claudecode-omc 5.6.4 → 5.6.6

package/bundled/upstream/oh-my-claudecode/skills/ultrawork/SKILL.md

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ level: 4
 ---
 
 <Purpose>
-Ultrawork is a parallel execution engine that runs multiple agents simultaneously for independent tasks. It is a component, not a standalone persistence mode -- it provides parallelism and smart model routing but not persistence, verification loops, or state management.
+Ultrawork is a parallel execution engine and execution protocol for independent work. It emphasizes intent grounding, parallel context gathering, dependency-aware task graphs for non-trivial work, and concise evidence-backed execution summaries. It is a component, not a standalone persistence mode -- it provides parallelism and routing guidance, but not persistence, verification loops, or long-lived state management.
 </Purpose>
 
 <Use_When>
@@ -33,21 +33,34 @@ Sequential task execution wastes time when tasks are independent. Ultrawork enab
 - Read `docs/shared/agent-tiers.md` before first delegation for agent selection guidance
 - Use `run_in_background: true` for operations over ~30 seconds (installs, builds, tests)
 - Run quick commands (git status, file reads, simple checks) in the foreground
+- Resolve intent and uncertainty before implementation; explore first, ask only when still blocked
+- For non-trivial tasks, produce a dependency-aware plan with parallel waves before execution
+- Keep delegated-task reports concise: short summary, files touched, verification status, blockers
+- Manual QA is required for implemented behavior, not just diagnostics
 </Execution_Policy>
 
 <Steps>
 1. **Read agent reference**: Load `docs/shared/agent-tiers.md` for tier selection
-2. **Classify tasks by independence**: Identify which tasks can run in parallel vs which have dependencies
-3. **Route to correct tiers**:
+2. **Ground intent first**: Confirm whether the request is implementation, investigation, evaluation, or research; do not code before that is clear
+3. **Gather context in parallel**:
+   - direct tools for quick reads/searches
+   - exploration/docs agents for broad context
+4. **Classify tasks by independence**: Identify which tasks can run in parallel vs which have dependencies
+5. **Create a task graph for non-trivial work**:
+   - Parallel Execution Waves
+   - Dependency Matrix
+   - acceptance criteria and verification steps per task
+6. **Route to correct tiers**:
    - Simple lookups/definitions: LOW tier (Haiku)
    - Standard implementation: MEDIUM tier (Sonnet)
    - Complex analysis/refactoring: HIGH tier (Opus)
-4. **Fire independent tasks simultaneously**: Launch all parallel-safe tasks at once
-5. **Run dependent tasks sequentially**: Wait for prerequisites before launching dependent work
-6. **Background long operations**: Builds, installs, and test suites use `run_in_background: true`
-7. **Verify when all tasks complete** (lightweight):
+7. **Fire independent tasks simultaneously**: Launch all parallel-safe tasks at once
+8. **Run dependent tasks sequentially**: Wait for prerequisites before launching dependent work
+9. **Background long operations**: Builds, installs, and test suites use `run_in_background: true`
+10. **Verify when all tasks complete** (lightweight):
    - Build/typecheck passes
    - Affected tests pass
+   - Manual QA completed for implemented behavior
    - No new errors introduced
 </Steps>
 

package/bundled/upstream/superpowers/.omc-source/bundle.json

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+{
+  "syncedAt": "2026-05-15T05:55:34.311Z",
+  "sourceName": "superpowers",
+  "remote": "https://github.com/obra/superpowers.git",
+  "ref": "main",
+  "kind": "content-repo",
+  "harnesses": [
+    "claude"
+  ],
+  "artifacts": [
+    "skills",
+    "agents",
+    "hooks",
+    "commands"
+  ],
+  "manifests": [],
+  "profiles": [
+    "claude-runtime",
+    "reference-only"
+  ]
+}

package/bundled/upstream/superpowers/hooks/hooks-cursor.json

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
   "hooks": {
     "sessionStart": [
       {
-        "command": "./hooks/session-start"
+        "command": "./hooks/run-hook.cmd session-start"
       }
     ]
   }

package/bundled/upstream/superpowers/skills/executing-plans/SKILL.md

@@ -65,6 +65,6 @@ After all tasks complete and verified:
 ## Integration
 
 **Required workflow skills:**
-- **superpowers:using-git-worktrees** - REQUIRED: Set up isolated workspace before starting
+- **superpowers:using-git-worktrees** - Ensures isolated workspace (creates one or verifies existing)
 - **superpowers:writing-plans** - Creates the plan this skill executes
 - **superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch** - Complete development after all tasks

package/bundled/upstream/superpowers/skills/finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.md

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ description: Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need t
 
 Guide completion of development work by presenting clear options and handling chosen workflow.
 
-**Core principle:** Verify tests → Present options → Execute choice → Clean up.
+**Core principle:** Verify tests → Detect environment → Present options → Execute choice → Clean up.
 
 **Announce at start:** "I'm using the finishing-a-development-branch skill to complete this work."
 
@@ -37,7 +37,24 @@ Stop. Don't proceed to Step 2.
 
 **If tests pass:** Continue to Step 2.
 
-### Step 2: Determine Base Branch
+### Step 2: Detect Environment
+
+**Determine workspace state before presenting options:**
+
+```bash
+GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
+GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
+```
+
+This determines which menu to show and how cleanup works:
+
+| State | Menu | Cleanup |
+|-------|------|---------|
+| `GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON` (normal repo) | Standard 4 options | No worktree to clean up |
+| `GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON`, named branch | Standard 4 options | Provenance-based (see Step 6) |
+| `GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON`, detached HEAD | Reduced 3 options (no merge) | No cleanup (externally managed) |
+
+### Step 3: Determine Base Branch
 
 ```bash
 # Try common base branches
@@ -46,9 +63,9 @@ git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD master 2>/dev/null
 
 Or ask: "This branch split from main - is that correct?"
 
-### Step 3: Present Options
+### Step 4: Present Options
 
-Present exactly these 4 options:
+**Normal repo and named-branch worktree — present exactly these 4 options:**
 
 ```
 Implementation complete. What would you like to do?
@@ -61,30 +78,45 @@ Implementation complete. What would you like to do?
 Which option?
 ```
 
+**Detached HEAD — present exactly these 3 options:**
+
+```
+Implementation complete. You're on a detached HEAD (externally managed workspace).
+
+1. Push as new branch and create a Pull Request
+2. Keep as-is (I'll handle it later)
+3. Discard this work
+
+Which option?
+```
+
 **Don't add explanation** - keep options concise.
 
-### Step 4: Execute Choice
+### Step 5: Execute Choice
 
 #### Option 1: Merge Locally
 
 ```bash
-# Switch to base branch
-git checkout <base-branch>
+# Get main repo root for CWD safety
+MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
+cd "$MAIN_ROOT"
 
-# Pull latest
+# Merge first — verify success before removing anything
+git checkout <base-branch>
 git pull
-
-# Merge feature branch
 git merge <feature-branch>
 
 # Verify tests on merged result
 <test command>
 
-# If tests pass
-git branch -d <feature-branch>
+# Only after merge succeeds: cleanup worktree (Step 6), then delete branch
 ```
 
-Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 5)
+Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 6), then delete branch:
+
+```bash
+git branch -d <feature-branch>
+```
 
 #### Option 2: Push and Create PR
 
@@ -103,7 +135,7 @@ EOF
 )"
 ```
 
-Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 5)
+**Do NOT clean up worktree** — user needs it alive to iterate on PR feedback.
 
 #### Option 3: Keep As-Is
 
@@ -127,36 +159,46 @@ Wait for exact confirmation.
 
 If confirmed:
 ```bash
-git checkout <base-branch>
-git branch -D <feature-branch>
+MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
+cd "$MAIN_ROOT"
 ```
 
-Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 5)
+Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 6), then force-delete branch:
+```bash
+git branch -D <feature-branch>
+```
 
-### Step 5: Cleanup Worktree
+### Step 6: Cleanup Workspace
 
-**For Options 1, 2, 4:**
+**Only runs for Options 1 and 4.** Options 2 and 3 always preserve the worktree.
 
-Check if in worktree:
 ```bash
-git worktree list | grep $(git branch --show-current)
+GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
+GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
+WORKTREE_PATH=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
 ```
 
-If yes:
+**If `GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON`:** Normal repo, no worktree to clean up. Done.
+
+**If worktree path is under `.worktrees/`, `worktrees/`, or `~/.config/superpowers/worktrees/`:** Superpowers created this worktree — we own cleanup.
+
 ```bash
-git worktree remove <worktree-path>
+MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
+cd "$MAIN_ROOT"
+git worktree remove "$WORKTREE_PATH"
+git worktree prune  # Self-healing: clean up any stale registrations
 ```
 
-**For Option 3:** Keep worktree.
+**Otherwise:** The host environment (harness) owns this workspace. Do NOT remove it. If your platform provides a workspace-exit tool, use it. Otherwise, leave the workspace in place.
 
 ## Quick Reference
 
 | Option | Merge | Push | Keep Worktree | Cleanup Branch |
 |--------|-------|------|---------------|----------------|
-| 1. Merge locally | ✓ | - | - | ✓ |
-| 2. Create PR | - | ✓ | ✓ | - |
-| 3. Keep as-is | - | - | ✓ | - |
-| 4. Discard | - | - | - | ✓ (force) |
+| 1. Merge locally | yes | - | - | yes |
+| 2. Create PR | - | yes | yes | - |
+| 3. Keep as-is | - | - | yes | - |
+| 4. Discard | - | - | - | yes (force) |
 
 ## Common Mistakes
 
@@ -165,13 +207,25 @@ git worktree remove <worktree-path>
 - **Fix:** Always verify tests before offering options
 
 **Open-ended questions**
-- **Problem:** "What should I do next?" → ambiguous
-- **Fix:** Present exactly 4 structured options
+- **Problem:** "What should I do next?" is ambiguous
+- **Fix:** Present exactly 4 structured options (or 3 for detached HEAD)
 
-**Automatic worktree cleanup**
-- **Problem:** Remove worktree when might need it (Option 2, 3)
+**Cleaning up worktree for Option 2**
+- **Problem:** Remove worktree user needs for PR iteration
 - **Fix:** Only cleanup for Options 1 and 4
 
+**Deleting branch before removing worktree**
+- **Problem:** `git branch -d` fails because worktree still references the branch
+- **Fix:** Merge first, remove worktree, then delete branch
+
+**Running git worktree remove from inside the worktree**
+- **Problem:** Command fails silently when CWD is inside the worktree being removed
+- **Fix:** Always `cd` to main repo root before `git worktree remove`
+
+**Cleaning up harness-owned worktrees**
+- **Problem:** Removing a worktree the harness created causes phantom state
+- **Fix:** Only clean up worktrees under `.worktrees/`, `worktrees/`, or `~/.config/superpowers/worktrees/`
+
 **No confirmation for discard**
 - **Problem:** Accidentally delete work
 - **Fix:** Require typed "discard" confirmation
@@ -183,18 +237,15 @@ git worktree remove <worktree-path>
 - Merge without verifying tests on result
 - Delete work without confirmation
 - Force-push without explicit request
+- Remove a worktree before confirming merge success
+- Clean up worktrees you didn't create (provenance check)
+- Run `git worktree remove` from inside the worktree
 
 **Always:**
 - Verify tests before offering options
-- Present exactly 4 options
+- Detect environment before presenting menu
+- Present exactly 4 options (or 3 for detached HEAD)
 - Get typed confirmation for Option 4
 - Clean up worktree for Options 1 & 4 only
-
-## Integration
-
-**Called by:**
-- **subagent-driven-development** (Step 7) - After all tasks complete
-- **executing-plans** (Step 5) - After all batches complete
-
-**Pairs with:**
-- **using-git-worktrees** - Cleans up worktree created by that skill
+- `cd` to main repo root before worktree removal
+- Run `git worktree prune` after removal

package/bundled/upstream/superpowers/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ description: Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before m
 
 # Requesting Code Review
 
-Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work.
+Dispatch a code reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work.
 
 **Core principle:** Review early, review often.
 
@@ -29,16 +29,15 @@ BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/main
 HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
 ```
 
-**2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent:**
+**2. Dispatch code reviewer subagent:**
 
-Use Task tool with superpowers:code-reviewer type, fill template at `code-reviewer.md`
+Use Task tool with `general-purpose` type, fill template at `code-reviewer.md`
 
 **Placeholders:**
-- `{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}` - What you just built
+- `{DESCRIPTION}` - Brief summary of what you built
 - `{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}` - What it should do
 - `{BASE_SHA}` - Starting commit
 - `{HEAD_SHA}` - Ending commit
-- `{DESCRIPTION}` - Brief summary
 
 **3. Act on feedback:**
 - Fix Critical issues immediately
@@ -56,12 +55,11 @@ You: Let me request code review before proceeding.
 BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
 HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
 
-[Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent]
-  WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
+[Dispatch code reviewer subagent]
+  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
   PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/superpowers/plans/deployment-plan.md
   BASE_SHA: a7981ec
   HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
-  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
 
 [Subagent returns]:
   Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
@@ -82,7 +80,7 @@ You: [Fix progress indicators]
 - Fix before moving to next task
 
 **Executing Plans:**
-- Review after each batch (3 tasks)
+- Review after each task or at natural checkpoints
 - Get feedback, apply, continue
 
 **Ad-Hoc Development:**

package/bundled/upstream/superpowers/skills/requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md

@@ -1,111 +1,133 @@
-# Code Review Agent
+# Code Reviewer Prompt Template
 
-You are reviewing code changes for production readiness.
+Use this template when dispatching a code reviewer subagent.
 
-**Your task:**
-1. Review {WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}
-2. Compare against {PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}
-3. Check code quality, architecture, testing
-4. Categorize issues by severity
-5. Assess production readiness
+**Purpose:** Review completed work against requirements and code quality standards before it cascades into more work.
 
-## What Was Implemented
+```
+Task tool (general-purpose):
+  description: "Review code changes"
+  prompt: |
+    You are a Senior Code Reviewer with expertise in software architecture,
+    design patterns, and best practices. Your job is to review completed work
+    against its plan or requirements and identify issues before they cascade.
 
-{DESCRIPTION}
+    ## What Was Implemented
 
-## Requirements/Plan
+    {DESCRIPTION}
 
-{PLAN_REFERENCE}
+    ## Requirements / Plan
 
-## Git Range to Review
+    {PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}
 
-**Base:** {BASE_SHA}
-**Head:** {HEAD_SHA}
+    ## Git Range to Review
 
-```bash
-git diff --stat {BASE_SHA}..{HEAD_SHA}
-git diff {BASE_SHA}..{HEAD_SHA}
-```
+    **Base:** {BASE_SHA}
+    **Head:** {HEAD_SHA}
 
-## Review Checklist
-
-**Code Quality:**
-- Clean separation of concerns?
-- Proper error handling?
-- Type safety (if applicable)?
-- DRY principle followed?
-- Edge cases handled?
-
-**Architecture:**
-- Sound design decisions?
-- Scalability considerations?
-- Performance implications?
-- Security concerns?
-
-**Testing:**
-- Tests actually test logic (not mocks)?
-- Edge cases covered?
-- Integration tests where needed?
-- All tests passing?
-
-**Requirements:**
-- All plan requirements met?
-- Implementation matches spec?
-- No scope creep?
-- Breaking changes documented?
-
-**Production Readiness:**
-- Migration strategy (if schema changes)?
-- Backward compatibility considered?
-- Documentation complete?
-- No obvious bugs?
-
-## Output Format
+    ```bash
+    git diff --stat {BASE_SHA}..{HEAD_SHA}
+    git diff {BASE_SHA}..{HEAD_SHA}
+    ```
 
-### Strengths
-[What's well done? Be specific.]
+    ## What to Check
 
-### Issues
+    **Plan alignment:**
+    - Does the implementation match the plan / requirements?
+    - Are deviations justified improvements, or problematic departures?
+    - Is all planned functionality present?
 
-#### Critical (Must Fix)
-[Bugs, security issues, data loss risks, broken functionality]
+    **Code quality:**
+    - Clean separation of concerns?
+    - Proper error handling?
+    - Type safety where applicable?
+    - DRY without premature abstraction?
+    - Edge cases handled?
 
-#### Important (Should Fix)
-[Architecture problems, missing features, poor error handling, test gaps]
+    **Architecture:**
+    - Sound design decisions?
+    - Reasonable scalability and performance?
+    - Security concerns?
+    - Integrates cleanly with surrounding code?
 
-#### Minor (Nice to Have)
-[Code style, optimization opportunities, documentation improvements]
+    **Testing:**
+    - Tests verify real behavior, not mocks?
+    - Edge cases covered?
+    - Integration tests where they matter?
+    - All tests passing?
 
-**For each issue:**
-- File:line reference
-- What's wrong
-- Why it matters
-- How to fix (if not obvious)
+    **Production readiness:**
+    - Migration strategy if schema changed?
+    - Backward compatibility considered?
+    - Documentation complete?
+    - No obvious bugs?
 
-### Recommendations
-[Improvements for code quality, architecture, or process]
+    ## Calibration
 
-### Assessment
+    Categorize issues by actual severity. Not everything is Critical.
+    Acknowledge what was done well before listing issues — accurate praise
+    helps the implementer trust the rest of the feedback.
+
+    If you find significant deviations from the plan, flag them specifically
+    so the implementer can confirm whether the deviation was intentional.
+    If you find issues with the plan itself rather than the implementation,
+    say so.
+
+    ## Output Format
+
+    ### Strengths
+    [What's well done? Be specific.]
+
+    ### Issues
 
-**Ready to merge?** [Yes/No/With fixes]
+    #### Critical (Must Fix)
+    [Bugs, security issues, data loss risks, broken functionality]
 
-**Reasoning:** [Technical assessment in 1-2 sentences]
+    #### Important (Should Fix)
+    [Architecture problems, missing features, poor error handling, test gaps]
 
-## Critical Rules
+    #### Minor (Nice to Have)
+    [Code style, optimization opportunities, documentation polish]
+
+    For each issue:
+    - File:line reference
+    - What's wrong
+    - Why it matters
+    - How to fix (if not obvious)
+
+    ### Recommendations
+    [Improvements for code quality, architecture, or process]
+
+    ### Assessment
+
+    **Ready to merge?** [Yes | No | With fixes]
+
+    **Reasoning:** [1-2 sentence technical assessment]
+
+    ## Critical Rules
+
+    **DO:**
+    - Categorize by actual severity
+    - Be specific (file:line, not vague)
+    - Explain WHY each issue matters
+    - Acknowledge strengths
+    - Give a clear verdict
+
+    **DON'T:**
+    - Say "looks good" without checking
+    - Mark nitpicks as Critical
+    - Give feedback on code you didn't actually read
+    - Be vague ("improve error handling")
+    - Avoid giving a clear verdict
+```
 
-**DO:**
-- Categorize by actual severity (not everything is Critical)
-- Be specific (file:line, not vague)
-- Explain WHY issues matter
-- Acknowledge strengths
-- Give clear verdict
+**Placeholders:**
+- `{DESCRIPTION}` — brief summary of what was built
+- `{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}` — what it should do (plan file path, task text, or requirements)
+- `{BASE_SHA}` — starting commit
+- `{HEAD_SHA}` — ending commit
 
-**DON'T:**
-- Say "looks good" without checking
-- Mark nitpicks as Critical
-- Give feedback on code you didn't review
-- Be vague ("improve error handling")
-- Avoid giving a clear verdict
+**Reviewer returns:** Strengths, Issues (Critical / Important / Minor), Recommendations, Assessment
 
 ## Example Output
 

package/bundled/upstream/superpowers/skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md

@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ Execute plan by dispatching fresh subagent per task, with two-stage review after
 
 **Core principle:** Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review (spec then quality) = high quality, fast iteration
 
+**Continuous execution:** Do not pause to check in with your human partner between tasks. Execute all tasks from the plan without stopping. The only reasons to stop are: BLOCKED status you cannot resolve, ambiguity that genuinely prevents progress, or all tasks complete. "Should I continue?" prompts and progress summaries waste their time — they asked you to execute the plan, so execute it.
+
 ## When to Use
 
 ```dot
@@ -265,7 +267,7 @@ Done!
 ## Integration
 
 **Required workflow skills:**
-- **superpowers:using-git-worktrees** - REQUIRED: Set up isolated workspace before starting
+- **superpowers:using-git-worktrees** - Ensures isolated workspace (creates one or verifies existing)
 - **superpowers:writing-plans** - Creates the plan this skill executes
 - **superpowers:requesting-code-review** - Code review template for reviewer subagents
 - **superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch** - Complete development after all tasks

package/bundled/upstream/superpowers/skills/subagent-driven-development/code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md

@@ -7,14 +7,13 @@ Use this template when dispatching a code quality reviewer subagent.
 **Only dispatch after spec compliance review passes.**
 
 ```
-Task tool (superpowers:code-reviewer):
+Task tool (general-purpose):
   Use template at requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md
 
-  WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: [from implementer's report]
+  DESCRIPTION: [task summary, from implementer's report]
   PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task N from [plan-file]
   BASE_SHA: [commit before task]
   HEAD_SHA: [current commit]
-  DESCRIPTION: [task summary]
 ```
 
 **In addition to standard code quality concerns, the reviewer should check:**

package/bundled/upstream/superpowers/skills/systematic-debugging/CREATION-LOG.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ Reference example of extracting, structuring, and bulletproofing a critical skil
 
 ## Source Material
 
-Extracted debugging framework from `/Users/jesse/.claude/CLAUDE.md`:
+Extracted debugging framework from `~/.claude/CLAUDE.md`:
 - 4-phase systematic process (Investigation → Pattern Analysis → Hypothesis → Implementation)
 - Core mandate: ALWAYS find root cause, NEVER fix symptoms
 - Rules designed to resist time pressure and rationalization

package/bundled/upstream/superpowers/skills/systematic-debugging/root-cause-tracing.md

@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ digraph when_to_use {
 
 ### 1. Observe the Symptom
 ```
-Error: git init failed in /Users/jesse/project/packages/core
+Error: git init failed in ~/project/packages/core
 ```
 
 ### 2. Find Immediate Cause