.github/skills/heal-skill/SKILL.md
Fix incorrect SKILL.md files when a skill has wrong instructions or outdated API references
npx skillsauth add the-rabak/compound-engineering-plugin heal-skillInstall 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.
Analyze the conversation to detect which skill is running, reflect on what went wrong, propose specific fixes, get user approval, then apply changes with optional commit. </objective>
<context> Skill detection: !`ls -1 ./skills/*/skill.md | head -5` </context><quick_start> <workflow>
</quick_start>
<process> <step_1 name="detect_skill"> Identify the skill from conversation context:Set: SKILL_NAME=[skill-name] and SKILL_DIR=./skills/$SKILL_NAME
If unclear, ask the user. </step_1>
<step_2 name="reflection_and_analysis"> Focus on $ARGUMENTS if provided, otherwise analyze broader context.
Determine:
<step_3 name="scan_affected_files">
ls -la $SKILL_DIR/
ls -la $SKILL_DIR/references/ 2>/dev/null
ls -la $SKILL_DIR/scripts/ 2>/dev/null
</step_3>
<step_4 name="present_proposed_changes"> Present changes in this format:
**Skill being healed:** [skill-name]
**Issue discovered:** [1-2 sentence summary]
**Root cause:** [brief explanation]
**Files to be modified:**
- [ ] SKILL.md
- [ ] references/[file].md
- [ ] scripts/[file].py
**Proposed changes:**
### Change 1: SKILL.md - [Section name]
**Location:** Line [X] in SKILL.md
**Current (incorrect):**
[exact text from current file]
**Corrected:**
[new text]
**Reason:** [why this fixes the issue]
[repeat for each change across all files]
**Impact assessment:**
- Affects: [authentication/API endpoints/parameters/examples/etc.]
**Verification:**
These changes will prevent: [specific error that prompted this]
</step_4>
<step_5 name="request_approval">
Should I apply these changes?
1. Yes, apply and commit all changes
2. Apply but don't commit (let me review first)
3. Revise the changes (I'll provide feedback)
4. Cancel (don't make changes)
Choose (1-4):
Wait for user response. Do not proceed without approval. </step_5>
<step_6 name="apply_changes"> Only after approval (option 1 or 2):
<success_criteria>
tools
Package one plan execution packet into a compact ticket-local execution packet with parent refs, scope fences, feature-home ownership, and evidence commands. Use when converting plans into local tickets or when execution needs one ticket-sized context pack without the full plan.
tools
Package one plan execution packet into a compact ticket-local execution packet with parent refs, scope fences, feature-home ownership, and evidence commands. Use when converting plans into local tickets or when execution needs one ticket-sized context pack without the full plan.
testing
Run a deep adversarial review of plans and architecture before implementation. Use when validating strategy docs, contracts, roadmaps, and competitive positioning with scored findings and prioritized recommendations.
testing
Run a deep adversarial review of plans and architecture before implementation. Use when validating strategy docs, contracts, roadmaps, and competitive positioning with scored findings and prioritized recommendations.