fix(implement): 明確指定分析頁檢查工作包相依

skills/implement/SKILL.md

@@ -24,14 +24,14 @@ All wiki reads and writes go through `jsc-gitea:wiki`.
    4. **The PR has to be yours before you touch it.** Run `jsc-sdlc/tools/wp-gate.sh owns {owner}/{repo} {index} --wp {the work package number that PR column belongs to}`. `status=owned` → carry on. `status=foreign` (exit 1) → leave that PR alone, name the work package the script says holds it, and let that package's own session handle it. `status=unowned` (exit 0) → carry on, and report that ownership could not be determined. Completion condition: the script has run for that PR and its verdict is reported.
    5. **Agree on the fix before making it.** Run the `jsc-ask:ask` decision tree over the comments the script printed — issue comments, review verdicts and inline comments alike — one option set per comment, each option stating its impact scope (which files it touches, whether it changes the package's TDD todos). **Never fix a comment automatically**: a reviewer's wording often allows two different fixes, and picking one silently costs another review round. Completion condition: the user has said how each comment is handled before any file is edited.
    6. **Each round of fixes MUST run as a sub agent** inside that package's own worktree, pushing to the same work branch, so the PR updates itself. Hand the sub agent the agreed decisions and let the comment text stay inside it — the main agent keeps only the decisions and the bookkeeping. Never open a second PR for the same package.
-   7. Give every printed comment an outcome — fixed, no fix needed, or cannot fix. Ignore what you cannot fix, plus pure discussion and praise: do not reply on the PR and do not stop the flow, and list each ignored comment with its reason in your final report.
+   7. Give every printed comment an outcome — fixed, no fix needed, or cannot fix. Reply to every handled comment with `jsc-gitea/tools/gitea.sh comment-reply {owner}/{repo} {index} {issue|review|inline} {comment id} {reply file}`. The reply states the outcome and the commit, file, or reason. Pure discussion and praise can be ignored only when you list the reason. Rules and the completion condition: `jsc-meta/references/pr-report.md`.
    8. Write the script's `latest=` value into that work package's PR column, appended after the existing PR link as `#{index} 已處理留言 {ISO time}`, and save the page back to the wiki. Next run passes it as `--since`, so handled comments stay handled. Reuse the existing PR column and add no new column; the analysis page's columns belong to `analyze`.
    9. **One round of comment fixes is one finished task — call `jsc-log:worklog` now**, under the Rules section's one-task-one-entry rule. Completion condition: the entry for this round is saved on `LOG_{HASH}` before the next round starts.
    10. Exit 3 means the gate could not decide (a missing dependency, or the PR could not be found). Report it and stop — an undecidable gate never counts as merged.
    11. Completion condition: every work package holding an unmerged PR has had this run's comments triaged (fixed, no fix needed, or cannot fix), logged and reported; a package left unmerged after this does not block step 5/6 for packages that do not depend on it.
 5. Read `ANALYZE_CONTENTS` via `jsc-gitea:wiki` and list what is unfinished: plan name, HASH, work package number, count of open items. A selectable work package must satisfy all three: **unfinished, not holding a work ticket, and — verified by step 6's `wp-gate.sh check-deps`, never by eyeballing the 相依 column yourself — dependency-free or all dependencies merged**. Completion condition: you have listed every selectable work package, or reported that none is selectable and stopped.
 6. **Before picking, the candidate's own dependencies decide — the gate lives in code, not in this text, and it is scoped to that one candidate, never to every open PR on the page**:
-   1. For the candidate work package the user is about to choose, run `jsc-sdlc/tools/wp-gate.sh check-deps {owner}/{repo} {wp-number}`. It re-reads the analysis page and queries Gitea itself — it does not trust anything you already read or concluded.
+   1. For the candidate work package the user is about to choose, run `jsc-sdlc/tools/wp-gate.sh check-deps {owner}/{repo} {wp-number} --analyze ANALYZE_{HASH}`. It re-reads the caller-specified analysis page and queries Gitea itself — it does not trust anything you already read or concluded, and it never guesses the page from the repository hash.
    2. Exit 0 (`status=ready`) → eligible; proceed to claim it. Exit 1 (`status=blocked`) → not eligible; report which dependency work package's PR is not merged yet, and offer the user the other eligible candidates instead of this one. Exit 3 (`status=missing-dep`) is an undecidable gate — report it and stop; never treat an undecidable result as either ready or blocked.
    3. A dependency phrased as text pointing outside this analysis page (another plan, another analysis) cannot be checked by the script; it comes back listed separately as needing manual confirmation. Confirm it with the user before proceeding — an unchecked cross-page dependency is not the same as a cleared one.
    4. Let the user pick per `jsc-ask:ask` rules from the eligible candidates only (options state open-item count and estimated effort). **List delivery packages (交付 `是`) first** — the analysis page makes `WP-01` the standalone delivery package, so keep that order in the options. Write the ticket into that work package's ticket column (the zh-TW field 「工作證」) on the analysis page and save it back to the wiki.
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ All wiki reads and writes go through `jsc-gitea:wiki`.
        - `3` — the PR could not be found. Report and stop; a PR nobody can find never counts as merged.
        - `2` — bad arguments, or Gitea was unreachable on the very first poll. Fix the arguments or the environment and run it again; never fall back to eyeballing the PR page and calling it merged.
     6. **Do not start another work package in this session.** An unrelated package can still proceed, but in its own session with its own worktree; packages that depend on this one stay blocked until step 4 or step 11.5 sees it merged.
-    7. Completion condition: the PR exists, its URL is saved on the analysis page and reported to the user, the lock existed (`status=locked`), the work log entry is saved, and `pr-watch.sh` has returned `0` with `wp-gate.sh check` confirming `status=merged` — or the run stopped on a reported `2`, `3` or `status=closed-unmerged`.
+    7. Completion condition: the PR exists, its URL is saved on the analysis page and reported to the user with the table format in `jsc-meta/references/pr-report.md`, the lock existed (`status=locked`), the work log entry is saved, and `pr-watch.sh` has returned `0` with `wp-gate.sh check` confirming `status=merged` — or the run stopped on a reported `2`, `3` or `status=closed-unmerged`.
 12. **Delivery document** — a finished work package is a delivery, so **always ask before producing it; never pick a format silently and never skip this step**:
     1. Ask per `jsc-ask:ask` rules which format to produce. The options are fixed: **a `DELIVER_{HASH}` wiki page** or **a Gitea issue comment**. State the impact scope on each (the wiki page lives beside the plan and analysis pages; the issue comment reaches whoever follows that issue).
     2. Both formats use the same structure — `templates/deliver-page.md`, in Traditional Chinese. Only the destination differs. Sample values and personal-data handling: `references/deliver-formats.md`.

skills/maintain/SKILL.md

@@ -24,8 +24,8 @@ All wiki reads and writes go through `jsc-gitea:wiki`.
 
       Completion condition: the user has picked the methods to apply, and every picked method is either applied or reported with the reason it could not be.
    3. **A code comment states why the code is written this way; it never states where the work is tracked.** Issue numbers, commit hashes, branch names, people's names and `@` mentions stay out of every code comment this project's maintenance touches — including the comments the cleanup method rewrites. Full list and the allowed exceptions: `jsc-review/references/comment-scope.md`. `jsc-hooks/hooks/comment-scope.sh` compares each file after it is written and prints a warning; fix the flagged line at once, then carry on. Completion condition: this project's diff holds no comment line carrying an issue number, a commit hash, a branch name, a person's name or an `@` mention, and every warning the hook printed is fixed.
-   4. Commit the changes to a new branch per `jsc-git:commit`, push, then open a PR per `jsc-git:pr` back to the branch of step 3.1, passing it explicitly as the base. Completion condition: the PR exists, and you have reported its URL and number.
+   4. Commit the changes to a new branch per `jsc-git:commit`, push, then open a PR per `jsc-git:pr` back to the branch of step 3.1, passing it explicitly as the base. Completion condition: the PR exists, and you have reported it with the table format in `jsc-meta/references/pr-report.md`.
    5. **One project's maintenance is one finished task — call `jsc-log:worklog` right after its PR is open.** A task is one of three things: one work package, one round of PR-comment fixes, or one standalone fix commit; this stage produces the third kind, one per project. Never let the stage end and then write a single catch-up entry, and never let a second project start before the first one's entry is saved — by then the elapsed time, the token counts and the difficulties are gone. Every entry appends to the same `LOG_{HASH}` page. Content parked earlier by `tools/stage-report.sh --pending-file` is merged into that same write and cleared only once the write succeeds; parked content is not a written log. Completion condition: this project's entry is saved on `LOG_{HASH}` before the next project's sub agent starts.
    6. Update the project's last-maintained field (the zh-TW column 「前次維護時間」) in `MAINTAIN_CONTENTS` to today. Completion condition: `MAINTAIN_CONTENTS` shows today's date in 「前次維護時間」 for that project, saved on the wiki.
-4. The main agent reports the summary: maintenance methods applied per project, PR links, and failure reasons. The report and all generated wiki content, commits, and PR descriptions stay Traditional Chinese per the STE100 rule. Completion condition: the summary names every project read in step 2, each with its applied methods and either a PR link or the reason it was skipped.
+4. The main agent reports the summary: maintenance methods applied per project, PR table rows, and failure reasons. The report and all generated wiki content, commits, and PR descriptions stay Traditional Chinese per the STE100 rule. Completion condition: the summary names every project read in step 2, each with its applied methods and either a PR table row or the reason it was skipped.
 5. **Stage report — the last thing this stage does, including when no project was in window.** Run `tools/stage-report.sh maintain` with one `--page MAINTAIN:{page}` per wiki page this run wrote (`MAINTAIN_CONTENTS` counts), plus `--worklog` and `--worklog-heading` pointing at the entries step 3.5 wrote. `--pending-file {file} --log-hash {HASH}` is the fallback for a stage that stopped before any project finished: it holds the content for the next `jsc-log:worklog` run, and held content is not a written log. Rules and exit codes: `references/stage-report.md`. Exit 1 is a warning, never a block. Completion condition: the script's output is reported to the user verbatim, and every wiki page this run wrote appears in it.