feat: prepare stable CEWP core contracts

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/config.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+blank_issues_enabled: false
+contact_links:
+  - name: Private security report
+    url: https://github.com/SetraTheXX/Codex-Engineering-Workflow-Pack/security/advisories/new
+    about: Report vulnerabilities privately. Do not disclose secrets or exploit details in a public issue.

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature-request.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+name: Feature request
+description: Propose a focused improvement backed by a real workflow need.
+title: "[feature]: "
+labels: ["enhancement"]
+body:
+  - type: markdown
+    attributes:
+      value: |
+        Do not include secrets, private source, repository paths, or raw logs. Keep examples sanitized or redacted. Native Codex goal mode remains the simpler path for low-risk one-step work.
+  - type: textarea
+    id: task
+    attributes:
+      label: Target task class
+      description: Describe the bounded, risky, recoverable, or evidence-sensitive task where this helps.
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: current
+    attributes:
+      label: Current workaround and limitation
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: outcome
+    attributes:
+      label: Observable outcome
+      description: Explain the smallest public behavior that would solve the need.
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: dropdown
+    id: native
+    attributes:
+      label: Would native goal mode be sufficient?
+      options: ["No", "Uncertain", "Yes"]
+    validations:
+      required: true

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/receipt-quality.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+name: Receipt quality feedback
+description: Report missing, misleading, or hard-to-understand evidence.
+title: "[receipt]: "
+labels: ["evidence"]
+body:
+  - type: markdown
+    attributes:
+      value: |
+        Do not include secrets, credentials, source code, private paths, prompts, or raw logs. Include only a redacted export or a sanitized excerpt.
+  - type: dropdown
+    id: truth
+    attributes:
+      label: Affected truth label
+      description: Which observed / estimated / budgeted / unknown distinction was unclear?
+      options: [observed, estimated, budgeted, unknown, multiple, not-applicable]
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: field
+    attributes:
+      label: Misleading or missing field
+      description: Name the receipt section and explain what a reader could misunderstand.
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: excerpt
+    attributes:
+      label: Redacted receipt excerpt
+      description: Use `cewp workflow export` or `cewp pilot export`; remove anything still sensitive.
+      render: json
+  - type: textarea
+    id: expected
+    attributes:
+      label: Expected explanation
+    validations:
+      required: true

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/setup-failure.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+name: Setup failure
+description: Report an install, initialization, or diagnostics failure.
+title: "[setup]: "
+labels: ["setup"]
+body:
+  - type: markdown
+    attributes:
+      value: |
+        Do not include secrets, credentials, private repository paths, source code, or raw logs. Redact local paths and sensitive values before submitting.
+  - type: input
+    id: version
+    attributes:
+      label: CEWP version
+      placeholder: 0.13.0-beta.0
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: environment
+    attributes:
+      label: Environment
+      description: Provide OS, Node, Git, and Codex versions without account details.
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: doctor
+    attributes:
+      label: Sanitized cewp doctor --json output
+      description: Remove absolute paths and sensitive values.
+      render: json
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: failure
+    attributes:
+      label: Sanitized failure and attempted remediation
+      description: Include the public command, short redacted error, and whether the suggested remediation worked.
+    validations:
+      required: true

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/workflow-failure.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+name: Workflow failure
+description: Report a supervision, verification, recovery, review, or finalize failure.
+title: "[workflow]: "
+labels: ["workflow"]
+body:
+  - type: markdown
+    attributes:
+      value: |
+        Do not include secrets, credentials, private repository paths, source code, or raw logs. Use a redacted receipt excerpt when evidence is useful.
+  - type: dropdown
+    id: stage
+    attributes:
+      label: Workflow stage
+      options: [plan, approval, execution, verification, recovery, review, receipt, finalize, cleanup]
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: command
+    attributes:
+      label: Public command and sanitized error
+      description: Include only the bounded command and redacted error.
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: expected
+    attributes:
+      label: Expected behavior
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: actual
+    attributes:
+      label: Actual behavior
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: recovery
+    attributes:
+      label: Recovery state
+      description: State whether prior evidence was retained and what next action CEWP reported.

CONTRIBUTING.md

@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
+# Contributing To CEWP
+
+CEWP is a Codex-first, local-first supervision and evidence project. Contributions
+should improve the guarded Codex path, compatibility, recovery, verification, or
+evidence quality. Provider expansion and automatic model routing remain paused
+through 1.0.
+
+## Local Setup
+
+Use maintained Node.js 22 or newer and Git:
+
+```bash
+node ./bin/cewp.js --help
+node ./bin/cewp.js doctor
+npm test
+```
+
+The runtime has no package dependencies. Do not introduce one unless it produces
+a demonstrated contract-level benefit.
+
+## Development Loop
+
+Use one observable behavior at a time:
+
+```text
+red test -> smallest green implementation -> refactor -> next behavior
+```
+
+Prefer public CLI or Core contracts over private call-count assertions. Start with
+the nearest focused command, for example:
+
+```bash
+npm run test:pilot-record
+npm run test:phase13
+npm run check
+git diff --check
+```
+
+Before claiming completion, run the commands required by the affected contract,
+the full suite, package dry-run, and the relevant clean-install/platform gate.
+
+## Contribution Boundaries
+
+- CEWP Core remains authoritative for ownership, scope, policy, verification,
+  budgets, reviewer PASS, and finalization.
+- Keep exactly one execution owner and one managed backend per checkpoint.
+- Keep provider-specific identities outside provider-neutral workflow schemas.
+- Do not add providers, desktop UI, terminal servers, private host protocols,
+  mandatory telemetry, automatic merge/push/publish/tag/release, or a global skip
+  verification switch.
+- Treat unknown host usage and billing impact as unknown, never zero.
+- Preserve beta read compatibility and add migration tests for format changes.
+
+## Privacy
+
+Do not commit `.cewp/pilots/`, `.cewp/`, `.cewp-private`, credentials, raw prompts,
+private logs, or local repository paths. The private `phase-8-to-1.0` roadmap is
+not a public package artifact. Before every maintainer commit, the tracking scan
+must return no matches:
+
+```bash
+git ls-files | rg "phase-8-to-1\.0|\.cewp-private"
+```
+
+Redacted exports reduce disclosure risk but do not prove arbitrary prose contains
+no secret. Review every export before sharing it.
+
+## Issues And Pull Requests
+
+Choose a `good first issue` only when it has a bounded public behavior, explicit
+files or scope, a focused test command, and no private pilot dependency. Useful
+starter work includes documentation corrections, deterministic fixture gaps,
+clear diagnostics, and narrowly scoped contract tests.
+
+Describe the user-visible outcome, test evidence, migration impact, and any gate
+that remains open. A passing test is evidence for the behavior it covers, not a
+claim that a whole roadmap phase or real-user pilot succeeded.

README.md

@@ -67,7 +67,9 @@ Nothing in that flow merges, pushes, publishes, tags, or creates a release.
 
 ## Codex Plugin
 
-The thin plugin contributes exactly three conversational skills. CEWP Core and the CLI remain authoritative.
+The thin plugin contributes exactly three conversational skills, a local stdio MCP bridge, and an optional
+review-required subagent evidence hook. Every mutating MCP operation delegates to the same CEWP Core used
+by the CLI; plugin surfaces do not become execution owners or bypass gates.
 
 From a source checkout:
 
@@ -77,7 +79,14 @@ codex plugin add cewp@cewp-local
 codex plugin list
 ```
 
-Then ask Codex to plan a supervised run, run the current checkpoint, or resume an existing run. The plugin does not gain direct access to the host's private thread, native goal lifecycle, billing data, or persistent UI.
+Then ask Codex to plan a supervised run, run the current checkpoint, or resume an existing run. The plugin
+can expose `cewp_create`, `cewp_inspect`, `cewp_approve`, `cewp_continue`, `cewp_retry`, `cewp_revise`,
+`cewp_verify`, and `cewp_finalize` when the package-provided `cewp-mcp` command is on `PATH`. It does not
+gain direct access to the host's private thread, native goal lifecycle, billing data, or persistent UI.
+
+For a workflow with a validated host binding, `cewp integration controls <workflow-run-id> --json` shows
+preventive, post-execution, imported-observation, and unavailable control classes without promoting
+audit-only evidence into enforcement.
 
 ## What CEWP Records
 
@@ -108,10 +117,38 @@ Budget or host exhaustion produces a resumable pause, not a fake PASS. Partial f
 
 CEWP still ships ten reusable engineering skills and the earlier Coordinator Mode runtime for compatibility. The supervised path remains the managed `codex-exec` golden path. The workflow runtime adds source-bound compiler requests, approved task graphs, variable workers, result intake, recovery, revisions, and migrations without executing arbitrary prose or adding another backend.
 
+## Local Pilot Evidence
+
+Phase 13 pilot records are optional, local, and ignored by Git. They distinguish
+maintainer dogfood from genuinely independent participants and never add mandatory
+telemetry:
+
+```bash
+cewp pilot create --pilot-id dogfood-1 --participant maintainer-dogfood --participant-id maintainer-1
+cewp pilot status --json
+cewp pilot export dogfood-1 --json
+```
+
+The infrastructure is implemented, but real external pilot evidence is still
+absent. Fixtures and this maintainer's own runs do not satisfy external-user gates;
+1.0 is therefore not complete.
+
 ## Documentation
 
 - [Install Guide](docs/install.md)
 - [Supervised Workflow](docs/supervised-workflow.md)
+- [Native Goal or CEWP?](docs/native-goal-or-cewp.md)
+- [Stable Compatibility Contract](docs/stable-compatibility.md)
+- [Stable Contract Reference](docs/contracts.md)
+- [Migration Policy](docs/migration-policy.md)
+- [Troubleshooting and Recovery](docs/recovery-guide.md)
+- [Performance Budgets](docs/performance-budgets.md)
+- [1.0 Security Review](docs/security-review-1.0.md)
+- [Türkçe Manuel Kabul ve Deneme Rehberi](docs/manual-acceptance.md)
+- [External Integration Boundary](docs/external-integration-boundary.md)
+- [Evidence Receipts](docs/evidence-receipts.md)
+- [Architecture](docs/architecture.md)
+- [Contract Extension Example](docs/contract-extension-example.md)
 - [Workflow Runtime](docs/workflow-runtime.md)
 - [Known Limitations](docs/known-limitations.md)
 - [Pilot Kit](docs/pilot-kit.md)
@@ -120,10 +157,12 @@ CEWP still ships ten reusable engineering skills and the earlier Coordinator Mod
 - [Coordinator Mode Compatibility](docs/coordinator-mode.md)
 - [Adapter Contract](docs/adapter-contract.md)
 - [Release Notes](docs/release-notes.md)
+- [Contributing](CONTRIBUTING.md)
+- [Security Policy](SECURITY.md)
 
 ## Status
 
-CEWP is beta software. The workflow compiler emits a source-bound agent request rather than calling a model, and the graph runtime accepts only validated, explicitly approved definitions and evidence. External pilot gates are still required before a future stable release is declared complete. Review the plan, evidence, and receipt before integrating changes.
+CEWP is beta software. Phase 14 stable-core contracts are available through `cewp compatibility --json`, but external pilot gates and exact clean release matrices are still required before 1.0 can be declared complete. Review the plan, evidence, and receipt before integrating changes.
 
 ## License
 

SECURITY.md

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+# Security Policy
+
+CEWP is beta software. Security fixes for supported local Core, CLI, Codex plugin,
+MCP, hook, evidence, and packaging surfaces are accepted throughout the beta.
+
+## Private Reporting
+
+Report a suspected vulnerability through a private GitHub security advisory:
+
+https://github.com/SetraTheXX/Codex-Engineering-Workflow-Pack/security/advisories/new
+
+Do not disclose exploit details, secrets, credentials, private paths, source code,
+or unredacted logs in a public issue. If the private advisory form is unavailable,
+open a public issue that asks the maintainer for a private contact path without
+including vulnerability details.
+
+Include the CEWP version, OS, Node/Git/Codex versions, affected public command,
+expected boundary, and the smallest sanitized reproduction. Do not send account
+data or authentication material.
+
+## In-Scope Boundaries
+
+Reports are especially useful for:
+
+- path containment, traversal, and symlink escapes;
+- unsafe command or argument construction;
+- MCP schema, confirmation, or Core-gate bypasses;
+- hook trust, bundle drift, and false enforcement claims;
+- receipt and pilot-export redaction failures;
+- worktree ownership, cleanup, or double-dispatch conflicts;
+- imported evidence being presented as preventive enforcement;
+- provider output parsing that mutates state after malformed or partial output;
+- package inclusion of private runtime or planning files.
+
+CEWP does not claim that local hashes are tamper-proof, that hooks intercept every
+tool path, or that pattern redaction proves arbitrary prose has no secret. Reports
+that demonstrate a mismatch between documented and actual trust boundaries are in
+scope.
+
+## Response And Disclosure
+
+The maintainer will acknowledge a private report when available, reproduce it in
+a safe local fixture, classify data-loss and guardrail impact, and coordinate a
+fix and disclosure timeline with the reporter. Do not publish details before a
+fix or explicit coordinated disclosure agreement.

bin/cewp-mcp.js

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env node
+
+"use strict";
+
+const { runStdio } = require("../src/mcp/server");
+
+runStdio();