fix(marketplace): remove integrates_with field (schema violation)

Claude Code's marketplace schema does not support custom fields.
The `integrates_with` field on data-platform and viz-platform caused:
"Invalid schema: plugins.9: Unrecognized key: integrates_with"

This reverts the schema extension while keeping the validate_workflow_integration
MCP tool functional (it reads from plugin.json files directly, not marketplace.json).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

.claude-plugin/marketplace.json

@@ -6,12 +6,12 @@
   },
   "metadata": {
     "description": "Project management plugins with Gitea and NetBox integrations",
-    "version": "5.4.1"
+    "version": "5.7.1"
   },
   "plugins": [
     {
       "name": "projman",
-      "version": "3.3.0",
+      "version": "3.4.0",
       "description": "Sprint planning and project management with Gitea integration",
       "source": "./plugins/projman",
       "author": {
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@
     },
     {
       "name": "data-platform",
-      "version": "1.2.0",
+      "version": "1.3.0",
       "description": "Data engineering tools with pandas, PostgreSQL/PostGIS, and dbt integration",
       "source": "./plugins/data-platform",
       "author": {

CHANGELOG.md

@@ -4,7 +4,86 @@ All notable changes to the Leo Claude Marketplace will be documented in this fil
 
 The format is based on [Keep a Changelog](https://keepachangelog.com/en/1.0.0/).
 
-## [Unreleased]
+## [5.7.1] - 2026-02-02
+
+### Added
+- **contract-validator**: New `validate_workflow_integration` MCP tool — validates domain plugins expose required advisory interfaces (gate command, review command, advisory agent)
+- **contract-validator**: New `MISSING_INTEGRATION` issue type for workflow integration validation
+
+### Fixed
+- `scripts/setup.sh` banner version updated from v5.1.0 to v5.7.1
+
+### Reverted
+- **marketplace.json**: Removed `integrates_with` field — Claude Code schema does not support custom plugin fields (causes marketplace load failure)
+
+---
+
+## [5.7.0] - 2026-02-02
+
+### Added
+- **data-platform**: New `data-advisor` agent for data integrity, schema, and dbt compliance validation
+- **data-platform**: New `data-integrity-audit.md` skill defining audit rules, severity levels, and scanning strategies
+- **data-platform**: New `/data-gate` command for binary pass/fail data integrity gates (projman integration)
+- **data-platform**: New `/data-review` command for comprehensive data integrity audits
+
+### Changed
+- Domain Advisory Pattern now fully operational for both Viz and Data domains
+- projman orchestrator `Domain/Data` gates now resolve to live `/data-gate` command (previously fell through to "gate unavailable" warning)
+
+---
+
+## [5.6.0] - 2026-02-01
+
+### Added
+- **Domain Advisory Pattern**: Cross-plugin integration enabling projman to consult domain-specific plugins during sprint lifecycle
+- **projman**: New `domain-consultation.md` skill for domain detection and gate protocols
+- **viz-platform**: New `design-reviewer` agent for design system compliance auditing
+- **viz-platform**: New `design-system-audit.md` skill defining audit rules and severity levels
+- **viz-platform**: New `/design-review` command for detailed design system audits
+- **viz-platform**: New `/design-gate` command for binary pass/fail validation gates
+- **Labels**: New `Domain/Viz` and `Domain/Data` labels for domain routing
+
+### Changed
+- **projman planner**: Now loads domain-consultation skill and performs domain detection during planning
+- **projman orchestrator**: Now runs domain gates before marking Domain/* labeled issues as complete
+
+---
+
+## [5.5.0] - 2026-02-01
+
+### Added
+
+#### RFC System for Feature Tracking
+Wiki-based Request for Comments (RFC) system for capturing, reviewing, and tracking feature ideas through their lifecycle.
+
+**New Commands (projman):**
+- `/rfc-create` - Create new RFC from conversation or clarified specification
+- `/rfc-list` - List all RFCs grouped by status (Draft, Review, Approved, Implementing, Implemented, Rejected, Stale)
+- `/rfc-review` - Submit Draft RFC for maintainer review
+- `/rfc-approve` - Approve RFC, making it available for sprint planning
+- `/rfc-reject` - Reject RFC with documented reason
+
+**RFC Lifecycle:**
+- Draft → Review → Approved → Implementing → Implemented
+- Terminal states: Rejected, Superseded
+- Stale: Drafts with no activity >90 days
+
+**Sprint Integration:**
+- `/sprint-plan` now detects approved RFCs and offers selection
+- `/sprint-close` updates RFC status to Implemented on completion
+- RFC-Index wiki page auto-maintained with status sections
+
+**Clarity-Assist Integration:**
+- Vagueness hook now detects feature request patterns
+- Suggests `/rfc-create` for feature ideas
+- `/clarify` offers RFC creation after delivering clarified spec
+
+**New MCP Tool:**
+- `allocate_rfc_number` - Allocates next sequential RFC number
+
+**New Skills:**
+- `skills/rfc-workflow.md` - RFC lifecycle and state transitions
+- `skills/rfc-templates.md` - RFC page template specifications
 
 ### Changed
 

CLAUDE.md

@@ -1,5 +1,37 @@
 # CLAUDE.md
 
+## ⛔ MANDATORY BEHAVIOR RULES - READ FIRST
+
+**These rules are NON-NEGOTIABLE. Violating them wastes the user's time and money.**
+
+### 1. WHEN USER ASKS YOU TO CHECK SOMETHING - CHECK EVERYTHING
+- Search ALL locations, not just where you think it is
+- Check cache directories: `~/.claude/plugins/cache/`
+- Check installed: `~/.claude/plugins/marketplaces/`
+- Check source directories
+- **NEVER say "no" or "that's not the issue" without exhaustive verification**
+
+### 2. WHEN USER SAYS SOMETHING IS WRONG - BELIEVE THEM
+- The user knows their system better than you
+- Investigate thoroughly before disagreeing
+- **Your confidence is often wrong. User's instincts are often right.**
+
+### 3. NEVER SAY "DONE" WITHOUT VERIFICATION
+- Run the actual command/script to verify
+- Show the output to the user
+- **"Done" means VERIFIED WORKING, not "I made changes"**
+
+### 4. SHOW EXACTLY WHAT USER ASKS FOR
+- If user asks for messages, show the MESSAGES
+- If user asks for code, show the CODE
+- **Do not interpret or summarize unless asked**
+
+**FAILURE TO FOLLOW THESE RULES = WASTED USER TIME = UNACCEPTABLE**
+
+---
+
+
+
 This file provides guidance to Claude Code when working with code in this repository.
 
 ## ⛔ RULES - READ FIRST
@@ -247,7 +279,7 @@ leo-claude-mktplace/
 | Labels | `get_labels`, `suggest_labels`, `create_label`, `create_label_smart` |
 | Milestones | `list_milestones`, `get_milestone`, `create_milestone`, `update_milestone`, `delete_milestone` |
 | Dependencies | `list_issue_dependencies`, `create_issue_dependency`, `remove_issue_dependency`, `get_execution_order` |
-| Wiki | `list_wiki_pages`, `get_wiki_page`, `create_wiki_page`, `update_wiki_page`, `create_lesson`, `search_lessons` |
+| Wiki | `list_wiki_pages`, `get_wiki_page`, `create_wiki_page`, `update_wiki_page`, `create_lesson`, `search_lessons`, `allocate_rfc_number` |
 | **Pull Requests** | `list_pull_requests`, `get_pull_request`, `get_pr_diff`, `get_pr_comments`, `create_pr_review`, `add_pr_comment` |
 | Validation | `validate_repo_org`, `get_branch_protection` |
 
@@ -268,6 +300,20 @@ leo-claude-mktplace/
 | `staging` | Staging | Read-only code, can create issues |
 | `main`, `master` | Production | Read-only, emergency only |
 
+### RFC System
+
+Wiki-based Request for Comments system for tracking feature ideas from proposal through implementation.
+
+**RFC Wiki Naming:**
+- RFC pages: `RFC-NNNN: Short Title` (4-digit zero-padded)
+- Index page: `RFC-Index` (auto-maintained)
+
+**Lifecycle:** Draft → Review → Approved → Implementing → Implemented
+
+**Integration with Sprint Planning:**
+- `/sprint-plan` detects approved RFCs and offers selection
+- `/sprint-close` updates RFC status on completion
+
 ## Label Taxonomy
 
 43 labels total: 27 organization + 16 repository

README.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# Leo Claude Marketplace - v5.4.1
+# Leo Claude Marketplace - v5.7.1
 
 A collection of Claude Code plugins for project management, infrastructure automation, and development workflows.
 
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ AI-guided sprint planning with full Gitea integration. Transforms a proven 15-sp
 - Branch-aware security (development/staging/production)
 - Pre-sprint-close code quality review and test verification
 
-**Commands:** `/sprint-plan`, `/sprint-start`, `/sprint-status`, `/sprint-close`, `/labels-sync`, `/setup`, `/review`, `/test`, `/debug`, `/suggest-version`, `/proposal-status`, `/clear-cache`
+**Commands:** `/sprint-plan`, `/sprint-start`, `/sprint-status`, `/sprint-close`, `/labels-sync`, `/setup`, `/review`, `/test`, `/debug`, `/suggest-version`, `/proposal-status`, `/clear-cache`, `/rfc-create`, `/rfc-list`, `/rfc-review`, `/rfc-approve`, `/rfc-reject`
 
 #### [git-flow](./plugins/git-flow) *NEW in v3.0.0*
 **Git Workflow Automation**
@@ -138,7 +138,22 @@ Visualization toolkit with version-locked component validation and design token
 - 5 Page tools for multi-page app structure
 - Dual theme storage: user-level and project-level
 
-**Commands:** `/chart`, `/chart-export`, `/dashboard`, `/theme`, `/theme-new`, `/theme-css`, `/component`, `/accessibility-check`, `/breakpoints`, `/initial-setup`
+**Commands:** `/chart`, `/chart-export`, `/dashboard`, `/theme`, `/theme-new`, `/theme-css`, `/component`, `/accessibility-check`, `/breakpoints`, `/design-review`, `/design-gate`, `/initial-setup`
+
+## Domain Advisory Pattern
+
+The marketplace supports cross-plugin domain advisory integration:
+
+- **Domain Detection**: projman automatically detects when issues involve specialized domains (frontend/viz, data engineering)
+- **Acceptance Criteria**: Domain-specific acceptance criteria are added to issues during planning
+- **Execution Gates**: Domain validation gates (`/design-gate`, `/data-gate`) run before issue completion
+- **Extensible**: New domains can be added by creating advisory agents and gate commands
+
+**Current Domains:**
+| Domain | Plugin | Gate Command |
+|--------|--------|--------------|
+| Visualization | viz-platform | `/design-gate` |
+| Data | data-platform | `/data-gate` |
 
 ## MCP Servers
 
@@ -200,7 +215,7 @@ Cross-plugin compatibility validation tools.
 | Category | Tools |
 |----------|-------|
 | Parse | `parse_plugin_interface`, `parse_claude_md_agents` |
-| Validation | `validate_compatibility`, `validate_agent_refs`, `validate_data_flow` |
+| Validation | `validate_compatibility`, `validate_agent_refs`, `validate_data_flow`, `validate_workflow_integration` |
 | Report | `generate_compatibility_report`, `list_issues` |
 
 ## Installation

docs/COMMANDS-CHEATSHEET.md

@@ -21,6 +21,11 @@ Quick reference for all commands in the Leo Claude Marketplace.
 | **projman** | `/suggest-version` | | X | Analyze CHANGELOG and recommend semantic version bump |
 | **projman** | `/proposal-status` | | X | View proposal and implementation hierarchy with status |
 | **projman** | `/clear-cache` | | X | Clear plugin cache to force fresh configuration reload |
+| **projman** | `/rfc-create` | | X | Create new RFC from conversation or clarified spec |
+| **projman** | `/rfc-list` | | X | List all RFCs grouped by status |
+| **projman** | `/rfc-review` | | X | Submit Draft RFC for review |
+| **projman** | `/rfc-approve` | | X | Approve RFC in Review status for sprint planning |
+| **projman** | `/rfc-reject` | | X | Reject RFC with documented reason |
 | **git-flow** | `/commit` | | X | Create commit with auto-generated conventional message |
 | **git-flow** | `/commit-push` | | X | Commit and push to remote in one operation |
 | **git-flow** | `/commit-merge` | | X | Commit current changes, then merge into target branch |
@@ -87,7 +92,11 @@ Quick reference for all commands in the Leo Claude Marketplace.
 | **viz-platform** | `/chart-export` | | X | Export charts to PNG, SVG, PDF via kaleido |
 | **viz-platform** | `/accessibility-check` | | X | Color blind validation (WCAG contrast ratios) |
 | **viz-platform** | `/breakpoints` | | X | Configure responsive layout breakpoints |
+| **viz-platform** | `/design-review` | | X | Detailed design system audits |
+| **viz-platform** | `/design-gate` | | X | Binary pass/fail design system validation gates |
 | **viz-platform** | *SessionStart hook* | X | | Checks DMC version (non-blocking warning) |
+| **data-platform** | `/data-review` | | X | Comprehensive data integrity audits |
+| **data-platform** | `/data-gate` | | X | Binary pass/fail data integrity gates |
 | **contract-validator** | `/validate-contracts` | | X | Full marketplace compatibility validation |
 | **contract-validator** | `/check-agent` | | X | Validate single agent definition |
 | **contract-validator** | `/list-interfaces` | | X | Show all plugin interfaces |
@@ -129,6 +138,22 @@ Quick reference for all commands in the Leo Claude Marketplace.
 
 ## Dev Workflow Examples
 
+### Example 0: RFC-Driven Feature Development
+
+Full workflow from idea to implementation using RFCs:
+
+```
+1. /clarify                  # Clarify the feature idea
+2. /rfc-create               # Create RFC from clarified spec
+   ... refine RFC content ...
+3. /rfc-review 0001          # Submit RFC for review
+   ... review discussion ...
+4. /rfc-approve 0001         # Approve RFC for implementation
+5. /sprint-plan              # Select approved RFC for sprint
+   ... implement feature ...
+6. /sprint-close             # Complete sprint, RFC marked Implemented
+```
+
 ### Example 1: Starting a New Feature Sprint
 
 A typical workflow for planning and executing a feature sprint:
@@ -273,4 +298,4 @@ Ensure credentials are configured in `~/.config/claude/gitea.env`, `~/.config/cl
 
 ---
 
-*Last Updated: 2026-01-30*
+*Last Updated: 2026-02-02*

docs/CONFIGURATION.md

@@ -398,6 +398,7 @@ PR_REVIEW_AUTO_SUBMIT=false
 | **code-sentinel** | None | None | None needed |
 | **project-hygiene** | None | None | None needed |
 | **claude-config-maintainer** | None | None | None needed |
+| **contract-validator** | None | None | `/initial-setup` |
 
 ---
 

mcp-servers/contract-validator/mcp_server/server.py

@@ -131,6 +131,24 @@ class ContractValidatorMCPServer:
                         "required": ["agent_name", "claude_md_path"]
                     }
                 ),
+                Tool(
+                    name="validate_workflow_integration",
+                    description="Validate that a domain plugin exposes the required advisory interfaces (gate command, review command, advisory agent) expected by projman's domain-consultation skill",
+                    inputSchema={
+                        "type": "object",
+                        "properties": {
+                            "plugin_path": {
+                                "type": "string",
+                                "description": "Path to the domain plugin directory"
+                            },
+                            "domain_label": {
+                                "type": "string",
+                                "description": "The Domain/* label it claims to handle, e.g. Domain/Viz"
+                            }
+                        },
+                        "required": ["plugin_path", "domain_label"]
+                    }
+                ),
                 # Report tools (to be implemented in #188)
                 Tool(
                     name="generate_compatibility_report",
@@ -198,6 +216,8 @@ class ContractValidatorMCPServer:
                     result = await self._validate_agent_refs(**arguments)
                 elif name == "validate_data_flow":
                     result = await self._validate_data_flow(**arguments)
+                elif name == "validate_workflow_integration":
+                    result = await self._validate_workflow_integration(**arguments)
                 elif name == "generate_compatibility_report":
                     result = await self._generate_compatibility_report(**arguments)
                 elif name == "list_issues":
@@ -241,6 +261,10 @@ class ContractValidatorMCPServer:
         """Validate agent data flow"""
         return await self.validation_tools.validate_data_flow(agent_name, claude_md_path)
 
+    async def _validate_workflow_integration(self, plugin_path: str, domain_label: str) -> dict:
+        """Validate domain plugin exposes required advisory interfaces"""
+        return await self.validation_tools.validate_workflow_integration(plugin_path, domain_label)
+
     # Report tool implementations (Issue #188)
 
     async def _generate_compatibility_report(self, marketplace_path: str, format: str = "markdown") -> dict:

mcp-servers/contract-validator/mcp_server/validation_tools.py

@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ class IssueType(str, Enum):
     OPTIONAL_DEPENDENCY = "optional_dependency"
     UNDECLARED_OUTPUT = "undeclared_output"
     INVALID_SEQUENCE = "invalid_sequence"
+    MISSING_INTEGRATION = "missing_integration"
 
 
 class ValidationIssue(BaseModel):
@@ -65,6 +66,17 @@ class DataFlowResult(BaseModel):
     issues: list[ValidationIssue] = []
 
 
+class WorkflowIntegrationResult(BaseModel):
+    """Result of workflow integration validation for domain plugins"""
+    plugin_name: str
+    domain_label: str
+    valid: bool
+    gate_command_found: bool
+    review_command_found: bool
+    advisory_agent_found: bool
+    issues: list[ValidationIssue] = []
+
+
 class ValidationTools:
     """Tools for validating plugin compatibility and agent references"""
 
@@ -336,3 +348,107 @@ class ValidationTools:
         )
 
         return result.model_dump()
+
+    async def validate_workflow_integration(self, plugin_path: str, domain_label: str) -> dict:
+        """
+        Validate that a domain plugin exposes required advisory interfaces.
+
+        Checks for:
+        - Gate command (e.g., /design-gate, /data-gate) - REQUIRED
+        - Review command (e.g., /design-review, /data-review) - recommended
+        - Advisory agent referencing the domain label - recommended
+
+        Args:
+            plugin_path: Path to the domain plugin directory
+            domain_label: The Domain/* label it claims to handle (e.g., Domain/Viz)
+
+        Returns:
+            Validation result with found interfaces and issues
+        """
+        plugin_path_obj = Path(plugin_path)
+        issues = []
+
+        # Extract plugin name from path
+        plugin_name = plugin_path_obj.name
+        if not plugin_path_obj.exists():
+            return {
+                "error": f"Plugin directory not found: {plugin_path}",
+                "plugin_path": plugin_path,
+                "domain_label": domain_label
+            }
+
+        # Extract domain short name from label (e.g., "Domain/Viz" -> "viz", "Domain/Data" -> "data")
+        domain_short = domain_label.split("/")[-1].lower() if "/" in domain_label else domain_label.lower()
+
+        # Check for gate command
+        commands_dir = plugin_path_obj / "commands"
+        gate_command_found = False
+        gate_patterns = ["pass", "fail", "PASS", "FAIL", "Binary pass/fail", "gate"]
+
+        if commands_dir.exists():
+            for cmd_file in commands_dir.glob("*.md"):
+                if "gate" in cmd_file.name.lower():
+                    # Verify it's actually a gate command by checking content
+                    content = cmd_file.read_text()
+                    if any(pattern in content for pattern in gate_patterns):
+                        gate_command_found = True
+                        break
+
+        if not gate_command_found:
+            issues.append(ValidationIssue(
+                severity=IssueSeverity.ERROR,
+                issue_type=IssueType.MISSING_INTEGRATION,
+                message=f"Plugin '{plugin_name}' lacks a gate command for domain '{domain_label}'",
+                location=str(commands_dir),
+                suggestion=f"Create commands/{domain_short}-gate.md with binary PASS/FAIL output"
+            ))
+
+        # Check for review command
+        review_command_found = False
+        if commands_dir.exists():
+            for cmd_file in commands_dir.glob("*.md"):
+                if "review" in cmd_file.name.lower() and "gate" not in cmd_file.name.lower():
+                    review_command_found = True
+                    break
+
+        if not review_command_found:
+            issues.append(ValidationIssue(
+                severity=IssueSeverity.WARNING,
+                issue_type=IssueType.MISSING_INTEGRATION,
+                message=f"Plugin '{plugin_name}' lacks a review command for domain '{domain_label}'",
+                location=str(commands_dir),
+                suggestion=f"Create commands/{domain_short}-review.md for detailed audits"
+            ))
+
+        # Check for advisory agent
+        agents_dir = plugin_path_obj / "agents"
+        advisory_agent_found = False
+
+        if agents_dir.exists():
+            for agent_file in agents_dir.glob("*.md"):
+                content = agent_file.read_text()
+                # Check if agent references the domain label or gate command
+                if domain_label in content or f"{domain_short}-gate" in content.lower() or "advisor" in agent_file.name.lower() or "reviewer" in agent_file.name.lower():
+                    advisory_agent_found = True
+                    break
+
+        if not advisory_agent_found:
+            issues.append(ValidationIssue(
+                severity=IssueSeverity.WARNING,
+                issue_type=IssueType.MISSING_INTEGRATION,
+                message=f"Plugin '{plugin_name}' lacks an advisory agent for domain '{domain_label}'",
+                location=str(agents_dir) if agents_dir.exists() else str(plugin_path_obj),
+                suggestion=f"Create agents/{domain_short}-advisor.md referencing '{domain_label}'"
+            ))
+
+        result = WorkflowIntegrationResult(
+            plugin_name=plugin_name,
+            domain_label=domain_label,
+            valid=gate_command_found,  # Only gate is required for validity
+            gate_command_found=gate_command_found,
+            review_command_found=review_command_found,
+            advisory_agent_found=advisory_agent_found,
+            issues=issues
+        )
+
+        return result.model_dump()

mcp-servers/contract-validator/tests/test_validation_tools.py

@@ -254,3 +254,153 @@ async def test_validate_data_flow_missing_producer(validation_tools, tmp_path):
     # Should have warning about missing producer
     warning_issues = [i for i in result["issues"] if i["severity"].value == "warning"]
     assert len(warning_issues) > 0
+
+
+# --- Workflow Integration Tests ---
+
+@pytest.fixture
+def domain_plugin_complete(tmp_path):
+    """Create a complete domain plugin with gate, review, and advisory agent"""
+    plugin_dir = tmp_path / "viz-platform"
+    plugin_dir.mkdir()
+    (plugin_dir / ".claude-plugin").mkdir()
+    (plugin_dir / "commands").mkdir()
+    (plugin_dir / "agents").mkdir()
+
+    # Gate command with PASS/FAIL pattern
+    gate_cmd = plugin_dir / "commands" / "design-gate.md"
+    gate_cmd.write_text("""# /design-gate
+
+Binary pass/fail validation gate for design system compliance.
+
+## Output
+
+- **PASS**: All design system checks passed
+- **FAIL**: Design system violations detected
+""")
+
+    # Review command
+    review_cmd = plugin_dir / "commands" / "design-review.md"
+    review_cmd.write_text("""# /design-review
+
+Comprehensive design system audit.
+""")
+
+    # Advisory agent
+    agent = plugin_dir / "agents" / "design-reviewer.md"
+    agent.write_text("""# design-reviewer
+
+Design system compliance auditor.
+
+Handles issues with `Domain/Viz` label.
+""")
+
+    return str(plugin_dir)
+
+
+@pytest.fixture
+def domain_plugin_missing_gate(tmp_path):
+    """Create domain plugin with review and agent but no gate command"""
+    plugin_dir = tmp_path / "data-platform"
+    plugin_dir.mkdir()
+    (plugin_dir / ".claude-plugin").mkdir()
+    (plugin_dir / "commands").mkdir()
+    (plugin_dir / "agents").mkdir()
+
+    # Review command (but no gate)
+    review_cmd = plugin_dir / "commands" / "data-review.md"
+    review_cmd.write_text("""# /data-review
+
+Data integrity audit.
+""")
+
+    # Advisory agent
+    agent = plugin_dir / "agents" / "data-advisor.md"
+    agent.write_text("""# data-advisor
+
+Data integrity advisor for Domain/Data issues.
+""")
+
+    return str(plugin_dir)
+
+
+@pytest.fixture
+def domain_plugin_minimal(tmp_path):
+    """Create minimal plugin with no commands or agents"""
+    plugin_dir = tmp_path / "minimal-plugin"
+    plugin_dir.mkdir()
+    (plugin_dir / ".claude-plugin").mkdir()
+
+    readme = plugin_dir / "README.md"
+    readme.write_text("# Minimal Plugin\n\nNo commands or agents.")
+
+    return str(plugin_dir)
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_validate_workflow_integration_complete(validation_tools, domain_plugin_complete):
+    """Test complete domain plugin returns valid with all interfaces found"""
+    result = await validation_tools.validate_workflow_integration(
+        domain_plugin_complete,
+        "Domain/Viz"
+    )
+
+    assert "error" not in result
+    assert result["valid"] is True
+    assert result["gate_command_found"] is True
+    assert result["review_command_found"] is True
+    assert result["advisory_agent_found"] is True
+    assert len(result["issues"]) == 0
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_validate_workflow_integration_missing_gate(validation_tools, domain_plugin_missing_gate):
+    """Test plugin missing gate command returns invalid with ERROR"""
+    result = await validation_tools.validate_workflow_integration(
+        domain_plugin_missing_gate,
+        "Domain/Data"
+    )
+
+    assert "error" not in result
+    assert result["valid"] is False
+    assert result["gate_command_found"] is False
+    assert result["review_command_found"] is True
+    assert result["advisory_agent_found"] is True
+
+    # Should have one ERROR for missing gate
+    error_issues = [i for i in result["issues"] if i["severity"].value == "error"]
+    assert len(error_issues) == 1
+    assert "gate" in error_issues[0]["message"].lower()
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_validate_workflow_integration_minimal(validation_tools, domain_plugin_minimal):
+    """Test minimal plugin returns invalid with multiple issues"""
+    result = await validation_tools.validate_workflow_integration(
+        domain_plugin_minimal,
+        "Domain/Test"
+    )
+
+    assert "error" not in result
+    assert result["valid"] is False
+    assert result["gate_command_found"] is False
+    assert result["review_command_found"] is False
+    assert result["advisory_agent_found"] is False
+
+    # Should have one ERROR (gate) and two WARNINGs (review, agent)
+    error_issues = [i for i in result["issues"] if i["severity"].value == "error"]
+    warning_issues = [i for i in result["issues"] if i["severity"].value == "warning"]
+    assert len(error_issues) == 1
+    assert len(warning_issues) == 2
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_validate_workflow_integration_nonexistent_plugin(validation_tools, tmp_path):
+    """Test error when plugin directory doesn't exist"""
+    result = await validation_tools.validate_workflow_integration(
+        str(tmp_path / "nonexistent"),
+        "Domain/Test"
+    )
+
+    assert "error" in result
+    assert "not found" in result["error"].lower()

mcp-servers/gitea/mcp_server/server.py

@@ -435,6 +435,19 @@ class GiteaMCPServer:
                         }
                     }
                 ),
+                Tool(
+                    name="allocate_rfc_number",
+                    description="Allocate the next available RFC number by scanning existing RFC wiki pages",
+                    inputSchema={
+                        "type": "object",
+                        "properties": {
+                            "repo": {
+                                "type": "string",
+                                "description": "Repository name (owner/repo format)"
+                            }
+                        }
+                    }
+                ),
                 # Milestone Tools
                 Tool(
                     name="list_milestones",
@@ -980,6 +993,10 @@ class GiteaMCPServer:
                         limit=arguments.get('limit', 20),
                         repo=arguments.get('repo')
                     )
+                elif name == "allocate_rfc_number":
+                    result = await self.wiki_tools.allocate_rfc_number(
+                        repo=arguments.get('repo')
+                    )
                 # Milestone tools
                 elif name == "list_milestones":
                     result = await self.milestone_tools.list_milestones(**arguments)

mcp-servers/gitea/mcp_server/tools/wiki.py

@@ -4,9 +4,11 @@ Wiki management tools for MCP server.
 Provides async wrappers for wiki operations to support lessons learned:
 - Page CRUD operations
 - Lessons learned creation and search
+- RFC number allocation
 """
 import asyncio
 import logging
+import re
 from typing import List, Dict, Optional
 
 logging.basicConfig(level=logging.INFO)
@@ -147,3 +149,39 @@ class WikiTools:
             lambda: self.gitea.search_lessons(query, tags, repo)
         )
         return results[:limit]
+
+    async def allocate_rfc_number(self, repo: Optional[str] = None) -> Dict:
+        """
+        Allocate the next available RFC number.
+
+        Scans existing wiki pages for RFC-NNNN pattern and returns
+        the next sequential number.
+
+        Args:
+            repo: Repository in owner/repo format
+
+        Returns:
+            Dict with 'next_number' (int) and 'formatted' (str like 'RFC-0001')
+        """
+        pages = await self.list_wiki_pages(repo)
+
+        # Extract RFC numbers from page titles
+        rfc_numbers = []
+        rfc_pattern = re.compile(r'^RFC-(\d{4})')
+
+        for page in pages:
+            title = page.get('title', '')
+            match = rfc_pattern.match(title)
+            if match:
+                rfc_numbers.append(int(match.group(1)))
+
+        # Calculate next number
+        if rfc_numbers:
+            next_num = max(rfc_numbers) + 1
+        else:
+            next_num = 1
+
+        return {
+            'next_number': next_num,
+            'formatted': f'RFC-{next_num:04d}'
+        }

plugins/clarity-assist/commands/clarify.md

@@ -34,7 +34,31 @@ Load these skills before proceeding:
 2. **Diagnose** - Identify gaps and conflicts
 3. **Develop** - Gather clarifications via structured questions
 4. **Deliver** - Present refined specification
+5. **Offer RFC Creation** - For feature work, offer to save as RFC
 
 ## Output Format
 
 Use the Deliver phase template from `skills/4d-methodology.md` to present the clarified specification for user confirmation.
+
+## RFC Creation Offer (Step 5)
+
+After presenting the clarified specification, if the request appears to be a feature or enhancement:
+
+```
+---
+
+Would you like to save this as an RFC for formal tracking?
+
+An RFC (Request for Comments) provides:
+- Structured documentation of the proposal
+- Review workflow before implementation
+- Integration with sprint planning
+
+[1] Yes, create RFC from this specification
+[2] No, proceed with implementation directly
+```
+
+If user selects [1]:
+- Pass clarified specification to `/rfc-create`
+- The Summary, Motivation, and Design sections will be populated from the clarified spec
+- User can then refine the RFC and submit for review

plugins/clarity-assist/hooks/hooks.json

@@ -2,8 +2,13 @@
   "hooks": {
     "UserPromptSubmit": [
       {
-        "type": "command",
+        "matcher": "",
-        "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/vagueness-check.sh"
+        "hooks": [
+          {
+            "type": "command",
+            "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/vagueness-check.sh"
+          }
+        ]
       }
     ]
   }

plugins/clarity-assist/hooks/vagueness-check.sh

@@ -197,6 +197,38 @@ if (( $(echo "$SCORE > 1.0" | bc -l) )); then
     SCORE="1.0"
 fi
 
+# ============================================================================
+# Feature Request Detection (for RFC suggestion)
+# ============================================================================
+
+FEATURE_REQUEST=false
+
+# Feature request phrases
+FEATURE_PHRASES=(
+    "we should"
+    "it would be nice"
+    "feature request"
+    "idea:"
+    "suggestion:"
+    "what if we"
+    "wouldn't it be great"
+    "i think we need"
+    "we need to add"
+    "we could add"
+    "how about adding"
+    "can we add"
+    "new feature"
+    "enhancement"
+    "proposal"
+)
+
+for phrase in "${FEATURE_PHRASES[@]}"; do
+    if [[ "$PROMPT_LOWER" == *"$phrase"* ]]; then
+        FEATURE_REQUEST=true
+        break
+    fi
+done
+
 # ============================================================================
 # Output suggestion if score exceeds threshold
 # ============================================================================
@@ -208,8 +240,16 @@ if (( $(echo "$SCORE >= $THRESHOLD" | bc -l) )); then
 
     # Gentle, non-blocking suggestion
     echo "$PREFIX Your prompt could benefit from more clarity."
-    echo "$PREFIX Consider running /clarity-assist to refine your request."
+    echo "$PREFIX Consider running /clarify to refine your request."
     echo "$PREFIX (Vagueness score: ${SCORE_PCT}% - this is a suggestion, not a block)"
+
+    # Additional RFC suggestion if feature request detected
+    if [[ "$FEATURE_REQUEST" == true ]]; then
+        echo "$PREFIX This looks like a feature idea. Consider /rfc-create to track it formally."
+    fi
+elif [[ "$FEATURE_REQUEST" == true ]]; then
+    # Feature request detected but not vague - still suggest RFC
+    echo "$PREFIX This looks like a feature idea. Consider /rfc-create to track it formally."
 fi
 
 # Always exit 0 - this hook is non-blocking

plugins/claude-config-maintainer/hooks/hooks.json

@@ -2,8 +2,13 @@
   "hooks": {
     "SessionStart": [
       {
-        "type": "command",
+        "matcher": "",
-        "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/enforce-rules.sh"
+        "hooks": [
+          {
+            "type": "command",
+            "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/enforce-rules.sh"
+          }
+        ]
       }
     ]
   }

plugins/cmdb-assistant/hooks/hooks.json

@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
   "hooks": {
     "SessionStart": [
       {
+        "matcher": "",
         "hooks": [
           {
             "type": "command",

plugins/contract-validator/commands/validate-contracts.md

@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
    - Use `validate_compatibility` for pairwise checks
    - Use `validate_agent_refs` for CLAUDE.md agents
    - Use `validate_data_flow` for data sequences
+   - Use `validate_workflow_integration` for domain plugin advisory interfaces
 
 5. **Generate report**:
    - Use `generate_compatibility_report` for full report

plugins/contract-validator/hooks/hooks.json

@@ -2,8 +2,13 @@
   "hooks": {
     "SessionStart": [
       {
-        "type": "command",
+        "matcher": "",
-        "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/auto-validate.sh"
+        "hooks": [
+          {
+            "type": "command",
+            "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/auto-validate.sh"
+          }
+        ]
       }
     ],
     "PostToolUse": [

plugins/contract-validator/skills/mcp-tools-reference.md

@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ Available MCP tools for contract-validator operations.
 | `validate_compatibility` | Check two plugins for conflicts |
 | `validate_agent_refs` | Check agent tool references exist |
 | `validate_data_flow` | Verify data flow through agent sequence |
+| `validate_workflow_integration` | Check domain plugin exposes required advisory interfaces |
 
 ### Report Tools
 | Tool | Description |
@@ -53,6 +54,13 @@ Available MCP tools for contract-validator operations.
 3. Build Mermaid diagram from results
 ```
 
+### Workflow Integration Check
+```
+1. validate_workflow_integration(plugin_path, domain_label)  # Check single domain plugin
+2. For each domain in domain-consultation.md detection rules:
+     validate_workflow_integration(domain_plugin_path, domain_label)
+```
+
 ## Error Handling
 
 If MCP tools fail:

plugins/contract-validator/skills/validation-rules.md

@@ -30,6 +30,13 @@ Rules for validating plugin compatibility and agent definitions.
 3. Check for orphaned data references
 4. Ensure required data is available at each step
 
+### Workflow Integration Checks
+1. Gate command exists in plugin's commands/ directory
+2. Gate command produces binary PASS/FAIL output
+3. Review command exists (WARNING if missing, not ERROR)
+4. Advisory agent exists referencing the domain label
+- Severity: ERROR for missing gate, WARNING for missing review/agent
+
 ## Severity Levels
 
 | Level | Meaning | Action |
@@ -46,6 +53,8 @@ Rules for validating plugin compatibility and agent definitions.
 | Data flow gap | Producer not called before consumer | Reorder workflow steps |
 | Name conflict | Two plugins use same command | Rename one command |
 | Orphan reference | Data produced but never consumed | Remove or use the data |
+| Missing gate command | Domain plugin lacks /X-gate command | Create commands/{domain}-gate.md |
+| Missing advisory agent | Domain plugin has no reviewer agent | Create agents/{domain}-advisor.md |
 
 ## MCP Tools
 
@@ -54,4 +63,5 @@ Rules for validating plugin compatibility and agent definitions.
 | `validate_compatibility` | Check two plugins for conflicts |
 | `validate_agent_refs` | Check agent tool references |
 | `validate_data_flow` | Verify data flow sequences |
+| `validate_workflow_integration` | Check domain plugin advisory interfaces |
 | `list_issues` | Filter issues by severity or type |

plugins/data-platform/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "data-platform",
-  "version": "1.1.0",
+  "version": "1.3.0",
   "description": "Data engineering tools with pandas, PostgreSQL/PostGIS, and dbt integration",
   "author": {
     "name": "Leo Miranda",

plugins/data-platform/agents/data-advisor.md

@@ -0,0 +1,320 @@
+---
+agent: data-advisor
+description: Reviews code for data integrity, schema validity, and dbt compliance using data-platform MCP tools
+triggers:
+  - /data-review command
+  - /data-gate command
+  - projman orchestrator domain gate
+---
+
+# Data Advisor Agent
+
+You are a strict data integrity auditor. Your role is to review code for proper schema usage, dbt compliance, lineage integrity, and data quality standards.
+
+## Visual Output Requirements
+
+**MANDATORY: Display header at start of every response.**
+
+```
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+|  DATA-PLATFORM - Data Advisor                                         |
+|  [Target Path]                                                        |
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+```
+
+## Trigger Conditions
+
+Activate this agent when:
+- User runs `/data-review <path>`
+- User runs `/data-gate <path>`
+- Projman orchestrator requests data domain gate check
+- Code review includes database operations, dbt models, or data pipelines
+
+## Skills to Load
+
+- skills/data-integrity-audit.md
+- skills/mcp-tools-reference.md
+
+## Available MCP Tools
+
+### PostgreSQL (Schema Validation)
+
+| Tool | Purpose |
+|------|---------|
+| `pg_connect` | Verify database is reachable |
+| `pg_tables` | List tables, verify existence |
+| `pg_columns` | Get column details, verify types and constraints |
+| `pg_schemas` | List available schemas |
+| `pg_query` | Run diagnostic queries (SELECT only in review context) |
+
+### PostGIS (Spatial Validation)
+
+| Tool | Purpose |
+|------|---------|
+| `st_tables` | List tables with geometry columns |
+| `st_geometry_type` | Verify geometry types |
+| `st_srid` | Verify coordinate reference systems |
+| `st_extent` | Verify spatial extent is reasonable |
+
+### dbt (Project Validation)
+
+| Tool | Purpose |
+|------|---------|
+| `dbt_parse` | Validate project structure (ALWAYS run first) |
+| `dbt_compile` | Verify SQL renders correctly |
+| `dbt_test` | Run data tests |
+| `dbt_build` | Combined run + test |
+| `dbt_ls` | List all resources (models, tests, sources) |
+| `dbt_lineage` | Get model dependency graph |
+| `dbt_docs_generate` | Generate documentation for inspection |
+
+### pandas (Data Validation)
+
+| Tool | Purpose |
+|------|---------|
+| `describe` | Statistical summary for data quality checks |
+| `head` | Preview data for structural verification |
+| `list_data` | Check for stale DataFrames |
+
+## Operating Modes
+
+### Review Mode (default)
+
+Triggered by `/data-review <path>`
+
+**Characteristics:**
+- Produces detailed report with all findings
+- Groups findings by severity (FAIL/WARN/INFO)
+- Includes actionable recommendations with fixes
+- Does NOT block - informational only
+- Shows category compliance status
+
+### Gate Mode
+
+Triggered by `/data-gate <path>` or projman orchestrator domain gate
+
+**Characteristics:**
+- Binary PASS/FAIL output
+- Only reports FAIL-level issues
+- Returns exit status for automation integration
+- Blocks completion on FAIL
+- Compact output for CI/CD pipelines
+
+## Audit Workflow
+
+### 1. Receive Target Path
+
+Accept file or directory path from command invocation.
+
+### 2. Determine Scope
+
+Analyze target to identify what type of data work is present:
+
+| Pattern | Type | Checks to Run |
+|---------|------|---------------|
+| `dbt_project.yml` present | dbt project | Full dbt validation |
+| `*.sql` files in dbt path | dbt models | Model compilation, lineage |
+| `*.py` with `pg_query`/`pg_execute` | Database operations | Schema validation |
+| `schema.yml` files | dbt schemas | Schema drift detection |
+| Migration files (`*_migration.sql`) | Schema changes | Full PostgreSQL + dbt checks |
+
+### 3. Run Database Checks (if applicable)
+
+```
+1. pg_connect → verify database reachable
+   If fails: WARN, continue with file-based checks
+
+2. pg_tables → verify expected tables exist
+   If missing: FAIL
+
+3. pg_columns on affected tables → verify types
+   If mismatch: FAIL
+```
+
+### 4. Run dbt Checks (if applicable)
+
+```
+1. dbt_parse → validate project
+   If fails: FAIL immediately (project broken)
+
+2. dbt_ls → catalog all resources
+   Record models, tests, sources
+
+3. dbt_lineage on target models → check integrity
+   Orphaned refs: FAIL
+
+4. dbt_compile on target models → verify SQL
+   Compilation errors: FAIL
+
+5. dbt_test --select <targets> → run tests
+   Test failures: FAIL
+
+6. Cross-reference tests → models without tests
+   Missing tests: WARN
+```
+
+### 5. Run PostGIS Checks (if applicable)
+
+```
+1. st_tables → list spatial tables
+   If none found: skip PostGIS checks
+
+2. st_srid → verify SRID correct
+   Unexpected SRID: FAIL
+
+3. st_geometry_type → verify expected types
+   Wrong type: WARN
+
+4. st_extent → sanity check bounding box
+   Unreasonable extent: FAIL
+```
+
+### 6. Scan Python Code (manual patterns)
+
+For Python files with database operations:
+
+| Pattern | Issue | Severity |
+|---------|-------|----------|
+| `f"SELECT * FROM {table}"` | SQL injection risk | WARN |
+| `f"INSERT INTO {table}"` | Unparameterized mutation | WARN |
+| `pg_execute` without WHERE in DELETE/UPDATE | Dangerous mutation | WARN |
+| Hardcoded connection strings | Credential exposure | WARN |
+
+### 7. Generate Report
+
+Output format depends on operating mode (see templates in `skills/data-integrity-audit.md`).
+
+## Report Formats
+
+### Gate Mode Output
+
+**PASS:**
+```
+DATA GATE: PASS
+No blocking data integrity violations found.
+```
+
+**FAIL:**
+```
+DATA GATE: FAIL
+
+Blocking Issues (2):
+1. dbt/models/staging/stg_census.sql - Compilation error: column 'census_yr' not found
+   Fix: Column was renamed to 'census_year' in source table. Update model.
+
+2. portfolio_app/toronto/loaders/census.py:67 - References table 'census_raw' which does not exist
+   Fix: Table was renamed to 'census_demographics' in migration 003.
+
+Run /data-review for full audit report.
+```
+
+### Review Mode Output
+
+```
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+|  DATA-PLATFORM - Data Integrity Audit                                 |
+|  /path/to/project                                                     |
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+
+Target: /path/to/project
+Scope: 12 files scanned, 8 models checked, 3 tables verified
+
+FINDINGS
+
+FAIL (2)
+  1. [dbt/models/staging/stg_census.sql] Compilation error
+     Error: column 'census_yr' does not exist
+     Fix: Column was renamed to 'census_year'. Update SELECT clause.
+
+  2. [portfolio_app/loaders/census.py:67] Missing table reference
+     Error: Table 'census_raw' does not exist
+     Fix: Table renamed to 'census_demographics' in migration 003.
+
+WARN (3)
+  1. [dbt/models/marts/dim_neighbourhoods.sql] Missing dbt test
+     Issue: No unique test on neighbourhood_id
+     Suggestion: Add unique test to schema.yml
+
+  2. [portfolio_app/toronto/queries.py:45] Hardcoded SQL
+     Issue: f"SELECT * FROM {table_name}" without parameterization
+     Suggestion: Use parameterized queries
+
+  3. [dbt/models/staging/stg_legacy.sql] Orphaned model
+     Issue: No downstream consumers or exposures
+     Suggestion: Remove if unused or add to exposure
+
+INFO (1)
+  1. [dbt/models/marts/fct_demographics.sql] Documentation gap
+     Note: Model description missing in schema.yml
+     Suggestion: Add description for discoverability
+
+SUMMARY
+  Schema:   2 issues
+  Lineage:  Intact
+  dbt:      1 failure
+  PostGIS:  Not applicable
+
+VERDICT: FAIL (2 blocking issues)
+```
+
+## Severity Definitions
+
+| Level | Criteria | Action Required |
+|-------|----------|-----------------|
+| **FAIL** | dbt parse/compile fails, missing tables/columns, type mismatches, broken lineage, invalid SRID | Must fix before completion |
+| **WARN** | Missing tests, hardcoded SQL, schema drift, orphaned models | Should fix |
+| **INFO** | Documentation gaps, optimization opportunities | Consider for improvement |
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Response |
+|-------|----------|
+| Database not reachable | WARN: "PostgreSQL unavailable, skipping schema checks" - continue |
+| No dbt_project.yml | Skip dbt checks silently - not an error |
+| No PostGIS tables | Skip PostGIS checks silently - not an error |
+| MCP tool fails | WARN: "Tool {name} failed: {error}" - continue with remaining |
+| Empty path | PASS: "No data artifacts found in target path" |
+| Invalid path | Error: "Path not found: {path}" |
+
+## Integration with projman
+
+When called as a domain gate by projman orchestrator:
+
+1. Receive path from orchestrator (changed files for the issue)
+2. Determine what type of data work changed
+3. Run audit in gate mode
+4. Return structured result:
+   ```
+   Gate: data
+   Status: PASS | FAIL
+   Blocking: N issues
+   Summary: Brief description
+   ```
+5. Orchestrator decides whether to proceed based on gate status
+
+## Example Interactions
+
+**User**: `/data-review dbt/models/staging/`
+**Agent**:
+1. Scans all .sql files in staging/
+2. Runs dbt_parse to validate project
+3. Runs dbt_compile on each model
+4. Checks lineage for orphaned refs
+5. Cross-references test coverage
+6. Returns detailed report
+
+**User**: `/data-gate portfolio_app/toronto/`
+**Agent**:
+1. Scans for Python files with pg_query/pg_execute
+2. Checks if referenced tables exist
+3. Validates column types
+4. Returns PASS if clean, FAIL with blocking issues if not
+5. Compact output for automation
+
+## Communication Style
+
+Technical and precise. Report findings with exact locations, specific violations, and actionable fixes:
+
+- "Table `census_demographics` column `population` is `varchar(50)` in PostgreSQL but referenced as `integer` in `stg_census.sql` line 14. This will cause a runtime cast error."
+- "Model `dim_neighbourhoods` has no `unique` test on `neighbourhood_id`. Add to `schema.yml` to prevent duplicates."
+- "Spatial extent for `toronto_boundaries` shows global coordinates (-180 to 180). Expected Toronto bbox (~-79.6 to -79.1 longitude). Likely missing ST_Transform or wrong SRID on import."

plugins/data-platform/commands/data-gate.md

@@ -0,0 +1,104 @@
+---
+description: Data integrity compliance gate (pass/fail) for sprint execution
+arguments:
+  - name: path
+    description: File or directory to validate
+    required: true
+---
+
+# /data-gate
+
+Binary pass/fail validation for data integrity compliance. Used by projman orchestrator during sprint execution to gate issue completion.
+
+## Usage
+
+```
+/data-gate <path>
+```
+
+**Examples:**
+```
+/data-gate ./dbt/models/staging/
+/data-gate ./portfolio_app/toronto/parsers/
+/data-gate ./dbt/
+```
+
+## What It Does
+
+1. **Activates** the `data-advisor` agent in gate mode
+2. **Loads** the `skills/data-integrity-audit.md` skill
+3. **Determines scope** from target path:
+   - dbt project directory: full dbt validation (parse, compile, test, lineage)
+   - Python files with database operations: schema validation
+   - SQL files: dbt model validation
+   - Mixed: all applicable checks
+4. **Checks only FAIL-level violations:**
+   - dbt parse failures (project broken)
+   - dbt compilation errors (SQL invalid)
+   - Missing tables/columns referenced in code
+   - Data type mismatches that cause runtime errors
+   - Broken lineage (orphaned model references)
+   - PostGIS SRID mismatches
+5. **Returns binary result:**
+   - `PASS` - No blocking violations found
+   - `FAIL` - One or more blocking violations
+
+## Output
+
+### On PASS
+```
+DATA GATE: PASS
+No blocking data integrity violations found.
+```
+
+### On FAIL
+```
+DATA GATE: FAIL
+
+Blocking Issues (2):
+1. dbt/models/staging/stg_census.sql - Compilation error: column 'census_yr' not found
+   Fix: Column was renamed to 'census_year' in source table. Update model.
+
+2. portfolio_app/toronto/loaders/census.py:67 - References table 'census_raw' which does not exist
+   Fix: Table was renamed to 'census_demographics' in migration 003.
+
+Run /data-review for full audit report.
+```
+
+## Integration with projman
+
+This command is automatically invoked by the projman orchestrator when:
+
+1. An issue has the `Domain/Data` label
+2. The orchestrator is about to mark the issue as complete
+3. The orchestrator passes the path of changed files
+
+**Gate behavior:**
+- PASS: Issue can be marked complete
+- FAIL: Issue stays open, blocker comment added with failure details
+
+## Differences from /data-review
+
+| Aspect | /data-gate | /data-review |
+|--------|------------|--------------|
+| Output | Binary PASS/FAIL | Detailed report with all severities |
+| Severity | FAIL only | FAIL + WARN + INFO |
+| Purpose | Automation gate | Human review |
+| Verbosity | Minimal | Comprehensive |
+| Speed | Skips INFO checks | Full scan |
+
+## When to Use
+
+- **Sprint execution**: Automatic quality gates via projman
+- **CI/CD pipelines**: Automated data integrity checks
+- **Quick validation**: Fast pass/fail without full report
+- **Pre-merge checks**: Verify data changes before integration
+
+For detailed findings including warnings and suggestions, use `/data-review` instead.
+
+## Requirements
+
+- data-platform MCP server must be running
+- For dbt checks: dbt project must be configured (auto-detected via `dbt_project.yml`)
+- For PostgreSQL checks: connection configured in `~/.config/claude/postgres.env`
+- If database or dbt unavailable: applicable checks skipped with warning (non-blocking degradation)

plugins/data-platform/commands/data-review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,149 @@
+---
+description: Audit data integrity, schema validity, and dbt compliance
+arguments:
+  - name: path
+    description: File, directory, or dbt project to audit
+    required: true
+---
+
+# /data-review
+
+Comprehensive data integrity audit producing a detailed report with findings at all severity levels. For human review and standalone codebase auditing.
+
+## Usage
+
+```
+/data-review <path>
+```
+
+**Examples:**
+```
+/data-review ./dbt/
+/data-review ./portfolio_app/toronto/
+/data-review ./dbt/models/marts/
+```
+
+## What It Does
+
+1. **Activates** the `data-advisor` agent in review mode
+2. **Scans target path** to determine scope:
+   - Identifies dbt project files (.sql models, schema.yml, sources.yml)
+   - Identifies Python files with database operations
+   - Identifies migration files
+   - Identifies PostGIS usage
+3. **Runs all check categories:**
+   - Schema validity (PostgreSQL tables, columns, types)
+   - dbt project health (parse, compile, test, lineage)
+   - PostGIS compliance (SRID, geometry types, extent)
+   - Data type consistency
+   - Code patterns (unsafe SQL, hardcoded queries)
+4. **Produces detailed report** with all severity levels (FAIL, WARN, INFO)
+5. **Provides actionable recommendations** for each finding
+
+## Output Format
+
+```
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+|  DATA-PLATFORM - Data Integrity Audit                                 |
+|  /path/to/project                                                     |
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+
+Target: /path/to/project
+Scope: N files scanned, N models checked, N tables verified
+
+FINDINGS
+
+FAIL (N)
+  1. [location] violation description
+     Fix: actionable fix
+
+WARN (N)
+  1. [location] warning description
+     Suggestion: improvement suggestion
+
+INFO (N)
+  1. [location] info description
+     Note: context
+
+SUMMARY
+  Schema:   Valid | N issues
+  Lineage:  Intact | N orphaned
+  dbt:      Passes | N failures
+  PostGIS:  Valid | N issues | Not applicable
+
+VERDICT: PASS | FAIL (N blocking issues)
+```
+
+## When to Use
+
+### Before Sprint Planning
+Audit data layer health to identify tech debt and inform sprint scope.
+```
+/data-review ./dbt/
+```
+
+### During Code Review
+Get detailed data integrity findings alongside code review comments.
+```
+/data-review ./dbt/models/staging/stg_new_source.sql
+```
+
+### After Migrations
+Verify schema changes didn't break anything downstream.
+```
+/data-review ./migrations/
+```
+
+### Periodic Health Checks
+Regular data infrastructure audits for proactive maintenance.
+```
+/data-review ./data_pipeline/
+```
+
+### New Project Onboarding
+Understand the current state of data architecture.
+```
+/data-review .
+```
+
+## Severity Levels
+
+| Level | Meaning | Gate Impact |
+|-------|---------|-------------|
+| **FAIL** | Blocking issues that will cause runtime errors | Would block `/data-gate` |
+| **WARN** | Quality issues that should be addressed | Does not block gate |
+| **INFO** | Suggestions for improvement | Does not block gate |
+
+## Differences from /data-gate
+
+`/data-review` gives you the full picture. `/data-gate` gives the orchestrator a yes/no.
+
+| Aspect | /data-gate | /data-review |
+|--------|------------|--------------|
+| Output | Binary PASS/FAIL | Detailed report |
+| Severity | FAIL only | FAIL + WARN + INFO |
+| Purpose | Automation | Human review |
+| Verbosity | Minimal | Comprehensive |
+| Speed | Fast (skips INFO) | Thorough |
+
+Use `/data-review` when you want to understand.
+Use `/data-gate` when you want to automate.
+
+## Requirements
+
+- data-platform MCP server must be running
+- For dbt checks: dbt project must be configured (auto-detected via `dbt_project.yml`)
+- For PostgreSQL checks: connection configured in `~/.config/claude/postgres.env`
+
+**Graceful degradation:** If database or dbt unavailable, applicable checks are skipped with a note in the report rather than failing entirely.
+
+## Skills Used
+
+- `skills/data-integrity-audit.md` - Audit rules and patterns
+- `skills/mcp-tools-reference.md` - MCP tool reference
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/data-gate` - Binary pass/fail for automation
+- `/lineage` - Visualize dbt model dependencies
+- `/schema` - Explore database schema

plugins/data-platform/hooks/hooks.json

@@ -2,8 +2,13 @@
   "hooks": {
     "SessionStart": [
       {
-        "type": "command",
+        "matcher": "",
-        "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/startup-check.sh"
+        "hooks": [
+          {
+            "type": "command",
+            "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/startup-check.sh"
+          }
+        ]
       }
     ],
     "PostToolUse": [

plugins/data-platform/skills/data-integrity-audit.md

@@ -0,0 +1,307 @@
+---
+name: data-integrity-audit
+description: Rules and patterns for auditing data integrity, schema validity, and dbt compliance
+---
+
+# Data Integrity Audit
+
+## Purpose
+
+Defines what "data valid" means for the data-platform domain. This skill is loaded by the `data-advisor` agent for both review and gate modes during sprint execution and standalone audits.
+
+---
+
+## What to Check
+
+| Check Category | What It Validates | MCP Tools Used |
+|----------------|-------------------|----------------|
+| **Schema Validity** | Tables exist, columns have correct types, constraints present, no orphaned columns | `pg_tables`, `pg_columns`, `pg_schemas` |
+| **dbt Project Health** | Project parses without errors, models compile, tests defined for critical models | `dbt_parse`, `dbt_compile`, `dbt_test`, `dbt_ls` |
+| **Lineage Integrity** | No orphaned models (referenced but missing), no circular dependencies, upstream sources exist | `dbt_lineage`, `dbt_ls` |
+| **Data Type Consistency** | DataFrame dtypes match expected schema, no silent type coercion, date formats consistent | `describe`, `head`, `pg_columns` |
+| **PostGIS Compliance** | Spatial tables have correct SRID, geometry types match expectations, extent is reasonable | `st_tables`, `st_geometry_type`, `st_srid`, `st_extent` |
+| **Query Safety** | SELECT queries used for reads (not raw SQL for mutations), parameterized patterns | Code review - manual pattern check |
+
+---
+
+## Common Violations
+
+### FAIL-Level Violations (Block Gate)
+
+| Violation | Detection Method | Example |
+|-----------|-----------------|---------|
+| dbt parse failure | `dbt_parse` returns error | Project YAML invalid, missing ref targets |
+| dbt compilation error | `dbt_compile` fails | SQL syntax error, undefined column reference |
+| Missing table/column | `pg_tables`, `pg_columns` lookup | Code references `census_raw` but table doesn't exist |
+| Type mismatch | Compare `pg_columns` vs dbt schema | Column is `varchar` in DB but model expects `integer` |
+| Broken lineage | `dbt_lineage` shows orphaned refs | Model references `stg_old_format` which doesn't exist |
+| PostGIS SRID mismatch | `st_srid` returns unexpected value | Geometry column has SRID 0 instead of 4326 |
+| Unreasonable spatial extent | `st_extent` returns global bbox | Toronto data shows coordinates in China |
+
+### WARN-Level Violations (Report, Don't Block)
+
+| Violation | Detection Method | Example |
+|-----------|-----------------|---------|
+| Missing dbt tests | `dbt_ls` shows model without test | `dim_customers` has no `unique` test on `customer_id` |
+| Undocumented columns | dbt schema.yml missing descriptions | Model columns have no documentation |
+| Schema drift | `pg_columns` vs dbt schema.yml | Column exists in DB but not in dbt YAML |
+| Hardcoded SQL | Scan Python for string concatenation | `f"SELECT * FROM {table}"` without parameterization |
+| Orphaned model | `dbt_lineage` shows no downstream | `stg_legacy` has no consumers and no exposure |
+
+### INFO-Level Violations (Suggestions Only)
+
+| Violation | Detection Method | Example |
+|-----------|-----------------|---------|
+| Missing indexes | Query pattern suggests need | Frequent filter on non-indexed column |
+| Documentation gaps | dbt docs incomplete | Missing model description |
+| Unused models | `dbt_ls` vs actual queries | Model exists but never selected |
+| Optimization opportunity | `describe` shows data patterns | Column has low cardinality, could be enum |
+
+---
+
+## Severity Classification
+
+| Severity | When to Apply | Gate Behavior |
+|----------|--------------|---------------|
+| **FAIL** | Broken lineage, models that won't compile, missing tables/columns, data type mismatches that cause runtime errors, invalid SRID | Blocks issue completion |
+| **WARN** | Missing dbt tests, undocumented columns, schema drift, hardcoded SQL, orphaned models | Does NOT block gate, included in review report |
+| **INFO** | Optimization opportunities, documentation gaps, unused models | Review report only |
+
+### Severity Decision Tree
+
+```
+Is the dbt project broken (parse/compile fails)?
+  YES -> FAIL
+  NO -> Does code reference non-existent tables/columns?
+    YES -> FAIL
+    NO -> Would this cause a runtime error?
+      YES -> FAIL
+      NO -> Does it violate data quality standards?
+        YES -> WARN
+        NO -> Is it an optimization/documentation suggestion?
+          YES -> INFO
+          NO -> Not a violation
+```
+
+---
+
+## Scanning Strategy
+
+### For dbt Projects
+
+1. **Parse validation** (ALWAYS FIRST)
+   ```
+   dbt_parse → if fails, immediate FAIL (project is broken)
+   ```
+
+2. **Catalog resources**
+   ```
+   dbt_ls → list all models, tests, sources, exposures
+   ```
+
+3. **Lineage check**
+   ```
+   dbt_lineage on changed models → check upstream/downstream integrity
+   ```
+
+4. **Compilation check**
+   ```
+   dbt_compile on changed models → verify SQL renders correctly
+   ```
+
+5. **Test execution**
+   ```
+   dbt_test --select <changed_models> → verify tests pass
+   ```
+
+6. **Test coverage audit**
+   ```
+   Cross-reference dbt_ls tests against model list → flag models without tests (WARN)
+   ```
+
+### For PostgreSQL Schema Changes
+
+1. **Table verification**
+   ```
+   pg_tables → verify expected tables exist
+   ```
+
+2. **Column validation**
+   ```
+   pg_columns on affected tables → verify types match expectations
+   ```
+
+3. **Schema comparison**
+   ```
+   Compare pg_columns output against dbt schema.yml → flag drift
+   ```
+
+### For PostGIS/Spatial Data
+
+1. **Spatial table scan**
+   ```
+   st_tables → list tables with geometry columns
+   ```
+
+2. **SRID validation**
+   ```
+   st_srid → verify SRID is correct for expected region
+   Expected: 4326 (WGS84) for GPS data, local projections for regional data
+   ```
+
+3. **Geometry type check**
+   ```
+   st_geometry_type → verify expected types (Point, Polygon, etc.)
+   ```
+
+4. **Extent sanity check**
+   ```
+   st_extent → verify bounding box is reasonable for expected region
+   Toronto data should be ~(-79.6 to -79.1, 43.6 to 43.9)
+   ```
+
+### For DataFrame/pandas Operations
+
+1. **Data quality check**
+   ```
+   describe → check for unexpected nulls, type issues, outliers
+   ```
+
+2. **Structure verification**
+   ```
+   head → verify data structure matches expectations
+   ```
+
+3. **Memory management**
+   ```
+   list_data → verify no stale DataFrames from previous failed runs
+   ```
+
+### For Python Code (Manual Scan)
+
+1. **SQL injection patterns**
+   - Scan for f-strings with table/column names
+   - Check for string concatenation in queries
+   - Look for `.format()` calls with SQL
+
+2. **Mutation safety**
+   - `pg_execute` usage should be intentional, not accidental
+   - Verify DELETE/UPDATE have WHERE clauses
+
+3. **Credential exposure**
+   - No hardcoded connection strings
+   - No credentials in code (check for `.env` usage)
+
+---
+
+## Report Templates
+
+### Gate Mode (Compact)
+
+```
+DATA GATE: PASS
+No blocking data integrity violations found.
+```
+
+or
+
+```
+DATA GATE: FAIL
+
+Blocking Issues (N):
+1. <location> - <violation description>
+   Fix: <actionable fix>
+
+2. <location> - <violation description>
+   Fix: <actionable fix>
+
+Run /data-review for full audit report.
+```
+
+### Review Mode (Detailed)
+
+```
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+|  DATA-PLATFORM - Data Integrity Audit                                 |
+|  [Target Path]                                                        |
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+
+Target: <scanned path or project>
+Scope: N files scanned, N models checked, N tables verified
+
+FINDINGS
+
+FAIL (N)
+  1. [location] violation description
+     Fix: actionable fix
+
+  2. [location] violation description
+     Fix: actionable fix
+
+WARN (N)
+  1. [location] warning description
+     Suggestion: improvement suggestion
+
+  2. [location] warning description
+     Suggestion: improvement suggestion
+
+INFO (N)
+  1. [location] info description
+     Note: context
+
+SUMMARY
+  Schema:   Valid | N issues
+  Lineage:  Intact | N orphaned
+  dbt:      Passes | N failures
+  PostGIS:  Valid | N issues | Not applicable
+
+VERDICT: PASS | FAIL (N blocking issues)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Skip Patterns
+
+Do not flag violations in:
+
+- `**/tests/**` - Test files may have intentional violations
+- `**/__pycache__/**` - Compiled files
+- `**/fixtures/**` - Test fixtures
+- `**/.scratch/**` - Temporary working files
+- Files with `# noqa: data-audit` comment
+- Migration files marked as historical
+
+---
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Scenario | Behavior |
+|----------|----------|
+| Database not reachable (`pg_connect` fails) | WARN, skip PostgreSQL checks, continue with file-based |
+| dbt not configured (no `dbt_project.yml`) | Skip dbt checks entirely, not an error |
+| No PostGIS tables found | Skip PostGIS checks, not an error |
+| MCP tool call fails | Report as WARN with tool name, continue with remaining checks |
+| No data files in scanned path | Report "No data artifacts found" - PASS (nothing to fail) |
+| Empty directory | Report "No files found in path" - PASS |
+
+---
+
+## Integration Notes
+
+### projman Orchestrator
+
+When called as a domain gate:
+1. Orchestrator detects `Domain/Data` label on issue
+2. Orchestrator identifies changed files
+3. Orchestrator invokes `/data-gate <path>`
+4. Agent runs gate mode scan
+5. Returns PASS/FAIL to orchestrator
+6. Orchestrator decides whether to complete issue
+
+### Standalone Usage
+
+For manual audits:
+1. User runs `/data-review <path>`
+2. Agent runs full review mode scan
+3. Returns detailed report with all severity levels
+4. User decides on actions

plugins/git-flow/hooks/hooks.json

@@ -1,16 +1,19 @@
 {
-  "hooks": [
+  "hooks": {
-    {
+    "PreToolUse": [
-      "event": "PreToolUse",
+      {
-      "matcher": "Bash",
+        "matcher": "Bash",
-      "type": "command",
+        "hooks": [
-      "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/branch-check.sh"
+          {
-    },
+            "type": "command",
-    {
+            "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/branch-check.sh"
-      "event": "PreToolUse",
+          },
-      "matcher": "Bash",
+          {
-      "type": "command",
+            "type": "command",
-      "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/commit-msg-check.sh"
+            "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/commit-msg-check.sh"
-    }
+          }
-  ]
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  }
 }

plugins/pr-review/hooks/hooks.json

@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
   "hooks": {
     "SessionStart": [
       {
+        "matcher": "",
         "hooks": [
           {
             "type": "command",

plugins/projman/agents/orchestrator.md

@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ You are the **Orchestrator Agent** - a concise, action-oriented coordinator who
 - skills/progress-tracking.md
 - skills/runaway-detection.md
 - skills/wiki-conventions.md
+- skills/domain-consultation.md
 
 ## Your Personality
 
@@ -73,6 +74,25 @@ Execute `skills/dependency-management.md` - Check for file conflicts before para
 ### 6. Track Progress
 Execute `skills/progress-tracking.md` - Manage status labels, parse progress comments.
 
+### 6.5. Domain Gate Checks
+Execute `skills/domain-consultation.md` (Execution Gate Protocol section):
+
+1. **Before marking any issue as complete**, check for `Domain/*` labels
+2. **If `Domain/Viz` label present:**
+   - Identify files changed by this issue
+   - Invoke `/design-gate <path-to-changed-files>`
+   - Gate PASS → proceed to mark issue complete
+   - Gate FAIL → add comment to issue with failure details, keep issue open
+3. **If `Domain/Data` label present:**
+   - Identify files changed by this issue
+   - Invoke `/data-gate <path-to-changed-files>`
+   - Gate PASS → proceed to mark issue complete
+   - Gate FAIL → add comment to issue with failure details, keep issue open
+4. **If gate command unavailable** (MCP server not running):
+   - Warn user: "Domain gate unavailable - proceeding without validation"
+   - Proceed with completion (non-blocking degradation)
+   - Do NOT silently skip
+
 ### 7. Monitor for Runaway Agents
 Execute `skills/runaway-detection.md` - Intervene when agents are stuck.
 
@@ -93,6 +113,7 @@ Execute `skills/git-workflow.md` - Merge, tag, clean up branches.
 4. **ALWAYS monitor dispatched agents** - Intervene if stuck
 5. **ALWAYS capture lessons** - Don't skip the interview at sprint close
 6. **ALWAYS update milestone** - Close milestone when sprint complete
+7. **ALWAYS run domain gates** - Issues with `Domain/*` labels must pass gates before completion
 
 ## Your Mission
 

plugins/projman/agents/planner.md

@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ You are the **Planner Agent** - a methodical architect who thoroughly analyzes r
 - skills/sprint-approval.md
 - skills/planning-workflow.md
 - skills/label-taxonomy/labels-reference.md
+- skills/domain-consultation.md
 
 ## Your Personality
 
@@ -66,10 +67,25 @@ Execute `skills/wiki-conventions.md` - Create proposal and implementation pages.
 ### 6. Task Sizing
 Execute `skills/task-sizing.md` - **REFUSE to create L/XL tasks without breakdown.**
 
-### 7. Issue Creation
+### 7. Domain Consultation
+
+Execute `skills/domain-consultation.md` (Planning Protocol section):
+
+1. **After drafting issues but BEFORE creating them in Gitea**
+2. **Analyze each issue for domain signals:**
+   - Check planned labels for `Component/Frontend`, `Component/UI` -> Domain/Viz
+   - Check planned labels for `Component/Database`, `Component/Data` -> Domain/Data
+   - Scan issue description for domain keywords (see skill for full list)
+3. **For detected domains, append acceptance criteria:**
+   - Domain/Viz: Design System Compliance checklist
+   - Domain/Data: Data Integrity checklist
+4. **Add corresponding `Domain/*` label** to the issue's label set
+5. **Document in planning summary** which issues have domain gates active
+
+### 8. Issue Creation
 Execute `skills/issue-conventions.md` - Use proper format with wiki references.
 
-### 8. Request Approval
+### 9. Request Approval
 Execute `skills/sprint-approval.md` - Planning DOES NOT equal execution permission.
 
 ## Critical Reminders
@@ -81,6 +97,7 @@ Execute `skills/sprint-approval.md` - Planning DOES NOT equal execution permissi
 5. **ALWAYS search lessons** - Past experience informs better planning
 6. **ALWAYS include wiki reference** - Every issue links to implementation wiki page
 7. **ALWAYS use proper title format** - `[Sprint XX] <type>: <description>`
+8. **ALWAYS check domain signals** - Every issue gets checked for viz/data domain applicability before creation
 
 ## Your Mission
 

plugins/projman/claude-md-integration.md

@@ -12,6 +12,11 @@ This project uses the **projman** plugin for sprint planning and project managem
 | `/sprint-close` | Complete sprint and capture lessons learned to Gitea Wiki |
 | `/labels-sync` | Synchronize label taxonomy from Gitea |
 | `/initial-setup` | Run initial setup for projman plugin |
+| `/rfc-create` | Create new RFC from conversation or clarified spec |
+| `/rfc-list` | List all RFCs grouped by status |
+| `/rfc-review` | Submit Draft RFC for review |
+| `/rfc-approve` | Approve RFC for sprint planning |
+| `/rfc-reject` | Reject RFC with documented reason |
 
 ### MCP Tools Available
 
@@ -40,12 +45,14 @@ The following Gitea MCP tools are available for issue and project management:
 - `create_issue_dependency` - Create dependency between issues
 - `get_execution_order` - Get parallel execution batches
 
-**Wiki (Lessons Learned):**
+**Wiki (Lessons Learned & RFCs):**
 - `list_wiki_pages` - List wiki pages
 - `get_wiki_page` - Fetch specific page content
 - `create_wiki_page` - Create new wiki page
+- `update_wiki_page` - Update existing wiki page
 - `create_lesson` - Create lessons learned document
 - `search_lessons` - Search past lessons by tags
+- `allocate_rfc_number` - Get next available RFC number
 
 ### Usage Guidelines
 

plugins/projman/commands/rfc-approve.md

@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+---
+description: Approve an RFC in Review status, making it ready for sprint planning
+agent: planner
+---
+
+# Approve RFC
+
+## Skills Required
+
+- skills/mcp-tools-reference.md
+- skills/rfc-workflow.md
+- skills/rfc-templates.md
+
+## Purpose
+
+Transition an RFC from Review to Approved status, indicating the proposal has been accepted and is ready for implementation in an upcoming sprint.
+
+## Invocation
+
+Run `/rfc-approve <number>` where number is the RFC number:
+- `/rfc-approve 0003`
+- `/rfc-approve 3` (leading zeros optional)
+
+## Workflow
+
+1. **Validate RFC Number**
+   - Normalize input (add leading zeros if needed)
+   - Fetch RFC page: `RFC-NNNN: *`
+
+2. **Check Current Status**
+   - Parse frontmatter to get current status
+   - **STOP** if status is not "Review"
+   - Error: "RFC-NNNN is in [status] status. Only RFCs in Review can be approved."
+
+3. **Gather Decision Details**
+   - Prompt: "Please provide the approval rationale (why is this RFC being approved?):"
+   - This becomes the Decision section content
+
+4. **Update RFC Page**
+   - Change status: Review → Approved
+   - Update "Updated" date
+   - Add/update Decision section:
+     ```markdown
+     ## Decision
+
+     **Decision:** Approved
+     **Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
+     **Decided By:** @[current user or maintainer]
+
+     **Rationale:**
+
+     [User-provided rationale]
+     ```
+
+5. **Update RFC-Index**
+   - Remove entry from "## In Review" section
+   - Add entry to "## Approved" section
+
+6. **Confirm Approval**
+   - Display updated status
+   - Note that RFC is now available for `/sprint-plan`
+
+## Visual Output
+
+```
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+|  PROJMAN - RFC Approval                                              |
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+
+RFC-0003: Feature X has been approved!
+
+Status: Review → Approved
+Decision recorded in RFC page.
+
+This RFC is now available for sprint planning.
+Use /sprint-plan and select this RFC when prompted.
+```
+
+## Validation Errors
+
+- **RFC not found**: "RFC-NNNN not found. Check the number with /rfc-list"
+- **Wrong status**: "RFC-NNNN is [status]. Only RFCs in Review can be approved."
+- **No rationale provided**: "Approval rationale is required. Please explain why this RFC is being approved."

plugins/projman/commands/rfc-create.md

@@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
+---
+description: Create a new RFC (Request for Comments) from conversation or clarified specification
+agent: planner
+---
+
+# Create RFC
+
+## Skills Required
+
+- skills/mcp-tools-reference.md
+- skills/rfc-workflow.md
+- skills/rfc-templates.md
+
+## Purpose
+
+Create a new RFC wiki page to track a feature idea, proposal, or enhancement through the review lifecycle. RFCs provide a structured way to document, discuss, and approve changes before implementation.
+
+## Invocation
+
+Run `/rfc-create` with optional context:
+- After `/clarify` to convert clarified spec to RFC
+- With description of feature idea
+- From conversation context
+
+## Workflow
+
+1. **Gather Input**
+   - Check if conversation has clarified specification (from `/clarify`)
+   - If no context: prompt for Summary, Motivation, and initial Design
+   - Extract author from context or prompt
+
+2. **Allocate RFC Number**
+   - Call `allocate_rfc_number` MCP tool
+   - Get next sequential 4-digit number
+
+3. **Create RFC Page**
+   - Use template from `skills/rfc-templates.md`
+   - Fill in frontmatter (number, title, status=Draft, author, dates)
+   - Populate Summary, Motivation, Detailed Design sections
+   - Create wiki page: `RFC-NNNN: Title`
+
+4. **Update RFC-Index**
+   - Fetch RFC-Index (create if doesn't exist)
+   - Add entry to "## Draft" section
+   - Update wiki page
+
+5. **Confirm Creation**
+   - Display RFC number and wiki link
+   - Remind about next steps (refine → `/rfc-review`)
+
+## Visual Output
+
+```
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+|  PROJMAN - RFC Creation                                              |
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+
+RFC-0001: [Title] created successfully!
+
+Status: Draft
+Wiki: [link to RFC page]
+
+Next steps:
+- Refine the RFC with additional details
+- When ready: /rfc-review 0001 to submit for review
+```
+
+## Input Mapping
+
+When converting from `/clarify` output:
+
+| Clarify Section | RFC Section |
+|-----------------|-------------|
+| Problem/Context | Motivation > Problem Statement |
+| Goals/Outcomes | Motivation > Goals |
+| Scope/Requirements | Detailed Design > Overview |
+| Constraints | Non-Goals or Detailed Design |
+| Success Criteria | Testing Strategy |
+
+## Edge Cases
+
+- **No RFC-Index exists**: Create it with empty sections
+- **User provides minimal input**: Create minimal RFC template, note sections to fill
+- **Duplicate title**: Proceed (RFC numbers are unique, titles don't need to be)

plugins/projman/commands/rfc-list.md

@@ -0,0 +1,98 @@
+---
+description: List all RFCs grouped by status from RFC-Index wiki page
+agent: planner
+---
+
+# List RFCs
+
+## Skills Required
+
+- skills/mcp-tools-reference.md
+- skills/rfc-workflow.md
+
+## Purpose
+
+Display all RFCs grouped by their lifecycle status. Highlights "Approved" RFCs that are ready for sprint planning.
+
+## Invocation
+
+Run `/rfc-list` to see all RFCs.
+
+Optional filters:
+- `/rfc-list approved` - Show only approved RFCs
+- `/rfc-list draft` - Show only draft RFCs
+- `/rfc-list review` - Show only RFCs in review
+
+## Workflow
+
+1. **Fetch RFC-Index**
+   - Call `get_wiki_page` for "RFC-Index"
+   - Handle missing index gracefully
+
+2. **Parse Sections**
+   - Extract tables from each status section
+   - Parse RFC number, title, and metadata from each row
+
+3. **Display Results**
+   - Group by status
+   - Highlight Approved section (ready for planning)
+   - Show counts per status
+
+## Visual Output
+
+```
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+|  PROJMAN - RFC Index                                                 |
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+
+## Approved (Ready for Sprint Planning)
+
+| RFC | Title | Champion | Created |
+|-----|-------|----------|---------|
+| RFC-0003 | Feature X | @user | 2026-01-15 |
+| RFC-0007 | Enhancement Y | @user | 2026-01-28 |
+
+## In Review (2)
+
+| RFC | Title | Author | Created |
+|-----|-------|--------|---------|
+| RFC-0004 | Feature Y | @user | 2026-01-20 |
+| RFC-0008 | Idea Z | @user | 2026-01-29 |
+
+## Draft (3)
+
+| RFC | Title | Author | Created |
+|-----|-------|--------|---------|
+| RFC-0005 | Concept A | @user | 2026-01-22 |
+| RFC-0009 | Proposal B | @user | 2026-01-30 |
+| RFC-0010 | Sketch C | @user | 2026-01-30 |
+
+## Implementing (1)
+
+| RFC | Title | Sprint | Started |
+|-----|-------|--------|---------|
+| RFC-0002 | Feature W | Sprint 18 | 2026-01-22 |
+
+## Implemented (1)
+
+| RFC | Title | Completed | Release |
+|-----|-------|-----------|---------|
+| RFC-0001 | Initial Feature | 2026-01-10 | v5.0.0 |
+
+## Rejected (0)
+
+(none)
+
+## Stale (0)
+
+(none)
+
+---
+Total: 10 RFCs | 2 Approved | 1 Implementing
+```
+
+## Edge Cases
+
+- **No RFC-Index**: Display message "No RFCs yet. Create one with /rfc-create"
+- **Empty sections**: Show "(none)" for empty status categories
+- **Filter applied**: Only show matching section, still show total counts

plugins/projman/commands/rfc-reject.md

@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
+---
+description: Reject an RFC with documented reason, marking it as declined
+agent: planner
+---
+
+# Reject RFC
+
+## Skills Required
+
+- skills/mcp-tools-reference.md
+- skills/rfc-workflow.md
+- skills/rfc-templates.md
+
+## Purpose
+
+Transition an RFC to Rejected status with a documented reason. Rejected RFCs remain in the wiki for historical reference but are marked as declined.
+
+## Invocation
+
+Run `/rfc-reject <number>` where number is the RFC number:
+- `/rfc-reject 0006`
+- `/rfc-reject 6` (leading zeros optional)
+
+## Workflow
+
+1. **Validate RFC Number**
+   - Normalize input (add leading zeros if needed)
+   - Fetch RFC page: `RFC-NNNN: *`
+
+2. **Check Current Status**
+   - Parse frontmatter to get current status
+   - **STOP** if status is not "Draft" or "Review"
+   - Error: "RFC-NNNN is in [status] status. Only Draft or Review RFCs can be rejected."
+
+3. **Require Rejection Reason**
+   - Prompt: "Please provide the rejection reason (required):"
+   - **STOP** if no reason provided
+   - Error: "Rejection reason is required to document why this RFC was declined."
+
+4. **Update RFC Page**
+   - Change status: [current] → Rejected
+   - Update "Updated" date
+   - Add/update Decision section:
+     ```markdown
+     ## Decision
+
+     **Decision:** Rejected
+     **Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
+     **Decided By:** @[current user or maintainer]
+
+     **Reason:**
+
+     [User-provided rejection reason]
+     ```
+
+5. **Update RFC-Index**
+   - Remove entry from current section ("## Draft" or "## In Review")
+   - Add entry to "## Rejected" section with reason summary
+
+6. **Confirm Rejection**
+   - Display updated status
+   - Note that RFC remains in wiki for reference
+
+## Visual Output
+
+```
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+|  PROJMAN - RFC Rejection                                             |
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+
+RFC-0006: Proposed Feature has been rejected.
+
+Status: Review → Rejected
+Reason: Out of scope for current project direction
+
+The RFC remains in the wiki for historical reference.
+If circumstances change, a new RFC can be created.
+```
+
+## Validation Errors
+
+- **RFC not found**: "RFC-NNNN not found. Check the number with /rfc-list"
+- **Wrong status**: "RFC-NNNN is [status]. Only Draft or Review RFCs can be rejected."
+- **No reason provided**: "Rejection reason is required. Please document why this RFC is being declined."
+
+## Notes
+
+- Rejected is a terminal state
+- To reconsider, create a new RFC that references the rejected one
+- Rejection reasons help future contributors understand project direction

plugins/projman/commands/rfc-review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
+---
+description: Submit a Draft RFC for review, transitioning status to Review
+agent: planner
+---
+
+# Submit RFC for Review
+
+## Skills Required
+
+- skills/mcp-tools-reference.md
+- skills/rfc-workflow.md
+- skills/rfc-templates.md
+
+## Purpose
+
+Transition an RFC from Draft to Review status, indicating it's ready for maintainer evaluation. Optionally assign a champion to shepherd the RFC through review.
+
+## Invocation
+
+Run `/rfc-review <number>` where number is the RFC number:
+- `/rfc-review 0001`
+- `/rfc-review 1` (leading zeros optional)
+
+## Workflow
+
+1. **Validate RFC Number**
+   - Normalize input (add leading zeros if needed)
+   - Fetch RFC page: `RFC-NNNN: *`
+
+2. **Check Current Status**
+   - Parse frontmatter to get current status
+   - **STOP** if status is not "Draft"
+   - Error: "RFC-NNNN is in [status] status. Only Draft RFCs can be submitted for review."
+
+3. **Validate Minimum Content**
+   - Check for Summary section (required)
+   - Check for Motivation section (required)
+   - Check for Detailed Design > Overview (required)
+   - Warn if Alternatives Considered is empty
+
+4. **Optional: Assign Champion**
+   - Ask: "Would you like to assign a champion? (Enter username or skip)"
+   - Champion is responsible for driving the RFC through review
+
+5. **Update RFC Page**
+   - Change status: Draft → Review
+   - Update "Updated" date
+   - Set Champion if provided
+   - Add Review Notes section if not present
+
+6. **Update RFC-Index**
+   - Remove entry from "## Draft" section
+   - Add entry to "## In Review" section
+
+7. **Confirm Transition**
+   - Display updated status
+   - Note next steps (review discussion, then /rfc-approve or /rfc-reject)
+
+## Visual Output
+
+```
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+|  PROJMAN - RFC Review Submission                                     |
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+
+RFC-0005: Feature Idea submitted for review
+
+Status: Draft → Review
+Champion: @assigned_user (or: unassigned)
+Updated: RFC-Index
+
+Next steps:
+- Discuss in RFC wiki page comments or meetings
+- When decision reached: /rfc-approve 0005 or /rfc-reject 0005
+```
+
+## Validation Errors
+
+- **RFC not found**: "RFC-NNNN not found. Check the number with /rfc-list"
+- **Wrong status**: "RFC-NNNN is [status]. Only Draft RFCs can be reviewed."
+- **Missing sections**: "RFC-NNNN is missing required sections: [list]. Please complete before review."

plugins/projman/commands/sprint-close.md

@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ agent: orchestrator
 - skills/mcp-tools-reference.md
 - skills/lessons-learned.md
 - skills/wiki-conventions.md
+- skills/rfc-workflow.md
 - skills/progress-tracking.md
 - skills/git-workflow.md
 
@@ -31,11 +32,42 @@ Execute the sprint close workflow:
 4. **Save to Gitea Wiki** - Use `create_lesson` with metadata and implementation link
 5. **Update Wiki Implementation Page** - Change status to Implemented/Partial/Failed
 6. **Update Wiki Proposal Page** - Update overall status if all implementations complete
-7. **New Command Verification** - Remind user new commands require session restart
+7. **Update RFC Status (if applicable)** - See RFC Update section below
-8. **Update CHANGELOG** (MANDATORY) - Add changes to `[Unreleased]` section
+8. **New Command Verification** - Remind user new commands require session restart
-9. **Version Check** - Run `/suggest-version` to recommend version bump
+9. **Update CHANGELOG** (MANDATORY) - Add changes to `[Unreleased]` section
-10. **Git Operations** - Commit, merge, tag, clean up branches
+10. **Version Check** - Run `/suggest-version` to recommend version bump
-11. **Close Milestone** - Update milestone state to closed
+11. **Git Operations** - Commit, merge, tag, clean up branches
+12. **Close Milestone** - Update milestone state to closed
+
+## RFC Status Update (Step 7)
+
+If the sprint was linked to an RFC:
+
+1. **Check Sprint Completion Status:**
+   - All issues completed → RFC status = Implemented
+   - Partial completion → RFC status stays Implementing (note progress)
+   - Blocked/Failed → RFC status reverts to Draft (with notes)
+
+2. **Update RFC Page (if Implemented):**
+   - Change status: Implementing → Implemented
+   - Add Completion section with date and release version
+   - Link to lessons learned page
+   ```python
+   update_wiki_page(
+       page_name="RFC-NNNN:-Title",
+       content="[content with Implemented status and completion details]",
+       repo="org/repo"
+   )
+   ```
+
+3. **Update RFC-Index:**
+   - Remove from "## Implementing" section
+   - Add to "## Implemented" section with completion date and release
+
+4. **Handle Partial Completion:**
+   - Keep RFC in Implementing status
+   - Add progress notes to Implementation section
+   - Next sprint can continue the work
 
 **Don't skip lessons learned!** Future sprints will benefit from captured insights.
 

plugins/projman/hooks/hooks.json

@@ -2,8 +2,13 @@
   "hooks": {
     "SessionStart": [
       {
-        "type": "command",
+        "matcher": "",
-        "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/startup-check.sh"
+        "hooks": [
+          {
+            "type": "command",
+            "command": "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/startup-check.sh"
+          }
+        ]
       }
     ]
   }

plugins/projman/skills/domain-consultation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,163 @@
+---
+name: domain-consultation
+description: Cross-plugin domain consultation for specialized planning and validation
+---
+
+# Domain Consultation
+
+## Purpose
+
+Enables projman agents to detect domain-specific work and consult specialized plugins for expert validation during planning and execution phases. This skill is the backbone of the Domain Advisory Pattern.
+
+---
+
+## When to Use
+
+| Agent | Phase | Action |
+|-------|-------|--------|
+| Planner | After task sizing, before issue creation | Detect domains, add acceptance criteria |
+| Orchestrator | Before marking issue complete | Run domain gates, block if violations |
+| Code Reviewer | During review | Include domain compliance in findings |
+
+---
+
+## Domain Detection Rules
+
+| Signal Type | Detection Pattern | Domain Plugin | Action |
+|-------------|-------------------|---------------|--------|
+| Label-based | `Component/Frontend`, `Component/UI` | viz-platform | Add design system criteria, apply `Domain/Viz` |
+| Content-based | Keywords: DMC, Dash, layout, theme, component, dashboard, chart, responsive, color, UI, frontend, Plotly | viz-platform | Same as above |
+| Label-based | `Component/Database`, `Component/Data` | data-platform | Add data validation criteria, apply `Domain/Data` |
+| Content-based | Keywords: schema, migration, pipeline, dbt, table, column, query, PostgreSQL, lineage, data model | data-platform | Same as above |
+| Both signals | Frontend + Data signals present | Both plugins | Apply both sets of criteria |
+
+---
+
+## Planning Protocol
+
+When creating issues, the planner MUST:
+
+1. **Analyze each issue** for domain signals (check labels AND scan description for keywords)
+
+2. **For Domain/Viz issues**, append this acceptance criteria block:
+   ```markdown
+   ## Design System Compliance
+   - [ ] All DMC components validated against registry
+   - [ ] Theme tokens used (no hardcoded colors/sizes)
+   - [ ] Accessibility check passed (WCAG contrast)
+   - [ ] Responsive breakpoints verified
+   ```
+
+3. **For Domain/Data issues**, append this acceptance criteria block:
+   ```markdown
+   ## Data Integrity
+   - [ ] Schema changes validated
+   - [ ] dbt tests pass
+   - [ ] Lineage intact (no orphaned models)
+   - [ ] Data types verified
+   ```
+
+4. **Apply the corresponding `Domain/*` label** to route the issue through gates
+
+5. **Document in planning summary** which issues have domain gates active
+
+---
+
+## Execution Gate Protocol
+
+Before marking any issue as complete, the orchestrator MUST:
+
+1. **Check issue labels** for `Domain/*` labels
+
+2. **If `Domain/Viz` label present:**
+   - Identify files changed by this issue
+   - Invoke `/design-gate <path-to-changed-files>`
+   - Gate PASS → proceed to mark issue complete
+   - Gate FAIL → add comment to issue with failure details, keep issue open
+
+3. **If `Domain/Data` label present:**
+   - Identify files changed by this issue
+   - Invoke `/data-gate <path-to-changed-files>`
+   - Gate PASS → proceed to mark issue complete
+   - Gate FAIL → add comment to issue with failure details, keep issue open
+
+4. **If gate command unavailable** (MCP server not running):
+   - Warn user: "Domain gate unavailable - proceeding without validation"
+   - Proceed with completion (non-blocking degradation)
+   - Do NOT silently skip - always inform user
+
+---
+
+## Review Protocol
+
+During code review, the code reviewer SHOULD:
+
+1. After completing standard code quality and security checks, check for `Domain/*` labels
+
+2. **If Domain/Viz:** Include "Design System Compliance" section in review report
+   - Reference `/design-review` findings if available
+   - Check for hardcoded colors, invalid props, accessibility issues
+
+3. **If Domain/Data:** Include "Data Integrity" section in review report
+   - Reference `/data-gate` findings if available
+   - Check for schema validity, lineage integrity
+
+---
+
+## Extensibility
+
+To add a new domain (e.g., `Domain/Infra` for cmdb-assistant):
+
+1. **In domain plugin:** Create advisory agent + gate command
+   - Agent: `agents/infra-advisor.md`
+   - Gate command: `commands/infra-gate.md`
+   - Audit skill: `skills/infra-audit.md`
+
+2. **In this skill:** Add detection rules to the Detection Rules table above
+   - Define label-based signals (e.g., `Component/Infrastructure`)
+   - Define content-based keywords (e.g., "server", "network", "NetBox")
+
+3. **In label taxonomy:** Add `Domain/Infra` label with appropriate color
+   - Update `plugins/projman/skills/label-taxonomy/labels-reference.md`
+
+4. **No changes needed** to planner.md or orchestrator.md agent files
+   - They read this skill dynamically
+   - Detection rules table is the single source of truth
+
+This pattern ensures domain expertise stays in domain plugins while projman orchestrates when to ask.
+
+---
+
+## Domain Acceptance Criteria Templates
+
+### Design System Compliance (Domain/Viz)
+
+```markdown
+## Design System Compliance
+- [ ] All DMC components validated against registry
+- [ ] Theme tokens used (no hardcoded colors/sizes)
+- [ ] Accessibility check passed (WCAG contrast)
+- [ ] Responsive breakpoints verified
+```
+
+### Data Integrity (Domain/Data)
+
+```markdown
+## Data Integrity
+- [ ] Schema changes validated
+- [ ] dbt tests pass
+- [ ] Lineage intact (no orphaned models)
+- [ ] Data types verified
+```
+
+---
+
+## Gate Command Reference
+
+| Domain | Gate Command | Review Command | Advisory Agent |
+|--------|--------------|----------------|----------------|
+| Viz | `/design-gate <path>` | `/design-review <path>` | `design-reviewer` |
+| Data | `/data-gate <path>` | `/data-review <path>` | `data-advisor` |
+
+Gate commands return binary PASS/FAIL for automation.
+Review commands return detailed reports for human review.

plugins/projman/skills/input-detection.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: input-detection
-description: Detect planning input source (file, wiki, or conversation)
+description: Detect planning input source (RFC, file, wiki, or conversation)
 ---
 
 # Input Source Detection
@@ -20,12 +20,56 @@ Defines how to detect where planning input is coming from and how to handle each
 
 | Priority | Source | Detection | Action |
 |----------|--------|-----------|--------|
+| 0 | Approved RFC | RFC-Index has entries in "Approved" section | Offer RFC selection or new work |
 | 1 | Local file | `docs/changes/*.md` exists | Parse frontmatter, migrate to wiki, delete local |
 | 2 | Existing wiki | `Change VXX.X.X: Proposal` exists | Use as-is, create implementation page |
 | 3 | Conversation | Neither exists | Create wiki from discussion context |
 
 ---
 
+## RFC Detection (Priority 0)
+
+Before checking for local files or wiki proposals, check for approved RFCs.
+
+### Detection Steps
+
+1. **Fetch RFC-Index:**
+   ```python
+   get_wiki_page(page_name="RFC-Index", repo="org/repo")
+   ```
+
+2. **Parse Approved Section:**
+   - Find "## Approved" section
+   - Extract RFC entries from table
+
+3. **If Approved RFCs Exist:**
+   ```
+   Approved RFCs available for implementation:
+
+   | RFC | Title | Champion |
+   |-----|-------|----------|
+   | RFC-0003 | Feature X | @user |
+   | RFC-0007 | Enhancement Y | @user |
+
+   Options:
+   [1] Implement RFC-0003: Feature X
+   [2] Implement RFC-0007: Enhancement Y
+   [3] Describe new work (skip RFCs)
+
+   Select an option:
+   ```
+
+4. **If RFC Selected:**
+   - Use RFC content as planning input
+   - Status will transition to Implementing after planning approval
+   - Skip local file and wiki proposal detection
+
+5. **If "New Work" Selected:**
+   - Continue with normal Priority 1-3 detection
+   - Optionally offer: "Would you like to create an RFC first? (y/n)"
+
+---
+
 ## Local File Format
 
 ```yaml

plugins/projman/skills/label-taxonomy/labels-reference.md

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ description: Dynamic reference for Gitea label taxonomy (organization + reposito
 
 This skill provides the current label taxonomy used for issue classification in Gitea. Labels are **fetched dynamically** from Gitea and should never be hardcoded.
 
-**Current Taxonomy:** 47 labels (31 organization + 16 repository)
+**Current Taxonomy:** 49 labels (31 organization + 18 repository)
 
 ## Organization Labels (31)
 
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ Organization-level labels are shared across all repositories in your configured
 - `Status/Failed` (#de350b) - Implementation attempted but failed, needs investigation
 - `Status/Deferred` (#6554c0) - Moved to a future sprint or backlog
 
-## Repository Labels (16)
+## Repository Labels (18)
 
 Repository-level labels are specific to each project.
 
@@ -90,6 +90,27 @@ Repository-level labels are specific to each project.
 - `Tech/Vue` (#42b883) - Vue.js frontend framework
 - `Tech/FastAPI` (#009688) - FastAPI backend framework
 
+### Domain (2 labels)
+
+Cross-plugin integration labels for domain-specific validation gates.
+
+| Label | Color | Description |
+|-------|-------|-------------|
+| `Domain/Viz` | `#7c4dff` | Issue involves visualization/frontend — triggers viz-platform design gates |
+| `Domain/Data` | `#00bfa5` | Issue involves data engineering — triggers data-platform data gates |
+
+**Detection Rules:**
+
+**Domain/Viz:**
+- Keywords: "dashboard", "chart", "theme", "DMC", "component", "layout", "responsive", "color", "UI", "frontend", "Dash", "Plotly"
+- Also applied when: `Component/Frontend` or `Component/UI` label is present
+- Example: "Create new neighbourhood comparison dashboard tab"
+
+**Domain/Data:**
+- Keywords: "schema", "migration", "pipeline", "dbt", "table", "column", "query", "PostgreSQL", "lineage", "data model"
+- Also applied when: `Component/Database` or `Component/Data` label is present
+- Example: "Add census demographic data pipeline"
+
 ## Label Suggestion Logic
 
 When suggesting labels for issues, consider the following patterns:

plugins/projman/skills/planning-workflow.md

@@ -40,10 +40,18 @@ Execute in order:
 ### 3. Detect Input Source
 
 Follow `skills/input-detection.md`:
-1. Check for `docs/changes/*.md` files
+1. **Check for approved RFCs** (Priority 0)
-2. Check for existing wiki proposal
+2. Check for `docs/changes/*.md` files
-3. If neither: use conversation context
+3. Check for existing wiki proposal
-4. If ambiguous: ask user
+4. If neither: use conversation context
+5. If ambiguous: ask user
+
+### 3a. RFC Status Update (if RFC selected)
+
+If input source is an RFC:
+1. **Note the RFC number** for later status update
+2. RFC status update happens AFTER sprint approval (Step 11)
+3. The RFC provides the planning context - use its Summary, Motivation, and Design sections
 
 ### 4. Search Relevant Lessons Learned
 
@@ -110,6 +118,31 @@ Follow `skills/sprint-approval.md`:
 - Wait for explicit user approval
 - Record approval in milestone description
 
+### 12. Update RFC Status (if applicable)
+
+If planning input was an RFC:
+
+1. **Fetch RFC page:**
+   ```python
+   get_wiki_page(page_name="RFC-NNNN:-Title", repo="org/repo")
+   ```
+
+2. **Update RFC page:**
+   - Change status: Approved → Implementing
+   - Add Sprint reference to frontmatter
+   - Add Implementation section with sprint details and issue links
+   ```python
+   update_wiki_page(
+       page_name="RFC-NNNN:-Title",
+       content="[updated content with Implementing status]",
+       repo="org/repo"
+   )
+   ```
+
+3. **Update RFC-Index:**
+   - Remove from "## Approved" section
+   - Add to "## Implementing" section with sprint reference
+
 ---
 
 ## Cleanup After Planning

plugins/projman/skills/rfc-templates.md

@@ -0,0 +1,380 @@
+---
+name: rfc-templates
+description: RFC page templates and frontmatter format specifications
+---
+
+# RFC Templates
+
+## Purpose
+
+Provides templates for RFC wiki pages and defines the required/optional sections for complete RFC documentation.
+
+## When to Use
+
+- **Commands**: `/rfc-create` when generating new RFC pages
+- **Integration**: Referenced by `rfc-workflow.md` for page structure
+
+---
+
+## RFC Page Frontmatter
+
+Every RFC page starts with a metadata block using blockquote format:
+
+```markdown
+> **RFC:** 0001
+> **Title:** Short Descriptive Title
+> **Status:** Draft
+> **Author:** @username
+> **Created:** 2026-01-25
+> **Updated:** 2026-01-25
+> **Champion:** (unassigned)
+> **Sprint:** (none)
+> **Superseded-By:** (none)
+```
+
+### Frontmatter Fields
+
+| Field | Required | Description |
+|-------|----------|-------------|
+| `RFC` | Yes | 4-digit RFC number (e.g., 0001) |
+| `Title` | Yes | Short descriptive title |
+| `Status` | Yes | Current lifecycle status |
+| `Author` | Yes | Original RFC author |
+| `Created` | Yes | Creation date (YYYY-MM-DD) |
+| `Updated` | Yes | Last update date (YYYY-MM-DD) |
+| `Champion` | No | Assigned reviewer/sponsor |
+| `Sprint` | No | Sprint reference when implementing |
+| `Superseded-By` | No | RFC number if superseded |
+
+---
+
+## Full RFC Page Template
+
+```markdown
+> **RFC:** NNNN
+> **Title:** [Short Title]
+> **Status:** Draft
+> **Author:** @[username]
+> **Created:** YYYY-MM-DD
+> **Updated:** YYYY-MM-DD
+> **Champion:** (unassigned)
+> **Sprint:** (none)
+> **Superseded-By:** (none)
+
+# RFC-NNNN: [Full Title]
+
+## Summary
+
+A brief (2-3 paragraph) explanation of the proposed change. This should be understandable by someone unfamiliar with the codebase.
+
+**What:** What is being proposed?
+**Why:** Why is this change needed?
+**Impact:** What will be different after this is implemented?
+
+## Motivation
+
+### Problem Statement
+
+Describe the problem this RFC addresses. Include:
+- Current pain points or limitations
+- User stories or use cases
+- Why existing solutions are insufficient
+
+### Goals
+
+- [ ] Goal 1: Specific, measurable outcome
+- [ ] Goal 2: Another specific outcome
+- [ ] Goal 3: Third outcome
+
+### Non-Goals
+
+What is explicitly out of scope for this RFC:
+- Non-goal 1
+- Non-goal 2
+
+## Detailed Design
+
+### Overview
+
+High-level description of the solution approach.
+
+### Architecture
+
+Describe the technical architecture:
+- Components involved
+- Data flow
+- Integration points
+
+### Implementation Details
+
+#### Component 1
+
+Detailed implementation for component 1.
+
+#### Component 2
+
+Detailed implementation for component 2.
+
+### API/Interface Changes
+
+If applicable, describe any API or interface changes:
+
+```python
+# Example new API
+def new_function(param1: str, param2: int) -> dict:
+    """Description of new function."""
+    pass
+```
+
+### Database/Storage Changes
+
+If applicable, describe any data model changes.
+
+### Configuration Changes
+
+If applicable, describe any new configuration options.
+
+## Alternatives Considered
+
+### Alternative 1: [Name]
+
+**Description:** Brief description of this alternative.
+
+**Pros:**
+- Pro 1
+- Pro 2
+
+**Cons:**
+- Con 1
+- Con 2
+
+**Why not chosen:** Explanation.
+
+### Alternative 2: [Name]
+
+**Description:** Brief description of this alternative.
+
+**Pros:**
+- Pro 1
+
+**Cons:**
+- Con 1
+
+**Why not chosen:** Explanation.
+
+## Unresolved Questions
+
+Questions that need to be answered before or during implementation:
+
+1. **Question 1:** Description of open question
+   - Possible answer A
+   - Possible answer B
+
+2. **Question 2:** Description of another open question
+
+## Dependencies
+
+- Dependency 1: Description and status
+- Dependency 2: Description and status
+
+## Security Considerations
+
+Describe any security implications:
+- Authentication/authorization impacts
+- Data privacy considerations
+- Potential attack vectors and mitigations
+
+## Testing Strategy
+
+How will this be tested:
+- Unit tests
+- Integration tests
+- Manual testing checklist
+
+## Rollout Plan
+
+How will this be deployed:
+- Feature flags
+- Phased rollout
+- Rollback strategy
+
+---
+
+## Review Notes
+
+*(Added during Review phase)*
+
+### Review Discussion
+
+Summary of review feedback and discussions.
+
+### Changes Made
+
+List of changes made in response to review feedback.
+
+---
+
+## Decision
+
+*(Added when Approved or Rejected)*
+
+**Decision:** [Approved/Rejected]
+**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
+**Decided By:** @[username]
+
+**Rationale:**
+
+Explanation of the decision.
+
+---
+
+## Implementation
+
+*(Added during Implementing phase)*
+
+**Sprint:** [Sprint reference]
+**Started:** YYYY-MM-DD
+**Issues:**
+- #123: Issue title
+- #124: Another issue
+
+### Progress Notes
+
+Updates during implementation.
+
+---
+
+## Completion
+
+*(Added when Implemented)*
+
+**Completed:** YYYY-MM-DD
+**Release:** vX.Y.Z
+**Lessons Learned:** [Link to lessons wiki page]
+
+### Final Notes
+
+Summary of what was implemented and any deviations from the original design.
+```
+
+---
+
+## Section Requirements by Status
+
+### Draft (Minimum)
+- Summary (complete)
+- Motivation (at least Problem Statement)
+- Detailed Design (at least Overview)
+
+### Review (Required)
+All Draft sections plus:
+- Alternatives Considered (at least 1)
+- Unresolved Questions (can be empty if none)
+
+### Approved (Required)
+All Review sections plus:
+- Decision section with approval
+
+### Implementing (Required)
+All Approved sections plus:
+- Implementation section with Sprint and Issues
+
+### Implemented (Required)
+All Implementing sections plus:
+- Completion section
+
+---
+
+## RFC-Index Entry Format
+
+### Draft Section Entry
+```markdown
+| [RFC-0005](RFC-0005:-Idea-Z) | Idea Z | @user | 2026-01-25 |
+```
+
+### Review Section Entry
+```markdown
+| [RFC-0004](RFC-0004:-Feature-Y) | Feature Y | @user | 2026-01-20 |
+```
+
+### Approved Section Entry
+```markdown
+| [RFC-0003](RFC-0003:-Feature-X) | Feature X | @champion | 2026-01-15 |
+```
+
+### Implementing Section Entry
+```markdown
+| [RFC-0002](RFC-0002:-Feature-W) | Feature W | Sprint 18 | 2026-01-22 |
+```
+
+### Implemented Section Entry
+```markdown
+| [RFC-0001](RFC-0001:-Initial-Feature) | Initial Feature | 2026-01-10 | v5.0.0 |
+```
+
+### Rejected Section Entry
+```markdown
+| [RFC-0006](RFC-0006:-Rejected-Idea) | Rejected Idea | Out of scope | 2026-01-18 |
+```
+
+---
+
+## Minimal RFC Template (Quick Start)
+
+For rapid RFC creation from conversation:
+
+```markdown
+> **RFC:** NNNN
+> **Title:** [Title]
+> **Status:** Draft
+> **Author:** @[username]
+> **Created:** YYYY-MM-DD
+> **Updated:** YYYY-MM-DD
+> **Champion:** (unassigned)
+> **Sprint:** (none)
+> **Superseded-By:** (none)
+
+# RFC-NNNN: [Title]
+
+## Summary
+
+[Brief description of the proposal]
+
+## Motivation
+
+### Problem Statement
+
+[What problem does this solve?]
+
+### Goals
+
+- [ ] [Primary goal]
+
+## Detailed Design
+
+### Overview
+
+[High-level approach]
+
+## Alternatives Considered
+
+*(To be added during review)*
+
+## Unresolved Questions
+
+- [Any open questions?]
+```
+
+---
+
+## Creating RFC from Clarified Spec
+
+When `/clarify` provides a clarified specification, map sections:
+
+| Clarify Output | RFC Section |
+|----------------|-------------|
+| Problem/Context | Motivation > Problem Statement |
+| Goals/Outcomes | Motivation > Goals |
+| Scope/Requirements | Detailed Design > Overview |
+| Constraints | Detailed Design or Non-Goals |
+| Success Criteria | Testing Strategy |

plugins/projman/skills/rfc-workflow.md

@@ -0,0 +1,308 @@
+---
+name: rfc-workflow
+description: RFC lifecycle management, state transitions, and wiki page conventions
+---
+
+# RFC Workflow
+
+## Purpose
+
+Defines the Request for Comments (RFC) system for capturing, reviewing, and tracking feature ideas through their lifecycle from initial proposal to implementation.
+
+## When to Use
+
+- **Planner agent**: When detecting approved RFCs for sprint planning
+- **Commands**: `/rfc-create`, `/rfc-list`, `/rfc-review`, `/rfc-approve`, `/rfc-reject`
+- **Integration**: With `/sprint-plan` to select approved RFCs for implementation
+
+---
+
+## RFC Lifecycle States
+
+```
+                    ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+                    │                                              │
+                    ▼                                              │
+┌─────────┐    ┌─────────┐    ┌──────────┐    ┌──────────────┐    │
+│  Draft  │───▶│ Review  │───▶│ Approved │───▶│ Implementing │────┤
+└─────────┘    └─────────┘    └──────────┘    └──────────────┘    │
+     │              │                               │              │
+     │              │                               ▼              │
+     │              │                        ┌─────────────┐       │
+     │              │                        │ Implemented │       │
+     │              │                        └─────────────┘       │
+     │              │                               │              │
+     │              ▼                               ▼              │
+     │         ┌──────────┐                  ┌────────────┐        │
+     │         │ Rejected │                  │ Superseded │        │
+     │         └──────────┘                  └────────────┘        │
+     │                                                             │
+     ▼                                                             │
+┌─────────┐                                                        │
+│  Stale  │────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+└─────────┘    (revived → Draft)
+```
+
+---
+
+## State Definitions
+
+| Status | Meaning | Valid Transitions |
+|--------|---------|-------------------|
+| `Draft` | Idea captured, needs refinement | → Review, → Stale |
+| `Review` | Being evaluated by maintainers | → Approved, → Rejected, → Draft |
+| `Approved` | Ready for sprint planning | → Implementing |
+| `Rejected` | Declined with documented reason | (terminal) |
+| `Implementing` | Active sprint work in progress | → Implemented, → Draft (if blocked) |
+| `Implemented` | Completed, links to release | → Superseded |
+| `Stale` | Draft with no activity >90 days | → Draft (if revived) |
+| `Superseded` | Replaced by newer RFC | (terminal) |
+
+---
+
+## State Transition Rules
+
+### Draft → Review
+- **Who can transition**: RFC author or any maintainer
+- **Requirements**: RFC has complete Summary, Motivation, and Detailed Design sections
+- **Action**: Update status, optionally assign champion
+
+### Review → Approved
+- **Who can transition**: Maintainer or designated reviewer
+- **Requirements**: Review discussion complete, no blocking concerns
+- **Action**: Update status, add Decision section with approval reason
+
+### Review → Rejected
+- **Who can transition**: Maintainer or designated reviewer
+- **Requirements**: Reason must be documented
+- **Action**: Update status, add Decision section with rejection reason
+
+### Approved → Implementing
+- **Who can transition**: Planner agent via `/sprint-plan`
+- **Requirements**: RFC selected for sprint
+- **Action**: Update status, add Sprint reference, update RFC-Index
+
+### Implementing → Implemented
+- **Who can transition**: Orchestrator agent via `/sprint-close`
+- **Requirements**: Sprint completed successfully
+- **Action**: Update status, add completion date, link to lessons learned
+
+### Implementing → Draft
+- **Who can transition**: Any maintainer
+- **Requirements**: Implementation blocked, needs rework
+- **Action**: Update status, add Implementation Notes explaining why
+
+### Draft → Stale
+- **Automatic**: No activity for 90 days
+- **Action**: Update status in RFC-Index
+
+### Stale → Draft
+- **Who can transition**: Anyone
+- **Requirements**: Renewed interest, updated content
+- **Action**: Update status, add Revival Notes
+
+### Implemented → Superseded
+- **Who can transition**: Any maintainer
+- **Requirements**: New RFC replaces functionality
+- **Action**: Update status, add Superseded-By reference
+
+---
+
+## Wiki Page Naming
+
+| Page Type | Naming Convention | Example |
+|-----------|-------------------|---------|
+| RFC Page | `RFC-NNNN: Short Title` | `RFC-0001: RFC System Implementation` |
+| Index Page | `RFC-Index` | `RFC-Index` |
+
+**Number Format:**
+- 4-digit zero-padded (0001, 0002, 0003, ...)
+- Sequential, never reused
+- Allocated via `allocate_rfc_number` MCP tool
+
+---
+
+## Number Allocation Logic
+
+```python
+# Pseudocode for allocate_rfc_number
+async def allocate_rfc_number(repo):
+    pages = await list_wiki_pages(repo)
+    rfc_pages = [p for p in pages if p['title'].startswith('RFC-')]
+
+    if not rfc_pages:
+        return {'next_number': 1, 'formatted': 'RFC-0001'}
+
+    numbers = []
+    for page in rfc_pages:
+        # Extract number from "RFC-NNNN: Title"
+        match = re.match(r'RFC-(\d{4})', page['title'])
+        if match:
+            numbers.append(int(match.group(1)))
+
+    next_num = max(numbers) + 1 if numbers else 1
+    return {
+        'next_number': next_num,
+        'formatted': f'RFC-{next_num:04d}'
+    }
+```
+
+---
+
+## RFC-Index Page Format
+
+The RFC-Index page organizes RFCs by status:
+
+```markdown
+# RFC Index
+
+## Approved
+
+RFCs ready for implementation in upcoming sprints.
+
+| RFC | Title | Champion | Created |
+|-----|-------|----------|---------|
+| [RFC-0003](RFC-0003:-Feature-X) | Feature X | @user | 2026-01-15 |
+
+## In Review
+
+RFCs currently being evaluated.
+
+| RFC | Title | Author | Created |
+|-----|-------|--------|---------|
+| [RFC-0004](RFC-0004:-Feature-Y) | Feature Y | @user | 2026-01-20 |
+
+## Draft
+
+RFCs in early development.
+
+| RFC | Title | Author | Created |
+|-----|-------|--------|---------|
+| [RFC-0005](RFC-0005:-Idea-Z) | Idea Z | @user | 2026-01-25 |
+
+## Implementing
+
+RFCs currently being implemented.
+
+| RFC | Title | Sprint | Started |
+|-----|-------|--------|---------|
+| [RFC-0002](RFC-0002:-Feature-W) | Feature W | Sprint 18 | 2026-01-22 |
+
+## Implemented
+
+Completed RFCs.
+
+| RFC | Title | Completed | Release |
+|-----|-------|-----------|---------|
+| [RFC-0001](RFC-0001:-Initial-Feature) | Initial Feature | 2026-01-10 | v5.0.0 |
+
+## Rejected
+
+RFCs that were declined.
+
+| RFC | Title | Reason | Date |
+|-----|-------|--------|------|
+| [RFC-0006](RFC-0006:-Rejected-Idea) | Rejected Idea | Out of scope | 2026-01-18 |
+
+## Stale
+
+Inactive RFCs (no updates >90 days).
+
+| RFC | Title | Last Updated |
+|-----|-------|--------------|
+```
+
+---
+
+## Creating RFC-Index
+
+If RFC-Index doesn't exist when creating first RFC:
+
+```python
+create_wiki_page(
+    repo="org/repo",
+    title="RFC-Index",
+    content="""# RFC Index
+
+## Approved
+
+RFCs ready for implementation in upcoming sprints.
+
+| RFC | Title | Champion | Created |
+|-----|-------|----------|---------|
+
+## In Review
+
+RFCs currently being evaluated.
+
+| RFC | Title | Author | Created |
+|-----|-------|--------|---------|
+
+## Draft
+
+RFCs in early development.
+
+| RFC | Title | Author | Created |
+|-----|-------|--------|---------|
+
+## Implementing
+
+RFCs currently being implemented.
+
+| RFC | Title | Sprint | Started |
+|-----|-------|--------|---------|
+
+## Implemented
+
+Completed RFCs.
+
+| RFC | Title | Completed | Release |
+|-----|-------|-----------|---------|
+
+## Rejected
+
+RFCs that were declined.
+
+| RFC | Title | Reason | Date |
+|-----|-------|--------|------|
+
+## Stale
+
+Inactive RFCs (no updates >90 days).
+
+| RFC | Title | Last Updated |
+|-----|-------|--------------|
+"""
+)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Updating RFC-Index
+
+When RFC status changes:
+
+1. Fetch current RFC-Index content
+2. Parse sections by status header
+3. Remove RFC entry from old section (if present)
+4. Add RFC entry to new section
+5. Update wiki page
+
+**Example status change (Draft → Review):**
+1. Remove from "## Draft" section
+2. Add to "## In Review" section
+
+---
+
+## Integration Points
+
+| Component | How It Uses RFC System |
+|-----------|------------------------|
+| `/rfc-create` | Creates RFC page + updates RFC-Index |
+| `/rfc-list` | Reads and displays RFC-Index |
+| `/rfc-review` | Transitions Draft → Review |
+| `/rfc-approve` | Transitions Review → Approved |
+| `/rfc-reject` | Transitions Review/Draft → Rejected |
+| `/sprint-plan` | Detects Approved RFCs, transitions to Implementing |
+| `/sprint-close` | Transitions Implementing → Implemented |
+| `clarity-assist` | Suggests `/rfc-create` for feature ideas |

plugins/viz-platform/agents/design-reviewer.md

@@ -0,0 +1,288 @@
+---
+agent: design-reviewer
+description: Reviews code for design system compliance using viz-platform MCP tools
+triggers:
+  - /design-review command
+  - /design-gate command
+  - projman orchestrator domain gate
+---
+
+# Design Reviewer Agent
+
+You are a strict design system compliance auditor. Your role is to review code for proper use of Dash Mantine Components, theme tokens, and accessibility standards.
+
+## Visual Output Requirements
+
+**MANDATORY: Display header at start of every response.**
+
+```
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+|  VIZ-PLATFORM - Design Reviewer                                      |
+|  [Target Path]                                                       |
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+```
+
+## Trigger Conditions
+
+Activate this agent when:
+- User runs `/design-review <path>`
+- User runs `/design-gate <path>`
+- Projman orchestrator requests design domain gate check
+- Code review includes DMC/Dash components
+
+## Skills to Load
+
+- skills/design-system-audit.md
+
+## Available MCP Tools
+
+| Tool | Purpose |
+|------|---------|
+| `validate_component` | Check DMC component configurations for invalid props |
+| `get_component_props` | Retrieve expected props for a component |
+| `list_components` | Cross-reference components against DMC registry |
+| `theme_validate` | Validate theme configuration |
+| `accessibility_validate_colors` | Verify color contrast meets WCAG standards |
+| `accessibility_validate_theme` | Full theme accessibility audit |
+
+## Operating Modes
+
+### Review Mode (default)
+
+Triggered by `/design-review <path>`
+
+**Characteristics:**
+- Produces detailed report with all findings
+- Groups findings by severity (FAIL/WARN/INFO)
+- Includes actionable recommendations with code fixes
+- Does NOT block - informational only
+- Shows theme compliance percentage
+
+### Gate Mode
+
+Triggered by `/design-gate <path>` or projman orchestrator domain gate
+
+**Characteristics:**
+- Binary PASS/FAIL output
+- Only reports FAIL-level issues
+- Returns exit status for automation integration
+- Blocks completion on FAIL
+- Compact output for CI/CD pipelines
+
+## Audit Workflow
+
+### 1. Receive Target Path
+Accept file or directory path from command invocation.
+
+### 2. Scan for DMC Usage
+Find relevant files:
+```python
+# Look for files with DMC imports
+import dash_mantine_components as dmc
+
+# Look for component instantiations
+dmc.Button(...)
+dmc.Card(...)
+```
+
+### 3. Component Validation
+For each DMC component found:
+
+1. Extract component name and props from code
+2. Call `list_components` to verify component exists in registry
+3. Call `get_component_props` to get valid prop schema
+4. Compare used props against schema
+5. **FAIL**: Invalid props, unknown components
+6. **WARN**: Deprecated patterns, React-style props
+
+### 4. Theme Compliance Check
+Detect hardcoded values that should use theme tokens:
+
+| Pattern | Issue | Recommendation |
+|---------|-------|----------------|
+| `color="#228be6"` | Hardcoded color | Use `color="blue"` or theme token |
+| `color="rgb(34, 139, 230)"` | Hardcoded RGB | Use theme color reference |
+| `style={"padding": "16px"}` | Hardcoded size | Use `p="md"` prop |
+| `style={"fontSize": "14px"}` | Hardcoded font | Use `size="sm"` prop |
+
+### 5. Accessibility Validation
+Check accessibility compliance:
+
+1. Call `accessibility_validate_colors` on detected color pairs
+2. Check color contrast ratios (min 4.5:1 for AA)
+3. Verify interactive components have accessible labels
+4. Flag missing aria-labels on buttons/links
+
+### 6. Generate Report
+Output format depends on operating mode.
+
+## Report Formats
+
+### Gate Mode Output
+
+**PASS:**
+```
+DESIGN GATE: PASS
+No blocking design system violations found.
+```
+
+**FAIL:**
+```
+DESIGN GATE: FAIL
+
+Blocking Issues (2):
+1. app/pages/home.py:45 - Invalid prop 'onclick' on dmc.Button
+   Fix: Use 'n_clicks' for click handling
+
+2. app/components/nav.py:12 - Component 'dmc.Navbar' not found
+   Fix: Use 'dmc.AppShell.Navbar' (DMC v0.14+)
+
+Run /design-review for full audit report.
+```
+
+### Review Mode Output
+
+```
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+|  VIZ-PLATFORM - Design Review Report                                 |
+|  /path/to/project                                                    |
++----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+
+Files Scanned: 8
+Components Analyzed: 34
+Theme Compliance: 78%
+
+## FAIL - Must Fix (2)
+
+### app/pages/home.py:45
+**Invalid prop on dmc.Button**
+- Found: `onclick=handle_click`
+- Valid props: n_clicks, disabled, loading, ...
+- Fix: `n_clicks` triggers callback, not `onclick`
+
+### app/components/nav.py:12
+**Component not in registry**
+- Found: `dmc.Navbar`
+- Status: Removed in DMC v0.14
+- Fix: Use `dmc.AppShell.Navbar` instead
+
+## WARN - Should Fix (3)
+
+### app/pages/home.py:23
+**Hardcoded color**
+- Found: `color="#228be6"`
+- Recommendation: Use `theme.colors.blue[6]` or `color="blue"`
+
+### app/components/card.py:56
+**Hardcoded spacing**
+- Found: `style={"padding": "16px"}`
+- Recommendation: Use `p="md"` prop instead
+
+### app/layouts/header.py:18
+**Low color contrast**
+- Foreground: #888888, Background: #ffffff
+- Contrast ratio: 3.5:1 (below AA standard of 4.5:1)
+- Recommendation: Darken text to #757575 for 4.6:1 ratio
+
+## INFO - Suggestions (2)
+
+### app/components/card.py:8
+**Consider more specific component**
+- Found: `dmc.Box` used as card container
+- Suggestion: `dmc.Paper` provides card semantics and shadow
+
+### app/pages/dashboard.py:92
+**Missing aria-label**
+- Found: `dmc.ActionIcon` without accessible label
+- Suggestion: Add `aria-label="Close"` for screen readers
+
+## Summary
+
+| Severity | Count | Action |
+|----------|-------|--------|
+| FAIL | 2 | Must fix before merge |
+| WARN | 3 | Address in this PR or follow-up |
+| INFO | 2 | Optional improvements |
+
+Gate Status: FAIL (2 blocking issues)
+```
+
+## Severity Definitions
+
+| Level | Criteria | Action Required |
+|-------|----------|-----------------|
+| **FAIL** | Invalid props, unknown components, breaking changes | Must fix before merge |
+| **WARN** | Hardcoded values, deprecated patterns, contrast issues | Should fix |
+| **INFO** | Suboptimal patterns, missing optional attributes | Consider for improvement |
+
+## Common Violations
+
+### FAIL-Level Issues
+
+| Issue | Pattern | Fix |
+|-------|---------|-----|
+| Invalid prop | `onclick=handler` | Use `n_clicks` + callback |
+| Unknown component | `dmc.Navbar` | Use `dmc.AppShell.Navbar` |
+| Wrong prop type | `size=12` (int) | Use `size="lg"` (string) |
+| Invalid enum value | `variant="primary"` | Use `variant="filled"` |
+
+### WARN-Level Issues
+
+| Issue | Pattern | Fix |
+|-------|---------|-----|
+| Hardcoded color | `color="#hex"` | Use theme color name |
+| Hardcoded size | `padding="16px"` | Use spacing prop |
+| Low contrast | ratio < 4.5:1 | Adjust colors |
+| React prop pattern | `className` | Use Dash equivalents |
+
+### INFO-Level Issues
+
+| Issue | Pattern | Suggestion |
+|-------|---------|------------|
+| Generic container | `dmc.Box` for cards | Use `dmc.Paper` |
+| Missing aria-label | Interactive without label | Add accessible name |
+| Inline styles | `style={}` overuse | Use component props |
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Response |
+|-------|----------|
+| MCP server unavailable | Report error, suggest checking viz-platform MCP setup |
+| No DMC files found | "No Dash Mantine Components detected in target path" |
+| Invalid path | "Path not found: {path}" |
+| Empty directory | "No Python files found in {path}" |
+
+## Integration with Projman
+
+When called as a domain gate by projman orchestrator:
+
+1. Receive path from orchestrator
+2. Run audit in gate mode
+3. Return structured result:
+   ```json
+   {
+     "gate": "design",
+     "status": "PASS|FAIL",
+     "blocking_count": 0,
+     "summary": "No violations found"
+   }
+   ```
+4. Orchestrator decides whether to proceed based on gate status
+
+## Example Interactions
+
+**User**: `/design-review src/pages/`
+**Agent**:
+1. Scans all .py files in src/pages/
+2. Identifies DMC component usage
+3. Validates each component with MCP tools
+4. Checks theme token usage
+5. Runs accessibility validation
+6. Returns full review report
+
+**User**: `/design-gate src/`
+**Agent**:
+1. Scans all .py files
+2. Identifies FAIL-level issues only
+3. Returns PASS if clean, FAIL with blocking issues if not
+4. Compact output for pipeline integration

plugins/viz-platform/commands/design-gate.md

@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
+---
+description: Design system compliance gate (pass/fail) for sprint execution
+arguments:
+  - name: path
+    description: File or directory to validate
+    required: true
+---
+
+# /design-gate
+
+Binary pass/fail validation for design system compliance. Used by projman orchestrator during sprint execution to gate issue completion.
+
+## Usage
+
+```
+/design-gate <path>
+```
+
+**Examples:**
+```
+/design-gate ./app/pages/dashboard.py
+/design-gate ./app/components/
+```
+
+## What It Does
+
+1. **Activates** the `design-reviewer` agent in gate mode
+2. **Loads** the `skills/design-system-audit.md` skill
+3. **Scans** target path for DMC usage
+4. **Checks only for FAIL-level violations:**
+   - Invalid component props
+   - Non-existent components
+   - Missing required props
+   - Deprecated components
+5. **Returns binary result:**
+   - `PASS` - No blocking violations found
+   - `FAIL` - One or more blocking violations
+
+## Output
+
+### On PASS
+```
+DESIGN GATE: PASS
+No blocking design system violations found.
+```
+
+### On FAIL
+```
+DESIGN GATE: FAIL
+
+Blocking Issues (2):
+1. app/pages/home.py:45 - Invalid prop 'onclick' on dmc.Button
+   Fix: Use 'n_clicks' for click handling
+
+2. app/components/nav.py:12 - Component 'dmc.Navbar' not found
+   Fix: Use 'dmc.AppShell.Navbar' (DMC v0.14+)
+
+Run /design-review for full audit report.
+```
+
+## Integration with projman
+
+This command is automatically invoked by the projman orchestrator when:
+
+1. An issue has the `Domain/Viz` label
+2. The orchestrator is about to mark the issue as complete
+3. The orchestrator passes the path of changed files
+
+**Gate behavior:**
+- PASS → Issue can be marked complete
+- FAIL → Issue stays open, blocker comment added
+
+## Differences from /design-review
+
+| Aspect | /design-gate | /design-review |
+|--------|--------------|----------------|
+| Output | Binary PASS/FAIL | Detailed report |
+| Severity | FAIL only | FAIL + WARN + INFO |
+| Purpose | Automation gate | Human review |
+| Verbosity | Minimal | Comprehensive |
+
+## When to Use
+
+- **Automated pipelines**: CI/CD design system checks
+- **Sprint execution**: Automatic quality gates
+- **Quick validation**: Fast pass/fail without full report
+
+For detailed findings, use `/design-review` instead.
+
+## Requirements
+
+- viz-platform MCP server must be running
+- Target path must exist

plugins/viz-platform/commands/design-review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+---
+description: Audit codebase for design system compliance
+arguments:
+  - name: path
+    description: File or directory to audit
+    required: true
+---
+
+# /design-review
+
+Scans target path for Dash Mantine Components usage and validates against design system standards.
+
+## Usage
+
+```
+/design-review <path>
+```
+
+**Examples:**
+```
+/design-review ./app/pages/
+/design-review ./app/components/dashboard.py
+/design-review .
+```
+
+## What It Does
+
+1. **Activates** the `design-reviewer` agent in review mode
+2. **Loads** the `skills/design-system-audit.md` skill
+3. **Scans** target path for:
+   - Python files with DMC imports
+   - Component instantiations and their props
+   - Style dictionaries and color values
+   - Accessibility attributes
+4. **Validates** against:
+   - DMC component registry (valid components and props)
+   - Theme token usage (no hardcoded colors/sizes)
+   - Accessibility standards (contrast, ARIA labels)
+5. **Produces** detailed report grouped by severity
+
+## Output
+
+Generates a comprehensive audit report with:
+
+- **FAIL**: Invalid props, deprecated components, missing required props
+- **WARN**: Hardcoded colors/sizes, missing accessibility attributes
+- **INFO**: Optimization suggestions, consistency recommendations
+
+Each finding includes:
+- File path and line number
+- Description of the issue
+- Recommended fix
+
+## When to Use
+
+- **Before PR review**: Catch design system violations early
+- **On existing codebases**: Audit for compliance gaps
+- **During refactoring**: Ensure changes maintain compliance
+- **Learning**: Understand design system best practices
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/design-gate` - Binary pass/fail for sprint execution (no detailed report)
+- `/component` - Inspect individual DMC component props
+- `/theme` - Check active theme configuration
+
+## Requirements
+
+- viz-platform MCP server must be running
+- Target path must contain Python files with DMC usage

plugins/viz-platform/hooks/hooks.json

@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
 {
-  "hooks": []
+  "hooks": {}
 }

plugins/viz-platform/skills/design-system-audit.md

@@ -0,0 +1,280 @@
+---
+name: design-system-audit
+description: Design system compliance rules and violation patterns for viz-platform audits
+---
+
+# Design System Audit
+
+## Purpose
+
+Defines what to check, how to classify violations, and common patterns for design system compliance auditing of Dash Mantine Components (DMC) code.
+
+---
+
+## What to Check
+
+### 1. Component Prop Validity
+
+| Check | Tool | Severity |
+|-------|------|----------|
+| Invalid prop names (typos) | `validate_component` | FAIL |
+| Invalid prop values | `validate_component` | FAIL |
+| Missing required props | `validate_component` | FAIL |
+| Deprecated props | `get_component_props` | WARN |
+| Unknown props | `validate_component` | WARN |
+
+### 2. Theme Token Usage
+
+| Check | Detection | Severity |
+|-------|-----------|----------|
+| Hardcoded hex colors | Regex `#[0-9a-fA-F]{3,6}` | WARN |
+| Hardcoded RGB/RGBA | Regex `rgb\(` | WARN |
+| Hardcoded font sizes | Regex `fontSize=\d+` | WARN |
+| Hardcoded spacing | Regex `margin=\d+|padding=\d+` | INFO |
+| Missing theme provider | AST analysis | FAIL |
+
+**Allowed exceptions:**
+- Colors in theme definition files
+- Test/fixture files
+- Comments and documentation
+
+### 3. Accessibility Compliance
+
+| Check | Tool | Severity |
+|-------|------|----------|
+| Color contrast ratio < 4.5:1 (AA) | `accessibility_validate_colors` | WARN |
+| Color contrast ratio < 3:1 (large text) | `accessibility_validate_colors` | WARN |
+| Missing aria-label on interactive | Manual scan | WARN |
+| Color-only information | `accessibility_validate_theme` | WARN |
+| Focus indicator missing | Manual scan | INFO |
+
+### 4. Responsive Design
+
+| Check | Detection | Severity |
+|-------|-----------|----------|
+| Fixed pixel widths > 600px | Regex `width=\d{3,}` | INFO |
+| Missing breakpoint handling | No `visibleFrom`/`hiddenFrom` | INFO |
+| Non-responsive layout | Fixed Grid columns | INFO |
+
+---
+
+## Common Violations
+
+### FAIL-Level Violations
+
+```python
+# Invalid prop name (typo)
+dmc.Button(colour="blue")  # Should be 'color'
+
+# Invalid enum value
+dmc.Button(size="large")   # Should be 'lg'
+
+# Missing required prop
+dmc.Select(data=[...])     # Missing 'id' for callbacks
+
+# Invalid component name
+dmc.Buttons(...)           # Should be 'Button'
+
+# Wrong case
+dmc.Button(fullwidth=True) # Should be 'fullWidth'
+
+# React patterns in Dash
+dmc.Button(onClick=fn)     # Should use 'id' + callback
+```
+
+### WARN-Level Violations
+
+```python
+# Hardcoded colors
+dmc.Text(color="#ff0000")           # Use theme token
+dmc.Button(style={"color": "red"})  # Use theme token
+
+# Hardcoded font size
+dmc.Text(style={"fontSize": "14px"})  # Use 'size' prop
+
+# Poor contrast
+dmc.Text(color="gray")  # Check contrast ratio
+
+# Inline styles for colors
+dmc.Container(style={"backgroundColor": "#f0f0f0"})
+
+# Deprecated patterns
+dmc.Button(variant="subtle")  # Check if still supported
+```
+
+### INFO-Level Violations
+
+```python
+# Fixed widths
+dmc.Container(w=800)  # Consider responsive
+
+# Missing responsive handling
+dmc.Grid.Col(span=6)  # Consider span={{ base: 12, md: 6 }}
+
+# Optimization opportunity
+dmc.Stack([dmc.Text(...) for _ in range(100)])  # Consider virtualization
+```
+
+---
+
+## Severity Classification
+
+| Level | Icon | Meaning | Action |
+|-------|------|---------|--------|
+| **FAIL** | Red circle | Blocking issue, will cause runtime error | Must fix before completion |
+| **WARN** | Orange circle | Quality issue, violates best practices | Should fix, may be waived |
+| **INFO** | Yellow circle | Suggestion for improvement | Consider for future |
+
+### Severity Decision Tree
+
+```
+Is it invalid syntax/props?
+  YES -> FAIL
+  NO -> Does it violate accessibility standards?
+    YES -> WARN
+    NO -> Does it use hardcoded styles?
+      YES -> WARN
+      NO -> Is it a best practice suggestion?
+        YES -> INFO
+        NO -> Not a violation
+```
+
+---
+
+## Scanning Strategy
+
+### File Types to Scan
+
+| Extension | Priority | Check For |
+|-----------|----------|-----------|
+| `*.py` | High | DMC component usage |
+| `*.dash.py` | High | Layout definitions |
+| `theme*.py` | High | Theme configuration |
+| `layout*.py` | High | Layout structure |
+| `components/*.py` | High | Custom components |
+| `callbacks/*.py` | Medium | Component references |
+
+### Scan Process
+
+1. **Find relevant files**
+   ```
+   glob: **/*.py
+   filter: Contains 'dmc.' or 'dash_mantine_components'
+   ```
+
+2. **Extract component usages**
+   - Parse Python AST
+   - Find all `dmc.*` calls
+   - Extract component name and kwargs
+
+3. **Validate each component**
+   - Call `validate_component(name, props)`
+   - Record violations with file:line reference
+
+4. **Scan for patterns**
+   - Hardcoded colors (regex)
+   - Inline styles (AST)
+   - Fixed dimensions (regex)
+
+5. **Run accessibility checks**
+   - Extract color combinations
+   - Call `accessibility_validate_colors`
+
+---
+
+## Report Template
+
+```
+Design System Audit Report
+==========================
+Path: <scanned-path>
+Files Scanned: N
+Timestamp: YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS
+
+Summary
+-------
+FAIL: N blocking violations
+WARN: N quality warnings
+INFO: N suggestions
+
+Findings
+--------
+
+FAIL Violations (must fix)
+--------------------------
+[file.py:42] Invalid prop 'colour' on Button
+  Found: colour="blue"
+  Expected: color="blue"
+  Docs: https://mantine.dev/core/button
+
+[file.py:58] Invalid size value on Text
+  Found: size="huge"
+  Expected: One of ['xs', 'sm', 'md', 'lg', 'xl']
+
+WARN Violations (should fix)
+----------------------------
+[theme.py:15] Hardcoded color detected
+  Found: color="#ff0000"
+  Suggestion: Use theme color token (e.g., color="red")
+
+[layout.py:23] Low contrast ratio (3.2:1)
+  Found: Text on background
+  Required: 4.5:1 for WCAG AA
+  Suggestion: Darken text or lighten background
+
+INFO Suggestions
+----------------
+[dashboard.py:100] Consider responsive breakpoints
+  Found: span=6 (fixed)
+  Suggestion: span={{ base: 12, md: 6 }}
+
+Files Scanned
+-------------
+- src/components/button.py (3 components)
+- src/layouts/main.py (8 components)
+- src/theme.py (1 theme config)
+
+Gate Result: PASS | FAIL
+```
+
+---
+
+## Integration with MCP Tools
+
+### Required Tools
+
+| Tool | Purpose | When Used |
+|------|---------|-----------|
+| `validate_component` | Check component props | Every component found |
+| `get_component_props` | Get expected props | When suggesting fixes |
+| `list_components` | Verify component exists | Unknown component names |
+| `theme_validate` | Validate theme config | Theme files |
+| `accessibility_validate_colors` | Check contrast | Color combinations |
+| `accessibility_validate_theme` | Full a11y audit | Theme files |
+
+### Tool Call Pattern
+
+```
+For each Python file:
+  For each dmc.Component(...) found:
+    result = validate_component(
+      component_name="Component",
+      props={extracted_props}
+    )
+    if result.errors:
+      record FAIL violation
+    if result.warnings:
+      record WARN violation
+```
+
+---
+
+## Skip Patterns
+
+Do not flag violations in:
+
+- `**/tests/**` - Test files may have intentional violations
+- `**/__pycache__/**` - Compiled files
+- `**/fixtures/**` - Test fixtures
+- Files with `# noqa: design-audit` comment
+- Theme definition files (colors are expected there)

scripts/setup.sh

@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ print_report() {
 # --- Main ---
 main() {
     echo "=============================================="
-    echo "  Leo Claude Marketplace Setup (v5.1.0)"
+    echo "  Leo Claude Marketplace Setup (v5.7.1)"
     echo "=============================================="
     echo ""