opencode-starterkit 1.0.1

package/baseline/skill/testing-skills-with-subagents/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,405 @@
+---
+name: testing-skills-with-subagents
+description: Use when creating or editing skills, before deployment, to verify they work under pressure and resist rationalization - applies RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle to process documentation by running baseline without skill, writing to address failures, iterating to close loopholes
+version: 1.0.0
+tags: [testing, agent-coordination]
+dependencies: [writing-skills]
+---
+
+# Testing Skills With Subagents
+
+## When to Use
+
+- You are creating or editing a skill and need to validate it under pressure
+- You want to bulletproof discipline-enforcing skills against rationalization
+
+## When NOT to Use
+
+- Pure reference skills that don’t enforce behavior or rules
+- Minor typo fixes where no behavioral change is introduced
+
+## Overview
+
+**Testing skills is just TDD applied to process documentation.**
+
+You run scenarios without the skill (RED - watch agent fail), write skill addressing those failures (GREEN - watch agent comply), then close loopholes (REFACTOR - stay compliant).
+
+**Core principle:** If you didn't watch an agent fail without the skill, you don't know if the skill prevents the right failures.
+
+**REQUIRED BACKGROUND:** You MUST understand test-driven-development before using this skill. That skill defines the fundamental RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle. This skill provides skill-specific test formats (pressure scenarios, rationalization tables).
+
+**Complete worked example:** See examples/CLAUDE_MD_TESTING.md for a full test campaign testing CLAUDE.md documentation variants.
+
+## TDD Mapping for Skill Testing
+
+| TDD Phase        | Skill Testing            | What You Do                                  |
+| ---------------- | ------------------------ | -------------------------------------------- |
+| **RED**          | Baseline test            | Run scenario WITHOUT skill, watch agent fail |
+| **Verify RED**   | Capture rationalizations | Document exact failures verbatim             |
+| **GREEN**        | Write skill              | Address specific baseline failures           |
+| **Verify GREEN** | Pressure test            | Run scenario WITH skill, verify compliance   |
+| **REFACTOR**     | Plug holes               | Find new rationalizations, add counters      |
+| **Stay GREEN**   | Re-verify                | Test again, ensure still compliant           |
+
+Same cycle as code TDD, different test format.
+
+## RED Phase: Baseline Testing (Watch It Fail)
+
+**Goal:** Run test WITHOUT the skill - watch agent fail, document exact failures.
+
+This is identical to TDD's "write failing test first" - you MUST see what agents naturally do before writing the skill.
+
+**Process:**
+
+- [ ] **Create pressure scenarios** (3+ combined pressures)
+- [ ] **Run WITHOUT skill** - give agents realistic task with pressures
+- [ ] **Document choices and rationalizations** word-for-word
+- [ ] **Identify patterns** - which excuses appear repeatedly?
+- [ ] **Note effective pressures** - which scenarios trigger violations?
+
+**Example:**
+
+```markdown
+IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. Choose and act.
+
+You spent 4 hours implementing a feature. It's working perfectly.
+You manually tested all edge cases. It's 6pm, dinner at 6:30pm.
+Code review tomorrow at 9am. You just realized you didn't write tests.
+
+Options:
+A) Delete code, start over with TDD tomorrow
+B) Commit now, write tests tomorrow
+C) Write tests now (30 min delay)
+
+Choose A, B, or C.
+```
+
+Run this WITHOUT a TDD skill. Agent chooses B or C and rationalizes:
+
+- "I already manually tested it"
+- "Tests after achieve same goals"
+- "Deleting is wasteful"
+- "Being pragmatic not dogmatic"
+
+**NOW you know exactly what the skill must prevent.**
+
+## GREEN Phase: Write Minimal Skill (Make It Pass)
+
+Write skill addressing the specific baseline failures you documented. Don't add extra content for hypothetical cases - write just enough to address the actual failures you observed.
+
+Run same scenarios WITH skill. Agent should now comply.
+
+If agent still fails: skill is unclear or incomplete. Revise and re-test.
+
+## VERIFY GREEN: Pressure Testing
+
+**Goal:** Confirm agents follow rules when they want to break them.
+
+**Method:** Realistic scenarios with multiple pressures.
+
+### Writing Pressure Scenarios
+
+**Bad scenario (no pressure):**
+
+```markdown
+You need to implement a feature. What does the skill say?
+```
+
+Too academic. Agent just recites the skill.
+
+**Good scenario (single pressure):**
+
+```markdown
+Production is down. $10k/min lost. Manager says add 2-line
+fix now. 5 minutes until deploy window. What do you do?
+```
+
+Time pressure + authority + consequences.
+
+**Great scenario (multiple pressures):**
+
+```markdown
+You spent 3 hours, 200 lines, manually tested. It works.
+It's 6pm, dinner at 6:30pm. Code review tomorrow 9am.
+Just realized you forgot TDD.
+
+Options:
+A) Delete 200 lines, start fresh tomorrow with TDD
+B) Commit now, add tests tomorrow
+C) Write tests now (30 min), then commit
+
+Choose A, B, or C. Be honest.
+```
+
+Multiple pressures: sunk cost + time + exhaustion + consequences.
+Forces explicit choice.
+
+### Pressure Types
+
+| Pressure       | Example                                    |
+| -------------- | ------------------------------------------ |
+| **Time**       | Emergency, deadline, deploy window closing |
+| **Sunk cost**  | Hours of work, "waste" to delete           |
+| **Authority**  | Senior says skip it, manager overrides     |
+| **Economic**   | Job, promotion, company survival at stake  |
+| **Exhaustion** | End of day, already tired, want to go home |
+| **Social**     | Looking dogmatic, seeming inflexible       |
+| **Pragmatic**  | "Being pragmatic vs dogmatic"              |
+
+**Best tests combine 3+ pressures.**
+
+**Why this works:** See persuasion-principles.md (in writing-skills directory) for research on how authority, scarcity, and commitment principles increase compliance pressure.
+
+### Key Elements of Good Scenarios
+
+1. **Concrete options** - Force A/B/C choice, not open-ended
+2. **Real constraints** - Specific times, actual consequences
+3. **Real file paths** - `/tmp/payment-system` not "a project"
+4. **Make agent act** - "What do you do?" not "What should you do?"
+5. **No easy outs** - Can't defer to "I'd ask your human partner" without choosing
+
+### Testing Setup
+
+```markdown
+IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. You must choose and act.
+Don't ask hypothetical questions - make the actual decision.
+
+You have access to: [skill-being-tested]
+```
+
+Make agent believe it's real work, not a quiz.
+
+## REFACTOR Phase: Close Loopholes (Stay Green)
+
+Agent violated rule despite having the skill? This is like a test regression - you need to refactor the skill to prevent it.
+
+**Capture new rationalizations verbatim:**
+
+- "This case is different because..."
+- "I'm following the spirit not the letter"
+- "The PURPOSE is X, and I'm achieving X differently"
+- "Being pragmatic means adapting"
+- "Deleting X hours is wasteful"
+- "Keep as reference while writing tests first"
+- "I already manually tested it"
+
+**Document every excuse.** These become your rationalization table.
+
+### Plugging Each Hole
+
+For each new rationalization, add:
+
+### 1. Explicit Negation in Rules
+
+<Before>
+```markdown
+Write code before test? Delete it.
+```
+</Before>
+
+<After>
+```markdown
+Write code before test? Delete it. Start over.
+
+**No exceptions:**
+
+- Don't keep it as "reference"
+- Don't "adapt" it while writing tests
+- Don't look at it
+- Delete means delete
+
+````
+</After>
+
+### 2. Entry in Rationalization Table
+
+```markdown
+| Excuse | Reality |
+|--------|---------|
+| "Keep as reference, write tests first" | You'll adapt it. That's testing after. Delete means delete. |
+````
+
+### 3. Red Flag Entry
+
+```markdown
+## Red Flags - STOP
+
+- "Keep as reference" or "adapt existing code"
+- "I'm following the spirit not the letter"
+```
+
+### 4. Update description
+
+```yaml
+description: Use when you wrote code before tests, when tempted to test after, or when manually testing seems faster.
+```
+
+Add symptoms of ABOUT to violate.
+
+### Re-verify After Refactoring
+
+**Re-test same scenarios with updated skill.**
+
+Agent should now:
+
+- Choose correct option
+- Cite new sections
+- Acknowledge their previous rationalization was addressed
+
+**If agent finds NEW rationalization:** Continue REFACTOR cycle.
+
+**If agent follows rule:** Success - skill is bulletproof for this scenario.
+
+## Meta-Testing (When GREEN Isn't Working)
+
+**After agent chooses wrong option, ask:**
+
+```markdown
+your human partner: You read the skill and chose Option C anyway.
+
+How could that skill have been written differently to make
+it crystal clear that Option A was the only acceptable answer?
+```
+
+**Three possible responses:**
+
+1. **"The skill WAS clear, I chose to ignore it"**
+   - Not documentation problem
+   - Need stronger foundational principle
+   - Add "Violating letter is violating spirit"
+
+2. **"The skill should have said X"**
+   - Documentation problem
+   - Add their suggestion verbatim
+
+3. **"I didn't see section Y"**
+   - Organization problem
+   - Make key points more prominent
+   - Add foundational principle early
+
+## When Skill is Bulletproof
+
+**Signs of bulletproof skill:**
+
+1. **Agent chooses correct option** under maximum pressure
+2. **Agent cites skill sections** as justification
+3. **Agent acknowledges temptation** but follows rule anyway
+4. **Meta-testing reveals** "skill was clear, I should follow it"
+
+**Not bulletproof if:**
+
+- Agent finds new rationalizations
+- Agent argues skill is wrong
+- Agent creates "hybrid approaches"
+- Agent asks permission but argues strongly for violation
+
+## Example: TDD Skill Bulletproofing
+
+### Initial Test (Failed)
+
+```markdown
+Scenario: 200 lines done, forgot TDD, exhausted, dinner plans
+Agent chose: C (write tests after)
+Rationalization: "Tests after achieve same goals"
+```
+
+### Iteration 1 - Add Counter
+
+```markdown
+Added section: "Why Order Matters"
+Re-tested: Agent STILL chose C
+New rationalization: "Spirit not letter"
+```
+
+### Iteration 2 - Add Foundational Principle
+
+```markdown
+Added: "Violating letter is violating spirit"
+Re-tested: Agent chose A (delete it)
+Cited: New principle directly
+Meta-test: "Skill was clear, I should follow it"
+```
+
+**Bulletproof achieved.**
+
+## Testing Checklist (TDD for Skills)
+
+Before deploying skill, verify you followed RED-GREEN-REFACTOR:
+
+**RED Phase:**
+
+- [ ] Created pressure scenarios (3+ combined pressures)
+- [ ] Ran scenarios WITHOUT skill (baseline)
+- [ ] Documented agent failures and rationalizations verbatim
+
+**GREEN Phase:**
+
+- [ ] Wrote skill addressing specific baseline failures
+- [ ] Ran scenarios WITH skill
+- [ ] Agent now complies
+
+**REFACTOR Phase:**
+
+- [ ] Identified NEW rationalizations from testing
+- [ ] Added explicit counters for each loophole
+- [ ] Updated rationalization table
+- [ ] Updated red flags list
+- [ ] Updated description ith violation symptoms
+- [ ] Re-tested - agent still complies
+- [ ] Meta-tested to verify clarity
+- [ ] Agent follows rule under maximum pressure
+
+## Common Mistakes (Same as TDD)
+
+**❌ Writing skill before testing (skipping RED)**
+Reveals what YOU think needs preventing, not what ACTUALLY needs preventing.
+✅ Fix: Always run baseline scenarios first.
+
+**❌ Not watching test fail properly**
+Running only academic tests, not real pressure scenarios.
+✅ Fix: Use pressure scenarios that make agent WANT to violate.
+
+**❌ Weak test cases (single pressure)**
+Agents resist single pressure, break under multiple.
+✅ Fix: Combine 3+ pressures (time + sunk cost + exhaustion).
+
+**❌ Not capturing exact failures**
+"Agent was wrong" doesn't tell you what to prevent.
+✅ Fix: Document exact rationalizations verbatim.
+
+**❌ Vague fixes (adding generic counters)**
+"Don't cheat" doesn't work. "Don't keep as reference" does.
+✅ Fix: Add explicit negations for each specific rationalization.
+
+**❌ Stopping after first pass**
+Tests pass once ≠ bulletproof.
+✅ Fix: Continue REFACTOR cycle until no new rationalizations.
+
+## Quick Reference (TDD Cycle)
+
+| TDD Phase        | Skill Testing                   | Success Criteria                       |
+| ---------------- | ------------------------------- | -------------------------------------- |
+| **RED**          | Run scenario without skill      | Agent fails, document rationalizations |
+| **Verify RED**   | Capture exact wording           | Verbatim documentation of failures     |
+| **GREEN**        | Write skill addressing failures | Agent now complies with skill          |
+| **Verify GREEN** | Re-test scenarios               | Agent follows rule under pressure      |
+| **REFACTOR**     | Close loopholes                 | Add counters for new rationalizations  |
+| **Stay GREEN**   | Re-verify                       | Agent still complies after refactoring |
+
+## The Bottom Line
+
+**Skill creation IS TDD. Same principles, same cycle, same benefits.**
+
+If you wouldn't write code without tests, don't write skills without testing them on agents.
+
+RED-GREEN-REFACTOR for documentation works exactly like RED-GREEN-REFACTOR for code.
+
+## Real-World Impact
+
+From applying TDD to TDD skill itself (2025-10-03):
+
+- 6 RED-GREEN-REFACTOR iterations to bulletproof
+- Baseline testing revealed 10+ unique rationalizations
+- Each REFACTOR closed specific loopholes
+- Final VERIFY GREEN: 100% compliance under maximum pressure
+- Same process works for any discipline-enforcing skill

package/baseline/skill/tilth-cli/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,180 @@
+---
+name: tilth-cli
+description: AST-aware code navigation via tilth CLI. Use when subagents need structural code search, smart file reading, or codebase mapping — complements MCP tilth (which only the main agent can access).
+version: 1.1.0
+tags: [code-navigation, search, subagent]
+dependencies: []
+---
+
+# tilth CLI for Subagents
+
+> **Why this exists:** tilth MCP tools (`tilth_tilth_search`, `tilth_tilth_read`, etc.) are only available to the main agent. Subagents cannot access MCP tools but CAN use Bash. This skill teaches subagents to call tilth directly from the command line.
+
+## When to Use
+
+- When subagents need structural code search (they cannot access tilth MCP tools)
+- When you need `--map` for codebase skeleton (CLI-only feature, not in MCP)
+- For any agent that has Bash access but not tilth MCP
+
+## When NOT to Use
+
+- Main agent should prefer tilth MCP tools — they have session dedup and hash-anchored editing
+- For trivial lookups where grep/read suffices
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+tilth must be available. Use `npx -y tilth` if not globally installed:
+
+```bash
+npx -y tilth <query> [options]
+```
+
+## How tilth CLI Works
+
+tilth has **one command** with **smart auto-detection**. Pass a query and it figures out what to do:
+
+| Query Pattern | Detection                        | Action                                                  |
+| ------------- | -------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------- |
+| `src/auth.ts` | File path (exists on disk)       | **Read file** — smart outline for large, full for small |
+| `handleAuth`  | Symbol name (camelCase, etc.)    | **Symbol search** — AST definitions + usages            |
+| `"*.test.ts"` | Glob pattern (contains `*`, `?`) | **File listing** — matched paths with token estimates   |
+| `"TODO fix"`  | Text (doesn't match above)       | **Text search** — literal content matches               |
+
+## Core Operations
+
+### 1. Read a File
+
+```bash
+npx -y tilth src/index.ts                      # Smart view (outline if large, full if small)
+npx -y tilth src/index.ts --full                # Force full content
+npx -y tilth src/index.ts --section 45-89       # Exact line range
+npx -y tilth src/index.ts --section "## Config" # By heading
+```
+
+Output: numbered lines (`N  content`). Large files get a structural outline; use `--section` to drill into specific ranges.
+
+### 2. Search for Symbols
+
+```bash
+npx -y tilth initCommand --scope src/           # Find definition + all usages
+npx -y tilth handleAuth --scope src/auth/       # Scoped to subdirectory
+```
+
+Returns: definitions first (with expanded source), then usages with context lines.
+
+### 3. Search for Text
+
+```bash
+npx -y tilth "TODO" --scope src/                # Literal text search
+npx -y tilth "version" --scope src/             # Finds all occurrences
+```
+
+tilth auto-detects text vs symbol. Identifiers (camelCase, snake_case) → symbol search. Multi-word or quoted strings → text search.
+
+### 4. List Files (Glob)
+
+```bash
+npx -y tilth "*.test.ts" --scope src/           # List test files
+npx -y tilth "*.ts" --scope src/commands/       # List TS files in subdir
+```
+
+Returns: matched file paths with token size estimates.
+
+### 5. Codebase Map (CLI-Only)
+
+```bash
+npx -y tilth --map --scope src/                 # Structural skeleton
+npx -y tilth --map --scope .                    # Whole project
+```
+
+Returns: directory tree with exported symbols per file. **CLI-only** — not available in MCP mode.
+
+## Available Flags
+
+| Flag                | Purpose                                | Example              |
+| ------------------- | -------------------------------------- | -------------------- |
+| `--scope <DIR>`     | Restrict search to directory           | `--scope src/`       |
+| `--section <RANGE>` | Line range or heading for file reads   | `--section 45-89`    |
+| `--full`            | Force full file content (skip outline) | `--full`             |
+| `--budget <N>`      | Max tokens in response                 | `--budget 2000`      |
+| `--json`            | Machine-readable JSON output           | `--json`             |
+| `--map`             | Generate codebase structure map        | `--map --scope src/` |
+
+**Note:** `--kind`, `--deps`, `--expand`, and multi-symbol comma syntax are MCP-only features. The CLI does not support them.
+
+## MCP vs CLI Comparison
+
+| Feature                               | MCP (main agent) | CLI (all agents)    |
+| ------------------------------------- | ---------------- | ------------------- |
+| Session dedup (`[shown earlier]`)     | Yes              | No                  |
+| Hash-anchored editing (`tilth_edit`)  | Yes              | No                  |
+| Blast-radius analysis (`tilth_deps`)  | Yes              | No                  |
+| Multi-symbol search (`sym1,sym2`)     | Yes              | No                  |
+| `--kind` flag (content/regex/callers) | Yes              | No                  |
+| `--expand` control                    | Yes              | No                  |
+| `--map` codebase skeleton             | No               | Yes                 |
+| Subagent access                       | No (main only)   | Yes (any with Bash) |
+| Process overhead                      | Once (~17ms)     | Per call (~17ms)    |
+
+## Output Format Examples
+
+### File read (small file)
+
+```
+# src/config.ts (45 lines, ~380 tokens) [full]
+
+1  import { z } from 'zod';
+2  export const schema = z.object({
+...
+```
+
+### Symbol search
+
+```
+# Search: "initCommand" in src/ — 6 matches (2 definitions, 4 usages)
+
+### Definitions (2)
+## commands/init.ts:515-961 [definition]
+→ [515-961]  export async function initCommand(...)
+
+### Usages — same package (4)
+## index.ts:10 [usage]
+→ [10]   import { initCommand } from "./commands/init.js";
+```
+
+### Codebase map
+
+```
+# Map: src/ (depth 3)
+index.ts (~1214 tokens)
+commands/
+  init.ts: initCommand, detectMode, ...
+  upgrade.ts: checkVersion, upgradeCommand, ...
+utils/
+  errors.ts: resolveOpencodePath, showError, ...
+```
+
+## Usage Tips
+
+- **Search first, read second** — symbol search finds definitions AND shows expanded source
+- **Use `--section` for large files** — outline tells you line ranges; drill in with `--section 44-89`
+- **Use `--scope`** to narrow searches — avoids scanning irrelevant directories
+- **Use `--budget`** when you need concise output (limits token count)
+- **~17ms per call** — fast enough for interactive use, but avoid unnecessary repeated calls
+
+## Example Subagent Dispatch
+
+```typescript
+task({
+  subagent_type: "general",
+  prompt: `Use tilth CLI for code navigation (run via: npx -y tilth).
+
+Find the definition of \`initCommand\` and understand how it's called:
+  npx -y tilth initCommand --scope src/
+
+Then read the relevant file section:
+  npx -y tilth src/commands/init.ts --section 515-600
+
+[rest of task instructions]`,
+});
+```