Problem
skills/craft-prompt/references/goal-conditions.md currently focuses on a single inline /goal condition string. That is correct for small goals, but recent practice shows a second useful shape: a reviewable goal spec saved as a markdown artifact before activation.
The distinction matters because long-running goals can burn substantial time and tokens if the contract is wrong.
Proposed change
Add a short section to skills/craft-prompt/references/goal-conditions.md that distinguishes two output shapes:
- Inline condition: a short 1-3 sentence
/goal <condition> for small, clear tasks.
- Reviewable goal spec: a markdown contract for expensive, ambiguous, or multi-hour work, optionally saved under
goals/<slug>.md and activated only after review.
The reviewable spec should make clear that the file is not active goal state. It becomes active only when the user runs something like /goal @goals/<slug>.md, where supported.
Acceptance criteria
- The reference explains when to use inline vs file-backed goal specs.
- The reviewable spec template includes outcome, evidence, constraints, non-goals, scope, budget, blocked stop condition, and final report expectations.
- Claude/Codex differences are explicit where they affect behavior, especially transcript-visible evidence for evaluator judgment.
- The guidance does not imply CraftKit should auto-activate goals.
- The section stays concise and does not turn the reference into a full new skill.
Source patterns
- OpenAI Codex
/goal guidance: durable objective, verifiable stopping condition, pause/resume/clear lifecycle.
- Claude Code
/goal guidance: evaluator sees transcript evidence and does not call tools.
goal-setter: intent interview plus reviewable goals/<goal-name>.md activation artifact.
Problem
skills/craft-prompt/references/goal-conditions.mdcurrently focuses on a single inline/goalcondition string. That is correct for small goals, but recent practice shows a second useful shape: a reviewable goal spec saved as a markdown artifact before activation.The distinction matters because long-running goals can burn substantial time and tokens if the contract is wrong.
Proposed change
Add a short section to
skills/craft-prompt/references/goal-conditions.mdthat distinguishes two output shapes:/goal <condition>for small, clear tasks.goals/<slug>.mdand activated only after review.The reviewable spec should make clear that the file is not active goal state. It becomes active only when the user runs something like
/goal @goals/<slug>.md, where supported.Acceptance criteria
Source patterns
/goalguidance: durable objective, verifiable stopping condition, pause/resume/clear lifecycle./goalguidance: evaluator sees transcript evidence and does not call tools.goal-setter: intent interview plus reviewablegoals/<goal-name>.mdactivation artifact.