fix(plugins): sync all 171 plugin SKILL.md files with fixed skills/ versions

Propagates Anti-Patterns sections, description rewrites, Required Inputs
additions, and Quality Checks format fixes from skills/ to matching plugin
SKILL.md copies.

https://claude.ai/code/session_01MuGKn3a3Gbqoe8uM5Lmuqt

plugins/pm-strategy/skills/ambiguity-resolver/SKILL.md

@@ -72,6 +72,13 @@ Input: *"We need to figure out what to do about our enterprise customers."*
 **In scope:** Enterprise accounts ($50K+ ARR) showing declining health scores in the last two quarters
 **Out of scope:** SMB segment, new enterprise acquisition strategy
 
+## Anti-Patterns
+
+- [ ] Do not reframe the brief into questions that are still too broad to research — each reframed question must be answerable by a specific activity
+- [ ] Do not list a research activity without stating what it would tell you and what it would NOT tell you
+- [ ] Do not leave the decision owner as "leadership" or "the team" — name a specific person or role
+- [ ] Do not omit an explicit out-of-scope boundary — without it, scope will expand organically and the brief becomes meaningless
+
 ## Quality Checks
 
 - [ ] Every reframed question is specific enough to research (not "how do we improve things?")

plugins/pm-strategy/skills/competitive-intelligence-monitor/SKILL.md

@@ -56,6 +56,13 @@ Ask the user for these if not provided:
 **This Week's Strategic Summary:**
 [2 sentences max — what is the overall competitive landscape doing?]
 
+## Anti-Patterns
+
+- [ ] Do not mark a signal as Low priority simply because it is new and unfamiliar — unknown competitive moves often deserve investigation before dismissal
+- [ ] Do not provide "monitor" as the recommended response for a High-priority signal — High signals require a specific action with a named owner
+- [ ] Do not include signals from competitors that are not relevant to the stated roadmap or strategic priorities — noise reduces the brief's usefulness and trains the team to ignore it
+- [ ] Do not produce a diff-mode brief that is longer than the full report — if the diff output exceeds 300 words, it is a full report, not a diff
+
 ## Quality Checks
 
 - [ ] Every High-priority signal has a specific response action and owner

plugins/pm-strategy/skills/competitor-signal-tracker/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: competitor-signal-tracker
-description: "Analyse competitor moves and surface strategic implications for your product. Use when asked to track competitor signals, analyse a competitor announcement, understand what a competitor is doing strategically, or produce a competitive intelligence report. Produces a categorised signal analysis with threat ratings, roadmap implications, and recommended responses."
+description: "Analyse competitor moves and translate them into strategic implications for your product roadmap. Use when a competitor announces a new feature, pricing change, partnership, or strategic shift, or when producing a periodic competitive intelligence report. Produces a categorised signal analysis with reactive-vs-proactive assessment, threat ratings, specific roadmap implications, and recommended responses with owners."
 ---
 
 # Competitor Signal Tracker Skill
@@ -44,6 +44,13 @@ Ask the user for these if not provided:
 #### Strategic Summary
 [2-3 sentences on the overall competitive landscape shift this period]
 
+## Anti-Patterns
+
+- [ ] Do not rate a signal as High threat without explaining the specific roadmap item or customer segment it threatens — unjustified threat ratings lose credibility over time
+- [ ] Do not treat a hiring signal as definitive proof of a strategic bet — hiring signals require corroboration from product, messaging, or pricing signals before acting on them
+- [ ] Do not conflate a competitor's announcement with a competitor's shipped capability — press releases and blog posts often describe aspirations, not production features
+- [ ] Do not recommend "accelerate existing initiative" for every High signal — sometimes the right response is to differentiate harder in an adjacent area rather than race the competitor directly
+
 ## Quality Checks
 
 - [ ] Every signal is categorised (not just described)

plugins/pm-strategy/skills/executive-update/SKILL.md

@@ -58,3 +58,11 @@ Ask the user for these if not provided:
 - [ ] Every risk has a mitigation or watch action
 - [ ] Every decision needed has at least two options and a recommendation
 - [ ] Written for a CFO or CEO — no jargon, all outcomes
+
+## Anti-Patterns
+
+- [ ] Do not lead with context or background — executives read the headline first; bury the important thing below two sentences of setup and they will miss it
+- [ ] Do not present metrics without a comparison point — a number without context (vs. target, vs. last period) cannot be interpreted and will prompt follow-up questions
+- [ ] Do not soften or spin risks — executives rely on these updates to make resource and escalation decisions; sanitised risk sections destroy the update's utility
+- [ ] Do not present a "Decisions Needed" item without a recommendation — asking an executive to decide without your view forces them to do the analytical work the PM should have done
+- [ ] Do not exceed 250 words in the main body — length signals the author has not done the compression work; every word over 250 reduces the chance the update is read

plugins/pm-strategy/skills/stakeholder-influence-mapper/SKILL.md

@@ -58,3 +58,11 @@ Ask the user for these if not provided:
 - [ ] Each stakeholder's talking points lead with their concern, not your agenda
 - [ ] At least one "do not approach until X is aligned" flag is considered
 - [ ] The ask from each stakeholder is a single, specific thing (not a vague "support")
+
+## Anti-Patterns
+
+- [ ] Do not approach high-influence blockers before aligning their sponsors — approach order determines outcome
+- [ ] Do not create talking points that lead with your agenda — always lead with the stakeholder's stated concern
+- [ ] Do not treat every stakeholder as equally important — focus depth on the decision-makers and key influencers
+- [ ] Do not omit the "do not approach until X is aligned" flags — sequencing mistakes can permanently close doors
+- [ ] Do not build the map based only on org chart position — influence often lives outside formal authority

plugins/pm-strategy/skills/strategic-narrative-generator/SKILL.md

@@ -67,3 +67,11 @@ Ask the user for these if not provided:
 - [ ] Each theme has a specific, measurable metric (not "improve engagement")
 - [ ] Progression story shows causal links between quarters, not just chronological listing
 - [ ] "Not on the roadmap" section includes at least 2 items with clear rationale
+
+## Anti-Patterns
+
+- [ ] Do not produce a narrative that lists initiatives chronologically without showing causal progression — the story must show why each phase enables the next
+- [ ] Do not use abstract strategic language that cannot be repeated by a non-technical listener — test whether someone could explain it back without the document
+- [ ] Do not omit the "what's not on the roadmap" section — what you are choosing not to do is as important as what you are doing
+- [ ] Do not set themes without measurable metrics — a theme without a metric cannot be tracked or held to account
+- [ ] Do not skip the hard questions section — preparing for objections in advance is the purpose of the narrative exercise