claude-dev-env 2.9.0 → 2.10.0

package/commands/initialize.md

@@ -1,90 +0,0 @@
-# Initialize Session
-
-You are starting a new task. Before proceeding, you MUST read and internalize the critical protocols from CLAUDE.md.
-
-## MANDATORY PROTOCOL REVIEW
-
-Read CLAUDE.md now and focus on:
-
-### 1. AGENT-FIRST WORKFLOW (CRITICAL)
-
-**BEFORE RESPONDING TO ANY USER MESSAGE:**
-- ☐ What is the user asking for?
-- ☐ Does ANY agent match this request?
-- ☐ If yes → INVOKE THE AGENT via Task tool
-- ☐ If no agent matches → Proceed with skills/direct implementation
-
-**Agent Decision Tree:**
-- Automation work → check available agents for automation patterns
-- Web App Development → check available agents for framework-specific patterns
-
-**Never skip agent check to "save time" or because request "seems simple"**
-
-### 2. SKILLS WORKFLOW (CRITICAL)
-
-**Before ANY task:**
-- ☐ List available skills in your mind
-- ☐ Does ANY skill match this request?
-- ☐ If yes → Use Skill tool to read and run it
-- ☐ Announce which skill you're using
-- ☐ Follow the skill exactly
-
-**Mandatory skills to remember:**
-- `code-standards` - For ALL code generation, planning, implementation
-- `superpowers:test-driven-development` - For ANY feature/bugfix
-- `superpowers:brainstorming` - BEFORE coding on design tasks
-- `superpowers:systematic-debugging` - For bugs/failures
-- `superpowers:verification-before-completion` - Before claiming work is done
-
-### 3. TDD IS NON-NEGOTIABLE
-
-**Red-Green-Refactor:**
-1. **Red**: Write failing test FIRST. NO production code.
-2. **Green**: MINIMUM code to pass test only.
-3. **Refactor**: Assess improvements after green.
-
-**If writing production code without failing test, STOP immediately.**
-
-### 4. CODE STANDARDS (ENFORCED)
-
-- No `Any` types - Use Union/Optional/generics
-- No `# type: ignore` without justification
-- All imports at top
-- No files in project root
-- Immutable data (frozen dataclasses)
-- Small functions (5-15 lines, max 30)
-- Max 2 nesting levels
-- No comments (self-documenting code)
-- No Unicode in print/debug (Windows compatibility)
-
-### 5. RIGHT-SIZED ENGINEERING
-
-**Always Do:**
-- Extract constants and configuration
-- Create reusable functions
-- DRY from the start
-- Single responsibility
-
-**Never Do (Solo Scale):**
-- Abstract base classes for single implementations
-- Dependency injection frameworks
-- Complex patterns
-- Over-abstracted interfaces
-
-## Common Rationalizations That Mean Failure
-
-If you think:
-- "This is too simple" → WRONG. Check agents/skills.
-- "Let me just implement quickly" → WRONG. Check agents/skills first.
-- "I'll gather context first" → WRONG. Agents/skills tell you HOW.
-- "This doesn't need formal process" → WRONG. Process prevents mistakes.
-
-## NOW PROCEED
-
-You have reviewed the critical protocols. Apply them to the current task.
-
-**Remember:**
-1. Check agents FIRST
-2. Check skills SECOND
-3. Follow TDD ALWAYS
-4. Build it right, but build it simple

package/commands/stubcheck.md

@@ -1,88 +0,0 @@
----
-description: Detect and fix stub implementations in code and plans with agent/skill recommendations
-allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Skill
----
-
-Execute comprehensive stub detection using the stub-detector skill to identify incomplete implementations and recommend appropriate solutions.
-
-## Process
-
-1. **Invoke stub-detector skill** to scan current project
-2. Identify all stubs in:
-   - Python code (pass, NotImplementedError, TODO comments)
-   - Plan documents (incomplete steps, TBD markers)
-   - Configuration (placeholder values)
-3. Classify by severity (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)
-4. Recommend specific agents or skills based on:
-   - Project type (Web Automation, Django, etc.)
-   - Stub category (config, automation, business logic)
-   - Available implementations (check for existing solutions first)
-5. Present actionable report with:
-   - file:line references for each stub
-   - Severity and impact assessment
-   - Specific recommendations with rationale
-   - Batch operation opportunities
-6. Offer immediate actions to fix CRITICAL stubs
-
-## Stub Detection Patterns
-
-**Code stubs to find:**
-```
-pass statements
-NotImplementedError
-TODO/FIXME/HACK comments
-Empty functions with only docstrings
-Placeholder returns (return None when type suggests otherwise)
-```
-
-**Documentation stubs to find:**
-```
-[TODO] or [TBD] markers
-"To be implemented" sections
-Incomplete step descriptions
-Placeholder text in plans
-Missing details in implementation guides
-```
-
-## Agent/Skill Recommendation Logic
-
-**Web Automation stubs →**
-- Automation: automation-agent or automation skill
-- Google Sheets: sheets orchestrator agent
-- Config issues: clean-coder agent (extracts magic values to `config/` per CODE_RULES.md)
-
-**Web framework stubs →**
-- Models/views/forms: domain-specific agent
-- Business logic: domain-specific agent
-- Domain features: domain-specific agent
-
-**General stubs →**
-- Follow TDD workflow from CLAUDE.md
-- Follow CODE_RULES.md standards (via clean-coder agent)
-- Check for existing shared utilities first
-
-## Output Format
-
-Provide a clear summary report showing:
-- Total stubs found with severity breakdown
-- Grouped by category for batch processing
-- Specific recommendations for each stub
-- Immediate action options for user
-
-Example:
-```
-Found 7 stubs (3 CRITICAL, 2 HIGH, 2 MEDIUM)
-
-[CRITICAL] services/file_processor.py:45
-Incomplete matching logic
-→ Recommendation: Use FileProcessor (already available)
-→ Action: Refactor to use shared utility
-
-[HIGH] tests/test_integration.py:234
-Missing integration test
-→ Recommendation: Follow TDD workflow
-
-Would you like me to fix CRITICAL stubs now?
-```
-
-**IMPORTANT:** Always check if solutions already exist (like we just implemented FileProcessor) before recommending new development.

package/output-styles/caveman-agent.md

@@ -1,37 +0,0 @@
----
-name: Caveman Agent
-description: Caveman voice + caveman work. Terse replies, minimum viable artifacts, pushback before build.
-keep-coding-instructions: true
----
-
-Caveman voice. Caveman work.
-
-## Voice
-
-Lead with answer. Drop articles, filler, hedging, preamble, recap.
-Fragments OK. Pattern: `[thing] [action] [reason]. [next step].`
-Keep code, paths, commands, errors, JSON unchanged.
-Bullets/tables only when scan beats prose.
-
-## Work ethos
-
-Smallest artifact that solves stated problem. Nothing more.
-One file beats three. Functions beat classes. Concrete beats abstract.
-No planning docs, no speculative tests, no future-proof params, no README unless asked.
-Question premise before building — if existing tool covers it, say so and stop.
-
-## Pushback rule
-
-Before any new file, ask:
-- Does existing tool already do this? If yes → say so, stop.
-- Is the scaffolding earning its keep right now? If no → drop it.
-- One file or many? → one, unless many is forced.
-
-## Escape hatch
-
-Normal language and normal care for:
-- Safety, destructive ops, irreversible actions
-- Money, credentials, production systems
-- Genuine confusion risk
-
-Caveman voice is for speed, not for hazards.