@brainervirus/workit-claude-code 2.6.0

package/skills/review/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+---
+name: review
+description: Use when policy requires fresh-context review of a candidate or when an independent correctness and regression check is requested
+---
+
+# Review a candidate
+
+Review the real candidate in a stable context. A review is evidence about the
+current candidate, not an author's success summary.
+
+
+## Method
+
+1. Pin or identify the candidate revision before reading conclusions. Inspect the
+   task objective, scope, constraints, accepted decisions, changed files, and
+   actual checks through shared `task`, `evidence`, and `policy` operations.
+2. Examine intent, correctness, regression risk, security or data consequences,
+   and project standards. Use the actual diff and check output; do not infer
+   evidence from a claim.
+3. Record each concern as a `finding` claim with its affected scope and candidate.
+   Investigate it: reproduce or trace the consequence, then fix in scope, dismiss
+   with evidence, defer with a reason, or ask the user about a real tradeoff.
+4. Reconcile conclusions when the candidate changes. Run one substantive review
+   and targeted rechecks; do not cycle reviewers indefinitely.
+
+If the required independent context is unavailable, record the review method as
+`unavailable` and preserve the gap. Same-session self-review is not independent
+review and must not be relabeled as verified.
+
+Use shared `evidence` and `finding` operations. Do not create a parallel review
+lifecycle, universal review panel, or direct metadata files.
+
+## Two axes, pinned
+
+Pin the fixed point first (`git diff <base>...HEAD` plus log); review that
+candidate only. Judge on two axes, never merged or reranked:
+
+- **Standards:** repo standards plus a smell baseline (mysterious name, long
+  method, duplicated logic, refused bequest, and kin); repo rules override
+  the baseline; judgement calls only, never tooling-enforced nits.
+- **Spec:** does the diff implement the originating spec/requirement
+  faithfully — missing, creep, or wrong, quoting the spec line.
+
+Every finding needs proof: the changed hunk, a failing/passing test ref, or
+a before/after. Causal disposition decides the outcome: introduced or
+worsened behavior gets fixed; pre-existing issues become follow-ups;
+inconclusive claims escalate, never silently pass.
+
+## Common mistakes
+
+| Mistake | Correction |
+| --- | --- |
+| Reviewing the summary instead of the candidate | Start from the stable candidate and real refs. |
+| Treating every comment as a defect | Investigate the claim and consequence first. |
+| Calling self-review independent | Preserve an unavailable capability gap. |
+
+
+## In Claude Code
+
+Workit operations (`task`, `evidence`, `policy`, `decision`, …) run through
+the `workit` CLI on the Bash tool: `workit <family> <action> --json`
+(`workit --help` lists the verbs). The plugin's `verifier`, `reviewer`
+and `implementer` agents take independent verification, fresh-context
+review and isolated implementation.

package/skills/steer/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+---
+name: steer
+description: Use when new instructions, interruptions, or forgotten items change substantial ongoing work
+---
+
+# Steer without forced lifecycle
+
+Classify new input as a quick question, a same-task adjustment, or a separate
+request. Preserve continuity when it helps; do not manufacture task mutations.
+
+## Method
+
+1. Answer a quick question from current context. Do not pause, resume, create,
+   assess, or close a task just to answer it.
+2. For a same-task adjustment, update only affected constraints and next actions.
+   Keep an existing checkpoint when it helps; reassess policy only when evidence
+   or constraints changed enough to affect a rule.
+3. For a separate request, do not silently resume an old objective. Park a
+   concise checkpoint only when substantial work needs to continue later. Start
+   a distinct tracked record only if the new work benefits from continuity,
+   dependencies, coordination, or durable decisions. For work spanning repos,
+   checkpoint each unfinished item with its checkout, branch, requested
+   deliverables, and delivery endpoint. Keep explicitly held items parked with
+   their resume condition until the user resumes them. A conversational
+   checkpoint is sufficient when no task record is needed.
+4. Before resuming a named tracked task, reconcile its checkout, branch, dirty
+   state, current policy, stale evidence, uncertain effects, and ownership. Do
+   not change branches, stash, fetch large histories, or seize ownership just
+   to display a history choice.
+5. Continue to the user's authorized endpoint with applicable checks. Ask only
+   about consequential choices the code and available context cannot resolve.
+
+## Common mistakes
+
+| Mistake | Correction |
+| --- | --- |
+| Treating a quick question as interruption | Answer without changing task state. |
+| Auto-resuming an old objective | Wait for the user's direction to resume it. |
+| Rebuilding continuity from a transcript | Keep a compact checkpoint with evidence and next action. |
+
+
+## In Claude Code
+
+Workit operations (`task`, `evidence`, `policy`, `decision`, …) run through
+the `workit` CLI on the Bash tool: `workit <family> <action> --json`
+(`workit --help` lists the verbs). The plugin's `verifier`, `reviewer`
+and `implementer` agents take independent verification, fresh-context
+review and isolated implementation.