diff options
| author | Craig Jennings <c@cjennings.net> | 2026-04-22 08:08:59 -0500 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Craig Jennings <c@cjennings.net> | 2026-04-22 08:08:59 -0500 |
| commit | 1fb4232671d30aa867e3e7b0c74d48a989e460c5 (patch) | |
| tree | bbe7ccaa14c1ca2a7e4b7c7378104074dbd1a8ea /review-code | |
| parent | 5302673fab3ade9a348dd096aafe12fe21310ff6 (diff) | |
| download | rulesets-1fb4232671d30aa867e3e7b0c74d48a989e460c5.tar.gz rulesets-1fb4232671d30aa867e3e7b0c74d48a989e460c5.zip | |
chore: remove fix-issue skill, superseded by start-work
The fix-issue skill has been replaced by start-work, which covers the same ground (picking up a ticket with a known fix and carrying it through to handoff) with a seven-phase structure and three user-approval gates. Deleted fix-issue/SKILL.md and swept the references.
Updated:
- Makefile SKILLS list: remove fix-issue, add start-work so make install creates the right symlink.
- brainstorm/SKILL.md: implementation-path list points at start-work.
- debug/SKILL.md description: both "do NOT use for ticket-driven work" and "Companion to" references updated.
- review-code/SKILL.md description: "drafting implementation" redirect updated.
No change in meaning. Every old fix-issue context now names start-work.
Diffstat (limited to 'review-code')
| -rw-r--r-- | review-code/SKILL.md | 2 |
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/review-code/SKILL.md b/review-code/SKILL.md index fdf5cfb..f01094c 100644 --- a/review-code/SKILL.md +++ b/review-code/SKILL.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ --- name: review-code -description: Review code changes against engineering standards. Accepts a PR number, a SHA range (BASE..HEAD), the current branch's diff against main, staged changes, or a described scope ("the last 3 commits"). Audits CLAUDE.md adherence (reads root + per-directory CLAUDE.md), intent-vs-delivery (when given a plan/ADR/ticket), security, testing (TDD evidence + three-category coverage), conventions (conventional commits + no AI attribution), root-cause discipline, architecture (layering + scope), API contracts. Produces a structured report — Strengths, per-criterion PASS/WARN/FAIL, per-issue Critical/Important/Minor severity — ending with an explicit verdict (Approve / Request Changes / Needs Discussion) plus 1-2 sentence reasoning. Self-filters low-confidence findings; never flags pre-existing issues, lint/typecheck issues (CI handles those), or changes on unmodified lines. Use before merging a PR, before pushing a branch, or when reviewing a teammate's work. Do NOT use for proposing features (use brainstorm or arch-design), drafting implementation (use fix-issue or add-tests), standalone security audits (use security-check), or narrow style-only checks (a linter handles those). +description: Review code changes against engineering standards. Accepts a PR number, a SHA range (BASE..HEAD), the current branch's diff against main, staged changes, or a described scope ("the last 3 commits"). Audits CLAUDE.md adherence (reads root + per-directory CLAUDE.md), intent-vs-delivery (when given a plan/ADR/ticket), security, testing (TDD evidence + three-category coverage), conventions (conventional commits + no AI attribution), root-cause discipline, architecture (layering + scope), API contracts. Produces a structured report — Strengths, per-criterion PASS/WARN/FAIL, per-issue Critical/Important/Minor severity — ending with an explicit verdict (Approve / Request Changes / Needs Discussion) plus 1-2 sentence reasoning. Self-filters low-confidence findings; never flags pre-existing issues, lint/typecheck issues (CI handles those), or changes on unmodified lines. Use before merging a PR, before pushing a branch, or when reviewing a teammate's work. Do NOT use for proposing features (use brainstorm or arch-design), drafting implementation (use start-work or add-tests), standalone security audits (use security-check), or narrow style-only checks (a linter handles those). --- # /review-code |