fix: Complete hybrid workflow documentation gaps (#30)

[striderZA]

Summary

Closes two documentation gaps identified in the hybrid workflow PR review:

1. Missing producer role — assigned cross-domain coordination to technical-director with design conflicts escalated to creative-director
2. No guard against review-mode state bleed — added workflow isolation note clarifying that the hybrid fast lane explicitly bypasses production/review-mode.txt

Changes

• docs/hybrid-workflow.md: Added producer-duties note after slimmed hierarchy table
• .opencode/skills/hybrid-prototype/SKILL.md: Added workflow isolation constraint

Related

Closes #30

[github-actions]

Here's my code review of PR #30.

---

Code Review: fix/hybrid-doc-gaps

Issues Found

1. Dangling bullet point — formatting break (.opencode/skills/hybrid-prototype/SKILL.md:140)

Line 140 is a loose bullet floating between two --- section dividers (lines 138 and 142) with no section heading. It reads like it belongs under ## Constraints but is cut off by the second divider. Fix: move it inside the Constraints list before the closing ---.

## Constraints

- Prototype code must NEVER import from production source files
- ...
- **Workflow isolation**: This skill explicitly bypasses `production/review-mode.txt`...

2. Naming inconsistency — doc references /prototype, skill is /hybrid-prototype (docs/hybrid-workflow.md:115,179)

The document calls it "The /prototype Fast Lane" (line 115) and references /prototype as the command (line 179). But the actual new command is /hybrid-prototype — the existing /prototype skill remains unchanged. A user reading this will invoke the wrong command. These should say /hybrid-prototype.

3. Missing opencode.json registration

The new hybrid-prototype skill isn't registered in opencode.json. It may not be discoverable by the CCGS hooks plugin depending on discovery mechanism.

4. Missing skills-reference.md entry

.opencode/docs/skills-reference.md lists /prototype on line 111 but has no entry for the new /hybrid-prototype.

Suggestions (non-blocking)

• Producer merger is underspecified — docs/hybrid-workflow.md:83 says producer duties merge into technical-director, but the codebase has 91+ references to producer handling sprint planning, milestone reviews, gate checks, and scope management. The document should clarify which of these duties the technical-director inherits and which are simply dropped in the hybrid model.
• prototypes/ directory doesn't exist yet — the doc and skill reference it extensively. Consider creating it with a .gitkeep placeholder as part of this PR.

Summary

Severity	Count	Items
Bug (formatting)	1	Dangling bullet in SKILL.md:140
Bug (naming)	2	Doc says /prototype instead of /hybrid-prototype
Missing registration	2	opencode.json + skills-reference.md
Suggestion	2	Producer duties scope, prototypes/ directory

opencode session  |  github run

[github-actions]

Here's my review of PR #30.

Review Summary

This PR adds 335 lines across 5 files to document the two-phase hybrid discovery-production workflow and the /hybrid-prototype skill. The documentation is well-structured, follows existing conventions, and all file registrations (opencode.json, skills-reference.md, prototypes/.gitkeep) are present.

The automated review comment (github-actions) contains several incorrect claims:

• "Dangling bullet point" — the file at SKILL.md:138-141 has clean formatting (heading → blank → table), no dangling bullet exists
• "Naming inconsistency /prototype vs /hybrid-prototype" — both references (lines 115 and 179) correctly use /hybrid-prototype
• "Missing opencode.json registration" — the command IS registered at opencode.json:4-10
• "Missing skills-reference.md entry" — the entry IS present at skills-reference.md:24
• "prototypes/ directory doesn't exist" — prototypes/.gitkeep is added in this PR

Actual Findings

Severity	Item
Minor	producer role not listed in Merged/Deferred Roles table (hybrid-workflow.md:85-95). Line 83 mentions it's merged into technical-director, but the merged roles table lists every other role except producer. Add a row for consistency.
Suggestion	The difference table in SKILL.md:141-148 lists /prototype under "Review mode gates" as "Solo / Lean / Full" — but the existing /prototype skill (prototype/SKILL.md) frontmatter doesn't define review-mode gates. Consider verifying accuracy of the comparison.
Suggestion	docs/hybrid-workflow.md says producer duties merge into technical-director, but team-orchestration commands like /team-release and /team-qa reference producer directly. A note about how these commands work in hybrid mode would help.

Verdict

Looks good. The PR cleanly closes the documented gaps. The automated review's block items (formatting bug, naming bug, missing registrations) are all false positives based on the actual file contents. Only minor documentation polish items remain.

opencode session  |  github run