feat(claude): add /article-audit slash command for external-knowledge auditing

.claude/commands/article-audit.md

@@ -0,0 +1,148 @@
+---
+description: Audit an article (URL or pasted text) against CLAUDE.md and the rule-encoding surfaces — output a coverage map + verdict + (if gap) a draft GitHub issue body
+argument-hint: <URL or "pasted">
+---
+
+# Article audit
+
+The user just pasted (or linked) an external article — a blog post, newsletter,
+or talk transcript about a software pattern, performance technique, framework
+feature, or architectural practice. Your job is to **audit it against this
+project's existing encoding** so the user can decide in one glance: already
+covered (skip), or genuine gap (open an issue).
+
+The pattern is established (see #85 consumer-idempotency, #86 sidecar — both
+opened via this routine). This command makes the routine reusable.
+
+## Inputs
+
+`$ARGUMENTS` is one of:
+- A URL → fetch it with `WebFetch`, then audit the content
+- The literal word `pasted` → the article body is in the user's previous
+  message; audit that
+- Something else → assume it's the article body itself, audit it
+
+## What to do
+
+### 1. Read the article
+
+If URL, fetch it. If pasted, use the prior message content. Don't ask the user
+to paste again unless the source is genuinely missing.
+
+### 2. Extract the article's load-bearing claims
+
+Identify 5–10 specific claims the article makes. Bullet form. Examples:
+
+- "Use compiled queries for frequently executed reads"
+- "Pass MessageId to broker for publisher-side dedup"
+- "Sidecar pattern handles cross-cutting concerns"
+
+Skip throat-clearing, ad copy, and "subscribe to my course" bits.
+
+### 3. Map each claim against the project's encoding surfaces
+
+For each claim, search **systematically** through these surfaces in this
+order, and quote the matching rule when found:
+
+1. **`/CLAUDE.md`** — canonical hard/soft rules. Use `Grep` for the key
+   nouns/verbs (e.g. "compiled queries", "idempotent", "sidecar", "outbox").
+2. **`.coderabbit.yaml`** `path_instructions` — file-pattern-scoped guidance.
+3. **`.claude/agents/architecture-reviewer.md`** "Pattern Checklist" — scan
+   rules the agent applies.
+4. **`.claude/skills/dotnet-performance/`** (project-authored) — deeper why
+   behind perf rules.
+5. **Supporting docs** — read selectively, not exhaustively:
+   - `docs/architecture.md`
+   - `docs/performance-and-data-correctness.md`
+   - `docs/project-decisions.md` (especially for "considered + rejected"
+     stances — this is where Dapr/sidecars/etc. live)
+   - `docs/cqrs-data-access.md`
+   - `docs/dev-loop.md`
+
+Don't read every file end-to-end. Use `Grep` to locate matches, then `Read`
+just the relevant sections. The goal is speed.
+
+### 4. Classify each claim
+
+Each claim falls into one of these buckets:
+
+- **"Already encoded, more rigorously"** — the project has a stricter version.
+  Quote the project's wording so the comparison is concrete.
+- **"Already encoded, equivalent"** — same idea, point at the rule.
+- **"Considered + rejected"** — the project explicitly chose otherwise.
+  Point at `project-decisions.md` or the relevant CLAUDE.md "do NOT" rule.
+- **"Encoded but patterns not consolidated"** — the principle is there, but
+  the project's specific implementations aren't named together as a list.
+  Worth a small encoding pass. (This was #85 — the three consumer-idempotency
+  patterns.)
+- **"Implicit, worth making explicit"** — the project follows the practice in
+  behavior but doesn't document the *why* or the *triggers*. Worth a small
+  doc pass. (This was #86 — sidecar reconsideration triggers.)
+- **"Genuine gap"** — the project has no encoded stance. Real work to do.
+
+### 5. Produce the output
+
+Write directly to the user. Structure:
+
+#### Headline verdict
+
+One of:
+- **"Already encoded, no action needed."** (most common, ~70%)
+- **"Already encoded, with one interesting divergence."** (when the project's
+  stance is materially different from the article's recommendation)
+- **"Already encoded, with one small consolidation worth doing."** (when the
+  patterns are in use but not collected as a canonical list)
+- **"Partial coverage — one genuine gap."** (rare)
+
+#### Comparison table
+
+Markdown table: article claim → project encoding → stance.
+
+#### The interesting divergence section (if applicable)
+
+When the project explicitly chose a different path, name the trade-off and
+what would flip the calculus. This is where you point at `project-decisions.md`
+or the relevant "do NOT" rule.
+
+#### Recommendation
+
+One of:
+- **No action** — the table is the deliverable. Done.
+- **Open an issue for a small encoding pass** — draft the issue body inline,
+  ready to paste into `gh issue create`. Use the project's Issue Form fields
+  (What / Why / Acceptance / Notes). Suggest labels.
+- **Open an issue for a genuine gap** — same shape, but the work is larger.
+  Flag if it's an epic.
+
+If the answer is "open an issue," **ask the user before running
+`gh issue create`.** They might want to tweak wording, add labels, or defer.
+Don't just create issues on their behalf.
+
+## Style notes
+
+- Be tight. The user is checking if the article is worth their attention; a
+  3-page audit defeats the purpose.
+- When quoting CLAUDE.md, use the exact wording. Don't paraphrase the
+  canonical rule — that would itself be paraphrase drift.
+- Don't suggest opening issues for trivial style nits or restatements of
+  things already in `dev-loop.md` "What we deliberately don't use."
+- If the article advocates something the project explicitly rejected, the
+  table should make that rejection load-bearing — the user should walk away
+  knowing the project's stance is intentional, not accidental.
+
+## What this command is NOT
+
+- Not a research assistant. It compares ONE article against the project; it
+  doesn't go find related material.
+- Not an auto-encoder. It proposes issues; the user decides.
+- Not a CodeRabbit replacement. CodeRabbit reviews diffs; this reviews
+  external knowledge against the rule set.
+
+## Example invocations
+
+- `/article-audit https://www.milanjovanovic.tech/blog/the-idempotent-consumer-pattern-in-net` — fetches + audits
+- `/article-audit pasted` — audits whatever the user pasted in the prior turn
+- `/article-audit` (no args) — audits the most recent pasted article in the
+  conversation; if there isn't one, ask what to audit
+
+Run the audit on the article identified by `$ARGUMENTS` now.