feat: add retro flow and defer craft review to project style

[KodingDev]

Meridian should be the workflow and harness layer: the standard, model adapters, hooks, and user-owned flows. Code style should come from the project and its style skills. This change makes that split explicit. It also covers the retro and test-first workflows that previously needed outside skills.

Changes

• New retro flow (user-invoked, report-only). It reviews a session, branch, or PR for friction: user corrections, rework, late check failures, and review catches. It names the cause of each one and proposes the strongest durable fix, in this order: a failing check, a deleted or rewritten instruction, one new instruction line, then a skill change. Lessons that already exist as text and were still missed get a check instead of more text.
• The craft lens defers to the project's style authority. It reads the project instructions and any installed style skill (house-style, golden) first, and uses its own checklist only where they are silent. Two lines no longer contradict house-style: one-call helpers are flagged only when their name adds nothing, and doc comments on exports are not slop.
• respond triages automated reviewer findings. Fix when a realistic failure path exists and the fix is in proportion. Dismiss with the traced path otherwise. Ask the user before dismissing a security finding. A bot's severity label is not evidence.
• Professional standard. Before asking about a fork, run an experiment if that settles it. Before reporting or acting on a measured number, explain what limits it.
• execute writes the failing test first when a task adds or fixes behavior and a test seam exists.
• README. It explains how to remove the 0.6-era KodingDev/claude-plugins install. That install's session hook forces the routing skill on every request and still loads alongside a current install.
• Version 0.14.0 and a CHANGELOG entry. One new negative eval scenario: reflecting on a session must not trigger retro.

Not included

• Project playbook overrides (pstack's .agents/playbooks/ with extends). Project instructions already let a repo add to a flow, so a second mechanism would duplicate layer 2.

Feedback wanted

• Does retro's fix order match how you want lessons encoded?
• Is "style authority" the right place for the craft lens to stop?

Verification

• pnpm check passes: format, lint, typecheck, and 39 tests. This includes the consistency test, now with retro in MANUAL_FLOWS.
• pnpm eval did not run, because it makes paid model calls.

---

Generated by Claude Code