fix(skills): address bot review findings post-943b299

- competitive-platform-analysis: add ## Examples section per ECC
  guidelines (8-axis taxonomy walkthrough + pre-filter scoring matrix)
- competitive-report-structure: clarify dimension 9 poles are client-
  specific (e.g., Memorability/Hireability) not hard-coded names
- brand-discovery: fix terminal state — set inProgressModule to null
  after 90_SYNTHESIS.md is complete to prevent misleading resumption

All fixes mirrored to .agents/ copies.

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

.agents/skills/brand-discovery/SKILL.md

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ description: >-
   personality, voice, narrative, and founder-brand tension across 8 modules
   using laddering, 5 Whys, and projective techniques. Produces a resumable
   session with disk-persisted state and a master brandbook (90_SYNTHESIS.md).
+origin: community
 ---
 
 # Brand Discovery
@@ -114,7 +115,9 @@ After writing, confirm: "Module X saved. State updated. Next: Y."
 **Terminal module (90_SYNTHESIS.md):** when writing the final synthesis,
 set `inProgressModule` to `"90_SYNTHESIS.md"` and `nextModule` to `null`
 in `state.json`. After writing, set `completedModules` to include
-`"90_SYNTHESIS.md"` and confirm: "Brandbook complete. All modules saved."
+`"90_SYNTHESIS.md"`, then set `inProgressModule` to `null` — leaving it
+populated would cause a future resumption to treat the completed brandbook
+as still in progress. Confirm: "Brandbook complete. All modules saved."
 
 ## Multi-founder mode
 

.agents/skills/competitive-platform-analysis/SKILL.md

@@ -175,6 +175,40 @@ each tagged with its axis positions, tier, and source links, ready to hand to
 - **Relying on a single source per competitor.** Self-reported site copy is marketing, not fact. Verify attributes across at least two sources.
 - **Jumping straight to scoring.** This skill scopes and tiers the set. Benchmark-methodology handles scoring. Don't conflate the two steps.
 
+## Examples
+
+**Scenario:** A boutique brand-identity studio (2-person, EU-remote, productized
+sprints, contrarian/manifesto-driven aesthetic) wants to scope its competitive
+set before benchmarking. The strategic tension from the positioning brief is
+*memorability × hireability*.
+
+**Step 1 — eight-axis population (sample candidates):**
+
+| Candidate | Positioning stance | Specialization | Size band | Engagement | Distinctiveness | Evidence model | Brand strength | Market |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| Studio A | brand-led / editorial | identity only | micro | productized | contrarian | aesthetic-led | cult | global-remote |
+| Studio B | capability-led | broad DS+motion | boutique | bespoke | conventional | outcome-led | interchangeable | US |
+| Agency C | capability-led | brand+digital | mid-size | retainer | conventional | outcome-led | interchangeable | EU |
+| Freelancer D | brand-led | brand voice only | solo | day-rate | editorial | aesthetic-led | ownable | global |
+| Studio E | brand-led | brand strategy | micro | productized | manifesto-driven | outcome-led | cult | EU-remote |
+
+**Step 2 — pre-filter scoring (client scoping consequence: weight distinctiveness
+because the client's moat is POV-first, not capability breadth):**
+
+| Candidate | Offer overlap (1–5) | Distinctiveness (1–5) | Commercial credibility (1–5) | Craft proximity (1–5) | Tier | Include? |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| Studio A | 5 | 5 | 3 | 5 | Direct | ✓ must-profile |
+| Studio B | 3 | 2 | 5 | 3 | Adjacent | ✓ credibility anchor |
+| Agency C | 2 | 1 | 5 | 2 | Aspirational | ✓ scale reference |
+| Freelancer D | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4 | Direct | ✓ cautionary case |
+| Studio E | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | Direct | ✓ must-profile |
+
+**Step 3 — output handed to `benchmark-methodology`:**
+Five candidates (3 Direct, 1 Adjacent, 1 Aspirational), each tagged with
+axis positions, tier, and source links. Studio A and Studio E are the
+sharpest head-to-head rivals; Freelancer D is the "memorable but
+un-hireable" cautionary case to learn from.
+
 ## Related Skills
 
 - `brand-discovery` — use first to establish the positioning brief and strategic tension that scopes the competitor set.

.agents/skills/competitive-report-structure/SKILL.md

@@ -74,7 +74,8 @@ the detail.
 ### 4. Benchmarking matrix
 The full **competitors × dimensions** table — the quantitative spine. Rows =
 competitors (grouped by tier), columns = the nine benchmark dimensions (note:
-dimension 9 — strategic tension — has two poles: Memorability and Hireability;
+dimension 9 — strategic tension — has two poles (e.g., Memorability and
+Hireability for a brand-studio client; substitute the client's own paired axes);
 represent them as two separate sub-columns rather than averaging them). Include
 the client's own honest self-assessment as a row for contrast. Use a **heatmap**
 (color or symbol scale) so strength/weakness patterns are scannable. Do **not**

skills/brand-discovery/SKILL.md

@@ -115,7 +115,9 @@ After writing, confirm: "Module X saved. State updated. Next: Y."
 **Terminal module (90_SYNTHESIS.md):** when writing the final synthesis,
 set `inProgressModule` to `"90_SYNTHESIS.md"` and `nextModule` to `null`
 in `state.json`. After writing, set `completedModules` to include
-`"90_SYNTHESIS.md"` and confirm: "Brandbook complete. All modules saved."
+`"90_SYNTHESIS.md"`, then set `inProgressModule` to `null` — leaving it
+populated would cause a future resumption to treat the completed brandbook
+as still in progress. Confirm: "Brandbook complete. All modules saved."
 
 ## Multi-founder mode
 

skills/competitive-platform-analysis/SKILL.md

@@ -175,6 +175,40 @@ each tagged with its axis positions, tier, and source links, ready to hand to
 - **Relying on a single source per competitor.** Self-reported site copy is marketing, not fact. Verify attributes across at least two sources.
 - **Jumping straight to scoring.** This skill scopes and tiers the set. Benchmark-methodology handles scoring. Don't conflate the two steps.
 
+## Examples
+
+**Scenario:** A boutique brand-identity studio (2-person, EU-remote, productized
+sprints, contrarian/manifesto-driven aesthetic) wants to scope its competitive
+set before benchmarking. The strategic tension from the positioning brief is
+*memorability × hireability*.
+
+**Step 1 — eight-axis population (sample candidates):**
+
+| Candidate | Positioning stance | Specialization | Size band | Engagement | Distinctiveness | Evidence model | Brand strength | Market |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| Studio A | brand-led / editorial | identity only | micro | productized | contrarian | aesthetic-led | cult | global-remote |
+| Studio B | capability-led | broad DS+motion | boutique | bespoke | conventional | outcome-led | interchangeable | US |
+| Agency C | capability-led | brand+digital | mid-size | retainer | conventional | outcome-led | interchangeable | EU |
+| Freelancer D | brand-led | brand voice only | solo | day-rate | editorial | aesthetic-led | ownable | global |
+| Studio E | brand-led | brand strategy | micro | productized | manifesto-driven | outcome-led | cult | EU-remote |
+
+**Step 2 — pre-filter scoring (client scoping consequence: weight distinctiveness
+because the client's moat is POV-first, not capability breadth):**
+
+| Candidate | Offer overlap (1–5) | Distinctiveness (1–5) | Commercial credibility (1–5) | Craft proximity (1–5) | Tier | Include? |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| Studio A | 5 | 5 | 3 | 5 | Direct | ✓ must-profile |
+| Studio B | 3 | 2 | 5 | 3 | Adjacent | ✓ credibility anchor |
+| Agency C | 2 | 1 | 5 | 2 | Aspirational | ✓ scale reference |
+| Freelancer D | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4 | Direct | ✓ cautionary case |
+| Studio E | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | Direct | ✓ must-profile |
+
+**Step 3 — output handed to `benchmark-methodology`:**
+Five candidates (3 Direct, 1 Adjacent, 1 Aspirational), each tagged with
+axis positions, tier, and source links. Studio A and Studio E are the
+sharpest head-to-head rivals; Freelancer D is the "memorable but
+un-hireable" cautionary case to learn from.
+
 ## Related Skills
 
 - `brand-discovery` — use first to establish the positioning brief and strategic tension that scopes the competitor set.

skills/competitive-report-structure/SKILL.md

@@ -74,7 +74,8 @@ the detail.
 ### 4. Benchmarking matrix
 The full **competitors × dimensions** table — the quantitative spine. Rows =
 competitors (grouped by tier), columns = the nine benchmark dimensions (note:
-dimension 9 — strategic tension — has two poles: Memorability and Hireability;
+dimension 9 — strategic tension — has two poles (e.g., Memorability and
+Hireability for a brand-studio client; substitute the client's own paired axes);
 represent them as two separate sub-columns rather than averaging them). Include
 the client's own honest self-assessment as a row for contrast. Use a **heatmap**
 (color or symbol scale) so strength/weakness patterns are scannable. Do **not**