From ab45d5e6e1733b7ae27a0795f2a86418c2d451a0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Test Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2026 10:36:26 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Added domain-model, updates to github-triage, and caveman --- caveman/SKILL.md | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++ domain-model/ADR-FORMAT.md | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++ domain-model/CONTEXT-FORMAT.md | 77 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ domain-model/SKILL.md | 79 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ github-triage/SKILL.md | 13 +----- zoom-out/SKILL.md | 7 +++ 6 files changed, 260 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) create mode 100644 caveman/SKILL.md create mode 100644 domain-model/ADR-FORMAT.md create mode 100644 domain-model/CONTEXT-FORMAT.md create mode 100644 domain-model/SKILL.md create mode 100644 zoom-out/SKILL.md diff --git a/caveman/SKILL.md b/caveman/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..85770a3 --- /dev/null +++ b/caveman/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ +--- +name: caveman +description: > + Ultra-compressed communication mode. Cuts token usage ~75% by dropping + filler, articles, and pleasantries while keeping full technical accuracy. + Use when user says "caveman mode", "talk like caveman", "use caveman", + "less tokens", "be brief", or invokes /caveman. +--- + +Respond terse like smart caveman. All technical substance stay. Only fluff die. + +## Persistence + +ACTIVE EVERY RESPONSE once triggered. No revert after many turns. No filler drift. Still active if unsure. Off only when user says "stop caveman" or "normal mode". + +## Rules + +Drop: articles (a/an/the), filler (just/really/basically/actually/simply), pleasantries (sure/certainly/of course/happy to), hedging. Fragments OK. Short synonyms (big not extensive, fix not "implement a solution for"). Abbreviate common terms (DB/auth/config/req/res/fn/impl). Strip conjunctions. Use arrows for causality (X -> Y). One word when one word enough. + +Technical terms stay exact. Code blocks unchanged. Errors quoted exact. + +Pattern: `[thing] [action] [reason]. [next step].` + +Not: "Sure! I'd be happy to help you with that. The issue you're experiencing is likely caused by..." +Yes: "Bug in auth middleware. Token expiry check use `<` not `<=`. Fix:" + +### Examples + +**"Why React component re-render?"** + +> Inline obj prop -> new ref -> re-render. `useMemo`. + +**"Explain database connection pooling."** + +> Pool = reuse DB conn. Skip handshake -> fast under load. + +## Auto-Clarity Exception + +Drop caveman temporarily for: security warnings, irreversible action confirmations, multi-step sequences where fragment order risks misread, user asks to clarify or repeats question. Resume caveman after clear part done. + +Example -- destructive op: + +> **Warning:** This will permanently delete all rows in the `users` table and cannot be undone. +> +> ```sql +> DROP TABLE users; +> ``` +> +> Caveman resume. Verify backup exist first. diff --git a/domain-model/ADR-FORMAT.md b/domain-model/ADR-FORMAT.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..da7e78e --- /dev/null +++ b/domain-model/ADR-FORMAT.md @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@ +# ADR Format + +ADRs live in `docs/adr/` and use sequential numbering: `0001-slug.md`, `0002-slug.md`, etc. + +Create the `docs/adr/` directory lazily — only when the first ADR is needed. + +## Template + +```md +# {Short title of the decision} + +{1-3 sentences: what's the context, what did we decide, and why.} +``` + +That's it. An ADR can be a single paragraph. The value is in recording *that* a decision was made and *why* — not in filling out sections. + +## Optional sections + +Only include these when they add genuine value. Most ADRs won't need them. + +- **Status** frontmatter (`proposed | accepted | deprecated | superseded by ADR-NNNN`) — useful when decisions are revisited +- **Considered Options** — only when the rejected alternatives are worth remembering +- **Consequences** — only when non-obvious downstream effects need to be called out + +## Numbering + +Scan `docs/adr/` for the highest existing number and increment by one. + +## When to offer an ADR + +All three of these must be true: + +1. **Hard to reverse** — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful +2. **Surprising without context** — a future reader will look at the code and wonder "why on earth did they do it this way?" +3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons + +If a decision is easy to reverse, skip it — you'll just reverse it. If it's not surprising, nobody will wonder why. If there was no real alternative, there's nothing to record beyond "we did the obvious thing." + +### What qualifies + +- **Architectural shape.** "We're using a monorepo." "The write model is event-sourced, the read model is projected into Postgres." +- **Integration patterns between contexts.** "Ordering and Billing communicate via domain events, not synchronous HTTP." +- **Technology choices that carry lock-in.** Database, message bus, auth provider, deployment target. Not every library — just the ones that would take a quarter to swap out. +- **Boundary and scope decisions.** "Customer data is owned by the Customer context; other contexts reference it by ID only." The explicit no-s are as valuable as the yes-s. +- **Deliberate deviations from the obvious path.** "We're using manual SQL instead of an ORM because X." Anything where a reasonable reader would assume the opposite. These stop the next engineer from "fixing" something that was deliberate. +- **Constraints not visible in the code.** "We can't use AWS because of compliance requirements." "Response times must be under 200ms because of the partner API contract." +- **Rejected alternatives when the rejection is non-obvious.** If you considered GraphQL and picked REST for subtle reasons, record it — otherwise someone will suggest GraphQL again in six months. diff --git a/domain-model/CONTEXT-FORMAT.md b/domain-model/CONTEXT-FORMAT.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..493859e --- /dev/null +++ b/domain-model/CONTEXT-FORMAT.md @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +# CONTEXT.md Format + +## Structure + +```md +# {Context Name} + +{One or two sentence description of what this context is and why it exists.} + +## Language + +**Order**: +A customer's request to purchase one or more items. +_Avoid_: Purchase, transaction + +**Invoice**: +A request for payment sent to a customer after delivery. +_Avoid_: Bill, payment request + +**Customer**: +A person or organization that places orders. +_Avoid_: Client, buyer, account + +## Relationships + +- An **Order** produces one or more **Invoices** +- An **Invoice** belongs to exactly one **Customer** + +## Example dialogue + +> **Dev:** "When a **Customer** places an **Order**, do we create the **Invoice** immediately?" +> **Domain expert:** "No — an **Invoice** is only generated once a **Fulfillment** is confirmed." + +## Flagged ambiguities + +- "account" was used to mean both **Customer** and **User** — resolved: these are distinct concepts. +``` + +## Rules + +- **Be opinionated.** When multiple words exist for the same concept, pick the best one and list the others as aliases to avoid. +- **Flag conflicts explicitly.** If a term is used ambiguously, call it out in "Flagged ambiguities" with a clear resolution. +- **Keep definitions tight.** One sentence max. Define what it IS, not what it does. +- **Show relationships.** Use bold term names and express cardinality where obvious. +- **Only include terms specific to this project's context.** General programming concepts (timeouts, error types, utility patterns) don't belong even if the project uses them extensively. Before adding a term, ask: is this a concept unique to this context, or a general programming concept? Only the former belongs. +- **Group terms under subheadings** when natural clusters emerge. If all terms belong to a single cohesive area, a flat list is fine. +- **Write an example dialogue.** A conversation between a dev and a domain expert that demonstrates how the terms interact naturally and clarifies boundaries between related concepts. + +## Single vs multi-context repos + +**Single context (most repos):** One `CONTEXT.md` at the repo root. + +**Multiple contexts:** A `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the repo root lists the contexts, where they live, and how they relate to each other: + +```md +# Context Map + +## Contexts + +- [Ordering](./src/ordering/CONTEXT.md) — receives and tracks customer orders +- [Billing](./src/billing/CONTEXT.md) — generates invoices and processes payments +- [Fulfillment](./src/fulfillment/CONTEXT.md) — manages warehouse picking and shipping + +## Relationships + +- **Ordering → Fulfillment**: Ordering emits `OrderPlaced` events; Fulfillment consumes them to start picking +- **Fulfillment → Billing**: Fulfillment emits `ShipmentDispatched` events; Billing consumes them to generate invoices +- **Ordering ↔ Billing**: Shared types for `CustomerId` and `Money` +``` + +The skill infers which structure applies: + +- If `CONTEXT-MAP.md` exists, read it to find contexts +- If only a root `CONTEXT.md` exists, single context +- If neither exists, create a root `CONTEXT.md` lazily when the first term is resolved + +When multiple contexts exist, infer which one the current topic relates to. If unclear, ask. diff --git a/domain-model/SKILL.md b/domain-model/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..ca627ca --- /dev/null +++ b/domain-model/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,79 @@ +--- +name: domain-model +description: Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates documentation (CONTEXT.md, ADRs) inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's language and documented decisions. +disable-model-invocation: true +--- + +Interview me relentlessly about every aspect of this plan until we reach a shared understanding. Walk down each branch of the design tree, resolving dependencies between decisions one-by-one. For each question, provide your recommended answer. + +Ask the questions one at a time, waiting for feedback on each question before continuing. + +If a question can be answered by exploring the codebase, explore the codebase instead. + +## Domain awareness + +During codebase exploration, also look for existing documentation: + +### File structure + +Most repos have a single context: + +``` +/ +├── CONTEXT.md +├── docs/ +│ └── adr/ +│ ├── 0001-event-sourced-orders.md +│ └── 0002-postgres-for-write-model.md +└── src/ +``` + +If a `CONTEXT-MAP.md` exists at the root, the repo has multiple contexts. The map points to where each one lives: + +``` +/ +├── CONTEXT-MAP.md +├── docs/ +│ └── adr/ ← system-wide decisions +├── src/ +│ ├── ordering/ +│ │ ├── CONTEXT.md +│ │ └── docs/adr/ ← context-specific decisions +│ └── billing/ +│ ├── CONTEXT.md +│ └── docs/adr/ +``` + +Create files lazily — only when you have something to write. If no `CONTEXT.md` exists, create one when the first term is resolved. If no `docs/adr/` exists, create it when the first ADR is needed. + +## During the session + +### Challenge against the glossary + +When the user uses a term that conflicts with the existing language in `CONTEXT.md`, call it out immediately. "Your glossary defines 'cancellation' as X, but you seem to mean Y — which is it?" + +### Sharpen fuzzy language + +When the user uses vague or overloaded terms, propose a precise canonical term. "You're saying 'account' — do you mean the Customer or the User? Those are different things." + +### Discuss concrete scenarios + +When domain relationships are being discussed, stress-test them with specific scenarios. Invent scenarios that probe edge cases and force the user to be precise about the boundaries between concepts. + +### Cross-reference with code + +When the user states how something works, check whether the code agrees. If you find a contradiction, surface it: "Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible — which is right?" + +### Update CONTEXT.md inline + +When a term is resolved, update `CONTEXT.md` right there. Don't batch these up — capture them as they happen. Use the format in [CONTEXT-FORMAT.md](./CONTEXT-FORMAT.md). + +### Offer ADRs sparingly + +Only offer to create an ADR when all three are true: + +1. **Hard to reverse** — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful +2. **Surprising without context** — a future reader will wonder "why did they do it this way?" +3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons + +If any of the three is missing, skip the ADR. Use the format in [ADR-FORMAT.md](./ADR-FORMAT.md). diff --git a/github-triage/SKILL.md b/github-triage/SKILL.md index 347e6b5..a717b0d 100644 --- a/github-triage/SKILL.md +++ b/github-triage/SKILL.md @@ -116,18 +116,7 @@ The reproduction attempt informs the grilling session and the agent brief. A con ### Step 4: Grilling session (if needed) -If the issue needs to be fleshed out before it's ready for an agent, interview the maintainer to build a complete specification. Follow the /grill-me pattern: - -- Ask questions one at a time -- Provide a recommended answer for each question -- If a question can be answered by exploring the codebase, explore the codebase instead - -The goal is to reach a point where you can write a complete agent brief. Keep going until you have: - -- A clear summary of the desired behavior -- Concrete acceptance criteria -- Key interfaces that may need to change -- A clear boundary of what's out of scope +If the issue needs to be fleshed out before it's ready for an agent, interview the maintainer to build a complete specification. ### Step 5: Apply the outcome diff --git a/zoom-out/SKILL.md b/zoom-out/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b8a8420 --- /dev/null +++ b/zoom-out/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ +--- +name: zoom-out +description: Tell the agent to zoom out and give broader context or a higher-level perspective. Use when you're unfamiliar with a section of code or need to understand how it fits into the bigger picture. +disable-model-invocation: true +--- + +I don't know this area of code well. Go up a layer of abstraction. Give me a map of all the relevant modules and callers.