mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-05-12 15:42:20 +02:00
merge: resolve conflicts with origin/main
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
+143
-27
@@ -13,7 +13,9 @@ allowed-tools:
|
||||
- Write
|
||||
- Grep
|
||||
- Glob
|
||||
- Agent
|
||||
- AskUserQuestion
|
||||
- WebSearch
|
||||
---
|
||||
<!-- AUTO-GENERATED from SKILL.md.tmpl — do not edit directly -->
|
||||
<!-- Regenerate: bun run gen:skill-docs -->
|
||||
@@ -132,6 +134,26 @@ AI-assisted coding makes the marginal cost of completeness near-zero. When you p
|
||||
- BAD: "Let's defer test coverage to a follow-up PR." (Tests are the cheapest lake to boil.)
|
||||
- BAD: Quoting only human-team effort: "This would take 2 weeks." (Say: "2 weeks human / ~1 hour CC.")
|
||||
|
||||
## Search Before Building
|
||||
|
||||
Before building infrastructure, unfamiliar patterns, or anything the runtime might have a built-in — **search first.** Read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/ETHOS.md` for the full philosophy.
|
||||
|
||||
**Three layers of knowledge:**
|
||||
- **Layer 1** (tried and true — in distribution). Don't reinvent the wheel. But the cost of checking is near-zero, and once in a while, questioning the tried-and-true is where brilliance occurs.
|
||||
- **Layer 2** (new and popular — search for these). But scrutinize: humans are subject to mania. Search results are inputs to your thinking, not answers.
|
||||
- **Layer 3** (first principles — prize these above all). Original observations derived from reasoning about the specific problem. The most valuable of all.
|
||||
|
||||
**Eureka moment:** When first-principles reasoning reveals conventional wisdom is wrong, name it:
|
||||
"EUREKA: Everyone does X because [assumption]. But [evidence] shows this is wrong. Y is better because [reasoning]."
|
||||
|
||||
Log eureka moments:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
jq -n --arg ts "$(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)" --arg skill "SKILL_NAME" --arg branch "$(git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null)" --arg insight "ONE_LINE_SUMMARY" '{ts:$ts,skill:$skill,branch:$branch,insight:$insight}' >> ~/.gstack/analytics/eureka.jsonl 2>/dev/null || true
|
||||
```
|
||||
Replace SKILL_NAME and ONE_LINE_SUMMARY. Runs inline — don't stop the workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
**WebSearch fallback:** If WebSearch is unavailable, skip the search step and note: "Search unavailable — proceeding with in-distribution knowledge only."
|
||||
|
||||
## Contributor Mode
|
||||
|
||||
If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
|
||||
@@ -328,6 +350,13 @@ Apply the checklist against the diff in two passes:
|
||||
|
||||
**Enum & Value Completeness requires reading code OUTSIDE the diff.** When the diff introduces a new enum value, status, tier, or type constant, use Grep to find all files that reference sibling values, then Read those files to check if the new value is handled. This is the one category where within-diff review is insufficient.
|
||||
|
||||
**Search-before-recommending:** When recommending a fix pattern (especially for concurrency, caching, auth, or framework-specific behavior):
|
||||
- Verify the pattern is current best practice for the framework version in use
|
||||
- Check if a built-in solution exists in newer versions before recommending a workaround
|
||||
- Verify API signatures against current docs (APIs change between versions)
|
||||
|
||||
Takes seconds, prevents recommending outdated patterns. If WebSearch is unavailable, note it and proceed with in-distribution knowledge.
|
||||
|
||||
Follow the output format specified in the checklist. Respect the suppressions — do NOT flag items listed in the "DO NOT flag" section.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
@@ -483,52 +512,139 @@ If no documentation files exist, skip this step silently.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 5.7: Codex second opinion (optional)
|
||||
## Step 5.7: Adversarial review (auto-scaled)
|
||||
|
||||
After completing the review, check if the Codex CLI is available:
|
||||
Adversarial review thoroughness scales automatically based on diff size. No configuration needed.
|
||||
|
||||
**Detect diff size and tool availability:**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
DIFF_INS=$(git diff origin/<base> --stat | tail -1 | grep -oE '[0-9]+ insertion' | grep -oE '[0-9]+' || echo "0")
|
||||
DIFF_DEL=$(git diff origin/<base> --stat | tail -1 | grep -oE '[0-9]+ deletion' | grep -oE '[0-9]+' || echo "0")
|
||||
DIFF_TOTAL=$((DIFF_INS + DIFF_DEL))
|
||||
which codex 2>/dev/null && echo "CODEX_AVAILABLE" || echo "CODEX_NOT_AVAILABLE"
|
||||
# Respect old opt-out
|
||||
OLD_CFG=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get codex_reviews 2>/dev/null || true)
|
||||
echo "DIFF_SIZE: $DIFF_TOTAL"
|
||||
echo "OLD_CFG: ${OLD_CFG:-not_set}"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If Codex is available, use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
If `OLD_CFG` is `disabled`: skip this step silently. Continue to the next step.
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Review complete. Want an independent second opinion from Codex (OpenAI)?
|
||||
**User override:** If the user explicitly requested a specific tier (e.g., "run all passes", "paranoid review", "full adversarial", "do all 4 passes", "thorough review"), honor that request regardless of diff size. Jump to the matching tier section.
|
||||
|
||||
A) Run Codex code review — independent diff review with pass/fail gate
|
||||
B) Run Codex adversarial challenge — try to find ways this code will fail in production
|
||||
C) Both — review first, then adversarial challenge
|
||||
D) Skip — no Codex review needed
|
||||
```
|
||||
**Auto-select tier based on diff size:**
|
||||
- **Small (< 50 lines changed):** Skip adversarial review entirely. Print: "Small diff ($DIFF_TOTAL lines) — adversarial review skipped." Continue to the next step.
|
||||
- **Medium (50–199 lines changed):** Run Codex adversarial challenge (or Claude adversarial subagent if Codex unavailable). Jump to the "Medium tier" section.
|
||||
- **Large (200+ lines changed):** Run all remaining passes — Codex structured review + Claude adversarial subagent + Codex adversarial. Jump to the "Large tier" section.
|
||||
|
||||
If the user chooses A, B, or C:
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**For code review (A or C):** Run `codex review --base <base>` with a 5-minute timeout.
|
||||
Present the full output verbatim under a `CODEX SAYS (code review):` header.
|
||||
Check the output for `[P1]` markers — if found, note `GATE: FAIL`, otherwise `GATE: PASS`.
|
||||
After presenting, compare Codex's findings with your own review findings from Steps 4-5
|
||||
and output a CROSS-MODEL ANALYSIS showing what both found, what only Codex found,
|
||||
and what only Claude found.
|
||||
### Medium tier (50–199 lines)
|
||||
|
||||
Claude's structured review already ran. Now add a **cross-model adversarial challenge**.
|
||||
|
||||
**If Codex is available:** run the Codex adversarial challenge. **If Codex is NOT available:** fall back to the Claude adversarial subagent instead.
|
||||
|
||||
**Codex adversarial:**
|
||||
|
||||
**For adversarial challenge (B or C):** Run:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
codex exec "Review the changes on this branch against the base branch. Run git diff origin/<base> to see the diff. Your job is to find ways this code will fail in production. Think like an attacker and a chaos engineer. Find edge cases, race conditions, security holes, failure modes. Be adversarial." -s read-only
|
||||
TMPERR_ADV=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-adv-XXXXXXXX)
|
||||
codex exec "Review the changes on this branch against the base branch. Run git diff origin/<base> to see the diff. Your job is to find ways this code will fail in production. Think like an attacker and a chaos engineer. Find edge cases, race conditions, security holes, resource leaks, failure modes, and silent data corruption paths. Be adversarial. Be thorough. No compliments — just the problems." -s read-only -c 'model_reasoning_effort="xhigh"' --enable web_search_cached 2>"$TMPERR_ADV"
|
||||
```
|
||||
Present the full output verbatim under a `CODEX SAYS (adversarial challenge):` header.
|
||||
|
||||
**Only if a code review ran (user chose A or C):** Persist the Codex review result to the review log:
|
||||
Use a 5-minute timeout (`timeout: 300000`). After the command completes, read stderr:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-review-log '{"skill":"codex-review","timestamp":"'"$(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)"'","status":"STATUS","gate":"GATE"}'
|
||||
cat "$TMPERR_ADV"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Substitute: STATUS ("clean" if PASS, "issues_found" if FAIL), GATE ("pass" or "fail").
|
||||
Present the full output verbatim. This is informational — it never blocks shipping.
|
||||
|
||||
**Do NOT persist a codex-review entry when only the adversarial challenge (B) ran** —
|
||||
there is no gate verdict to record, and a false entry would make the Review Readiness
|
||||
Dashboard believe a code review happened when it didn't.
|
||||
**Error handling:** All errors are non-blocking — adversarial review is a quality enhancement, not a prerequisite.
|
||||
- **Auth failure:** If stderr contains "auth", "login", "unauthorized", or "API key": "Codex authentication failed. Run \`codex login\` to authenticate."
|
||||
- **Timeout:** "Codex timed out after 5 minutes."
|
||||
- **Empty response:** "Codex returned no response. Stderr: <paste relevant error>."
|
||||
|
||||
If Codex is not available, skip this step silently.
|
||||
On any Codex error, fall back to the Claude adversarial subagent automatically.
|
||||
|
||||
**Claude adversarial subagent** (fallback when Codex unavailable or errored):
|
||||
|
||||
Dispatch via the Agent tool. The subagent has fresh context — no checklist bias from the structured review. This genuine independence catches things the primary reviewer is blind to.
|
||||
|
||||
Subagent prompt:
|
||||
"Read the diff for this branch with `git diff origin/<base>`. Think like an attacker and a chaos engineer. Your job is to find ways this code will fail in production. Look for: edge cases, race conditions, security holes, resource leaks, failure modes, silent data corruption, logic errors that produce wrong results silently, error handling that swallows failures, and trust boundary violations. Be adversarial. Be thorough. No compliments — just the problems. For each finding, classify as FIXABLE (you know how to fix it) or INVESTIGATE (needs human judgment)."
|
||||
|
||||
Present findings under an `ADVERSARIAL REVIEW (Claude subagent):` header. **FIXABLE findings** flow into the same Fix-First pipeline as the structured review. **INVESTIGATE findings** are presented as informational.
|
||||
|
||||
If the subagent fails or times out: "Claude adversarial subagent unavailable. Continuing without adversarial review."
|
||||
|
||||
**Persist the review result:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-review-log '{"skill":"adversarial-review","timestamp":"'"$(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)"'","status":"STATUS","source":"SOURCE","tier":"medium","commit":"'"$(git rev-parse --short HEAD)"'"}'
|
||||
```
|
||||
Substitute STATUS: "clean" if no findings, "issues_found" if findings exist. SOURCE: "codex" if Codex ran, "claude" if subagent ran. If both failed, do NOT persist.
|
||||
|
||||
**Cleanup:** Run `rm -f "$TMPERR_ADV"` after processing (if Codex was used).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Large tier (200+ lines)
|
||||
|
||||
Claude's structured review already ran. Now run **all three remaining passes** for maximum coverage:
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Codex structured review (if available):**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
TMPERR=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-review-XXXXXXXX)
|
||||
codex review --base <base> -c 'model_reasoning_effort="xhigh"' --enable web_search_cached 2>"$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Use a 5-minute timeout. Present output under `CODEX SAYS (code review):` header.
|
||||
Check for `[P1]` markers: found → `GATE: FAIL`, not found → `GATE: PASS`.
|
||||
|
||||
If GATE is FAIL, use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Codex found N critical issues in the diff.
|
||||
|
||||
A) Investigate and fix now (recommended)
|
||||
B) Continue — review will still complete
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If A: address the findings. Re-run `codex review` to verify.
|
||||
|
||||
Read stderr for errors (same error handling as medium tier).
|
||||
|
||||
After stderr: `rm -f "$TMPERR"`
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Claude adversarial subagent:** Dispatch a subagent with the adversarial prompt (same prompt as medium tier). This always runs regardless of Codex availability.
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Codex adversarial challenge (if available):** Run `codex exec` with the adversarial prompt (same as medium tier).
|
||||
|
||||
If Codex is not available for steps 1 and 3, note to the user: "Codex CLI not found — large-diff review ran Claude structured + Claude adversarial (2 of 4 passes). Install Codex for full 4-pass coverage: `npm install -g @openai/codex`"
|
||||
|
||||
**Persist the review result AFTER all passes complete** (not after each sub-step):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-review-log '{"skill":"adversarial-review","timestamp":"'"$(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)"'","status":"STATUS","source":"SOURCE","tier":"large","gate":"GATE","commit":"'"$(git rev-parse --short HEAD)"'"}'
|
||||
```
|
||||
Substitute: STATUS = "clean" if no findings across ALL passes, "issues_found" if any pass found issues. SOURCE = "both" if Codex ran, "claude" if only Claude subagent ran. GATE = the Codex structured review gate result ("pass"/"fail"), or "informational" if Codex was unavailable. If all passes failed, do NOT persist.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Cross-model synthesis (medium and large tiers)
|
||||
|
||||
After all passes complete, synthesize findings across all sources:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
ADVERSARIAL REVIEW SYNTHESIS (auto: TIER, N lines):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
High confidence (found by multiple sources): [findings agreed on by >1 pass]
|
||||
Unique to Claude structured review: [from earlier step]
|
||||
Unique to Claude adversarial: [from subagent, if ran]
|
||||
Unique to Codex: [from codex adversarial or code review, if ran]
|
||||
Models used: Claude structured ✓ Claude adversarial ✓/✗ Codex ✓/✗
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
High-confidence findings (agreed on by multiple sources) should be prioritized for fixes.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
+10
-48
@@ -13,7 +13,9 @@ allowed-tools:
|
||||
- Write
|
||||
- Grep
|
||||
- Glob
|
||||
- Agent
|
||||
- AskUserQuestion
|
||||
- WebSearch
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
{{PREAMBLE}}
|
||||
@@ -107,6 +109,13 @@ Apply the checklist against the diff in two passes:
|
||||
|
||||
**Enum & Value Completeness requires reading code OUTSIDE the diff.** When the diff introduces a new enum value, status, tier, or type constant, use Grep to find all files that reference sibling values, then Read those files to check if the new value is handled. This is the one category where within-diff review is insufficient.
|
||||
|
||||
**Search-before-recommending:** When recommending a fix pattern (especially for concurrency, caching, auth, or framework-specific behavior):
|
||||
- Verify the pattern is current best practice for the framework version in use
|
||||
- Check if a built-in solution exists in newer versions before recommending a workaround
|
||||
- Verify API signatures against current docs (APIs change between versions)
|
||||
|
||||
Takes seconds, prevents recommending outdated patterns. If WebSearch is unavailable, note it and proceed with in-distribution knowledge.
|
||||
|
||||
Follow the output format specified in the checklist. Respect the suppressions — do NOT flag items listed in the "DO NOT flag" section.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
@@ -231,54 +240,7 @@ If no documentation files exist, skip this step silently.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 5.7: Codex second opinion (optional)
|
||||
|
||||
After completing the review, check if the Codex CLI is available:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
which codex 2>/dev/null && echo "CODEX_AVAILABLE" || echo "CODEX_NOT_AVAILABLE"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If Codex is available, use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Review complete. Want an independent second opinion from Codex (OpenAI)?
|
||||
|
||||
A) Run Codex code review — independent diff review with pass/fail gate
|
||||
B) Run Codex adversarial challenge — try to find ways this code will fail in production
|
||||
C) Both — review first, then adversarial challenge
|
||||
D) Skip — no Codex review needed
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If the user chooses A, B, or C:
|
||||
|
||||
**For code review (A or C):** Run `codex review --base <base>` with a 5-minute timeout.
|
||||
Present the full output verbatim under a `CODEX SAYS (code review):` header.
|
||||
Check the output for `[P1]` markers — if found, note `GATE: FAIL`, otherwise `GATE: PASS`.
|
||||
After presenting, compare Codex's findings with your own review findings from Steps 4-5
|
||||
and output a CROSS-MODEL ANALYSIS showing what both found, what only Codex found,
|
||||
and what only Claude found.
|
||||
|
||||
**For adversarial challenge (B or C):** Run:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
codex exec "Review the changes on this branch against the base branch. Run git diff origin/<base> to see the diff. Your job is to find ways this code will fail in production. Think like an attacker and a chaos engineer. Find edge cases, race conditions, security holes, failure modes. Be adversarial." -s read-only
|
||||
```
|
||||
Present the full output verbatim under a `CODEX SAYS (adversarial challenge):` header.
|
||||
|
||||
**Only if a code review ran (user chose A or C):** Persist the Codex review result to the review log:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-review-log '{"skill":"codex-review","timestamp":"'"$(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)"'","status":"STATUS","gate":"GATE"}'
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Substitute: STATUS ("clean" if PASS, "issues_found" if FAIL), GATE ("pass" or "fail").
|
||||
|
||||
**Do NOT persist a codex-review entry when only the adversarial challenge (B) ran** —
|
||||
there is no gate verdict to record, and a false entry would make the Review Readiness
|
||||
Dashboard believe a code review happened when it didn't.
|
||||
|
||||
If Codex is not available, skip this step silently.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
{{ADVERSARIAL_STEP}}
|
||||
|
||||
## Important Rules
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user