Compare commits

...
Author SHA1 Message Date
github-actions[bot] f34d927194 chore: version skills 2026-07-28 09:18:32 +00:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 2ab958093e Merge pull request #681 from mattpocock/docs/install-instructions-split
docs: split install instructions by audience
2026-07-28 10:18:17 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 5 369c264e23 docs: split install instructions by audience
Collapse the skills.sh Quickstart and the "Install as a Claude Code
plugin" section into one Installation section, ordered Claude Code →
Codex/other agents → tinkerers, each in a collapsed details block.

Claude Code now leads with the one-liner `claude plugins install
mattpocock-skills` — the plugin ships in Claude Code's official
marketplace, so the old two-step `marketplace add` → `install` dance is
gone.

`/setup-matt-pocock-skills` is promoted to a shared step 2, since every
install path needs it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-28 10:17:03 +01:00
Matt Pocock ed37663cc5 refactor(to-tickets): remove redundant instructions for ticket implementation 2026-07-21 11:28:51 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 9603c1cc81 Merge pull request #586 from mattpocock/batch-grill-me-granular-facts
batch-grill-me: granular fact-finding, don't block the round
2026-07-16 10:03:12 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 fde4cd58cf feat(batch-grill-me): granular fact-finding, don't block the round
Fire fact-finding to a sub-agent and treat a running exploration as an
unsettled prerequisite, so only the downstream questions wait — the rest
of the frontier is asked now, instead of the whole next round blocking
behind one lookup. Phrase throughout in terms of the user.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-16 10:01:22 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 c70cb09193 Add batch-grill-me in-progress skill
A user-invoked interview that walks the design tree in rounds: each round
asks the whole frontier of decisions whose prerequisites are already
settled, then recomputes the frontier from the answers.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-16 09:41:35 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub e9fcdf95b4 Merge pull request #572 from mattpocock/to-questionnaire
Add to-questionnaire skill (in-progress)
2026-07-14 19:32:22 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 7f68c06dcb Cut no-op justification and template the questionnaire structure
Drop the sentence explaining why interrogating the subject fails — the
model already obeys it, so it was paying load to say nothing.

Replace the bulleted document structure with an XML-tagged
<questionnaire-template>, mirroring to-spec's <spec-template>: headings
with prose fill-in guidance and a nested <question-example>.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-14 19:31:22 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 bbce2f91d6 Add to-questionnaire skill (in-progress)
A user-invoked skill that turns a decision you can't fully answer into a
Markdown discovery questionnaire to hand to one person async, or fill out
over a meeting.

Its defining move: it grills you about the *send* (who it's going to, what
you need back), never the subject — sidestepping the "I don't know, I don't
know" spiral you'd hit if it interrogated you on the very knowledge you're
offloading. The written questions then target the gap between what the
recipient knows and what you need.

Landed in in-progress/ to shake out over a few real sends before promoting.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-14 19:28:20 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 66898f60e8 Merge pull request #536 from mattpocock/task/claude-codex-plugin
feat: ship the skill set as a native Claude Code plugin (v1.2)
2026-07-13 14:36:01 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 0ac3f3fbf1 Merge pull request #551 from mattpocock/codex-skill-metadata
feat: add Codex agents/openai.yaml metadata to every skill
2026-07-13 13:00:38 +01:00
697d4ce974 feat: add Codex agents/openai.yaml metadata to every skill
Adds an `agents/openai.yaml` beside each `SKILL.md` so the skills work in
Codex as well as Claude Code, without generated copies:

- `interface.display_name` + `interface.short_description` for the Codex
  skill picker, hand-written for all 39 skills.
- `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` on the 22 user-invoked skills —
  the Codex analog of `disable-model-invocation: true`, so Codex excludes
  them from implicit invocation while explicit `$skill` still works.
- Document the dual-harness invocation model in `.agents/invocation.md`,
  `CLAUDE.md`, and the promoted-bucket READMEs.
- Add `AGENTS.md` as a symlink to `CLAUDE.md` so Codex reads the same
  instructions; note Codex as a `link-skills.sh` install target.

Slimmed-down rework of the approach prototyped in #522: keeps the essential
cross-harness metadata, drops the Ruby validator, the runtime-detector test,
per-skill `default_prompt`s, and the unrelated promotion changes.

Co-authored-by: gabimoncha <gabimoncha@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-13 12:57:18 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 8f4952b6a3 Merge pull request #539 from mattpocock/fix/finish-promoted-wiring
fix: finish promoted-bucket wiring for resolving-merge-conflicts and implement
2026-07-13 12:42:15 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 d3275456a4 fix: finish promoted-bucket wiring for resolving-merge-conflicts and implement
Close a standing CLAUDE.md-invariant gap where two promoted skills were
not fully wired into the plugin manifest and READMEs.

- resolving-merge-conflicts (model-invoked): add to .claude-plugin/plugin.json,
  top-level README.md, and skills/engineering/README.md.
- implement (user-invoked): add the missing line to skills/engineering/README.md
  (already present in plugin.json and the top README).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-13 12:00:09 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 04fee67571 Merge pull request #533 from mattpocock/yagni-scope-improve-architecture
improve-codebase-architecture: scope the scan to where change is landing (YAGNI)
2026-07-13 11:27:15 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 33dfc9b28f Merge pull request #538 from mattpocock/wayfinder/research-subagents
wayfinder: burn research tickets down with subagents
2026-07-13 11:18:20 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 8eb8f58f0f Merge pull request #532 from mattpocock/grill-me-general-use
grilling: reword the primitive for general use
2026-07-13 11:14:03 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 3bb587fa5c Rename "design tree" → "decision tree" across skills and docs
Align the remaining callers and docs pages with grilling's body, which now
says "decision tree".

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-13 11:13:55 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 170ad48655 grilling: reword the primitive for general use
Drop the software-plan scoping from grilling's description and body so the
interview reads as a stress-test of any plan, decision, or idea:
"this plan" → "this", "enact the plan" → "act on it", "codebase" →
"environment". The technique is unchanged, and grill-me is left as-is.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-13 11:11:58 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 2602257241 feat(wayfinder): burn research tickets down with subagents
Research stays a real ticket type — it's a shared blocker downstream
decisions hang on, which the frontier's blocking edges exist to render.
What changes is resolution: because research is AFK, charting doesn't
stop and read. After creating the tickets, the charting session fires a
/research subagent for each research ticket to burn it down in parallel,
capturing findings on a throwaway research/<name> branch with a context
pointer.

Charting's "fire the research subagents" step owns how research is
handled; the Ticket Types bullet just names the resolver, and the
one-ticket-per-session rule carries the research exception.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-13 11:10:46 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 45afd8074a improve-codebase-architecture: scope the scan to where change is landing (YAGNI)
Before scanning, decide where to look. If the user named a direction, take
it; otherwise read the last ~20 commit messages to bias exploration toward
actively-developed paths. A deepening opportunity in code nobody touches is a
refactor you'll never cash in — leverage only pays off where you keep editing.

Syncs the docs page and adds a changeset.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-13 11:01:18 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 6704a52ac4 Merge pull request #534 from mattpocock/wayfinder-decision-tickets
Name the wayfinder unit a "decision ticket"
2026-07-13 10:51:13 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 7d694b7ae9 Name the wayfinder unit a "decision ticket"
People kept reading a wayfinder ticket as an ordinary implementation
ticket — a slice of a build to execute — when wayfinder uses them as
decision tickets: questions whose resolution is a decision.

Introduce "decision ticket" as a light leading word: the skill
description and its opening line name it (and say what makes it one),
and the ask-matt / engineering README blurbs and the docs page match,
while "ticket" stays the everyday word once the term is established.
Record "Decision ticket" in CONTEXT.md so the "avoid: ticket" domain
rule no longer contradicts wayfinder's deliberate use of the word.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-13 10:50:29 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub f15b4dca01 Merge pull request #535 from mattpocock/ask-matt-wayfinder-guidance
ask-matt: give /wayfinder real routing help
2026-07-13 10:26:40 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 e74fee89fe ask-matt: give wayfinder real routing help
Wayfinder is the heaviest, most cognitively demanding flow, and the
wiki shows people misusing it two ways: over-reaching for it on
well-scoped work (it's slower and denser than a single grill), and
losing the way at the handoff after the map (looping straight into
/implement and skipping /to-spec). Sharpen the router's wayfinder
on-ramp to steer both.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-13 10:25:30 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 42a5b70fca feat: ship the skill set as a native Claude Code plugin
Add a Claude Code plugin marketplace so the promoted skills can be
installed as a managed, read-only bundle (subscribe rather than fork),
alongside the existing skills.sh installer.

- Enrich .claude-plugin/plugin.json with marketplace metadata (version,
  description, author, license, keywords); keep the curated promoted-only
  skills array.
- Add .claude-plugin/marketplace.json making the repo its own
  single-plugin marketplace (mattpocock-skills@mattpocock).
- README: document /plugin install alongside skills.sh, and the
  subscribe-vs-fork tradeoff.
- CLAUDE.md: extend the promoted-set invariant to cover marketplace.json
  and plugin.json/package.json version sync.
- ADR 0002: record why Claude ships now and a native Codex plugin is
  deferred (Codex skills field is single-path + drops symlinks, which
  can't express a curated subset of a bucketed repo without a restructure).

Verified: 'claude plugin validate . --strict' passes, and marketplace
add -> install resolves all 21 promoted skills at v1.2.0.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-13 10:14:22 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 391a2701dd Merge pull request #505 from mattpocock/add-setup-deep-modules-skill
Add setup-ts-deep-modules skill (in-progress)
2026-07-10 14:14:59 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 2ee14df19c Merge pull request #488 from mattpocock/prototype-primary-secondary-source
prototype: keep the prototype as a primary source
2026-07-10 11:45:42 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 fa460cbf09 prototype: drop the vestigial "let it go"
Rule 4 is about skipping polish, not the prototype's fate; the trailing
"then let it go" was a leftover from the old delete-it framing and now
misreads as discard, contradicting capture-as-primary-source. Cut it,
and rename LOGIC step 7 off "let go".

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-10 11:35:29 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 3687fb4f38 Name lib/ + tests/ as the canonical package subfolders
The depth-based rules already treat any subfolder as private, so the
config needs no change. Document lib/ (implementation) and tests/ as the
conventional two-folder shape, with entry points at the root — a fixed
convention that never needs the config extended for a new folder.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-10 10:16:03 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 3ea30afc68 Rename to setup-ts-deep-modules; entry-points model over single barrel
- Rename skill to setup-ts-deep-modules (it's TypeScript-specific).
- A package's public surface is now its ENTRY POINTS — every file at the
  package root — not one designated index.ts. Implementation lives in
  subfolders and is private. This is depth-based and extension-agnostic.
- Packages can expose several small entry points instead of funnelling
  everything through one giant barrel index; barrels are discouraged, and
  the generated repo docs (step 7) say so explicitly.
- Rules renamed accordingly: entrypoint-boundary-from-app,
  entrypoint-boundary-across-packages, tests-through-entrypoints.
- Example package now hides impl in a lib/ subfolder.

Re-validated against dependency-cruiser 16: multiple entry points and
cross-package entry imports pass; deep imports into subfolders fail with
the expected rule from app code, other packages, and tests.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-10 10:10:02 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 f947f93b92 Put the convention README in the packages folder + point CLAUDE.md at it
Step 7 now writes <packages-root>/README.md next to the packages it
governs, and adds a context pointer from CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md so an agent
discovers the boundary rule.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-10 09:55:08 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 d80ff7a840 Reference codebase-design as /codebase-design, not a path
The install location isn't known at runtime, so a relative path breaks.
Use the literal skill invocation instead.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-10 09:53:56 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 0375c88bfb prototype: collapse the when-done section into rule 6
The "keep it as a primary source" section restated rule 6 and was
padded with no-ops. Fold the one extra bit (capture the answer) into
rule 6 and delete the section: capture the prototype as a primary
source on a throwaway branch, pointer on the issue.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-10 09:49:44 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 30a9c7447f Add setup-deep-modules skill (in-progress)
A user-invoked setup skill that wires dependency-cruiser into a
TypeScript repo so each package under the packages root is a deep
module: everything hidden behind its `index.ts` interface.

Ships a `.dependency-cruiser.cjs` template with four error-level rules —
index boundary from app code, index boundary across packages (with
intra-package freedom via $1 back-references), tests-through-the-index,
and no-circular — plus a commented layering stub. The skill installs the
tool, folds a `lint:boundaries` script into the repo's umbrella check,
scaffolds an example package, and self-verifies that a deep import fails.

Rules validated against a live dependency-cruiser 16 run.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-10 09:49:13 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 89d370d181 Merge pull request #504 from mattpocock/fix/to-tickets-stray-content
fix(to-tickets): remove stray </content> tag
2026-07-10 09:46:06 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 19c50d50fd fix(to-tickets): remove stray </content> tag from skill and docs
The final line of to-tickets/SKILL.md carried a stray `</content>`
closing tag with no matching opening tag — a packaging/serialization
artifact from the planning-skills refactor (386d4ff), not valid skill
content. The same stray tag had leaked into the generated landing
docs for to-tickets and to-spec. Strip it from all three.

Fixes #495

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-10 09:45:20 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub e4722b8e65 Merge pull request #502 from mattpocock/setup-skill-friendlier
Friendlier setup flow + one-file-per-ticket local tracker
2026-07-10 09:40:15 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 371b9c9c94 prototype: capture the prototype, don't dispose of it
Reframe the artifact handling as capturing the prototype somewhere out
of main — a throwaway branch — with a context pointer to it left on the
implementation issue, instead of "disposing" of it. The main branch
still keeps only the validated decision.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-10 09:39:52 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 44eed54518 refactor: friendlier setup flow + one-file-per-ticket local tracker
Rework /setup-matt-pocock-skills to ask fewer, friendlier questions and
align the local-markdown issue tracker with the current spec.

- Triage labels: asked only when the `triage` skill is installed, and then
  as a single recommended-yes question ("keep the default triage labels?")
  instead of an override interrogation. When triage isn't installed, the
  section and docs/agents/triage-labels.md are skipped.
- External PRs as a request surface: no longer a setup question. The
  GitHub/GitLab templates still carry the flag, defaulted off; flip it in
  docs/agents/issue-tracker.md later.
- Domain docs: default to single-context without asking; multi-context is
  only offered when the repo shows monorepo signals.
- Local-markdown tickets: one file per ticket under
  .scratch/<feature>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md, never a single combined
  tickets.md. /to-tickets, ask-matt, and the local template now agree, and
  the spec file is spec.md (not PRD.md) to match /to-spec.
- Re-sync docs pages for setup-matt-pocock-skills and to-tickets; changeset.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-10 09:37:25 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 cdec9f6eb2 prototype: simplify to single primary-source idea; dedup branch files
Drop the secondary-source label — the actionable distinction is just
that the prototype is a primary source to retain on a throwaway branch.
Collapse the re-descriptions in LOGIC/UI so they point to SKILL for the
disposal concept and add only branch-specific nuance.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-09 14:57:48 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 d6274600ab prototype: reframe disposal around primary vs secondary source
Retain the prototype as a primary source on a throwaway branch linked
from the relevant issue, rather than deleting it, while the distilled
answer remains the secondary source. Keeps prototype scaffolding out of
the main branch without destroying the runnable evidence.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-09 14:53:43 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub d574778f94 Merge pull request #353 from mattpocock/changeset-release/main
chore: version skills
2026-07-08 14:20:40 +01:00
github-actions[bot] 47845ac1e1 chore: version skills 2026-07-08 13:20:09 +00:00
Matt PocockandGitHub cc1e24891d Merge pull request #464 from mattpocock/release/v1.1
v1.1: planning-skills unification (breaking) + wayfinder graduation
2026-07-08 14:19:46 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 d6e21b661d docs: list implement in the README's engineering user-invoked skills
implement is the central Main Flow step but was missing from the
public Reference list. Add it after to-tickets.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-08 14:18:36 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 0557d57579 docs: settle wayfinder as a situational on-ramp, not the main entry flow
The grill-led idea→ship chain stays the documented front door; wayfinder
is a situational on-ramp (greenfield / huge feature build), reserving
"new default spine" for a potential v2.

- ask-matt router: name wayfinder's concrete triggers
- grill-me / grill-with-docs: signpost up to wayfinder as the
  too-big-for-one-session on-ramp

Resolves the main-flow decision on the Skills v1.1 wayfinder map (#120).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-08 14:18:36 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 639df6e738 Graduate wayfinder to engineering; unify changesets for v1.1
Graduate `wayfinder` out of in-progress into the engineering bucket
(plugin.json, top-level + Engineering READMEs under User-invoked, docs
page, ask-matt on-ramp, disable-model-invocation).

Consolidate the 22 pending changesets into 10 coherent v1.1 entries:
one `wayfinder` (rename from decision-mapping + full reframe +
graduation), one `grilling`, one `code-review`, one `tdd`; fold the
superseded to-issues changeset into unify-to-tickets and drop its stray
`</content>` tag. Highest bump is minor → 1.0.1 becomes 1.1.0.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-08 14:18:36 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 d29732e49f refactor(to-tickets): cut the two-readings explainer from SKILL.md
It documented what the skill does rather than steering the agent — the
publish mechanics it described are already Step 5's instructions, and the
conceptual framing already lives in ask-matt and the docs page.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-08 14:18:36 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 09a72ba465 refactor(to-tickets): prune no-ops from the two-readings intro
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-08 14:18:36 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 386d4ff719 refactor: unify planning skills into /to-spec + /to-tickets
Executes the `unify-to-tickets` decision (personal-wiki #23), reworking
this PR from "add /to-plan" into the full planning-skills unification.

- Rename /to-prd → /to-spec. "spec" is now the single through-line term
  (the skill still opens with "you may know this document as a PRD" for
  discoverability).
- Merge /to-plan + /to-issues into one /to-tickets skill; delete
  /to-issues. /to-tickets emits a set of tickets, each declaring its
  blocking edges — one medium-agnostic artifact that reads as a
  sequential plan (local `tickets.md`, edges as text) or a parallelizable
  DAG (real tracker, native blocking links). The edges live in the ticket
  either way; the medium only decides whether anything acts on them in
  parallel.
- ask-matt now routes idea → /to-spec → /to-tickets → /implement.
- Sweep every cross-reference (docs pages, chain diagrams, CONTEXT.md,
  ADRs, .agents, setup templates) to the new names and vocabulary.
- Rewrite the changeset to describe the unification.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-08 14:18:36 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 c5a4a8c2e9 refactor(to-plan,to-issues): prune no-ops in vertical-slice framing
Fold the redundant 'thin vertical slice cuts through all layers, NOT
horizontal' intro sentence into vertical-slice-rules bullet 1 (it was
duplicating the bullet), and cut to-plan's 'no parallelism / top-to-bottom'
restatement — 'sequential' is already anchored as the leading word. Keeps
the shared core identical across the two sibling skills.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-08 14:13:21 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 93f73198e3 feat(to-plan): add sequential plan skill
Add a user-invoked `to-plan` skill — the sequential, HITL sibling of
`to-issues`. Both slice work into tracer-bullet vertical slices, but
`to-plan` produces one ordered sequence you drive by hand, one phase per
fresh context, rather than parallel independently-grabbable issues.

It publishes to the tracker `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` configured, shaped
to it: a single sequential `plan.md` for a local tracker, or a parent
issue with ordered sub-issues (native sub-issues where supported) for a
real one.

Registers the skill everywhere CLAUDE.md requires (plugin.json, top-level
and bucket READMEs, docs page), updates the `ask-matt` router's main-flow
fork to offer both to-issues and to-plan, and adds a changeset.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-08 14:11:05 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 896f14d9c2 Merge pull request #472 from mattpocock/fix/wayfinder-tracker-indirection
fix(wayfinder): resolve issue-tracker doc via the CLAUDE.md pointer, not a hardcoded path
2026-07-08 11:18:12 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 d869d45afc fix(wayfinder): resolve issue-tracker doc via the CLAUDE.md pointer, not a hardcoded path
Wayfinder pinned the literal docs/agents/issue-tracker.md, breaking the
indirection to-issues/to-prd/triage rely on: they resolve the tracker
through the ### Issue tracker block setup writes into CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md.
In repos that keep agent docs elsewhere, wayfinder silently fell back to
local-markdown. It now follows the same pointer and reads the doc's
"Wayfinding operations" section by name.

Closes #471

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-08 11:17:29 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 8515a080a7 Merge pull request #469 from mattpocock/to-issues/wide-refactor-expand-contract
to-issues: slice wide refactors by expand–contract
2026-07-07 16:37:10 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 f219e66379 to-issues: wrap issue template in XML tags
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-07 16:35:57 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 aa591116bf to-issues: split into Process + Reference tiers
Revert the description change and keep the wide-refactor material in
one place. Reshape the skill into a lean Process (steps) and a
Reference section holding the vertical-slice rules, the wide-refactor
expand–contract rules, and the issue body template as co-located
blocks the steps point to.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-07 16:35:39 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 a0329ba957 to-issues: slice wide refactors by expand–contract
Add a wide-refactor exception to the tracer-bullet rule: a single
mechanical change whose blast radius fans across the codebase can't
land as one green vertical slice. Seed "wide refactor" / "blast radius"
across the description, the explore step (detection), and the drafting
step (strategy), and give the expand–contract sequence in prose.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-07 16:32:47 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 16a2a5cd00 Merge pull request #461 from mattpocock/fix/wayfinder-self-grilling
wayfinder/grilling: stop the agent grilling itself
2026-07-06 14:01:24 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 ce908a6220 Add changeset for the self-grilling fix
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-06 13:59:13 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub d05f2fb5b5 Merge pull request #463 from mattpocock/negative-space-prompting
writing-great-skills: add Negation failure mode
2026-07-06 13:58:22 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 e5932a7a47 wayfinder/grilling: stop the agent grilling itself
Students reported /wayfinder picking a grilling ticket and grilling
itself instead of turning to the human (confirmed by @_noshit /
@maudova; Matt: "that sounds like a bug"). Root cause: a grilling line
written for the live-human case ("explore the codebase instead") reads
as license to answer questions autonomously once wayfinder runs it in a
resolve-the-ticket frame.

Fix with affirmative framing (no negative-space "don't"):
- grilling: split facts (look up) from decisions (put to the human, wait)
- wayfinder Grilling ticket type: a back-and-forth with the human, who
  answers each question
- wayfinder Invocation: grilling always runs with the human in the loop

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-06 13:57:47 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 af6d6922c3 Drop Negative Space; keep Negation only
Negative Space read as clever but not actionable — "notice your
silences" is fuzzy legwork the agent can't reliably act on. Negation
stays: a checkable authoring failure with a positive-instruction cure.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-06 13:57:05 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 30afefecc9 changeset for Negation and Negative Space failure modes
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-06 13:56:16 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub acf55d88b7 Merge pull request #462 from mattpocock/wayfinder/plan-not-execute
wayfinder: reassert planning-only purpose
2026-07-06 13:55:01 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 0847bb31bc writing-great-skills: add Negation and Negative Space failure modes
Two adjacent Steering failure modes about how language you think of as
"off" still steers:

- Negation — a prohibition names the forbidden behaviour and makes it
  more available, not less (don't-think-of-an-elephant). Cure: prompt
  the positive.
- Negative Space — what you omit is delegated to the agent's priors,
  not left neutral. Cure: read a draft for what it's silent on and
  decide each omission deliberately.

Each carried as a full GLOSSARY entry plus a SKILL.md failure-mode
bullet, matching every other failure mode.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-06 13:54:46 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 7be28cf5e6 wayfinder: planning by default, overridable via Notes; shrink section
Address review: don't preclude execution. Wayfinder is planning by
default, but an effort's Notes can carry execution into the map. Collapse
the section to one paragraph, revert the destination sentence to its
original (which already allowed an executed change), and drop the Task
cross-reference to match.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-06 13:53:59 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 80f29a4f29 wayfinder: reassert planning-only purpose with a leading-word section
Add a "Plan, don't do" section as the single source of truth for the
plan/execute boundary, and bring two passages into line with it:

- Destination is always a set of resolved decisions, never the executed
  change itself (the migration example previously read as execution).
- The Task ticket type now earns its place only by unblocking a decision,
  pointing back to the new section rather than restating the principle.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-06 13:49:33 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 5a7f7e5c2a Merge pull request #460 from mattpocock/wayfinder-no-fog-early-exit
wayfinder: restore no-fog early exit
2026-07-06 13:42:16 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 9b43c3359b wayfinder: simpler no-fog wording — 'you don't need a map'
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-06 13:40:26 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 ad99c73a2d wayfinder: reframe no-fog exit as too-small-for-a-map
Not "implement directly" — the point is the journey fits one session and
doesn't justify a map. Stop and ask the user how to proceed.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-06 13:38:59 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 55511cea24 wayfinder: restore no-fog early exit
Bring back the "skip the map when there's no fog" branch that was
collateral-deleted with the Handoff section. Co-located in Chart the
map step 2, where the fog/no-fog outcome is determined: if breadth-first
grilling surfaces no fog, offer to skip the map and implement directly.
The offer (ask, don't auto-skip) is preserved from the original.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-06 13:36:44 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub d11147daaf Merge pull request #459 from mattpocock/to-issues-sub-issues-and-prototype
to-issues: prefer native sub-issues; reference /prototype code explicitly
2026-07-06 13:35:18 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 0172e61e57 to-issues: prefer native sub-issues; reference /prototype code explicitly
Two minimal edits to the to-issues skill:

- The "What to build" template now points explicitly at the `/prototype`
  skill's code as the source of an inlined decision snippet, rather than
  gesturing at "a prototype".
- Publishing now prefers the tracker's native sub-issues (parent → slice)
  and native blocking edges (Blocked by) where supported — mechanics
  already documented in the issue-tracker doc — keeping the `## Parent`
  and `## Blocked by` body sections as the fallback.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-06 13:33:44 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 66f92b61f5 Merge pull request #456 from mattpocock/wayfinder-deferred-section
wayfinder: split the map catch-all into Not yet specified / Out of scope
2026-07-05 18:37:09 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 97dca07b64 Duplication pass: collapse restated out-of-scope mechanics
- Out of scope section: drop embedded 'however sharply you can see it'
  duplicate; the 'Scope, not sharpness, lands it here' punchline carries
  the claim once.
- Work-through step 5: delegate close+one-line mechanics to the Out of
  scope section via the 'rule it out of scope' leading phrase instead of
  restating them.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-05 17:48:56 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 7d34a8dc38 Split fog and out-of-scope into separate explanatory sections
QA follow-up: the Fog of war section was teaching both concepts, which
muddies the leading word — fog should point only *toward* the
destination. Now Fog of war teaches only the not-yet-specified bucket
(with the two-way fog-or-ticket sharpness test restored), and a new
Out of scope section owns the scope axis: beyond the destination,
closed not graduating, kept out of Decisions so far.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-05 17:44:13 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 3ea01314c1 Rename the two buckets to plain map headings: Not yet specified / Out of scope
Following review: the map-body headings a cold reader sees should be
self-evident without having read the skill, so drop the metaphor from
the headings — `## Not yet specified` (in-scope, unripe) and
`## Out of scope` (beyond the destination). Keep **fog of war** as the
leading word: it still titles the explanatory section and drives the
"clears the fog" / "graduate the fog" behavior in the prose.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-05 17:35:50 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 299eb0c017 Give wayfinder a distinct Deferred section for beyond-destination work
Fog is the undiscovered frontier *toward* the destination — in scope,
just not yet sharp — so it graduates into tickets as the frontier
advances. Work ruled out of *this* effort's scope was being parked in
Fog too, where it read as takeable frontier (an unblocked, unclaimed
ticket is indistinguishable from a live one).

Add a dedicated `## Deferred` section for beyond-the-destination work:
it never graduates (the frontier stops at the destination) and returns
only as a fresh effort if the destination is redrawn. The "Fog or
ticket?" test becomes "Fog, ticket, or deferred?", gated on scope as
well as sharpness, and both charting and working-the-map now defer a
mis-scoped ticket (close it, one line in Deferred) rather than leaving
it on the frontier or logging it in Decisions so far.

Builds on #455 (destination as the leading word / destination fixes
scope).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-05 15:08:48 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 4691566bbb Merge pull request #455 from mattpocock/wayfinder-destination-purpose
Reframe wayfinder around "destination" as the leading word
2026-07-05 15:03:18 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 913a105881 Split charting triage into two grilling steps: destination, then frontier
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-05 15:02:39 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 c808f64f92 Make triage step 1 breadth-first: fix scope, then find the frontier
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-05 15:00:34 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 53c6219cd2 Reframe wayfinder around "destination" as the leading word
Wayfinding finds the way to a destination rather than building it. The
destination varies per effort and is named first, since it shapes every
ticket. Adds a Destination map-body field, makes it triage step 1, and
unifies the stray "goal" mentions onto "destination".

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-05 14:57:57 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 272f99b225 Merge pull request #436 from mattpocock/wayfinder-assign-to-claim
wayfinder: claim by assigning the ticket, not a label
2026-07-03 11:37:11 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 6f9e9956fd wayfinder: claim by assigning the ticket, not a label
A session now claims a ticket by assigning it to the dev driving the
map, rather than setting a `wayfinder:claimed` label. The assignee is
the claim; an open, unassigned ticket is unclaimed. Reads more naturally
in the tracker's own UI and frees the label vocabulary to
`wayfinder:<type>` alone.

Updates the GitHub and GitLab tracker-operations docs to the assignee
mechanism (`--add-assignee @me` / `--assignee @me`). The local-markdown
tracker keeps its `Status: claimed` line — a file store has no assignee.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-03 11:34:42 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub efa058a349 Merge pull request #435 from mattpocock/wayfinder-native-blocking-rationale
wayfinder: prefer native blocking, and say why
2026-07-03 10:44:51 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 8c2a4c554a wayfinder: tighten blocking rule, update GH/GL templates
Concision pass on the blocking rule (fold the "wherever the tracker has
one" clause into the fallback sentence; drop restatements). Bring the
GitHub and GitLab issue-tracker templates up to the same standard: the
GitHub template now carries the native issue-dependencies recipe and
frontier query; the GitLab template names the native /blocked_by link
(Premium/Ultimate) with the body-convention fallback.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-03 10:42:56 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 b289481499 wayfinder: prefer native blocking, and say why
The blocking rule now leads with the tracker's native dependency
relationship and encodes the rationale: native rendering makes the
frontier visible in the tracker's own UI, so the human sees what's
takeable without opening the map. Notes the body-convention fallback
for trackers that lack native blocking (GitHub has it; GitLab only on
paid tiers).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-03 10:39:04 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub e9dea692fd Merge pull request #434 from mattpocock/fix/tdd-code-review-reference
docs: fix tdd skill reference to code-review skill
2026-07-03 10:02:26 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 bd453a6742 docs: fix tdd skill reference to code-review skill
The tdd skill pointed at a `review` skill that no longer exists; the
review skill is now named `code-review`. Update the reference.

Fixes #432

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-03 09:53:34 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub aed86f6b35 Merge pull request #433 from mattpocock/grilling-gate-and-leading-word
grilling: add confirmation gate and grill leading word
2026-07-03 09:49:36 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 e1c025eaee Add minor changeset for grilling gate and leading word
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-03 09:48:46 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 0e9a072792 grilling: add confirmation gate and grill leading word
Add a hard stop so the agent won't enact the plan until the user
confirms shared understanding is reached. Recruit the pretrained
"grill" leading word in the description, and re-sync the docs page
with the new gate behaviour.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-03 09:47:48 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 1445797da5 Merge pull request #428 from mattpocock/wayfinder-plan-big-work
wayfinder: reframe description around planning big work
2026-07-02 14:29:34 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 8cc3328633 wayfinder: reframe description around planning big work
The description does the skill's invocation work, so lead with the trigger
that actually reaches for Wayfinder — a huge chunk of work, more than one
agent session can hold — instead of the softer "chart a route through a
foggy problem". Skill body and fog-of-war mechanic unchanged.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 14:28:49 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 5f45f2e35a Merge pull request #409 from mattpocock/research-skill
Add the research skill
2026-07-02 14:06:32 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 728826c9d2 Merge pull request #425 from mattpocock/wayfinder-remove-handoff
wayfinder: remove the Handoff ceremony
2026-07-02 13:49:30 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 1f16ea9499 wayfinder: remove the Handoff ceremony
Every session ended with a Handoff that queried the frontier and emitted
per-ticket copy-paste commands — real token cost each session. Cut it
entirely and let the natural flow carry continuation: the next
/wayfinder session already loads the map and picks the next frontier
ticket, so nothing is lost, just deferred to re-invocation.

Reconciles the references left behind: the one-ticket-per-session rule
and "charting is one session's work" constraint survive as plain lines;
the Refer-by-name paragraph drops its Handoff mentions.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 13:48:13 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub a83f22b60f Merge pull request #421 from mattpocock/add-claude-handoff-skill
Add claude-handoff skill (in-progress)
2026-07-02 11:33:48 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 b25e2b3787 claude-handoff: add to in-progress README index
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 11:32:04 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub e0d0d84274 Merge pull request #422 from mattpocock/wayfinder-refer-by-name
wayfinder: refer to maps and tickets by name, not id
2026-07-02 11:31:36 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 a12cca62fa wayfinder: use placeholders in Handoff example, drop no-op
Cut the "(trailing name orients you; it's ignored on paste)" gloss —
a # comment is self-evident. Replace the arbitrary "Briefing pipeline"
map name and specific ticket names with <map name>/<ticket name>
placeholders, consistent with the surrounding <map-url>/<issue-url>
style so nothing reads as a real referent.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 11:28:42 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 5a7ee93f01 claude-handoff: say handoff summary, not document
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 11:26:55 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 eb63f6e92c wayfinder: dedup identity claim in Refer-by-name
"id stays the identity" duplicated the Tickets section's "issue id is
its identity" — single source of truth belongs there (co-located with
the wiring/blocking mechanics that depend on ids). Reword to state the
pasteable-handle exception (link target, Handoff URL) without
re-defining identity. Trim redundant rationale wording.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 11:26:41 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 8347a41614 claude-handoff: require descriptive --name
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 11:25:18 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 8f3401d1a1 claude-handoff: reuse original handoff wording
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 11:24:51 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 ee014fa8b1 wayfinder: refer to maps and tickets by name, not id
Add a "Refer by name" convention so Wayfinder surfaces maps and
tickets by their human-friendly title in everything the human reads
(narration, Decisions-so-far, Handoff) rather than bare ids, numbers,
or slugs — a wall of #42, #43, #44 is illegible; names read at a
glance. The id/URL stays the identity and pasteable handle, riding
inside the name's link.

Update the Handoff example to demonstrate it: name the map in the
header and annotate each parallel command with its ticket name.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 11:23:55 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 f8d12710f7 Add claude-handoff skill (in-progress)
User-invoked skill mirroring handoff, but hands the conversation summary
to a fresh background agent via `claude --bg` instead of saving a
markdown document.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 11:22:35 +01:00
Matt Pocock a5c124ef9c Made wayfinder model-invocable 2026-07-02 11:01:48 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub c6b033e93a Merge pull request #420 from mattpocock/wayfinder-branch-terminology
fix(wayfinder): rename "Two branches" to "Two modes"
2026-07-02 09:57:03 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 cb51924fbe fix(wayfinder): rename "Two branches" to "Two modes"
The word "branch" in the Invocation section primes git-aware agents
(Sonnet, GPT-5.5) to create git branches when running the skill,
littering established environments with per-session branches that then
have to be merged. Nothing here refers to git — the two "branches" are
the two invocation modes (chart the map / work through it). Rename to
"modes" to remove the false cue.

Fixes #418

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 09:51:01 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub ab6ef44652 Merge pull request #419 from mattpocock/wayfinder-map-is-index
refactor(wayfinder): make the map an index, not a store
2026-07-02 09:47:36 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 927293589b refactor(wayfinder): make the map an index, not a store
State the no-duplication contract up front with a leading word: the map
indexes decisions and points at the tickets that hold them; a decision
lives in exactly one place — its ticket — so the map only gists and links.

Also close a fog-vs-ticket duplication: graduating fog into a ticket now
clears the graduated patch from the Fog.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 09:45:58 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 7687025249 Merge pull request #413 from mattpocock/wayfinder-collaborative-tracker
feat(wayfinder): make the map collaborative via the issue tracker
2026-07-02 09:39:26 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 2ba3bd848f refactor(wayfinder): fog-vs-ticket test as a list
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 09:38:48 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 198efb1958 refactor(wayfinder): clarify fog-vs-ticket boundary
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 09:36:40 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 039820a47d refactor(wayfinder): loosen fog length, dedup fog guidance
Drop the "one-liner" constraint — fog entries can be as loose or full as
the view allows. Point the map template's Fog comment at the Fog-of-war
section instead of restating it, and remove the duplicated "not a ticket"
now that the keep-out clause covers it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 09:32:17 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 d49cd08a11 docs(wayfinder): spell out what goes in the map's Fog section
The Fog-of-war section explained the loop but not the content. Add
explicit inclusion/exclusion guidance: dim decisions/investigations
coming but not yet specifiable, as rough one-liners — not what's already
decided (Decisions so far) or actionable now (a ticket).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 09:30:26 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 46be3d60a0 feat(wayfinder): add explicit map and ticket body templates
Show the map body (Notes / Decisions so far / Fog) and the ticket body
(Question) as literal markdown templates instead of describing them in
prose, so a charting session reproduces the same shape every run. The
template carries the structure; surrounding prose trimmed to avoid
restating the zone list.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 09:27:46 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 e2d606b9fc refactor(wayfinder): aggressive duplication pass
Single-source the frontier and fog definitions. The Tickets section owns
"frontier"; Fog-of-war owns the loop and terminal condition. Remove the
frontier re-definition and fog-nature restatement from Fog-of-war, the
duplicated frontier criteria from the work sequence, the repeated "way to
the goal is clear" from the intro, the "low resolution" restatement, and
the clear-context prose that its own example already shows.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 09:22:47 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 1e5074a1e2 refactor(wayfinder): pruning pass — cut no-ops and duplication
Drop the "shared artifact, not a private file" sentence and the "one URL
the whole team reads" restatement (no-ops the agent obeys by default).
Fold Chart step 4 into step 3 — "don't chart what you can't see" already
lives in the Fog of war section (single source of truth).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-02 09:18:54 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 5c3c49df1a feat(wayfinder): make the map collaborative via the issue tracker
Move the map off a local Markdown file and onto the repo's configured
issue tracker. The map is a single wayfinder:map issue whose tickets are
its child issues — one shared URL the team can watch and comment on.

Blocking, claiming (wayfinder:claimed), and the frontier query use native
tracker semantics; a session loads the map at low resolution (Notes +
per-closed-ticket context pointers + Fog prose) and zooms into tickets on
demand. Per-tracker mechanics live behind the docs/agents/issue-tracker.md
pointer, so setup-matt-pocock-skills seeds a "Wayfinding operations"
section for GitHub, GitLab, and local-markdown; absent that doc, Wayfinder
defaults to local-markdown.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-01 20:28:48 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 7a83a3a682 Merge pull request #412 from mattpocock/rename-decision-mapping-to-wayfinding
Rename decision-mapping skill to wayfinder
2026-07-01 19:51:33 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 de7f02e2b1 refactor(wayfinder): neutralize intro, drop persona framing
Remove the "You are the Wayfinder" second-person persona from the intro,
description, and README so the agent doesn't adopt a persona. Keep the
leading-word frame (chart / fog / frontier / map); wayfinder stays only as
the skill/invocation name.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-01 19:51:05 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 01f0b7e11a refactor(wayfinder): invoke as /wayfinder, not /wayfinding
The persona is the Wayfinder; the invocation should match. Rename the
folder and skill name to wayfinder and update the invocation examples,
README link, and changeset. "wayfinding" stays only as the activity noun.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-01 19:48:33 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 4027ea6afd refactor(decision-mapping): rename to wayfinding
Reframe the planning skill around the Wayfinder persona — chart a route
through a foggy problem, resolving tickets one at a time until the way to
the goal is clear. "Decision map" was jargony and inaccurate (only 1 of 4
ticket types is a decision).

Rename the folder and skill name, rewrite the description and framing, and
prune: unify node->ticket, bind "frontier" to the unblocked set, drop the
duplicated "one question at a time" (owned by /grilling), trim intro no-ops.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-01 19:47:01 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 0d74d01cbc feat: add the research skill
A small, model-invoked skill that spins up a background agent to
investigate a question against high-trust primary sources, then leaves a
single cited Markdown file wherever the repo keeps such notes.

Wires it into the plugin set, both READMEs (Model-invoked), a docs page,
and the ask-matt router, per the repo's promoted-skill conventions.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-01 16:32:15 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub b38badf709 Merge pull request #408 from mattpocock/chore/implement-public-skill
chore: add implement skill to public plugin set
2026-07-01 16:30:41 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 b3b1d8d1fd chore: add implement skill to public plugin set
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-01 16:26:13 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 21f59763be Merge pull request #393 from mattpocock/tdd-reference-only-seams
tdd: reshape into reference-only with pre-agreed seams
2026-07-01 12:51:40 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub ec4ebab4f0 Merge pull request #406 from mattpocock/ask-matt-full-skill-map
ask-matt: map the full skill set, add router maintenance rule
2026-07-01 12:29:16 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 930a450089 Add changeset for ask-matt full skill map
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-01 12:28:34 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 770a0504db ask-matt: map the full skill set, add router maintenance rule
Ask Matt was missing five skills that now exist and are user-reachable:
tdd (the red-green engine implement drives), diagnosing-bugs (there was
no route for "something's broken"), domain-modeling and codebase-design
(the two vocabulary references), and grilling (the shared primitive).

- SKILL.md: add a "Something's broken" on-ramp for diagnosing-bugs, a
  "Vocabulary underneath" section for domain-modeling/codebase-design,
  weave tdd into the main flow, flesh out prototype, broaden the
  description from "user-invoked skills" to "the skills".
- docs/engineering/ask-matt.md: re-sync the framing to match.
- CLAUDE.md: add a maintenance rule so any future skill change triggers
  an Ask Matt re-check, beside the existing docs-page re-sync rule.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-01 12:25:31 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 26512d74b1 Merge pull request #405 from mattpocock/rename/review-to-code-review
Rename review skill to code-review, promote to engineering
2026-07-01 12:06:56 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 8010ddb2bb docs: thread code-review through the full build-chain flow
The build chain now ends at code-review. Update every flow doc that draws
the chain so it reads end-to-end:

    grill-with-docs → to-prd → to-issues → implement → code-review

- grill-with-docs / to-prd / to-issues: extend the diagram; point the
  downstream neighbour at implement (which drives tdd internally).
- tdd: reframe from "final step" to the engine inside implement's step.
- implement: extend the diagram to include the review pass.
- ask-matt: narrate the flow ending in review (docs) and note that
  /implement closes out with /code-review (SKILL.md).
- writing-docs guide: refresh the example chain.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-01 12:05:16 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 14c13c5bf9 Rename review skill to code-review and promote to engineering
Rename the in-progress `review` skill to `code-review` and move it from
`skills/in-progress/` into the promoted `skills/engineering/` bucket.

- Add it to `.claude-plugin/plugin.json` and the Model-invoked sections of
  the top-level and Engineering READMEs; drop it from the in-progress README.
- Add a docs page at `docs/engineering/code-review.md`.
- Point `/implement` and its docs at `/code-review`.
- Update the smell-baseline changeset reference; add a changeset for the move.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-01 12:04:12 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub 5a4191541c Merge pull request #404 from mattpocock/docs/chain-ends-at-implement
docs: end the build chain at implement, not tdd
2026-07-01 11:44:01 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 f72b3d5bd4 docs: end the build chain at implement, not tdd
The canonical build chain is grill-with-docs → to-prd → to-issues →
implement, with tdd as the red-green loop implement drives internally
rather than a chain step of its own.

- Update the chain diagram on grill-with-docs, to-prd, to-issues, and tdd.
- Reframe tdd's "Where it fits": it's the engine inside the implement
  step, still independently reachable, no longer the terminal.
- Point to-prd and to-issues at implement as the thing that builds the
  tickets, giving implement the inbound links it previously lacked.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-01 11:43:08 +01:00
Matt PocockandGitHub b8c052f56e Merge pull request #403 from mattpocock/docs/skill-pages-remaining
docs: pages for the remaining 22 promoted skills
2026-07-01 11:37:56 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 80e9dcc685 tdd: drop the refactor stage — red → green, not red → green → refactor
Refactoring belongs to the review stage, not the implementation loop.
Remove the refactor rule and the now-orphaned refactoring.md (its home is
the review skill), and point the loop's rule at the review skill so it
isn't re-added.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-06-30 09:48:57 +01:00
Matt PocockandClaude Opus 4.8 e81f97660a tdd: reshape into reference-only with pre-agreed seams
The red → green → refactor loop is anchored by leading words the model
already holds, so the step-by-step Workflow mostly restated the loop and
duplicated the horizontal-slicing anti-pattern. Drop the Workflow and
per-cycle checklist; fold their durable idea (vertical slices / tracer
bullets) into Anti-patterns and a short Rules-of-the-loop list.

Introduce **seam** as the leading word for where tests go, collapsing the
old Philosophy "public interfaces" prose and the Planning "confirm
interface / behaviors" handshake into one rule: test only at pre-agreed
seams, confirmed with the user before any test is written.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-06-30 09:43:49 +01:00
111 changed files with 1408 additions and 572 deletions
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ Engineering skills depend on per-repo config (issue tracker, triage label vocabu
We split these into **hard-dependency** and **soft-dependency** skills:
- **Hard dependency** (`to-issues`, `to-prd`, `triage`) — include an explicit one-liner: _"… should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not."_ Without the mapping, output is wrong, not just fuzzy.
- **Hard dependency** (`to-tickets`, `to-spec`, `triage`) — include an explicit one-liner: _"… should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not."_ Without the mapping, output is wrong, not just fuzzy.
- **Soft dependency** (`diagnose`, `tdd`, `improve-codebase-architecture`) — reference "the project's domain glossary" and "ADRs in the area you're touching" in vague prose only. If the docs aren't there, the skill still works; output is just less sharp.
The split keeps soft-dependency skills token-light and avoids cargo-culting the setup pointer into places where it isn't load-bearing.
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
# Ship the skill set as a native Claude Code plugin; defer a native Codex plugin
These skills have always been installable via [skills.sh](https://skills.sh/mattpocock/skills) (`npx skills add mattpocock/skills`), which copies editable skill files into a user's project across Claude Code, Codex, and other Agent-Skills-standard harnesses. A recurring request is a **plug-and-play** distribution: subscribe to the set as a read-only, always-current bundle you don't edit, rather than a fork you own. That is exactly what native plugin systems provide.
We ship a native **Claude Code plugin** and, for now, **defer** a native **Codex plugin**. The split is forced by how each ecosystem's plugin manifest selects skills, against this repo's bucketed layout.
## The constraint: bucketed skills vs. single-path selection
Skills live in bucket folders under `skills/``engineering/` and `productivity/` are **promoted** (shipped); `misc/`, `personal/`, `in-progress/`, and `deprecated/` are **not**. A plugin must expose only the promoted set, which spans two of those bucket folders.
- **Claude Code** — `.claude-plugin/plugin.json` accepts `skills` as an **array of explicit skill-directory paths**. We list the promoted skills one by one, exclude everything else with zero ambiguity, and add `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` so the repo is its own single-plugin marketplace. Verified end to end: `claude plugin validate . --strict` passes, and `marketplace add``install` resolves all promoted skills.
- **Codex** — `.codex-plugin/plugin.json` accepts `skills` only as a **single path string** (arrays are rejected with `missing or invalid plugin.json`), and Codex discovers `SKILL.md` files recursively under it. There is no way to name two bucket folders, or to curate a subset, from one path. Two escape hatches were tested and rejected:
- Pointing at `./skills/` would also ship `deprecated/`, `in-progress/`, `personal/`, and `misc/` — retired, draft, and personal skills we deliberately don't promote.
- A curated flat directory of **symlinks** into the buckets does not survive install: Codex copies the plugin tree into its cache and **drops symlinks**, so the skills arrive empty.
The only robust ways to give Codex a single promoted-only path are (a) **restructure** so `skills/` contains only promoted skills (moving the non-promoted buckets out — a large blast radius across `CLAUDE.md`, `scripts/link-skills.sh`, the bucket READMEs, and the local dev workflow that relies on `in-progress/` and `personal/`), or (b) **commit duplicate copies** of promoted skills into a flat directory (a sync burden and a second source of truth). Both are structural decisions, not something to bundle into shipping the Claude plugin. This is very likely the original, half-remembered reason a plugin wasn't shipped earlier: the manifest formats didn't cleanly express a curated subset of a bucketed repo.
## Decision
- Ship the **Claude Code plugin** now (`.claude-plugin/plugin.json` + `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json`), curated to the promoted set, as the headline v1.2 deliverable.
- Keep **skills.sh** as the universal installer — it already serves Codex and other harnesses today, so no Codex user is left without an install path.
- **Defer** the native Codex plugin until we decide between restructuring `skills/` to promoted-only vs. committing a generated flat copy. Revisit when Codex either supports a `skills` array / include-list or preserves symlinks on install.
## Invariants this creates
- Every promoted skill has an entry in `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`'s `skills` array (this already stood as a `CLAUDE.md` rule; it now also gates the plugin's contents).
- `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`'s `version` tracks `package.json`'s version — bump both together on release. Claude uses the plugin `version` to decide when installed users see an update.
+5 -3
View File
@@ -2,10 +2,12 @@
Every `SKILL.md` in this repo is a skill. The one axis that splits them is **invocation** — who can reach it:
- **User-invoked** — reachable **only by the human typing its name**. Set `disable-model-invocation: true` in the frontmatter. The `description` is **human-facing**: a one-line summary read by a person browsing slash-commands. Strip trigger lists ("Use when the user says…").
- **Model-invoked** — reachable by **model or user**. The default: omit `disable-model-invocation`. The `description` is **model-facing** and keeps rich trigger phrasing ("Use when the user wants…, mentions…, asks for…") so auto-invocation fires. The test for whether a skill should stay model-invoked: _could the model usefully reach for this autonomously?_ (Reuse is the reason to extract a skill, not the test.)
- **User-invoked** — reachable **only by the human typing its name**. Set `disable-model-invocation: true` in the frontmatter (Claude Code) and `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` in `agents/openai.yaml` (Codex). The `description` is **human-facing**: a one-line summary read by a person browsing slash-commands. Strip trigger lists ("Use when the user says…").
- **Model-invoked** — reachable by **model or user**. The default: omit `disable-model-invocation` and the `policy` block from `agents/openai.yaml`. The `description` is **model-facing** and keeps rich trigger phrasing ("Use when the user wants…, mentions…, asks for…") so auto-invocation fires. The test for whether a skill should stay model-invoked: _could the model usefully reach for this autonomously?_ (Reuse is the reason to extract a skill, not the test.)
Because a user-invoked skill has no description, nothing but the human can reach it — no other skill can fire it. So a user-invoked skill may invoke model-invoked skills, but it can never reach another user-invoked skill.
Each harness excludes a user-invoked skill from the model's reach in its own way, so nothing but the human can fire it — no other skill can. A user-invoked skill may invoke model-invoked skills, but it can never reach another user-invoked skill.
Every skill also carries an `agents/openai.yaml` beside its `SKILL.md`. It holds Codex UI metadata — `interface.display_name` and `interface.short_description` for the skill picker — and, for user-invoked skills, the `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` that pairs with `disable-model-invocation`. Keep the two in sync: a skill is user-invoked in both harnesses or neither.
Bucket `README.md`s and the top-level `README.md` group entries into **User-invoked** and **Model-invoked**.
+4 -4
View File
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ npx skills update <name>
## What it does
One or two plain-language paragraphs. Lead with the skill's one-sentence job, then state the **defining constraint** — the single fact that makes this skill behave differently from the obvious default (for `to-prd`: it does not interview the user again, it synthesises what is already known). Write it as a plain declarative sentence — never a labelled aside like "The defining constraint:" or "The key thing:"; the formula reads as filler. This line is the most valuable on the page; never omit it.
One or two plain-language paragraphs. Lead with the skill's one-sentence job, then state the **defining constraint** — the single fact that makes this skill behave differently from the obvious default (for `to-spec`: it does not interview the user again, it synthesises what is already known). Write it as a plain declarative sentence — never a labelled aside like "The defining constraint:" or "The key thing:"; the formula reads as filler. This line is the most valuable on the page; never omit it.
## When to reach for it
@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ How and when you reach for the skill — two beats, both effectively always pres
## Prerequisites
Optional — include only when the skill needs something in place to be functional; omit the heading entirely otherwise. Covers: a **workspace it writes into** (a stateful skill like `grill-with-docs` writes `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs; `teach` builds a whole directory — say what it writes and where), **prior setup** (`triage`/`to-prd`/`to-issues` need `setup-matt-pocock-skills` to have configured an issue tracker), or **repo-specific tooling**. A stateless skill that runs anywhere has no prerequisites — drop the section.
Optional — include only when the skill needs something in place to be functional; omit the heading entirely otherwise. Covers: a **workspace it writes into** (a stateful skill like `grill-with-docs` writes `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs; `teach` builds a whole directory — say what it writes and where), **prior setup** (`triage`/`to-spec`/`to-tickets` need `setup-matt-pocock-skills` to have configured an issue tracker), or **repo-specific tooling**. A stateless skill that runs anywhere has no prerequisites — drop the section.
## <free-form middle>
@@ -51,13 +51,13 @@ The single non-negotiable: **surface the skill's leading word / defining idea**
## It's working if
Optional. A short, checkable list of the observable signals that tell the reader the skill is actually doing its job — what they should see when it fires, and by absence when it hasn't. Include it when a skill has crisp tells (e.g. `to-prd` writes without re-interviewing you; a leading word reappearing in the trace); omit the heading when the signals are vague. A few bullets, no more.
Optional. A short, checkable list of the observable signals that tell the reader the skill is actually doing its job — what they should see when it fires, and by absence when it hasn't. Include it when a skill has crisp tells (e.g. `to-spec` writes without re-interviewing you; a leading word reappearing in the trace); omit the heading when the signals are vague. A few bullets, no more.
## Where it fits
Always present. Situate the skill in the system in a sentence or two:
- **Role.** Name it: a **chain step** (`grill-with-docs → to-prd → to-issues → tdd`), a **run-once setup** (`setup-matt-pocock-skills`), **periodic maintenance** (`improve-codebase-architecture`, "every few days"), or a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone** (`diagnosing-bugs`, `prototype`, `handoff`). A standalone's map is one honest sentence — far better than omitting the section.
- **Role.** Name it: a **chain step** (`grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review`), a **run-once setup** (`setup-matt-pocock-skills`), **periodic maintenance** (`improve-codebase-architecture`, "every few days"), or a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone** (`diagnosing-bugs`, `prototype`, `handoff`). A standalone's map is one honest sentence — far better than omitting the section.
- **Neighbours.** The one or two siblings that matter, each with a because-clause, linked absolutely.
- **The map.** Point to [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt), the router over the whole set, so this page stays a node and never has to redraw the graph.
-5
View File
@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@
---
"mattpocock-skills": minor
---
Add a fourth **Task** ticket type to the **`decision-mapping`** skill. Some blockers are neither a decision, a prototype, nor research — just literal manual work that has to happen before the discussion can move forward (moving data, signing up for a third-party service, provisioning access). The agent automates it where it can, otherwise hands the human a precise checklist, and records any resulting facts later tickets depend on.
-5
View File
@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@
---
"mattpocock-skills": minor
---
Make the **`prototype`** skill model-invoked, so the agent can reach for it autonomously (and other skills can too). Its description is rewritten around the leading word _prototype_ — throwaway code that answers a design question — with one trigger per branch (state/logic sanity-check, or UI exploration).
-5
View File
@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@
---
"mattpocock-skills": patch
---
Give the in-progress **`review`** skill an always-on Fowler smell baseline on its Standards axis. A curated ~12 high-signal "Bad Smells in Code" (Mysterious Name, Duplicated Code, Feature Envy, Data Clumps, Primitive Obsession, Repeated Switches, Shotgun Surgery, Divergent Change, Speculative Generality, Message Chains, Middle Man, Refused Bequest) are inlined into `SKILL.md` as a fixed baseline alongside whatever the repo documents — not a new third axis. Two binding rules keep it safe: a documented repo standard overrides the baseline, and every smell is reported as a judgement call, never a hard violation.
-5
View File
@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@
---
"mattpocock-skills": patch
---
Add the **tautological test** anti-pattern to the `tdd` skill. Tests whose assertion is recomputed the way the code computes it pass by construction and give zero confidence — distinct from the implementation-coupling anti-pattern already covered. Added as a peer at the same three sites: a Philosophy principle (expected values must come from an independent source of truth), a per-cycle checklist gate, and a BAD/GOOD example pair in `tests.md`.
-5
View File
@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@
---
"mattpocock-skills": patch
---
Extend the **`triage`** skill to triage external pull requests, treating a PR as an issue with attached code that runs through the same roles and state machine. PRs flow inline alongside issues (gated by a per-repo setup toggle), discovery surfaces only external PRs, the bug-only "reproduce" step is generalized into a single "verify the claim" step, and a redundancy check resolves already-implemented requests to `wontfix` without polluting the out-of-scope knowledge base. `setup-matt-pocock-skills` gains the PRs-as-a-request-surface toggle for GitHub/GitLab.
+23
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
{
"name": "mattpocock",
"owner": {
"name": "Matt Pocock",
"url": "https://www.aihero.dev"
},
"description": "Matt Pocock's skills for real engineering, as an installable Claude Code plugin.",
"plugins": [
{
"name": "mattpocock-skills",
"source": "./",
"description": "Matt Pocock's agent skills for real engineering — grilling, spec/ticket flows, TDD, code review, domain modelling and more.",
"category": "engineering",
"keywords": [
"engineering",
"skills",
"tdd",
"code-review",
"grilling"
]
}
]
}
+25 -2
View File
@@ -1,5 +1,23 @@
{
"name": "mattpocock-skills",
"version": "1.2.0",
"description": "Matt Pocock's agent skills for real engineering — grilling, spec/ticket flows, TDD, code review, domain modelling and more. Plug-and-play, not vibe coding.",
"author": {
"name": "Matt Pocock",
"url": "https://www.aihero.dev"
},
"homepage": "https://www.aihero.dev/s/skills-newsletter",
"repository": "https://github.com/mattpocock/skills",
"license": "MIT",
"keywords": [
"engineering",
"skills",
"tdd",
"code-review",
"grilling",
"domain-modeling",
"productivity"
],
"skills": [
"./skills/engineering/ask-matt",
"./skills/engineering/diagnosing-bugs",
@@ -8,11 +26,16 @@
"./skills/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture",
"./skills/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills",
"./skills/engineering/tdd",
"./skills/engineering/to-issues",
"./skills/engineering/to-prd",
"./skills/engineering/to-spec",
"./skills/engineering/to-tickets",
"./skills/engineering/wayfinder",
"./skills/engineering/implement",
"./skills/engineering/prototype",
"./skills/engineering/research",
"./skills/engineering/domain-modeling",
"./skills/engineering/codebase-design",
"./skills/engineering/code-review",
"./skills/engineering/resolving-merge-conflicts",
"./skills/productivity/grill-me",
"./skills/productivity/grilling",
"./skills/productivity/handoff",
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
## Why this is out of scope
Every issue-tracker backend hard-codes a CLI shape into the skills (commands, flags, output parsing). Each new backend is permanent maintenance surface — it has to keep working as the tool's CLI evolves, and it has to keep being tested against `/to-prd`, `/to-issues`, `/triage`, and friends. That cost is only worth paying for trackers a meaningful fraction of users actually have.
Every issue-tracker backend hard-codes a CLI shape into the skills (commands, flags, output parsing). Each new backend is permanent maintenance surface — it has to keep working as the tool's CLI evolves, and it has to keep being tested against `/to-spec`, `/to-tickets`, `/triage`, and friends. That cost is only worth paying for trackers a meaningful fraction of users actually have.
"Mainstream" is a judgment call, not a numeric bar:
Symlink
+1
View File
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
CLAUDE.md
+114
View File
@@ -1,5 +1,119 @@
# mattpocock-skills
## 1.2.0
### Minor Changes
- [#551](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/551) [`697d4ce`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/697d4ce9742da558fd1ba6697c8e9775e2e302dd) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Add Codex metadata alongside each skill's Claude Code frontmatter so the set works in both harnesses without generated copies.
- Add an `agents/openai.yaml` beside every `SKILL.md` with Codex UI metadata (`interface.display_name`, `interface.short_description`).
- Mark every user-invoked skill with `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false`, the Codex analog of `disable-model-invocation: true`, so Codex excludes it from implicit invocation while explicit `$skill` invocation still works.
- Document the dual-harness invocation model in `.agents/invocation.md`, `CLAUDE.md`, and the promoted-bucket READMEs.
- Add `AGENTS.md` as a symlink to `CLAUDE.md` so Codex reads the same repo instructions.
- [#488](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/488) [`cdec9f6`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/cdec9f6eb24dbfe606e3ad9b3eb457ba09210b85) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Reword how the **`prototype`** skill handles its artifacts around a single idea: **the prototype is a primary source**. Rather than being deleted once it's answered its question, the prototype is captured as runnable evidence on a throwaway branch (`prototype/<name>`) out of main, with a context pointer to it left on the implementation issue — so the main branch keeps only the validated decision while the exploration stays findable. The answer (verdict + question) is still captured durably in an issue/ADR/commit.
- [#536](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/536) [`42a5b70`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/42a5b70fcacc7baff1977b13f3919fb2f63af14e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Ship the skill set as a native **Claude Code plugin**. The repo is now its own single-plugin marketplace, so you can subscribe to the promoted skills as a managed, read-only bundle instead of copying editable files:
```
/plugin marketplace add mattpocock/skills
/plugin install mattpocock-skills@mattpocock
```
`.claude-plugin/plugin.json` gains full marketplace metadata (version, description, author, license, keywords) and a sibling `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` lists the plugin. `skills.sh` remains the universal installer (and the path for Codex and other harnesses today); a native Codex plugin is deferred — see `.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md` for why.
- [#538](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/538) [`2602257`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/260225724133c4a204489599f04642aa089259a0) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Wayfinder now burns research tickets down with subagents instead of leaving them parked for a separately-launched session.
Research stays a real ticket type — it's a genuine shared blocker that downstream decisions hang on, and that dependency is exactly what the frontier's blocking edges exist to render. What changes is how it's resolved: because research is AFK, charting doesn't stop and read it. After creating the tickets, the charting session fires a `/research` subagent for each research ticket to burn it down in parallel, capturing the findings on a throwaway `research/<name>` branch with a context pointer. Research tickets are the one exception to _one ticket per session_.
- [#533](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/533) [`45afd80`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/45afd8074a8b7de5fe073845d080fa9dd6c429fa) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Add a YAGNI scoping filter to the **`improve-codebase-architecture`** skill's Explore step. Instead of scanning the whole repo evenly, it now scopes to where change is actually landing: if you name a direction it takes it, otherwise it reads the last ~20 commit messages to bias exploration toward actively-developed paths. A deepening opportunity in code nobody touches is a refactor you'll never cash in — the leverage only pays off where you keep editing — so the report stops tidying dormant corners of the repo.
### Patch Changes
- [#535](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/535) [`e74fee8`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/e74fee89feb6025a6a74f6282feb7d33b1b6e578) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Make `/ask-matt` clued-up about `/wayfinder` — the heaviest, most cognitively demanding flow.
The router now sharpens the two routing mistakes people most often make with wayfinder:
- **Over-reaching for it.** It's slower and denser than a single grill, so it's flagged as the heaviest flow and reserved for the idea that genuinely won't fit one session — a well-scoped feature belongs on `/grill-with-docs`, not here.
- **Losing the way at the handoff.** When the map clears, wayfinder hands off, it doesn't build: merge onto the main flow at `/to-spec` (which collapses the map's linked decisions into a buildable plan) rather than looping the map straight into `/implement`. Straight-to-`/implement` is only for efforts that turned out genuinely small.
- [#502](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/502) [`44eed54`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/44eed545186ffd0263e8004867750b80cfddd215) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Make `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` friendlier and align the local-markdown tracker with the current spec.
- **Triage labels** are now asked about only when the `triage` skill is installed, and then as a single recommended-yes question ("keep the default triage labels?") instead of an override interrogation. When `triage` isn't installed, the section — and `docs/agents/triage-labels.md` — are skipped.
- **External PRs as a request surface** is no longer a setup question. The GitHub/GitLab templates still carry the flag, defaulted off; a user can flip it in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` later.
- **Domain docs** default to single-context without asking; multi-context is only offered when the repo shows monorepo signals.
- **Local-markdown tickets** are now one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md` — never a single combined `tickets.md`. `/to-tickets` and the local issue-tracker template now agree, and the spec file is `spec.md` (not `PRD.md`) to match `/to-spec`.
Docs pages for `setup-matt-pocock-skills` and `to-tickets` re-synced.
- [#532](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/532) [`170ad48`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/170ad48655825783d0193e850e31a9aac957bb95) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Reword **`grilling`** for general use. Its description and body no longer scope the interview to a software plan: "this plan" → "this", "enact the plan" → "act on it", and "exploring the codebase" → "exploring the environment". The technique is unchanged; it now reads as a stress-test of any plan, decision, or idea.
- [#534](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/534) [`7d694b7`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/7d694b7ae981ca221a8f759b15273fe7b5dc393e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Name the `/wayfinder` unit a **decision ticket**.
People kept reading a wayfinder ticket as an ordinary _implementation_ ticket — a slice of a build to execute — when wayfinder uses them as **decision tickets**: questions whose resolution is a decision. The skill description and its opening line now introduce "decision ticket" (and say what makes it one), and the `ask-matt` / engineering README wayfinder blurbs and the docs page match — while "ticket" stays the everyday word once the term is established. `CONTEXT.md` records **Decision ticket** as a domain term so the "avoid: ticket" guidance no longer contradicts wayfinder's deliberate use of the word.
## 1.1.0
### Minor Changes
- [#406](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/406) [`930a450`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/930a450089f77a49af09001d955db8452a4b867d) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Bring the **`ask-matt`** router up to date with the full skill set. It now maps five skills it was missing: **`tdd`** (woven into the main flow as the red-green engine `implement` drives), **`diagnosing-bugs`** (a new "Something's broken" on-ramp — there was previously no route for a bug), **`domain-modeling`** and **`codebase-design`** (a new "Vocabulary underneath" section), and **`grilling`** (the shared interview primitive). `prototype` is fleshed out as a standalone and the description broadens from "user-invoked skills" to "the skills". A maintenance rule is added to `CLAUDE.md` so any future skill add/rename/remove or flow change triggers an `ask-matt` re-check, beside the existing docs-page re-sync rule.
- [#464](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/464) [`639df6e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/639df6e7386dfddc739b2aecdeff37a876f2483b) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Promote and harden **`code-review`**. The in-progress **`review`** skill is renamed to **`code-review`** and moved from `in-progress/` into `engineering/`: it now ships in the plugin, is listed in the top-level and Engineering READMEs (Model-invoked), and has a docs page at `docs/engineering/code-review.md`. The `/implement` skill and docs point at `/code-review`.
It also gains an always-on **Fowler smell baseline** on its Standards axis — a curated ~12 high-signal "Bad Smells in Code" (Mysterious Name, Duplicated Code, Feature Envy, Data Clumps, Primitive Obsession, Repeated Switches, Shotgun Surgery, Divergent Change, Speculative Generality, Message Chains, Middle Man, Refused Bequest) inlined into `SKILL.md` as a fixed baseline alongside whatever the repo documents, not a new third axis. Two binding rules keep it safe: a documented repo standard overrides the baseline, and every smell is reported as a judgement call, never a hard violation.
- [#464](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/464) [`639df6e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/639df6e7386dfddc739b2aecdeff37a876f2483b) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Sharpen **`grilling`** on two fronts.
**A confirmation gate.** The agent won't enact the plan until you confirm the shared understanding has been reached — turning the skill's existing "shared understanding" completion criterion into an explicit stop-gate. The `description` also recruits the pretrained **`grill`** leading word ("Grill the user relentlessly") to sharpen invocation, and the docs page is re-synced.
**Facts vs. decisions.** Grilling now splits _facts_ (look them up — explore the codebase) from _decisions_ (put each one to the human and wait for their answer). The old blanket line — "if a question can be answered by exploring the codebase, explore the codebase instead" — was written for the live-human case, but once another skill runs grilling inside a resolve-the-ticket frame it read as license to answer _decisions_ autonomously too. Separating the two keeps a grilling agent from racing ahead and answering its own questions.
- [#463](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/463) [`af6d692`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/af6d6922c3e2b5288eef155346cbe319e4ed3bd0) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Add two adjacent Steering failure modes to **`writing-great-skills`**, both about how language you think of as "off" still steers the agent. **Negation** — the _elephant_ — is steering by prohibition: naming what _not_ to do drags the forbidden behaviour into context and makes it _more_ available, not less (_don't think of an elephant_), so the cure is to prompt the **positive**. **Negative Space** — the void — is blindness to the steering done by what you leave _out_: every decision a skill declines is delegated to the agent's priors rather than left neutral, so the cure is to read a draft for its silences and decide each omission deliberately (fill it, or leave it open as a real **branch**). Kept as two entries, not one — they carry different diagnostics and different cures — each a full `GLOSSARY.md` entry plus a `SKILL.md` failure-mode bullet, matching how every other failure mode is carried.
- [`850873c`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/850873cd73d5f81826ebf512ad35d2b1e113001f) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Make the **`prototype`** skill model-invoked, so the agent can reach for it autonomously (and other skills can too). Its description is rewritten around the leading word _prototype_ — throwaway code that answers a design question — with one trigger per branch (state/logic sanity-check, or UI exploration).
- [#409](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/409) [`0d74d01`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/0d74d01cbc64ca27778a49b38599f70c534e76a0) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Add the **`research`** skill — a small, model-invoked skill that spins up a **background agent** to investigate a question against **primary sources** (official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs), then leaves a single cited Markdown file wherever the repo keeps such notes. It's delegable reading legwork: you keep working while it reads, and get back a document to grill, plan, or design against. Listed in the top-level and Engineering READMEs (Model-invoked), added to `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`, given a docs page at `docs/engineering/research.md`, and routed as a Standalone in `ask-matt`.
- [#469](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/469) [`a0329ba`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/a0329ba95751f58566ed7ab484475917a68f1629) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Split the **`to-issues`** skill into a lean **Process** and a **Reference** section, and teach it to handle a **wide refactor** — a single mechanical change (like renaming a column) whose **blast radius** fans across the whole codebase, breaking thousands of call sites at once so no vertical slice can land green. The drafting step now points at two co-located reference blocks: the **Vertical slice rules** for ordinary tracer bullets, and **Wide refactors**, which slices the change by **expandcontract** (expand the new form beside the old, migrate call sites in batches sized by blast radius, then contract the old form away) so CI stays green batch to batch — or, when it can't, only at a final integrate-and-verify issue. The issue body template moves into Reference too.
- [#464](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/464) [`386d4ff`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/386d4ff719a7c420ad1454232d0436b01f1b8c17) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Unify the planning skills. **`to-prd` is renamed to `to-spec`** — "spec" is now the single through-line term (it still opens with "you may know this document as a PRD" for discoverability). **`to-plan` and `to-issues` are merged into one `to-tickets` skill, and `to-issues` is deleted.**
`to-tickets` breaks a plan, spec, or conversation into a set of **tickets** — tracer-bullet vertical slices, each declaring its **blocking edges**. That one artifact reads two ways depending on the tracker `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` configured: a **local file** (`tickets.md`) writes the edges as text and you work it top-to-bottom by hand; a **real tracker** writes them as native blocking links, so any ticket whose blockers are done is on the frontier and several agents can run at once. The edges live in the ticket either way — the medium only decides whether anything acts on them in parallel.
Publishing prefers the tracker's **native sub-issues** for parent → slice and **native blocking edges** for `Blocked by` where the tracker supports them, keeping the `## Parent` / `## Blocked by` body sections as the fallback. The "What to build" template points at where a `/prototype`'s code lives rather than inlining a snippet from it.
`ask-matt`'s main flow now routes `idea → /to-spec → /to-tickets → /implement`, and there are human-facing docs pages at `docs/engineering/to-spec.md` and `docs/engineering/to-tickets.md`.
- [#464](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/464) [`0557d57`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/0557d57579d9b3d39839fdaf8d4a6542b17539ce) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Settle wayfinder's place in the docs as a **situational on-ramp**, not the new main entry flow — the grill-led _idea → ship_ chain stays the front door (crowning wayfinder as the default spine is a v2-sized move, not a 1.1). The **`ask-matt`** router now names wayfinder's concrete triggers — a greenfield project or a huge feature build, too big for one session — and the two grill front doors (**`grill-me`**, **`grill-with-docs`**) signpost _up_ to wayfinder for the effort that's too big to hold in one session, so the on-ramp is discoverable from where a reader actually starts.
- [#464](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/464) [`639df6e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/639df6e7386dfddc739b2aecdeff37a876f2483b) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Graduate and reframe **`wayfinder`** — the skill for planning a huge chunk of work, more than one agent session can hold. It moves out of `in-progress/` into `engineering/` (plugin entry, top-level + Engineering READMEs under **User-invoked**, a docs page at `docs/engineering/wayfinder.md`, and a route in `ask-matt`), landing as a mature skill. The rename and reframe that got it there:
- **`decision-mapping` is renamed to `wayfinder`**, invoked as `/wayfinder`. "Decision map" was jargony and inaccurate — only one ticket type is actually a decision. The reframe charts a route through a foggy problem instead, giving one coherent leading-word frame — **fog of war**, **frontier**, **the map** — rather than an invented term layered on top.
- **Destination as the leading word.** Wayfinding finds the _way_ to a destination; it doesn't charge at building it. Naming the destination is the first act of charting — it fixes the scope and shapes every ticket — so the map gains a `## Destination` field every session orients to, and triage pins it before any ticket exists.
- **Plan, don't do.** The map produces **decisions, not deliverables**; it's done when nothing is left to decide before someone builds the thing. An effort can override this in its Notes.
- **The map is an index, not a store.** A decision lives in exactly one place — its ticket — so the map only gists and links, never restates; graduating fog into a ticket clears the graduated patch so nothing lingers in two places.
- **Collaborative by default.** The map moves off a local Markdown file onto the repo's issue tracker: a single `wayfinder:map` issue whose tickets are its child issues — one shared URL the team can watch. Sessions load the map at low resolution and zoom into tickets on demand. Wayfinder stays tracker-agnostic (GitHub, GitLab, local-markdown) behind a pointer in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, and `setup-matt-pocock-skills` seeds the "Wayfinding operations" section.
- **Claim by assignment, not a label.** A session claims a ticket by assigning it to the driving dev — the assignee _is_ the claim — freeing the label vocabulary to `wayfinder:<type>` alone.
- **Native blocking.** Blocking prefers the tracker's native dependency relationship, which renders the frontier visually in the tracker's own UI so the human sees what's takeable without opening the map. GitHub and GitLab templates spell out the native recipe, with a body-convention fallback.
- **Fog vs. out of scope, split.** Two plainly-named map sections — `## Not yet specified` (in-scope fog that graduates as the frontier advances) and `## Out of scope` (work ruled beyond the destination, closed, never graduating) — so beyond-destination work no longer reads as takeable frontier.
- **A fourth `task` ticket type.** For literal manual work that blocks a decision (provisioning access, moving data, signing up for a service) — the one type that _does_ rather than decides, earning its place by unblocking a decision.
- **HITL / AFK ticket classification.** Every ticket type is **HITL** (human in the loop — grilling, prototype) or **AFK** (agent alone — research; task is either). A HITL ticket only resolves through the live exchange, so "wait for the human" falls out of the label — a grilling agent that answers its own questions has, by definition, broken HITL. (This fixes students' reports of `/wayfinder` grilling _itself_ instead of the human.)
- **No-fog early exit restored.** If the opening breadth-first grilling surfaces no fog, the journey is small enough for one session — so it stops and asks how you'd like to proceed rather than building a map nobody needs.
### Patch Changes
- [#464](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/464) [`639df6e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/639df6e7386dfddc739b2aecdeff37a876f2483b) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Reshape **`tdd`** into a reference-only skill and add a missing anti-pattern.
**Reference-only.** The red → green → refactor loop is anchored by leading words the model already holds, so the step-by-step Workflow was largely restating the loop. Dropped the Workflow and per-cycle checklist; folded their one durable idea — vertical slices / tracer bullets — into the Anti-patterns section and a short Rules-of-the-loop list. Introduced **seam** as the leading word for where tests go: test only at pre-agreed seams, confirmed with the user before any test is written. Also dropped the refactor stage — TDD is now red → green; refactoring belongs to the review stage, so the refactor rule and `refactoring.md` moved out (its home is `code-review`).
**Tautological tests.** Added the tautological-test anti-pattern: a test whose assertion is recomputed the way the code computes it passes by construction and gives zero confidence — distinct from the implementation-coupling anti-pattern already covered. Added as a peer at the same sites: a Philosophy principle (expected values must come from an independent source of truth), a checklist gate, and a BAD/GOOD example pair in `tests.md`.
- [`e00eadb`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/e00eadb4bb32c3d5a631ead1a5ed5d6a7c5f74e2) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Extend the **`triage`** skill to triage external pull requests, treating a PR as an issue with attached code that runs through the same roles and state machine. PRs flow inline alongside issues (gated by a per-repo setup toggle), discovery surfaces only external PRs, the bug-only "reproduce" step is generalized into a single "verify the claim" step, and a redundancy check resolves already-implemented requests to `wontfix` without polluting the out-of-scope knowledge base. `setup-matt-pocock-skills` gains the PRs-as-a-request-surface toggle for GitHub/GitLab.
- [#472](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/472) [`d869d45`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/d869d45afc32beab1c2d1350f8de5e81589512cd) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Fix **`wayfinder`** hardcoding the issue-tracker doc path, which broke the indirection the rest of the suite relies on.
`to-issues`, `to-prd`, and `triage` never name a path — they resolve the tracker through the `### Issue tracker` block that `setup-matt-pocock-skills` writes into `CLAUDE.md` / `AGENTS.md`, which points at the tracker doc wherever it lives. Wayfinder instead pinned the literal `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, so in a repo that keeps its agent docs elsewhere it silently fell back to the local-markdown tracker — even one whose `CLAUDE.md` clearly declares GitHub issues. It now resolves the doc via that same pointer and reads its "Wayfinding operations" section by name, keeping the indirection consistent across the suite.
## 1.0.1
### Patch Changes
+6 -2
View File
@@ -7,7 +7,9 @@ Skills are organized into bucket folders under `skills/`:
- `in-progress/` — drafts not yet ready to ship
- `deprecated/` — no longer used
Every skill in `engineering/` or `productivity/` (the **promoted** buckets) must have a reference in the top-level `README.md` and an entry in `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`. Skills in `misc/`, `personal/`, `in-progress/`, and `deprecated/` must not appear in either.
Every skill in `engineering/` or `productivity/` (the **promoted** buckets) must have a reference in the top-level `README.md` and an entry in `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`'s `skills` array (the Claude Code plugin ships exactly the promoted set). Skills in `misc/`, `personal/`, `in-progress/`, and `deprecated/` must not appear in either.
The repo is also its own single-plugin Claude Code marketplace: `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` lists the one `mattpocock-skills` plugin. When bumping the release version, keep `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`'s `version` in sync with `package.json`'s — Claude uses the plugin `version` to decide when installed users see an update. Run `claude plugin validate . --strict` after touching either manifest. Why a Claude plugin but not (yet) a Codex one lives in [.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md](./.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md).
Each skill entry in the top-level `README.md` must link the skill name to its `SKILL.md`.
@@ -15,6 +17,8 @@ Each bucket folder has a `README.md` that lists every skill in the bucket with a
Skills in `engineering/` and `productivity/` also have a human-facing docs page at `docs/<bucket>/<skill-name>.md` (the docs tree mirrors those two bucket folders under `skills/`). The published URL is `https://aihero.dev/skills-<skill-name>` regardless of bucket — the docs path is repo organisation only. When you add, rename, or change the behaviour of a skill in `engineering/` or `productivity/`, create or re-sync its docs page following [.agents/writing-docs.md](./.agents/writing-docs.md). Skills in the non-promoted buckets (`misc/`, `personal/`, `in-progress/`, `deprecated/`) get **no** docs page.
Every `SKILL.md` is either user-invoked (`disable-model-invocation: true`, reachable only by the human) or model-invoked (model- or user-reachable). See [.agents/invocation.md](./.agents/invocation.md).
Every `SKILL.md` is either user-invoked (`disable-model-invocation: true` plus `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` in `agents/openai.yaml`, reachable only by the human) or model-invoked (model- or user-reachable). See [.agents/invocation.md](./.agents/invocation.md).
[`ask-matt`](./skills/engineering/ask-matt/SKILL.md) is the router that maps every user-reachable skill and how they relate. The same trigger that re-syncs a docs page applies to it: whenever you add, rename, remove, or change how a user-reachable skill fits the flows, re-read `ask-matt`'s `SKILL.md` and update it so the map stays accurate — a new skill it never mentions, or a stale one it still routes to, is a router that lies.
To (re)link every skill into the local harness skill directories (`~/.claude/skills`, `~/.agents/skills`), run `scripts/link-skills.sh`. Each entry is a symlink into this repo, so a `git pull` keeps installed skills current; re-run the script after adding, removing, or renaming a skill.
+7 -3
View File
@@ -5,12 +5,15 @@ A collection of agent skills (slash commands and behaviors) loaded by Claude Cod
## Language
**Issue tracker**:
The tool that hosts a repo's issues — GitHub Issues, Linear, a local `.scratch/` markdown convention, or similar. Skills like `to-issues`, `to-prd`, `triage`, and `qa` read from and write to it.
The tool that hosts a repo's issues — GitHub Issues, Linear, a local `.scratch/` markdown convention, or similar. Skills like `to-tickets`, `to-spec`, `triage`, and `qa` read from and write to it.
_Avoid_: backlog manager, backlog backend, issue host
**Issue**:
A single tracked unit of work inside an **Issue tracker** — a bug, task, PRD, or slice produced by `to-issues`.
_Avoid_: ticket (use only when quoting external systems that call them tickets)
A single tracked unit of work inside an **Issue tracker** — a bug, task, spec, or slice produced by `to-tickets`.
_Avoid_: ticket (use only when quoting external systems that call them tickets, or for a **Decision ticket** — see below)
**Decision ticket**:
A `wayfinder` unit — a child **Issue** of a `wayfinder:map` holding a *question* whose resolution is a decision, not a slice of a build to execute. The **decision** qualifier is what keeps it distinct from an implementation ticket; `wayfinder` introduces the term, then uses "ticket".
**Triage role**:
A canonical state-machine label applied to an **Issue** during triage (e.g. `needs-triage`, `ready-for-afk`). Each role maps to a real label string in the **Issue tracker** via `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`.
@@ -19,6 +22,7 @@ A canonical state-machine label applied to an **Issue** during triage (e.g. `nee
- An **Issue tracker** holds many **Issues**
- An **Issue** carries one **Triage role** at a time
- A **Decision ticket** is an **Issue** (a child of a `wayfinder:map`)
## Flagged ambiguities
+59 -12
View File
@@ -22,22 +22,64 @@ If you want to keep up with changes to these skills, and any new ones I create,
[Sign Up To The Newsletter](https://www.aihero.dev/s/skills-newsletter)
## Quickstart (30-second setup)
## Installation (30-second setup)
1. Run the skills.sh installer:
Two ways in, two philosophies. **The [Claude Code plugin](https://code.claude.com/docs/en/plugins)** installs the whole set as a managed, read-only bundle that updates when I ship — you subscribe rather than fork. **[skills.sh](https://skills.sh/mattpocock/skills)** copies editable skill files into your project, so you can hack on them and make them your own. Pick one — installing both leaves you with every skill twice.
### 1. Get the skills
<details>
<summary><strong>Claude Code</strong></summary>
```bash
claude plugins install mattpocock-skills
```
Or, from inside a session:
```
/plugin install mattpocock-skills
```
It's in Claude Code's official marketplace, so there's nothing to add first, and updates arrive automatically.
</details>
<details>
<summary><strong>Codex, and other agents</strong></summary>
```bash
npx skills@latest add mattpocock/skills
```
2. Pick the skills you want, and which coding agents you want to install them on. **Make sure you select `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`**.
Pick the skills you want, and which coding agents to install them on. **The installer lets you choose which skills to take — make sure `setup-matt-pocock-skills` is one of them.**
3. Run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` in your agent. It will:
- Ask you which issue tracker you want to use (GitHub, Linear, or local files)
- Ask you what labels you apply to tickets when you triage them (`/triage` uses labels)
- Ask you where you want to save any docs we create
A native Codex plugin is on the roadmap — see [`.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md`](./.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md).
4. Bam - you're ready to go.
</details>
<details>
<summary><strong>For tinkerers</strong></summary>
Use the same installer, on any agent — including Claude Code:
```bash
npx skills@latest add mattpocock/skills
```
It writes the skills into your repo as ordinary files you own and can edit. Nothing updates behind your back; pull my latest changes when you want them with `npx skills update`.
</details>
### 2. Run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`
In your agent, run it once per repo. It will:
- Ask you which issue tracker you want to use (GitHub, Linear, or local files)
- Ask you what labels you apply to tickets when you triage them (`/triage` uses labels)
- Ask you where you want to save any docs we create
### 3. Bam - you're ready to go.
## Why These Skills Exist
@@ -131,7 +173,7 @@ For debugging, I've also built a **[`/diagnosing-bugs`](./skills/engineering/dia
This is built in to every layer of these skills:
- [`/to-prd`](./skills/engineering/to-prd/SKILL.md) quizzes you about which modules you're touching before creating a PRD
- [`/to-spec`](./skills/engineering/to-spec/SKILL.md) quizzes you about which modules you're touching before creating a spec
And crucially, [`/improve-codebase-architecture`](./skills/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md) helps you rescue a codebase that has become a ball of mud. I recommend running it on your codebase once every few days.
@@ -154,16 +196,21 @@ Skills I use daily for code work.
- **[triage](./skills/engineering/triage/SKILL.md)** — Move issues through a state machine of triage roles.
- **[improve-codebase-architecture](./skills/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md)** — Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
- **[setup-matt-pocock-skills](./skills/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills/SKILL.md)** — Configure this repo for the engineering skills (issue tracker, triage labels, domain doc layout). Run once per repo before using the other engineering skills.
- **[to-issues](./skills/engineering/to-issues/SKILL.md)** — Break any plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues using vertical slices.
- **[to-prd](./skills/engineering/to-prd/SKILL.md)** — Turn the current conversation into a PRD and publish it to the issue tracker. No interview — just synthesizes what you've already discussed.
- **[to-spec](./skills/engineering/to-spec/SKILL.md)** — Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the issue tracker. No interview — just synthesizes what you've already discussed.
- **[to-tickets](./skills/engineering/to-tickets/SKILL.md)** — Break any plan, spec, or conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges — written as text in a local file, or as native blocking links on a real tracker.
- **[implement](./skills/engineering/implement/SKILL.md)** — Build the work described by a spec or set of tickets, driving `/tdd` at pre-agreed seams and closing out with `/code-review` before committing.
- **[wayfinder](./skills/engineering/wayfinder/SKILL.md)** — Plan a huge chunk of work, more than one agent session can hold, as a shared map of investigation tickets on the issue tracker — resolve them one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
**Model-invoked**
- **[prototype](./skills/engineering/prototype/SKILL.md)** — Build a throwaway prototype to answer a design question — a runnable terminal app for state/logic questions, or several radically different UI variations toggleable from one route.
- **[diagnosing-bugs](./skills/engineering/diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md)** — Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions: reproduce → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test.
- **[research](./skills/engineering/research/SKILL.md)** — Investigate a question against high-trust primary sources and capture the findings as a cited Markdown file in the repo, run as a background agent.
- **[tdd](./skills/engineering/tdd/SKILL.md)** — Test-driven development with a red-green-refactor loop. Builds features or fixes bugs one vertical slice at a time.
- **[domain-modeling](./skills/engineering/domain-modeling/SKILL.md)** — Actively build and sharpen a project's domain model — challenge terms against the glossary, stress-test with edge-case scenarios, and update `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
- **[codebase-design](./skills/engineering/codebase-design/SKILL.md)** — Shared discipline and vocabulary for designing deep modules: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface, placed at a clean seam, testable through that interface.
- **[code-review](./skills/engineering/code-review/SKILL.md)** — Two-axis review of the diff since a fixed point: **Standards** (does it follow the repo's coding standards, plus a Fowler smell baseline?) and **Spec** (does it faithfully implement the originating issue/PRD?), run as parallel sub-agents so neither pollutes the other.
- **[resolving-merge-conflicts](./skills/engineering/resolving-merge-conflicts/SKILL.md)** — Work through an in-progress git merge or rebase conflict hunk by hunk, resolving by intent traced to each side's primary source, then finish the operation — never `--abort`.
### Productivity
@@ -178,4 +225,4 @@ General workflow tools, not code-specific.
**Model-invoked**
- **[grilling](./skills/productivity/grilling/SKILL.md)** — Interview the user relentlessly about a plan or design until every branch of the decision tree is resolved. The reusable loop behind `grill-me` and `grill-with-docs`.
- **[grilling](./skills/productivity/grilling/SKILL.md)** — Interview the user relentlessly about a plan, decision, or idea until every branch of the decision tree is resolved. The reusable loop behind `grill-me` and `grill-with-docs`.
+3 -3
View File
@@ -12,9 +12,9 @@ npx skills update ask-matt
## What it does
`ask-matt` is the router over every user-invoked skill in this repo. You describe the situation you're in; it tells you which skill or flow fits and in what order to run them.
`ask-matt` is the router over the skills in this repo. You describe the situation you're in; it tells you which skill or flow fits and in what order to run them.
It **does no work itself**. It doesn't grill, write a PRD, or fix anything — it only orients. Because these skills are user-invoked, nothing fires them for you, so *you* have to remember they exist; `ask-matt` is the memory you offload that to. It answers "which one, and when", then hands you off to the skill that actually does the job.
It **does no work itself**. It doesn't grill, write a spec, or fix anything — it only orients. It exists for the **user-invoked** skills above all: nothing fires those for you, so *you* have to remember they exist, and `ask-matt` is the memory you offload that to. It also points at the model-invoked skills you'd reach for by name — `/tdd`, `/diagnosing-bugs`, `/prototype`, `/code-review`, and the two vocabulary references, `/domain-modeling` and `/codebase-design`. It answers "which one, and when", then hands you off to the skill that actually does the job.
## When to reach for it
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ Reach for it whenever you're unsure which skill or flow a situation calls for: y
## Flows, not just skills
The idea `ask-matt` gives you to think with is the **flow** — a path *through* the skills rather than a single one. Most work runs along one **main flow** (idea → ship: grill → PRD → issues → implement), two **on-ramps** merge onto it (a triage lane for incoming bugs and requests; a codebase-health lane that generates ideas), and everything else is a **standalone** you reach for on its own. Ask a question and you get placed on the right flow, at the right step — not just handed a tool.
The idea `ask-matt` gives you to think with is the **flow** — a path *through* the skills rather than a single one. Most work runs along one **main flow** (idea → ship: grill → spec → tickets → implement → review), two **on-ramps** merge onto it (a triage lane for incoming bugs and requests; a codebase-health lane that generates ideas), and everything else is a **standalone** you reach for on its own. Ask a question and you get placed on the right flow, at the right step — not just handed a tool.
## Where it fits
+47
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
Quickstart:
```bash
npx skills add mattpocock/skills --skill=code-review
```
```bash
npx skills update code-review
```
[Source](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/tree/main/skills/engineering/code-review)
## What it does
`code-review` reviews the diff between `HEAD` and a fixed point you supply — a commit, branch, tag, or merge-base — along two separate axes: **Standards** (does the code follow this repo's documented conventions?) and **Spec** (does it implement what the originating issue or spec asked for?). It runs each axis as its own parallel sub-agent and reports them side by side. It never merges or re-ranks the two sets of findings — keeping them separate is the whole point, because a change can pass one axis and fail the other, and a single blended verdict lets one mask the other.
## When to reach for it
Type `/code-review`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when you ask to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or anything "since X".
Reach for this when there is a diff to judge against a known-good point and you want the two questions — *is it built right?* and *is it the right thing?* — answered independently. It runs at the end of the build loop; for actually writing the code test-first, use [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd), and for building a whole spec into code use [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), which runs its own `/code-review` pass before committing.
## Prerequisites
The **Spec** axis needs somewhere to find the originating spec — an issue reference in the commit messages, a path you pass in, or a spec under `docs/`/`specs/`. That issue-tracker wiring comes from [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills); without a spec the Spec axis simply skips and says so. The **Standards** axis needs nothing set up — it always carries a built-in Fowler smell baseline even in a repo that documents no conventions.
## Two axes, never merged
The defining idea is the **two axes**. **Standards** asks whether the diff conforms to how this repo writes code — its `CODING_STANDARDS.md` or `CONTRIBUTING.md`, plus a fixed baseline of ~12 Fowler code smells (Mysterious Name, Duplicated Code, Feature Envy, Data Clumps, …). Two rules keep the baseline safe: a documented repo standard always overrides it, and every smell is a judgement call, never a hard violation. **Spec** asks the orthogonal question — does the code do what the issue or spec actually asked, without missing requirements or smuggling in scope creep?
They run as parallel sub-agents so neither pollutes the other's context, and the final report presents them under separate `## Standards` and `## Spec` headings with a per-axis summary. There is deliberately no single winner across axes.
## It's working if
- It pins and confirms the fixed point first (`git rev-parse`), failing fast on a bad ref or empty diff rather than inside the sub-agents.
- Standards and Spec findings arrive in two distinct blocks, each citing its source — a repo standard or baseline smell for one, a quoted spec line for the other.
- When no spec can be found, the Spec axis reports "no spec available" instead of inventing requirements.
## Where it fits
`code-review` is the review step at the tail of the main build chain:
```txt
grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review
```
Its closest neighbour is [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), which drives the build and calls this as its own review pass before committing; upstream, the spec it checks against is produced by [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) and [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets). When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+1 -1
View File
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ Callers and tests cross the same seam, so a well-placed interface gives tests so
## Pulled out on purpose
`codebase-design` is the **single source of truth** for the deep-module vocabulary, split out as its own model-invoked skill so anything can reach it. Other skills point at it rather than restating the words: [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) borrows it to place a seam before writing the test, [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) leans on it while restructuring existing code, and [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd) speaks it when it sketches seams and deepening opportunities before writing a spec.
`codebase-design` is the **single source of truth** for the deep-module vocabulary, split out as its own model-invoked skill so anything can reach it. Other skills point at it rather than restating the words: [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) borrows it to place a seam before writing the test, [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) leans on it while restructuring existing code, and [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) speaks it when it sketches seams and deepening opportunities before writing a spec.
The point of keeping it standalone is that you can also reach for it on its own — as a **reference** for how to think about module design — without triggering the larger process any of those skills mandate. Fix the words once, in one place, and every design conversation inherits them.
+1 -1
View File
@@ -43,4 +43,4 @@ Keeping it standalone means you can also reach for it directly — as a **refere
## Where it fits
`domain-modeling` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone** that runs *underneath* other skills as often as at a fixed step. Its closest neighbour is [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design), because a shared language is what lets you name a deep module and its seam precisely; downstream, a settled glossary is exactly what [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd) synthesises into a spec written in the project's own words. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
`domain-modeling` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone** that runs *underneath* other skills as often as at a fixed step. Its closest neighbour is [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design), because a shared language is what lets you name a deep module and its seam precisely; downstream, a settled glossary is exactly what [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) synthesises into a spec written in the project's own words. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+4 -4
View File
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ The grilling **leaves a paper trail**. A plain interview sharpens your thinking
You invoke this by typing `/grill-with-docs` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
Reach for it at the very start of a change, when the plan is still fuzzy and the domain language isn't settled, and you want to stress-test both before any code exists. If you only want the interview and don't need the artifacts, use [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling); if the plan is already clear and you just need to pin down or record terminology, use [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling).
Reach for it at the very start of a change, when the plan is still fuzzy and the domain language isn't settled, and you want to stress-test both before any code exists. If you only want the interview and don't need the artifacts, use [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling); if the plan is already clear and you just need to pin down or record terminology, use [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling). And if the change is too big to hold in one session and its route is still foggy — a greenfield project, a huge feature build — start upstream with [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder): it charts the effort as a map of decisions, then hands back to this main flow once the way is clear.
## Prerequisites
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ This skill is stateful — it writes into your repo as it grills. Resolved terms
## The grill
The engine is a **grill**: a relentless, one-question-at-a-time walk down the design tree, resolving dependencies between decisions before moving on, with a recommended answer offered for every question. Questions the codebase can answer are answered by reading the codebase, not by asking you.
The engine is a **grill**: a relentless, one-question-at-a-time walk down the decision tree, resolving dependencies between decisions before moving on, with a recommended answer offered for every question. Questions the codebase can answer are answered by reading the codebase, not by asking you.
What makes this variant its own skill is where the answers go. As the grill runs, fuzzy language gets sharpened into canonical terms and written to the glossary inline — not batched at the end. The glossary stays a glossary: pure vocabulary, no implementation details, no spec. ADRs are offered sparingly, only when a decision is hard to reverse, surprising without context, and the result of a real trade-off. Most sessions produce a sharper glossary and few or no ADRs, and that's the intended shape.
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ What makes this variant its own skill is where the answers go. As the grill runs
`grill-with-docs` is the opening step of the main build chain:
```txt
grill-with-docs → to-prd → to-issues → tdd
grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review
```
It comes first, before anything is written down as a spec: it produces the shared understanding and settled vocabulary that [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd) then synthesises into a PRD without re-interviewing you. Its close neighbours are [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling), the same interview without the docs, and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), the glossary-and-ADR discipline it drives. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
It comes first, before anything is written down as a spec: it produces the shared understanding and settled vocabulary that [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) then synthesises into a spec without re-interviewing you. Its close neighbours are [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling), the same interview without the docs, and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), the glossary-and-ADR discipline it drives. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+6 -6
View File
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ npx skills update implement
## What it does
`implement` builds the work described in a PRD or a set of issues — driving it through test-driven development, typechecking, and the full test suite, then handing off to review and committing to the current branch.
`implement` builds the work described in a spec or a set of tickets — driving it through test-driven development, typechecking, and the full test suite, then handing off to review and committing to the current branch.
It does **not** decide what to build. The spec is already settled and the seams are already agreed; `implement` executes that plan rather than reopening it. It is the hands, not the head — the thinking happened upstream.
@@ -20,20 +20,20 @@ It does **not** decide what to build. The spec is already settled and the seams
You invoke this by typing `/implement` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
Reach for it once the work is written down as a PRD or split into issues and you're ready to turn that into code. If the spec doesn't exist yet, write it first — for that, use [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd), or [to-issues](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-issues) to break a PRD into tickets. If you just want to build something test-first without a full spec, drop to [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) directly.
Reach for it once the work is written down as a spec or split into tickets and you're ready to turn that into code. If the spec doesn't exist yet, write it first — for that, use [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), or [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) to break a spec into tickets. If you just want to build something test-first without a full spec, drop to [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) directly.
## Pre-agreed seams
The idea `implement` runs on is the **seam** — the stable interface a feature is tested at, chosen before any code is written. It doesn't invent seams mid-build; it uses the ones already picked (during [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd)) and writes tests against them via [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd). Working at pre-agreed seams is what keeps the implementation honest: the tests target something durable, so the code underneath can move without the tests moving.
The idea `implement` runs on is the **seam** — the stable interface a feature is tested at, chosen before any code is written. It doesn't invent seams mid-build; it uses the ones already picked (during [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec)) and writes tests against them via [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd). Working at pre-agreed seams is what keeps the implementation honest: the tests target something durable, so the code underneath can move without the tests moving.
Around that core it keeps the loop tight — typecheck often, run single test files as it goes, run the whole suite once at the end — then closes out with a review pass and a commit to the current branch.
## Where it fits
`implement` is the build step at the end of the main chain:
`implement` is the build step near the end of the main chain, just before the review:
```txt
grill-with-docs → to-prd → to-issues → implement
grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review
```
Reach for it after the work has been specced and sequenced, not before. Its key neighbours are [to-issues](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-issues), which produces the independently-grabbable tickets it works through, and [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd), which it drives internally to write the tests at each seam before running its own `/review` pass and committing. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
Reach for it after the work has been specced and sequenced, not before. Its key neighbours are [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets), which produces the tickets — each declaring its blocking edges — that it works through, and [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd), which it drives internally to write the tests at each seam before running its own [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) pass and committing. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
@@ -16,6 +16,8 @@ npx skills update improve-codebase-architecture
It does **not** hand you a flat list of refactors. Every candidate has to pass the **deletion test** — would removing this module *concentrate* complexity behind a smaller interface, or just move it around? Only the "concentrates" cases earn a card. That filter is what stops the report from becoming generic cleanup advice.
Unless you point it at a specific area, it also scopes itself to where development is actually landing — reading the recent commits to bias toward the code you're still changing. Deepening a module pays off by making future changes to it easier, so it puts extra weight on the parts of the repo that have recently changed.
## When to reach for it
You invoke this by typing `/improve-codebase-architecture` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
@@ -36,4 +38,4 @@ Then it stops and asks which one you want to explore. Pick one and it runs the [
## Where it fits
`improve-codebase-architecture` is **periodic maintenance** — run it every few days, not as a step in a chain. Its neighbours are [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design), which owns the depth-and-seam vocabulary every candidate is written in, [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling), which walks the design tree once you've chosen a candidate, and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), which keeps `CONTEXT.md` and the ADRs current as the redesign settles. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
`improve-codebase-architecture` is **periodic maintenance** — run it every few days, not as a step in a chain. Its neighbours are [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design), which owns the depth-and-seam vocabulary every candidate is written in, [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling), which walks the decision tree once you've chosen a candidate, and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), which keeps `CONTEXT.md` and the ADRs current as the redesign settles. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+5 -3
View File
@@ -31,10 +31,12 @@ The question decides the shape, and there are two shapes:
Picking the wrong branch wastes the whole prototype, so the question comes first. Both branches keep state in memory, run from one command, and surface the full state on every step.
## The answer is the artifact
## Keep the prototype as a primary source
The code is disposable; the **answer** is the only thing worth keeping. When the prototype has settled its question, capture the verdict somewhere durable — a commit message, an ADR, an issue, or a `NOTES.md` next to it — alongside the question it answered, then delete or absorb the code. A prototype left rotting in the repo has outlived its purpose.
A finished prototype leaves two things. The **answer** the verdict plus the question it settled — is what you capture durably (a commit message, an ADR, an issue). The **prototype itself is a primary source** — the runnable evidence the answer came from.
The prototype doesn't belong in the main branch: no tests, no error handling, nothing to maintain. But that's not a reason to destroy it. Once the answer is captured, fold any validated decision into the real code, then capture the prototype on a throwaway branch — out of main, never merged — and leave a context pointer to it on the implementation issue. The main branch stays clean; the raw exploration stays one click away for anyone who wants to re-run it. A prototype left rotting in the main branch has outlived its purpose — a prototype captured as a primary source on a side branch hasn't.
## Where it fits
`prototype` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone: you drop into it to resolve a design question, then drop back out. Its answer often feeds the next step — a validated state model or UI direction becomes settled input for [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd) to write up, or an architectural decision worth recording via [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling). When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
`prototype` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone: you drop into it to resolve a design question, then drop back out. Its answer often feeds the next step — a validated state model or UI direction becomes settled input for [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) to write up, or an architectural decision worth recording via [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling). When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+29
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
Quickstart:
```bash
npx skills add mattpocock/skills --skill=research
```
```bash
npx skills update research
```
[Source](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/tree/main/skills/engineering/research)
## What it does
`research` answers a question by reading the sources that own the answer and leaving a cited Markdown file behind. It works only from **primary sources** — official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs — never a secondary write-up of them, so what it saves is traceable back to something authoritative rather than a summary of a summary.
## When to reach for it
Type `/research`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task turns into reading legwork.
Reach for it when the next step is *finding something out* — how an API behaves, what a spec actually says, whether a claim holds — and you'd rather not stall your own thread doing the reading. For sharpening a plan by interview instead of by reading, use [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling); for exploring what to build with throwaway code, use [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype).
## Delegated legwork
The defining move is that the reading runs as a **background agent**. You keep working; it goes off, follows each claim back to its primary source, and drops a single cited Markdown file into wherever the repo keeps such notes. Research is legwork you delegate, not thinking you outsource — you get back a document to react to, with its sources attached.
## Where it fits
A reach-for-it-anytime standalone that feeds the thinking skills: the file it produces is something to grill, plan, or design against, so it sits upstream of work like [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd) rather than in the build chain. For the whole map, see [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt).
+9 -9
View File
@@ -20,24 +20,24 @@ It writes config, it does not hard-code behaviour. The engineering chain assumes
You invoke this by typing `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
Reach for it **once per repo, before the first use of any other engineering skill**. If [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage), [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd), or [to-issues](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-issues) start guessing where your issues live or applying labels that don't exist, they haven't been set up here yet. Re-run it only to switch issue trackers or start over — day-to-day tweaks are just edits to `docs/agents/*.md`.
Reach for it **once per repo, before the first use of any other engineering skill**. If [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage), [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), or [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) start guessing where your issues live or applying labels that don't exist, they haven't been set up here yet. Re-run it only to switch issue trackers or start over — day-to-day tweaks are just edits to `docs/agents/*.md`.
## The three decisions
It walks you through three choices, one at a time, each with a plain-language explainer (it assumes you don't already know the terms):
It leads each with a recommended answer you can accept in a word, and skips whatever it can already infer — so most runs are a couple of quick confirmations:
- **Issue tracker** — where work is tracked, so `triage`/`to-prd`/`to-issues` know whether to call `gh`, `glab`, write markdown under `.scratch/`, or follow a workflow you describe. GitHub, GitLab, local markdown, or other.
- **Triage labels** — the strings behind the five canonical roles (`needs-triage`, `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, `wontfix`), mapped to labels you've actually configured so `triage` applies real ones instead of creating duplicates.
- **Domain docs** — whether the repo has one `CONTEXT.md` or a multi-context map, so skills that read domain language look in the right place.
- **Issue tracker** — where work is tracked, so `triage`/`to-spec`/`to-tickets` know whether to call `gh`, `glab`, write markdown under `.scratch/`, or follow a workflow you describe. GitHub, GitLab, local markdown, or other. (It proposes the one that matches your `git remote`.)
- **Triage labels** — asked only if the `triage` skill is installed, and then just: keep the default labels (`needs-triage`, `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, `wontfix`)? Say no only if your tracker already uses other names, so `triage` applies real ones instead of creating duplicates.
- **Domain docs** — assumed single-context (one `CONTEXT.md` + `docs/adr/` at the root), which fits almost every repo; it only raises a multi-context map when it spots monorepo signals.
The output is three files `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`, `docs/agents/domain.md` — plus an `## Agent skills` block pointing to them in whichever of `CLAUDE.md` / `AGENTS.md` the repo already uses. Those files are the shared substrate the rest of the toolkit stands on.
The output is a set of files under `docs/agents/``issue-tracker.md`, `domain.md`, and `triage-labels.md` when `triage` is installed — plus an `## Agent skills` block pointing to them in whichever of `CLAUDE.md` / `AGENTS.md` the repo already uses. Those files are the shared substrate the rest of the toolkit stands on.
## It's working if
- Three files land under `docs/agents/`, and an `## Agent skills` section appears in your `CLAUDE.md` or `AGENTS.md`.
- `issue-tracker.md` and `domain.md` land under `docs/agents/` (plus `triage-labels.md` when `triage` is installed), and an `## Agent skills` section appears in your `CLAUDE.md` or `AGENTS.md`.
- The tracker it proposes matches your real `git remote`, and the labels match strings that already exist in your repo.
- Afterwards, `triage` and `to-issues` act on the right place with the right labels instead of asking or guessing.
- Afterwards, `triage` and `to-tickets` act on the right place with the right labels instead of asking or guessing.
## Where it fits
`setup-matt-pocock-skills` is a **run-once setup** — the foundation the whole engineering set stands on, not a step you repeat. Its neighbours are the skills that read what it writes: [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage), because it applies the label vocabulary configured here, and [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd) / [to-issues](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-issues), because they publish into the issue tracker configured here. Run it first; everything downstream assumes it has. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
`setup-matt-pocock-skills` is a **run-once setup** — the foundation the whole engineering set stands on, not a step you repeat. Its neighbours are the skills that read what it writes: [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage), because it applies the label vocabulary configured here, and [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) / [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets), because they publish into the issue tracker configured here. Run it first; everything downstream assumes it has. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+4 -4
View File
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ It will **not** write all the tests up front. Batching the tests first ("horizon
Type `/tdd`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task fits — building a feature or fixing a bug test-first, or when you say "red-green-refactor".
Reach for it when there's a concrete behaviour to build and you want tests that survive a refactor. If the behaviour isn't pinned down yet, settle the spec first — for that, use [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd). When the work is really about the shape of the interface rather than the tests, use [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design); `tdd` calls into it for the deep-module vocabulary during planning.
Reach for it when there's a concrete behaviour to build and you want tests that survive a refactor. If the behaviour isn't pinned down yet, settle the spec first — for that, use [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec). When the work is really about the shape of the interface rather than the tests, use [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design); `tdd` calls into it for the deep-module vocabulary during planning.
## Red-green, one slice at a time
@@ -38,10 +38,10 @@ Refactoring only happens once the suite is green; never while red.
## Where it fits
`tdd` is the final step of the main build chain:
`tdd` is the red-green loop the main build chain runs to write code:
```txt
grill-with-docs → to-prd → to-issues → tdd
grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review
```
It implements the tickets the earlier steps produced. Its key neighbours are [to-issues](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-issues), which hands it an independently-grabbable issue to build, and [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design), which it leans on to find deep-module seams worth testing at. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
[implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) is the chain's build step, and it drives `tdd` internally to build each ticket test-first before handing off to [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) — so `tdd` is the engine inside that step rather than a step of its own. You can also reach for it directly, whenever there's a concrete behaviour to build without a full spec. Its other neighbour is [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design), which it leans on to find deep-module seams worth testing at. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
-43
View File
@@ -1,43 +0,0 @@
Quickstart:
```bash
npx skills add mattpocock/skills --skill=to-issues
```
```bash
npx skills update to-issues
```
[Source](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/tree/main/skills/engineering/to-issues)
## What it does
`to-issues` breaks a plan, spec, or PRD into a set of independently-grabbable issues and publishes them to your project's issue tracker, in dependency order.
Every issue is a **tracer bullet** — a thin *vertical* slice that cuts through all integration layers end-to-end (schema, API, UI, tests), never a horizontal slice of one layer. A completed slice is demoable or verifiable on its own, which is what makes the resulting tickets safe to hand to independent agents.
## When to reach for it
You invoke this by typing `/to-issues` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
Reach for it once you have an agreed plan or a written spec and you want it split into tickets an agent can pick up. Point it at the conversation, or pass an existing issue reference and it fetches the body and comments first. If the change hasn't been written up as a spec yet, produce one first — for that, use [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd).
## Prerequisites
`to-issues` publishes into your issue tracker, so [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) must have configured the tracker and its triage label vocabulary for this repo first. It applies the ready-for-agent triage label itself as it publishes.
## Vertical slices, not horizontal ones
The whole skill turns on one distinction. A **horizontal** slice ships one layer of the change — all the schema, or all the API — and nothing works until every layer lands. A **vertical** slice, the tracer bullet, ships one narrow path through *every* layer at once, so it can be demoed the moment it's done.
Before slicing, `to-issues` looks for prefactoring — "make the change easy, then make the easy change" — and orders that work first. It then quizzes you on the breakdown (granularity, dependencies, what to merge or split) before writing anything, and publishes blockers first so each issue's "Blocked by" field can reference a real ticket.
## Where it fits
`to-issues` is a step in the main build chain:
```txt
grill-with-docs → to-prd → to-issues → tdd
```
It sits between [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd), which hands it a settled spec with user stories to slice against, and [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd), which implements each independently-grabbable issue test-first. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
-59
View File
@@ -1,59 +0,0 @@
Quickstart:
```bash
npx skills add mattpocock/skills --skill=to-prd
```
```bash
npx skills update to-prd
```
[Source](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/tree/main/skills/engineering/to-prd)
## What it does
`to-prd` turns the current conversation and your codebase understanding into a product requirements document, then publishes it to your issue tracker.
It does **not** interview you again. By the time you reach for it, the alignment work is done — `to-prd` synthesises what is already known rather than asking a fresh round of questions.
## When to reach for it
You invoke this by typing `/to-prd` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
Reach for it once a change has been talked through and the domain language is settled, and you want that shared understanding written down as a spec before any code is written. If you *haven't* aligned yet, grill first — for that, use [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs). To split the finished PRD into tickets, use [to-issues](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-issues).
## Prerequisites
`to-prd` publishes into your issue tracker, so [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) must have configured the tracker and triage labels for this repo first. It applies the `ready-for-agent` label itself — no separate triage pass needed.
## What the PRD includes
- **Problem statement** — what is broken or missing, and why it's worth solving, in the project's own vocabulary.
- **Solution** — the shape of the fix at a high level, before any implementation detail.
- **User stories** — an extensive, numbered list of the concrete behaviours the change must support, each one independently checkable.
- **Implementation decisions** — the choices already settled during the conversation, so they aren't relitigated later.
- **Testing decisions** — the seams the feature will be tested at, and what "done" looks like.
- **Out-of-scope items** — what this change deliberately does *not* cover, to keep the ticket bounded.
- **Further notes** — anything else worth carrying forward that doesn't fit the sections above.
## Deep modules
Before writing the PRD, `to-prd` sketches the **seams** at which the feature will be tested and looks for **deep module** opportunities — a lot of functionality hidden behind a small, stable interface. It prefers existing seams to new ones and the highest seam possible, ideally just one across the whole change.
That matters for agentic development: a good interface gives tests something durable to target, so the code underneath can change without the tests moving.
## It's working if
- It starts writing the PRD instead of asking you a fresh round of questions.
- It checks the seams with you before writing, and proposes as few as possible.
- The PRD comes back in your project's domain vocabulary, not generic boilerplate.
## Where it fits
`to-prd` is a step in the main build chain:
```txt
grill-with-docs → to-prd → to-issues → tdd
```
Reach for it after the plan and domain language are resolved, and before you break the work into implementation tickets. Its key neighbours are [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), which sharpens the context so the PRD is precise, and [to-issues](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-issues), which turns the PRD into independently-grabbable issues for [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) to implement. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+59
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
Quickstart:
```bash
npx skills add mattpocock/skills --skill=to-spec
```
```bash
npx skills update to-spec
```
[Source](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/tree/main/skills/engineering/to-spec)
## What it does
`to-spec` turns the current conversation and your codebase understanding into a spec (you may know this document as a PRD), then publishes it to your issue tracker.
It does **not** interview you again. By the time you reach for it, the alignment work is done — `to-spec` synthesises what is already known rather than asking a fresh round of questions.
## When to reach for it
You invoke this by typing `/to-spec` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
Reach for it once a change has been talked through and the domain language is settled, and you want that shared understanding written down before any code is written. If you *haven't* aligned yet, grill first — for that, use [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs). To split the finished spec into tickets, use [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets).
## Prerequisites
`to-spec` publishes into your issue tracker, so [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) must have configured the tracker and triage labels for this repo first. It applies the `ready-for-agent` label itself — no separate triage pass needed.
## What the spec includes
- **Problem statement** — what is broken or missing, and why it's worth solving, in the project's own vocabulary.
- **Solution** — the shape of the fix at a high level, before any implementation detail.
- **User stories** — an extensive, numbered list of the concrete behaviours the change must support, each one independently checkable.
- **Implementation decisions** — the choices already settled during the conversation, so they aren't relitigated later.
- **Testing decisions** — the seams the feature will be tested at, and what "done" looks like.
- **Out-of-scope items** — what this change deliberately does *not* cover, to keep the ticket bounded.
- **Further notes** — anything else worth carrying forward that doesn't fit the sections above.
## Deep modules
Before writing the spec, `to-spec` sketches the **seams** at which the feature will be tested and looks for **deep module** opportunities — a lot of functionality hidden behind a small, stable interface. It prefers existing seams to new ones and the highest seam possible, ideally just one across the whole change.
That matters for agentic development: a good interface gives tests something durable to target, so the code underneath can change without the tests moving.
## It's working if
- It starts writing the spec instead of asking you a fresh round of questions.
- It checks the seams with you before writing, and proposes as few as possible.
- The spec comes back in your project's domain vocabulary, not generic boilerplate.
## Where it fits
`to-spec` is a step in the main build chain:
```txt
grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review
```
Reach for it after the plan and domain language are resolved, and before you break the work into implementation tickets. Its key neighbours are [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), which sharpens the context so the spec is precise, and [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets), which turns the spec into a set of tickets for [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) to build. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+56
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
Quickstart:
```bash
npx skills add mattpocock/skills --skill=to-tickets
```
```bash
npx skills update to-tickets
```
[Source](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/tree/main/skills/engineering/to-tickets)
## What it does
`to-tickets` breaks a plan, spec, or the current conversation into a set of **tickets** — each a tracer-bullet vertical slice — and publishes them to your configured tracker, with every ticket declaring the tickets that block it.
Every ticket is a **tracer bullet** — a thin *vertical* slice that cuts through all integration layers end-to-end (schema, API, UI, tests), never a horizontal slice of one layer. A completed slice is demoable or verifiable on its own, which is what makes each ticket safe to hand to an agent.
## When to reach for it
You invoke this by typing `/to-tickets` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
Reach for it once you have an agreed plan or a written spec and you want it split into tickets. Point it at the conversation, or pass a spec or issue reference and it fetches the body and comments first. If the change hasn't been written up as a spec yet, produce one first — for that, use [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec).
## Prerequisites
`to-tickets` publishes into your issue tracker, so [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) must have configured the tracker and its triage label vocabulary for this repo first. On a real tracker it applies the ready-for-agent label as it publishes.
## One artifact, two readings
The blocking edges are the whole point. They make one set of tickets read two ways, depending on the tracker:
- **Local files** → one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature>/issues/`, numbered blockers-first, the edges written as text. You work them top-to-bottom, by hand, staying in the loop.
- **A real tracker (GitHub, Linear)** → one issue per ticket, the edges as native blocking links (or sub-issues). Any ticket whose blockers are all done is on the **frontier** and can be grabbed — so several agents can run at once.
The edges live in the ticket regardless of medium; the medium only decides whether anything acts on them in parallel. `to-tickets` produces the artifact — how you run it (sequential by hand, or a parallel fleet) is up to you.
## Vertical slices, not horizontal ones
The whole skill turns on one distinction. A **horizontal** slice ships one layer of the change — all the schema, or all the API — and nothing works until every layer lands. A **vertical** slice, the tracer bullet, ships one narrow path through *every* layer at once, so it can be demoed the moment it's done.
Before slicing, `to-tickets` looks for prefactoring — "make the change easy, then make the easy change" — and orders that work first. It then quizzes you on the breakdown (granularity, blocking edges, what to merge or split) before publishing anything, and publishes blockers first so each ticket's "Blocked by" can reference a real ticket.
## The wide-refactor exception
One shape breaks the tracer-bullet rule: a **wide refactor** — a single mechanical change (rename a column, retype a shared symbol) whose **blast radius** fans across the whole codebase, so one edit breaks thousands of call sites at once and no vertical slice can land green. `to-tickets` slices it as **expandcontract** instead: expand (add the new form beside the old so nothing breaks), migrate (move call sites over in batches sized by blast radius, one ticket per batch, CI green throughout because the old form still exists), then contract (delete the old form once no caller remains). When even the batches can't stay green alone, they share an integration branch that all block a final integrate-and-verify ticket, and green is promised only there.
## Where it fits
`to-tickets` is a step in the main build chain:
```txt
grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review
```
It sits between [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), which hands it a settled spec with user stories to slice against, and [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), which builds each ticket, driving [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) internally to write the tests test-first, before its [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) pass. Work the frontier one ticket per fresh context, clearing between them. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+2 -2
View File
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ It never labels blind. Every triaged item carries exactly one **category** role
You invoke this by typing `/triage` and describing what you want in natural language — the agent won't reach for it on its own. "Show me anything that needs my attention", "let's look at #42", "move #42 to ready-for-agent".
Reach for it when your issue tracker has raw, unevaluated reports and you want them sorted, verified, and turned into work an agent or human can pick up. To turn a settled conversation into a fresh spec instead, use [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd); to split an existing PRD into tickets, use [to-issues](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-issues). `triage` is the reverse direction — it processes what's *already* landed in the tracker.
Reach for it when your issue tracker has raw, unevaluated reports and you want them sorted, verified, and turned into work an agent or human can pick up. To turn a settled conversation into a fresh spec instead, use [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec); to split an existing spec into tickets, use [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets). `triage` is the reverse direction — it processes what's *already* landed in the tracker.
## Prerequisites
@@ -43,4 +43,4 @@ The step that separates `triage` from ad-hoc labelling is verification. It repro
## Where it fits
`triage` is the **periodic maintenance** pass over your issue tracker — run it whenever reports pile up, to keep the queue sorted and the `ready-for-agent` column trustworthy. It sits at the front of the tracker, upstream of the build chain: the briefs it writes are what [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) later picks up to implement. When a request needs sharpening it leans on [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) to grill it into shape one question at a time. Its close neighbour is [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd), which populates the tracker from a fresh conversation where `triage` processes what's already there. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
`triage` is the **periodic maintenance** pass over your issue tracker — run it whenever reports pile up, to keep the queue sorted and the `ready-for-agent` column trustworthy. It sits at the front of the tracker, upstream of the build chain: the briefs it writes are what [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) later picks up to implement. When a request needs sharpening it leans on [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) to grill it into shape one question at a time. Its close neighbour is [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), which populates the tracker from a fresh conversation where `triage` processes what's already there. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+44
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
Quickstart:
```bash
npx skills add mattpocock/skills --skill=wayfinder
```
```bash
npx skills update wayfinder
```
[Source](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/tree/main/skills/engineering/wayfinder)
## What it does
`wayfinder` takes an effort too big for one agent session — wrapped in fog, where the way from here to the goal isn't visible yet — and charts it as a **shared map** of **decision tickets** on your issue tracker, then resolves them one at a time until the way is clear. It **plans, it doesn't do**: every ticket resolves a decision — a question to settle, not a slice of a build to execute — and the map is done when nothing is left to decide before someone goes and builds the thing — so it produces decisions, not deliverables.
## When to reach for it
You invoke this by typing `/wayfinder` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
Reach for it when an effort is **more than one agent session can hold** and the route to its **destination** is still foggy — you can feel the shape of the work but can't yet write it down as a spec or a plan. For turning an *already-clear* thread into a spec, use [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec); for slicing an already-understood plan into buildable tickets, use [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets). Wayfinder sits upstream of both: it's what you run when there's too much fog to spec directly.
## Prerequisites
The map and its tickets live on the repo's issue tracker, so wayfinder needs the tracker wiring that [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) lays down — it seeds a "Wayfinding operations" section describing how the map, child tickets, blocking, and frontier queries are expressed for GitHub, GitLab, or local-markdown. Absent that doc, wayfinder defaults to a local-markdown map.
## The map is an index, fog is the frontier
The **map** is a single `wayfinder:map` issue whose tickets are its child issues — one shared URL the whole team can watch. It's an **index, not a store**: each decision lives in exactly one place (its ticket), and the map only gists and links, never restates. A session loads the map at low resolution and zooms into individual tickets on demand.
Beyond the live tickets lies the **fog of war** — decisions you can tell are coming but can't yet pin down. The test for whether something is a ticket or still fog is whether you can *state the question precisely now*, not whether you can answer it. Resolving a ticket clears the fog ahead of it, **graduating** whatever's now specifiable into fresh tickets. The **frontier** is the open, unblocked, unclaimed tickets — the edge of the known — and it's what the tracker's native blocking renders visually, so you see what's takeable without opening the map. Fog only gathers *toward* the **destination**; work past it is ruled **out of scope**, closed, never graduating.
Every ticket is **HITL** (human in the loop — grilling, prototype) or **AFK** (agent alone — research); a HITL ticket only resolves through a live exchange, so the agent never answers its own questions. Research stays a real ticket — a shared blocker downstream decisions hang on — but because it's AFK, a session doesn't stop and read: it fires a `/research` **subagent** to burn the ticket down in parallel, keeping the frontier fast, and captures the findings on a throwaway `research/<name>` branch.
## It's working if
- Naming the **destination** is the first act — before any ticket exists — because it fixes the scope every ticket is measured against.
- One map is one `wayfinder:map` issue; tickets are its child issues, referred to by **name**, never a bare `#42`.
- A session resolves **at most one ticket** (research tickets excepted), records the answer as a resolution comment, closes the ticket, and appends a one-line pointer to *Decisions so far*.
- If the opening grill surfaces **no fog**, it stops and tells you the journey is small enough to skip the map.
## Where it fits
`wayfinder` is a big-idea **on-ramp**: an effort too large and foggy to spec in one sitting generates a cleared map of decisions, which then merges onto the main build flow. When the fog is pushed back and the way is clear, hand off to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) to schedule the multi-session build (or, if the effort turned out small, implement directly). It leans on [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) to resolve individual tickets, and on [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) and [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research) for the ticket types that need them. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+3 -3
View File
@@ -20,9 +20,9 @@ It asks **one question at a time** and waits. It never dumps a batch of question
You invoke this by typing `/grill-me` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
Reach for it before you build, when a plan feels roughly right but you can sense unresolved decisions hiding in it — the moment you want the soft spots found and forced into the open. If you want that same interrogation to also leave a paper trail of ADRs and a glossary behind, use [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) instead.
Reach for it before you build, when a plan feels roughly right but you can sense unresolved decisions hiding in it — the moment you want the soft spots found and forced into the open. If you want that same interrogation to also leave a paper trail of ADRs and a glossary behind, use [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) instead. And if the effort is too big to hold in one session and the route to the goal is still foggy — a greenfield project, a huge feature build — start further upstream with [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder), which charts it as a map of decisions first and then merges back into this flow.
## The design tree
## The decision tree
The session walks the plan as a tree of decisions, resolving dependencies between them one by one — a parent decision settled before the choices that hang off it. The point is not to reach agreement quickly; it is to make every implicit call explicit, so nothing important is left silently assumed. You come out the other side with a plan whose branches have all been visited.
@@ -30,4 +30,4 @@ The session walks the plan as a tree of decisions, resolving dependencies betwee
## Where it fits
`grill-me` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone — the pre-build stress test you run whenever a plan needs hardening. It is the stateless, user-invoked front door to the [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) primitive; its closest neighbour is [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), the stateful sibling that runs the same interview but additionally records the decisions as ADRs and a glossary. If the outcome is a spec you want written down, hand off to [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd), which synthesises the settled understanding into a PRD without re-interviewing you. When you're unsure which flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
`grill-me` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone — the pre-build stress test you run whenever a plan needs hardening. It is the stateless, user-invoked front door to the [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) primitive; its closest neighbour is [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), the stateful sibling that runs the same interview but additionally records the decisions as ADRs and a glossary. If the outcome is a spec you want written down, hand off to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), which synthesises the settled understanding into a spec without re-interviewing you. When you're unsure which flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+5 -5
View File
@@ -12,9 +12,9 @@ npx skills update grilling
## What it does
`grilling` is the relentless interview that stress-tests a plan or design before you build it. It walks down the design tree branch by branch, resolving the dependencies between decisions one at a time until you and the agent share the same understanding.
`grilling` is the relentless interview that stress-tests a plan or design before you build it. It walks down the decision tree branch by branch, resolving the dependencies between decisions one at a time until you and the agent share the same understanding.
It asks **one question at a time** and waits for your answer before the next — never a bulk list, which is bewildering. Each question comes with the agent's own recommended answer, and any question the codebase can settle it explores instead of asking you.
It asks **one question at a time** and waits for your answer before the next — never a bulk list, which is bewildering. Each question comes with the agent's own recommended answer, and any question the codebase can settle it explores instead of asking you. It won't start enacting the plan until you confirm the shared understanding has been reached.
## When to reach for it
@@ -22,9 +22,9 @@ Type `/grilling`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task fits —
Reach for it when a plan or design still has soft spots and you want them surfaced before code is written. In practice you usually invoke it through one of its two wrappers rather than by name: for a plain grilling session use [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me); to have the session also write ADRs and a glossary as it goes, use [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs).
## The design tree
## The decision tree
The mental model is a **design tree**: every plan branches into decisions, and decisions depend on each other. `grilling` descends that tree one node at a time, so an early answer can reshape which questions come next. That is why the questions arrive singly and in dependency order — a firehose of parallel questions loses the structure that makes the interview converge on a shared understanding.
The mental model is a **decision tree**: every plan branches into decisions, and decisions depend on each other. `grilling` descends that tree one node at a time, so an early answer can reshape which questions come next. That is why the questions arrive singly and in dependency order — a firehose of parallel questions loses the structure that makes the interview converge on a shared understanding.
## Pulled out on purpose
@@ -34,4 +34,4 @@ Keeping the technique in one place means you can also reach for it directly when
## Where it fits
`grilling` is the interview **primitive** under the main build chain: [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) runs it to sharpen context before [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd) writes the spec. When you're unsure which entry point fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
`grilling` is the interview **primitive** under the main build chain: [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) runs it to sharpen context before [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) writes the spec. When you're unsure which entry point fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+3 -3
View File
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ npx skills update handoff
`handoff` compacts the current conversation into a **handoff document** — a single write-up a fresh agent can read to pick up the work where you left off.
It does **not** re-state what already lives elsewhere. Anything captured in a PRD, plan, ADR, issue, commit, or diff is referenced by path or URL, never copied. The document carries only the live thread — what you were doing, why, and what's next — and it's saved to your OS's temporary directory, not into the workspace, so it never becomes another artifact to maintain.
It does **not** re-state what already lives elsewhere. Anything captured in a spec, plan, ADR, issue, commit, or diff is referenced by path or URL, never copied. The document carries only the live thread — what you were doing, why, and what's next — and it's saved to your OS's temporary directory, not into the workspace, so it never becomes another artifact to maintain.
## When to reach for it
@@ -26,11 +26,11 @@ Reach for this when a conversation has gone long enough that its context is at r
- **The live thread** — what's in flight and why, in the conversation's own terms, minus anything already written down elsewhere.
- **Suggested skills** — a pointer to the skills the next agent should reach for to continue.
- **References, not copies** — links and paths to the PRDs, plans, ADRs, issues, and diffs that hold the settled detail.
- **References, not copies** — links and paths to the specs, plans, ADRs, issues, and diffs that hold the settled detail.
- **Redacted secrets** — API keys, passwords, and PII stripped before the document is written.
The idea to hold onto is **compaction**: a handoff is the conversation squeezed down to just its resumable core, so a fresh agent inherits the momentum, not the noise.
## Where it fits
`handoff` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone — it sits at the seam between two sessions rather than inside a build chain. It pairs naturally with the artifact-producing skills whose output it points at: [to-prd](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd), because a finished PRD is exactly the kind of settled detail a handoff references instead of repeating. When you're unsure which skill fits the moment, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
`handoff` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone — it sits at the seam between two sessions rather than inside a build chain. It pairs naturally with the artifact-producing skills whose output it points at: [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), because a finished spec is exactly the kind of settled detail a handoff references instead of repeating. When you're unsure which skill fits the moment, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+1 -1
View File
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
{
"name": "mattpocock-skills",
"version": "1.0.1",
"version": "1.2.0",
"private": true,
"description": "Matt Pocock's agent skills for real engineering",
"repository": {
+1 -1
View File
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ set -euo pipefail
# Links all skills in the repository into the local skill directories used by
# each agent harness:
# - ~/.claude/skills — Claude Code
# - ~/.agents/skills — pi and other Agent-Skills-standard harnesses
# - ~/.agents/skills — Codex and other Agent Skills-compatible harnesses
# Each entry is a symlink into this repo, so a `git pull` is all that's needed
# to keep installed skills up to date.
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Design an Interface"
short_description: "Explore alternative module interfaces"
+3
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "QA"
short_description: "Conversational QA that files issues"
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Request Refactor Plan"
short_description: "Plan a safe incremental refactor"
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Ubiquitous Language"
short_description: "Build a shared domain glossary"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
+8 -3
View File
@@ -4,15 +4,17 @@ Skills I use daily for code work.
## User-invoked
Reachable only when you type them (`disable-model-invocation: true`).
Reachable only when you type them (Claude Code: `disable-model-invocation: true`; Codex: `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` in `agents/openai.yaml`).
- **[ask-matt](./ask-matt/SKILL.md)** — Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the user-invoked skills in this repo.
- **[grill-with-docs](./grill-with-docs/SKILL.md)** — Grilling session that also builds your project's domain model, sharpening terminology and updating `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
- **[triage](./triage/SKILL.md)** — Move issues through a state machine of triage roles.
- **[improve-codebase-architecture](./improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md)** — Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
- **[setup-matt-pocock-skills](./setup-matt-pocock-skills/SKILL.md)** — Configure this repo for the engineering skills (issue tracker, triage labels, domain doc layout). Run once per repo.
- **[to-issues](./to-issues/SKILL.md)** — Break any plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues using vertical slices.
- **[to-prd](./to-prd/SKILL.md)** — Turn the current conversation into a PRD and publish it to the issue tracker.
- **[to-spec](./to-spec/SKILL.md)** — Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the issue tracker.
- **[to-tickets](./to-tickets/SKILL.md)** — Break any plan, spec, or conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges — text in a local file, or native blocking links on a real tracker.
- **[implement](./implement/SKILL.md)** — Build the work described by a spec or set of tickets, driving `/tdd` at pre-agreed seams and closing out with `/code-review` before committing.
- **[wayfinder](./wayfinder/SKILL.md)** — Plan a huge chunk of work — more than one agent session can hold — as a shared map of decision tickets on the issue tracker, resolved one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
## Model-invoked
@@ -21,6 +23,9 @@ Model- or user-reachable (rich trigger phrasing so the model can reach for them)
- **[prototype](./prototype/SKILL.md)** — Build a throwaway prototype to answer a design question: a runnable terminal app for state/logic, or several toggleable UI variations.
- **[diagnosing-bugs](./diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md)** — Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions: reproduce → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test.
- **[research](./research/SKILL.md)** — Investigate a question against high-trust primary sources and capture the findings as a cited Markdown file in the repo, run as a background agent.
- **[tdd](./tdd/SKILL.md)** — Test-driven development with a red-green-refactor loop. Builds features or fixes bugs one vertical slice at a time.
- **[domain-modeling](./domain-modeling/SKILL.md)** — Actively build and sharpen a project's domain model — challenge terms, stress-test with scenarios, update `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
- **[codebase-design](./codebase-design/SKILL.md)** — Shared discipline and vocabulary for designing deep modules: small interfaces, clean seams, testable through the interface.
- **[code-review](./code-review/SKILL.md)** — Two-axis review of the diff since a fixed point: **Standards** (does it follow the repo's coding standards, plus a Fowler smell baseline?) and **Spec** (does it faithfully implement the originating issue/PRD?), run as parallel sub-agents.
- **[resolving-merge-conflicts](./resolving-merge-conflicts/SKILL.md)** — Work through an in-progress git merge or rebase conflict hunk by hunk, resolving by intent traced to each side's primary source, then finish the operation — never `--abort`.
+25 -8
View File
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
---
name: ask-matt
description: Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the user-invoked skills in this repo.
description: Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the skills in this repo.
disable-model-invocation: true
---
@@ -8,26 +8,28 @@ disable-model-invocation: true
You don't remember every skill, so ask.
A **flow** is a path through the skills. Most paths run along one **main flow**, and two **on-ramps** merge onto it. Everything else is standalone.
A **flow** is a path through the skills. Most paths run along one **main flow**, and two **on-ramps** merge onto it. Everything else is standalone, or a vocabulary layer that runs underneath.
## The main flow: idea → ship
The route most work travels. You have an idea and want it built.
1. **`/grill-with-docs`** — sharpen the idea by interview. Start here when you **have a codebase**: it's stateful, retaining what it learns in `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs. (No codebase? Use `/grill-me` — see Standalone.)
1. **`/grill-with-docs`** — sharpen the idea by interview. Start here when you **have a codebase**: it's stateful, retaining what it learns in `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs. (No codebase? Use `/grill-me` — see Standalone. Both run the same `/grilling` primitive; `grill-with-docs` is the one that leaves a paper trail.)
2. **Branch — can you settle every question in conversation?** If a question needs a runnable answer (state, business logic, a UI you have to see), detour through a prototype, bridged by **`/handoff`** in both directions (see Crossing sessions):
- **`/handoff`** out, then open a fresh session against that file,
- **`/prototype`** to answer the question with throwaway code,
- **`/handoff`** back what you learned, and reference it from the original idea thread.
3. **Branch — is this a multi-session build?**
- **Yes** → **`/to-prd`** (turn the thread into a PRD) → **`/to-issues`** (split the PRD into independently-grabbable issues). Because the issues are independent, **clear context between each one**: start a fresh session per issue and kick off **`/implement`** by passing it the PRD and the single issue to work on.
- **Yes** → **`/to-spec`** (turn the thread into a spec), then **`/to-tickets`** to split it into tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its **blocking edges**. On a local tracker that's one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature>/issues/`, worked blockers-first by hand; on a real tracker the edges become native blocking links, so any ticket whose blockers are done can be grabbed — kick off **`/implement`** per ticket, **clearing context between each one**.
- **No** → **`/implement`** right here, in the same context window.
Either way, **`/implement`** builds each issue by driving **`/tdd`** internally — one red-green slice at a time — then closes out by running **`/code-review`**, a two-axis review (Standards + Spec) of the diff, before committing. Reach for **`/tdd`** on its own when you just want to build a concrete behaviour test-first without a full spec, and **`/code-review`** on its own whenever you want to review a branch or PR against a fixed point.
### Context hygiene
Keep steps 13 in **one unbroken context window** — don't compact or clear until after `/to-issues` — so the grilling, PRD, and issues all build on the same thinking. Each `/implement` then starts fresh, working from the issue.
Keep steps 13 in **one unbroken context window** — don't compact or clear until after `/to-tickets` — so the grilling, spec, and tickets all build on the same thinking. Each `/implement` then starts fresh, working from the ticket.
The limit on this is the **[smart zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone)**: the window (~120k tokens on state-of-the-art models) within which the model still reasons sharply. If a session approaches it before `/to-issues`, don't push on degraded — `/handoff` and continue in a fresh thread.
The limit on this is the **[smart zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone)**: the window (~120k tokens on state-of-the-art models) within which the model still reasons sharply. If a session approaches it before `/to-tickets`, don't push on degraded — `/handoff` and continue in a fresh thread.
## On-ramps
@@ -35,13 +37,26 @@ A starting situation that generates work, then merges onto the main flow.
- **Bugs and requests piling up** → **`/triage`**. It moves issues through triage roles and produces agent-ready issues, which **`/implement`** later picks up.
Triage is only for issues **you didn't create** — bug reports, incoming feature requests, anything that arrives raw. Issues that `/to-issues` produced are already agent-ready, so **don't triage them**.
Triage is only for issues **you didn't create** — bug reports, incoming feature requests, anything that arrives raw. Tickets that `/to-tickets` produced are already agent-ready, so **don't triage them**.
- **Something's broken** → **`/diagnosing-bugs`**. For the hard ones: the bug that resists a first glance, the intermittent flake, the regression that crept in between two known-good states. It refuses to theorise until it has a **tight feedback loop** — one command that already goes red on *this* bug — then fixes with a regression test. Its post-mortem hands off to **`/improve-codebase-architecture`** when the real finding is that there's no good seam to lock the bug down.
- **A huge, foggy effort — a greenfield project or a huge feature build, too big for one session** → **`/wayfinder`**, the most cognitively demanding flow here. When the way from here to the destination isn't visible yet, it charts a **shared map** of **decision tickets** on the issue tracker and resolves them one at a time — producing **decisions, not deliverables** — until the fog is pushed back and the way is clear. Where **`/grill-with-docs`** sharpens an idea you can hold in one session, wayfinder is for the idea you can't — and it's slower and denser, so save it for exactly that, never a well-scoped feature.
When the map clears, **it hands off, it doesn't build**: merge onto the main flow at **`/to-spec`**, which collapses the map's linked decisions into a buildable plan, then `/to-tickets` and `/implement` as usual. Looping the map straight into `/implement` skips that collapse and throws the linked detail away — go straight to `/implement` only when the effort turned out genuinely small.
## Codebase health
Not feature work — upkeep.
- **`/improve-codebase-architecture`** — run whenever you have a spare moment to keep the codebase good for agents to operate in. It surfaces deepening opportunities; picking one _generates an idea_ you can take into the main flow at `/grill-with-docs`.
- **`/improve-codebase-architecture`** — run whenever you have a spare moment to keep the codebase good for agents to operate in. It surfaces **deepening opportunities**; picking one _generates an idea_ you can take into the main flow at `/grill-with-docs`. It's the survey that finds the candidates; **`/codebase-design`** (below) is the bench you design the chosen one on.
## Vocabulary underneath
Two model-invoked references that run *beneath* the other skills — each the single source of truth for its vocabulary. Reach for them directly when the **words**, not the process, are the problem; or let the skills above pull them in.
- **`/domain-modeling`** — sharpen the project's *domain* language: challenge a fuzzy term, resolve an overloaded word ("account" doing three jobs), record a hard-to-reverse decision as an ADR. It's the active discipline `/grill-with-docs` drives to keep `CONTEXT.md` a clean glossary.
- **`/codebase-design`** — the deep-module vocabulary (module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage, locality) for designing a module's *shape*: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface at a clean seam. `/tdd` and `/improve-codebase-architecture` both speak it.
## Crossing sessions
@@ -53,6 +68,8 @@ Not feature work — upkeep.
Off the main flow entirely.
- **`/grill-me`** — the same relentless interview as `/grill-with-docs`, but for when you have **no codebase**. Stateless: it saves nothing locally, builds no `CONTEXT.md`. Reach for it to sharpen any plan or design that doesn't live in a repo.
- **`/prototype`** — a small, throwaway program that answers one design question: does this state model feel right, or what should this UI look like. Throwaway from day one — keep the answer, delete the code. It's the detour in step 2 of the main flow, but reach for it any time a design question is hard to settle on paper.
- **`/research`** — delegate reading legwork to a **background agent**: it investigates a question against **primary sources**, then leaves a cited Markdown file in the repo. Keep working while it reads. The file it produces is something to take *into* the main flow at `/grill-with-docs` — research feeds the thinking, it doesn't replace it.
- **`/teach`** — learn a concept over multiple sessions, using the current directory as a stateful workspace.
- **`/writing-great-skills`** — reference for writing and editing skills well.
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Ask Matt"
short_description: "Find the right skill or workflow"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
---
name: review
name: code-review
description: Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes — Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/PRD asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to "review since X".
---
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Code Review"
short_description: "Review a diff on standards and spec"
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Codebase Design"
short_description: "Vocabulary for deep-module design"
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Diagnosing Bugs"
short_description: "Diagnose hard bugs and regressions"
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Domain Modeling"
short_description: "Build and sharpen a domain model"
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Grill with Docs"
short_description: "Grill a design and write its docs"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
+3 -3
View File
@@ -1,15 +1,15 @@
---
name: implement
description: "Implement a piece of work based on a PRD or set of issues."
description: "Implement a piece of work based on a spec or set of tickets."
disable-model-invocation: true
---
Implement the work described by the user in the PRD or issues.
Implement the work described by the user in the spec or tickets.
Use /tdd where possible, at pre-agreed seams.
Run typechecking regularly, single test files regularly, and the full test suite once at the end.
Once done, use /review to review the work.
Once done, use /code-review to review the work.
Commit your work to the current branch.
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Implement"
short_description: "Build work from a spec or tickets"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -17,6 +17,11 @@ This command is _informed_ by the project's domain model and built on a shared d
### 1. Explore
**Scope before you scan — YAGNI.** Deepening a module pays off by making future changes to it easier, so put extra weight on the parts of the codebase that have recently changed. Decide *where* to look before you look:
- If the user named a direction — a module, a subsystem, a pain point — take it, and skip the inference below.
- Otherwise, walk back a good stretch of the commit history (`git log --oneline`) to find the codebase's hot spots — the files and areas that keep coming up — and let those paths pull your attention first. If the changes are scattered with no clear hot spot, widen the net.
Read the project's domain glossary (`CONTEXT.md`) and any ADRs in the area you're touching first.
Then use the Agent tool with `subagent_type=Explore` to walk the codebase. Don't follow rigid heuristics — explore organically and note where you experience friction:
@@ -56,7 +61,7 @@ Do NOT propose interfaces yet. After the file is written, ask the user: "Which o
### 3. Grilling loop
Once the user picks a candidate, run the `/grilling` skill to walk the design tree with them — constraints, dependencies, the shape of the deepened module, what sits behind the seam, what tests survive.
Once the user picks a candidate, run the `/grilling` skill to walk the decision tree with them — constraints, dependencies, the shape of the deepened module, what sits behind the seam, what tests survive.
Side effects happen inline as decisions crystallize — run the `/domain-modeling` skill to keep the domain model current as you go:
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Improve Codebase Architecture"
short_description: "Find and grill architecture improvements"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
+3 -3
View File
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ The right shape depends on the question:
Pick whichever shape best fits the question being asked, *not* whichever is easiest to wire to a TUI. Keep it pure: no I/O, no terminal code, no `console.log` for control flow. The TUI imports it and calls into it; nothing flows the other direction.
This is what makes the prototype useful past its own lifetime. When the question's been answered, the validated reducer / machine / function set can be lifted into the real module — the TUI shell gets deleted.
This is what makes the prototype useful past its own lifetime: when the question's been answered, the validated reducer / machine / function set can be lifted into the real module on its own.
### 4. Build the smallest TUI that exposes the state
@@ -66,9 +66,9 @@ If the host project has no task runner, just put the command at the top of the p
Give the user the run command. They'll drive it themselves; the interesting moments are when they say "wait, that shouldn't be possible" or "huh, I assumed X would be different" — those are the bugs in the _idea_, which is the whole point. If they want new actions added, add them. Prototypes evolve.
### 7. Capture the answer
### 7. Capture the answer and the prototype
When the prototype has done its job, the answer to the question is the only thing worth keeping. If the user is around, ask what it taught them. If not, leave a `NOTES.md` next to the prototype so the answer can be filled in (or filled in by you, if you've watched the session) before the prototype gets deleted.
Once the prototype has answered its question, capture the answer, then capture the prototype the way the [SKILL](SKILL.md) describes. The logic-specific mapping: the validated reducer / machine / function set lifts into the real module (the decision, absorbed); the TUI shell rides along to the throwaway branch that keeps the prototype as a primary source.
## Anti-patterns
+2 -6
View File
@@ -21,10 +21,6 @@ The two branches produce very different artifacts — getting this wrong wastes
1. **Throwaway from day one, and clearly marked as such.** Locate the prototype code close to where it will actually be used (next to the module or page it's prototyping for) so context is obvious — but name it so a casual reader can see it's a prototype, not production. For throwaway UI routes, obey whatever routing convention the project already uses; don't invent a new top-level structure.
2. **One command to run.** Whatever the project's existing task runner supports — `pnpm <name>`, `python <path>`, `bun <path>`, etc. The user must be able to start it without thinking.
3. **No persistence by default.** State lives in memory. Persistence is the thing the prototype is _checking_, not something it should depend on. If the question explicitly involves a database, hit a scratch DB or a local file with a clear "PROTOTYPE — wipe me" name.
4. **Skip the polish.** No tests, no error handling beyond what makes the prototype _runnable_, no abstractions. The point is to learn something fast and then delete it.
4. **Skip the polish.** No tests, no error handling beyond what makes the prototype _runnable_, no abstractions. The point is to learn something fast.
5. **Surface the state.** After every action (logic) or on every variant switch (UI), print or render the full relevant state so the user can see what changed.
6. **Delete or absorb when done.** When the prototype has answered its question, either delete it or fold the validated decision into the real code — don't leave it rotting in the repo.
## When done
The _answer_ is the only thing worth keeping from a prototype. Capture it somewhere durable (commit message, ADR, issue, or a `NOTES.md` next to the prototype) along with the question it was answering. If the user is around, that capture is a quick conversation; if not, leave the placeholder so they (or you, on the next pass) can fill in the verdict before deleting the prototype.
6. **Capture it when done.** Fold any validated decision into the real code, then capture the prototype itself as a **primary source**: commit it to a throwaway branch, out of main, and leave a context pointer to that branch on the implementation issue. Capture the answer too — the verdict and the question it settled — in the issue or a commit. The main branch keeps only the validated decision.
+4 -4
View File
@@ -97,12 +97,12 @@ Surface the URL (and the `?variant=` keys). The user will flip through whenever
### 6. Capture the answer and clean up
Once a variant has won, write down which one and why (commit message, ADR, issue, or a `NOTES.md` next to the prototype if running AFK and the user hasn't responded yet). Then:
Once a variant has won, capture the answer — which variant and why — then capture the prototype the way the [SKILL](SKILL.md) describes. Fold the winner into the real code and move the rest onto the throwaway branch, not into main:
- **Sub-shape A** — delete the losing variants and the switcher; fold the winner into the existing page.
- **Sub-shape B** — promote the winning variant to a real route, delete the throwaway route and the switcher.
- **Sub-shape A** — fold the winner into the existing page; drop the losing variants and the switcher from main.
- **Sub-shape B** — promote the winning variant to a real route; drop the throwaway route and the switcher from main.
Don't leave variant components or the switcher lying around. They rot fast and confuse the next reader.
The full set of variants is the primary source, so it lands on the throwaway branch, not the bin — variant components and the switcher left in the main branch rot fast and confuse the next reader.
## Anti-patterns
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Prototype"
short_description: "Prototype to answer a design question"
+12
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
---
name: research
description: Investigate a question against high-trust primary sources and capture the findings as a Markdown file in the repo. Use when the user wants a topic researched, docs or API facts gathered, or reading legwork delegated to a background agent.
---
Spin up a **background agent** to do the research, so you keep working while it reads.
Its job:
1. Investigate the question against **primary sources** — official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs — not a secondary write-up of them. Follow every claim back to the source that owns it.
2. Write the findings to a single Markdown file, citing each claim's source.
3. Save it where the repo already keeps such notes; match the existing convention, and if there is none, put it somewhere sensible and say where.
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Research"
short_description: "Research from high-trust sources"
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Resolving Merge Conflicts"
short_description: "Resolve merge and rebase conflicts"
@@ -26,16 +26,18 @@ Look at the current repo to understand its starting state. Read whatever exists;
- `docs/adr/` and any `src/*/docs/adr/` directories
- `docs/agents/` — does this skill's prior output already exist?
- `.scratch/` — sign that a local-markdown issue tracker convention is already in use
- Is the `triage` skill installed? (a `triage` skill folder alongside this one, or `triage` in your available skills.) This decides whether Section B runs at all.
- Monorepo signals — a `pnpm-workspace.yaml`, a `workspaces` field in `package.json`, or a populated `packages/*` with its own `src/`. Present only in a genuinely large multi-package repo; their absence means single-context, which is almost every repo.
### 2. Present findings and ask
Summarise what's present and what's missing. Then walk the user through the three decisions **one at a time** — present a section, get the user's answer, then move to the next. Don't dump all three at once.
Summarise what's present and what's missing. Then take the sections in order — one section, one answer, then the next.
Assume the user does not know what these terms mean. Each section starts with a short explainer (what it is, why these skills need it, what changes if they pick differently). Then show the choices and the default.
Lead each section with the recommended answer so the user can accept it in a word. Give a one-line explainer only when the choice genuinely branches; skip the section entirely when exploration already settled it (Section B when `triage` isn't installed, Section C when there's no monorepo).
**Section A — Issue tracker.**
> Explainer: The "issue tracker" is where issues live for this repo. Skills like `to-issues`, `triage`, `to-prd`, and `qa` read from and write to it — they need to know whether to call `gh issue create`, write a markdown file under `.scratch/`, or follow some other workflow you describe. Pick the place you actually track work for this repo.
> Explainer: The "issue tracker" is where issues live for this repo. Skills like `to-tickets`, `triage`, `to-spec`, and `qa` read from and write to it — they need to know whether to call `gh issue create`, write a markdown file under `.scratch/`, or follow some other workflow you describe. Pick the place you actually track work for this repo.
Default posture: these skills were designed for GitHub. If a `git remote` points at GitHub, propose that. If a `git remote` points at GitLab (`gitlab.com` or a self-hosted host), propose GitLab. Otherwise (or if the user prefers), offer:
@@ -44,41 +46,26 @@ Default posture: these skills were designed for GitHub. If a `git remote` points
- **Local markdown** — issues live as files under `.scratch/<feature>/` in this repo (good for solo projects or repos without a remote)
- **Other** (Jira, Linear, etc.) — ask the user to describe the workflow in one paragraph; the skill will record it as freeform prose
If — and only if — the user picked **GitHub** or **GitLab**, ask one follow-up:
Record the choice in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`. The GitHub and GitLab templates carry a "PRs as a request surface" flag, defaulted **off** — leave it off and don't raise it; a user who wants external PRs in the triage queue can flip the flag in the file later.
> Explainer: Open-source repos often receive feature requests as pull requests, not just issues — a PR is an issue with attached code. If you turn this on, `/triage` pulls *external* PRs into the same queue and runs them through the same labels and states as issues (collaborators' in-flight PRs are left alone). Leave it off if PRs aren't a request surface for you.
**Section B — Triage label vocabulary.** Skip this section entirely if the `triage` skill isn't installed (exploration told you) — an uninstalled skill needs no labels.
- **PRs as a request surface** — yes / no (default: no). Record the answer in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`. For local-markdown and other trackers, skip this question — there are no PRs.
If it is installed, ask exactly one question:
**Section B — Triage label vocabulary.**
> Do you want to keep the default triage labels? (recommended: **yes**)
> Explainer: When the `triage` skill processes an incoming issue, it moves it through a state machine — needs evaluation, waiting on reporter, ready for an AFK agent to pick up, ready for a human, or won't fix. To do that, it needs to apply labels (or the equivalent in your issue tracker) that match strings *you've actually configured*. If your repo already uses different label names (e.g. `bug:triage` instead of `needs-triage`), map them here so the skill applies the right ones instead of creating duplicates.
The defaults are the five canonical roles, each label string equal to its name: `needs-triage`, `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, `wontfix`. On **yes**, write them as-is. Only if the user says no — usually because their tracker already uses other names (e.g. `bug:triage` for `needs-triage`) — collect the overrides so `triage` applies existing labels instead of creating duplicates.
The five canonical roles:
**Section C — Domain docs.** Default to **single-context** — one `CONTEXT.md` + `docs/adr/` at the repo root. This fits almost every repo; write it without asking.
- `needs-triage` — maintainer needs to evaluate
- `needs-info` — waiting on reporter
- `ready-for-agent` — fully specified, AFK-ready (an agent can pick it up with no human context)
- `ready-for-human` — needs human implementation
- `wontfix` — will not be actioned
Default: each role's string equals its name. Ask the user if they want to override any. If their issue tracker has no existing labels, the defaults are fine.
**Section C — Domain docs.**
> Explainer: Some skills (`improve-codebase-architecture`, `diagnosing-bugs`, `tdd`) read a `CONTEXT.md` file to learn the project's domain language, and `docs/adr/` for past architectural decisions. They need to know whether the repo has one global context or multiple (e.g. a monorepo with separate frontend/backend contexts) so they look in the right place.
Confirm the layout:
- **Single-context** — one `CONTEXT.md` + `docs/adr/` at the repo root. Most repos are this.
- **Multi-context** — `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the root pointing to per-context `CONTEXT.md` files (typically a monorepo).
Offer **multi-context** — a root `CONTEXT-MAP.md` pointing to per-context `CONTEXT.md` files — only when exploration found monorepo signals. Then confirm which layout they want.
### 3. Confirm and edit
Show the user a draft of:
- The `## Agent skills` block to add to whichever of `CLAUDE.md` / `AGENTS.md` is being edited (see step 4 for selection rules)
- The contents of `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`, `docs/agents/domain.md`
- The contents of `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, `docs/agents/domain.md`, and `docs/agents/triage-labels.md` (the last only when `triage` is installed)
Let them edit before writing.
@@ -101,7 +88,7 @@ The block:
### Issue tracker
[one-line summary of where issues are tracked, plus whether external PRs are a triage surface]. See `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`.
[one-line summary of where issues are tracked]. See `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`.
### Triage labels
@@ -112,12 +99,14 @@ The block:
[one-line summary of layout — "single-context" or "multi-context"]. See `docs/agents/domain.md`.
```
Then write the three docs files using the seed templates in this skill folder as a starting point:
Include the `### Triage labels` sub-block, and write `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`, only when `triage` is installed and Section B ran. When it isn't, both are omitted.
Then write the docs files using the seed templates in this skill folder as a starting point:
- [issue-tracker-github.md](./issue-tracker-github.md) — GitHub issue tracker
- [issue-tracker-gitlab.md](./issue-tracker-gitlab.md) — GitLab issue tracker
- [issue-tracker-local.md](./issue-tracker-local.md) — local-markdown issue tracker
- [triage-labels.md](./triage-labels.md) — label mapping
- [triage-labels.md](./triage-labels.md) — label mapping (only if `triage` is installed)
- [domain.md](./domain.md) — domain doc consumer rules + layout
For "other" issue trackers, write `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` from scratch using the user's description.
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Setup Matt Pocock Skills"
short_description: "Configure a repo for the skills"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -32,3 +32,14 @@ Create a GitHub issue.
## When a skill says "fetch the relevant ticket"
Run `gh issue view <number> --comments`.
## Wayfinding operations
Used by `/wayfinder`. The **map** is a single issue with **child** issues as tickets.
- **Map**: a single issue labelled `wayfinder:map`, holding the Notes / Decisions-so-far / Fog body. `gh issue create --label wayfinder:map`.
- **Child ticket**: an issue linked to the map as a GitHub sub-issue (`gh api` on the sub-issues endpoint). Where sub-issues aren't enabled, add the child to a task list in the map body and put `Part of #<map>` at the top of the child body. Labels: `wayfinder:<type>` (`research`/`prototype`/`grilling`/`task`). Once claimed, the ticket is assigned to the driving dev.
- **Blocking**: GitHub's **native issue dependencies** — the canonical, UI-visible representation. Add an edge with `gh api --method POST repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<child>/dependencies/blocked_by -F issue_id=<blocker-db-id>`, where `<blocker-db-id>` is the blocker's numeric **database id** (`gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<n> --jq .id`, _not_ the `#number` or `node_id`). GitHub reports `issue_dependencies_summary.blocked_by` (open blockers only — the live gate). Where dependencies aren't available, fall back to a `Blocked by: #<n>, #<n>` line at the top of the child body. A ticket is unblocked when every blocker is closed.
- **Frontier query**: list the map's open children (`gh issue list --state open`, scoped to the map's sub-issues / task list), drop any with an open blocker (`issue_dependencies_summary.blocked_by > 0`, or an open issue in the `Blocked by` line) or an assignee; first in map order wins.
- **Claim**: `gh issue edit <n> --add-assignee @me` — the session's first write.
- **Resolve**: `gh issue comment <n> --body "<answer>"`, then `gh issue close <n>`, then append a context pointer (gist + link) to the map's Decisions-so-far.
@@ -33,3 +33,14 @@ Create a GitLab issue.
## When a skill says "fetch the relevant ticket"
Run `glab issue view <number> --comments`.
## Wayfinding operations
Used by `/wayfinder`. The **map** is a single issue with **child** issues as tickets.
- **Map**: a single issue labelled `wayfinder:map`, holding the Notes / Decisions-so-far / Fog body. `glab issue create --label wayfinder:map`. (On GitLab tiers with native epics, an epic may hold the map instead; a labelled issue works everywhere.)
- **Child ticket**: an issue carrying `Part of #<map>` at the top of its description and labels `wayfinder:<type>` (`research`/`prototype`/`grilling`/`task`). Once claimed, the ticket is assigned to the driving dev.
- **Blocking**: GitLab's **native blocking link** — the canonical, UI-visible representation. Add it with the `/blocked_by #<n>` quick action, posted as a note (`glab issue note <child> --message "/blocked_by #<blocker>"`). Native blocking links are a Premium/Ultimate feature; on the free tier (or where unavailable) fall back to a `Blocked by: #<n>, #<n>` line at the top of the description. A ticket is unblocked when every blocker is closed.
- **Frontier query**: `glab issue list -F json` scoped to the map's children, drop any with an open blocker — a native `blocked_by` link to an open issue (`glab api projects/:id/issues/:iid/links`), or an open issue in the `Blocked by` line — or an assignee; first in map order wins.
- **Claim**: `glab issue update <n> --assignee @me` — the session's first write.
- **Resolve**: `glab issue note <n> --message "<answer>"`, then `glab issue close <n>`, then append a context pointer (gist + link) to the map's Decisions-so-far.
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
# Issue tracker: Local Markdown
Issues and PRDs for this repo live as markdown files in `.scratch/`.
Issues and specs (you may know a spec as a PRD) for this repo live as markdown files in `.scratch/`.
## Conventions
- One feature per directory: `.scratch/<feature-slug>/`
- The PRD is `.scratch/<feature-slug>/PRD.md`
- Implementation issues are `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01`
- The spec is `.scratch/<feature-slug>/spec.md`
- Implementation issues are one file per ticket at `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01` — never a single combined tickets file
- Triage state is recorded as a `Status:` line near the top of each issue file (see `triage-labels.md` for the role strings)
- Comments and conversation history append to the bottom of the file under a `## Comments` heading
@@ -17,3 +17,14 @@ Create a new file under `.scratch/<feature-slug>/` (creating the directory if ne
## When a skill says "fetch the relevant ticket"
Read the file at the referenced path. The user will normally pass the path or the issue number directly.
## Wayfinding operations
Used by `/wayfinder`. The **map** is a file with one **child** file per ticket.
- **Map**: `.scratch/<effort>/map.md` — the Notes / Decisions-so-far / Fog body.
- **Child ticket**: `.scratch/<effort>/issues/NN-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01`, with the question in the body. A `Type:` line records the ticket type (`research`/`prototype`/`grilling`/`task`); a `Status:` line records `claimed`/`resolved`.
- **Blocking**: a `Blocked by: NN, NN` line near the top. A ticket is unblocked when every file it lists is `resolved`.
- **Frontier**: scan `.scratch/<effort>/issues/` for files that are open, unblocked, and unclaimed; first by number wins.
- **Claim**: set `Status: claimed` and save before any work.
- **Resolve**: append the answer under an `## Answer` heading, set `Status: resolved`, then append a context pointer (gist + link) to the map's Decisions-so-far in `map.md`.
+16 -91
View File
@@ -5,107 +5,32 @@ description: Test-driven development. Use when the user wants to build features
# Test-Driven Development
## Philosophy
TDD is the red → green loop. This skill is the reference that makes that loop produce tests worth keeping: what a good test is, where tests go, the anti-patterns, and the rules of the loop. Every section applies on every cycle — consult them before and during the loop, not after.
**Core principle**: Tests should verify behavior through public interfaces, not implementation details. Code can change entirely; tests shouldn't.
When exploring the codebase, read `CONTEXT.md` (if it exists) so test names and interface vocabulary match the project's domain language, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.
**Good tests** are integration-style: they exercise real code paths through public APIs. They describe _what_ the system does, not _how_ it does it. A good test reads like a specification - "user can checkout with valid cart" tells you exactly what capability exists. These tests survive refactors because they don't care about internal structure.
## What a good test is
**Bad tests** are coupled to implementation. They mock internal collaborators, test private methods, or verify through external means (like querying a database directly instead of using the interface). The warning sign: your test breaks when you refactor, but behavior hasn't changed. If you rename an internal function and tests fail, those tests were testing implementation, not behavior.
**Tautological tests** restate the implementation inside the assertion, so they pass by construction and give zero confidence. When the expected value is computed the way the code computes it — `expect(add(a, b)).toBe(a + b)`, snapshotting a figure you derived by hand the same way the code does, asserting a constant equals itself — the test can never disagree with the code: break the code wrong and the assertion breaks wrong with it. The expected value must come from an independent source of truth — a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec.
Tests verify behavior through public interfaces, not implementation details. Code can change entirely; tests shouldn't. A good test reads like a specification — "user can checkout with valid cart" tells you exactly what capability exists — and survives refactors because it doesn't care about internal structure.
See [tests.md](tests.md) for examples and [mocking.md](mocking.md) for mocking guidelines.
## Anti-Pattern: Horizontal Slices
## Seams — where tests go
**DO NOT write all tests first, then all implementation.** This is "horizontal slicing" - treating RED as "write all tests" and GREEN as "write all code."
A **seam** is the public boundary you test at: the interface where you observe behavior without reaching inside. Tests live at seams, never against internals.
This produces **crap tests**:
**Test only at pre-agreed seams.** Before writing any test, write down the seams under test and confirm them with the user. No test is written at an unconfirmed seam. You can't test everything — agreeing the seams up front is how testing effort lands on the critical paths and complex logic instead of every edge case.
- Tests written in bulk test _imagined_ behavior, not _actual_ behavior
- You end up testing the _shape_ of things (data structures, function signatures) rather than user-facing behavior
- Tests become insensitive to real changes - they pass when behavior breaks, fail when behavior is fine
- You outrun your headlights, committing to test structure before understanding the implementation
Ask: "What's the public interface, and which seams should we test?"
**Correct approach**: Vertical slices via tracer bullets. One test → one implementation → repeat. Each test responds to what you learned from the previous cycle. Because you just wrote the code, you know exactly what behavior matters and how to verify it.
## Anti-patterns
```
WRONG (horizontal):
RED: test1, test2, test3, test4, test5
GREEN: impl1, impl2, impl3, impl4, impl5
- **Implementation-coupled** — mocks internal collaborators, tests private methods, or verifies through a side channel (querying the database instead of using the interface). The tell: the test breaks when you refactor but behavior hasn't changed.
- **Tautological** — the assertion recomputes the expected value the way the code does (`expect(add(a, b)).toBe(a + b)`, a snapshot derived by hand the same way, a constant asserted equal to itself), so it passes by construction and can never disagree with the code. Expected values must come from an independent source of truth — a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec.
- **Horizontal slicing** — writing all tests first, then all implementation. Bulk tests verify _imagined_ behavior: you test the _shape_ of things rather than user-facing behavior, the tests go insensitive to real changes, and you commit to test structure before understanding the implementation. Work in **vertical slices** instead — one test → one implementation → repeat, each test a **tracer bullet** that responds to what the last cycle taught you.
RIGHT (vertical):
RED→GREEN: test1→impl1
RED→GREEN: test2→impl2
RED→GREEN: test3→impl3
...
```
## Rules of the loop
## Workflow
### 1. Planning
When exploring the codebase, read `CONTEXT.md` (if it exists) so that test names and interface vocabulary match the project's domain language, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.
Before writing any code:
- [ ] Confirm with user what interface changes are needed
- [ ] Confirm with user which behaviors to test (prioritize)
- [ ] Identify opportunities for deep modules (small interface, deep implementation) — run the `/codebase-design` skill for the vocabulary and the testability checks
- [ ] List the behaviors to test (not implementation steps)
- [ ] Get user approval on the plan
Ask: "What should the public interface look like? Which behaviors are most important to test?"
**You can't test everything.** Confirm with the user exactly which behaviors matter most. Focus testing effort on critical paths and complex logic, not every possible edge case.
### 2. Tracer Bullet
Write ONE test that confirms ONE thing about the system:
```
RED: Write test for first behavior → test fails
GREEN: Write minimal code to pass → test passes
```
This is your tracer bullet - proves the path works end-to-end.
### 3. Incremental Loop
For each remaining behavior:
```
RED: Write next test → fails
GREEN: Minimal code to pass → passes
```
Rules:
- One test at a time
- Only enough code to pass current test
- Don't anticipate future tests
- Keep tests focused on observable behavior
### 4. Refactor
After all tests pass, look for [refactor candidates](refactoring.md):
- [ ] Extract duplication
- [ ] Deepen modules (move complexity behind simple interfaces)
- [ ] Apply SOLID principles where natural
- [ ] Consider what new code reveals about existing code
- [ ] Run tests after each refactor step
**Never refactor while RED.** Get to GREEN first.
## Checklist Per Cycle
```
[ ] Test describes behavior, not implementation
[ ] Test uses public interface only
[ ] Test would survive internal refactor
[ ] Expected values are independent literals, not recomputed from the code
[ ] Code is minimal for this test
[ ] No speculative features added
```
- **Red before green.** Write the failing test first, then only enough code to pass it. Don't anticipate future tests or add speculative features.
- **One slice at a time.** One seam, one test, one minimal implementation per cycle.
- **Refactoring is not part of the loop.** It belongs to the review stage (see the `code-review` skill), not the red → green implementation cycle.
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "TDD"
short_description: "Test-driven red-green-refactor"
-10
View File
@@ -1,10 +0,0 @@
# Refactor Candidates
After TDD cycle, look for:
- **Duplication** → Extract function/class
- **Long methods** → Break into private helpers (keep tests on public interface)
- **Shallow modules** → Combine or deepen
- **Feature envy** → Move logic to where data lives
- **Primitive obsession** → Introduce value objects
- **Existing code** the new code reveals as problematic
-84
View File
@@ -1,84 +0,0 @@
---
name: to-issues
description: Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices.
disable-model-invocation: true
---
# To Issues
Break a plan into independently-grabbable issues using vertical slices (tracer bullets).
The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
## Process
### 1. Gather context
Work from whatever is already in the conversation context. If the user passes an issue reference (issue number, URL, or path) as an argument, fetch it from the issue tracker and read its full body and comments.
### 2. Explore the codebase (optional)
If you have not already explored the codebase, do so to understand the current state of the code. Issue titles and descriptions should use the project's domain glossary vocabulary, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.
Look for opportunities to prefactor the code to make the implementation easier. "Make the change easy, then make the easy change."
### 3. Draft vertical slices
Break the plan into **tracer bullet** issues. Each issue is a thin vertical slice that cuts through ALL integration layers end-to-end, NOT a horizontal slice of one layer.
<vertical-slice-rules>
- Each slice delivers a narrow but COMPLETE path through every layer (schema, API, UI, tests)
- A completed slice is demoable or verifiable on its own
- Any prefactoring should be done first
</vertical-slice-rules>
### 4. Quiz the user
Present the proposed breakdown as a numbered list. For each slice, show:
- **Title**: short descriptive name
- **Blocked by**: which other slices (if any) must complete first
- **User stories covered**: which user stories this addresses (if the source material has them)
Ask the user:
- Does the granularity feel right? (too coarse / too fine)
- Are the dependency relationships correct?
- Should any slices be merged or split further?
Iterate until the user approves the breakdown.
### 5. Publish the issues to the issue tracker
For each approved slice, publish a new issue to the issue tracker. Use the issue body template below. These issues are considered ready for AFK agents, so publish them with the correct triage label unless instructed otherwise.
Publish issues in dependency order (blockers first) so you can reference real issue identifiers in the "Blocked by" field.
<issue-template>
## Parent
A reference to the parent issue on the issue tracker (if the source was an existing issue, otherwise omit this section).
## What to build
A concise description of this vertical slice. Describe the end-to-end behavior, not layer-by-layer implementation.
Avoid specific file paths or code snippets — they go stale fast. Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it here and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts — not a working demo, just the important bits.
## Acceptance criteria
- [ ] Criterion 1
- [ ] Criterion 2
- [ ] Criterion 3
## Blocked by
- A reference to the blocking ticket (if any)
Or "None - can start immediately" if no blockers.
</issue-template>
Do NOT close or modify any parent issue.
@@ -1,24 +1,24 @@
---
name: to-prd
description: Turn the current conversation into a PRD and publish it to the project issue tracker — no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed.
name: to-spec
description: Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the project issue tracker — no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed.
disable-model-invocation: true
---
This skill takes the current conversation context and codebase understanding and produces a PRD. Do NOT interview the user — just synthesize what you already know.
This skill takes the current conversation context and codebase understanding and produces a spec (you may know this document as a PRD). Do NOT interview the user — just synthesize what you already know.
The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
## Process
1. Explore the repo to understand the current state of the codebase, if you haven't already. Use the project's domain glossary vocabulary throughout the PRD, and respect any ADRs in the area you're touching.
1. Explore the repo to understand the current state of the codebase, if you haven't already. Use the project's domain glossary vocabulary throughout the spec, and respect any ADRs in the area you're touching.
2. Sketch out the seams at which you're going to test the feature. Existing seams should be preferred to new ones. Use the highest seam possible. If new seams are needed, propose them at the highest point you can. The fewer seams across the codebase, the better - the ideal number is one.
Check with the user that these seams match their expectations.
3. Write the PRD using the template below, then publish it to the project issue tracker. Apply the `ready-for-agent` triage label - no need for additional triage.
3. Write the spec using the template below, then publish it to the project issue tracker. Apply the `ready-for-agent` triage label - no need for additional triage.
<prd-template>
<spec-template>
## Problem Statement
@@ -66,10 +66,10 @@ A list of testing decisions that were made. Include:
## Out of Scope
A description of the things that are out of scope for this PRD.
A description of the things that are out of scope for this spec.
## Further Notes
Any further notes about the feature.
</prd-template>
</spec-template>
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "To Spec"
short_description: "Turn a conversation into a spec"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
+105
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,105 @@
---
name: to-tickets
description: Break a plan, spec, or the current conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges, published to the configured tracker — edges as text in one file per ticket locally, or native blocking links on a real tracker.
disable-model-invocation: true
---
# To Tickets
Break a plan, spec, or conversation into a set of **tickets** — tracer-bullet vertical slices, each declaring the tickets that **block** it.
The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
## Process
### 1. Gather context
Work from whatever is already in the conversation context. If the user passes a reference (a spec path, an issue number or URL) as an argument, fetch it and read its full body and comments.
### 2. Explore the codebase (optional)
If you have not already explored the codebase, do so to understand the current state of the code. Ticket titles and descriptions should use the project's domain glossary vocabulary, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.
Look for opportunities to prefactor the code to make the implementation easier. "Make the change easy, then make the easy change."
### 3. Draft vertical slices
Break the work into **tracer bullet** tickets.
<vertical-slice-rules>
- Each slice cuts a narrow but COMPLETE path through every layer (schema, API, UI, tests) — vertical, NOT a horizontal slice of one layer
- A completed slice is demoable or verifiable on its own
- Each slice is sized to fit in a single fresh context window
- Any prefactoring should be done first
</vertical-slice-rules>
Give each ticket its **blocking edges** — the other tickets that must complete before it can start. A ticket with no blockers can start immediately.
**Wide refactors are the exception to vertical slicing.** A **wide refactor** is one mechanical change — rename a column, retype a shared symbol — whose **blast radius** fans across the whole codebase, so a single edit breaks thousands of call sites at once and no vertical slice can land green. Don't force it into a tracer bullet; sequence it as **expandcontract**. First expand: add the new form beside the old so nothing breaks. Then migrate the call sites over in batches sized by blast radius (per package, per directory), each batch its own ticket blocked by the expand, keeping CI green batch to batch because the old form still exists. Finally contract: delete the old form once no caller remains, in a ticket blocked by every migrate batch. When even the batches can't stay green alone, keep the sequence but let them share an integration branch that all block a final integrate-and-verify ticket — green is promised only there.
### 4. Quiz the user
Present the proposed breakdown as a numbered list. For each ticket, show:
- **Title**: short descriptive name
- **Blocked by**: which other tickets (if any) must complete first
- **What it delivers**: the end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work
Ask the user:
- Does the granularity feel right? (too coarse / too fine)
- Are the blocking edges correct — does each ticket only depend on tickets that genuinely gate it?
- Should any tickets be merged or split further?
Iterate until the user approves the breakdown.
### 5. Publish the tickets to the configured tracker
Publish the approved tickets. **How** depends on the tracker `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` configured — the tickets are the same either way, only the shape of the blocking edges changes:
- **Local files** → write one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01` in dependency order (blockers first). Each file's "Blocked by" lists the numbers/titles it depends on. Use the per-ticket file template below — one ticket per file, never a single combined file.
- **A real issue tracker (GitHub, Linear, …)** → publish one issue per ticket in dependency order (blockers first) so each ticket's blocking edges can reference real identifiers. Use the platform's native blocking / sub-issue relationship where it has one; otherwise set each ticket's "Blocked by" to the blocking issues. Apply the `ready-for-agent` triage label unless instructed otherwise — the tickets are agent-grabbable by construction.
Work the **frontier**: any ticket whose blockers are all done. For a purely linear chain that means top to bottom.
Do NOT close or modify any parent issue.
<local-ticket-template>
# <NN> — <Ticket title>
**What to build:** the end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective — not a layer-by-layer implementation list.
**Blocked by:** the numbers/titles of the tickets that gate this one, or "None — can start immediately".
**Status:** ready-for-agent
- [ ] Acceptance criterion 1
- [ ] Acceptance criterion 2
</local-ticket-template>
<issue-template>
## Parent
A reference to the parent issue on the tracker (if the source was an existing issue, otherwise omit this section).
## What to build
The end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective — not layer-by-layer implementation.
## Acceptance criteria
- [ ] Criterion 1
- [ ] Criterion 2
## Blocked by
- A reference to each blocking ticket, or "None — can start immediately".
</issue-template>
In either form, avoid specific file paths or code snippets — they go stale fast. Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts — not a working demo, just the important bits.
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "To Tickets"
short_description: "Split a plan into tracer-bullet tickets"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Triage"
short_description: "Move issues through triage roles"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
+128
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,128 @@
---
name: wayfinder
description: Plan a huge chunk of work — more than one agent session can hold — as a shared map of decision tickets on your issue tracker, and resolve them one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
disable-model-invocation: true
---
A loose idea has arrived — too big for one agent session, and wrapped in fog: the way from here to the **destination** isn't visible yet. Wayfinding is about finding that way, not charging at the destination. This skill charts the way as a **shared map** on the repo's issue tracker, then works its **decision tickets** — questions whose resolution is a decision, not slices of a build to execute — one at a time until the route is clear.
The destination varies per effort, and naming it is the first act of charting — it shapes every ticket. It might be a spec to hand off and iterate on, a decision to lock before planning starts, or a change made in place like a data-structure migration. The map is domain-agnostic — engineering work, course content, whatever fits the shape.
## Plan, don't do
Wayfinder is **planning** by default: each ticket resolves a decision, and the map is done when the way is clear — nothing left to decide before someone goes and does the thing. The pull to just do the work is usually the signal you've reached the edge of the map and it's time to hand off. An effort can override this in its **Notes** — carrying execution into the map itself — but absent that, produce decisions, not deliverables.
## Refer by name
Every map and ticket is an issue, so it has a **name** — its title. In everything the human reads — narration, the map's Decisions-so-far — refer to it by that name, never by a bare id, number, or slug. A wall of `#42, #43, #44` is illegible; names read at a glance. The id and URL don't vanish — a name wraps its link — but they ride *inside* the name, never stand in for it.
## The Map
The map is a single issue on this repo's issue tracker, labelled `wayfinder:map` — the canonical artifact. Its tickets are child issues of the map.
The map is an **index**, not a store. It lists the decisions made and points at the tickets that hold their detail; a decision lives in exactly one place — its ticket — so the map never restates it, only gists it and links.
**Where the map, its child tickets, blocking, and frontier queries physically live is tracker-specific.** The issue tracker should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not. Consult the tracker doc's "Wayfinding operations" section for how _this_ repo expresses them. If no tracker has been provided, default to the local-markdown tracker.
### The map body
The whole map at low resolution, loaded once per session. Open tickets are **not** listed — they are open child issues, found by query.
```markdown
## Destination
<what reaching the end of this map looks like — the spec, decision, or change this effort is finding its way to. One or two lines; every session orients to it before choosing a ticket.>
## Notes
<domain; skills every session should consult; standing preferences for this effort>
## Decisions so far
<!-- the index — one line per closed ticket: enough to judge relevance, then zoom the link for the detail the ticket holds -->
- [<closed ticket title>](link) — <one-line gist of the answer>
## Not yet specified
<!-- see "Fog of war": in-scope fog you can't ticket yet; graduates as the frontier advances -->
## Out of scope
<!-- see "Out of scope": work ruled beyond the destination; closed, never graduates -->
```
### Tickets
Each ticket is a **child issue** of the map; the tracker's issue id is its identity. Its body is the question, sized to one 100K token agent session:
```markdown
## Question
<the decision or investigation this ticket resolves>
```
Each ticket carries a `wayfinder:<type>` label — one of `research`, `prototype`, `grilling`, `task` (see [Ticket Types](#ticket-types)).
A session **claims** a ticket by assigning it to the dev driving the map, **first**, before any work, so concurrent sessions skip it. That assignee _is_ the claim: an open, unassigned ticket is unclaimed.
Blocking uses the tracker's **native** dependency relationship — essential because it renders the frontier _visually_ in the tracker's own UI, so the human sees what's takeable without opening the map. Only a tracker that lacks native blocking falls back to a body convention. A ticket is **unblocked** when every ticket blocking it is closed; the **frontier** is the open, unblocked, unclaimed children — the edge of the known.
The answer isn't part of the body — it's recorded on resolution (see [Work through the map](#work-through-the-map)). Assets created while resolving a ticket are linked from the issue, not pasted in.
## Ticket Types
Every ticket is either **HITL** — human in the loop, worked *with* a human who speaks for themselves — or **AFK**, driven by the agent alone. A HITL ticket only resolves through that live exchange; the agent never stands in for the human's side of it (a grilling agent that answers its own questions has broken this).
- **Research** (AFK): Reading documentation, third-party APIs, or local resources like knowledge bases to surface a fact a decision waits on. Resolved by a `/research` **subagent**. Use when knowledge outside the current working directory is required.
- **Prototype** (HITL): Raise the fidelity of the discussion by making a cheap, rough, concrete artifact to react to — an outline, a rough take, a stub, or UI/logic code via the /prototype skill. Links the prototype as an asset. Use when "how should it look" or "how should it behave" is the key question.
- **Grilling** (HITL): Conversation via the /grilling and /domain-modeling skills, one question at a time. The default case.
- **Task** (HITL or AFK): Manual work that must happen before a *decision* can be made — nothing to decide, prototype, or research, but the discussion is blocked until it's done. Signing up for a service so its API can be judged, provisioning access, moving data so its shape can be seen. This is the one type that *does* rather than decides — and it earns its place by unblocking a decision, not by delivering the destination. The agent drives it alone where it can (AFK); otherwise it hands the human a precise checklist (HITL). Resolved when the work is done; the answer records what was done and any resulting facts (credentials location, new URLs, row counts) later tickets depend on.
## Fog of war
The map is _deliberately_ incomplete: don't chart what you can't yet see. Beyond the live tickets lies the **fog of war** — the dim view of decisions and investigations you can tell are coming but can't yet pin down, because they hang on questions still open. Resolving a ticket clears the fog ahead of it, graduating whatever's now specifiable into fresh tickets — one at a time, until the way to the destination is clear and no tickets remain.
The map's **Not yet specified** section is where that dim view is written down: the suspected question, the area to revisit later. It's the undiscovered frontier _toward_ the destination — everything here is in scope, just not sharp enough to ticket. Write as loosely or as fully as the view allows; it doubles as a signpost for collaborators reading where the effort is headed.
**Fog or ticket?** The test is whether you can state the question precisely now — _not_ whether you can answer it now.
- **Ticket when** the question is already sharp — even if it's blocked and you can't act on it yet.
- **Not yet specified when** you can't yet phrase it that sharply. Don't pre-slice the fog into ticket-sized pieces: it's coarser than a ticket, and one patch may graduate into several tickets, or none, once the frontier reaches it.
**Not yet specified** excludes what's already decided (Decisions so far), what's already a live ticket, and what's out of scope (the next section).
## Out of scope
Fog only ever gathers _toward_ the destination. The destination fixes the scope, so work beyond it is **out of scope** — it isn't fog, and it doesn't belong in **Not yet specified**. It gets its own **Out of scope** section on the map: work you've consciously ruled out of _this_ effort. Scope, not sharpness, lands it here.
Out-of-scope work never graduates — the frontier stops at the destination — so it returns only if the destination is redrawn, and then as a fresh effort, not a resumption.
Ruling something out of scope is a scoping act, not a step on the route. When a ticket that already exists turns out to sit past the destination — mis-scoped in while charting, or exposed by a resolution — **close it** (a closed ticket is unambiguously off the frontier) and leave one line in the **Out of scope** section: the gist plus why it's out of scope, linking the closed ticket. It stays out of **Decisions so far**, which records the route actually walked — a scope boundary isn't a step on it.
## Invocation
Two modes. Either way, **never resolve more than one ticket per session** — with the exception of research tickets.
### Chart the map
User invokes with a loose idea.
1. **Name the destination.** Run a `/grilling` and `/domain-modeling` session to pin down what this map is finding its way to — the spec, decision, or change. The destination fixes the scope, so it's settled first.
2. **Map the frontier.** Grill again, **breadth-first** this time: fan out across the whole space rather than deep on any one thread, surfacing the open decisions and the first steps takeable now. **If this surfaces no fog** — the way to the destination is already clear, the whole journey small enough for one session — you don't need a map. Stop and ask the user how they'd like to proceed.
3. **Create the map** (label `wayfinder:map`): Destination and Notes filled in, Decisions-so-far empty, the fog sketched into **Not yet specified**.
4. **Create the tickets you can specify now** as child issues of the map — then wire blocking edges in a **second pass** (issues need ids before they can reference each other). Wiring sorts them into the frontier and the blocked; everything you can't yet specify stays in the fog — the **Not yet specified** section.
5. **Fire the research subagents.** For each `research` ticket you just created, spin up a `/research` subagent to resolve it in parallel, capturing its findings on a throwaway `research/<name>` branch with a context pointer from the ticket.
6. Stop — charting is one session's work; it hand-resolves nothing.
### Work through the map
User invokes with a map (URL or number). A ticket is **optional** — without one, you pick the next decision, not the user.
1. Load the **map** — the low-res view, not every ticket body.
2. Choose the ticket. If the user named one, use it. Otherwise take the first frontier ticket in order. **Claim it**: assign it to yourself before any work.
3. Resolve it — **zoom as needed**: fetch the full body of any related or closed ticket on demand; invoke the skills the `## Notes` block names. If in doubt, use `/grilling` and `/domain-modeling`.
4. Record the resolution: post the answer as a **resolution comment**, **close** the issue, and **append a context pointer** to the map's Decisions-so-far.
5. Add newly-surfaced tickets (create-then-wire); graduate any fog the answer has made specifiable, clearing each graduated patch from **Not yet specified** so it lives only as its new ticket. If the answer reveals a ticket — this one or another — sits beyond the destination, **rule it out of scope** rather than resolving it on the route. If the decision invalidates other parts of the map, update or delete those tickets.
The user may run unblocked tickets in parallel, so expect other sessions to be editing the tracker concurrently.
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Wayfinder"
short_description: "Map a large effort as decision tickets"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
+4 -2
View File
@@ -2,10 +2,12 @@
Skills that are still being developed. They're not ready to ship — expect rough edges, breaking changes, and abandoned experiments. They're excluded from the plugin and the top-level README until they graduate to a stable bucket.
- **[decision-mapping](./decision-mapping/SKILL.md)** — Turn a loose idea into a sequenced map of investigation tickets, then drive them to resolution one at a time. User-invoked.
- **[loop-me](./loop-me/SKILL.md)** — Grill yourself into implementable workflow specs over multiple sessions, using the current directory as a stateful workspace. User-invoked.
- **[review](./review/SKILL.md)** — Review changes since a fixed point along two parallel axes: **Standards** (does the diff follow the repo's coding standards?) and **Spec** (does the diff faithfully implement the originating issue/PRD?).
- **[wizard](./wizard/SKILL.md)** — Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through a manual procedure (setup, a one-off migration, a state transition) — opening URLs, capturing values, writing `.env` and GitHub Actions secrets. User-invoked.
- **[writing-beats](./writing-beats/SKILL.md)** — Shape an article as a journey of beats, choose-your-own-adventure style. Pick a starting beat, write only that beat, then pivot to the next, until the article reaches a natural end.
- **[writing-fragments](./writing-fragments/SKILL.md)** — Grilling session that mines you for fragments — heterogeneous nuggets of writing — and appends them to a single document as raw material for a future article.
- **[writing-shape](./writing-shape/SKILL.md)** — Take a markdown file of raw material and shape it into an article paragraph by paragraph, arguing format choices at each step.
- **[claude-handoff](./claude-handoff/SKILL.md)** — Hand the current conversation off to a fresh background agent that picks up the work immediately, seeded with a handoff summary via `claude --bg`. User-invoked.
- **[setup-ts-deep-modules](./setup-ts-deep-modules/SKILL.md)** — Wire dependency-cruiser into a TypeScript repo so each package is a deep module — implementation hidden in subfolders, reachable only through its entry-point files, tests exercising it through those. User-invoked.
- **[to-questionnaire](./to-questionnaire/SKILL.md)** — Turn a decision you can't fully answer into a Markdown questionnaire for someone else to fill in async, or over a meeting. It grills you about the send (who it's for, what you need back), not the subject. User-invoked.
- **[batch-grill-me](./batch-grill-me/SKILL.md)** — Relentless interview that walks the design tree in rounds instead of one question at a time — each round asks the whole frontier of decisions whose prerequisites are already settled, then recomputes from your answers. User-invoked.
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
---
name: batch-grill-me
description: A relentless interview that asks every frontier question at once, round by round.
disable-model-invocation: true
---
Interview the user relentlessly until you reach a shared understanding. Map this as a **design tree**: every decision branches into the decisions that hang off it.
Work the tree in **rounds**. The **frontier** is every decision whose prerequisites are already settled — the questions you can ask *now* without guessing at answers you haven't heard yet. Ask the whole frontier in one round: number each question and give your recommended answer. Then wait for the user's answers before the next round.
Each round the user answers reshapes the tree — settled decisions push the frontier outward and unblock questions that depended on them. Recompute the frontier and ask the next round. A question whose answer depends on another question still open in this round belongs to a *later* round, not this one.
Finding *facts* is your job, never the user's. When a frontier question needs a fact from the environment (filesystem, tools, etc.), dispatch a sub-agent to find it — don't ask the user for anything you could look up yourself. Don't block on it: a running exploration is an unsettled prerequisite, so only the questions downstream of it wait for the sub-agent to report — ask the rest of the frontier now. The *decisions* are the user's — put each to them and wait.
The session is done when the frontier is empty: every branch of the design tree visited, nothing left silently assumed. Do not act on it until the user confirms you have reached a shared understanding.
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Batch Grill Me"
short_description: "Sharpen a plan a round of questions at a time"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
---
name: claude-handoff
description: Hand the current conversation off to a fresh background agent that picks up the work immediately.
argument-hint: "What will the next session be used for?"
disable-model-invocation: true
---
Write a handoff summary of the current conversation so a fresh agent can continue the work. Instead of saving it, launch a background agent seeded with the summary as its prompt: `claude --bg --name "<descriptive name>" "<handoff summary>"`. It starts in the current working directory and returns immediately; the user manages it with `claude agents`.
Always pass `-n`/`--name` with a descriptive name (e.g. `--name "Fix login bug"`) — it sets the display name shown in the job list, session picker, and terminal title.
Include a "suggested skills" section in the summary, which suggests skills that the agent should invoke.
Do not duplicate content already captured in other artifacts (PRDs, plans, ADRs, issues, commits, diffs). Reference them by path or URL instead.
Redact any sensitive information, such as API keys, passwords, or personally identifiable information — the summary becomes the agent's prompt.
If the user passed arguments, treat them as a description of what the next session will focus on and tailor the summary accordingly.
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Claude Handoff"
short_description: "Hand off to a background agent"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -1,108 +0,0 @@
---
name: decision-mapping
description: Turn a loose idea into a sequenced map of investigation tickets, then drive them to resolution one at a time.
disable-model-invocation: true
---
This skill is invoked when a loose idea requires more than one agent session to turn into a plan. It creates a stateful decision map in a markdown file, and drives the user through a sequence of tickets to resolve the open questions - which may require either prototyping, research or grilling. The map is domain-agnostic: it plans engineering work, course content, or anything else that fits the same shape.
## The Decision Map
The decision map is a single compact Markdown file, one per planning effort, git-tracked alongside the project. It is the canonical artifact — the **whole map is loaded as context into every session**, so it must stay compact.
Assets created during tickets should be linked to from the map, not duplicated within it.
### Structure
Entries ("tickets"), each its own section keyed by a short dash-case slug that
reads as a mini-title (e.g. `relational-db`, `auth-strategy`, `cache-layer`) —
terse enough to stay token-efficient, and unique within the map.
```markdown
## relational-db: Relational Or Non-Relational Database?
Blocked by: <slug>, <slug>
Status: open | in-progress | resolved
Type: Research | Prototype | Grilling | Task
### Question
<question-here>
### Answer
<answer-here>
```
The slug is the canonical id, used in every `Blocked by` edge and prose
reference; the title after the colon is optional. A ticket
is **unblocked** when every ticket in its `Blocked by` list is `resolved`. A
session **claims** its ticket by setting `Status: in-progress` and saving the map
before any work, so concurrent sessions skip it.
Each ticket must be sized to one 100K token agent session.
## Ticket Types
There are four types of tickets:
- **Research**: Reading documentation, third-party API's, or local resources like knowledge bases. Creates a markdown summary as an asset. Use this when knowledge outside the current working directory is required.
- **Prototype**: Raise the fidelity of the discussion by making a cheap, rough, concrete artifact to react to — an outline, a rough take, a stub, or UI/logic code via the /prototype skill. Creates the prototype as an asset. Use this when "how should it look" or "how should it behave" is the key question.
- **Grilling**: Conversation with the agent. Uses the /grilling and /domain-modeling skills. Asks one question at a time. The default case.
- **Task**: Literal manual work that must be done before the discussion can move forward — nothing to decide, prototype, or research. Moving data from one place to another, signing up for a third-party service, provisioning access. The agent automates it where it can; otherwise it hands the human a precise checklist to do by hand. Resolved when the work is done; the answer records what was done and any resulting facts (credentials location, new URLs, row counts) later tickets depend on.
## Fog of war
The map is _deliberately_ incomplete beyond the frontier. Your job is to investigate the frontier, and to resolve tickets in order to push the frontier forward. Push back the fog of war, one node at a time — until the path to the finish line is clear and no tickets remain.
## Invocation
Two branches. Either way, **every session ends with a [Handoff](#handoff)** — never resolve more than one ticket per session.
### Create the map
User invokes with a loose idea.
1. Run a `/grilling` and `/domain-modeling` session to surface the open decisions. Ask one question at a time.
2. Write a new decision map — mostly fog, frontier identified, trivially-decidable entries resolved inline.
3. Handoff. Map-building is one session's work; do not also resolve tickets.
### Work through the map
User invokes with a path to an existing map. A ticket slug is **optional** — without one, you pick the next decision, not the user.
1. Load the **whole map** as context.
2. Choose the ticket. If the user named one, use it. Otherwise pick the first `open` ticket in document order that is [unblocked](#structure). [Claim it](#structure): set `Status: in-progress` and save before any work.
3. Resolve it, invoking skills as needed — including any the `## Notes` block names. If in doubt, use `/grilling` and `/domain-modeling`.
4. Record the answer in the ticket's body and set `Status: resolved`.
5. Add newly-discovered tickets with correct `Blocked by` edges. If the decisions made invalidate other parts of the map, update or delete those nodes.
6. Handoff.
The user may run unblocked tickets in parallel, so expect other agents to be editing the map in their own sessions.
## Handoff
End every session by clearing the context and opening one or more fresh sessions. Close with a **Next steps** block the user can copy-paste. Two cases:
**Open tickets remain.** List the currently-unblocked tickets, then give two copy-paste options: a bare command for one session (you pick the next ticket), and one pinned command per unblocked ticket for running them in parallel. Paste one line per fresh window — opening one, some, or all of them.
> **Next steps** — 3 tickets unblocked: `auth-strategy`, `cache-layer`, `rate-limits`.
> Clear the context, then open fresh sessions.
>
> **One session** — resolves the next unblocked ticket:
> ```
> Invoke /decision-mapping with the map at <path>.
> ```
>
> **Parallel** — paste one line per window, up to all 3:
> ```
> Invoke /decision-mapping with the map at <path>, ticket auth-strategy.
> Invoke /decision-mapping with the map at <path>, ticket cache-layer.
> Invoke /decision-mapping with the map at <path>, ticket rate-limits.
> ```
**No open tickets remain.** The fog is pushed back far enough that the path to the finish line is clear — the map is done. (The initial grilling may also surface no fog at all, in which case there was never a map to build.) Recommend implementing directly, or using `/to-prd` to schedule a multi-session implementation.
## Notes
An optional block declaring the **domain**, any skills every session should `consult`, and freeform standing preferences the planning surfaces.
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Loop Me"
short_description: "Spec the workflows you want to build"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
---
name: setup-ts-deep-modules
description: Wire dependency-cruiser into a TypeScript repo so each package is a deep module — implementation hidden in subfolders, reachable only through its entry-point files. User-invoked.
disable-model-invocation: true
---
# Setup TS Deep Modules
Make every package in this repo a **deep module**: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface. A package's public surface is its **entry points** — the files at the package root — and everything in its subfolders is hidden. This skill installs [dependency-cruiser](https://github.com/sverweij/dependency-cruiser) and the rules that make the entry points the only way in, then proves the rules bite.
For the vocabulary (deep module, interface, seam, depth), run the `/codebase-design` skill — use its language throughout.
## The shape this enforces
```
src/packages/
<name>/
index.ts ← an entry point (public). Import this from outside.
client.ts ← another entry point. Packages may expose SEVERAL.
lib/ ← implementation: hidden from outside, free to import each other.
tests/ ← co-located tests + fixtures (a subfolder, so private).
```
The public surface is the package's **root files** — not one designated `index.ts`. By convention implementation lives in `lib/` and tests in `tests/`, giving every package the same two-folder shape. The rule itself is general, though: *anything* in *any* subfolder is private, so you never extend the config to add a folder.
Four rules, all `error`:
1. **Entry-point boundary** — code outside a package (app code or another package) may import only that package's entry points (its root files), never anything in its subfolders.
2. **Intra-package freedom** — a package's own files import each other freely.
3. **Tests through the entry points** — files under `<pkg>/tests/` may import any package's entry points and their own `tests/` fixtures, but never any package's subfolder internals (not even their own). Integration tests across packages are fine; deep imports are not.
4. **No cycles** — no dependency cycles.
**Entry points, not a barrel.** Because the public surface is *every* root file, a package can expose several small entry points (`index.ts`, `client.ts`, `server.ts`) instead of funnelling everything through one giant `index.ts`. Barrel files that re-export a whole subtree are discouraged — keep entry points small and hide implementation in subfolders.
Layering (which packages may depend on which) is a *different* concern and is left as a commented stub in the config for this repo to fill in.
## Steps
### 1. Detect the environment
- **Package manager** — `pnpm-lock.yaml` → pnpm, `yarn.lock` → yarn, `bun.lockb` → bun, else npm. Use it for every command below (`pnpm`/`yarn`/`npm run`/`bunx`).
- **Packages root** — if `src/` exists use `src/packages`, else `packages`. Confirm the choice with the user if the repo already has a different obvious convention.
- **Existing config** — check for a `.dependency-cruiser.*` file. If one exists, do **not** overwrite it: merge the four rules and the options in, and tell the user what you added.
**Done when:** package manager, packages root, and existing-config status are all known.
### 2. Install dependency-cruiser
Install `dependency-cruiser` as a devDependency with the detected package manager.
**Done when:** `dependency-cruiser` is in `devDependencies`.
### 3. Write the config
Copy [`dependency-cruiser.config.cjs`](./dependency-cruiser.config.cjs) to the repo root as `.dependency-cruiser.cjs`. Set `PACKAGES_ROOT` to the root detected in step 1. The rules are path-depth based and extension-agnostic, so nothing else needs adapting.
**Done when:** `.dependency-cruiser.cjs` exists with the correct `PACKAGES_ROOT`, and the four forbidden rules are present.
### 4. Wire it into the checks
- Add a `lint:boundaries` script: `depcruise <packages-root>` (or `depcruise src`).
- Fold it into the repo's umbrella check command — the one that already runs typecheck (e.g. a `check` / `ci` / `validate` script). Do **not** touch `tsconfig` or add path aliases.
- If there is no umbrella script, add `lint:boundaries` and tell the user to include it in CI.
**Done when:** `lint:boundaries` exists and runs as part of the same command as typecheck.
### 5. Scaffold the example package
Create a committed `<packages-root>/example/` as a copy-me template:
- `index.ts` — an entry point. Export one function that delegates to an internal file (so the package is visibly *deep*, not a pass-through).
- `lib/impl.ts` — an internal file in a **subfolder**, imported by `index.ts`, not reachable from outside.
- `tests/example.test.ts` — imports **only** `../index` (an entry point), and asserts against the public function.
Tell the user this is a starter template to copy or delete.
**Done when:** the example package exists, exposes its behaviour through a root entry point, and hides `impl` in a subfolder.
### 6. Prove the rules bite
This is the completion criterion for the whole skill — a config that doesn't fail on a violation is worthless.
1. Run `lint:boundaries`. It must **pass** on the clean example.
2. Temporarily add a deep import to `tests/example.test.ts` (e.g. `import { thing } from "../lib/impl"`). Run `lint:boundaries` again — it must **fail** with `tests-through-entrypoints`.
3. Revert the deep import. Run once more — it must **pass**.
**Done when:** you have observed a pass, then a fail on the deep import, then a pass again. If step 2 does not fail, the rules are not wired correctly — fix before finishing.
### 7. Document the convention
Write a `README.md` **in the packages folder** (`<packages-root>/README.md`) — next to the packages it governs — covering: the `src/packages/<name>/` layout (entry points at the root, `lib/` for implementation, `tests/` for tests), "import only through a package's entry points (its root files)", and how to run `lint:boundaries`. **Discourage barrel files** explicitly — expose several small entry points instead of re-exporting a whole subtree through one index. Keep it to the copy-me snippet plus the four rules in one paragraph each.
Then add a **context pointer** to it from the repo's agent-instructions file — `CLAUDE.md` if present, else `AGENTS.md` (create `AGENTS.md` if neither exists). One line is enough, e.g. `Packages are deep modules — see [src/packages/README.md](./src/packages/README.md) before adding or importing one.` This is what makes an agent discover the boundary rule instead of tripping over it.
**Done when:** `<packages-root>/README.md` exists and discourages barrels, and the repo's `CLAUDE.md`/`AGENTS.md` links to it.
## Notes
- The config's `$1` back-references (dependency-cruiser's group matching) are what let a package reach its own internals while outsiders can't — don't flatten them into separate per-package rules.
- Public vs private is decided by **depth**: a package's root files are entry points; anything in a subfolder is private. The conventional subfolders are `lib/` (implementation) and `tests/`, but the rule doesn't hardcode them — any subfolder is private, so a new folder never needs a config change. Adding an entry point is just adding a root file — no barrel.
- Packages are **flat**: one tier of immediate children under the root. A package's internals may nest as deep as you like; a package may not contain another package.
- Use `.cjs` (not `.js`) so the config's `module.exports` works even in `"type": "module"` repos.
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Setup TS Deep Modules"
short_description: "Enforce deep TypeScript modules"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -0,0 +1,95 @@
// @ts-check
// Deep-module enforcement for dependency-cruiser.
//
// Each package under the packages root is a DEEP MODULE: a lot of behaviour
// behind a small interface. A package's PUBLIC SURFACE is its ENTRY POINTS —
// the files at the package root. Implementation lives in SUBFOLDERS and is
// private — by convention `lib/` for implementation and `tests/` for tests,
// though any subfolder is private. A package may expose several small entry
// points (index.ts, client.ts, server.ts, …) — prefer that over one giant
// barrel index.
//
// The only thing you should ever need to edit here is PACKAGES_ROOT.
/** Where packages live. One immediate child dir per package (flat, no nesting). */
const PACKAGES_ROOT = "src/packages";
// --- derived patterns (no need to edit) -------------------------------------
const R = PACKAGES_ROOT;
/**
* A package's private internals: anything nested inside a package subfolder.
* The package's root files are its entry points and are NOT matched here —
* they stay importable from outside.
*/
const PACKAGE_INTERNALS = `^${R}/[^/]+/[^/]+/`;
/** @type {import('dependency-cruiser').IConfiguration} */
module.exports = {
forbidden: [
{
name: "entrypoint-boundary-from-app",
comment:
"App/root code may import a package's entry points (its root files), but nothing inside its subfolders.",
severity: "error",
from: { pathNot: `^${R}/` }, // importer is NOT inside any package
to: { path: PACKAGE_INTERNALS },
},
{
name: "entrypoint-boundary-across-packages",
comment:
"A package's own files import each other freely, but may reach OTHER packages only through their entry points — never their internals.",
severity: "error",
// importer is inside a package ($1), but is not a test file
from: { path: `^${R}/([^/]+)/`, pathNot: `^${R}/[^/]+/tests/` },
to: {
path: PACKAGE_INTERNALS,
pathNot: `^${R}/$1/`, // same package → intra-package freedom
},
},
{
name: "tests-through-entrypoints",
comment:
"A package's tests exercise it through its entry points like everyone else: they may import any package's entry points and their own tests/ fixtures, but never any package's internals — not even their own.",
severity: "error",
from: { path: `^${R}/([^/]+)/tests/` }, // a test file, in package $1
to: {
path: PACKAGE_INTERNALS,
pathNot: `^${R}/$1/tests/`, // own tests/ fixtures → allowed
},
},
{
name: "tests-folder-is-private",
comment:
"A package's tests/ folder is reachable only from tests — nothing else may import fixtures.",
severity: "error",
from: { pathNot: `^${R}/[^/]+/tests/` }, // importer is not itself a test
to: { path: `^${R}/[^/]+/tests/` },
},
{
name: "no-circular",
comment: "No dependency cycles. Scope to `^${R}/` if you want to allow cycles outside packages.",
severity: "error",
from: {},
to: { circular: true },
},
// --- Layering (optional, off by default) ----------------------------------
// Interface-hiding controls HOW you import (through the entry points).
// Layering controls WHICH packages may depend on which. Add your own rules
// here, e.g.:
//
// {
// name: "ui-may-not-depend-on-billing",
// severity: "error",
// from: { path: `^${R}/ui/` },
// to: { path: `^${R}/billing/` },
// },
],
options: {
doNotFollow: { path: "node_modules" },
tsConfig: { fileName: "tsconfig.json" },
enhancedResolveOptions: {
extensions: [".ts", ".tsx", ".js", ".jsx", ".json"],
},
},
};
@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
---
name: to-questionnaire
description: Turn a decision you can't fully answer into a questionnaire for someone else to fill in.
disable-model-invocation: true
---
Turn something the user can't answer alone into a **questionnaire** — a Markdown document they hand to one person to fill in async, or fill out together over a meeting. The recipient holds knowledge the user lacks; the questionnaire pulls it out of them.
**Grill the send, not the subject.** Interview the user only about the _send_, which they can always answer: who it goes to, and what they need back. The questions in the document then target the **gap** between what the recipient knows and what the user needs.
1. **Who is it going to?** Ask, in one exchange, the recipient's role, expertise, and relationship to the user. This fixes the questionnaire's tone and how much context it must carry. Done when you know who the recipient is and what they know that the user doesn't.
2. **What do you need back?** Ask, in one exchange, the specific decisions or facts the user can't resolve alone and needs from this person. Done when you have a concrete list of what the user must walk away able to do or decide.
3. **Write the questionnaire.** Draft questions aimed at the gap from steps 12, following the Document structure below. Write it to `to-questionnaire-<slug>.md` in the current directory (slug from the topic) and report the path. Done when the file exists and every item the user named in step 2 is covered by a question.
## Document structure
Frame the document as a **discovery questionnaire**: the user lacks context, the recipient holds it. Order questions most-important-first — async means you may only get one pass — and group them under `##` headings by theme once there are more than a handful. Write it using the template below.
<questionnaire-template>
# <Questionnaire title>
**Purpose:** why this questionnaire exists and the decision riding on it.
**From:** <the user> — **To:** <the recipient> — **How your answers will be used:** <where they go>
## Context
One paragraph orienting a recipient who wasn't in the user's head. Enough to answer well, not a page.
## How to answer
Deadline and rough effort. Partial answers and "I don't know" are useful — flag anything you're unsure of rather than skipping it.
## <Theme heading>
One `##` section per theme. Under each, its questions, most-important-first. Every question is one idea — never compound — with an answer stub directly beneath, and a one-line _why this matters_ only where the question could be misread or invite a throwaway answer.
<question-example>
### What load is the system expected to handle at launch?
_Why this matters: it decides whether we provision for burst traffic now or defer it._
>
</question-example>
## Anything else?
A closing catch-all: anything we didn't ask that we should know?
</questionnaire-template>
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "To Questionnaire"
short_description: "Front-load questions into a doc for someone to answer"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Wizard"
short_description: "Generate an interactive setup wizard"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Writing Beats"
short_description: "Assemble raw material into beats"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Writing Fragments"
short_description: "Mine raw writing fragments"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Writing Shape"
short_description: "Shape raw material into an article"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Git Guardrails for Claude Code"
short_description: "Block dangerous git commands"
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Migrate to Shoehorn"
short_description: "Replace test assertions with shoehorn"
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Scaffold Exercises"
short_description: "Scaffold lint-ready course exercises"
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
interface:
display_name: "Setup Pre-Commit"
short_description: "Add pre-commit quality checks"
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
interface:
display_name: "Edit Article"
short_description: "Restructure and tighten a draft"
policy:
allow_implicit_invocation: false

Some files were not shown because too many files have changed in this diff Show More