skills/implement/SKILL.md
Disciplined per-commit workflow with Greybeard review, build gates, and Critique loops
npx skillsauth add alexanderguy/skills implementInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
A disciplined implementation workflow that produces reviewed, verified commits. Load this skill when you want each commit to go through architectural review, build verification, and code critique before it lands.
Before using this workflow, load the style and philosophy skills. Follow their conventions throughout.
This is a standalone skill, loaded on request. It is not part of dispatch. Use it when you want a single agent to work through a series of commits with review discipline.
The caller defines what work to do and where the commit boundaries are. This skill defines how each commit gets produced.
Use TaskCreate, TaskUpdate, and TaskList to track progress throughout the workflow. These tools give the user real-time visibility into what you're doing.
Before starting implementation, use TaskCreate for each commit-sized unit of work from the caller's instructions:
When you begin a unit of work, mark its task in_progress with TaskUpdate. As you move through the workflow steps, update the task's activeForm to reflect which step you're in:
When the commit lands and Critique is clean, mark the task completed.
If new work surfaces during implementation (Greybeard suggests a preparatory refactor, Critique reveals a missing edge case that warrants its own commit), create a new task with TaskCreate and work it through the full per-commit workflow.
For each logical unit of work that results in a commit, follow these steps in order. Do not skip steps.
Mark the task in_progress and set activeForm to "Reviewing approach with Greybeard: {subject}".
Before writing any code, describe your implementation approach to Greybeard and ask for feedback.
What to send Greybeard:
How to handle feedback:
Use the @greybeard subagent for this step.
Update activeForm to "Implementing: {subject}".
The order of operations depends on whether you're fixing a bug or building a feature. In both cases, follow the repository's existing test conventions — look at how existing tests are structured, where they live, what framework they use, and match that style. If the repository has no existing tests, ask the caller what test framework and conventions to use before proceeding.
For bug fixes (test-first):
For new features:
Keep the test focused on the behavior introduced by this commit. Don't test unrelated functionality. The test is part of the deliverable, not an afterthought.
Keep the scope tight to what was discussed. If you discover additional work is needed, finish the current commit's scope first and note the additional work for a future commit.
Update activeForm to "Running build gate: {subject}".
Run make (or the project's equivalent full pipeline: format, lint, build, test).
Update activeForm to "Committing: {subject}".
Create the commit. Follow the commit message conventions from the style skill. Include the test in the same commit as the implementation — they are one logical unit of work.
Update activeForm to "Running Critique loop: {subject}".
Ask Critique to review the committed change.
How to run:
Spawn the @critique subagent and ask it to review the output of git show HEAD. Include the intent from Step 1 (what the change is meant to accomplish and the approach agreed with Greybeard) so Critique can evaluate whether the implementation matches the plan, not just surface-level quality. Tell Critique to limit its findings to the scope of the current commit -- pre-existing issues in touched files are out of scope.
Read its findings
For each issue marked VERIFIED or HIGH confidence: fix it
Re-run the build gate (Step 3) to verify fixes
Land the fixes on the right commit. If the target is HEAD, git commit --amend. Otherwise use git rebase -i with edit on the target commit:
git rebase -i <base-branch>
# In the editor, change "pick <sha> ..." to "edit <sha> ..."
# ... make the fix at the stop ...
git add <files>
git commit --amend --no-edit
git rebase --continue
If the situation calls for more elaborate history surgery, search your available skills for one whose description covers git rebase or branch-history cleanup, and load it. Re-run the build gate after the rebase completes.
Ask Critique to review git show HEAD again. Re-include the original intent from Step 1 and tell it what you fixed since the last pass so it can focus on verifying the fixes and checking for new issues rather than re-reviewing the entire change from scratch.
Repeat until Critique comes back clean or all remaining findings are acknowledged and intentional
When to stop looping:
Mark the current task completed with TaskUpdate. Move to the next unit of work and return to Step 1.
Don't shortcut the loop. The value is in the discipline. Skipping Greybeard "because this change is simple" or skipping Critique "because the build passes" defeats the purpose.
Keep commits focused, but do not drop findings. When Critique surfaces something outside the current commit's scope, every finding must be assigned one of four dispositions: (a) fix in the current commit, (b) commit it separately on this branch, (c) file a new issue with concrete acceptance criteria, or (d) accept it as-is. "Out of scope" is not a disposition. "Note it for later" is not a disposition unless you also say which of (a)–(d) "later" means.
Disposition (d) always requires operator approval — neither you nor greybeard can drop a finding on your own. For (c), the issue must be filed in this session, with its ID or URL in the status update; a promise to file it later is dropping the work. If you are orchestrated by karen, route the decision through karen's section 9 procedure (consult greybeard, paste his recommendation verbatim, escalate to the operator for any "accept as-is" or any unclear answer). If you are running directly, consult the operator before choosing (c) or (d).
Build must pass before every commit, amend, and rebase stop. Never commit code that doesn't compile or pass tests. Fix build failures first, then commit, amend, or continue the rebase.
Greybeard is for approach, Critique is for execution. Greybeard reviews your plan before you write code. Critique reviews your code after you write it. Don't conflate the two.
After reviewing this skill, state: "I have reviewed the implement skill and am ready to follow the commit workflow."
development
General coding conventions for clean, maintainable code. Always load this skill when writing or reviewing code in any language.
tools
Implement a feature or fix based on a Linear issue
testing
Orchestrate parallel subagent task runs. Smart input resolution - provide a name, directory, yaml file, or spec file. No argument runs the latest dispatch.
development
Perform a code review or pull request review on a branch