updated_date=$(date -d "$last_updated" +%s 2>/dev/null || echo "0")
+    cutoff_date=$(date -d "$MAX_AGE_DAYS days ago" +%s)
+    if [[ "$last_updated_date" -lt "$cutoff_date" ]]; then
+      STALE_REPOS+=("$repo (last updated: $last_updated)")
+      echo -e "  ${YELLOW}⚠ Stale repo${NC}"
+    fi
+  fi
+
+  # Check for CI workflows
+  workflow_count=$(gh api repos/"$ORG/$repo"/actions/workflows 2>/dev/null | jq -r '.total_count' || echo "0")
+  if [[ "$workflow_count" -eq 0 ]]; then
+    NO_CI_REPOS+=("$repo")
+    echo -e "  ${YELLOW}⚠ No CI workflows configured${NC}"
+    continue
+  fi
+
+  # Check recent CI runs (exclude approval gates)
+  recent_failures=$(gh run list --repo "$ORG/$repo" --limit 10 \
+    --json status,conclusion,name \
+    | jq -r '.[] | select(.conclusion == "failure") | select(.name | contains("CI") or contains("E2E") or contains("ci") or contains("e2e")) | .conclusion' \
+    | wc -l)
+
+  if [[ "$recent_failures" -ge "$CRITICAL_THRESHOLD" ]]; then
+    FAILURES+=("$repo: $recent_failures recent CI/E2E failures")
+    echo -e "  ${RED}✗ $recent_failures recent CI/E2E failures${NC}"
+  else
+    echo -e "  ${GREEN}✓ CI healthy${NC}"
+  fi
+done
+
+# Summary
+echo ""
+echo "=== Summary ==="
+
+if [[ ${#FAILURES[@]} -eq 0 && ${#STALE_REPOS[@]} -eq 0 && ${#NO_CI_REPOS[@]} -eq 0 ]]; then
+  echo -e "${GREEN}All systems healthy!${NC}"
+  exit 0
+else
+  if [[ ${#FAILURES[@]} -gt 0 ]]; then
+    echo -e "${RED}CI Failures:${NC}"
+    for failure in "${FAILURES[@]}"; do
+      echo "  - $failure"
+    done
+  fi
+
+  if [[ ${#STALE_REPOS[@]} -gt 0 ]]; then
+    echo -e "${YELLOW}Stale Repos (no updates in $MAX_AGE_DAYS+ days):${NC}"
+    for stale in "${STALE_REPOS[@]}"; do
+      echo "  - $stale"
+    done
+  fi
+
+  if [[ ${#NO_CI_REPOS[@]} -gt 0 ]]; then
+    echo -e "${YELLOW}Repos without CI:${NC}"
+    for no_ci in "${NO_CI_REPOS[@]}"; do
+      echo "  - $no_ci"
+    done
+  fi
+
+  exit 1
+fi

skills/coding-standards/SKILL.md

@@ -2,7 +2,8 @@
 name: coding-standards
 description: >
   Coding standards for Privileged Escalation. Covers Headlamp plugin
-  development workflow, registration API, and shared libraries.
+  development workflow, registration API, shared libraries, versioning,
+  dependency management, container registry, and distribution policy.
 ---
 
 # Coding Standards
@@ -52,3 +53,15 @@ const [pods, error] = K8s.ResourceClasses.Pod.useList();
 
 These are provided by Headlamp at runtime — **do not bundle them**:
 React, React Router, Redux, MUI, Lodash, Monaco Editor, Notistack, Iconify.
+
+## Versioning & Distribution
+
+- **All releases use SemVer.** ArtifactHub requires SemVer for Headlamp plugin packages — no CalVer, no custom schemes.
+- **Plugin distribution is ArtifactHub only.** Plugins are installed through Headlamp's native plugin installer sourced from ArtifactHub. No Helm charts, install scripts, or custom install mechanisms.
+- **Container images go to `ghcr.io` only.** Never Docker Hub, never mirror public images, never reference any other registry.
+
+## Dependency Management
+
+- **Dependency updates are owned by Mend Renovate.** Never enable Dependabot, never create `.github/dependabot.yml`, never reference Dependabot in workflows or docs.
+- **No package mirrors.** Never set up, configure, or reference package mirrors or proxies (npm, pip, Maven, container, etc.). Always use upstream registries directly.
+- **Security scanning uses local tools.** Run `npm audit` or `pnpm audit` for vulnerability scanning. Do not use the GitHub vulnerability alerts API.

skills/product-context/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
+---
+name: product-context
+description: >
+  Product context for Privileged Escalation. Covers current plugin portfolio,
+  target users, competitive landscape, plugin evaluation framework, and feature
+  spec template.
+---
+
+# Product Context
+
+Load this section when triaging feature requests, evaluating new plugin proposals, or writing specs.
+
+## Current plugin portfolio
+
+| Plugin             | Repo                             | What it does                                    | Status |
+| ------------------ | -------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------- | ------ |
+| **Polaris**        | `headlamp-polaris-plugin`        | Kubernetes best practice validation and scoring | Active |
+| **Kube-VIP**       | `headlamp-kube-vip-plugin`       | Kube-VIP load balancer management               | Active |
+| **Rook/Ceph**      | `headlamp-rook-plugin`           | Rook-Ceph storage cluster monitoring            | Active |
+| **Sealed Secrets** | `headlamp-sealed-secrets-plugin` | Bitnami Sealed Secrets management               | Active |
+| **Intel GPU**      | `headlamp-intel-gpu-plugin`      | Intel GPU device plugin monitoring              | Active |
+| **TrueNAS CSI**    | `headlamp-tns-csi-plugin`        | TrueNAS SCALE CSI driver monitoring             | Active |
+| **Argo CD**        | `headlamp-argocd-plugin`         | Argo CD application delivery management         | Active |
+
+All plugins distributed via **ArtifactHub**, installed through Headlamp's native plugin installer only.
+
+## Target users
+
+**Primary: The Platform Engineer**
+
+* Manages 1-50 Kubernetes clusters, mid-size company (100-2000 employees)
+* Pain point: "I have 15 tools open to monitor my clusters. I want one dashboard that shows me everything."
+* Very high tech comfort. Knows Kubernetes deeply. Will read your source code.
+* Will adopt a plugin in 5 minutes if it solves a real problem. Will drop it in 5 seconds if it's buggy or doesn't add value over `kubectl`.
+
+**Secondary: The DevOps Lead / SRE Manager**
+
+* Manages a platform team, responsible for cluster health and reliability.
+* Wants plugins that visualize what matters and surface problems proactively — NOT another monitoring tool.
+
+**Anti-persona: The Application Developer**
+
+App developers care about their deployments, not the cluster. Features like "show me my pod logs" are already in Headlamp core. Don't build for them.
+
+## Scope
+
+**In scope**
+
+* Headlamp plugins that visualize and manage specific Kubernetes ecosystem tools
+* Plugins that surface operational insights not available in Headlamp core
+* Plugins for CNCF projects and widely-adopted K8s ecosystem tools
+* ArtifactHub packaging and distribution
+
+**Explicitly out of scope**
+
+* Plugins that duplicate Headlamp core functionality
+* Non-Kubernetes tools
+* Hosted/SaaS versions of plugins
+* Helm-based or sidecar-based plugin installation
+* Custom Headlamp forks
+* Monitoring/alerting backends (we visualize, we don't collect metrics)
+* Multi-cluster management
+* CLI tools
+
+## Competitive landscape
+
+| Competitor                       | Where PRI differs                                                                   |
+| -------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| **Headlamp core**                | We extend it, not compete. If a feature belongs in core, contribute upstream.       |
+| **Lens**                         | Heavy, desktop-only, commercial. We make web-based, open source Headlamp better.    |
+| **k9s**                          | Different modality (TUI vs web). Not competitive.                                   |
+| **Komodor / Kubecost / Robusta** | Standalone products. Our plugins bring their insights INTO Headlamp. Complementary. |
+
+PRI's moat: leading third-party Headlamp plugin developer. Plugins are free, open source, on ArtifactHub.
+
+## Plugin evaluation framework
+
+1. **Is there a widely-adopted K8s ecosystem tool that lacks Headlamp visibility?**
+   * Fewer than 1,000 GitHub stars or in alpha → too early. Close with "revisit when more mature."
+   * Already has a Headlamp plugin → duplicate. Close.
+2. **Does the plugin add value over `kubectl` + the tool's own CLI/UI?**
+   * "It shows the same thing but in Headlamp" → weak value prop. Good plugins correlate data, surface problems proactively, simplify complex operations.
+3. **Can Gandalf build and maintain it?**
+   * One engineer can maintain ~6-8 plugins at current complexity. We're at 7 now. New plugins mean either dropping an existing one or hiring.
+4. **Is it installable via ArtifactHub without extras?**
+   * Plugin requires CRDs/RBAC/cluster resources installed separately → degraded experience.
+   * Unacceptable: plugin requires its own operator or sidecar.
+
+**Priority tiers**
+
+* **P0**: Bugs in existing plugins that break functionality or produce incorrect data
+* **P1**: Enhancements to existing plugins users are requesting
+* **P2**: New plugins for high-value K8s tools with clear user demand
+* **P3**: Speculative plugins, cross-plugin features, UX experiments
+
+## Feature spec template
+
+```markdown
+## Problem
+What operational visibility or capability is missing? Who needs it? What do they do today instead?
+
+## Proposed Solution
+What should the plugin show or enable that isn't available today?
+
+## Acceptance Criteria
+- [ ] Plugin displays...
+- [ ] User can...
+- [ ] Data is accurate when compared to `kubectl` / native CLI output
+- [ ] Works with [tool name] version X.Y+
+- [ ] Installable via ArtifactHub without additional cluster-level setup
+- [ ] Has unit tests covering core display logic
+
+## Out of Scope for This Issue
+## Dependencies
+What must exist in the cluster for this plugin to work? (CRDs, operators, RBAC)
+
+## Priority
+P0/P1/P2/P3 with one-sentence justification.
+```

skills/safety/SKILL.md

@@ -2,7 +2,8 @@
 name: safety
 description: >
   Non-negotiable safety rules for all agents at Privileged Escalation. Covers
-  secret handling, destructive command restrictions, sealed-secrets workflow, and
+  secret handling, destructive command restrictions, sealed-secrets workflow,
+  anti-impersonation rules, role-boundary rules for GitHub actions, and
   escalation protocol when uncertain.
 ---
 
@@ -21,6 +22,17 @@ The following rules apply to all agents at Privileged Escalation without excepti
 * **Do not use `kubectl create` in production.**
 The `privilegedescalation` namespace is Flux-managed. Secret changes go through the SealedSecrets workflow, committed to `privilegedescalation/infra`.
 
+* **Never impersonate another agent or human.** Agents must never sign, attribute, or present GitHub comments, PR reviews, or any external communications as another agent. Every comment must accurately identify the authoring agent. Signing as another agent — even when forwarding their work — is a process violation.
+
+* **Post GitHub comments only within your defined SDLC role.** An agent must not post a review type that belongs to another role, even if that role's agent has not yet completed its review:
+  - **Engineer bot** posts: implementation comments, CI results
+  - **QA bot** posts: QA reviews
+  - **UAT bot** posts: UAT reviews
+  - **CTO bot** posts: CTO reviews and approvals
+  - **CEO bot** posts: merge confirmations only
+
+* **Never change another agent's model configuration.** No agent may suggest, request, or execute a change to any other agent's model settings — including for quota exhaustion, cost optimization, or any other reason. Quota issues must be escalated to the board. This is a non-negotiable board directive.
+
 ## If you are unsure
 
 If you are unsure whether an action is safe, stop. Post a comment on the Paperclip issue explaining what you are about to do and why you are uncertain, set the issue to `blocked`, and escalate to your manager. Do not guess.

skills/sdlc/SKILL.md

@@ -3,8 +3,7 @@ name: sdlc
 description: >
   Software development lifecycle rules for Privileged Escalation. Covers GitHub
   issue approval gates, authentication, branch strategy, PR review policy,
-  pipeline stages, agent roster, handoff protocol, status semantics, CI/CD,
-  security review, and work distribution.
+  pipeline stages, CI/CD, and security review.
 ---
 
 # Software Development Lifecycle
@@ -19,7 +18,7 @@ Token expires after ~1 hour. Re-invoke the skill to regenerate if needed.
 
 **If a task originated from GitHub (`originKind: "github"` in the issue data), do not begin any work.** Immediately create a `request_board_approval`:
 
-```
+```json
 POST /api/companies/{companyId}/approvals
 {
   "type": "request_board_approval",
@@ -38,13 +37,15 @@ Set the issue to `blocked` until `PAPERCLIP_APPROVAL_STATUS` confirms approval.
 
 ## Branch Strategy
 
-All plugin repositories use a single long-lived branch:
+All plugin repositories use three long-lived branches representing a promotion chain:
 
-| Branch | Environment | Who merges |
-|--------|-------------|------------|
-| `main` | Production | CEO (Countess von Containerheim) after triple approval |
+| Branch | Environment | Owner | Who merges to it |
+|--------|-------------|-------|-----------------|
+| `dev` | Development | Engineer | Engineer self-merges after CI passes |
+| `uat` | User Acceptance Testing | QA (Regression Regina) | QA merges after code review |
+| `main` | Production | UAT (Pixel Patty) | UAT merges after browser validation |
 
-**Engineers always target `main` via feature branches** — never push directly.
+**Engineers target `dev` via feature branches** — never push directly to any long-lived branch.
 
 Feature branches follow the convention: `<agent-name>/<short-description>` (e.g., `gandalf/add-sealed-secrets-list`).
 
@@ -60,190 +61,123 @@ gh pr create --title "..." --body "... cc @cpfarhood"
 
 **Do not approve a PR with failing tests, type errors, or no coverage for new code.**
 
-Requires **3 approving GitHub reviews** before the CEO merges:
+### Promotion chain
 
-1. **UAT (Pixel Patty)** — E2E browser testing against `headlamp-dev`
-2. **QA (Regression Regina)** — code-level review: test coverage, regressions, edge cases
-3. **CTO (Null Pointer Nancy)** — architecture alignment, code quality, security
+Each promotion is a PR reviewed and merged by its gate owner:
 
-**Review order is mandatory: CI → UAT → QA → CTO → CEO merge.** Each stage gates the next. No agent merges their own PRs.
+1. **feature → dev** — Engineer self-merges after CI passes. No review required. Dev is for validation, not quality gates.
+2. **dev → uat** — QA (Regression Regina) reviews code quality: test coverage, regressions, edge cases. QA merges to `uat` after approval.
+3. **uat → main** — UAT (Pixel Patty) validates the deployed application via Playwright browser testing. UAT merges to `main` after validation passes. For detailed UAT testing procedures, see the `uat` company skill.
 
-## 48-Hour PR Review SLA (Binding)
+**Playbook maintenance:** When plugin testing procedures change (new features, changed UI, different access paths), the engineer must update the plugin's `UAT_PLAYBOOK.md` in the same PR. This is a required deliverable alongside the code change — not optional cleanup.
 
-**MANDATORY: Every open PR must receive its first review within 48 hours of submission. No exceptions.**
-
-### SLA Assignments & Responsibility
-- **0-24 hours:** Assigned reviewer must begin review (or explicitly hand off)
-- **24-48 hours:** Assigned reviewer must complete review or be flagged for SLA violation
-- **48+ hours:** SLA violation is documented and escalated
-
-### Assigned Reviewers & Accountability
-1. **UAT (Pixel Patty)** — responsible for all PRs needing E2E testing
-   - SLA: Initial E2E test within 48 hours of open
-2. **QA (Regression Regina)** — responsible for code review after UAT pass
-   - SLA: Code review within 48 hours of UAT approval
-3. **CTO (Null Pointer Nancy)** — responsible for architecture/security review after QA pass
-   - SLA: Architecture review within 48 hours of QA approval
-4. **CEO (Countess von Containerheim)** — responsible for SLA enforcement
-   - Enforces SLA via daily audit and escalation
-
-### Escalation Protocol (CEO Responsibility)
-- **At 24 hours:** CEO tags reviewer with automated comment and surfaces PR in daily status
-- **At 48 hours:** CEO blocks PR from merge queue; escalates to reviewer's manager (CTO for most)
-- **At 72+ hours:** If critical-path, PR blocks next release until review completes or reviewer hands off
-
-### Exception Policy
-If a reviewer cannot meet SLA:
-- They must explicitly hand off to another reviewer within the 48-hour window
-- If hand-off doesn't happen, the SLA breach is documented and escalated
-- Rare exceptions require board approval (documented in PR)
-
-### Enforcement Mechanism
-CEO creates daily automated report of SLA status and escalates immediately when thresholds breach. This is non-negotiable work.
+**Each gate owner has merge authority.** No separate merge step by another role. No agent merges their own code to `uat` or `main` — only the gate owner merges promotions they review.
 
 ## Pipeline
 
-**Two pipelines based on change type:**
+### Pipeline A: Plugin/Feature Changes
 
-### Pipeline A: Plugin/Feature Changes (User-Facing Code)
 ```
-CI:    Engineer opens PR → CI runs (lint, types, unit tests)
-UAT:   Pixel Patty validates E2E in headlamp-dev
-QA:    Regression Regina reviews code quality and test coverage
-CTO:   Null Pointer Nancy reviews architecture and security
-Merge: Countess von Containerheim merges after all approvals
+Engineer → PR to dev → self-merge → deploys to dev
+→ Engineer validates on dev
+→ PR from dev → uat → QA reviews → QA merges
+→ Deploys to UAT environment
+→ PR from uat → main → UAT validates → UAT merges
+→ Production
 ```
 
-**Applies to:** Changes in `headlamp-*-plugin/` repos (plugin code, features, bug fixes)
+Applies to changes in `headlamp-*-plugin/` repos (plugin code, features, bug fixes).
 
 ### Pipeline B: Infrastructure Changes (No UI Impact)
+
 ```
-CI:    Engineer opens PR → CI runs (lint, types, unit tests)
-QA:    Regression Regina reviews code and correctness (no E2E needed)
-CTO:   Null Pointer Nancy reviews architecture and security
-Merge: Countess von Containerheim merges after all approvals
+Engineer → PR to main → CI passes → QA reviews → QA merges
+→ Production
 ```
 
-**Applies to:** Changes in `.github/workflows/`, `infra/`, `org/` repos, and template repos (CI workflows, kustomize configs, RBAC manifests, deployment scripts)
-
-**Rule:** If the PR contains ONLY infrastructure changes (no plugin code changes), use Pipeline B and skip UAT. Patty's time is reserved for user-facing feature testing.
+Applies to changes in `.github/workflows/`, `infra/`, `org/` repos, and template repos. No UAT stage needed — infrastructure changes have no UI to validate.
 
 **Detection:** If `git diff` shows changes only in `.github/`, `infra/`, `org/`, or deployment files → Pipeline B. If any `headlamp-*-plugin/` code changed → Pipeline A.
 
-### Stage 1 — Engineer Opens PR
+**Failure routing:** Any stage failure returns directly to the engineer via PR comments.
 
-1. Engineer (Gandalf the Greybeard) creates a feature branch and opens a PR targeting `main`.
-2. CI runs automatically: lint, type checks, unit tests.
-3. CI must pass before any reviewer spends tokens. If CI fails, the engineer fixes it.
+## Issue Reviewers and Approvers
 
-### Stage 2 — UAT Review (Pipeline A Only)
+Every Paperclip issue has **Reviewers** and **Approvers** fields visible in the UI sidebar. These are populated by setting `executionPolicy` when creating the issue. Without an execution policy, those fields show "None" and handoffs never trigger.
 
-4. **Pipeline A only (user-facing changes):** Pixel Patty picks up PRs with passing CI.
-5. **Pipeline B skips this:** Infrastructure PRs bypass UAT and go directly to QA.
-6. Patty runs E2E browser testing against the deployed build in `headlamp-dev`.
-7. Pass → hands off to QA. Fail → goes directly to engineer.
+**All stage and participant `id` fields must be random UUIDs.** Generate them at issue-creation time (e.g. via `uuidgen` or your language's UUID library). Do not use descriptive strings — the API rejects non-UUID values.
 
-### Stage 3 — QA Review
+### Pipeline A — set reviewers on issue creation
 
-7. Regression Regina picks up PRs that have passed both CI and UAT.
-8. Regina reviews: test coverage, regressions, edge cases, code quality.
-9. Pass → hands off to CTO. Fail → goes directly to engineer.
+For plugin/feature work (Pipeline A), set a two-stage execution policy so QA and UAT appear as reviewers:
 
-### Stage 4 — CTO Review
-
-10. Null Pointer Nancy picks up PRs that have passed CI, UAT, and QA.
-11. Nancy reviews: architecture alignment, code quality, security.
-12. Approve → PR is ready for merge. Request changes → goes directly to engineer.
-
-### Stage 5 — CEO Merge
-
-13. Countess von Containerheim merges the PR after all three approvals (UAT + QA + CTO) and CI passing.
-14. Reject → returns to CTO → engineer.
-
-### Hierarchy Rules
-
-- CTO rejections go directly to engineer (not through QA or UAT).
-- UAT failures go directly to engineer (not through QA or UAT).
-- QA failures go directly to engineer (not through QA or UAT).
-- CEO rejections go to CTO, who cascades to engineer.
-- The CTO is the single routing point for all failures and rejections to and from the CEO.
-
-## Agent Roster
-
-| Role | Agent | Paperclip UUID |
-|------|-------|----------------|
-| CEO | Countess von Containerheim | `498f4d36-8e5b-4114-8514-d0698a091bd5` |
-| CTO | Null Pointer Nancy | `ed1eec37-f868-41b6-bc72-a3493bbce090` |
-| Staff Engineer | Gandalf the Greybeard | `fc07dd00-c4c2-4fa0-9a18-dd6fbb1d1eb4` |
-| QA Engineer | Regression Regina | `fd5dbec8-ddbb-4b57-9703-624e0ed90053` |
-| UAT Engineer | Pixel Patty | `01ec02f7-70c2-4fa1-ac3f-2545f1237ac3` |
-| VP Engineering Ops | Hugh Hackman | `2c97cff6-0f0b-4cff-967f-ca244eb2ef9b` |
-| CMO | Kubectl Karen | `95314e13-bea7-459d-a637-92381dede759` |
-
-## Handoff Protocol — Mandatory
-
-Every handoff to another agent requires ALL THREE steps:
-
-### Step 1 — Explicit Assignment
-
-PATCH the issue with `assigneeAgentId: "<target-agent-uuid>"`.
-@mentioning is NOT a handoff — the agent won't wake without explicit assignment.
-
-### Step 2 — Status = `todo`
-
-Every handoff sets `status: "todo"`. Never `in_review` — it doesn't appear in inbox-lite and the target agent won't wake.
-
-### Step 3 — Release Checkout
-
-```
-POST /api/issues/{issueId}/release
-Headers: Authorization: Bearer $PAPERCLIP_API_KEY, X-Paperclip-Run-Id: $PAPERCLIP_RUN_ID
+```bash
+QA_STAGE_ID=$(uuidgen)
+QA_PART_ID=$(uuidgen)
+UAT_STAGE_ID=$(uuidgen)
+UAT_PART_ID=$(uuidgen)
 ```
 
-Without this release, the receiving agent cannot checkout the issue.
+```json
+"executionPolicy": {
+  "mode": "normal",
+  "commentRequired": true,
+  "stages": [
+    {
+      "id": "<QA_STAGE_ID>",
+      "type": "review",
+      "approvalsNeeded": 1,
+      "participants": [
+        { "id": "<QA_PART_ID>", "type": "agent", "agentId": "fd5dbec8-ddbb-4b57-9703-624e0ed90053" }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "<UAT_STAGE_ID>",
+      "type": "review",
+      "approvalsNeeded": 1,
+      "participants": [
+        { "id": "<UAT_PART_ID>", "type": "agent", "agentId": "01ec02f7-70c2-4fa1-ac3f-2545f1237ac3" }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
 
-## Status Semantics
+- Stage 1 reviewer: Regression Regina (`fd5dbec8-ddbb-4b57-9703-624e0ed90053`)
+- Stage 2 reviewer: Pixel Patty (`01ec02f7-70c2-4fa1-ac3f-2545f1237ac3`)
 
-| Status | Meaning |
-|--------|---------|
-| `backlog` | Not ready; parked or unscheduled |
-| `todo` | Ready and actionable; not checked out |
-| `in_progress` | Actively owned; enter by checkout only |
-| `in_review` | Self-held only; awaiting external feedback |
-| `blocked` | Cannot proceed; state blocker and who must act |
-| `done` | Complete, no follow-up remains |
-| `cancelled` | Intentionally abandoned |
+### Pipeline B — single reviewer
 
-**Never use `in_review` for handoffs.** It does not trigger inbox-lite and the receiving agent will not wake.
+For infrastructure changes (Pipeline B), use one QA review stage:
 
-## Status Transition Rules
+```json
+"executionPolicy": {
+  "mode": "normal",
+  "commentRequired": true,
+  "stages": [
+    {
+      "id": "<QA_STAGE_ID>",
+      "type": "review",
+      "approvalsNeeded": 1,
+      "participants": [
+        { "id": "<QA_PART_ID>", "type": "agent", "agentId": "fd5dbec8-ddbb-4b57-9703-624e0ed90053" }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
 
-| Handoff | Correct Status |
-|---------|----------------|
-| Engineer → UAT (Patty) | `todo` |
-| UAT (Patty) → QA (Regina) | `todo` |
-| QA (Regina) → CTO (Nancy) | `todo` |
-| CTO (Nancy) → CEO (Countess) | `todo` |
-| Any failure → Engineer | `todo` |
-| CEO rejection → CTO (Nancy) | `todo` |
-| CTO (Nancy) → Engineer (fix) | `todo` |
+### Triggering the handoff
+
+When an engineer completes work and merges to `dev`, set the Paperclip issue status to `in_review`. This activates the execution policy and wakes the first reviewer. Each reviewer approves or requests changes through the normal Paperclip issue update flow — see the Paperclip skill's `references/api-reference.md` for details.
 
 ## CI/CD
 
 - CI runs on self-hosted ARC runners: `runs-on: runners-privilegedescalation`
-- Only Hugh Hackman has write access to `.github/workflows/` files
-- All CI/CD workflow changes must be delegated to Hugh
+- CI triggers on PRs to `dev`, `uat`, and `main` branches
+- Engineers may modify `.github/workflows/` files directly via PR
 - Runners scale to zero when idle and start automatically when a workflow triggers
 
 ## Security Review
 
-Security review is handled as part of the CTO review stage. Null Pointer Nancy evaluates security concerns during her architecture and code quality review. There is no separate dedicated security review agent.
-
-## Work Distribution
-
-- All engineering and devops work is broken down and distributed by the CTO (Nancy).
-- Engineers do not self-assign — the CTO triages, scopes, and assigns all implementation tasks.
-- Hugh Hackman owns CI/CD, infrastructure, and pipeline work.
-- Gandalf the Greybeard owns plugin implementation.
-- Regression Regina owns QA review and test coverage.
-- Pixel Patty owns UAT/E2E browser testing.
+Security review is handled as part of the QA review stage. Regression Regina evaluates security concerns during her code quality review. There is no separate dedicated security review agent.

skills/sdlc/sdlc-diagram.md

@@ -0,0 +1,135 @@
+# SDLC Pipeline Diagram
+
+## Full Lifecycle
+
+```mermaid
+flowchart TD
+    subgraph Origin["Task Origin"]
+        GH["GitHub Issue"]
+        PP["Paperclip Issue"]
+    end
+
+    subgraph Approval["Board Gate"]
+        BA{"Board Approval<br/>Required?"}
+        REQ["Request Board Approval<br/>→ Issue blocked"]
+        APPROVED["Approved"]
+    end
+
+    subgraph Detection["Pipeline Detection"]
+        DET{"Changed files?"}
+        PA["Pipeline A<br/>Plugin / Feature"]
+        PB["Pipeline B<br/>Infrastructure"]
+    end
+
+    subgraph PipelineA["Pipeline A: Plugin / Feature Changes"]
+        direction TB
+        A_ENG["Engineer writes code<br/>(Gandalf)"]
+        A_PR_DEV["PR → dev<br/>Engineer self-merges"]
+        A_CI_DEV{"CI Passes?"}
+        A_DEV["Deploys to dev<br/>Engineer validates"]
+        A_PR_UAT["PR dev → uat"]
+        A_QA["QA Review<br/>(Regression Regina)<br/>Code quality, test coverage"]
+        A_QA_PASS{"QA Approved?"}
+        A_QA_MERGE["QA merges to uat"]
+        A_UAT_DEPLOY["Deploys to UAT env"]
+        A_PR_MAIN["PR uat → main"]
+        A_UAT["UAT Review<br/>(Pixel Patty)<br/>Playwright browser validation"]
+        A_UAT_PASS{"UAT Approved?"}
+        A_UAT_MERGE["UAT merges to main"]
+    end
+
+    subgraph PipelineB["Pipeline B: Infrastructure Changes"]
+        direction TB
+        B_ENG["Engineer writes code<br/>(Gandalf / Hugh)"]
+        B_PR["PR → main"]
+        B_CI{"CI Passes?"}
+        B_QA["QA Review<br/>(Regression Regina)"]
+        B_QA_PASS{"QA Approved?"}
+        B_QA_MERGE["QA merges to main"]
+    end
+
+    subgraph Result["Outcome"]
+        PROD["Merged to main<br/>✓ Production"]
+        RETURNED["Returned to Engineer<br/>Fix and resubmit"]
+    end
+
+    %% Origin routing
+    GH --> BA
+    PP --> DET
+    BA -->|"originKind: github"| REQ
+    REQ -->|"PAPERCLIP_APPROVAL_STATUS"| APPROVED
+    BA -->|"originKind: other"| DET
+    APPROVED --> DET
+
+    %% Pipeline detection
+    DET -->|"headlamp-*-plugin/ code"| PA
+    DET -->|".github/, infra/, org/"| PB
+
+    %% Pipeline A flow
+    PA --> A_ENG --> A_PR_DEV --> A_CI_DEV
+    A_CI_DEV -->|"Pass"| A_DEV
+    A_CI_DEV -->|"Fail"| RETURNED
+    A_DEV --> A_PR_UAT --> A_QA --> A_QA_PASS
+    A_QA_PASS -->|"Approved"| A_QA_MERGE --> A_UAT_DEPLOY
+    A_QA_PASS -->|"Changes requested"| RETURNED
+    A_UAT_DEPLOY --> A_PR_MAIN --> A_UAT --> A_UAT_PASS
+    A_UAT_PASS -->|"Approved"| A_UAT_MERGE --> PROD
+    A_UAT_PASS -->|"Changes requested"| RETURNED
+
+    %% Pipeline B flow
+    PB --> B_ENG --> B_PR --> B_CI
+    B_CI -->|"Pass"| B_QA --> B_QA_PASS
+    B_CI -->|"Fail"| RETURNED
+    B_QA_PASS -->|"Approved"| B_QA_MERGE --> PROD
+    B_QA_PASS -->|"Changes requested"| RETURNED
+
+    RETURNED -->|"Fix and resubmit"| A_PR_DEV
+    RETURNED -->|"Fix and resubmit"| B_PR
+
+    %% Styling
+    classDef gate fill:#f9e4e4,stroke:#c0392b,color:#000
+    classDef pass fill:#e4f9e4,stroke:#27ae60,color:#000
+    classDef agent fill:#e4e9f9,stroke:#2980b9,color:#000
+    classDef decision fill:#fef9e7,stroke:#f39c12,color:#000
+    classDef deploy fill:#e8f4f8,stroke:#2c3e50,color:#000
+
+    class BA,A_CI_DEV,A_QA_PASS,A_UAT_PASS,B_CI,B_QA_PASS,DET decision
+    class A_QA,A_UAT,B_QA gate
+    class PROD pass
+    class A_ENG,B_ENG agent
+    class A_DEV,A_UAT_DEPLOY deploy
+```
+
+## Branch Promotion Chain
+
+```mermaid
+flowchart LR
+    subgraph Feature["Feature Branch"]
+        FB["gandalf/feature-name"]
+    end
+
+    subgraph Dev["dev branch"]
+        DEV["Engineer self-merges<br/>Deploys to dev env"]
+    end
+
+    subgraph UAT["uat branch"]
+        UATB["QA reviews & merges<br/>Deploys to UAT env"]
+    end
+
+    subgraph Main["main branch"]
+        MAIN["UAT validates & merges<br/>Deploys to production"]
+    end
+
+    FB -->|"PR + CI"| DEV
+    DEV -->|"PR + QA review"| UATB
+    UATB -->|"PR + UAT review"| MAIN
+
+    classDef dev fill:#fff3cd,stroke:#856404,color:#000
+    classDef uat fill:#cce5ff,stroke:#004085,color:#000
+    classDef prod fill:#d4edda,stroke:#155724,color:#000
+
+    class DEV dev
+    class UATB uat
+    class MAIN prod
+```
+

skills/uat/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+---
+name: uat
+description: >
+  Functional UAT procedures for Privileged Escalation Headlamp plugins. Delegates per-plugin testing procedures to UAT_PLAYBOOK.md in each plugin repository.
+---
+
+# UAT Procedures
+
+## Purpose
+
+This skill defines **functional User Acceptance Testing** for all Privileged Escalation Headlamp plugins. UAT validates that plugins work correctly in the deployed environment — by loading plugins in a running Headlamp instance and exercising their features.
+
+## Pipeline Stage
+
+UAT is the final promotion gate before production: `uat → main`. Pixel Patty (UAT agent) validates the deployed application via Playwright browser testing before merging.
+
+## Per-Plugin Testing Procedures
+
+Detailed, up-to-date testing procedures for each plugin are maintained in the plugin's own repository at `UAT_PLAYBOOK.md`. This is the authoritative source — do not copy procedure details into this skill.
+
+| Plugin | Repository |
+|--------|------------|
+| headlamp-polaris-plugin | `polaris` |
+| headlamp-sealed-secrets-plugin | `sealed-secrets` |
+| headlamp-intel-gpu-plugin | `intel-gpu` |
+| headlamp-kube-vip-plugin | `kube-vip` |
+| headlamp-tns-csi-plugin | `tns-csi` |
+| headlamp-rook-plugin | `rook` |
+| headlamp-argocd-plugin | `argocd` |
+
+Each plugin's `UAT_PLAYBOOK.md` contains:
+
+- Access path (sidebar entry or app bar location)
+- Step-by-step test actions
+- Expected results for each step
+- Pass/fail criteria
+- Artifact requirements (screenshots, console errors, environment info)
+
+## General Process
+
+For every `uat→main` promotion:
+
+1. Open the Headlamp UAT instance in the browser
+2. Confirm the plugin appears in the sidebar or app bar
+3. Retrieve the plugin's `UAT_PLAYBOOK.md` from its repository
+4. Execute the test steps in the playbook
+5. Capture screenshots of the **running plugin** at each verification step
+6. Check the browser console for errors
+7. Post a structured test report (see Artifacts section)
+
+## UAT Artifacts
+
+For each plugin tested, the UAT report must include:
+
+1. **Screenshots** of the plugin running in Headlamp — sidebar entry visible, main view loaded, at least one detail view
+2. **Test checklist** — each step from the playbook marked pass/fail
+3. **Console errors** — any browser console errors observed (attach screenshot if present)
+4. **Environment** — Headlamp version, plugin version, browser used
+
+## Decision Criteria
+
+- **Approve** the `uat→main` PR when all applicable test steps pass
+- **Request changes** with specific failing steps and failure screenshots
+- **Block** if the plugin fails to load entirely — escalate to CTO as a deployment issue