Add knowledge-backed AL development

Add read-only planning and repository-changing development skills so BCQuality
knowledge can guide features, bug fixes, refactors, upgrades, and maintenance
before the existing AL review gate runs. Track Microsoft Learn ingestion and
add development and BCApps-shaped guidance evaluation fixtures.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot-Session: 638b66d2-9f06-4f60-8781-808709e1485c

microsoft/skills/development/al-development-plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+---
+kind: action-skill
+id: al-development-plan
+version: 1
+title: AL development plan guidance
+description: Produces a read-only BCQuality knowledge bundle for an existing Business Central AL development plan.
+inputs: [development-plan, repository]
+outputs: [development-guidance-report]
+bc-version: [all]
+technologies: [al]
+countries: [w1]
+application-area: [all]
+---
+
+# AL development plan guidance
+
+Selects the BCQuality knowledge that should constrain an existing AL development plan. It does not implement, edit, stage, commit, or publish anything in the target repository. Repository-specific orchestrators can consume this skill before their own test and implementation phases while retaining ownership of workflow, tooling, and delivery.
+
+Both a readable `repository` and a non-empty `development-plan` are required. The plan may be structured data or text, but it must identify the intended change. Return `not-applicable` without changing files when either input is absent or the repository is not an AL project.
+
+## Source
+
+Read the BCQuality knowledge index once. Use entries from every enabled layer and domain. The index supplies candidate paths, applicability dimensions, keywords, titles, and descriptions; it never substitutes for opening selected articles in full.
+
+Inspect the target repository read-only for `app.json`, affected files and symbols named by the plan, relevant tests, permission sets, dependencies, target/runtime versions, countries, application areas, and repository conventions. Do not create scratch or generated files inside the target repository.
+
+## Relevance
+
+Apply READ's matching semantics using:
+
+- `bc-version` from the plan, target application, or supplied context; for upgrades, distinguish source and target versions.
+- `technologies` from the affected files, beginning with `[al]`.
+- `countries` from the plan, `app.json`, or workspace configuration.
+- `application-area` from the plan and affected objects.
+
+When a dimension cannot be resolved, retain conditionally applicable candidates only when they can materially constrain the plan. Record the dimension in `context.unknown` and explain it in `unresolved`; do not silently treat it as a match.
+
+## Worklist
+
+1. Normalize the plan into: request summary, development kind, assumptions, root cause or design intent, affected files and symbols, proposed changes, test strategy, and acceptance criteria. When the plan has no normalized kind, apply the same categories as `al-development`: new or expanded behavior is `feature`, a defect correction is `bug`, behavior-preserving restructuring is `refactor`, migration is `upgrade`, and other bounded work is `maintenance`. A repository-specific additive event or extensibility request maps to `feature`; retain its original work-item type in the request summary. Do not redesign the repository-specific workflow.
+2. Build retrieval vocabulary from the plan and confirmed repository symbols. Give exact object types, properties, methods, analyzers, errors, and affected domains more weight than broad business nouns.
+3. Search the index in separate passes:
+   - data ownership, keys, setup, numbering, validation, transactions, and upgrade;
+   - behavior, events, interfaces, errors, permissions, privacy, and telemetry;
+   - pages, reports, APIs, integrations, localization, and accessibility;
+   - tests, analyzers, packaging, and deployment constraints.
+4. Add an article when its keywords or indexed topic match a concrete planned change, affected symbol, acceptance criterion, or validation obligation. Applicability alone is not enough.
+5. Open every selected article in full. Read any referenced `.good.*` and `.bad.*` sibling needed to make the constraint concrete. Never cite an index row that was not opened.
+6. Resolve contradictory normative guidance with READ's layer precedence and record losing candidates in `suppressed`.
+7. Check the resulting worklist across the whole plan. A bug fix may require testing, data, performance, and upgrade guidance at once; a feature plan may require security and lifecycle constraints that are not named in its title.
+
+Keep the worklist focused. Do not include generic engineering advice, an entire domain, or an article that would not change implementation or validation.
+
+## Action
+
+For each worklist article:
+
+1. Copy its exact path and optional commit SHA.
+2. State `used-for` as the concrete plan decision or affected surface.
+3. Translate its normative Best Practice and Anti Pattern into short implementation constraints without adding facts or weakening conditions.
+4. Include only opened, existing sibling samples in `sample-paths`.
+5. Derive validation considerations only where the plan or selected knowledge requires observable evidence. Describe the evidence to obtain; do not claim it already exists or passed.
+
+Do not change the target repository. Before emitting, verify every knowledge and sample path exists in the live BCQuality checkout and was opened during this run. If reference integrity cannot be established, return `failed` rather than fabricating guidance.
+
+## Output
+
+Return one `development-guidance-report` conforming to DO. `completed` requires that every selected article was opened and faithfully converted into constraints. `no-knowledge` is valid when the plan is applicable but BCQuality contains no relevant article. `partial` names every unevaluated candidate or unresolved applicability gap.

microsoft/skills/development/al-development.md

@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+---
+kind: action-skill
+id: al-development
+version: 1
+title: AL development
+description: Implements Business Central AL features, bug fixes, refactors, upgrades, and maintenance changes using BCQuality knowledge.
+inputs: [development-request, repository]
+outputs: [implementation-report]
+bc-version: [all]
+technologies: [al]
+countries: [w1]
+application-area: [all]
+guidance-skill: microsoft/skills/development/al-development-plan.md
+quality-skill: microsoft/skills/review/al-code-review.md
+---
+
+# AL development
+
+Implements a Business Central change in an existing AL repository. Feature work, bug fixing, refactoring, upgrades, and maintenance share one public contract and one quality pipeline; their different investigation disciplines are execution modes within this skill.
+
+Both a writable `repository` and a `development-request` are required. A structured request has this shape:
+
+```yaml
+development-request:
+  kind: auto # feature | bug | refactor | upgrade | maintenance
+  description: string # optional when plan states the requested outcome
+  plan: string # optional
+  acceptance-criteria: [string] # optional
+```
+
+A plain-text request is normalized to `kind: auto` with the text as `description`. A plan-only request is valid when the plan states the requested outcome. Return `not-applicable` without changing files when either input is absent, both description and plan are empty, or the repository is not an AL project.
+
+## Source
+
+Read the frontmatter `guidance-skill`; it owns BCQuality discovery and returns the knowledge constraints for the implementation plan. Inspect the target repository for `app.json`, existing objects, tests, permission sets, analyzers, build scripts, naming and object-ID conventions, dependencies, target/runtime versions, localization layout, and uncommitted user changes. For bugs, refactors, and upgrades, inspect enough history and surrounding code to establish the behavior being changed.
+
+## Relevance
+
+Resolve and pass this context to the guidance-skill:
+
+- `bc-version` from the target application's platform/application/runtime settings or supplied context. For an upgrade, distinguish source and target versions.
+- `technologies: [al]`, plus any additional technology actually required by the request.
+- `countries` from `app.json`, workspace configuration, or supplied context.
+- `application-area` from the request and affected objects.
+
+Record unresolved dimensions in the development plan rather than silently substituting broad values. The guidance-skill applies READ's matching semantics and returns any conditional applicability in its report.
+
+## Worklist
+
+1. Normalize the request, deriving a concise description from a plan-only input, and classify `kind: auto` as:
+   - `feature` for new or intentionally expanded behavior;
+   - `bug` for observed behavior that contradicts an expected result;
+   - `refactor` for structural change with no intended behavior change;
+   - `upgrade` for schema, data, dependency, runtime, or application-version migration;
+   - `maintenance` for bounded development work that fits none of the above.
+   Preserve an explicit valid kind. When repository evidence conflicts with it, record the mismatch and ask for clarification before changing files rather than silently switching disciplines.
+2. Establish the mode-specific implementation contract:
+   - **Feature:** define user-visible behavior and cover data lifecycle, UI/API, permissions, extensibility, upgrade impact, telemetry, and tests where applicable.
+   - **Bug:** state expected versus actual behavior, reproduce or otherwise prove the defect, trace the root cause, and define a regression test that fails for that cause.
+   - **Refactor:** identify the behavior and public contracts that must remain invariant, plus the checks that establish a before/after baseline.
+   - **Upgrade:** identify source and target states, data migration, compatibility, idempotency, and validation requirements.
+   - **Maintenance:** define the bounded outcome and the behavior that must not change.
+3. Treat a supplied plan as an input constraint, not as proof. Reconcile it with repository reality and BCQuality; preserve its intent, correct unsafe assumptions, and record consequential deviations.
+4. Discover existing implementation patterns and reusable objects before proposing new ones. Preserve repository conventions and current user changes.
+5. Materialize a `development-plan` containing the classified kind, request, assumptions, affected files and symbols, design or root cause, proposed changes, validation strategy, and acceptance criteria.
+6. Invoke the frontmatter `guidance-skill` with that plan, the repository, and the resolved context. It performs Source, Relevance, and knowledge worklisting independently and read-only.
+7. Require a complete guidance result before editing product code:
+   - `completed` — use every returned constraint and validation consideration.
+   - `no-knowledge` — return `no-knowledge` without implementing a Business Central-specific change.
+   - `not-applicable`, `partial`, or `failed` — return the corresponding non-completed outcome without editing product code; preserve its reason in `remaining`.
+8. Copy the guidance report's selected paths into the eventual implementation report only when the corresponding constraint materially shaped the implementation. Carry its suppression records forward.
+
+## Action
+
+1. Record the starting working-tree state so unrelated changes are preserved and excluded from `changes`.
+2. Apply the execution mode:
+   - **Feature:** implement the smallest complete vertical slice; do not leave placeholder surfaces.
+   - **Bug:** reproduce first when feasible, fix the root cause rather than the symptom, keep the patch surgical, and add a regression test.
+   - **Refactor:** capture a behavioral baseline, avoid unrelated behavior changes, and prove the declared invariants afterward.
+   - **Upgrade:** make migrations rerunnable where required, preserve data and compatibility, and validate both upgraded and fresh-install paths when applicable.
+   - **Maintenance:** make only the bounded requested change and preserve surrounding behavior.
+3. Produce a coherent design that satisfies the implementation contract and every constraint returned by the guidance-skill. Reuse existing abstractions and object ranges. Do not hard-code a Business Central fact in this skill or invent a rule absent from both the repository and reliable platform knowledge.
+4. Implement the request end to end. Include all surfaces required by the mode, acceptance criteria, and repository conventions. Do not create success-shaped stubs.
+5. Treat the guidance report as design constraints throughout implementation. Adapt its referenced companion samples to the target codebase; never copy demonstration IDs or names blindly.
+6. Run the smallest existing build, analyzer, and test commands that cover the change. Fix failures caused by the implementation. Record every command and real outcome in `validation`; unavailable checks are `not-run`, never `passed`.
+7. Invoke the frontmatter `quality-skill` against the final implementation diff. Fix all justified knowledge-backed `blocker` and `major` findings and concrete defects introduced by this work, then rerun affected validation and review. Preserve the last findings-report in `review` and add a `validation` entry with `id: "review"`. If review is disabled or unavailable, record `not-run` and return `partial`.
+8. Verify the persisted files against the implementation contract, acceptance criteria, and mode-specific evidence. If behavior, validation, or review remains incomplete, return `partial` and list the exact gap in `remaining`.
+
+## Output
+
+Return one `implementation-report` conforming to DO. Set `plan.kind` to the classified execution mode. `knowledge` lists only articles opened in full and materially used. `changes` lists only files changed by this skill. `completed` requires a persisted implementation, passing required validation, and no unresolved `blocker` or `major` finding in `review`.