hotfix
Skill3 starsChanged 31 days agoMITView on GitHub
Emergency production fix that branches from the latest release tag, applies a minimal fix, ships with expedited review, and backports to main.
- Commits and pushes
29 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- cyrilichti/agent-workflowstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- jacksnxly/keryxtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudiostheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- florian101010/awesome-agentic-AI-coding-templatetheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- azmainadel/devloop-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- dmzoneill/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 24, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use playtest-report, soak-test 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.
CoralGameSkillplaytest-report
Generates a structured playtest report template or analyzes existing playtest notes into a structured format. Use this to standardize playtest feedback collection and analysis.
Also in 12 projects that use this
lilangMaxSkillsoak-test
Generate a soak test protocol for extended play sessions. Defines what to observe, measure, and log during long play sessions to surface slow leaks, fatigue effects, and edge cases that only appear after sustained play. Primarily used in Polish and Release phases.
Also in 9 projects that use this
lilangMaxSkillteam-live-ops
Orchestrate the live-ops team for post-launch content planning: coordinates live-ops-designer, economy-designer, analytics-engineer, community-manager, writer, and narrative-director to design and plan a season, event, or live content update.
Also in 9 projects that use this
CoralGameSkillteam-polish
Orchestrate the polish team: coordinates performance-analyst, technical-artist, sound-designer, and qa-tester to optimize, polish, and harden a feature or area for release quality.
Also in 14 projects that use this
- +5 more from lilangMax
- +3 more from CoralGame
Other versions29 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 29
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 27ksame name
- microsoft/roosterjs★ 1.3ksame name
- nudgebee/nudgebee★ 520same name
- pixel-cellar/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 324same name
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudios★ 118same name
- tranhieutt/software_development_department★ 71same name
- Aurealibe/claude-config★ 68same name
- cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio★ 40same name
- CoralGame/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 19same name
- dawn840705/codex-code-studios★ 17same name
19 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository42 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- asideSkill
- assessmentSkill
- auditSkill
- benchmarkSkill
- brainSkill
- checkpointSkill
- cleanupSkill
- concise-modeSkill
- cross-modelSkill
- deploySkill
- designSkill
- explainSkill
- fix-issueSkill
- ganSkill
- guardSkill
- incidentSkill
- infraSkill
- interview-meSkill
- investigateSkill
- migrateSkill
- module-auditSkill
- morningSkill
- onboardSkill
- planSkill
- profileSkill
- pr-summarySkill
- readmeSkill
- refactorSkill
- researchSkill
- resolveSkill
- respondSkill
- retroSkill
- reviewSkill
- session-logSkill
- setupSkill
- shipSkill
- skill-newSkill
- spikeSkill
- tddSkill
- testSkill
- zoom-outSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
19 rules. 0 are common, 17 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 27 edited versions we read keep these.
17
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 23
No arguments: interactive mode.
- Distinctive: line 36
If no tags exist, use the current state of the main branch as the baseline.
- Very specific: line 44
Use a short, descriptive branch name: hotfix/null-pointer-checkout, hotfix/rate-limit-bypass.
- Distinctive: line 48
Read only the files directly related to the bug.
- Distinctive: line 54
Write a test that demonstrates the failure.
- Distinctive: line 60
If reproduction requires infrastructure that is not available locally, document the reproduction steps and skip to the fix.
- Distinctive: line 69
No dependency updates unless the dependency is the root cause
- Distinctive: line 74
Run the test files that cover the affected code first, for the fastest signal:
- Distinctive: line 98
After the hotfix is merged to the release branch:
- Distinctive: line 106
Run tests on main to verify the cherry-pick applies cleanly.
- Very specific: line 118
When no release branch exists and the PR targeted main, tag that PR's merge commit by its SHA instead of origin/<release-branch>.
- Distinctive: line 123
No scope creep on the hotfix branch.
- Distinctive: line 126
Never skip the reproduction test.
- Distinctive: line 127
If the fix is not obvious within 30 minutes, escalate.
- Distinctive: line 139
Stop and bring in another engineer when 30 minutes have passed and the fix is still not obvious.
- Distinctive: line 140
Stop and trim the diff when it contains a rename, a style change, or a dependency bump that is not the root cause.
- Distinctive: line 141
Stop and write the reproduction test when the fix is applied and no test has failed on the unfixed branch.
- Distinctive: line 142
Stop and rebranch from the tag when the hotfix branch was cut from main while a release tag exists.
- Distinctive: line 143
Stop and resolve before tagging when the cherry-pick onto main conflicts or the tests on main fail.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 27 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.
Files
Overview
Expedited workflow for production emergencies. Prioritizes speed and minimal change over thoroughness. Every step is designed to get a safe fix deployed as fast as possible.
When to Use
- A released version is broken in production and the fix cannot wait for the next release from main.
- The root cause is known, or the failing code path is narrow enough to find within 30 minutes.
- For an unclear root cause, run
/investigatefirst and return here with the hypothesis it confirmed. - For a fix that can ride the next regular release, use the normal branch and
/shipflow.
Arguments
- No arguments: interactive mode. Ask what is broken in production.
<description>: start the hotfix for the described issue.
Process
Step 1: Find the release baseline
Identify the latest release tag:
git describe --tags --abbrev=0If no tags exist, use the current state of the main branch as the baseline.
Step 2: Create the hotfix branch
git checkout -b hotfix/<description> <tag>Use a short, descriptive branch name: hotfix/null-pointer-checkout, hotfix/rate-limit-bypass.
Step 3: Identify the minimal fix
Read only the files directly related to the bug. Do not read surrounding code for context unless strictly necessary. Do not refactor anything.
The fix must be the smallest possible change that resolves the production issue. If two approaches exist and one touches fewer lines, choose that one.
Step 4: Reproduce the bug
Write a test that demonstrates the failure. This test must:
- Fail on the current hotfix branch before the fix
- Pass after the fix is applied
- Be fast to run in isolation
If reproduction requires infrastructure that is not available locally, document the reproduction steps and skip to the fix.
Step 5: Apply the fix
Implement the minimal change. Rules for hotfix code:
- No refactoring
- No renaming
- No style changes
- No dependency updates unless the dependency is the root cause
- No "while I'm here" improvements
Step 6: Run critical tests
Run the test files that cover the affected code first, for the fastest signal:
<test-runner> <affected-test-files>Then run the full local gate per ../../rules/git-workflow.md before committing, in order: format check, lint, type check, full test suite, build. Urgency shortens the review, never the gate; CI runs the same gate again after the push.
Step 7: Commit
fix(scope): <description>
Hotfix for v<version>. <Brief explanation of the root cause>.Step 8: Push and create PR
Push the hotfix branch. Create a PR targeting the release branch. If no release branch exists, target main.
Mark the PR as urgent in the title: [HOTFIX] fix(scope): <description>.
Step 9: Backport to main
After the hotfix is merged to the release branch:
git checkout main
git pull origin main
git cherry-pick <hotfix-commit-hash>Run tests on main to verify the cherry-pick applies cleanly. If conflicts exist, resolve them and verify.
Step 10: Tag the patch release
Tag the merged fix on the release branch, never HEAD. After Step 9 the checkout is main, whose tip is the cherry-pick and carries none of the release branch's history.
git fetch origin <release-branch>
git tag -a v<major>.<minor>.<patch+1> -m "v<major>.<minor>.<patch+1>" origin/<release-branch>
git push origin v<major>.<minor>.<patch+1>When no release branch exists and the PR targeted main, tag that PR's merge commit by its SHA instead of origin/<release-branch>.
Rules
- Minimal change only. The hotfix branch exists to fix one thing and nothing else.
- No scope creep on the hotfix branch. Another issue noticed while fixing gets its own change on main, in the same session.
- Speed is the priority. Skip steps that do not contribute to getting the fix deployed safely.
- Backport must happen the same day. A fix that lives only on the release branch will be lost on the next release from main.
- Never skip the reproduction test. A hotfix without a test is a hotfix that can regress silently.
- If the fix is not obvious within 30 minutes, escalate. Call in another engineer. A wrong hotfix is worse than a slow hotfix.
Common Rationalizations
- "The fix is obvious, the reproduction test only slows us down": a hotfix without a failing test can regress silently. Write the test from Step 4 first, or document the reproduction steps when the infrastructure is not available locally.
- "A cleaner refactor would remove the whole class of bug": the hotfix branch carries the smallest change that resolves the production issue. Pick the approach that touches fewer lines.
- "The full suite takes too long, so skip tests": run the affected test files first for speed, then the full local gate of format, lint, type check, full suite, and build before the commit.
- "The backport can happen with the next release": the next release is cut from main, so a fix that lives only on the release branch ships the bug again. Cherry-pick to main the same day.
- "One more hour and I will have it": past 30 minutes without an obvious fix, bring in another engineer. A wrong hotfix costs more than a slow one.
Red Flags
- Stop and bring in another engineer when 30 minutes have passed and the fix is still not obvious.
- Stop and trim the diff when it contains a rename, a style change, or a dependency bump that is not the root cause.
- Stop and write the reproduction test when the fix is applied and no test has failed on the unfixed branch.
- Stop and rebranch from the tag when the hotfix branch was cut from main while a release tag exists.
- Stop and resolve before tagging when the cherry-pick onto main conflicts or the tests on main fail.
Verification
- The hotfix branch starts at the tag
git describe --tags --abbrev=0returned, or at main when the repository has no tags. - A test fails on the branch without the fix and passes with it, or the reproduction steps are written down because the infrastructure was not available locally.
- The diff holds only the fix and its test.
- Format check, lint, type check, the full test suite, and the build each exit 0 locally before the commit, and the PR title starts with
[HOTFIX]and targets the release branch, or main when no release branch exists. - The fix commit is cherry-picked onto main and the tests on main pass.
- The patch tag
v<major>.<minor>.<patch+1>exists on the remote.
Related skills
/investigate-- When the root cause is unclear and structured debugging is needed before the fix./ship commit-- Commit the hotfix./incident-- Document the incident after the fix is deployed./review-- Expedited review of the hotfix PR.
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
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.

