Proposal: agent-runtime-boundaries skill plus README plugin table fix and docs CI #1319

Summary

This repository automatically closes external PRs, so I'm opening an issue first to ask whether the maintainers would like these changes — the full diff is available on a fork branch and I can adapt it to whatever contribution path fits.

Fork branch (full diff): https://github.com/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins/compare/main...cyberspace-cs:knowledge-work-plugins:feat/agent-runtime-boundaries-skill?expand=1

Three related changes (5 files, +461/−1, one commit):

1. New skill: engineering/skills/agent-runtime-boundaries (258 lines)

The engineering plugin covers code (code-review, testing-strategy) and the process around code (incident-response, deploy-checklist), but nothing covers the runtime in which the agent itself runs. The skill defines:

• five boundaries — filesystem, credentials, egress, process, audit — each with one chokepoint;
• a sandbox tiering table that states, per tier, what it deliberately does not enforce;
• a workflow from blast-radius inventory → negative probes → public residual-risk disclosure;
• approval gates that must be enforced by the harness, not by prompts;
• an anti-pattern table of controls that look like enforcement but aren't.

2. README plugin table is stale

The landing page declares 11 plugins while the repository actually contains 17 first-party plugins. Six (design, engineering, human-resources, operations, pdf-viewer, small-business) are unreachable from the landing page. The connector columns were prose, not the plugins' own .mcp.json; both are fixed.

3. New docs-consistency CI

.github/workflows/check-docs-consistency.yml + verify_docs_consistency.py (stdlib only, 6 invariants) — the missing check that allowed the drift in (2) to persist.

Output on current HEAD:

first-party plugins: 17 / marketplace.json entries: 115 / skills checked: 182 / OK

Questions for maintainers

1. Is the new agent-runtime-boundaries skill a welcome addition to the engineering plugin?
2. Would you prefer the README fix and CI check as separate changes?
3. What is the correct contribution path for external skill additions — issue + patch from a member, or a member-sponsored PR?

Happy to split, reshape, or move any part of this as directed.