feat(shared-skills): incorporate ouroboros/gajae-code patterns into planning skills

Improvements inspired by Q00/ouroboros and Yeachan-Heo/gajae-code:

planing-prometheustic:
- Add brownfield detection (greenfield vs brownfield context awareness)
- Add topology enumeration (Round 0) to lock component list before
  deep interview, preventing depth-first overfitting to one component
- Add interview routing rule (facts→code, tradeoffs→user, mixed→both)
- Add retrieval budget (direct reads first, subagents only when needed)
- Add challenge perspective shifts (Contrarian/Simplifier/Ontologist)
- Per-component clearance checklist (every component must pass)
- Handle ITERATE verdict from Momus (max 2 auto-fix rounds)
- NO numeric scoring — qualitative clearance only, per Prometheus style

metis:
- Add brownfield/greenfield detection with evidence to output
- Add topology enumeration (top-level components) to output format
- Add topology directives (planner must cover every active component)
- Add per-component coverage tracking guidance
- Explicit prohibition on numeric scoring formulas

momus:
- Add ITERATE verdict between OKAY and REJECT (fixable gaps the
  planner can patch without user input, max 2 auto-fix rounds)
- Update output format for three-verdict system
- Update review process step 6 for three-way decision
- REJECT now reserved for fundamental blockers or missing user decisions

packages/omo-codex/plugin/skills/metis/SKILL.md

@@ -14,11 +14,13 @@ Your analysis feeds into the planner. Be actionable.
 
 ## Goal
 
-Classify the user's intent, discover codebase patterns, surface hidden requirements and AI-slop risks, and produce structured directives that make the downstream plan decision-complete.
+Classify intent, detect brownfield/greenfield, enumerate top-level components, discover codebase patterns, surface hidden requirements and AI-slop risks, and produce structured directives that make the downstream plan decision-complete.
 
 ## Success criteria
 
 - Intent classified with rationale
+- Brownfield/greenfield detected with evidence
+- Top-level components enumerated (topology) so the planner covers every sibling
 - Pre-analysis findings grounded in actual codebase exploration
 - Questions are specific (not generic "what's the scope?")
 - Directives are actionable MUST/MUST NOT statements
@@ -30,6 +32,7 @@ Classify the user's intent, discover codebase patterns, surface hidden requireme
 - Explore before asking. For Build/Research intents, spawn read-only subagents BEFORE questioning the user.
 - Never ask generic questions. Be specific: "Should this change UserService only, or also AuthService?"
 - Never suggest acceptance criteria requiring human intervention.
+- No numeric scoring or ambiguity formulas. Use qualitative assessment only.
 
 <intent_classification>
 
@@ -151,6 +154,13 @@ Directives for planner:
 ## Output Format
 
 ```markdown
+## Project Context
+**Brownfield**: [yes/no] — [evidence: package files, git history, existing source]
+**Topology** (top-level components that can succeed or fail independently):
+1. [Component name]: [one-sentence description] — [evidence: file paths or user statement]
+2. ...
+**Deferred**: [components explicitly out of scope for this work, if any]
+
 ## Intent Classification
 **Type**: [Refactoring | Build | Mid-sized | Collaborative | Architecture | Research]
 **Confidence**: [High | Medium | Low]
@@ -158,10 +168,10 @@ Directives for planner:
 
 ## Pre-Analysis Findings
 [Results from exploration]
-[Relevant codebase patterns discovered]
+[Relevant codebase patterns discovered with file:line references]
 
 ## Questions for User
-1. [Most critical question first]
+1. [Most critical question first — target the weakest component]
 2. [Second priority]
 3. [Third priority]
 
@@ -177,6 +187,10 @@ Directives for planner:
 - PATTERN: Follow `[file:lines]`
 - TOOL: Use `[specific tool]` for [purpose]
 
+### Topology Directives
+- MUST: Interview covers EVERY active component, not just the most-described one
+- MUST: Clearance check runs per-component — no component left with undefined goal or constraints
+
 ### QA/Acceptance Criteria Directives (MANDATORY)
 > ZERO USER INTERVENTION PRINCIPLE