Fix: Replace AskUserQuestion with question tool in skill files

.opencode/skills/adopt/SKILL.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ name: adopt
 description: "Brownfield onboarding — audits existing project artifacts for template format compliance (not just existence), classifies gaps by impact, and produces a numbered migration plan. Run this when joining an in-progress project or upgrading from an older template version. Distinct from /project-stage-detect (which checks what exists) — this checks whether what exists will actually work with the template's skills."
 argument-hint: "[focus: full | gdds | adrs | stories | infra]"
 user-invocable: true
-allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, AskUserQuestion
+allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, question
 agent: technical-director
 ---
 
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ Use the same heuristic as `/project-stage-detect`:
 - game-concept.md exists → Concept
 - Nothing → Fresh (not a brownfield project — suggest `/start`)
 
-If the project appears fresh (no artifacts at all), use `AskUserQuestion`:
+If the project appears fresh (no artifacts at all), use `question`:
 - "This looks like a fresh project — no existing artifacts found. `/adopt` is for
   projects with work to migrate. What would you like to do?"
   - "Run `/start` — begin guided first-time onboarding"
@@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ If a prior adoption plan was detected in Phase 1, add a note:
 > "A previous plan exists at `docs/adoption-plan-[prior-date].md`. The new plan will
 > reflect current project state — it does not diff against the prior run."
 
-Use `AskUserQuestion`:
+Use `question`:
 - "Ready to write the migration plan?"
   - "Yes — write `docs/adoption-plan-[date].md`"
   - "Show me the full plan preview first (don't write yet)"
@@ -369,7 +369,7 @@ After writing the adoption plan (or if the user cancels writing), check whether
 
 **If it exists**: Read it and note the current mode — "Review mode is already set to `[current]`." — skip the prompt.
 
-**If it does not exist**: Use `AskUserQuestion`:
+**If it does not exist**: Use `question`:
 
 - **Prompt**: "One more setup step: how much design review would you like as you work through the workflow?"
 - **Options**:
@@ -389,11 +389,11 @@ Create the `production/` directory if it does not exist.
 ## Phase 7: Offer First Action
 
 After writing the plan, don't stop there. Pick the single highest-priority gap
-and offer to handle it immediately using `AskUserQuestion`. Choose the first
+and offer to handle it immediately using `question`. Choose the first
 branch that applies:
 
 **If there are parenthetical status values in systems-index.md:**
-Use `AskUserQuestion`:
+Use `question`:
 - "The most urgent fix is `systems-index.md` — [N] rows have parenthetical status
   values (e.g. `Needs Revision (see notes)`) that break /gate-check,
   /create-stories, and /architecture-review right now. I can fix these in-place."
@@ -402,7 +402,7 @@ Use `AskUserQuestion`:
   - "Done — leave me with the plan"
 
 **If ADRs are missing `## Status` (and no parenthetical issue):**
-Use `AskUserQuestion`:
+Use `question`:
 - "The most urgent fix is adding `## Status` to [N] ADR(s): [list filenames].
   Without it, /story-readiness silently passes all ADR checks. Start with
   [first affected filename]?"
@@ -411,7 +411,7 @@ Use `AskUserQuestion`:
   - "I'll handle ADRs myself"
 
 **If GDDs are missing Acceptance Criteria (and no blocking issues above):**
-Use `AskUserQuestion`:
+Use `question`:
 - "The most urgent gap is missing Acceptance Criteria in [N] GDD(s):
   [list filenames]. Without them, /create-stories can't generate stories.
   Start with [highest-priority GDD filename]?"
@@ -420,7 +420,7 @@ Use `AskUserQuestion`:
   - "I'll handle GDDs myself"
 
 **If no BLOCKING or HIGH gaps exist:**
-Use `AskUserQuestion`:
+Use `question`:
 - "No blocking gaps — this project is template-compatible. What next?"
   - "Walk me through the medium-priority improvements"
   - "Run /project-stage-detect for a broader health check"

.opencode/skills/architecture-decision/SKILL.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ name: architecture-decision
 description: "Creates an Architecture Decision Record (ADR) documenting a significant technical decision, its context, alternatives considered, and consequences. Every major technical choice should have an ADR."
 argument-hint: "[title] [--review full|lean|solo]"
 user-invocable: true
-allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Task, AskUserQuestion
+allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Task, question
 ---
 
 When this skill is invoked:
@@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ or explicitly accepted as an intentional exception.
 
 Before asking anything, derive the skill's best guesses from the context already
 gathered (GDDs read, engine reference loaded, existing ADRs scanned). Then present
-a **confirm/adjust** prompt using `AskUserQuestion` — not open-ended questions.
+a **confirm/adjust** prompt using `question` — not open-ended questions.
 
 **Derive assumptions first:**
 - **Problem**: Infer from the title + GDD context what decision needs to be made
@@ -178,11 +178,11 @@ a **confirm/adjust** prompt using `AskUserQuestion` — not open-ended questions
 - **GDD linkage**: Extract which GDD systems the title directly relates to
 - **Status**: Always `Proposed` for new ADRs — never ask the user what the status is
 
-**Scope of assumptions tab**: Assumptions cover only: problem framing, alternative approaches, upstream dependencies, GDD linkage, and status. Schema design questions (e.g., "How should spawn timing work?", "Should data be inline or external?") are NOT assumptions — they are design decisions belonging to a separate step after the assumptions are confirmed. Do not include schema design questions in the assumptions AskUserQuestion widget.
+**Scope of assumptions tab**: Assumptions cover only: problem framing, alternative approaches, upstream dependencies, GDD linkage, and status. Schema design questions (e.g., "How should spawn timing work?", "Should data be inline or external?") are NOT assumptions — they are design decisions belonging to a separate step after the assumptions are confirmed. Do not include schema design questions in the assumptions question widget.
 
-**After assumptions are confirmed**, if the ADR involves schema or data design choices, use a separate multi-tab `AskUserQuestion` to ask each design question independently before drafting.
+**After assumptions are confirmed**, if the ADR involves schema or data design choices, use a separate multi-tab `question` to ask each design question independently before drafting.
 
-**Present assumptions with `AskUserQuestion`:**
+**Present assumptions with `question`:**
 
 ```
 Here's what I'm assuming before drafting:
@@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ Status: Proposed
 Do not generate the ADR until the user confirms assumptions or provides corrections.
 
 **After engine specialist and TD reviews return** (Step 4.5/4.6), if unresolved
-decisions remain, present each one as a separate `AskUserQuestion` with the proposed
+decisions remain, present each one as a separate `question` with the proposed
 options as choices plus a free-text escape:
 
 ```
@@ -371,7 +371,7 @@ developers reading the GDD from implementing the wrong interface.
 
 If no inconsistencies: skip this block silently.
 
-5. **Write approval** — Use `AskUserQuestion`:
+5. **Write approval** — Use `question`:
 
 If GDD sync issues were found:
 - "ADR draft is complete. How would you like to proceed?"
@@ -414,7 +414,7 @@ Registry candidates from this ADR:
 
 **BLOCKING — do not write to `docs/registry/architecture.yaml` without explicit user approval.**
 
-Ask using `AskUserQuestion`:
+Ask using `question`:
 - "May I update `docs/registry/architecture.yaml` with these [N] new stances?"
   - Options: "Yes — update the registry", "Not yet — I want to review the candidates", "Skip registry update"
 
@@ -425,7 +425,7 @@ changing, set the old entry to `status: superseded_by: ADR-[NNNN]` and add the n
 
 ## 7. Closing Next Steps
 
-After the ADR is written (and registry optionally updated), close with `AskUserQuestion`.
+After the ADR is written (and registry optionally updated), close with `question`.
 
 Before generating the widget:
 1. Read `docs/registry/architecture.yaml` — check if any priority ADRs are still unwritten (look for ADRs flagged in technical-preferences.md or systems-index.md as prerequisites)

.opencode/skills/architecture-review/SKILL.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ name: architecture-review
 description: "Validates completeness and consistency of the project architecture against all GDDs. Builds a traceability matrix mapping every GDD technical requirement to ADRs, identifies coverage gaps, detects cross-ADR conflicts, verifies engine compatibility consistency across all decisions, and produces a PASS/CONCERNS/FAIL verdict. The architecture equivalent of /design-review."
 argument-hint: "[focus: full | coverage | consistency | engine | single-gdd path/to/gdd.md]"
 user-invocable: true
-allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Task, AskUserQuestion
+allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Task, question
 agent: technical-director
 model: opus
 ---
@@ -451,7 +451,7 @@ FAIL: Critical gaps (Foundation/Core layer requirements uncovered),
 
 ## Phase 8: Write and Update Traceability Index
 
-Use `AskUserQuestion` for the write approval:
+Use `question` for the write approval:
 - "Review complete. What would you like to write?"
   - [A] Write all three files (review report + traceability index + TR registry)
   - [B] Write review report only — `docs/architecture/architecture-review-[date].md`
@@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ After completing the review and writing approved files, present:
 3. **Rerun trigger**: "Re-run `/architecture-review` after each new ADR is written
    to verify coverage improves"
 
-Then close with `AskUserQuestion`:
+Then close with `question`:
 - "Architecture review complete. What would you like to do next?"
   - [A] Write a missing ADR — open a fresh session and run `/architecture-decision [system]`
   - [B] Run `/gate-check pre-production` — if all blocking gaps are resolved
@@ -619,7 +619,7 @@ If any spawned agent returns BLOCKED, errors, or fails to complete:
 
 1. **Surface immediately**: Report "[AgentName]: BLOCKED — [reason]" before continuing
 2. **Assess dependencies**: If the blocked agent's output is required by a later phase, do not proceed past that phase without user input
-3. **Offer options** via AskUserQuestion with three choices:
+3. **Offer options** via question with three choices:
    - Skip this agent and note the gap in the final report
    - Retry with narrower scope (fewer GDDs, single-system focus)
    - Stop here and resolve the blocker first

.opencode/skills/art-bible/SKILL.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ name: art-bible
 description: "Guided, section-by-section Art Bible authoring. Creates the visual identity specification that gates all asset production. Run after /brainstorm is approved and before /map-systems or any GDD authoring begins."
 argument-hint: "[--review full|lean|solo]"
 user-invocable: true
-allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Task, AskUserQuestion
+allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Task, question
 ---
 
 ## Phase 0: Parse Arguments and Context Check
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ Read `.opencode/docs/technical-preferences.md` if it exists — extract performa
 
 Present the session context and ask two questions before authoring anything:
 
-Use `AskUserQuestion` with two tabs:
+Use `question` with two tabs:
 - Tab **"Scope"** — "Which sections need to be authored today?"
   Options: `Full bible — all 9 sections` / `Visual identity core (sections 1–4 only)` / `Asset standards only (section 8)` / `Resume — fill in missing sections`
 - Tab **"References"** — "Do you have reference games, films, or art that define the visual direction?"
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ If a visual anchor exists from game-concept.md: present it and ask:
 - Provide: game concept (elevator pitch, core fantasy), full pillar set, platform target, any reference games/art from Phase 1 framing, the visual anchor if it exists
 - Ask: "Draft a Visual Identity Statement for this game. Provide: (1) a one-line visual rule that could resolve any visual decision ambiguity, (2) 2–3 supporting visual principles, each with a one-sentence design test ('when X is ambiguous, this principle says choose Y'). Anchor all principles directly in the stated pillars — each principle must serve a specific pillar."
 
-Present the art-director's draft to the user. Use `AskUserQuestion`:
+Present the art-director's draft to the user. Use `question`:
 - Options: `[A] Lock this in` / `[B] Revise the one-liner` / `[C] Revise a supporting principle` / `[D] Describe my own direction`
 
 Write the approved section to file immediately.
@@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ Write the approved section to file.
 - **`art-director`**: Visual style for UI — diegetic vs. screen-space HUD, typography direction (font personality, weight, size hierarchy), iconography style (flat/outlined/illustrated/photorealistic), animation feel for UI elements
 - **`ux-designer`**: UX alignment check — does the visual direction support the interaction patterns this game requires? Flag any conflicts between art direction and readability/accessibility needs.
 
-Collect both. If they conflict (e.g., art-director wants elaborate diegetic UI but ux-designer flags it would reduce combat readability), surface the conflict explicitly with both positions. Do NOT silently resolve — use `AskUserQuestion` to let the user decide.
+Collect both. If they conflict (e.g., art-director wants elaborate diegetic UI but ux-designer flags it would reduce combat readability), surface the conflict explicitly with both positions. Do NOT silently resolve — use `question` to let the user decide.
 
 Write the approved section to file.
 
@@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ Before presenting next steps, check project state:
 - Does `design/gdd/gdd-cross-review-*.md` exist? → review-all-gdds is done
 - Do GDDs exist (check above)? → include /consistency-check option
 
-Use `AskUserQuestion` for next steps. Only include options that are genuinely next based on the state check above:
+Use `question` for next steps. Only include options that are genuinely next based on the state check above:
 
 **Option pool — include only if not already done:**
 - `[_] Run /map-systems — decompose the concept into systems before writing GDDs` (skip if systems-index.md exists)

.opencode/skills/asset-spec/SKILL.md

@@ -3,11 +3,11 @@ name: asset-spec
 description: "Generate per-asset visual specifications and AI generation prompts from GDDs, level docs, or character profiles. Produces structured spec files and updates the master asset manifest. Run after art bible and GDD/level design are approved, before production begins."
 argument-hint: "[system:<name> | level:<name> | character:<name>] [--review full|lean|solo]"
 user-invocable: true
-allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Task, AskUserQuestion
+allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Task, question
 ---
 
 If no argument is provided, check whether `design/assets/asset-manifest.md` exists:
-- If it exists: read it, find the first context (system/level/character) with any asset at status "Needed" but no spec file written yet, and use `AskUserQuestion`:
+- If it exists: read it, find the first context (system/level/character) with any asset at status "Needed" but no spec file written yet, and use `question`:
   - Prompt: "The next unspecced context is **[target]**. Generate asset specs for it?"
   - Options: `[A] Yes — spec [target]` / `[B] Pick a different target` / `[C] Stop here`
 - If no manifest: fail with:
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ Read all source material **before** asking the user anything.
 ### Source doc reads (by target type):
 - **system**: Read `design/gdd/[target-name].md`. Extract the **Visual/Audio Requirements** section. If it doesn't exist or reads `[To be designed]`:
   > "The Visual/Audio section of `design/gdd/[target-name].md` is empty. Either run `/design-system [target-name]` to complete the GDD, or describe the visual needs manually."
-  Use `AskUserQuestion`: `[A] Describe needs manually` / `[B] Stop — complete the GDD first`
+  Use `question`: `[A] Describe needs manually` / `[B] Stop — complete the GDD first`
 - **level**: Read `design/levels/[target-name].md`. Extract art requirements, asset list, VFX needs, and the art-director's production concept specs from Step 4.
 - **character**: Read `design/narrative/characters/[target-name].md` or search `design/narrative/` for the character profile. Extract visual description, role, and any specified distinguishing features.
 
@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ Group assets into categories:
 - **Audio** — SFX, music tracks, ambient loops *(note: audio specs are descriptions only — no generation prompts)*
 - **3D Assets** — meshes, materials (if applicable per engine)
 
-Present the full identified list to the user. Use `AskUserQuestion`:
+Present the full identified list to the user. Use `question`:
 - Prompt: "I identified [N] assets across [N] categories for **[target]**. Review before speccing:"
 - Show the grouped list in conversation text first
 - Options: `[A] Proceed — spec all of these` / `[B] Remove some assets` / `[C] Add assets I didn't catch` / `[D] Adjust categories`
@@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ Combine the agent outputs into a draft spec per asset. Present all specs in conv
 **Status:** Needed
 ```
 
-After presenting all specs, use `AskUserQuestion`:
+After presenting all specs, use `question`:
 - Prompt: "Asset specs for **[target]** — [N] assets. Review complete?"
 - Options: `[A] Approve all — write to file` / `[B] Revise a specific asset` / `[C] Regenerate with different direction`
 
@@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ Ask: "May I update `design/assets/asset-manifest.md`?"
 
 ## Phase 6: Close
 
-Use `AskUserQuestion`:
+Use `question`:
 - Prompt: "Asset specs complete for **[target]**. What's next?"
 - Options:
   - `[A] Spec another system — /asset-spec system:[next-system]`