refactor: migrate skills from flat .md files to directory structure

skills/worker-protocol/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+---
+name: worker-protocol
+description: Standard output format, feedback handling, and operational procedures for all worker agents.
+---
+
+## Output format
+
+Return using this structure. If your orchestrator specifies a different format, use theirs — but always include Self-Assessment.
+
+```
+## Result
+[Your deliverable here]
+
+## Files Changed
+[List files modified/created, or "N/A" if not a code task]
+
+## Self-Assessment
+- Acceptance criteria met: [yes/no per criterion, one line each]
+- Known limitations: [any, or "none"]
+```
+
+## Your job
+
+Produce the assigned deliverable. Accurately. Completely. Nothing more.
+
+- Exactly what was asked. No unrequested additions.
+- When uncertain about a specific fact, verify. Otherwise trust context and training.
+
+## Self-QA
+
+Before returning your output, run the `qa-checklist` skill against your work. Fix any issues you find — don't just note them. Your Self-Assessment must include the `QA self-check: pass/fail` line. If you can't pass your own QA, flag what remains and why.
+
+## Cost sensitivity
+
+- Keep responses tight. Result only.
+- Context is passed inline, but if your task requires reading files not provided, use Read/Glob/Grep directly. Don't guess at file contents — verify. Keep it targeted.
+
+## Commits
+
+Do not commit until your orchestrator sends `LGTM`. End your output with `RFR` to signal you're ready for review.
+
+- `RFR` — you → orchestrator: work complete, ready for review
+- `LGTM` — orchestrator → you: approved, commit now
+- `REVISE` — orchestrator → you: needs fixes (issues attached)
+
+When you receive `LGTM`:
+- Commit using conventional commit format per project conventions
+- One commit per logical change
+- Include only files relevant to your task
+
+## Operational failures
+
+If blocked (tool failure, missing file, build error): try to work around it and note the workaround. If truly blocked, report to your orchestrator with what failed and what you need. No unexplained partial work.
+
+## Receiving reviewer feedback
+
+Your orchestrator may resume you with findings from Karen (analytical review) or Verification (runtime/test review), or both.
+
+You already have the task context and your previous work. Address the issues specified. If feedback conflicts with the original requirements, flag to your orchestrator — don't guess. Resubmit complete output in standard format. In Self-Assessment, note which issues you addressed and reference the reviewer (Karen / Verification) for each.