agentleFS
LeostrukaLeostruka/devin-bundle/skills/finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.md

finishing-a-development-branch

Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when the implementation is complete, all tests pass, and the work needs to be integrated.

  • Commits and pushes

187 other projects use a version of this, 153 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use chinese-code-review, chinese-commit-conventions and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • Leodorareluctant259Skill

    chinese-code-review

    中文代码审查规范——在保持专业严谨的同时,用符合国内团队文化的方式给出有效反馈

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • Leodorareluctant259Skill

    chinese-commit-conventions

    中文 Git 提交规范 — 适配国内团队的 commit message 规范和 changelog 自动化

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • obraSkill

    diagnosing-superpowers

    Use when a superpowers session went wrong and your human partner wants to know why — repeated work, ignored plans, stumbles, poor results, a skill that didn't fire, "it took too long", "why is it so expensive", "what is it doing" — or wants to build a bug report for the superpowers maintainers, for the current session or a past one identified by id or path, on any harness.

    Also in 20 projects that use this

  • kntismSkill

    condition-based-waiting

    Use when tests have race conditions, timing dependencies, or inconsistent pass/fail behavior - replaces arbitrary timeouts with condition polling to wait for actual state changes, eliminating flaky tests from timing guesses

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    testing-anti-patterns

    Use when writing or changing tests, adding mocks, or tempted to add test-only methods to production code - prevents testing mock behavior, production pollution with test-only methods, and mocking without understanding dependencies

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    root-cause-tracing

    Use when errors occur deep in execution and you need to trace back to find the original trigger - systematically traces bugs backward through call stack, adding instrumentation when needed, to identify source of invalid data or incorrect behavior

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • +3 more from Leodorareluctant259

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

9 rules. 1 is common, 3 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.

  • 1

    Common

    Most of the 173 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 5

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Common:

    Core principle: Verify tests → Detect environment → Present options → Execute choice → Clean up.

    line 10
  2. Very specific:

    Before declaring the branch ready, run a gates gate: re-read the spec, run the checklist, and confirm every acceptance criterion is met.

    line 16
  3. Very specific:

    If scripts/spec-consistency.py exists, run it on the plan — read the findings list.

    line 26
  4. Very specific:

    Run the project's full test suite (npm test / cargo test / pytest / go test ./...).

    line 41
  5. Distinctive:

    If tests fail on the merged result: stop, leave the worktree and branch in place, and investigate — nothing has been pushed, so the merge …

    line 127
  6. Very specific:

    Before creating the PR, run code-review on the diff.

    line 146
  7. Distinctive:

    Keep the worktree — your human partner iterates on PR feedback there.

    line 153
  8. Distinctive:

    Wait for that exact confirmation.

    line 173
  9. Very specific:

    If the work may continue in another session (Option 2 or 3), invoke handoff before cleanup to capture remaining context.

    line 188

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 173 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Finishing a Development Branch

Overview

Core principle: Verify tests → Detect environment → Present options → Execute choice → Clean up.

Announce at start: "I'm using the finishing-a-development-branch skill to complete this work."

Step 0: Pre-flight verification

Before declaring the branch ready, run a gates gate: re-read the spec, run the checklist, and confirm every acceptance criterion is met. Invoke execution first if you are unsure whether the final review should be deep or light.

Step 0.5: Converge - plan vs delivered

Spec drift is a documented failure mode: agents implement ~70-90% of a spec and the missing parts stay invisible. Before the options menu, diff the artifacts against the tree:

  1. Find the plan (.devin/plans/*.md named by the work) and the ledger (.devin/ledgers/<task>.md).
  2. If scripts/spec-consistency.py exists, run it on the plan — read the findings list; errors must be resolved or explained.
  3. Walk the plan's checkboxes against the diff (git diff <base>...HEAD, git log): every ticked task needs corresponding delivered code; delivered code with no task is drift.
  4. Ledger check: no ticked gate may carry EVIDENCE: pending.
  5. Outcome is binary:
    • Converged — plan, ledger, and tree agree. Say so with evidence.
    • Drift — do NOT silently absorb it. Append the residual items to the plan as open tasks (- [ ] Residual: <what is missing>) and report them in the completion summary. The user decides whether they block the merge.

Step 1: Verify Tests

Run the project's full test suite (npm test / cargo test / pytest / go test ./...).

If tests fail, report the failures and stop — the menu comes after a green suite:

Tests failing (<N> failures). Must fix before completing:

[Show failures]

If tests pass: continue to Step 2.

Step 2: Detect Environment

GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
# Capture now, while still inside the workspace — Step 5 changes directory
# before cleanup (Step 6) needs this value
WORKTREE_PATH=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)

This determines which menu to show and how cleanup works:

StateMenuCleanup
GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON (normal repo)Standard 3 optionsNo worktree to clean up
GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON, named branchStandard 3 optionsProvenance-based (see Step 6)
GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON, detached HEADReduced 2 options (no merge)Externally managed — leave in place

Step 3: Determine Base Branch

The base branch is whatever this work forked from — usually named in the plan, the conversation, or the branch's upstream. If it is not already known, ask: "This branch split from <your best guess> - is that correct?" Confirm before merging: merging into the wrong base is expensive to undo.

Step 4: Present Options

Normal repo and named-branch worktree — present exactly these 3 options:

Implementation complete. What would you like to do?

1. Merge back to <base-branch> locally
2. Push and create a Pull Request
3. Keep the branch as-is (I'll handle it later)

Which option?

Detached HEAD — present exactly these 2 options:

Implementation complete. You're on a detached HEAD (externally managed workspace).

1. Push as new branch and create a Pull Request
2. Keep as-is (I'll handle it later)

Which option?

Present the menu exactly as written — concise, with every option coming from the list above. Discarding the work happens only in response to your human partner explicitly asking for it (see "If your human partner asks to discard the work" below). Wait for their answer; the integration decision is theirs.

Step 5: Execute Choice

Option 1: Merge Locally

# Get main repo root for CWD safety
MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
cd "$MAIN_ROOT"

# Merge first — verify success before removing anything
git checkout <base-branch>
git pull
git merge <feature-branch>

# Verify tests on merged result
<test command>

If tests fail on the merged result: stop, leave the worktree and branch in place, and investigate — nothing has been pushed, so the merge is local and recoverable.

Once the merged result is green: clean up the worktree (Step 6), then delete the branch:

git branch -d <feature-branch>

Option 2: Push and Create PR

git push -u origin <feature-branch>
# From a detached HEAD, name the new branch on the remote:
# git push origin HEAD:refs/heads/<new-branch>

Before creating the PR, run code-review on the diff.

Then create the pull/merge request against <base-branch> with the forge's tooling — its CLI if one is available, or the creation URL most forges print when you push — following the repo's PR template and conventions if present, and report the URL to your human partner.

Keep the worktree — your human partner iterates on PR feedback there.

Option 3: Keep As-Is

Report: "Keeping branch <name>. Worktree preserved at <path>."

If your human partner asks to discard the work

This path exists only as a response to an explicit request to throw the work away. Confirm first:

This will permanently delete:
- Branch <name>
- All commits: <commit-list>
- Worktree at <path>

Type 'discard' to confirm.

Wait for that exact confirmation. When it arrives:

MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
cd "$MAIN_ROOT"

Then clean up the worktree (Step 6) and force-delete the branch:

git branch -D <feature-branch>

Step 6: Cleanup Workspace

  • If the work may continue in another session (Option 2 or 3), invoke handoff before cleanup to capture remaining context.

Runs for Option 1 and confirmed discards. Options 2 and 3 always preserve the worktree. Both callers have already changed directory to the main repo root — worktree removal must run from outside the worktree — and use the GIT_DIR/GIT_COMMON/WORKTREE_PATH values captured in Step 2, from before that directory change.

If GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON: Normal repo, no worktree to clean up. Done.

If WORKTREE_PATH is under .worktrees/ or worktrees/: Devin created this worktree — we own cleanup:

git worktree remove "$WORKTREE_PATH"
git worktree prune  # Self-healing: clean up any stale registrations

Otherwise: The host environment owns this workspace — leave it in place. If your platform provides a workspace-exit tool, use it.

Quick Reference

OptionMergePushKeep WorktreeCleanup Branch
1. Merge locallyyes--yes
2. Create PR-yesyes-
3. Keep as-is--yes-
Discard (explicit request only)---yes (force)

Common Rationalizations

ExcuseReality
"Tests passed earlier this session"Run the suite on the tree you are about to integrate. A green run only proves the tree it ran on.
"They obviously want it merged"Integration is your human partner's decision. Present the menu and wait.
"They seem done with this feature — I'll offer to discard it"The menu is complete as written. Discard happens only when your human partner asks for it in so many words.
"'Yeah, get rid of it' counts as confirmation"Only the typed word discard authorizes deletion.
"The PR is up, so the worktree is clutter now"PR feedback gets fixed in that worktree. It stays until the work lands.
"This other worktree looks stale — I'll clean it too"Clean up only worktrees under .worktrees/ or worktrees/. Everything else belongs to the host.
"The merged-result failure is probably flaky"A failing merged result stops everything. Branch and worktree stay put while you investigate.
"The base branch is obviously main"Confirm the fork point or ask. Merging into the wrong base is expensive to undo.
"The push was rejected — force-push will fix it"A rejected push means the remote moved. Investigate; force-push only on your human partner's explicit request.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.