maintain-evolve
Skill1 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when a deployed app needs a change, a bug fix, a new feature, a dependency bump, or a status check, or when PIPELINE_STATUS.md says current_phase: live — including from a fresh session with no prior context. Not for the first build or the first deploy.
In this repository7 other files it gives its agents.
- saas-pipelineSkill
- foundation-researchSkill
- redesign-visualSkill
- scaffold-legoSkill
- deploy-vpsSkill
- kaviarSkill
- install-harness-skillSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- could be automatic: a setting could enforce it
- Very specific: line 15
Read PIPELINE_STATUS.md in full — app, stack, deploy state, change log (§5), open blockers (§6).
- Distinctive: line 41
Run existing tests after the change, not just before committing.
- Distinctive: line 71
No fixed schedule, but raise it if it's clearly been a while:
- Distinctive: line 81
Don't do these unprompted mid-urgent-bug-fix — mention once the immediate ask is handled.
≈ “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.
Files
Phase 4 — Maintain & Evolve
Runs in a fresh session, possibly weeks later, possibly a different AI harness, zero memory of the build. Nothing here assumes "what we discussed earlier" — that context doesn't exist.
Step 1 — Rebuild context from the status file, not memory
Read PIPELINE_STATUS.md in full — app, stack, deploy state, change log (§5), open
blockers (§6). Missing something referenced? Ask, don't guess from the app's name or
assumptions about "what apps like this usually have."
Need to understand the codebase itself (not just the status file)? Use Repomix
(shared/references/repomix-usage.md) — one deterministic command, not manual file-by-file
exploration. Check repomix_cache_sha in PIPELINE_STATUS.md §3 first; only re-run if HEAD
has moved since.
File missing entirely → reconstruct from git log + README, tell the user plainly, rebuild the status file from what's found plus what they confirm.
Step 2 — Understand the requested change
Same discipline as Phase 1 Step 1: concrete description before touching code. Bug report → get repro detail (what they did, expected, got), not just "it's broken."
Step 3 — Make the change
- Work on a branch (
fix/<short>orfeature/<short>) — never direct commits tomainpost-launch (pershared/references/ci-and-branching.md; Coolify auto-deploys on every push tomain, so a direct commit is an immediate production deploy with no gate). - Match existing conventions — don't introduce a new pattern for one change.
- Touches a module Phase 2 disabled-not-deleted (
modules_removed_or_disabled)? Check there first — re-enabling beats rebuilding from scratch. - Adds or changes a feature? Update
FEATURE_BLUEPRINT.md(path inPIPELINE_STATUS.md§3) — it's a living document, not a one-time Phase-2 artifact. A stale blueprint defeats its own purpose for the next session that reads it. - Run existing tests after the change, not just before committing.
- More than three steps? Ledger it. One line per finished task in
docs/pipeline/LEDGER.mdwith its commit range (Task 2: complete (commits a1b2c3d..d4e5f6a)), and a separate reviewer for anything risky — auth, payments, migrations, anything that can lose data. Two verdicts: does it do what was asked (quote the request), and is it any good. Name the model on every dispatch; an omitted one inherits the session's expensive model. Full discipline:00-orchestrator/SKILL.md→ Delegation discipline.
Step 4 — Commit properly
Per shared/references/git-hygiene.md: small logical commits, never commit secrets,
schema changes go through the boilerplate's own migration tooling — never hand-edit
production data directly.
Step 5 — Push, let CI gate it, then merge and deploy
Push the branch. CI runs automatically (lint/typecheck/build/test —
shared/references/ci-and-branching.md). Green → merge to main. Not green → fix on the
branch, don't merge around it.
Once merged, Coolify deploys automatically. Verify the live site actually reflects the change — visit it, don't trust "deploy succeeded" alone.
Something breaks in prod → Coolify keeps previous deploy images, roll back from its dashboard immediately if real users are affected, debug separately after.
Step 6 — Update the status file
Append to §5 (maintenance log): date, what changed, git SHA, deployed y/n. Update §6 if anything's now blocked/resolved. This line is what lets the next session — months later, maybe a different AI — pick up instantly.
Recurring housekeeping (surface proactively, don't wait to be asked)
No fixed schedule, but raise it if it's clearly been a while:
- Dependency updates — Dependabot/Renovate if enabled, or manual
npm outdatedmonthly. - Backup verification — confirm scheduled backups are still landing
(
03-deploy-vps/references/coolify.md), not just configured. - Security re-check —
03-deploy-vps/references/security-hardening.md§4: SSH config, Coolify version, dependency audit. A working app doesn't mean the launch baseline held. - Alerting sanity check — notification channel + Uptime Kuma still active, pointed
somewhere actually checked.
alerting_configured: noin the status file → close that gap now if it was skipped originally.
Don't do these unprompted mid-urgent-bug-fix — mention once the immediate ask is handled.
Reference files
references/git-pipeline.md— commit discipline, migrations, rollback, branching- Also draws on
03-deploy-vps/references/security-hardening.mdand03-deploy-vps/references/alerting-monitoring.mdfor the recurring checks above
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.

