---
name: printing-press-polish
description: >
  Polish a generated CLI to pass verification and become publish-ready. Runs
  diagnostics (dogfood, verify, scorecard, go vet), automatically fixes all
  issues (verify failures, dead code, descriptions, README, MCP tool quality),
  reports the before/after delta, and offers to publish. Use after any
  /printing-press run, or on any CLI in ~/printing-press/library/. Trigger
  phrases: "polish", "improve the CLI", "fix verify", "make it publish-ready",
  "clean up the CLI", "get this ready to ship".
context: fork
min-binary-version: "4.0.0"
allowed-tools:
  - Bash
  - Read
  - Glob
  - Grep
  - Write
  - Edit
  - AskUserQuestion
---

# /printing-press-polish

Polish a generated CLI so it passes verification and is ready to publish.

The retro improves the Printing Press. Polish improves the generated CLI. This skill runs in a forked context (`context: fork`) so its diagnostic and fix loop doesn't pollute the caller — the diagnostic spam, fix iterations, and re-diagnose noise stay scoped to the polish session, and the caller receives a clean summary.

```bash
/printing-press-polish redfin
/printing-press-polish redfin-pp-cli
/printing-press-polish ~/printing-press/library/redfin
```

## When to run

After any `/printing-press` generation, especially when:
- The shipcheck verdict is `ship-with-gaps`
- The verify pass rate is below 80%
- The scorecard is below 85
- You want the CLI publish-ready in one pass

Can also be run standalone on any CLI in `~/printing-press/library/`.

## Setup

```bash
# min-binary-version: 4.0.0

PRESS_HOME="$HOME/printing-press"
PRESS_LIBRARY="$PRESS_HOME/library"

if ! command -v cli-printing-press >/dev/null 2>&1; then
  echo "cli-printing-press binary not found."
  echo "Install with:  go install github.com/mvanhorn/cli-printing-press/v4/cmd/cli-printing-press@latest"
  return 1 2>/dev/null || exit 1
fi
```

After setup, check binary version compatibility. Read the `min-binary-version` field from this skill's YAML frontmatter. Run `cli-printing-press version --json` and parse the version from the output. Compare it to `min-binary-version` using semver rules. If the installed binary is older than the minimum, stop immediately and tell the user: "cli-printing-press binary vX.Y.Z is older than the minimum required vA.B.C. Run `go install github.com/mvanhorn/cli-printing-press/v4/cmd/cli-printing-press@latest` to update."

### Public-library hint

If the user's request includes phrasing like "polish notion **in the
public library**", "polish **from the public library**", or "polish the
published cal-com" — and the named CLI is **not** in
`$PRESS_LIBRARY/<slug>/` — they're asking to polish a CLI that lives
upstream but not locally. Polish runs against the internal library, so
the right move is to import first.

Suggest: `/printing-press-import <slug>` to bring it in, then re-run
polish. Don't try to polish a CLI that isn't in the internal library.

If the named CLI **is** already in `$PRESS_LIBRARY/<slug>/`, the
"public library" phrasing is informational — just proceed with polish
and let the divergence check (below) handle any drift.

### Resolve CLI

The argument string can contain a `--standalone` flag plus one positional value (a slug, binary name, or path). The flag may appear before or after the positional value; it is the only flag this skill consumes from `args`. Strip it before path resolution.

The positional value can be:
- A short name: `redfin` (looks up `$PRESS_LIBRARY/redfin`)
- A full name: `redfin-pp-cli` (strips suffix, looks up `$PRESS_LIBRARY/redfin`)
- A path: `~/printing-press/library/redfin` (used directly)

Resolution order for the positional value:
1. If it is an absolute or `~`-prefixed path and exists, use it
2. Try `$PRESS_LIBRARY/<arg>` (exact match — works for slug like `redfin`)
3. If it has `-pp-cli` suffix, strip it and try `$PRESS_LIBRARY/<slug>` (e.g., `redfin-pp-cli` → `redfin`)
4. Fuzzy search: `ls $PRESS_LIBRARY/ | grep -i <arg>` for close matches

**Caller scenarios and the `--standalone` flag.** Polish has two callers; they invoke it through different mechanisms, and the Publish Offer at the end of this skill fires only when `STANDALONE_MODE` is true. **Determine `STANDALONE_MODE` from the caller mode and the flag, not from the resolved path.**

- **Standalone (user-invoked, `/printing-press-polish redfin`).** Invoked via the slash command. Treat as `STANDALONE_MODE=true` unconditionally — the slash-command form is the publish-intent surface, even when the user omits the flag. The arg is a slug or binary name; resolution lands on `$PRESS_LIBRARY/<slug>/`. This is the published copy and the right target.
- **Mid-pipeline (main printing-press skill Phase 5.5, hold-path "Polish to retry").** Invoked via the Skill tool with `args: "$CLI_WORK_DIR"`. The arg is an absolute path to `~/printing-press/.runstate/.../runs/.../working/<api>-pp-cli/`; resolution must hit rule 1. `STANDALONE_MODE=false` by default — main SKILL owns the publish flow on this path, so polish defers. **Do not paraphrase the arg to the slug** — Phase 5.5 fires before the working CLI is promoted, so `$PRESS_LIBRARY/<slug>/` either doesn't exist or holds the *prior* run's stale CLI.
- **Skill-tool standalone override.** A non-slash caller that genuinely wants polish to publish must opt in explicitly by including `--standalone` in `args` (e.g., `args: "--standalone ~/printing-press/library/redfin"`). Without that token, polish never publishes from a Skill-tool invocation — even if the resolved path happens to live under `$PRESS_LIBRARY/`. The flag is the contract; the path is not.

This caller-mode-driven gate replaces the older path-substring heuristic (`*.runstate/*`). The heuristic broke when the main SKILL's Phase 5.5/5.6 ordering inverted, or when polish was invoked from a non-`.runstate` scratch layout: polish would see a `$PRESS_LIBRARY/<slug>/` path, conclude "standalone," and fire its Publish Offer (fork, global git config, public PR) inside a mid-pipeline run. The flag is unambiguous and the safer default is no-publish.

The lock-status check in the next code block is the safety net for the mid-pipeline scenario: if a build lock is held for this CLI (under either name form), polish refuses to run. `cli-printing-press lock` normalizes slug ↔ binary-name internally, so the check works regardless of which form the basename produces.

If no match or multiple matches, present via `AskUserQuestion`. Show at most 4
matches sorted by modification time (most recent first) with human-friendly
relative timestamps (e.g., "generated 2 hours ago").

```bash
CLI_DIR="<resolved path>"
CLI_NAME="$(basename "$CLI_DIR")"
STANDALONE_MODE="<true|false>"  # true iff slash-command invocation or --standalone in args; default false for Skill-tool invocations

# Check if there's an active build lock — polish edits would be overwritten
# when the running build promotes to library.
_lock_json=$(cli-printing-press lock status --cli "$CLI_NAME" --json 2>/dev/null)
if echo "$_lock_json" | grep -q '"held".*true'; then
  if echo "$_lock_json" | grep -q '"stale".*true'; then
    echo "Warning: stale lock exists for $CLI_NAME (build may have crashed)."
    echo "Proceeding with polish. Run 'cli-printing-press lock release --cli $CLI_NAME' to clear."
  else
    echo "An active build is in progress for $CLI_NAME."
    echo "Polish edits would be overwritten when the build promotes."
    echo "Wait for the build to finish, then run polish."
    exit 1
  fi
fi

# Verify it's a valid Go CLI
if [ ! -f "$CLI_DIR/go.mod" ]; then
  echo "Not a valid CLI directory: $CLI_DIR"
  exit 1
fi

echo "Polishing: $CLI_NAME"
echo "Location: $CLI_DIR"
```

### Find spec and research dir

```bash
API_SLUG="${CLI_NAME%-pp-cli}"
SPEC_PATH=""
for f in "$PRESS_HOME/manuscripts/$API_SLUG"/*/research/*.yaml "$PRESS_HOME/manuscripts/$API_SLUG"/*/research/*.json "$PRESS_HOME/manuscripts/$CLI_NAME"/*/research/*.yaml "$PRESS_HOME/manuscripts/$CLI_NAME"/*/research/*.json; do
  if [ -f "$f" ]; then
    SPEC_PATH="$f"
    break
  fi
done

# Build the spec flag once. Empty when no spec was found — diagnostic
# commands accept a missing --spec and degrade gracefully.
SPEC_FLAG=""
if [ -n "$SPEC_PATH" ]; then
  SPEC_FLAG="--spec $SPEC_PATH"
fi

# Locate the research dir. dogfood's --research-dir triggers
# checkNovelFeatures, which writes novel_features_built back into
# research.json AND syncs the verified list into .printing-press.json.
# Without this flag, legacy CLIs whose manifest predates the
# novel_features schema fail publish-validate's transcendence gate.
#
# Two layouts to handle, keyed on $CLI_DIR path structure (NOT on the
# absence of a manuscripts entry — re-generating a previously-published
# API leaves stale manuscript entries from prior runs that would point
# scorecard at the wrong research.json):
#  1. Mid-pipeline polish (invoked from the main printing-press flow
#     before promote): $CLI_DIR is under $PRESS_RUNSTATE/.../runs/<id>/working/<cli>
#     (i.e. the path contains `.runstate/`), and research.json lives at
#     $PRESS_RUNSTATE/.../runs/<id>/research.json — $CLI_DIR's grandparent.
#  2. Post-promote (standalone polish): research.json lives at
#     manuscripts/<api>/<run-id>/research.json.
RESEARCH_DIR=""
case "$CLI_DIR" in
  *.runstate/*)
    _grandparent="$(dirname "$(dirname "$CLI_DIR")")"
    if [ -f "$_grandparent/research.json" ]; then
      RESEARCH_DIR="$_grandparent"
    fi
    ;;
  *)
    for d in "$PRESS_HOME/manuscripts/$API_SLUG"/*/research.json "$PRESS_HOME/manuscripts/$CLI_NAME"/*/research.json; do
      if [ -f "$d" ]; then
        RESEARCH_DIR="$(dirname "$d")"
        break
      fi
    done
    ;;
esac

# Use a bash array so the flag survives paths with spaces (e.g. when
# $HOME or $PRESS_RUNSTATE resolves through a path containing spaces).
RESEARCH_ARGS=()
if [ -n "$RESEARCH_DIR" ]; then
  RESEARCH_ARGS=(--research-dir "$RESEARCH_DIR")
fi
```

### Divergence check

**Stop and run this step before Phase 1. Do not skip it. Do not proceed to diagnostics until you have completed the check and resolved any divergence.**

The internal copy at `$CLI_DIR` can drift from the public library (`mvanhorn/printing-press-library`) copy if anyone edited the public repo directly after this CLI was last published. Polishing a stale internal copy and re-publishing later silently overwrites those public-only fixes — a real failure mode that shipped CLIs hit.

**You must:**

1. **Locate the public library clone.** Honor `$PRINTING_PRESS_LIBRARY_PUBLIC` if set; otherwise scan the user's filesystem however fits this platform. Validate every candidate by checking the git remote points at `mvanhorn/printing-press-library` — other directories may share the name (forks, accidental name collisions). If multiple valid clones exist, prefer the most recently modified; ask the user to disambiguate only if still unclear.
2. **Locate this CLI inside the clone.** `find <clone>/library -type d -name "<api>-pp-cli"` or equivalent.
3. **Run `diff -r <public-cli-dir> $CLI_DIR`** with these exclusions, all of which are expected to diverge after publish:
   - `.printing-press-tools-polish.json` (local ledger, not published)
   - `.printing-press-pii-polish.json` (local ledger, not published)
   - `go.mod` and `go.sum` — publish rewrites the module path from `<api>-pp-cli` to `github.com/mvanhorn/printing-press-library/library/<category>/<api>`
   - All `.go` files where the only difference is the rewritten import path (the publish step propagates the new module path through every internal import). When inspecting `.go` diffs, scan for substantive changes — anything beyond the module-path prefix swap is real divergence.

   Concretely: `diff -r --exclude=go.mod --exclude=go.sum --exclude=.printing-press-tools-polish.json --exclude=.printing-press-pii-polish.json <public-cli-dir> $CLI_DIR`.

   Don't pass `--exclude='<api>-pp-cli'` or `--exclude='<api>-pp-mcp'` — those names match both the root-level binary files **and** the `cmd/<api>-pp-cli/` and `cmd/<api>-pp-mcp/` source directories. Excluding by binary name silently skips the entire `cmd/` subtree, hiding real divergence in `main.go`. The "Only in $CLI_DIR: <api>-pp-cli" line for the built binary is one row of expected output, not noise worth filtering at the cost of completeness.
4. **Surface the result** before continuing.

Outcomes:

- **No clone found** → user doesn't have public locally. State this explicitly ("public library not found locally; proceeding on internal as canonical") and continue.
- **Clone found but doesn't contain this CLI** → never published or under a different name. State this and continue.
- **Found and diff is empty** → in sync. State this and continue.
- **Found and divergent** → **stop**. Do not run Phase 1 diagnostics yet. List the divergent files for the user. Ask via AskUserQuestion: **sync public→internal**, or **proceed without syncing**. If the user picks sync, copy public's version of the divergent files into internal, then continue polish on the synced internal copy.

Before showing the sync prompt, check whether internal has files modified after its `.printing-press.json` timestamp (the user has been polishing locally without publishing). If yes, hedge the prompt explicitly: syncing will overwrite their pending local work. Let them decide whether to keep their local edits or pull public's.

After sync (or explicit skip), the rest of polish operates on `$CLI_DIR` as canonical. The eventual `/printing-press-publish` step pushes internal back to public; no second divergence check is needed there.

**The check has run only when one of the four outcomes above is explicitly stated in your response.** Silent omission counts as not having run it.

## Phase 1: Baseline diagnostics

```bash
cd "$CLI_DIR"

# Build
go build -o "$CLI_NAME" ./cmd/"$CLI_NAME" 2>&1

# Diagnostics. SPEC_FLAG and RESEARCH_ARGS are set in the "Find spec
# and research dir" step above. RESEARCH_ARGS enables dogfood to
# verify novel features and sync them into .printing-press.json
# (required for publish-validate's transcendence gate).
cli-printing-press dogfood --dir "$CLI_DIR" $SPEC_FLAG "${RESEARCH_ARGS[@]}" 2>&1
cli-printing-press verify --dir "$CLI_DIR" $SPEC_FLAG --json 2>&1
cli-printing-press workflow-verify --dir "$CLI_DIR" --json > /tmp/polish-workflow-verify.json 2>&1 || true
cli-printing-press verify-skill --dir "$CLI_DIR" --json > /tmp/polish-verify-skill.json 2>&1 || true
# publish-validate is a publish-readiness gate, not a CLI-readiness gate.
# Mid-pipeline polish runs before the main SKILL's promote step and before
# the publish skill packages tools-manifest.json, so its prerequisites
# (manifest.printer from git config github.user, packaged tools manifest,
# phase5 acceptance proof relocated under $CLI_DIR/.manuscripts/<run>/proofs/)
# are not yet satisfied. Running publish-validate here would cascade
# parent-pipeline-owned failures into the polish ship_recommendation,
# which the main SKILL's Phase 5.5 verdict-override then turns into a
# CLI-level hold. Only run publish-validate when polish is the publish
# entry point (slash-command invocation or explicit --standalone).
if [ "$STANDALONE_MODE" = "true" ]; then
  cli-printing-press publish validate --dir "$CLI_DIR" --json > /tmp/polish-publish-validate.json 2>&1 || true
fi
# --live-check samples novel-feature outputs and populates
# live_check.features[].warnings (Wave B entity detection) — required for
# the "Output entity warnings" row below to have data to read.
# RESEARCH_ARGS points scorecard at the run's research.json when the
# CLI lives under $PRESS_RUNSTATE/runs/<id>/working/<cli> (mid-pipeline
# polish). Without it, scorecard looks adjacent to the binary, doesn't
# find research.json, and reports `unable: true`.
cli-printing-press scorecard --dir "$CLI_DIR" $SPEC_FLAG "${RESEARCH_ARGS[@]}" --live-check --json > /tmp/polish-scorecard.json 2>&1 || true
cli-printing-press scorecard --dir "$CLI_DIR" $SPEC_FLAG 2>&1
cli-printing-press tools-audit "$CLI_DIR" --json > /tmp/polish-tools-audit-before.json 2>&1 || true
cli-printing-press pii-audit "$CLI_DIR" --json > /tmp/polish-pii-audit-before.json 2>&1 || true
go vet ./... 2>&1
```

verify-skill and workflow-verify run alongside dogfood/verify/scorecard so polish catches the same class of failures the public-library CI catches. `publish-validate` runs only when `STANDALONE_MODE=true` (slash-command or `--standalone` Skill-tool invocation). The publish-validate leg is a hard ship-gate **for standalone polish**: in that mode polish cannot recommend `ship` or `ship-with-gaps` while `cli-printing-press publish validate` reports `passed: false`. Mid-pipeline polish (`STANDALONE_MODE=false`) skips publish-validate entirely — its prerequisites (manifest.printer from `git config github.user`, packaged `tools-manifest.json`, phase5 acceptance proof relocated under `$CLI_DIR/.manuscripts/<run>/proofs/`) are parent-pipeline-owned and not yet satisfied at this point; the main SKILL's Phase 6 publish flow gates on publish-validate at the correct time. See "Ship logic" below for how this affects ship_recommendation.

**If Phase 1 baseline reveals the underlying CLI needs re-discovery** — broken HTML/SSR extraction, sparse capture (fewer than 5 unique endpoints in the source manuscript), wrong endpoint shapes, missing GraphQL operation hashes, or any signal that the CLI was generated from incomplete capture — polish does not normally do browser capture itself, but the shared playbook at `skills/printing-press/references/browser-sniff-capture.md` covers all available capture backends including the Claude chrome-MCP (`mcp__claude-in-chrome__*`) and computer-use (`mcp__computer-use__*`) when the runtime exposes them. Read Step 1 (tool detection), Step 2c.5 (failure-recovery menu), and Step 2e (chrome-MCP capture playbook) of that reference before improvising. Re-discovery from polish is rare but real; when it happens, use the shared backends — do not invent a new capture flow.

Parse findings into categories:

| Category | Source | What to look for |
|----------|--------|------------------|
| Verify failures | verify --json | Commands with score < 3 |
| SKILL static-check failures | verify-skill --json | Any `findings[]` with `severity=error` (flag-names, flag-commands, positional-args, unknown-command, canonical-sections). Hard ship-gate: ship cannot fire while these exist. |
| Workflow gaps | workflow-verify --json | Verdict `workflow-fail`. Soft gate: surface in `remaining_issues` and downgrade to `hold` when the workflow is the CLI's primary value. |
| Publish validation failures | publish validate --json | `passed: false`. **Standalone polish only** (runs only when `STANDALONE_MODE=true`); skipped in mid-pipeline polish where publish prerequisites aren't yet satisfied. When it runs, it's a hard ship-gate: ship cannot fire while publish validate fails. If the only failing check is missing phase5 acceptance, report `phase5 acceptance required` with the next-step command: authenticate, then run `cli-printing-press dogfood --dir "$CLI_DIR" $SPEC_FLAG --live --level quick --write-acceptance <proofs-dir>/phase5-acceptance.json`. Use the proofs directory from the validate error when present. |
| Dead code | dogfood | Dead functions, dead flags |
| Stale files | dogfood | Unregistered commands |
| Description issues | dogfood | Boilerplate root Short |
| README gaps | scorecard | README score < 8 |
| Example gaps | dogfood | Commands missing examples |
| Go vet issues | go vet | Any output |
| Output entity warnings | scorecard JSON | `live_check.features[].warnings` — raw HTML entities in human output |
| Output plausibility | Phase 4.85 | Findings from the agentic output review |
| MCP tool quality | tools-audit | Empty Short, thin Short, missing read-only annotations, thin MCP descriptions |
| Customer PII | pii-audit | Card last-4, email, phone, ZIP+4, postal-address shapes in high-risk files (manuscripts, fixtures, README) |

**Environmental failures vs. CLI defects.** Some Phase 1 outputs surface failures that aren't real CLI bugs and should not block ship:

- `scorecard --live-check` reporting `SQLITE_BUSY`, network timeouts, `401` from a mock or expired token, or HTTP errors that depend on the test workspace's permissions/state — these are test-environment issues, not CLI defects.
- `verify` mock-harness flakes on commands with binary output (e.g., `qr` returning a PNG that the substring matcher can't validate) or commands with optional positional args where dry-run output legitimately doesn't contain the verify probe string.

Classify these as environmental in `skipped_findings` with the specific reason; do not spend Phase 2 cycles trying to "fix" them. The polish skill's ship logic already excludes live-check failures from gating, but the agent should still annotate them so reviewers can see they were considered and dismissed deliberately.

### Phase 4.85 — Agentic output review (Wave B)

After the mechanical diagnostics above complete, invoke the `printing-press-output-review` sub-skill via the Skill tool. The sub-skill carries `context: fork` and owns the dispatch prompt, gate logic, and known blind spots — single source of truth shared with the main printing-press skill.

```
Skill(
  skill: "cli-printing-press:printing-press-output-review",
  args: "$CLI_DIR"
)
```

Parse the returned `---OUTPUT-REVIEW-RESULT---` block. `status: WARN` findings flow into the diagnostic categories above so Phase 2 fixes address both rule-based and plausibility issues. `status: SKIP` is informational — record but don't block.

Wave B gating applies: all findings are warnings, never blockers. Fix if obvious and cheap; document with a short comment if deferred.

Record baseline scores: scorecard total, verify pass rate, dogfood verdict, go vet issue count, output-review finding count.

## Phase 2: Fix

Fix in priority order. After each priority level, update the lock heartbeat:

```bash
cli-printing-press lock update --cli "$CLI_NAME" --phase polish 2>/dev/null
```

### Runtime variant default checklist

If a polish fix adds or changes a runtime mode, data-source option, auth tier, transport, or other user-visible default, document this short checklist before selecting the default:

- **User-visible default:** which behavior users get without extra flags or config.
- **Compatibility risk:** whether existing commands, scripts, MCP tools, or stored config change behavior.
- **Verification command:** the exact command that proves the default and the non-default escape hatch both work.

Keep the checklist in the polish notes or result block. Skip it for ordinary bug fixes that do not change runtime variants or defaults.

### Priority 0: MCP surface migration (legacy CLIs)

If Phase 1's `dogfood` reported `MCP Surface: FAIL` with a parity mismatch, the CLI was generated before the runtime cobratree walker existed and is still on the static `internal/mcp/tools.go` surface. The fix is mechanical:

```bash
cli-printing-press mcp-sync "$CLI_DIR"
```

That migrates the MCP surface to the runtime walker, regenerates `tools-manifest.json` and `internal/mcp/tools.go`, and applies any `mcp-descriptions.json` overrides. Re-run `dogfood` after; the parity gate flips to PASS. This is a known migration path for every CLI generated before the cobratree landed; running it on a CLI already on the runtime walker is a no-op refresh.

Skip this priority on CLIs where dogfood's MCP gate is already passing.

### Priority 1: Verify failures

For each command that fails verify dry-run or exec:

1. Read the command file
2. Find `Args: cobra.ExactArgs(N)` or similar constraint
3. Remove the `Args:` field
4. Add at the top of `RunE`:
   ```go
   if len(args) == 0 {
       return cmd.Help()
   }
   ```
5. For commands needing 2+ args, use `if len(args) < 2`
6. Check for dry-run nil-data crashes and add guards:
   ```go
   if flags.dryRun {
       return nil
   }
   ```

### Priority 2: Dead code

1. For each dead function flagged by dogfood, grep all `.go` files to verify
   it's truly unused (not just its definition matching itself)
2. If truly unused: remove the function
3. If used by another helper: leave it (false positive)
4. After removal, remove unused imports
5. Delete stale files (promoted commands not registered in root.go)

### Priority 3: CLI description and metadata

1. Read root command `Short` in `internal/cli/root.go`
2. If it contains boilerplate ("Reverse-engineered...", raw API title), rewrite:
   Pattern: `"<Product> CLI with <capability-1>, <capability-2>, and <capability-3>"`
3. Check commands for missing `Example` fields. Add realistic examples with
   domain-specific values.

### Priority 4: README

**Cardinal rule: run `<cli> <cmd> --help` for EVERY command you put in the
README.** Never guess flag names, argument formats, or valid values. If you
write `--start-time` but the flag is `--start`, the README is wrong and
users will get errors on their first try.

#### Source-of-truth files for rendered sections

Before editing README.md, SKILL.md, or `.printing-press.json`, identify whether
the section is rendered from a source file. Dogfood and regeneration overwrite
these rendered sections, so direct edits there are temporary and should be used
only to inspect the current output.

| Rendered section or field | Source-of-truth file::field | Polish workflow |
| --- | --- | --- |
| README `## Unique Features` | `research.json::novel_features_built[]` | Edit the underlying `research.json` feature description/example, then re-run dogfood with `--research-dir`. |
| SKILL `## Unique Capabilities` | `research.json::novel_features_built[]` | Edit the underlying `research.json` feature description/example, then re-run dogfood with `--research-dir`. |
| README Quick Start | `research.json::narrative.quickstart[]` | Edit the command/comment in `research.json`, then regenerate or re-run the dogfood/rendering step. |
| SKILL Recipes | `research.json::narrative.recipes[]` | Edit the recipe title, command, or explanation in `research.json`, then regenerate or re-run the dogfood/rendering step. |
| README/SKILL Troubleshooting | `research.json::narrative.troubleshoots[]` | Edit the symptom/fix pair in `research.json`, then regenerate or re-run the dogfood/rendering step. |
| `.printing-press.json` `display_name`, `description`, `mcp_*` | `WriteManifestForGenerate`; for description/display-name overrides, edit the spec (`info.title`, `info.x-display-name`, `info.description`) | Edit the spec or rerun the manifest writer. Do not hand-edit generated manifest metadata unless you are doing temporary diagnosis. |

Recommended loop for these rendered sections: edit the source field, re-run
dogfood with `--research-dir "$RESEARCH_DIR"` or regenerate the CLI as
appropriate, then run a second pass to confirm the rendered README/SKILL text
stays fixed. If you edit README.md or SKILL.md directly in one of these
sections, expect the next dogfood resync or regeneration to clobber the change.

To find the manuscript source:

```bash
PRESS_HOME="$HOME/printing-press"
API_SLUG="${CLI_NAME%-pp-cli}"
RESEARCH_JSON=""
for f in "$PRESS_HOME/manuscripts/$CLI_NAME"/*/research.json \
         "$PRESS_HOME/manuscripts/$API_SLUG"/*/research.json; do
  if [ -f "$f" ]; then RESEARCH_JSON="$f"; break; fi
done
```

If `RESEARCH_JSON` exists and a rendered section has bad prose, examples, or
flag references, fix the corresponding field in that file first. For novel
features, dogfood verifies `research.json::novel_features[]`, writes the
surviving set to `research.json::novel_features_built[]`, and syncs README
`## Unique Features`, SKILL `## Unique Capabilities`, `.printing-press.json`
`novel_features`, and root help Highlights from that verified set.

#### Required sections (must be present and correct)

1. **Title**: "# <Product Name> CLI" — use the product's real name with
   correct casing/punctuation (e.g., "Cal.com" not "Cal Com")
2. **Subtitle**: one sentence describing what the CLI does for the user,
   matching the root `Short` field. NOT a description of the API.
3. **Install**: correct install command. Use the printing-press-library
   repo URL, not a per-CLI repo that doesn't exist.
4. **Authentication**: how to set `<API>_API_KEY` env var, where to get
   a key (link to the provider's settings page), self-hosted URL override
   if supported. Read `config.go` to find all env vars.
5. **Quick Start**: 3-5 commands someone will actually run first. Pick
   commands that are both **most useful** (what you'd run daily) and
   **show the CLI's value** (why install this over curl). Usually:
   `doctor` → `sync` → transcendence command (`today`, `health`) →
   `search`. Avoid raw list commands — they dump data without
   demonstrating why the CLI exists.
6. **Commands**: categorized table. Group by domain function (Scheduling,
   Analytics, Account, Utilities), not by implementation structure.
7. **Output Formats**: show `--json`, `--select`, `--csv`, `--compact`,
   `--dry-run`, `--agent`. Use a real command, not a placeholder.
8. **Agent Usage**: agent-native properties and exit codes.
9. **Cookbook**: 8-15 recipes using **verified flag names** from `--help`.
   Show the CLI's unique capabilities: transcendence commands, filters,
   SQL queries, pipes. Include at least one mutation example.
10. **Health Check**: show actual `doctor` output, not a placeholder.
11. **Configuration**: list ALL env vars from config.go with descriptions.
    Include config file path.
12. **Troubleshooting**: common errors mapped to exit codes with fixes.

#### Optional sections (add at your discretion)

- **Rate Limits**: if the API has documented limits
- **Self-Hosting**: if the CLI supports `--api-url` or `BASE_URL` override
- **Pagination**: if the API has notable pagination behavior
- **Sources & Inspiration**: credits to community projects (generated by
  the machine, preserve if present)

### Priority 4.5: SKILL static-check failures (verify-skill)

Read `/tmp/polish-verify-skill.json` for the full finding list. Each finding has a `check` (`flag-names`, `flag-commands`, `positional-args`, `unknown-command`, or `canonical-sections`), a `command` (the path the SKILL claimed), and a `detail` describing the mismatch. Common shapes and fixes:

- **`flag-names`** — SKILL references `--foo` on a `<cli> ...` invocation but no command in `internal/cli/*.go` declares it. Either the example is wrong (fix the SKILL or remove the recipe) or the flag was deleted (decide if it should come back). **Out of scope:** flags on lines that invoke other tools (e.g. `npx -y @mvanhorn/printing-press install <api> --cli-only`, `gh pr create --base ...`, `go install ...`). The recipe-scoped flag-names check ignores those by design — never strip an external-tool flag to make verify-skill exit 0, and never replace the install instructions with a fabricated slash command. If the finding is firing on an external-tool flag anyway, that is a verify-skill bug, not a SKILL bug; report it instead of editing the SKILL.
- **`flag-commands`** — `--foo is declared elsewhere but not on <cmd>`. The flag exists somewhere but not on the command the SKILL invoked it on. Two fixes:
  1. If the flag is added via a shared helper like `addXxxFlags(cmd, ...)`, inline the `cmd.Flags().StringVar(...)` declaration directly in the affected command's source file. The verify-skill grep cannot follow function-call indirection.
  2. If the SKILL example is genuinely wrong, fix the example to use a flag the command does declare.
- **`positional-args`** — `got N positional args; Use: "<cmd> <arg>" expects M-M`. The SKILL recipe passed N positional args but the command's `Use:` declares M required. Two fixes:
  1. If the command also accepts the value via a `--flag`, change `Use: "cmd <arg>"` to `Use: "cmd [arg]"` (square brackets = optional). Verify-skill correctly accepts `--flag`-only invocations against an optional positional.
  2. If the SKILL example is missing a required positional, fix the example.
- **`canonical-sections`** — `install section drift: hand-edit detected in a generator-owned section`. The `## Prerequisites: Install the CLI` block has been edited away from what the generator would emit for this CLI today. **Do not hand-edit the install section.** It's templated from `internal/generator/templates/skill.md.tmpl` parameterized on `(api_name, category, uses_browser_http_transport)`; any drift means an automation step or person modified text the machine owns. Resolve by regenerating the printed CLI (run `printing-press regen` against this directory, or for a published CLI, regenerate from the spec and re-publish). If the canonical text itself is wrong (e.g., a real change to the install instructions is needed), fix the template, not the printed CLI.

When editing other parts of SKILL.md, Read the affected section first and Read it again after the Edit. `Edit` replaces a literal string; if the surrounding context has drifted, a single Edit can graft a second copy of a block onto the first instead of replacing it.

After fixing, re-run `cli-printing-press verify-skill --dir "$CLI_DIR"` and confirm exit 0 before moving on.

### Priority 5: Remaining dogfood issues

- Path validity mismatches
- Auth protocol mismatches
- Example drift (examples referencing wrong commands)
- Data pipeline integrity issues

### Priority 6: MCP tool quality

**Your goal now is to ensure every MCP tool exposed by this CLI carries agent-grade descriptions and correct read/write classifications.** Tool descriptions and classifications are how agents discover and decide whether to call a tool — thin descriptions and missing annotations directly degrade agent UX, and Phase 1's mechanical gates (verify, dogfood) do NOT catch this class of issue.

Stop and:

1. Run `cli-printing-press tools-audit "$CLI_DIR" --json` to surface mechanical findings (empty Short, thin Short, missing `mcp:read-only` on read-shaped command names).
2. You must read `references/tools-polish.md` and follow its instructions to address the findings AND run a judgment pass over every command — regardless of whether the audit flagged it. The audit catches mechanical issues; description quality and borderline classification (read-only vs. local-write) always require agent reasoning. You must not skip this.
3. **Accepting MCP-description findings carries a stricter contract.** `thin-mcp-description` and `empty-mcp-description` accepts require three pre-decision fields (`spec_source_material`, `target_description`, `gap_analysis`) populated per finding. The binary rejects bulk accepts (>5 findings sharing one rationale) and runs that "complete" without lifting MCPDescriptionQuality. Fix via override or generator improvement is the expected path; accept is rare. See `references/tools-polish.md` "Marking a finding accepted" for the full contract.

Proceed to "After all fixes" only when the audit's summary line reads `no pending findings` with no `incomplete:` block — every gate (pre-decision fields, duplicate rationale, scorecard delta) passes.

### Priority 7: Customer-PII gate

**Your goal now is to clear the PII ledger so promote and publish gates pass.** The PII gate is the deterministic floor that prevents real customer values from reaching published library content. It catches card-last-4, email, US phone, ZIP+4, and postal-address shapes in high-risk files.

Stop and:

1. Run `cli-printing-press pii-audit "$CLI_DIR"` to surface pending findings (or read `/tmp/polish-pii-audit-before.json` from Phase 1's baseline).
2. You must read `references/pii-polish.md` and follow its per-finding decision tree — fix real values in source with non-matching placeholders, or accept with the `category` + `evidence_context` pre-decision fields.
3. **Accepting PII findings carries a strict contract.** Missing fields, 6+ accepts sharing a rationale, or wholesale-accepting ≥10 findings without source fixes all fail the gate. See `references/pii-polish.md` "The accept contract" and "Forbidden accept patterns" for the full rules.

Proceed to "After all fixes" only when `pii-audit` reads `no pending findings` with no `incomplete:` block.

### After all fixes

```bash
go build -o "$CLI_NAME" ./cmd/"$CLI_NAME"
gofmt -w .
```

## Phase 3: Re-diagnose

Re-run the diagnostic sweep on the fixed CLI:

```bash
# RESEARCH_ARGS must travel with dogfood here too — without it,
# checkNovelFeatures doesn't re-sync novel_features_built after Phase 2
# edits, and publish-validate's transcendence gate reads stale state
# from Phase 1's pass.
cli-printing-press dogfood --dir "$CLI_DIR" $SPEC_FLAG "${RESEARCH_ARGS[@]}" 2>&1
cli-printing-press verify --dir "$CLI_DIR" $SPEC_FLAG --json 2>&1
cli-printing-press workflow-verify --dir "$CLI_DIR" --json 2>&1
cli-printing-press verify-skill --dir "$CLI_DIR" --json 2>&1
if [ "$STANDALONE_MODE" = "true" ]; then
  cli-printing-press publish validate --dir "$CLI_DIR" --json 2>&1
fi
cli-printing-press scorecard --dir "$CLI_DIR" $SPEC_FLAG 2>&1
cli-printing-press tools-audit "$CLI_DIR" 2>&1
cli-printing-press pii-audit "$CLI_DIR" 2>&1
go vet ./... 2>&1
```

Record the after scores. If verify-skill still has any `severity=error` findings, workflow-verify still reports `workflow-fail`, publish-validate still reports `passed: false` (standalone mode only — mid-pipeline polish doesn't run this check), or pii-audit still has pending findings or gate failures, ship cannot fire (see ship logic below).

## Ship logic

Compute the ship recommendation:

- **`ship`**: verify >= 80%, scorecard >= 75, no critical failures, **AND** verify-skill exits 0 (no SKILL/CLI mismatches), **AND** workflow-verify is not `workflow-fail`, **AND** (when `STANDALONE_MODE=true`) publish-validate reports `passed: true`, **AND** tools-audit shows zero pending findings (every finding fixed or explicitly accepted with rationale), **AND** pii-audit shows zero pending findings and zero gate failures (every PII finding fixed in source or accepted with valid pre-decision fields). The SKILL/workflow/publish/PII gates are hard requirements: a CLI that ships with a SKILL that lies about it (verify-skill findings) gives agents broken instructions; a CLI whose primary workflow fails verification has not actually shipped; a CLI that publish-validate rejects is not publishable; a CLI that fails pii-audit at promote/publish gates will halt shipping anyway. The publish-validate gate applies only when polish ran it (standalone mode); mid-pipeline polish defers publish-readiness to the main SKILL's Phase 6.
- **`ship-with-gaps`**: verify >= 65%, scorecard >= 65, non-critical gaps remain, **AND** the SKILL/workflow gates above hold, **AND** (when `STANDALONE_MODE=true`) the publish-validate gate holds, **AND** the README has a `## Known Gaps` block that lists the user-facing gaps. Reserved for the rare case where a refactor or external-dependency blocker prevents a clean fix.

  **README Known Gaps is mandatory for ship-with-gaps.** The published library copy is what downstream users see; if the verdict claims gaps exist but the README hides them, downstream users meet a CLI that misbehaves with no disclosure. Before emitting `ship_recommendation: ship-with-gaps`:

  1. Read the CLI's `README.md`. If a `## Known Gaps` section already exists (e.g., the main SKILL Phase 4 wrote it before polish ran), confirm it covers the user-facing items in `remaining_issues`. Add bullets for any newly surfaced user-facing gap polish discovered.
  2. If `## Known Gaps` is missing, write it — placed after `## Quick Start` (or before `## Usage`) to mirror the `## Unique Features` placement convention. One bullet per user-facing item from `remaining_issues`. Phrase from the user's perspective: what command misbehaves, what the workaround is. Example:

     ```markdown
     ## Known Gaps

     - **`analytics export --csv`** returns truncated rows on workspaces with >10k events. Use `--json` and pipe to `jq` as a workaround until the underlying export endpoint is paginated.
     ```

  3. Filter `remaining_issues` for user-facing entries when populating the section. Internal items (verify drift on a deprecated flag, MCP description tuning, polish-internal notes) do not belong in the public Known Gaps. If the agent cannot identify any user-facing gap from `remaining_issues`, the verdict is `ship`, not `ship-with-gaps`.
  4. List each Known Gaps write/update in `fixes_applied` so the caller can surface that this happened.

  If polish cannot responsibly populate Known Gaps from the available evidence (e.g., `remaining_issues` is all internal jargon with no user-facing reading), downgrade the verdict to `hold` rather than ship without disclosure.
- **`hold`**: verify < 65% or scorecard < 65 or critical failures, **OR** verify-skill has unresolved findings, **OR** workflow-verify reports `workflow-fail` and the workflow is the CLI's primary value, **OR** (when `STANDALONE_MODE=true`) publish-validate reports `passed: false`. Mid-pipeline polish never reaches `hold` because of publish-validate — the check doesn't run in that mode and `publish_validate_*` is emitted as `skipped (mid-pipeline)`.

### Push higher without gaming

The ship gates are a floor, not a ceiling. After they pass, look at scorecard dimensions still below max and ask whether each gap is real or structural:

1. **Find the underlying deficit, not the score.** The scorecard is a proxy for quality, not the goal itself. A README scoring 8/10 might be missing a Cookbook section or have outdated commands — that's a real, fixable gap. A `mcp_surface_strategy` scoring 2/10 on a 200-endpoint API might be flagging that the surface is mostly endpoint mirrors — also potentially fixable.
2. **If there's a real, agent-grade improvement available, make it.** Better description, missing flag doc, weak README section, an example that doesn't reflect actual usage. The CLI gets better and the score follows.
3. **If the deficit is structural, document and accept.** Some dimensions assume capabilities the CLI's domain doesn't have (a read-only API scored against write-workflow dimensions, a CLI with no auth scored on auth dimensions, a small API penalized on `surface_strategy` thresholds calibrated for large APIs). Note the reason in `skipped_findings` and move on.
4. **Never add scaffolding to satisfy the scorer.** Fake commands, fake tests, fake flags, or boilerplate prose written purely to nudge a number — those degrade the CLI to satisfy the proxy. The scorer is imperfect by design (the "scoring may be imperfect" caveat in AGENTS.md applies). Trust the underlying judgment, not the number.

#### MCP scorecard dims map to spec fields, not generator code

When `mcp_token_efficiency`, `mcp_tool_design`, `mcp_remote_transport`, or `mcp_surface_strategy` are below max, the fix is almost always a spec edit + regenerate (or `regen-merge` from a freshly-generated tree), **not** a generator-template change. Polish CAN address these — do not classify them as "feature add to a generator-owned file, retro candidate."

| Weak dim | Spec field that fixes it | What to add to `spec.yaml`'s `mcp:` block |
|---|---|---|
| `mcp_remote_transport` | `mcp.transport` | `transport: [stdio, http]` (small APIs at or under `spec.DefaultRemoteTransportEndpointThreshold` typed endpoints already get this by default; the override is only needed when the spec opted into a narrower list or the API is above the threshold and still wants remote reach) |
| `mcp_token_efficiency`, `mcp_surface_strategy` | `mcp.endpoint_tools`, `mcp.orchestration` | `endpoint_tools: hidden` + `orchestration: code` (Cloudflare pattern: ~70 raw endpoint tools collapse to `<api>_search` + `<api>_execute`; all endpoints still reachable via execute) |
| `mcp_tool_design` | `mcp.intents` | Define multi-step intent compositions for the workflows the API supports |
| `mcp_description_quality` | `mcp-descriptions.json` (override file at the CLI root) | Per-tool description overrides; thin spec-derived descriptions get richer text without spec edits |

Recommended threshold: at >50 typed endpoints, default to recommending all four (`transport`, `endpoint_tools=hidden`, `orchestration=code`, `intents` for the headline workflows). Small APIs (<= `spec.DefaultRemoteTransportEndpointThreshold`) get the http transport by default already, so `mcp_remote_transport` lands at 10/10 without any spec edit — only call it out if the spec explicitly narrowed the list. The full reference is `docs/SPEC-EXTENSIONS.md`.

After editing the spec, regenerate (or `regen-merge` the changes into the published library) so the new `mcp:` block reaches templates. Cobratree-walked novel commands continue to surface as MCP tools either way; they don't need spec changes.

Rule of thumb: if your fix would still be valuable if the scorecard didn't exist, do it. If the only motivation is "to push the score," don't.

## Display delta and emit result block

Display the delta to the user, then emit the structured `---POLISH-RESULT---` block. The block lets calling skills (e.g., main printing-press SKILL.md Phase 5.5) parse the recommendation and scores reliably; the human-readable table above is for the user.

```
Polish Results for <CLI_NAME>:

                    Before    After     Delta
  Scorecard:        XX/100    XX/100    +N
  Verify:           XX%       XX%       +N%
  Tools-audit:      XX        XX        -N pending findings

Fixes applied:
  - <one-line description of each fix>

Skipped findings:
  - <finding>: <why you chose not to fix it>

Remaining issues:
  - <one-line description of each issue you tried to fix but couldn't>

---POLISH-RESULT---
scorecard_before: <N>
scorecard_after: <N>
verify_before: <N>
verify_after: <N>
dogfood_before: <PASS|FAIL>
dogfood_after: <PASS|FAIL>
govet_before: <N>
govet_after: <N>
tools_audit_before: <N pending>
tools_audit_after: <N pending>
publish_validate_before: <PASS|FAIL|skipped (mid-pipeline)>
publish_validate_after: <PASS|FAIL|skipped (mid-pipeline)>
fixes_applied:
- <one-line description of each fix>
skipped_findings:
- <finding>: <why you chose not to fix it>
remaining_issues:
- <one-line description of each issue you tried to fix but couldn't>
ship_recommendation: <ship|ship-with-gaps|hold>
further_polish_recommended: <yes|no>
further_polish_reasoning: <one sentence explaining the call>
---END-POLISH-RESULT---
```

The three lists serve different purposes:
- **fixes_applied**: what changed — the caller displays these
- **skipped_findings**: issues you found but deliberately did not fix, with reasoning (e.g., "verify classifies `stale` as read — scorer bug, not a CLI problem", "thin-short on `version` accepted as-is — accurate and brief"). The caller surfaces these so the user can decide whether to address them manually.
- **remaining_issues**: issues you tried to fix but couldn't resolve.

**`publish_validate_*` values.** Emit `PASS` or `FAIL` when polish ran publish-validate (standalone mode). Emit the literal string `skipped (mid-pipeline)` when polish skipped it (mid-pipeline invocation, `STANDALONE_MODE=false`). The skipped value is informational only: callers must not treat it as a failure when deciding whether to cascade polish's `ship_recommendation` into a CLI-level hold.

### Picking `further_polish_recommended`

Your judgment, not a count of `remaining_issues`. Set `yes` when another polish invocation has a real chance of closing what's left:

- `remaining_issues` includes verify or dogfood failures you ran out of time on and a fresh pass with more attention per failure could plausibly resolve.
- The fixes you did land may have unblocked dependent issues you couldn't reach this pass.
- A SKILL/CLI mismatch needs a second look after this pass changed the source tree.

Set `no` when another invocation would re-tread the same ground:

- `remaining_issues` are decisions only the user can make (rename a flagship command, choose a default behavior, accept a structural trade-off).
- You already attempted the fix in two different ways this pass and both failed for the same reason.
- The blocker is external (API changed shape, rate-limited, missing credential) and not something a fresh polish run sees differently.
- `remaining_issues` is empty AND `skipped_findings` are all environmental or structural — there is nothing left for polish to do.

`further_polish_reasoning` is one sentence the caller surfaces verbatim. Make it specific ("verify failures on `analytics export` and `report show` looked closable but I gave up too early") rather than generic ("more polish might help"). Callers use this signal to decide whether to offer "Polish again" in their next prompt; a vague reason makes their prompt vague.

## Publish Offer

**Skip this entire section unless `STANDALONE_MODE` is true.** `STANDALONE_MODE` is set in the "Resolve CLI" block above based on the caller mode: true for slash-command invocations (`/printing-press-polish ...`) or Skill-tool invocations that pass `--standalone` in `args`; false otherwise. When false, polish is being called from main SKILL Phase 5.5 or hold-path "Polish to retry," and the working CLI has not been promoted to library yet. `/printing-press-publish <slug>` would resolve to `$PRESS_LIBRARY/<slug>/`, which is either empty or holds a stale prior run — invoking publish here would either fail to resolve or ship the wrong copy. The parent skill owns the publish flow on that path; just emit the result block and return.

A simple check:

```bash
if [ "$STANDALONE_MODE" != "true" ]; then
  echo "non-standalone caller; skipping Publish Offer"
  return
fi
```

The gate is the caller-mode flag, **not** the resolved path. A Skill-tool invocation without `--standalone` defers publish even when the path lives under `$PRESS_LIBRARY/<slug>/`; this is the safer default, and the only way the inverted Phase 5.5/5.6 failure mode (mid-pipeline run firing a public fork + PR) gets caught at the polish boundary. The previous path-substring heuristic (`*.runstate/*`) is no longer load-bearing here — it has been retained in the research-dir resolution block above because that block is selecting between two real on-disk layouts, which is a different concern from publish gating.

For standalone invocations, continue with the offer below.

If `ship` or `ship-with-gaps`:

Construct the prompt from the result block. The shape is data-driven so the user is never asked to weigh "Polish again" against "Publish" when polish itself just decided another pass would not help.

### Recommendation

Pick the recommended action from the polish result:

- `ship` + `remaining_issues` empty → recommend **Publish**.
- `ship` + `remaining_issues` non-empty + `further_polish_recommended: yes` → recommend **Polish again**.
- `ship` + `remaining_issues` non-empty + `further_polish_recommended: no` → recommend **Publish** if the remaining issues do not touch the CLI's headline commands, otherwise surface the trade-off and let the user decide between **Publish** (as-is; README is not auto-updated for `ship` verdicts) and **Done**.
- `ship-with-gaps` + `further_polish_recommended: yes` → recommend **Polish again**.
- `ship-with-gaps` + `further_polish_recommended: no` → recommend **Publish** (the gap is already in README's `## Known Gaps` because polish's ship logic enforces that for `ship-with-gaps` — see "Ship logic" above) or **Done** if the gap is publish-blocking — agent judgment.

### Menu

Suppress the "Polish again" option entirely when `further_polish_recommended: no`. Keep "Publish" and "Done" always available.

Surface `further_polish_reasoning` as context when polish opted out of recommending another pass — the user should see *why* polish is done.

Present via `AskUserQuestion`. Two example shapes:

**Polish converged clean** (`remaining_issues` empty, `further_polish_recommended: no`):

> "<CLI_NAME> polished: scorecard XX/100, verify XX%. Polish ran cleanly — nothing more to fix.
>
> Recommendation: Publish.
>
> 1. **Publish now** (recommended) — validate, package, and open a PR
> 2. **Done for now** — CLI is at ~/printing-press/library/<cli-name>"

**Polish thinks another pass would help** (`remaining_issues` non-empty, `further_polish_recommended: yes`):

> "<CLI_NAME> polished: scorecard XX/100, verify XX%. <N> issues remain.
>
> Polish notes: '<further_polish_reasoning>'
>
> Recommendation: Polish again before publishing.
>
> 1. **Polish again** (recommended) — close the remaining <N> issues
> 2. **Publish now** — ship as-is
> 3. **Done for now** — CLI is at ~/printing-press/library/<cli-name>"

The recommended option leads, carries the `(recommended)` label, and the leading `Recommendation:` line states the agent's call explicitly. Three reinforcing channels so the user does not have to infer from ordering.

### If "Publish now"

Check for existing PR:
```bash
gh pr list --repo mvanhorn/printing-press-library --head "feat/$CLI_NAME" --state open --author @me --json number,url --jq '.[0]' 2>/dev/null
```

Then invoke `/printing-press-publish <cli-name>`.

**After publish returns success**, offer retro as a soft tail. This mirrors the main `/printing-press` skill's Phase 6 behavior so users who reach publish through polish (mid-pipeline → polish-again → publish, or standalone polish → publish) get the same retro opportunity as users who reach publish directly through Phase 6.

Present via `AskUserQuestion`:

> "PR opened: <PR_URL>. Run a retro? It surfaces systemic gaps from this session (generator misses, scorer bugs, skill-doc drift) as a GitHub issue for the Printing Press maintainers. Every retro filed raises the floor for the next CLI — and your session context is freshest right now."
>
> 1. **No — I'm done** (default)
> 2. **Yes — run retro now**

If the user picks yes, invoke `/printing-press-retro`.

(When `STANDALONE_MODE` is false this whole section is unreachable — the Publish Offer guard at the top of this section returns early — so no extra check is needed here.)

### If "Polish again"

Re-run Phase 1 → Phase 2 → Phase 3 with the same CLI. Maximum 2 additional polish passes (3 total including the first).

### If "Done for now"

End normally.

## Rules

- Fix everything. Do not ask for approval before fixing — polish is autonomous.
- Report results honestly. Show what improved and what didn't.
- Do not add new features. Polish fixes quality issues, not feature gaps.
- Do not re-run research or generation. Polish works with the CLI as-is.
- Do not modify the printing-press generator. That's `/printing-press-retro`.
- Do not modify any files outside `$CLI_DIR`.
- If polish adds or renames a Cobra command, the MCP surface updates automatically through the generated `internal/mcp/cobratree` runtime mirror. Update `novel_features` only when README/SKILL highlights or registry display should change; use `cmd.Annotations["mcp:hidden"] = "true"` for debug-only commands.
- Maximum 1 fix-and-rediagnose pass per polish invocation. The "Polish again" path runs additional invocations (max 3 total).
- Prefer mechanical fixes over creative decisions. When a creative decision is needed (like the CLI description), use the research brief from manuscripts if available.
