xEdit Conflict Audit (W2)

Inherits the hub xedit-automation skill. Do not restate routing or anti-patterns here; this skill is the W2 workflow only.

Purpose

For a record or a plugin in scope, produce a verdict: no_conflict | itpo | itm | minor | breaking, plus the winning override, the override chain, and a list of plugins that reference the record. Output is a concise summary, not the raw daemon round-trips.

When To Use

• "Why is this mod's change not showing up?" → audit the affected records.
• "Which plugins overlap on this NPC / weapon / armour / keyword?" → audit by editor ID / form ID.
• "Is this load order safe to ship?" → audit a representative sample of records.

Tools

Use these MCP intent tools (do not drop to xedit_call unless an intent tool does not fit):

• xedit_session (always first; once per conversation).
• xedit_list_capabilities (once per conversation; sanity-check drift).
• xedit_find_record (locate the record(s) you want to audit).
• xedit_inspect_conflicts (the verdict tool).
• xedit_read_record (when you need to see the actual conflicting field values).
• xedit_call for r6-only daemon fields that no intent wrapper exposes yet: records.references, records.conflict_status, and records.apply_filter.

If the conflict is broad (many records across many plugins), do not loop through them one by one in the orchestrator — delegate to a read-only investigator sub-agent (see Hub skill, "Sub-agent delegation recipes").

补丁 vs 改顺序决策 / Patch-vs-reorder decision

This is the judgment gate after the tool surface tells you what wins. xEdit shows the override chain; it does not decide whether the right answer is accept, reorder, clean, remove, or patch. BB84's rule is situational thought over ritual: most overlap is normal, sorting is a single-choice lever, and exhaustive FormID stitching is not realistic at pack scale.

Use this section only to choose the remedy. If the verdict becomes PATCH, stop here and hand off; this W2 skill audits conflicts and names intent, it does not author patch records.

digraph patch_vs_reorder {
  rankdir=TB;
  node [shape=box];

  start [shape=doublecircle, label="Focused conflict readback\n(record fields + winning override)"];
  behavior [shape=diamond, label="Does this conflict explain\nreal broken/missing behavior?"];
  normal [shape=doublecircle, label="ACCEPT\nnormal overlap / chosen winner"];
  itm [shape=diamond, label="Is the losing/winning edit\njust copied vanilla?"];
  clean [shape=doublecircle, label="CLEAN\nITM candidate; do not invent meaning"];
  systemic [shape=diamond, label="Is one side a systemic rule\nand the other incidental author tweak?"];
  reorder [shape=doublecircle, label="REORDER\nlet the systemic rule win"];
  needed [shape=diamond, label="Are needed fields split\nacross multiple plugins?"];
  patch [shape=doublecircle, label="PATCH\nselectively forward needed fields"];
  remove [shape=doublecircle, label="REMOVE / REJECT\nmod role or data not worth repair debt"];

  start -> behavior;
  behavior -> normal [label="no"];
  behavior -> itm [label="yes / suspicious"];
  itm -> clean [label="yes"];
  itm -> systemic [label="no"];
  systemic -> reorder [label="yes"];
  systemic -> needed [label="no"];
  needed -> patch [label="yes"];
  needed -> remove [label="no: data not needed / role fails"];
}

Decision	Use when	Do not use when
ACCEPT	The later winner is the intended rule, or the lost edit is not needed for this pack.	You have not read the actual fields; "no crash" is not proof.
REORDER	One plugin expresses a broader systemic rule and the other edit is incidental. Let the rule win to reduce patch surface.	Needed fields are split across both sides; order can only choose one winner.
PATCH	Multiple plugins carry needed data for the same FormID, and sorting would lose required behavior either way.	You only feel uncomfortable seeing red; most data overlap is normal.
CLEAN	The record is an unchanged copy of vanilla / ITM candidate.	You are about to delete a value whose purpose you have not understood.
REMOVE / REJECT	The conflict reveals the mod's relevant data is not needed, off-role, or not worth the repair debt.	The source is silent on a hard removal threshold; do not invent one.

KB query discipline

This decision section is game-agnostic. Do not inline game-specific xEdit lore, record-class gotchas, or community patch-position folklore here.

Use KB when the conflict family depends on current game or ecosystem facts:

bgs_kb_query({ query: "xedit patch vs reorder conflict family", domains: ["xedit", "load-order"], games: ["<current game>"] })

If KB is silent, mark [GAP] instead of inventing a game-specific rule.

Red flags (STOP)

Thought	Reality
"Red means broken; fix every red cell."	Red means overlapping data. Most overlap is normal; chase behavior-breaking conflicts.
"Just reorder until both changes work."	Reordering is a single-choice lever: A wins or B wins. It cannot merge values.
"The rightmost value wins, so the rest is irrelevant."	Earlier columns are evidence of lost behavior; read them before deciding.
"I'll drag the field directly into the winning mod."	That mutates the source mod and creates cleanup debt. Make a patch if both values are needed.
"xEdit can patch everything, so order doesn't matter."	True in principle, impractical at real pack scale. Use order to reduce patch debt.
"xEdit shows the conflict, so xEdit alone proves the cause."	Some problems are script-use or presentation mismatches; mark uncertainty instead of guessing.

Rationalizations

Excuse	Reality
"Sorting is easier; I'll avoid patches."	Sorting chooses one side. If both sides contain needed fields, you are still dropping data.
"I'll patch all conflicts now so future me is safe."	Exhaustive FormID stitching is repair debt. Patch only the conflicts tied to intended behavior.
"The later mod is newer, so its override must be intended."	Later means winner, not correct. Compare the field's meaning against the pack's need.
"The game boots, so the conflict is acceptable."	Lost fields can silently disable features. Booting is not semantic success.
"The field label is obvious enough."	Some data names are abstract. If you do not know the purpose, investigate before forwarding.

When the verdict is PATCH, route to xedit-automation (see its ## 补丁创作判断 section).

R6 broad-audit shortcuts (capability gated)

Check xedit_list_capabilities and branch on system.capabilities.supports.*. Use these r6+ one-call forms when available; old child-by-child and record-by-record loops remain the fallback for pre-r6 daemons.

Recursive references (supports.referencesRecursive)

For CELL/WRLD/DIAL/QUST targets, prefer:

xedit_call({
  command: "records.references",
  args: { file, formId, recursive: true }
})

recursive: true unions outgoing references across ChildGroup descendants, so one call replaces the old "list every ChildGroup child, then reference-probe each child" loop. Deep reference: xedit.references-recursive.v1.

ChildGroup conflict summary (supports.conflictStatusChildGroup)

When records.conflict_status returns result.childGroup, read that block before expanding individual records. It summarizes per-signature child-group state as { total, conflicting } and includes a capped conflictingHits array (cap 20) for the first concrete children to inspect.

This is the broad-audit starting point for CELL/WRLD/DIAL/QUST conflicts: summarize the childGroup block, then deep-read only conflictingHits or a small representative sample. Deep reference: xedit.conflict-status-childgroup.v1.

apply_filter regex + parentFormId (supports.applyFilterExtensions)

Use records.apply_filter to collapse broad candidate discovery into a single server-side query when the daemon advertises supports.applyFilterExtensions (or the narrower .regex / .multiPattern subkeys, if exposed separately).

• Regex fields: editorIdRegex, displayNameRegex, fullNameRegex, baseEditorIdRegex, baseDisplayNameRegex.
• Regex engine: System.RegularExpressions.TRegEx.
• Guardrails: 100ms per-record timeout, 4-worker semaphore, and a RegexSlotsExhausted response counter so saturation is distinguishable from no matches.
• Multi-pattern OR: each *Pattern and *Regex field may be a scalar string or an array with OR semantics; max 32 entries.
• parentFormId: single-call ancestor filtering, e.g. "all REFRs whose container chain contains CELL X" without building your own parent walk.

Deep reference: xedit.apply-filter-extensions.v1.

Workflow

1. Bootstrap session. xedit_session({}). Confirm gameMode, consentEnabled not needed here (read-only), and loadOrderSize matches expectation.
2. Sanity-check capabilities. xedit_list_capabilities({}). Read the drift.onlyInLive and drift.onlyInDigest arrays plus the r6 support keys. If a target command you intend to use is missing from live, stop and tell the user.
3. Scope the audit. Decide whether the audit is per-record, per-plugin, per-signature, or parent-scoped (e.g. all REFRs under a CELL).
4. Locate records with the narrowest supported query.
   • Per-record by FormID: xedit_find_record({ file, formId }).
   • Per-editor-ID: xedit_find_record({ editorId }).
   • Parent-scoped or regex candidate set on r6+: xedit_call({ command: "records.apply_filter", args: { file?, signature?, parentFormId?, editorIdRegex?, ... } }).
   • Per-plugin fallback: xedit_call({ command: "records.list", args: { file, signature? } }), then iterate or delegate if large.
5. Inspect conflicts with child-group awareness. For each focused target, prefer xedit_inspect_conflicts({ file, formId }). For broad CELL/WRLD/DIAL/QUST targets on r6+, call records.conflict_status through xedit_call if you need the raw result.childGroup summary; expand only conflictingHits or a representative sample instead of probing every child.
6. Collect references efficiently. On r6+, xedit_call({ command: "records.references", args: { file, formId, recursive: true } }) gives a ChildGroup-wide outgoing-reference union. On pre-r6, fall back to the old child walk or delegate the loop.
7. Classify verdicts. Read the verdict field from the intent tool or map the raw records.conflict_status result with the same W2 labels:
   • no_conflict → safe.
   • itpo / itm → likely safe; consider cleaning.
   • minor → human review.
   • breaking → halt and surface.
8. For non-trivial verdicts, read the actual record. xedit_read_record({ file, formId }). Compare record.fields vs winningOverride vs baseRecord. Identify the diverging fields.
9. Summarise. Produce a short report: one row per record or child-group signature bucket audited, columns [file, formId, editorId/signature, verdict, winningFile, referencerCount, childGroupConflicts]. Surface only the breaking/minor verdicts to the user by default; the rest are appendix.

Verification (what counts as semantic pass)

• The audit's verdict for each spot-checked record matches what manual xEdit GUI inspection would show.
• For breaking verdicts, you have read the actual record fields and can name the diverging fields.
• The output report is concise: one row per record or child-group signature bucket, no raw daemon envelopes.
• The session's audit log (.opencode/artifacts/xedit-mcp/audit/YYYY-MM-DD.jsonl) contains one entry per MCP tool call you made.

If you cannot meet these for a record, mark it unknown in the report and explain why — do not guess.

Common Mistakes

• Calling xedit_call records.conflict_status directly when xedit_inspect_conflicts would do it with the verdict label already mapped; use raw records.conflict_status only when you need r6 response blocks such as result.childGroup.
• Treating no_conflict as proof of safety without reading at least one representative record.
• Looping through hundreds of records in the orchestrator's context when r6 recursive, childGroup, apply_filter, or delegation would collapse the work.
• Forgetting to call xedit_session first; downstream tools will refuse with state_violation.
• Asking the daemon for a file that is not in the load order; LOAD001 will fire — load it via the session first.

Delegation hints

This workflow is a strong candidate for read-only sub-agent delegation in two cases:

1. Large scope (> ~10 records to audit) — the round-trips will fill the orchestrator's context. Delegate the loop; receive the per-record summary table.
2. Exploratory diagnosis ("I don't know which record is causing this in-game issue") — let a sub-agent triangulate by editor ID and signature; you'll get the candidates back.

When delegating, include this skill and the hub skill in the sub-agent's prompt and provide the scope + budget.