Codex compatibility note:
- Invoke repository skills with
$skill-namein Codex; this mirrored copy rewrites legacy Claude/skill-namereferences.- Task tracker mandate: BEFORE executing any workflow or skill step, create/update task tracking for all steps and keep it synchronized as progress changes.
- User-question prompts mean to ask the user directly in Codex.
- Ignore Claude-specific mode-switch instructions when they appear.
- Strict execution contract: when a user explicitly invokes a skill, execute that skill protocol as written.
- Subagent authorization: when a skill is user-invoked or AI-detected and its protocol requires subagents, that skill activation authorizes use of the required
spawn_agentsubagent(s) for that task.- Do not skip, reorder, or merge protocol steps unless the user explicitly approves the deviation first.
- For workflow skills, execute each listed child-skill step explicitly and report step-by-step evidence.
- If a required step/tool cannot run in this environment, stop and ask the user before adapting.
Codex Project-Reference Loading (No Hooks)
Codex does not receive Claude hook-based doc injection. When coding, planning, debugging, testing, or reviewing, open project docs explicitly using this routing.
Always read:
docs/project-config.json(project-specific paths, commands, modules, and workflow/test settings)docs/project-reference/docs-index-reference.md(routes to the fulldocs/project-reference/*catalog)docs/project-reference/lessons.md(always-on guardrails and anti-patterns)
Situation-based docs:
- Backend/CQRS/API/domain/entity changes:
backend-patterns-reference.md,domain-entities-reference.md,project-structure-reference.md - Frontend/UI/styling/design-system:
frontend-patterns-reference.md,scss-styling-guide.md,design-system/README.md - Spec/test-case planning or TC mapping:
feature-docs-reference.md - Integration test implementation/review:
integration-test-reference.md - E2E test implementation/review:
e2e-test-reference.md - Code review/audit work:
code-review-rules.mdplus domain docs above based on changed files
Do not read all docs blindly. Start from docs-index-reference.md, then open only relevant files for the task.
[BLOCKING] Execute skill steps in declared order. NEVER skip, reorder, merge steps without explicit user approval. [BLOCKING] Before each step or sub-skill call, update task tracking:
in_progresson start,completedon end. [BLOCKING] Every completed/skipped step MUST include evidence or explicit skip reason. [BLOCKING] If Task tools unavailable, maintain equivalent step-by-step plan tracker with same status transitions.
Quick Summary
Goal: Implement features with deep research, comprehensive planning, maximum quality verification.
Workflow:
- Research — Deep investigation, multiple researcher subagents
- Plan — Detailed plan via
$plan; user approval required - Implement — Execute with full code review + SRE review
- Verify — Run all tests, review changes, update docs
Key Rules:
- Maximum thoroughness: research → plan → implement → review → test → docs
- User approval required at plan stage
- Break work into todo tasks; add final self-review task
First Principle — Easy to Change
The success metric of every coding decision is future change cost. DRY, SRP, abstraction, design patterns, naming, layering, tests — every technique exists to serve one goal: making the next change cheaper.
When evaluating code, a refactor, a test, or an abstraction, ask: does this make the next change cheaper or more expensive?
- Reject "best practices" that raise change cost (premature abstraction, speculative generality, leaky indirection, ceremony without payoff).
- Name the real enemies in findings: coupling, hidden state, duplicated knowledge, unclear intent, irreversible decisions exposed too early.
- A simpler design that is easy to change beats a sophisticated design that isn't.
Apply this lens before invoking any specific rule, pattern, or checklist below — if a downstream rule would raise change cost, this principle wins.
Default Mode Policy
Default mode HARD (full rigor). Every section below — deep research, mandatory
$plan, fullcode-reviewerreview, mandatory tests, mandatory$docs-update— applies by default.Opt out to fast mode ONLY when ALL true (task genuinely trivial):
- Single-file edit, ≤30 lines changed
- No design choice (only one reasonable approach)
- No cross-service impact, no contract change, no new dependency
- No new pattern — follows existing codebase pattern
- Existing tests cover change OR change non-functional (typo, comment, log message)
Any condition fails → use full protocol below. When in doubt, default hard. Skipping review/tests on non-trivial change ships bugs.
Fast mode skips (and only skips): researcher subagent phase (direct grep instead), mandatory
code-reviewerreview (self-review only), separate test phase (verify inline). Does NOT skip$planstep, test execution,$docs-updatetriage.
Frontend/UI Context (if applicable)
When task involves frontend or UI changes:
- Component patterns:
docs/project-reference/frontend-patterns-reference.md - Styling/BEM guide:
docs/project-reference/scss-styling-guide.md - Design system tokens:
docs/project-reference/design-system/README.md
Ultrathink plan and implement these tasks with maximum verification:
Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act.
$ARGUMENTS
Mode: Extra research, detailed planning, mandatory reviews.
Workflow
1. Deep Research Phase
- Launch 2-3
researchersubagents in parallel covering:- Technical approach validation
- Edge cases, failure modes
- Security implications
- Performance considerations
- Use
$scout-extfor comprehensive codebase analysis - Research reports max 150 lines each
- External Memory: Write all research to
.ai/workspace/analysis/{task-name}.analysis.md. Re-read ENTIRE file before planning. - Pre-Implementation Trace Gate: For bugfix, failed verification, stale/incorrect final output, regression, or behavior-changing fix plans, MUST ATTENTION confirm the plan/referenced analysis includes
Debugger Trace: End -> Start, all feeder paths, hypothesis matrix, owning fix layer, and forward convergence proof. If missing, STOP and produce the missing-trace list before editing.
After implementing, run
python .claude/scripts/code_graph connections <file> --jsonon modified files; verify no related files need updates.
Graph-Trace Before Implementation
When graph DB available, BEFORE writing code, trace blast radius:
python .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction both --json— what calls this code AND what it triggerspython .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction downstream --json— all downstream consumers- Prevents breaking implicit dependencies (bus message consumers, event handlers)
2. Comprehensive Planning
- Use
plannersubagent with all research reports - Create full plan directory:
plan.md— overview with risk assessmentphase-XX-*.md— detailed phase files- Success criteria per phase
- Rollback strategy
3. Verified Implementation
- Implement one phase at a time
- After each phase:
- Run type-check, compile
- Run relevant tests
- Self-review before proceeding
Batch Checkpoint (Large Plans)
For plans with 10+ tasks, execute in batches with human review:
- Execute batch — Complete next 3 tasks (or user-specified size)
- Report — Show implementation, verification output, any concerns
- Wait — Say "Ready for feedback" and STOP. Do NOT continue automatically.
- Apply feedback — Incorporate changes, execute next batch
- Repeat until all tasks complete
4. Mandatory Testing
- Use
testersubagent for full test coverage - Write tests for:
- Happy path scenarios
- Edge cases from research
- Error handling paths
- NO mocks or fake data
- Repeat until all tests pass
5. Mandatory Code Review
- Use
code-reviewersubagent - Address all critical and major findings
- Re-run tests after fixes
- Repeat until approved
6. Documentation Update
- Use
docs-managerto update relevant docs - Use
project-managerto update project status - Record architectural decisions
7. Final Report
- Summary of all changes
- Test coverage metrics
- Security considerations addressed
- Unresolved questions (if any)
- Ask user to review and approve
When to Use
- Critical production features
- Security-sensitive changes
- Public API modifications
- Database schema changes
- Cross-service integrations
Quality Gates
| Gate | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Research | 2+ researcher reports |
| Planning | Full plan directory |
| Tests | All pass, no mocks |
| Review | 0 critical/major findings |
| Docs | Updated if needed |
Next Steps (Standalone: MUST ATTENTION ask user via a direct user question. Skip if inside workflow.)
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — NO EXCEPTIONS: If this skill was called outside a workflow, MUST ATTENTION use a direct user question to present these options. Do NOT skip because task seems "simple" or "obvious" — user decides:
- "Proceed with full workflow (Recommended)" — Detect best workflow to continue from here (feature implemented). Ensures review, testing, docs steps aren't skipped.
- "$code-simplifier" — Simplify and clean up implementation
- "$workflow-review-changes" — Review changes before commit
- "Skip, continue manually" — user decides
If already inside a workflow, skip — workflow handles sequencing.
[IMPORTANT] Use task tracking to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting — including tasks for each file read. Prevents context loss from long files. For simple tasks, MUST ATTENTION ask user whether to skip.
docs/project-reference/domain-entities-reference.md— Domain entity catalog, relationships, cross-service sync (read when task involves business entities/models) (read directly when relevant; do not rely on hook-injected conversation text)docs/specs/— Test specifications by module (read existing TCs; generate/update via$tdd-specafter implementation)
End-to-Start Debugger Trace — For non-trivial bugs, failed verification, regression fixes, behavior-changing code, or unclear code flow, start from the observed final state and walk backward before proposing a fix.
- Frame 0: observed end state — Name the exact user-visible output, failing assertion, log line, persisted value, API response, rendered UI, or aggregate bucket. Record the reader/query/renderer that produced it with
file:lineevidence.- Walk backward one hop at a time — Trace final reader -> projection/cache/storage -> writer -> consumer/handler/job -> producer/caller -> original trigger. At every hop record: input, transformation, output, owner, and evidence.
- Enumerate all feeder paths — Find every upstream producer/caller/event/job that can write into the final path, including retry, async, cache, background, and alternate UI/API paths. Mark each path verified, ruled out, or still unknown.
- Build the hypothesis matrix — For each plausible cause, list evidence for, evidence against, how to reproduce/verify, blast radius, and status (
primary,contributing,ruled out,latent). Do not fix until competing causes are explicitly resolved or bounded.- Choose the owning fix layer — Identify the invariant owner and the lowest shared point that protects all downstream consumers. A fix at the symptom site is rejected unless the symptom site owns the invariant.
- Prove convergence forward — After choosing the fix, walk start -> end again and show how the corrected state reaches the observed final output. Map each root cause to a fix part and each fix part to a test/proof.
BLOCKED until: final state named · backward trace written · all feeder paths enumerated · hypothesis matrix completed · owning fix layer justified · forward convergence proof mapped to tests.
NEVER: Start at the first suspicious code path. Collapse multiple producers into one "flow". Treat duplicate symptoms as duplicate records without proving the read model. Skip ruled-out hypotheses.
Source/test drift check. For coding, fix, debug, investigation, test, or review work: when source behavior changes, inspect affected unit/integration/E2E tests and decide from evidence whether tests should change to match intended behavior or the source change is an unintended bug to fix. Do not write tests for migration code; schema/data migrations are one-time execution paths, not core application logic.
AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:
Check downstream references before deleting. Deleting components causes documentation and code staleness cascades. Map all referencing files before removal. Verify AI-generated content against actual code. AI hallucinates APIs, class names, and method signatures. Always grep to confirm existence before documenting or referencing. Trace full dependency chain after edits. Changing a definition misses downstream variables and consumers derived from it. Always trace the full chain. Trace ALL code paths when verifying correctness. Confirming code exists is not confirming it executes. Always trace early exits, error branches, and conditional skips — not just happy path. When debugging, ask "whose responsibility?" before fixing. Trace whether bug is in caller (wrong data) or callee (wrong handling). Fix at responsible layer — never patch symptom site. Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing. Before changing any constant, limit, flag, or pattern: read comments, check git blame, examine surrounding code. Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. Changes touching multiple stacks require verifying EVERY output. One green check is not all green checks. Holistic-first debugging — resist nearest-attention trap. When investigating any failure, list EVERY precondition first (config, env vars, DB names, endpoints, DI registrations, data preconditions), then verify each against evidence before forming any code-layer hypothesis. Surgical changes — apply the diff test. Bug fix: every changed line must trace directly to the bug. Don't restyle or improve adjacent code. Enhancement task: implement improvements AND announce them explicitly. Surface ambiguity before coding — don't pick silently. If request has multiple interpretations, present each with effort estimate and ask. Never assume all-records, file-based, or more complex path.
UI System Context — For ANY task touching
.ts,.html,.scss, or.cssfiles:MUST ATTENTION READ before implementing:
docs/project-reference/frontend-patterns-reference.md— component base classes, stores, formsdocs/project-reference/scss-styling-guide.md— BEM methodology, SCSS variables, mixins, responsivedocs/project-reference/design-system/README.md— design tokens, component inventory, iconsReference
docs/project-config.jsonfor project-specific paths.
Graph-Assisted Investigation — MANDATORY when
.code-graph/graph.dbexists.HARD-GATE: MUST ATTENTION run at least ONE graph command on key files before concluding any investigation.
Pattern: Grep finds files →
trace --direction bothreveals full system flow → Grep verifies details
Task Minimum Graph Action Investigation/Scout trace --direction bothon 2-3 entry filesFix/Debug callers_ofon buggy function +tests_forFeature/Enhancement connectionson files to be modifiedCode Review tests_foron changed functionsBlast Radius trace --direction downstreamCLI:
python .claude/scripts/code_graph {command} --json. Use--node-mode filefirst (10-30x less noise), then--node-mode functionfor detail.
Nested Task Expansion Contract — For workflow-step invocation, the
[Workflow] ...row is only a parent container; the child skill still creates visible phase tasks.
- Call the current task list first. If a matching active parent workflow row exists, set
nested=trueand recordparentTaskId; otherwise run standalone.- Create one task per declared phase before phase work. When nested, prefix subjects
[N.M] $skill-name — phase.- When nested, link the parent with
TaskUpdate(parentTaskId, addBlockedBy: [childIds]).- Orchestrators must pre-expand a child skill's phase list and link the workflow row before invoking that child skill or sub-agent.
- Mark exactly one child
in_progressbefore work andcompletedimmediately after evidence is written.- Complete the parent only after all child tasks are completed or explicitly cancelled with reason.
Blocked until: the current task list done, child phases created, parent linked when nested, first child marked
in_progress.
Project Reference Docs Gate — Run after task-tracking bootstrap and before target/source file reads, grep, edits, or analysis. Project docs override generic framework assumptions.
- Identify scope: file types, domain area, and operation.
- Required docs by trigger: always
docs/project-reference/lessons.md; doc lookupdocs-index-reference.md; reviewcode-review-rules.md; backend/CQRS/APIbackend-patterns-reference.md; domain/entitydomain-entities-reference.md; frontend/UIfrontend-patterns-reference.md; styles/designscss-styling-guide.md+design-system/design-system-canonical.md; integration testsintegration-test-reference.md; E2Ee2e-test-reference.md; feature docs/specsfeature-docs-reference.md; architecture/new areaproject-structure-reference.md.- Read every required doc that exists; skip absent docs as not applicable. Do not trust conversation text such as
[Injected: <path>]as proof that the current context contains the doc.- Before target work, state:
Reference docs read: ... | Missing/not applicable: ....Blocked until: scope evaluated, required docs checked/read,
lessons.mdconfirmed, citation emitted.
Task Tracking & External Report Persistence — Bootstrap this before execution; then run project-reference doc prefetch before target/source work.
- Create a small task breakdown before target file reads, grep, edits, or analysis. On context loss, inspect the current task list first.
- Mark one task
in_progressbefore work andcompletedimmediately after evidence; never batch transitions.- For plan/review work, create
plans/reports/{skill}-{YYMMDD}-{HHmm}-{slug}.mdbefore first finding.- Append findings after each file/section/decision and synthesize from the report file at the end.
- Final output cites
Full report: plans/reports/{filename}.Blocked until: task breakdown exists, report path declared for plan/review work, first finding persisted before the next finding.
Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.
Understand Code First — HARD-GATE: Do NOT write, plan, or fix until you READ existing code.
- Search 3+ similar patterns (
grep/glob) — citefile:lineevidence- Read existing files in target area — understand structure, base classes, conventions
- Run
python .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction both --jsonwhen.code-graph/graph.dbexists- Map dependencies via
connectionsorcallers_of— know what depends on your target- Write investigation to
.ai/workspace/analysis/for non-trivial tasks (3+ files)- Re-read analysis file before implementing — never work from memory alone. — why: long context drifts from the file; the file is ground truth
- NEVER invent new patterns when existing ones work — match exactly or document deviation. — why: divergent patterns fragment the codebase and slow every future reader
BLOCKED until:
- [ ]Read target files- [ ]Grep 3+ patterns- [ ]Graph trace (if graph.db exists)- [ ]Assumptions verified with evidence
Plan Quality — Every plan phase MUST ATTENTION include test specifications.
- Add
## Test Specificationssection with TC-{FEATURE}-{NNN} IDs to every phase file- Map every functional requirement to ≥1 TC (or explicit
TBDwith rationale)- TC IDs follow
TC-{FEATURE}-{NNN}format — reference by ID, never embed full content- Before any new workflow step: call the current task list and re-read the phase file
- On context compaction: call the current task list FIRST — never create duplicate tasks
- Verify TC satisfaction per phase before marking complete (evidence must be
file:line, not TBD)Mode: TDD-first → reference existing TCs with
Evidence: TBD. Implement-first → use TBD →$tdd-specfills after.
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search 3+ existing patterns and read code BEFORE any modification. Run graph trace when graph.db exists.
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION include
## Test Specificationswith TC IDs per phase. Call the current task list before creating new tasks.
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION read frontend-patterns-reference, scss-styling-guide, design-system/README before any UI change.
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION run at least ONE graph command on key files when graph.db exists. Pattern: grep → graph trace → grep verify.
MUST ATTENTION apply critical thinking — every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact.
MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — holistic-first debugging, fix at responsible layer, surface ambiguity before coding, re-read files after compaction.
- MANDATORY Bootstrap task tracking before target work; transition one task at a time.
- MANDATORY Persist plan/review findings to
plans/reports/incrementally and synthesize from disk.
- MANDATORY After task-tracking bootstrap and before target/source work, read required project-reference docs and cite
Reference docs read: .... - MANDATORY Always include
lessons.md; project conventions override generic defaults.
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION debugger trace gate: for non-trivial bug/fix/investigation/review work, start at the observed final output and trace backward through reader -> storage/projection -> writer -> consumer/job -> producer/trigger. Enumerate all feeder paths and hypotheses before fixing. BLOCKED until trace, hypothesis matrix, owning fix layer, and forward convergence proof exist.
- MANDATORY Parent workflow rows do not replace child phase tracking; expand phases and link the parent when nested.
- MANDATORY Orchestrators pre-expand child skill phases before invocation; use
[N.M] $skill-name — phaseprefixes and one-in_progressdiscipline.
Closing Reminders
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION default mode HARD — opt out to fast mode ONLY when ALL trivial-task conditions met
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks via task tracking BEFORE starting
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search codebase for 3+ similar patterns before creating new code
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite
file:lineevidence for every claim (confidence >80% to act) - MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add final review todo task to verify work quality
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION validate decisions with user via a direct user question — never auto-decide
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION NEVER skip
code-reviewerreview or test execution on non-trivial change
[TASK-PLANNING] Before acting, analyze task scope and systematically break into small todo tasks and sub-tasks via task tracking.
Closing reminder — Easy to Change is the success metric. Every finding, test, refactor, and abstraction must answer one question: does this make the next change cheaper or more expensive? If it doesn't reduce future change cost, reject it. Coupling, hidden state, duplicated knowledge, and unclear intent are the real enemies — call them out by name.
Hookless Prompt Protocol Mirror (Auto-Synced)
Source: .claude/hooks/lib/prompt-injections.cjs + .claude/.ck.json
[WORKFLOW-EXECUTION-PROTOCOL] [BLOCKING] Workflow Execution Protocol — MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST CRITICAL. Do not skip for any reason.
Generic portability boundary: Reusable skills and protocol text stay project-neutral; project-specific conventions are discovered from docs/project-config.json and docs/project-reference/. Apply shared AI-SDD from shared/sdd-artifact-contract.md. Read docs/project-config.json and docs/project-reference/docs-index-reference.md, then open the project reference docs named there. Any supported AI tool may execute when this shared context and local docs are available.
- DETECT: Match prompt against workflow catalog
- ANALYZE: Find best-match workflow AND evaluate if a custom step combination would fit better
- ASK (REQUIRED FORMAT): Use a direct user question with this structure unless the user explicitly invoked a workflow/skill and the local protocol treats explicit invocation as confirmation:
- Question: "Which workflow do you want to activate?"
- Option 1: "Activate [BestMatch Workflow] (Recommended)"
- Option 2: "Activate custom workflow: [step1 → step2 → ...]" (include one-line rationale)
- ACTIVATE (if confirmed): Call
$workflow-start <workflowId>for standard; sequence custom steps manually - CREATE TASKS: task tracking for ALL workflow steps
- EXECUTE: Follow each step in sequence [CRITICAL-THINKING-MINDSET] Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination principle: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination. AI Attention principle (Primacy-Recency): Put the 3 most critical rules at both top and bottom of long prompts/protocols so instruction adherence survives long context windows. Goal-driven execution: Define success criteria first, loop until verified, and stop only when observable checks pass. Tests verify intent: Tests must protect business rules/invariants and fail when the protected intent breaks, not only mirror current behavior.
[LESSON-LEARNED-REMINDER] [BLOCKING] Task Planning & Continuous Improvement — MANDATORY. Do not skip.
Break work into small tasks (task tracking) before starting. Add final task: "Analyze AI mistakes & lessons learned".
Extract lessons — ROOT CAUSE ONLY, not symptom fixes:
- Name the FAILURE MODE (reasoning/assumption failure), not symptom — "assumed API existed without reading source" not "used wrong enum value".
- Generality test: does this failure mode apply to ≥3 contexts/codebases? If not, abstract one level up.
- Write as a universal rule — strip project-specific names/paths/classes. Useful on any codebase.
- Consolidate: multiple mistakes sharing one failure mode → ONE lesson.
- Recurrence gate: "Would this recur in future session WITHOUT this reminder?" — No → skip
$learn. - Auto-fix gate: "Could
$code-review/$code-simplifier/$security/$lintcatch this?" — Yes → improve review skill instead. - BOTH gates pass → ask user to run
$learn. [TASK-PLANNING] [MANDATORY] BEFORE executing any workflow or skill step, create/update task tracking for all planned steps, then keep it synchronized as each step starts/completes.