本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

skill-enhance

Full enhancement pipeline for an existing Lattice skill — rewrites a molecule or atom to modern-capable-model grade: restores degraded grammar, deduplicates, hardens gates and branching to one-unambiguous-action precision, verifies zero behavioral loss against a pre-capture diff, then runs the combined QA gate (skill-review, skill-tighten, skill-validate) and an independent fresh-context verifier, fixing everything found. Consumer-first: optimized for first-time open-source users on fresh repos with minimal .lattice/ setup, running capable models. Use when the user says 'enhance this skill', 'upgrade this molecule', 'modernize this skill', 'optimize this skill', 'make this skill production grade', 'full enhancement', 'polish this molecule like design-blueprint', or names a molecule/atom to overhaul. For gap-finding only use skill-review; for conventions only use skill-validate — this skill runs the whole loop end to end.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md7.3 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。

Skill Enhance

Core responsibility: Take one existing Lattice skill from current state to modern-capable-model grade through a fixed pipeline: baseline → dependency map (background agent) → precision rewrite with guaranteed behavior preservation → combined three-skill QA → independent verification. The skill being enhanced must end up smaller-or-equal in redundancy, fully grammatical, convention-complete, and provably non-regressive. Organizing objective: deterministic execution — every sentence has exactly one reading, every reachable state exactly one action, every cross-file reference literally true. Acceptance test: two different capable models reading any sentence would act identically on it.

Input: One skill path or name (any tier). Molecules are the primary case.

Output: Edited files + close-out report.

STOP: NEVER commit, push, stash, checkout, reset, or run build-codex-plugin.sh. Working tree only — surface install/mirror commands for the user instead.

How to verify this skill did its job:

  • Pre-capture git diff exists; every preserved behavior in it is confirmed present after rewrite
  • QA trio re-run returns no critical gaps, CLEAN or tightened-only results, and PASS
  • Independent verifier reports zero real defects
  • Scenario walk leaves no branch with two possible readings

Step 1: Scope and baseline

  1. Read PROJECT.md (single source of truth for conventions) and the target SKILL.md in full. For each <!-- include: {name} --> line, also read source/shared/{name}.md — tools/install.sh swaps it in at that spot. Text inside an include belongs to source/shared/{name}.md — edit it there, never inline it into one skill; the change reaches every skill that includes it.
  2. Classify: tier (atom / molecule / refiner); if molecule, its type per PROJECT.md — generative (code-forge, refactor-safely, bug-fix) or planning/interactive (design-blueprint, architecture-compass). This governs every later rule: never transplant confirmation gates into generative molecules, never strip them from planning ones.
  3. STOP: capture the full git diff of target + likely-touched files BEFORE any edit, written to a temp file whose path you will hand to the Step 5 verifier. This baseline is the preservation oracle for Steps 3-5. Without it, "did we drop anything?" is unanswerable.

Step 2: Dependency map (background agent)

Spawn ONE background Explore agent — do not read serially in the main thread. It maps:

  1. Every framework:{atom} reference: real behavior/mode names each atom actually exposes, plus line counts.
  2. Sibling molecules feeding and consuming this one: exact handoff contracts — frontmatter fields, status values, .lattice/{subfolder} paths, section names each side greps for.
  3. Where the target's phases/levels are actually defined (own body vs referenced atom).
  4. Inventory of telegraphic damage: sentences missing articles/verbs ("ground decisions real project").

Step 3: Rewrite (main thread, after map returns)

Apply in order:

  1. Grammar restoration — every sentence complete. Telegraphic phrasing is ambiguity risk precisely at STOP/gate semantics.
  2. Deduplicate — same rule twice in different words → keep the sharpest once. Cut trailing rationale ("this ensures…", "without this…") EXCEPT consequences load-bearing at the exact action point — flag every deliberate keep in the report.
  3. Precision pass — hard gates get **STOP:** prefixes; targeted questions replace generic approval language; every conditional branch (missing doc, unreadable path, external reference, absent config, outputs created by older skill versions missing newer fields) resolves to exactly ONE action; expected-not-error paths marked as such.
  4. Scenario walk your own rewrite: fresh start / interrupted session / partial output / minimal input / maximal input / entry-and-resume edges (including partial entry points and legacy docs without new markers). Derive the state space from upstream contracts first — enumerate every status value, mode name, and doc-presence combination the upstream defines, and give each a defined outcome here. Close every gap where two readings survive.
  5. Preservation check against the Step 1 baseline — nothing dropped, renamed, or weakened.
  6. Contract alignment — verify every referenced behavior name, section heading, table schema, config key, and status value against the live atom files; fix mismatches even when pre-existing. Composition must interlock literally, not approximately.
  7. Convention restoration — always/conditional qualifiers on Required Skills, collaborative-judgment fallback wording in Ambiguity Signals, trigger phrases in description, description consistent with body.
  8. If the skill repurposes a code-generation atom in another mode: give that atom a compact named mode section. Never improvise inline; never inline atom content into a molecule.

Step 4: Combined QA gate (strict order)

Run on every touched file:

  1. skill-review — fix criticals and warnings; list observations for the user decision.
  2. skill-tighten — full T1-T6 sweep, apply.
  3. skill-validate — fix error-level findings directly; report warnings without applying.

Iterate until all three return clean/pass. Re-run any skill whose inputs a later fix changed.

Step 5: Independent verification (background agent)

Spawn ONE fresh general-purpose verifier that re-derives correctness WITHOUT trusting the diff author:

  • Semantic-preservation checklist from the Step 1 baseline
  • Internal-consistency scenario walk (Step 3.4 scenarios, independently)
  • Contract checks against the real consumer files — grep them, cite lines
  • Hedge/degraded-grammar grep across touched files
  • Frontmatter YAML validity, name/folder match

Fix everything it finds. Then: behavior-affecting fixes → re-run the affected Step 4 tools; single-line narrowing fixes → self-check against the loaded T1-T6/validator patterns instead of a full re-run.

Step 6: Close-out report

Report: files changed with before→after line counts; findings per QA tool and how each closed; deliberate keeps flagged; residual validator warnings listed untouched; and these commands surfaced for the user (not run):

./tools/install.sh <your-tool>/skills/   # smoke-test the skill loads
./tools/build-codex-plugin.sh            # refresh Codex mirror before committing

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

Enforce architectural rules when generating or modifying code, and validate proposed designs before approval (design mode). Defaults to clean architecture; supports any architecture style via the architecture-refiner. Validates layer responsibilities, dependency direction, and structural constraints using the loaded architecture rules. Use when generating code, reviewing architecture, creating new files, or when the user mentions 'architecture', 'layers', 'structure', 'dependency rules', 'hexagonal architecture', 'ports and adapters', 'modular monolith', or 'onion architecture'. Also use when reviewing generated code for structural compliance.

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。

techygarg/lattice1992026年10月10日 更新

Architectural thinking partner for an existing repository — scans the codebase, conducts a structured interview, agrees on current architectural state and recommended direction, and produces a shareable insights document. Scoped to one repository, module, or folder. Does not execute transformation — it orients. Use when the user says 'assess my codebase architecture', 'what direction should my codebase go', 'architecture compass', 'understand my architecture', 'audit architecture drift', 'architectural assessment', or 'help me understand what is wrong with my codebase'.

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。

techygarg/lattice1992026年10月10日 更新

Facilitate a structured conversation to define architecture principles for a repository. Supports multiple architecture styles: clean architecture (default), hexagonal / ports & adapters, modular monolith, or custom. Produces a formal architecture document that the corresponding atom will use. Use when setting up a new project, defining architecture standards, or when the user says 'setup architecture', 'define layers', 'architecture principles', 'help me define my architecture', 'hexagonal architecture', 'modular monolith', 'ports and adapters', or 'define my architecture style'.

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。

techygarg/lattice1992026年10月10日 更新

bug-fix

無料

Investigate, reproduce, and safely fix a bug with regression protection. Composes context, diagnosis, architecture, code quality, and testing guardrails into a reproduce-first repair workflow. Use when the user says 'fix this bug', 'debug this', 'investigate this failure', 'patch this regression', 'repair this issue', or 'why is this broken'.

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。

techygarg/lattice1992026年10月10日 更新

Apply clean code principles when generating or modifying implementation code. Enforces function focus, naming clarity, complexity management, error handling, and self-documenting style. Use when the user mentions 'clean code', 'code quality', 'coding guidelines', or 'implementation quality'. Loaded automatically by the code-generating molecules (code-forge, refactor-safely, bug-fix). This skill governs the craft of writing individual code units -- not architecture (see architecture), not security posture (see secure-coding), not test structure (see test-quality), and not refactoring workflows (see refactor-safely).

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。

techygarg/lattice1992026年10月10日 更新

Facilitate a structured conversation to define clean code principles for a repository. Produces a formal clean-code.md document that the clean-code atom will use as its override. Use when setting up coding standards, defining code quality rules, or when the user says 'setup clean code', 'define coding standards', 'code quality principles', 'coding guidelines', or 'help me define my code standards'.

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。

techygarg/lattice1992026年10月10日 更新

techygarg のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する