agentleFS
poradaporada/domfiles/skills/.dom-sensible-commit-flow/SKILL.md

dom-sensible-commit-flow

Skill7 starsChanged 8 days agoMITView on GitHub

Use whenever `sensible-commit-flow` applies.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈2

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Before a history update involving existing fixups or their targets, follow Preserve Pending Fixups.

    line 22
  2. Very specific:

    Dependencies: Use Update dependencies for a dependency maintenance batch, including directly caused compatibility, configuration, or …

    line 39
  3. Very specific:

    Fixups: Prefer fixup! <target-subject>, preserving the target commit’s complete subject without applying Message Form’s wording rules to …

    line 40
  4. Very specific:

    Root commits: Use Initial commit for a commit with no parents.

    line 41
  5. Distinctive:

    Releases: Use a bare semantic version only for an actual release commit when that form is established in the repository.

    line 42

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “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

Commit Flow

Load sensible-commit-flow and apply these personal defaults under the global Commit gate and Explicit user direction policies. The public skill owns inspection, grouping, message safeguards, execution, and verification. These preferences take precedence over optional conventions inferred from history, not repository requirements or explicit exact-message constraints.

Record Task Work

Resolve the operation through the global Automatic commits, Fixup commits, and Commit offers policies. For an automatic handoff, pass the governing grant, task scope, applicable review evidence or reviewed findings and their bounded corrections, and current target into the base’s Alternative Approval Modes route. Include any separate Checkpoint quality permission and its remaining hard gates. This overlay supplies neither authorization nor a review result.

Prepare fixups through the base’s new-commit route. Inspect the target’s patch and complete message, apply the base’s Establish Rewrite Eligibility checks to that target, and confirm its ancestry before creation. Use the fixup subject under Recurring Subjects, then verify the recorded target and contents. For subject-based fixups, use git commit --fixup=<commit-oid> to copy the target subject exactly.

Leave target message corrections to separately authorized history updates through the base’s history route. For every Rewrite eligibility check, establish the user’s authorship from task-confirmed author identity or reliable repository evidence, not the committer field or an assumed email alias. Identify upstream or vendor imports from their provenance, not just their paths.

Before a history update involving existing fixups or their targets, follow Preserve Pending Fixups.

Contribution Preparation Authorization

Apply the global Contribution Preparation Authorization policy only when its managed-installation and task conditions hold. That policy alone delegates this mode. Supply its recorded setup authorization or checkpoint grant to sensible-commit-flow through its Alternative Approval Modes reference. Neither setup authorization nor a checkpoint grant supplies a waiver.

For each call, supply the verified target, actual change scope, and requested operation. Carry forward the grant’s express request to revise provisional messages without assuming that supplied exact wording or all inherited messages may be revised. Return each commit result to sensible-contribution-flow while the recorded lifetime continues. Other calls follow the public skill’s applicable authorization path, including already authorized history updates.

Apply Fixup commits to content corrections during contribution preparation too. If pending fixups need consolidation for submission readiness, obtain explicit authorization for that history update before declaring readiness.

Message Form

  • Subject: Prefer the shortest clear statement of the shared purpose, using the public skill’s grammar except for the recurring subjects below. Omit colons, Conventional Commit prefixes, and scope labels. Do not use a, an, or the as articles in newly authored subjects. Rephrase to preserve meaning without articles rather than retaining them for fluency. Preserve exact names and code tokens.
  • Body: Use the subject as the complete newly authored message by default. Add an explanatory body, issue reference paragraphs, testing checklists, or trailers only when explicitly requested or required by the applicable message constraints. Route a remaining conflict with supplied attribution or another required message element through the public skill’s message safeguards rather than discarding it.

Recurring Subjects

  • Dependencies: Use Update dependencies for a dependency maintenance batch, including directly caused compatibility, configuration, or generated changes. Name one package when its update is deliberately singled out. Use Use when adopting a selected tool or version is the dominant decision.
  • Fixups: Prefer fixup! <target-subject>, preserving the target commit’s complete subject without applying Message Form’s wording rules to the copied subject. Use fixup! <full-commit-oid> when another ancestor of HEAD has the same subject. Select and record the target by its full object ID in either case.
  • Root commits: Use Initial commit for a commit with no parents.
  • Releases: Use a bare semantic version only for an actual release commit when that form is established in the repository.

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.