lite-kits 0.1.1__py3-none-any.whl → 0.3.2__py3-none-any.whl

This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
Files changed (63) hide show
  1. lite_kits/__init__.py +56 -4
  2. lite_kits/cli.py +782 -189
  3. lite_kits/core/__init__.py +6 -0
  4. lite_kits/core/banner.py +1 -1
  5. lite_kits/core/conflict_checker.py +115 -0
  6. lite_kits/core/detector.py +177 -0
  7. lite_kits/core/installer.py +242 -351
  8. lite_kits/core/manifest.py +146 -146
  9. lite_kits/core/validator.py +183 -0
  10. lite_kits/kits/README.md +6 -6
  11. lite_kits/kits/dev/README.md +241 -241
  12. lite_kits/kits/dev/{claude/commands → commands/.claude}/audit.md +143 -143
  13. lite_kits/kits/dev/{claude/commands → commands/.claude}/cleanup.md +2 -2
  14. lite_kits/kits/{git/claude/commands → dev/commands/.claude}/commit.md +2 -2
  15. lite_kits/kits/{project/claude/commands → dev/commands/.claude}/orient.md +3 -4
  16. lite_kits/kits/{git/claude/commands → dev/commands/.claude}/pr.md +1 -1
  17. lite_kits/kits/{git/claude/commands → dev/commands/.claude}/review.md +202 -202
  18. lite_kits/kits/{project/claude/commands → dev/commands/.claude}/stats.md +162 -162
  19. lite_kits/kits/{project/github/prompts → dev/commands/.github}/audit.prompt.md +143 -143
  20. lite_kits/kits/{git/github/prompts → dev/commands/.github}/cleanup.prompt.md +2 -2
  21. lite_kits/kits/{git/github/prompts → dev/commands/.github}/commit.prompt.md +2 -2
  22. lite_kits/kits/dev/{github/prompts → commands/.github}/orient.prompt.md +3 -4
  23. lite_kits/kits/{git/github/prompts → dev/commands/.github}/pr.prompt.md +1 -1
  24. lite_kits/kits/{git/github/prompts → dev/commands/.github}/review.prompt.md +202 -202
  25. lite_kits/kits/dev/{github/prompts → commands/.github}/stats.prompt.md +163 -163
  26. lite_kits/kits/kits.yaml +497 -180
  27. lite_kits/kits/multiagent/README.md +6 -6
  28. lite_kits/kits/multiagent/{claude/commands → commands/.claude}/sync.md +331 -331
  29. lite_kits/kits/multiagent/{github/prompts → commands/.github}/sync.prompt.md +73 -69
  30. lite_kits/kits/multiagent/memory/git-worktrees-protocol.md +370 -370
  31. lite_kits/kits/multiagent/memory/parallel-work-protocol.md +536 -536
  32. lite_kits/kits/multiagent/memory/pr-workflow-guide.md +275 -275
  33. lite_kits/kits/multiagent/templates/collaboration-structure/README.md +166 -166
  34. lite_kits/kits/multiagent/templates/decision.md +79 -79
  35. lite_kits/kits/multiagent/templates/handoff.md +95 -95
  36. lite_kits/kits/multiagent/templates/session-log.md +68 -68
  37. lite_kits-0.3.2.dist-info/METADATA +259 -0
  38. lite_kits-0.3.2.dist-info/RECORD +41 -0
  39. {lite_kits-0.1.1.dist-info → lite_kits-0.3.2.dist-info}/licenses/LICENSE +21 -21
  40. lite_kits/kits/dev/claude/commands/commit.md +0 -612
  41. lite_kits/kits/dev/claude/commands/orient.md +0 -146
  42. lite_kits/kits/dev/claude/commands/pr.md +0 -593
  43. lite_kits/kits/dev/claude/commands/review.md +0 -202
  44. lite_kits/kits/dev/claude/commands/stats.md +0 -162
  45. lite_kits/kits/dev/github/prompts/audit.prompt.md +0 -143
  46. lite_kits/kits/dev/github/prompts/cleanup.prompt.md +0 -382
  47. lite_kits/kits/dev/github/prompts/commit.prompt.md +0 -591
  48. lite_kits/kits/dev/github/prompts/pr.prompt.md +0 -603
  49. lite_kits/kits/dev/github/prompts/review.prompt.md +0 -202
  50. lite_kits/kits/git/README.md +0 -365
  51. lite_kits/kits/git/claude/commands/cleanup.md +0 -361
  52. lite_kits/kits/git/scripts/bash/get-git-context.sh +0 -208
  53. lite_kits/kits/git/scripts/powershell/Get-GitContext.ps1 +0 -242
  54. lite_kits/kits/project/README.md +0 -228
  55. lite_kits/kits/project/claude/commands/audit.md +0 -143
  56. lite_kits/kits/project/claude/commands/review.md +0 -112
  57. lite_kits/kits/project/github/prompts/orient.prompt.md +0 -150
  58. lite_kits/kits/project/github/prompts/review.prompt.md +0 -112
  59. lite_kits/kits/project/github/prompts/stats.prompt.md +0 -163
  60. lite_kits-0.1.1.dist-info/METADATA +0 -447
  61. lite_kits-0.1.1.dist-info/RECORD +0 -58
  62. {lite_kits-0.1.1.dist-info → lite_kits-0.3.2.dist-info}/WHEEL +0 -0
  63. {lite_kits-0.1.1.dist-info → lite_kits-0.3.2.dist-info}/entry_points.txt +0 -0
@@ -1,202 +1,202 @@
1
- ---
2
- description: Review staged changes against best practices
3
- ---
4
-
5
- # Code Review of Staged Changes
6
-
7
- **Purpose**: Review staged git changes for quality, best practices, and potential issues before committing.
8
-
9
- ## Execution Steps
10
-
11
- Execute the following steps to review staged changes:
12
-
13
- ### 1. Check Staged Files
14
-
15
- ```bash
16
- # Get list of staged files with status
17
- git diff --staged --name-status
18
- ```
19
-
20
- **If no files are staged**:
21
- - Inform user that nothing is staged
22
- - Suggest running `git add` or `/commit` to stage and commit together
23
- - Exit gracefully
24
-
25
- ### 2. Analyze Staged Changes
26
-
27
- ```bash
28
- # Get the actual diff with context
29
- git diff --staged
30
- ```
31
-
32
- ### 3. Review Changes
33
-
34
- Analyze the diff output for:
35
-
36
- **✅ Good Practices to Acknowledge**:
37
- - Clear, descriptive function/variable names
38
- - Appropriate comments where needed
39
- - Consistent formatting
40
- - Type hints (Python) or type annotations
41
- - Test coverage for new code
42
- - Error handling
43
- - Input validation
44
-
45
- **⚠️ Issues to Flag**:
46
- - **Security**:
47
- - Hardcoded credentials or API keys
48
- - SQL injection vulnerabilities
49
- - XSS vulnerabilities
50
- - Unsafe deserialization
51
- - Missing authentication/authorization checks
52
-
53
- - **Code Quality**:
54
- - TODOs or FIXMEs (should be tracked in issues)
55
- - Commented-out code blocks
56
- - Magic numbers without explanation
57
- - Overly complex functions (>50 lines)
58
- - Duplicate code patterns
59
- - Inconsistent naming conventions
60
-
61
- - **Best Practices**:
62
- - Missing error handling
63
- - No logging for important operations
64
- - Hardcoded configuration values
65
- - Missing input validation
66
- - Unused imports or variables
67
- - Missing docstrings for public APIs
68
-
69
- ### 4. Present Review Results
70
-
71
- Format output as follows:
72
-
73
- ```
74
- ## Code Review Results
75
-
76
- **Staged files**: [count]
77
- [list files with status: A=added, M=modified, D=deleted]
78
-
79
- **Summary of changes**:
80
- [brief description of what's being changed]
81
-
82
- ===========================================================
83
- **✅ Good Practices Found:**
84
- ===========================================================
85
-
86
- [List positive findings, grouped by file]
87
- - [file]: [specific good practice observed]
88
-
89
- ===========================================================
90
- **⚠️ Suggestions for Improvement:**
91
- ===========================================================
92
-
93
- [List issues/suggestions, grouped by file with line numbers if possible]
94
- - [file]:[line]: [specific issue and suggested fix]
95
-
96
- ===========================================================
97
- **🔒 Security Check:**
98
- ===========================================================
99
-
100
- [Report any security concerns or confirm none found]
101
- - ✓ No hardcoded credentials detected
102
- - ✓ No obvious security vulnerabilities
103
- - ⚠ [Any security concerns]
104
-
105
- ===========================================================
106
- **📊 Overall Assessment:**
107
- ===========================================================
108
-
109
- [One of: "Ready to commit", "Ready with minor suggestions", "Needs changes"]
110
-
111
- [Brief summary of overall code quality]
112
-
113
- **Recommendation**: [Approve / Address suggestions / Do not commit]
114
- ```
115
-
116
- ### 5. Handle User Response
117
-
118
- After presenting results, wait for user action. They may:
119
- - Proceed with commit anyway
120
- - Make changes and re-review
121
- - Cancel the review
122
-
123
- ## Example Output
124
-
125
- ```
126
- ## Code Review Results
127
-
128
- **Staged files**: 3
129
- - A src/auth.py (new file)
130
- - M src/models.py (modified)
131
- - A tests/test_auth.py (new file)
132
-
133
- **Summary of changes**:
134
- Adding user authentication system with bcrypt password hashing
135
- and JWT token generation.
136
-
137
- ===========================================================
138
- **✅ Good Practices Found:**
139
- ===========================================================
140
-
141
- - src/auth.py: Clear function names (hash_password, verify_password)
142
- - src/auth.py: Type hints used throughout
143
- - src/auth.py: Comprehensive docstrings for all functions
144
- - src/models.py: Proper SQLAlchemy relationship definitions
145
- - tests/test_auth.py: Good test coverage with fixtures
146
-
147
- ===========================================================
148
- **⚠️ Suggestions for Improvement:**
149
- ===========================================================
150
-
151
- - src/auth.py:45: Consider extracting hash_password to utils module
152
- Current: Function in auth.py
153
- Suggest: Move to src/utils/crypto.py for reusability
154
-
155
- - src/models.py:12: TODO comment present
156
- Line: "# TODO: Add password reset functionality"
157
- Suggest: Create GitHub issue and reference it in comment
158
-
159
- - tests/test_auth.py:67: Missing edge case test
160
- Suggest: Add test for empty password input
161
-
162
- - src/auth.py:23: Magic number for token expiration
163
- Current: expires_delta = timedelta(hours=24)
164
- Suggest: Move to config file or environment variable
165
-
166
- ===========================================================
167
- **🔒 Security Check:**
168
- ===========================================================
169
-
170
- ✓ No hardcoded credentials detected
171
- ✓ Using bcrypt for password hashing (good choice!)
172
- ✓ JWT tokens generated securely
173
- ⚠ Consider adding rate limiting to prevent brute force attacks
174
-
175
- ===========================================================
176
- **📊 Overall Assessment:**
177
- ===========================================================
178
-
179
- **Status**: Ready with minor suggestions
180
-
181
- The code follows good practices with proper type hints, docstrings,
182
- and test coverage. The suggestions above are minor improvements that
183
- can be addressed now or in future iterations.
184
-
185
- **Recommendation**: Approve and commit - suggestions are non-blocking
186
- ```
187
-
188
- ## Important Notes
189
-
190
- - This command is **read-only** - it never modifies files
191
- - Focus on **actionable feedback** - be specific about what to change
192
- - Be **encouraging** - acknowledge good practices
193
- - **Security first** - always check for security issues
194
- - Keep review **concise** - don't overwhelm with minor issues
195
- - **Respect the agent's work** - balance critique with acknowledgment
196
-
197
- ## Integration with Other Commands
198
-
199
- - Run `/review` before `/commit` to catch issues early
200
- - Use after making changes and staging them with `git add`
201
- - Combine with `/pr` workflow - review before creating PR
202
- - Works great in multi-agent workflows (one agent reviews another's work)
1
+ ---
2
+ description: Review staged changes against best practices
3
+ ---
4
+
5
+ # Code Review of Staged Changes
6
+
7
+ **Purpose**: Review staged git changes for quality, best practices, and potential issues before committing.
8
+
9
+ ## Execution Steps
10
+
11
+ Execute the following steps to review staged changes:
12
+
13
+ ### 1. Check Staged Files
14
+
15
+ ```bash
16
+ # Get list of staged files with status
17
+ git diff --staged --name-status
18
+ ```
19
+
20
+ **If no files are staged**:
21
+ - Inform user that nothing is staged
22
+ - Suggest running `git add` or `/commit` to stage and commit together
23
+ - Exit gracefully
24
+
25
+ ### 2. Analyze Staged Changes
26
+
27
+ ```bash
28
+ # Get the actual diff with context
29
+ git diff --staged
30
+ ```
31
+
32
+ ### 3. Review Changes
33
+
34
+ Analyze the diff output for:
35
+
36
+ **✅ Good Practices to Acknowledge**:
37
+ - Clear, descriptive function/variable names
38
+ - Appropriate comments where needed
39
+ - Consistent formatting
40
+ - Type hints (Python) or type annotations
41
+ - Test coverage for new code
42
+ - Error handling
43
+ - Input validation
44
+
45
+ **⚠️ Issues to Flag**:
46
+ - **Security**:
47
+ - Hardcoded credentials or API keys
48
+ - SQL injection vulnerabilities
49
+ - XSS vulnerabilities
50
+ - Unsafe deserialization
51
+ - Missing authentication/authorization checks
52
+
53
+ - **Code Quality**:
54
+ - TODOs or FIXMEs (should be tracked in issues)
55
+ - Commented-out code blocks
56
+ - Magic numbers without explanation
57
+ - Overly complex functions (>50 lines)
58
+ - Duplicate code patterns
59
+ - Inconsistent naming conventions
60
+
61
+ - **Best Practices**:
62
+ - Missing error handling
63
+ - No logging for important operations
64
+ - Hardcoded configuration values
65
+ - Missing input validation
66
+ - Unused imports or variables
67
+ - Missing docstrings for public APIs
68
+
69
+ ### 4. Present Review Results
70
+
71
+ Format output as follows:
72
+
73
+ ```
74
+ ## Code Review Results
75
+
76
+ **Staged files**: [count]
77
+ [list files with status: A=added, M=modified, D=deleted]
78
+
79
+ **Summary of changes**:
80
+ [brief description of what's being changed]
81
+
82
+ ===========================================================
83
+ **✅ Good Practices Found:**
84
+ ===========================================================
85
+
86
+ [List positive findings, grouped by file]
87
+ - [file]: [specific good practice observed]
88
+
89
+ ===========================================================
90
+ **⚠️ Suggestions for Improvement:**
91
+ ===========================================================
92
+
93
+ [List issues/suggestions, grouped by file with line numbers if possible]
94
+ - [file]:[line]: [specific issue and suggested fix]
95
+
96
+ ===========================================================
97
+ **🔒 Security Check:**
98
+ ===========================================================
99
+
100
+ [Report any security concerns or confirm none found]
101
+ - ✓ No hardcoded credentials detected
102
+ - ✓ No obvious security vulnerabilities
103
+ - ⚠ [Any security concerns]
104
+
105
+ ===========================================================
106
+ **📊 Overall Assessment:**
107
+ ===========================================================
108
+
109
+ [One of: "Ready to commit", "Ready with minor suggestions", "Needs changes"]
110
+
111
+ [Brief summary of overall code quality]
112
+
113
+ **Recommendation**: [Approve / Address suggestions / Do not commit]
114
+ ```
115
+
116
+ ### 5. Handle User Response
117
+
118
+ After presenting results, wait for user action. They may:
119
+ - Proceed with commit anyway
120
+ - Make changes and re-review
121
+ - Cancel the review
122
+
123
+ ## Example Output
124
+
125
+ ```
126
+ ## Code Review Results
127
+
128
+ **Staged files**: 3
129
+ - A src/auth.py (new file)
130
+ - M src/models.py (modified)
131
+ - A tests/test_auth.py (new file)
132
+
133
+ **Summary of changes**:
134
+ Adding user authentication system with bcrypt password hashing
135
+ and JWT token generation.
136
+
137
+ ===========================================================
138
+ **✅ Good Practices Found:**
139
+ ===========================================================
140
+
141
+ - src/auth.py: Clear function names (hash_password, verify_password)
142
+ - src/auth.py: Type hints used throughout
143
+ - src/auth.py: Comprehensive docstrings for all functions
144
+ - src/models.py: Proper SQLAlchemy relationship definitions
145
+ - tests/test_auth.py: Good test coverage with fixtures
146
+
147
+ ===========================================================
148
+ **⚠️ Suggestions for Improvement:**
149
+ ===========================================================
150
+
151
+ - src/auth.py:45: Consider extracting hash_password to utils module
152
+ Current: Function in auth.py
153
+ Suggest: Move to src/utils/crypto.py for reusability
154
+
155
+ - src/models.py:12: TODO comment present
156
+ Line: "# TODO: Add password reset functionality"
157
+ Suggest: Create GitHub issue and reference it in comment
158
+
159
+ - tests/test_auth.py:67: Missing edge case test
160
+ Suggest: Add test for empty password input
161
+
162
+ - src/auth.py:23: Magic number for token expiration
163
+ Current: expires_delta = timedelta(hours=24)
164
+ Suggest: Move to config file or environment variable
165
+
166
+ ===========================================================
167
+ **🔒 Security Check:**
168
+ ===========================================================
169
+
170
+ ✓ No hardcoded credentials detected
171
+ ✓ Using bcrypt for password hashing (good choice!)
172
+ ✓ JWT tokens generated securely
173
+ ⚠ Consider adding rate limiting to prevent brute force attacks
174
+
175
+ ===========================================================
176
+ **📊 Overall Assessment:**
177
+ ===========================================================
178
+
179
+ **Status**: Ready with minor suggestions
180
+
181
+ The code follows good practices with proper type hints, docstrings,
182
+ and test coverage. The suggestions above are minor improvements that
183
+ can be addressed now or in future iterations.
184
+
185
+ **Recommendation**: Approve and commit - suggestions are non-blocking
186
+ ```
187
+
188
+ ## Important Notes
189
+
190
+ - This command is **read-only** - it never modifies files
191
+ - Focus on **actionable feedback** - be specific about what to change
192
+ - Be **encouraging** - acknowledge good practices
193
+ - **Security first** - always check for security issues
194
+ - Keep review **concise** - don't overwhelm with minor issues
195
+ - **Respect the agent's work** - balance critique with acknowledgment
196
+
197
+ ## Integration with Other Commands
198
+
199
+ - Run `/review` before `/commit` to catch issues early
200
+ - Use after making changes and staging them with `git add`
201
+ - Combine with `/pr` workflow - review before creating PR
202
+ - Works great in multi-agent workflows (one agent reviews another's work)