Merge upstream v2.40.0 with local fork additions preserved

Incorporates 163 upstream commits (origin/main) while preserving all
local skills, agents, and commands. Metadata descriptions updated to
reflect actual component counts (30 agents, 56 skills, 7 commands).
file-todos/SKILL.md merged with both upstream command rename and local
assessment fields.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

plugins/compound-engineering/skills/jira-ticket-writer/references/api_reference.md

@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+# Reference Documentation for Jira Ticket Writer
+
+This is a placeholder for detailed reference documentation.
+Replace with actual reference content or delete if not needed.
+
+Example real reference docs from other skills:
+- product-management/references/communication.md - Comprehensive guide for status updates
+- product-management/references/context_building.md - Deep-dive on gathering context
+- bigquery/references/ - API references and query examples
+
+## When Reference Docs Are Useful
+
+Reference docs are ideal for:
+- Comprehensive API documentation
+- Detailed workflow guides
+- Complex multi-step processes
+- Information too lengthy for main SKILL.md
+- Content that's only needed for specific use cases
+
+## Structure Suggestions
+
+### API Reference Example
+- Overview
+- Authentication
+- Endpoints with examples
+- Error codes
+- Rate limits
+
+### Workflow Guide Example
+- Prerequisites
+- Step-by-step instructions
+- Common patterns
+- Troubleshooting
+- Best practices

plugins/compound-engineering/skills/jira-ticket-writer/references/tone-guide.md

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+# Tone Guide for Ticket Writing
+
+## Core Principle
+
+A human will read this ticket. Write like a teammate asking for help, not an AI generating a spec.
+
+## Pressure Test Checklist
+
+Review every sentence against these questions:
+
+### 1. Patronizing language
+
+- Does any sentence explain the reader's own domain back to them?
+- Would you say this to a senior engineer's face without feeling awkward?
+- Are you telling them HOW to implement something in their own system?
+- Are you preemptively arguing against approaches they haven't proposed?
+
+**Examples of patronizing language:**
+- "This is a common pattern in Kubernetes deployments" (they know)
+- "Helm charts support templating via {{ .Values }}" (they wrote the chart)
+- "Why X, not Y" sections that dismiss alternatives before anyone suggested them
+
+### 2. AI-isms to remove
+
+- Em dashes used more than once per paragraph
+- Every thought is a bullet point instead of a sentence
+- Rigid structure that feels generated (Ask -> Why -> Context -> AC)
+- Spec-writing voice: "When absent or false, existing behavior is preserved"
+- Overuse of "ensures", "leverages", "facilitates", "streamlines"
+- Unnecessary hedging: "It should be noted that..."
+- Filler transitions: "Additionally", "Furthermore", "Moreover"
+- Lists where prose would be more natural
+
+### 3. Human voice check
+
+- Does it sound like something you'd type in Slack, cleaned up slightly?
+- Are there moments of humility? ("you'd know better than us", "if we're missing something")
+- Is the tone collaborative rather than directive?
+- Would you feel comfortable putting your name on this?
+
+### 4. Kindness check
+
+- Frame requests as requests, not demands
+- Acknowledge the reader's expertise
+- Offer context without over-explaining
+- "Happy to chat more" > "Please advise"
+
+## What to keep
+
+- Technical detail and specifics (the reader needs these)
+- Code snippets showing current state and desired state
+- File references with line numbers
+- Clear "done when" criteria (but keep them minimal)