From 1fb4232671d30aa867e3e7b0c74d48a989e460c5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Craig Jennings Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2026 08:08:59 -0500 Subject: chore: remove fix-issue skill, superseded by start-work The fix-issue skill has been replaced by start-work, which covers the same ground (picking up a ticket with a known fix and carrying it through to handoff) with a seven-phase structure and three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. --- review-code/SKILL.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'review-code') 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 -- cgit v1.2.3