Code Quality & Workflow skills

A relentless interview to sharpen a plan or design.

Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.

Compact the current conversation into a handoff document for another agent to pick up.

Build and sharpen a project's domain model. Use when discussing codebase terminology, writing or editing a GLOSSARY.md, or recording or editing an ADR.

Shared vocabulary for designing deep modules. Use when the user wants to design or improve a module's interface, find deepening opportunities, decide where a seam goes, make code more testable or AI-navigable, or when another skill needs the deep-module vocabulary.

Diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Use when the user says "diagnose"/"debug this", or reports something broken/throwing/failing/slow.

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/spec 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".

Implement a piece of work based on a spec or set of tickets.

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.

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.

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).

Use when you need to resolve an in-progress git merge/rebase conflict.

Set up Claude Code hooks to block dangerous git commands (push, reset --hard, clean, branch -D, etc.) before they execute. Use when user wants to prevent destructive git operations, add git safety hooks, or block git push/reset in Claude Code.

Set up Husky pre-commit hooks with lint-staged (Prettier), type checking, and tests in the current repo. Use when user wants to add pre-commit hooks, set up Husky, configure lint-staged, or add commit-time formatting/typechecking/testing.

Rigor Intake helper for README-first deep learning repo reproduction. Use when the task is specifically to scan a repository, read the README and common project files, extract documented commands, classify inference, evaluation, and training candidates, and return the smallest trustworthy reproduction plan to the main orchestrator. Do not use for environment setup, asset download, command execution, final reporting, paper lookup, or end-to-end orchestration.

Use when working with a person on a HyperFrames project in Studio: first, whether their message asks for a change at all (questions, loose ideas and "don't change anything" get an answer and a plan, not an edit); for a new film, the plan, storyboard and build order that the HyperFrames launch films follow; and how the timeline should be laid out so it reads well (one caption track, one element kind per track, every scene a sub-composition) and where captions and key content may sit (safe zones). Don't use for how to perform an individual edit (split, trim, retime, volume, copy, swap): that is creator-editing-recipes.md in /hyperframes-core.

Turn a GitHub pull request (a PR URL, owner/repoN, or 'this PR' in a checked-out repo) into a code-change explainer video — changelog, feature reveal, fix, or refactor walkthrough built from the diff, commits, and files: the input is a code change, not a website. Not a product promo (/product-launch-video) or a no-PR topic explainer (/faceless-explainer). Unclear → /hyperframes.

Hand the current conversation off to a fresh background agent that picks up the work immediately.

Write a Conventional Commits message compressed to intent only. Use for "write a commit", "commit message", /commit or /caveman-commit.

Compressed code review - one line per finding with location, problem and fix. Use for /caveman-review, "review this PR", or "review the diff".

You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, modifying behavior, or planning anything new, in software or out of it (a talk, a business, a renovation).

Wire dependency-cruiser into a TypeScript repo so each package is a deep module, with implementation hidden in subfolders and reachable only through its entry-point files. User-invoked.

When to delegate to cavecrew-investigator (locate code), cavecrew-builder (1-2 file edit) or cavecrew-reviewer (diff review) instead of working inline or using Explore. Their output is compressed, so main context lasts longer.

Operate Orca-managed worktrees, folder contexts, terminals, repos, automations, artifacts, skill sharing, worktree comments, and Orca's embedded browser through the orca CLI. Use when the user says "$orca-cli", "Orca worktree", "child worktree", "spawn codex/claude in a worktree", "read/wait/send Orca terminal", "handoff" / "handover" / "give this to another agent", "Orca browser", "orca artifacts", or "share skills". Prefer it over raw git worktree, ad hoc PTYs, or Computer Use when Orca state is involved. Use Computer Use only when a visible window needs GUI control that a CLI, filesystem, or API cannot do.

Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices.

Rigor Analyze / Rigor Audit read-only skill for deep learning research repositories. Use when the user wants to read and understand a repository, inspect model structure and training or inference entrypoints, review configs and insertion points, or flag suspicious implementation patterns without modifying code or running heavy jobs. Do not use for active command execution, broad refactoring, speculative code adaptation, or automatic bug fixing.

Rigor Debug / Rigor Audit skill for deep learning research work. Use when the user pastes a traceback, terminal error, CUDA OOM, checkpoint load failure, shape mismatch, NaN loss symptom, or training failure and wants conservative diagnosis before any patching, with debug fixes clearly separated from research contributions. Do not use for broad refactoring, speculative adaptation, automatic exploratory patching, or general repository familiarization.

Rigor Improve implementation leaf skill for auditable candidate implementation in deep learning research repositories. Use when the researcher explicitly authorizes exploratory work on an isolated branch or worktree to transplant modules, adapt a backbone, add LoRA or adapter layers, replace a head, or stitch together meaningful low-risk migration ideas with rollback-aware records in exploreoutputs/. Do not use for end-to-end exploration orchestration on top of currentresearch, trusted baseline reproduction, conservative debugging, environment setup, verified contribution claims, or default repository analysis.

Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes

Implement the result of /to-spec and /to-tickets in code.

Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements

Reviews animation and motion code against a high craft bar derived from Emil Kowalski's design engineering philosophy. Default to flagging; approval is earned.

Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Reproduce → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test. Use when user says "diagnose this" / "debug this", reports a bug, says something is broken/throwing/failing, or describes a performance regression.

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation

Use when starting feature work that needs isolation from current workspace or before executing implementation plans - ensures an isolated workspace exists via native tools or git worktree fallback

Create a detailed refactor plan with tiny commits via user interview, then file it as a GitHub issue. Use when user wants to plan a refactor, create a refactoring RFC, or break a refactor into safe incremental steps.

Use when writing a PR body.

Cloudflare Workers best practices for production applications. Use when writing, reviewing, or configuring Workers.

When the user wants to plan, map, or restructure their website's page hierarchy, navigation, URL structure, or internal linking. Also use when the user mentions "sitemap," "site map," "visual sitemap," "site structure," "page hierarchy," "information architecture," "IA," "navigation design," "URL structure," "breadcrumbs," "internal linking strategy," "website planning," "what pages do I need," "how should I organize my site," "site navigation," "which website builder should I use," "migrate my website," or "add a blog to my existing site." Use this whenever someone is planning what pages a website should have, how they connect, and where to build them. NOT for XML sitemaps (that's technical SEO — see seo-audit). For SEO audits, see seo-audit. For structured data, see schema.

Audit, diagnose, or optimize website loading and interaction performance, Core Web Vitals, and Lighthouse performance scores.

Restructure code while preserving behavior. Use for extraction, consolidation, ownership moves, or cleanup where verification must bracket structural edits.

Diagnose ambiguous failures before editing. Use for unknown causes, intermittent behavior, performance regressions, or investigations needing evidence-ranked hypotheses.

Iterative worker-reviewer cycle that spawns a critic subagent to score work 1-10 and provide actionable feedback, then revises until a quality gate is met. Use when implementing features, writing specs, reviewing existing code, or completing any task where quality matters more than speed. Trigger phrases: "use review-loop", "polish this", "iterate on this", "/review-loop", "review with feedback loop".

Read-only review of Caveman Cloud evidence: cost, Cave Score, workflows, traces, latency, errors, routing, savings. Use when asked what Caveman found or where LLM spend goes.

Implement reversible compatibility-safe transitions. Use for schema, data, API, protocol, configuration, or dependency migrations requiring rollback and preservation proof.

Use when user asks to "build a Solana dapp", "write an Anchor program", "create a token", "debug Solana errors", "set up wallet connection", "test my Solana program", "fuzz my Solana program", "deploy to devnet", "send a v1 transaction", "support larger transactions", "fix maxSupportedTransactionVersion", or "explain Solana concepts" (rent, accounts, PDAs, CPIs). Also for program architecture (state layout, compute units, throughput, naming), quick on-chain lookups via public RPC + curl, gasless or sponsored-fee transactions (Kora), server-side signing with KMS/Turnkey/Privy/Fireblocks (Solana Keychain), and issuing stablecoins or allowlisted tokens (Mosaic). Covers wallets, Anchor/Pinocchio, Codama clients, Surfpool/LiteSVM/Mollusk testing, security review, and v1 transactions (SIMD-0385). Prefers @solana/kit 8 plugin clients building transaction v1 by default, @solana/kit-plugin-wallet + @solana/react for wallets, web3.js v3 as the legacy migration target, and Surfpool for local netw

Master TypeScript's advanced type system including generics, conditional types, mapped types, template literals, and utility types for building type-safe applications. Use when implementing complex type logic, creating reusable type utilities, or ensuring compile-time type safety in TypeScript projects.

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".