Files
gstack/investigate/SKILL.md.tmpl
T
Garry Tan 66c09644a7 feat: composable skills — INVOKE_SKILL resolver + factoring infrastructure (v0.13.7.0) (#644)
* feat: add parameterized resolver support to gen-skill-docs

Extend the placeholder regex from {{WORD}} to {{WORD:arg1:arg2}},
enabling parameterized resolvers like {{INVOKE_SKILL:plan-ceo-review}}.

- Widen ResolverFn type to accept optional args?: string[]
- Update RESOLVERS record to use ResolverFn type
- Both replacement and unresolved-check regexes updated
- Fully backward compatible: existing {{WORD}} patterns unchanged

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* feat: add INVOKE_SKILL resolver for composable skill loading

New composition.ts resolver module that emits prose instructing Claude
to read another skill's SKILL.md and follow it, skipping preamble
sections. Supports optional skip= parameter for additional sections.

Usage: {{INVOKE_SKILL:plan-ceo-review}} or
       {{INVOKE_SKILL:plan-ceo-review:skip=Outside Voice}}

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* feat: use frontmatter name: for skill symlinks and Codex paths

Patch all 3 name-derivation paths to read name: from SKILL.md
frontmatter instead of relying solely on directory basenames.
This enables directory names that differ from invocation names
(e.g., run-tests/ directory with name: test).

- setup: link_claude_skill_dirs reads name: via grep, falls back to basename
- gen-skill-docs.ts: codexSkillName uses frontmatter name for Codex output paths
- gen-skill-docs.ts: moved frontmatter extraction before Codex path logic

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* feat: extract CHANGELOG_WORKFLOW resolver from /ship

Move changelog generation logic into a reusable resolver. The resolver
is changelog-only (no version bump per Codex review recommendation).
Adds voice rules inline. /ship Step 5 now uses {{CHANGELOG_WORKFLOW}}.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* refactor: use INVOKE_SKILL resolver for plan-ceo-review office-hours fallback

Replace inline skill loading prose (read file, skip sections) with
{{INVOKE_SKILL:office-hours}} in the mid-session detection path.
The BENEFITS_FROM prerequisite offer is unchanged (separate use case).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* refactor: BENEFITS_FROM resolver delegates to INVOKE_SKILL

Eliminate duplicated skip-list logic by having generateBenefitsFrom
call generateInvokeSkill internally. The wrapper (AskUserQuestion,
design doc re-check) stays in BENEFITS_FROM. The loading instructions
(read file, skip sections, error handling) come from INVOKE_SKILL.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* test: add resolver tests for INVOKE_SKILL, CHANGELOG_WORKFLOW, parameterized args

12 new tests covering:
- INVOKE_SKILL: template placeholder, default skip list, error handling,
  BENEFITS_FROM delegation
- CHANGELOG_WORKFLOW: content, cross-check, voice guidance, format
- Parameterized resolver infra: colon-separated args processing,
  no unresolved placeholders across all generated SKILL.md files

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* chore: bump version and changelog (v0.13.7.0)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* fix: journey routing tests — CLAUDE.md routing rules + stronger descriptions

Three journey E2E tests (ideation, ship, debug) were failing because
Claude answered directly instead of invoking the Skill tool. Root cause:
skill descriptions in system-reminder are too weak to override Claude's
default behavior for tasks it can handle natively.

Fix has two parts:
1. CLAUDE.md routing rules in test workdir — Claude weighs project-level
   instructions higher than skill description metadata
2. "Proactively invoke" (not "suggest") in office-hours, investigate,
   ship descriptions — reinforces the routing signal

10/10 journey tests now pass (was 7/10).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* feat: one-time CLAUDE.md routing injection prompt

Add a preamble section that checks if the project's CLAUDE.md has
skill routing rules. If not (and user hasn't declined), asks once
via AskUserQuestion to inject a "## Skill routing" section.

Root cause: skill descriptions in system-reminder metadata are too
weak to reliably trigger proactive Skill tool invocation. CLAUDE.md
project instructions carry higher weight in Claude's decision making.

- Preamble bash checks for "## Skill routing" in CLAUDE.md
- Stores decline in gstack-config (routing_declined=true)
- Only asks once per project (HAS_ROUTING check + config check)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* feat: annotated config file + routing injection tests

gstack-config now writes a documented header on first config creation
with every supported key explained (proactive, telemetry, auto_upgrade,
skill_prefix, routing_declined, codex_reviews, skip_eng_review, etc.).
Users can edit ~/.gstack/config.yaml directly, anytime.

Also fixes grep to use ^KEY: anchoring so commented header lines don't
shadow real config values.

Tests added:
- 7 new gstack-config tests (annotated header, no duplication, comment
  safety, routing_declined get/set/reset)
- 6 new gen-skill-docs tests (preamble routing injection: bash checks,
  config reads, AskUserQuestion, decline persistence, routing rules)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* chore: bump to v0.13.9.0, separate CHANGELOG from main's releases

Split our branch's changes into a new 0.13.9.0 entry instead of
jamming them into 0.13.7.0 which already landed on main as
"Community Wave."

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs: clarify branch-scoped VERSION/CHANGELOG after merging main

Add explicit rules: merging main doesn't mean adopting main's version.
Branch always gets its own entry on top with a higher version number.
Three-point checklist after every merge.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* fix: put our 0.13.9.0 entry on top of CHANGELOG

Newest version goes on top. Our branch lands next, so our entry
must be above main's 0.13.8.0.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* fix: restore missing 0.13.7.0 Community Wave entry

Accidentally dropped the 0.13.7.0 entry when reordering.
All entries now present: 0.13.9.0 > 0.13.8.0 > 0.13.7.0 > 0.13.6.0.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs: add CHANGELOG integrity check rule

After any edit that moves/adds/removes entries, grep for version
headers and verify no gaps or duplicates before committing.
Prevents accidentally dropping entries during reordering.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-03-29 23:35:17 -06:00

203 lines
8.3 KiB
Cheetah

---
name: investigate
preamble-tier: 2
version: 1.0.0
description: |
Systematic debugging with root cause investigation. Four phases: investigate,
analyze, hypothesize, implement. Iron Law: no fixes without root cause.
Use when asked to "debug this", "fix this bug", "why is this broken",
"investigate this error", or "root cause analysis".
Proactively invoke this skill (do NOT debug directly) when the user reports
errors, 500 errors, stack traces, unexpected behavior, "it was working
yesterday", or is troubleshooting why something stopped working. (gstack)
allowed-tools:
- Bash
- Read
- Write
- Edit
- Grep
- Glob
- AskUserQuestion
- WebSearch
hooks:
PreToolUse:
- matcher: "Edit"
hooks:
- type: command
command: "bash ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../freeze/bin/check-freeze.sh"
statusMessage: "Checking debug scope boundary..."
- matcher: "Write"
hooks:
- type: command
command: "bash ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../freeze/bin/check-freeze.sh"
statusMessage: "Checking debug scope boundary..."
---
{{PREAMBLE}}
# Systematic Debugging
## Iron Law
**NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION FIRST.**
Fixing symptoms creates whack-a-mole debugging. Every fix that doesn't address root cause makes the next bug harder to find. Find the root cause, then fix it.
---
## Phase 1: Root Cause Investigation
Gather context before forming any hypothesis.
1. **Collect symptoms:** Read the error messages, stack traces, and reproduction steps. If the user hasn't provided enough context, ask ONE question at a time via AskUserQuestion.
2. **Read the code:** Trace the code path from the symptom back to potential causes. Use Grep to find all references, Read to understand the logic.
3. **Check recent changes:**
```bash
git log --oneline -20 -- <affected-files>
```
Was this working before? What changed? A regression means the root cause is in the diff.
4. **Reproduce:** Can you trigger the bug deterministically? If not, gather more evidence before proceeding.
{{LEARNINGS_SEARCH}}
Output: **"Root cause hypothesis: ..."** — a specific, testable claim about what is wrong and why.
---
## Scope Lock
After forming your root cause hypothesis, lock edits to the affected module to prevent scope creep.
```bash
[ -x "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../freeze/bin/check-freeze.sh" ] && echo "FREEZE_AVAILABLE" || echo "FREEZE_UNAVAILABLE"
```
**If FREEZE_AVAILABLE:** Identify the narrowest directory containing the affected files. Write it to the freeze state file:
```bash
STATE_DIR="${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_DATA:-$HOME/.gstack}"
mkdir -p "$STATE_DIR"
echo "<detected-directory>/" > "$STATE_DIR/freeze-dir.txt"
echo "Debug scope locked to: <detected-directory>/"
```
Substitute `<detected-directory>` with the actual directory path (e.g., `src/auth/`). Tell the user: "Edits restricted to `<dir>/` for this debug session. This prevents changes to unrelated code. Run `/unfreeze` to remove the restriction."
If the bug spans the entire repo or the scope is genuinely unclear, skip the lock and note why.
**If FREEZE_UNAVAILABLE:** Skip scope lock. Edits are unrestricted.
---
## Phase 2: Pattern Analysis
Check if this bug matches a known pattern:
| Pattern | Signature | Where to look |
|---------|-----------|---------------|
| Race condition | Intermittent, timing-dependent | Concurrent access to shared state |
| Nil/null propagation | NoMethodError, TypeError | Missing guards on optional values |
| State corruption | Inconsistent data, partial updates | Transactions, callbacks, hooks |
| Integration failure | Timeout, unexpected response | External API calls, service boundaries |
| Configuration drift | Works locally, fails in staging/prod | Env vars, feature flags, DB state |
| Stale cache | Shows old data, fixes on cache clear | Redis, CDN, browser cache, Turbo |
Also check:
- `TODOS.md` for related known issues
- `git log` for prior fixes in the same area — **recurring bugs in the same files are an architectural smell**, not a coincidence
**External pattern search:** If the bug doesn't match a known pattern above, WebSearch for:
- "{framework} {generic error type}" — **sanitize first:** strip hostnames, IPs, file paths, SQL, customer data. Search the error category, not the raw message.
- "{library} {component} known issues"
If WebSearch is unavailable, skip this search and proceed with hypothesis testing. If a documented solution or known dependency bug surfaces, present it as a candidate hypothesis in Phase 3.
---
## Phase 3: Hypothesis Testing
Before writing ANY fix, verify your hypothesis.
1. **Confirm the hypothesis:** Add a temporary log statement, assertion, or debug output at the suspected root cause. Run the reproduction. Does the evidence match?
2. **If the hypothesis is wrong:** Before forming the next hypothesis, consider searching for the error. **Sanitize first** — strip hostnames, IPs, file paths, SQL fragments, customer identifiers, and any internal/proprietary data from the error message. Search only the generic error type and framework context: "{component} {sanitized error type} {framework version}". If the error message is too specific to sanitize safely, skip the search. If WebSearch is unavailable, skip and proceed. Then return to Phase 1. Gather more evidence. Do not guess.
3. **3-strike rule:** If 3 hypotheses fail, **STOP**. Use AskUserQuestion:
```
3 hypotheses tested, none match. This may be an architectural issue
rather than a simple bug.
A) Continue investigating — I have a new hypothesis: [describe]
B) Escalate for human review — this needs someone who knows the system
C) Add logging and wait — instrument the area and catch it next time
```
**Red flags** — if you see any of these, slow down:
- "Quick fix for now" — there is no "for now." Fix it right or escalate.
- Proposing a fix before tracing data flow — you're guessing.
- Each fix reveals a new problem elsewhere — wrong layer, not wrong code.
---
## Phase 4: Implementation
Once root cause is confirmed:
1. **Fix the root cause, not the symptom.** The smallest change that eliminates the actual problem.
2. **Minimal diff:** Fewest files touched, fewest lines changed. Resist the urge to refactor adjacent code.
3. **Write a regression test** that:
- **Fails** without the fix (proves the test is meaningful)
- **Passes** with the fix (proves the fix works)
4. **Run the full test suite.** Paste the output. No regressions allowed.
5. **If the fix touches >5 files:** Use AskUserQuestion to flag the blast radius:
```
This fix touches N files. That's a large blast radius for a bug fix.
A) Proceed — the root cause genuinely spans these files
B) Split — fix the critical path now, defer the rest
C) Rethink — maybe there's a more targeted approach
```
---
## Phase 5: Verification & Report
**Fresh verification:** Reproduce the original bug scenario and confirm it's fixed. This is not optional.
Run the test suite and paste the output.
Output a structured debug report:
```
DEBUG REPORT
════════════════════════════════════════
Symptom: [what the user observed]
Root cause: [what was actually wrong]
Fix: [what was changed, with file:line references]
Evidence: [test output, reproduction attempt showing fix works]
Regression test: [file:line of the new test]
Related: [TODOS.md items, prior bugs in same area, architectural notes]
Status: DONE | DONE_WITH_CONCERNS | BLOCKED
════════════════════════════════════════
```
{{LEARNINGS_LOG}}
---
## Important Rules
- **3+ failed fix attempts → STOP and question the architecture.** Wrong architecture, not failed hypothesis.
- **Never apply a fix you cannot verify.** If you can't reproduce and confirm, don't ship it.
- **Never say "this should fix it."** Verify and prove it. Run the tests.
- **If fix touches >5 files → AskUserQuestion** about blast radius before proceeding.
- **Completion status:**
- DONE — root cause found, fix applied, regression test written, all tests pass
- DONE_WITH_CONCERNS — fixed but cannot fully verify (e.g., intermittent bug, requires staging)
- BLOCKED — root cause unclear after investigation, escalated