safeword 0.8.3 → 0.8.5

package/templates/skills/safeword-quality-reviewer/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: quality-reviewer
-description: Deep code quality review with web research. Use when user explicitly requests verification against latest docs ('double check against latest', 'verify versions', 'check security'), needs deeper analysis beyond automatic hook, or is working on projects without SAFEWORD.md/CLAUDE.md. Fetches current documentation (WebFetch), checks latest versions (WebSearch), and provides deep analysis (performance, security, alternatives).
+description: Deep code review with web research to verify against latest ecosystem. Use when user says 'double check against latest', 'verify versions', 'check security', 'review against docs', or needs deep analysis beyond automatic quality hook.
 allowed-tools: '*'
 ---
 
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ allowed-tools: '*'
 
 Deep quality review with web research to verify code against the latest ecosystem state.
 
-**Primary differentiator**: Web research (WebSearch, WebFetch) to verify against current versions, documentation, and best practices.
+**Primary differentiator**: Web research to verify against current versions, documentation, and best practices.
 
 **Triggers**:
 
@@ -16,7 +16,6 @@ Deep quality review with web research to verify code against the latest ecosyste
 - **Deep dive needed**: User wants analysis beyond automatic hook (performance, architecture alternatives, trade-offs)
 - **No SAFEWORD.md/CLAUDE.md**: Projects without context files (automatic hook won't run, manual review needed)
 - **Pre-change review**: User wants review before making changes (automatic hook only triggers after changes)
-- **Model-invoked**: Claude determines web research would be valuable
 
 **Relationship to automatic quality hook**:
 
@@ -43,7 +42,6 @@ Read relevant standards:
 
 - `CLAUDE.md` or `SAFEWORD.md` - Project-specific guidelines
 - `ARCHITECTURE.md` - Architectural principles
-- `@./.safeword/guides/code-philosophy.md` - Core coding principles
 
 ### 3. Evaluate Correctness
 
@@ -92,14 +90,12 @@ Read relevant standards:
 - Are we using libraries correctly?
 - Are we following official documentation?
 
-### 7. Verify Latest Versions ⭐ **PRIMARY VALUE**
+### 7. Verify Latest Versions - PRIMARY VALUE
 
 **CRITICAL**: This is your main differentiator from automatic hook. ALWAYS check versions.
 
-```text
-WebSearch: "[library name] latest stable version 2025"
-WebSearch: "[library name] security vulnerabilities"
-```
+Search for: "[library name] latest stable version 2025"
+Search for: "[library name] security vulnerabilities"
 
 **Flag if outdated:**
 
@@ -110,25 +106,17 @@ WebSearch: "[library name] security vulnerabilities"
 
 **Common libraries**: React, TypeScript, Vite, Next.js, Node.js, Vitest, Playwright, Jest, esbuild
 
-**Check even if dependencies didn't change** - User might be using outdated patterns.
-
-### 8. Verify Latest Documentation ⭐ **PRIMARY VALUE**
+### 8. Verify Latest Documentation - PRIMARY VALUE
 
 **CRITICAL**: This is your main differentiator from automatic hook. ALWAYS verify against current docs.
 
-```text
-WebFetch: https://react.dev (for React)
-WebFetch: https://vitejs.dev (for Vite)
-WebFetch: https://www.electronjs.org/docs (for Electron)
-```
+Fetch and check official documentation sites for the libraries in use.
 
 **Look for:**
 
 - Are we using deprecated APIs?
 - Are there newer, better patterns?
-- Did the library's recommendations change since training data?
-
-**Cache results**: If you checked docs recently in this session, don't re-fetch.
+- Did the library's recommendations change recently?
 
 ## Output Format
 
@@ -147,8 +135,8 @@ WebFetch: https://www.electronjs.org/docs (for Electron)
 **Anti-Bloat:** [✓/⚠️/❌] [Brief assessment]
 **Elegance:** [✓/⚠️/❌] [Brief assessment]
 **Standards:** [✓/⚠️/❌] [Brief assessment]
-**Versions:** [✓/⚠️/❌] [Latest version check with WebSearch]
-**Documentation:** [✓/⚠️/❌] [Current docs check with WebFetch]
+**Versions:** [✓/⚠️/❌] [Latest version check]
+**Documentation:** [✓/⚠️/❌] [Current docs check]
 
 **Verdict:** [APPROVE / REQUEST CHANGES / NEEDS DISCUSSION]
 
@@ -156,52 +144,14 @@ WebFetch: https://www.electronjs.org/docs (for Electron)
 **Suggested improvements:** [List or "None"]
 ```
 
-Use structured format for "double check"/"critique". Use brief format for specific questions.
-
-## Example: Full Review
-
-```markdown
-## Quality Review
-
-**Correctness:** ✓ Logic sound, edge cases covered, error handling adequate
-**Anti-Bloat:** ✓ Minimal dependencies, appropriate abstractions
-**Elegance:** ✓ Clear code, good naming, well-structured
-**Standards:** ✓ Follows CLAUDE.md patterns
-**Versions:** ✓ React 19.0.0 (latest stable), TypeScript 5.7.2 (latest)
-**Documentation:** ✓ Using current React patterns per https://react.dev
-
-**Verdict:** APPROVE - Production ready
-
-**Critical issues:** None
-**Suggested improvements:** None
-```
-
 ## Critical Reminders
 
-1. **Primary value: Web research** - Use WebSearch/WebFetch to verify against current ecosystem (versions, docs, security)
+1. **Primary value: Web research** - Verify against current ecosystem (versions, docs, security)
 2. **Complement automatic hook** - Hook does fast check with existing knowledge, you do deep dive with web research
 3. **Explicit triggers matter** - "double check against latest docs", "verify versions", "check security" = invoke web research
-4. **Projects without SAFEWORD.md** - Automatic hook won't run, you're the only quality check
-5. **Always check latest docs** - Verify patterns are current, not outdated (WebFetch)
-6. **Always verify versions** - Flag outdated dependencies (WebSearch)
-7. **Be thorough but concise** - Cover all areas but keep explanations brief
-8. **Provide actionable feedback** - Specific line numbers, concrete suggestions
-9. **Clear verdict** - Always end with APPROVE/REQUEST CHANGES/NEEDS DISCUSSION
-10. **Separate critical vs nice-to-have** - User needs to know what's blocking vs optional
-
-## Non-Obvious Edge Cases
-
-**User requests review after automatic hook ran:**
-
-- Acknowledge hook ran: "The automatic quality hook already did a fast check. I'll now do deeper analysis with web research..."
-- Focus on what automatic hook doesn't do: fetch latest docs, verify versions, security checks, performance analysis
-
-**WebSearch/WebFetch fails:**
-
-- Continue review without version/docs checks
-- Note: "Couldn't verify latest versions/docs, skipping that check"
-
-**Project has no CLAUDE.md/SAFEWORD.md:**
-
-- Use `@./.safeword/guides/code-philosophy.md` as fallback
-- Note: "No project-specific standards found, using general best practices"
+4. **Always check latest docs** - Verify patterns are current, not outdated
+5. **Always verify versions** - Flag outdated dependencies
+6. **Be thorough but concise** - Cover all areas but keep explanations brief
+7. **Provide actionable feedback** - Specific line numbers, concrete suggestions
+8. **Clear verdict** - Always end with APPROVE/REQUEST CHANGES/NEEDS DISCUSSION
+9. **Separate critical vs nice-to-have** - User needs to know what's blocking vs optional

package/dist/sync-AOKWEHCY.js

@@ -1,9 +0,0 @@
-import {
-  sync
-} from "./chunk-QYCKBF57.js";
-import "./chunk-SIK3BC7F.js";
-import "./chunk-ORQHKDT2.js";
-export {
-  sync
-};
-//# sourceMappingURL=sync-AOKWEHCY.js.map