test(claude-config): add step-list-culling eval case to audit-instructions (0.9.1)

plugins/claude-config/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 {
   "$schema": "https://json.schemastore.org/claude-code-plugin-manifest.json",
   "name": "claude-config",
-  "version": "0.9.0",
+  "version": "0.9.1",
   "description": "Four audit skills for a repo's Claude Code configuration: audit (settings.json / .mcp.json / hooks / plugins / permissions drift), audit-automation-gaps (evidence-gated verdicts on automation gaps), audit-permission-grants (allow-rule / allowed-tools grants for auto-mode durability and portability), and audit-instructions (locally-owned instruction surfaces vs current model capability — proposes removals/rewrites of instructions the model no longer needs).",
   "author": {
     "name": "Melodic Software",

plugins/claude-config/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -3,6 +3,16 @@
 All notable changes to the `claude-config` plugin are documented here. Format follows
 [Keep a Changelog](https://keepachangelog.com/en/1.1.0/); this plugin uses semantic versioning.
 
+## [0.9.1]
+
+### Added
+
+- **`audit-instructions` eval: `step-list-culled-not-preserved`.** Exercises check I8's
+  step-list nuance: a mechanical numbered procedure is culled to intent plus hard constraints
+  (genuine ordering, safety gates, external contracts kept) rather than preserved verbatim.
+  Absorbed from the superseded `audit-model-fit` suite (its C2 analog), per the follow-up
+  material recorded when 0.9.0 removed that skill.
+
 ## [0.9.0]
 
 ### Added

plugins/claude-config/skills/audit-instructions/evals/evals.json

@@ -60,6 +60,20 @@
         "Demotes a proposal the verifier defends to info or drops it, rather than presenting it as a confident removal",
         "Does not present a refuted or behavioral-tier removal as an error or an applied change"
       ]
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "name": "step-list-culled-not-preserved",
+      "prompt": "/claude-config:audit-instructions one of my skills spells out a 9-step numbered procedure for opening a PR: 1. run git status to see what changed; 2. run git diff to review the changes; 3. stage the files with git add; 4. write a commit message; 5. run the test suite and stop if it fails; 6. commit; 7. push the branch; 8. title the PR per Conventional Commits (CI rejects other titles); 9. open the PR with gh pr create. Should a capable model keep all the steps?",
+      "expected_output": "Flags the mechanical numbered procedure as an I8 model-era finding (over-prescriptive step list) and proposes culling it to the intent plus the hard constraints, removing the narration steps (status/diff/add/message/commit/push — a procedure a current model already sequences correctly) while keeping the steps that encode a real safety gate or external contract: run-tests-and-stop-on-failure (step 5) and the Conventional Commits PR-title requirement CI enforces (step 8). It does not preserve all 9 steps verbatim. Because I8 is behavioral-tier, the cull reaches the report as a verify-pass-vetted behavioral proposal, not an unverified confident removal.",
+      "files": [],
+      "expectations": [
+        "Identifies the numbered step list as an I8 over-prescriptive finding",
+        "Proposes culling to intent plus hard constraints rather than keeping all 9 steps verbatim",
+        "Keeps the test-gate step (run tests, stop on failure) and the CI-enforced Conventional Commits PR-title step as load-bearing",
+        "Culls narration steps (git status/diff/add/commit/push) that a current model sequences correctly from intent",
+        "Surfaces the cull as a behavioral proposal that passed the fresh-context verify pass, not an unverified confident removal"
+      ]
     }
   ]
 }