fix: /office-hours and /ceo-review accidentally contradict Boil the Lake

[simonemacario]

The problem

gstack tells users to "narrow scope" in /office-hours (Q4: Narrowest Wedge, "Narrow beats wide, early") and "cut everything" in /plan-ceo-review (SCOPE REDUCTION, Focus as subtraction, Subtraction default) — but doesn't distinguish product scope from implementation scope.

Users conflate the two. They hear "minimum viable" and skip tests. They hear "narrow your scope" and cut error handling. This directly contradicts the Completeness Principle and Boil the Ocean.

Concrete before/after

Before — user runs /office-hours, gets told to narrow scope, then implements:

"The office hours session said to find the narrowest wedge. So I'm building just the core flow — no tests, no error handling, no edge cases. We can add those later."

After:

"The narrowest wedge is the product surface — one feature, one workflow. But that wedge gets complete implementation: all edge cases, full test coverage, every error path. The wedge is small. The engineering is thorough."

The fix: two axes, one mantra

Scope is two axes, not one.

• Product scope (WHAT you build) — narrow early. Narrowest wedge, focus as subtraction, fewer things done better.
• Implementation scope (HOW COMPLETELY you build it) — always maximal. Boil the Lake. Every edge case, every test, every error path.

Narrow the product. Boil the implementation.

Changes (5 commits, rebased onto v0.13.0.0)

1. ETHOS.md — New "2. The Two Axes of Scope" section in the builder philosophy
2. scripts/resolvers/preamble.ts — Two-axis distinction added to generateCompletenessSection(). Propagates to ALL skills via {{PREAMBLE}}
3. office-hours + plan-ceo-review templates — Surgical clarifications:
   • Q4 Narrowest Wedge: "this is PRODUCT scope, not implementation quality"
   • SCOPE REDUCTION: "cut features, not quality"
   • Focus as subtraction: "do fewer things, but do them completely"
4. ETHOS.md section numbering — Consistent numbering (1, 2, 3)
5. Resolver migration — Original change targeted the monolithic gen-skill-docs.ts; adapted to the new scripts/resolvers/ architecture and regenerated all SKILL.md files

Test plan

• bun run gen:skill-docs — regenerated for both hosts, no errors
• bun test — passes (1 pre-existing failure in design-shotgun zsh glob check, unrelated)
• Completeness Principle appears in all generated SKILL.md files with two-axis text
• Rebased cleanly onto v0.13.0.0 (main as of 2026-03-28)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[simonemacario]

Code review

No issues found. Checked for bugs and CLAUDE.md compliance.

Verified: template-to-output pipeline (generateCompletenessSection(ctx) signature change + call site), commit bisection (4 logical commits), .tmpl editing workflow, and generated SKILL.md regeneration. All 557 tests pass per PR description.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

_{- If this code review was useful, please react with 👍. Otherwise, react with 👎.}

[simonemacario]

Rebased onto v0.13.0.0 — adapted to the new scripts/resolvers/ architecture (the original change targeted the monolithic gen-skill-docs.ts which has since been split).

The two-axis text now lives in scripts/resolvers/preamble.ts → generateCompletenessSection(), so it propagates to all skills via {{PREAMBLE}} as before. All SKILL.md files regenerated cleanly.

Updated the PR description to reflect the current state.