本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

commit

Stages and commits the current changes onto a safe working branch, enforcing branch discipline and optionally pushing upstream. TRIGGER when: the user wants to commit, save, or check in the current changes. DO NOT TRIGGER when: opening a pull request → pr.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md11.0 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Commit Changes

Introduction

Stage and commit the current changes onto a safe working branch. This skill enforces branch discipline: when the current branch is unsafe to commit to (the canonical rules live in step 2 below), it proposes a new fix/, feat/, docs/, etc. branch and switches to it after approval. It works equally well for brand-new work and for additional commits on an existing feature branch. If the user passes push, the branch is pushed upstream after the commit.

Arguments

<arguments> $ARGUMENTS </arguments>

Supported arguments:

  • push — After committing, push the branch upstream (git push -u origin <branch> on first push, otherwise git push).

Main Tasks

1. Assess Current State

  1. Run git status to see staged, unstaged, and untracked files.
  2. Run git branch --show-current to identify the current branch.
  3. Run git diff --stat and git diff --cached --stat to summarise the change footprint.
  4. If there are no changes to commit (working tree clean, nothing staged) — STOP and tell the user there's nothing to commit. Do not create an empty commit.
  5. If a merge, rebase, or cherry-pick is in progress (git status reports it, or .git/MERGE_HEAD / .git/rebase-* / .git/CHERRY_PICK_HEAD exist) — STOP and surface it to the user rather than committing into the middle of that operation.

2. Branch Safety — Never Commit to a Protected or Placeholder Branch

A branch is unsafe to commit to if any of the following hold:

  • It is the repository's default branch (resolve with git symbolic-ref refs/remotes/origin/HEAD --short 2>/dev/null | sed 's@^origin/@@', falling back to git remote show origin | sed -n 's/ *HEAD branch: //p').
  • It is a long-standing integration branch by name: main, master, stable, develop, dev, trunk.
  • It is a release branch: matches release/*, release-*, or is otherwise clearly named release-something (e.g. release-2026.05, releases/v3).
  • It is a placeholder / scratch branch generated by the harness or a worktree — specifically the auto-generated adjective-animal pattern (e.g. wary-cuckoo, lumbar-gorilla, wacky-otter, silent-fox), where the second word is an animal. These exist only to host a session and should not be committed to directly. Be careful not to over-match: legitimate two-word branches like dark-mode, rate-limit, cache-layer, or user-auth are real feature branches, not scratch branches. When a name is ambiguous (two hyphenated words but not clearly adjective-animal), do not assert it is unsafe — instead ask the user "this looks like it might be a generated scratch branch — is it, or is it a real branch you want to commit to?" and proceed on their answer.

If the current branch is unsafe by any of those rules:

  1. Do NOT commit on the current branch.
  2. Analyse the changes (diffs from step 1) to understand whether the work is a bug fix or new/extended behaviour.
  3. Propose a branch name using the conventional prefix that matches the change:
    • Bug fix → fix/<short-description> (e.g. fix/graphql-codegen-missing-types).
    • New feature or enhancement → feat/<short-description> (e.g. feat/add-commit-skill).
    • Docs-only, chore, refactor, etc. → mirror the conventional-commit type: docs/<…>, chore/<…>, refactor/<…>.
    • Use a concise kebab-case slug. If the repo has a visible naming convention in git branch -a or in AGENTS.md / CONTRIBUTING.md, follow that instead.
  4. Present the proposed branch name to the user and wait for explicit approval (the user may suggest a different name).
  5. After approval, create and switch to the branch: git checkout -b <branch-name>. The uncommitted changes carry across automatically.

If the current branch is already a real feature branch (i.e. not in any of the unsafe categories above), continue on it. Do not create a new branch unless the user explicitly asks for one.

3. Stage Changes

  1. Review what will be staged. Prefer adding files explicitly by path rather than git add -A or git add ., especially when untracked files are present — this avoids accidentally committing secrets (.env, credentials, key files) or large/generated artefacts.
  2. If staged changes already exist (the user pre-staged), respect that staging and only add additional files when it's clearly intended.
  3. Warn the user and require explicit confirmation before staging any file that looks sensitive (.env*, *secret*, *credential*, *.key, *.pem) or generated/large (node_modules/, build artefacts, dist/, __pycache__/, lockfiles changed unexpectedly).

4. Draft the Commit Message

Follow the repo's conventional-commit style (visible in git log):

  • Use a type prefix: feat:, fix:, refactor:, docs:, test:, chore:, ci:, etc.
  • Optional scope in parentheses: feat(backend): ..., fix(e2e): ....
  • Subject line under ~72 characters, imperative mood, no trailing period.
  • Focus on the why — what changed in terms of behaviour or capability, not a file list.
  • For multi-area changes, add a short body explaining the motivation.
  • Respect any repo or harness commit-trailer convention (e.g. a Co-Authored-By trailer the harness expects to append). Don't strip trailers that are already part of the project's workflow.
  • Never write a session-link trailer into the commit — strip it if the harness added one. Some harnesses append a line pointing at the private agent session, e.g. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_… (or any trailer carrying a URL to an agent, chat, or coding session). These leak an internal, usually unshareable URL into the project's permanent — often public — git history, and they reference session state no future reader can open, so they're pure noise at best and a disclosure at worst. This is the one exception to "don't strip trailers" above: if the harness has inserted such a line, remove it before committing, and never author one yourself. Legitimate project trailers (Co-Authored-By, Signed-off-by, Reviewed-by, etc.) still stay.

Inspect the most recent ~20 commits with git log --oneline -20 and mirror the style you see (scope conventions, capitalisation, whether bodies are used). Generic examples:

  • fix: correct off-by-one in pagination cursor
  • docs: archive completed specs and extract durable knowledge
  • feat: add commit skill for safe branch discipline

Present the proposed commit message to the user before committing. Adjust based on feedback.

5. Create the Commit

  1. Run git commit -m "<message>". For multi-line messages, use a HEREDOC:

    git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
    <subject>
    
    <body>
    EOF
    )"
    
  2. Do NOT pass --no-verify — let pre-commit hooks run. If a hook fails:

    • Read the hook output carefully.
    • Fix the underlying issue (formatting, lint, etc.) rather than bypassing.
    • Re-stage the fixed files and create a NEW commit so each fix stays traceable. (Don't reach for --amend to absorb hook fixes — only amend a commit you deliberately intend to rewrite.)
  3. Run git status after the commit to confirm a clean tree and verify success.

  4. Run git log -1 --stat so the user can see what landed.

6. Push Upstream (only when push argument is provided)

Skip this phase entirely if push was NOT passed.

When push IS provided:

  1. Re-verify the branch is not unsafe per the rules in step 2 (defence in depth, though step 2 should have prevented this).
  2. Check whether the branch already tracks a remote:
    • git rev-parse --abbrev-ref --symbolic-full-name @{u} 2>/dev/null
  3. If no upstream exists: git push -u origin <branch-name>.
  4. If an upstream exists: git push.
  5. Never use --force or --force-with-lease unless the user explicitly asks for it. Regular git push will fail if the remote has diverged — surface that error to the user instead of overwriting.
  6. Report the push result and, if a remote URL is configured (git config --get remote.origin.url), the branch URL the user can open.

Notes

Branch Safety:

  • The canonical list of unsafe branches lives in step 2 — that is the single source of truth; don't re-derive it from memory.
  • If asked to override the rule, refuse and explain — the user can switch branches themselves first if they truly intend to commit there (in which case this skill no longer applies).

This is a discipline skill — hold the line under pressure. Refusing to commit to a protected branch is the whole point, and the excuses below will appear. None of them change where the commit should land:

Excuse / pressureReality
"It's urgent / it's an emergency, just commit to main."Urgency doesn't change where the commit lands. A feat//fix/ branch takes seconds and is just as fast to merge.
"Just this once, skip the branch."There is no "just once" — the rule exists precisely for the tempting one-off. Propose a branch.
"It's a tiny change, the branch is overkill."Size is irrelevant to branch safety; a one-line fix on main is still a direct commit to a protected branch.
"The hook is failing, just use --no-verify."Fix the violation instead. Bypassing the hook defeats its purpose.
"The remote diverged, just --force."Never force-push unless the user explicitly asks. Surface the divergence instead.

Red-flags self-check — if you catch yourself thinking any of these, STOP and re-read step 2:

  • "This branch is probably fine to commit to."
  • "I'll commit here and sort the branch out later."
  • "The user clearly wants this on main, so the rule doesn't apply."

Secret Hygiene:

  • Prefer explicit git add <path> over wholesale git add -A.
  • Warn before staging anything that looks like a secret or credential.
  • A session-link trailer (Claude-Session: / any agent-session URL) is a disclosure too — strip it from the commit message before committing, per step 4.

Hook Discipline:

  • Pre-commit hooks exist for good reasons. Fix violations rather than bypassing with --no-verify.

Idempotency:

  • Safe to invoke repeatedly. With no changes to commit, the skill exits cleanly without creating an empty commit.

Expected Outcome

  • All staged/unstaged changes that the user wanted to capture are committed on a safe working branch.
  • The branch is named meaningfully (existing real feature branch preserved, or a new fix/<…> / feat/<…> / docs/<…> / etc. name approved by the user).
  • The commit message follows the repo's existing conventional-commit style.
  • If push was provided, the branch is pushed upstream.
  • Every branch deemed unsafe in step 2 is left untouched in all cases.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Analyzes recent CI failures on pull requests to identify flaky tests, using retry outcomes (failed attempt → green re-run) and cross-PR recurrence as evidence, and maintains a local longitudinal ledger so flakiness can be tracked over time. TRIGGER when: the user wants to find flaky tests, correlate recent CI failures, check which tests fail across PRs or recover on retry, or refresh the flakiness trend report. DO NOT TRIGGER when: babysitting a single PR's CI until green → monitoring-pull-requests; diagnosing or fixing one specific failing test → the bug-analysis skills.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

opsmill/infrahub5342026年10月10日 更新

Audits internal (dev/) and external (docs/) documentation completeness for a feature, subject, or set of existing docs, maps changes indicated by the user, across Infrahub's documentation layers, reports gaps, and optionally applies the fixes. TRIGGER when: the user wants to audit or check documentation coverage, find doc gaps after a feature branch, or verify docs are still current for a subject or specific files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: authoring new documentation from scratch → use the add-docs flow; only linting/formatting Markdown → run `uv run invoke docs.lint`.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

opsmill/infrahub5342026年10月10日 更新

Use when you've fixed a bug, added a feature, or made any user-facing change in a project that uses Towncrier and need to record it for the changelog — before committing or opening a PR, or whenever asked to add a changelog entry, towncrier fragment, or news fragment.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

opsmill/infrahub5342026年10月10日 更新

Turns a single feature idea, improvement, or bug into ONE well-structured GitHub issue. TRIGGER when: the user wants to file/open/create an issue, turn a feature idea or improvement into a ticket, or capture something missing or broken as a ticket. DO NOT TRIGGER when: breaking work into multiple issues or planning a body of work → a planning skill; writing a full Product Requirements Document → creating-prd; the idea is still fuzzy and unhardened → grilling-ideas first.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

opsmill/infrahub5342026年10月10日 更新

Synthesises the current conversation context into a Product Requirements Document and publishes it to GitHub (as a comment on a referenced issue, or a new issue). Synthesises from context; does not interview. TRIGGER when: the conversation has produced enough understanding of a feature and the user wants it captured as a PRD. DO NOT TRIGGER when: a single small issue is enough → creating-issues; the idea has not been stress-tested yet → grilling-ideas first; bug reports.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

opsmill/infrahub5342026年10月10日 更新

Stress-tests a fuzzy or vague feature idea before any PRD, spec, or ticket is written. TRIGGER when: the user has a fuzzy feature idea — one or two paragraphs, vague on users / scope / success — and wants to harden it, or says "grill / stress-test / pressure-test this idea." DO NOT TRIGGER when: the idea is already turned into a spec or PRD; bug fixes or refactors; the idea is hardened and you are ready to write the PRD → creating-prd.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

opsmill/infrahub5342026年10月10日 更新

opsmill のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する