agentleFS
vekzz-devvekzz-dev/opencode-skills/skills/git-commit/SKILL.md

git-commit

Skill4 starsChanged 40 days agoMITView on GitHub

Execute atomic git commits with conventional commit message analysis, intelligent staging, and message generation. Trigger: When user asks to commit changes, create a git commit, or mentions "/commit".

  • Reads credentials

174 other projects use a version of this, 33 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use git-pr, github-pr-create and 9 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.
  • klauswgSkill

    git-pr

    Prepare, review, publish, or update a complete GitHub pull request for the current repository, including local commit readiness, safe push strategy, semantic title validation, repository-native PR templates, issue linking, and checks verification. Use when the user asks to draft, create, submit, publish, open, or update a pull request. Always require the user to review and explicitly approve the exact final PR before any push or GitHub write.

    Also in 11 projects that use this

  • mjun0812Skill

    github-pr-create

    Pull Requestを作成するSkill。現在のbranchからpull requestを作成する。言語指定可能。 ユーザーが「PR作って」「pull request作成して」のように依頼したら使うこと。

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    git-branch

    Branch management for implementation. Use when you need to create a branch, switch branches, checkout, or verify branching strategy before implementing code. Do not use for commits (use git-commit), pull requests (use pull-request), or advanced git operations (rebase, merge).

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • klauswgSkill

    git-issue

    Prepare, review, create, or update evidence-based GitHub issues for the current repository with duplicate detection, repository-native templates, valid labels, and post-publication verification. Use when the user asks to draft, file, submit, publish, edit, or refine a GitHub issue, bug report, feature request, performance issue, or technical proposal. Always require the user to review and explicitly approve the exact final issue before any GitHub write.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • gologo13Skill

    git-push

    Push current branch to origin and sync with remote updates; keywords: git, rebase. Use only on explicit request; before execution, review diffs and list impact scope.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • GoogleSkill

    github-pr-review

    Review a GitHub pull request and leave inline comments in a natural human reviewing voice, indistinguishable from comments typed by hand on the GitHub web UI. Deliberately bounded to defects a reader can settle by looking at the anchored line, rather than a deep audit, so every comment is cheap for the author to check. Scales to 2-20 comments by PR size, parallelises analysis across sub-agents, drafts for approval, then posts individually with human pacing. Use when the user says "review this PR", "review PR 123", pastes a github.com/.../pull/N link, or asks for comments on a pull request. Don't use for reviewing local uncommitted changes or a diff against a branch (use the `review` skill for that).

    Also in 4 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

12 rules. 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 134 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 12

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Core principle: one commit = one deliverable behavior: If the working tree has multiple unrelated changes, do NOT commit them together.

    line 21
  2. Distinctive:

    If 2+ unrelated concerns exist: stop. Do NOT stage everything.

    line 43
  3. Distinctive:

    If the staged changes fail any check — stop, unstage (git restore --staged .), and re-split.

    line 79
  4. Distinctive:

    If you have a GPG or SSH signing key configured:

    line 105
  5. Distinctive:

    Keep description under 72 characters

    line 213
  6. Distinctive:

    When including a body, focus on what changed and why, not implementation diary:

    line 278
  7. Distinctive:

    Use paragraphs, not bullet lists

    line 303
  8. Distinctive:

    NEVER update git config

    line 327
  9. Distinctive:

    NEVER run destructive commands (--force, hard reset) without explicit request

    line 328
  10. Distinctive:

    NEVER skip hooks (--no-verify) unless user asks

    line 329
  11. Distinctive:

    NEVER force push to main/master

    line 330
  12. Distinctive:

    If commit fails due to hooks, fix and create NEW commit (don't amend)

    line 331

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 134 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

When to Use

  • Creating a new git commit
  • User asks to "commit changes" or "create a commit"
  • User mentions "/commit" command
  • Analyzing changes for conventional commit format

Instructions

Core principle: one commit = one deliverable behavior. If the working tree has multiple unrelated changes, do NOT commit them together. Commit one, then the next.

0. Classify the Changes (MANDATORY)

# See everything that changed (tracked + untracked)
git status --porcelain

# See full diff
git diff

# Also see staged if resuming a partial commit
git diff --staged

Group every change by which deliverable behavior it belongs to:

  • Bug fix A (e.g., null pointer in login)
  • Feature B (e.g., dark mode toggle)
  • Refactor C (e.g., extract auth helper)
  • Config D (e.g., CI workflow change)

If 2+ unrelated concerns exist: stop. Do NOT stage everything. Show the user the groups and ask: "Which one do you want to commit now?"

If only one concern: proceed directly to step 1.

1. Stage This Atomic Change ONLY

Stage only the files or hunks that belong to the selected logical change:

# Stage specific files
git add path/to/file1 path/to/file2

# Stage individual hunks when a file has mixed concerns
git add -p path/to/file-with-mixed-changes

# Stage by pattern
git add src/feature-b/*

Never commit secrets (.env, credentials.json, private keys). Add these to .gitignore preventively.

Never use bare git add . without first verifying it only captures one concern.

2. Verify Atomic Staging (MANDATORY GATE)

git diff --staged

Confirm the staged diff passes The Review Test:

  • Is this ONE deliverable behavior?
  • Does the repo compile/build with ONLY this change?
  • Can someone understand what it does from the diff?
  • Are tests included if this adds or changes behavior?

If the staged changes fail any check — stop, unstage (git restore --staged .), and re-split.

3. Generate Commit Message

Analyze the staged diff to determine:

  • Type: What kind of change is this?
  • Scope: What area/module is affected?
  • Description: One-line summary of what changed (present tense, imperative mood, <72 chars)

4. Execute Commit

# Multi-line (body is mandatory)
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
<type>(<scope>): <description>

<body>

[optional footer]
EOF
)"

5. Signed Commits (GPG/SSH)

If you have a GPG or SSH signing key configured:

# Sign a single commit
git commit -S -m "type(scope): description"

# Or configure Git to sign all commits by default
git config --global commit.gpgsign true

GitHub marks signed commits as Verified. See GitHub's signing guide to set up a key.

Commands

# Check what's staged
git diff --staged

# Check status
git status --porcelain

# Stage specific files for an atomic commit
git add src/feature-b/*

# Stage individual hunks (mixed concerns in one file)
git add -p src/file-with-mixed-changes

# Commit with message
git commit -m "type(scope): description"

# Multi-line commit (body is mandatory in this skill)
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
type(scope): description

Body text here

Footer: reference
EOF
)"

# Unstage everything (keep changes in working tree)
git restore --staged .

# Unstage a single file
git restore --staged path/to/file

# Amend last commit message (before pushing)
git commit --amend -m "type(scope): corrected message"

# Add forgotten files to last commit (before pushing)
git add forgotten-file.ts && git commit --amend --no-edit

# Create fixup commit for later rebase
git commit --fixup HEAD~2

# Autosquash fixup commits during rebase
git rebase -i --autosquash HEAD~5

# Preview the commit without creating it
git commit --dry-run

Conventional Commit Format

<type>[optional scope]: <description>

[optional body]

[optional footer(s)]

Note: A blank line is REQUIRED between description and body. Body is mandatory — explain the why, not just the what.

Commit Types

TypePurpose
featNew feature
fixBug fix
docsDocumentation only
styleFormatting/style (no logic)
refactorCode refactor (no feature/fix)
perfPerformance improvement
testAdd/update tests
buildBuild system/dependencies
ciCI/config changes
choreMaintenance/misc
revertRevert commit

Breaking Changes

# Exclamation mark after type/scope
feat!: remove deprecated endpoint

# BREAKING CHANGE footer
feat: allow config to extend other configs

BREAKING CHANGE: `extends` key behavior changed

Best Practices

  • One logical change per commit
  • Present tense: "add" not "added"
  • Imperative mood: "fix bug" not "fixes bug"
  • Reference issues: Closes #123, Refs #456
  • Keep description under 72 characters

Atomic Commits & Logical Order

Definition

A commit represents a deliverable behavior, fix, migration, or documentation unit — not a file type or architectural layer.

Logical Order

Commits must follow dependency order so each step is independently verifiable:

  1. Dependencies first — models, types, schemas, migrations
  2. Behavior after — services, use cases, business logic
  3. Integration at the end — wiring, endpoints, UI, configuration

Tests belong in the same commit as the behavior they verify. Docs belong in the same commit as the user-visible change they explain.

The Review Test

Before committing, confirm:

  • Can this commit be understood on its own?
  • Does the repo compile / build with ONLY this commit applied?
  • Can I revert this commit without breaking unrelated work?
  • Are tests included if this commit adds or changes behavior?

Good vs Weak Splits

Weak — split by file type (avoid):

feat: add User model
feat: add User service
feat: add User controller
feat: add User tests

Why: each commit leaves the repo in a broken or incomplete state. Tests arrive after the fact, so nothing is verifiable mid-series.

Strong — split by behavior, logical order:

feat(auth): add User model with validation rules
feat(auth): implement user registration with tests
feat(auth): wire registration endpoint

Why: each commit is self-contained. The repo compiles after every step. git bisect works reliably.

Anti-Patterns

Anti-PatternWhy It Fails
Tests in a separate commitBehavior can't be verified until tests arrive — breaks git bisect
Docs as a follow-up commitDocs arrive after the feature shipped, confusing users
Refactor + feature in one commitTwo concerns: impossible to review or revert cleanly
Mid-series compilation brokenEvery commit must compile — otherwise the series is not atomic
git add . without reviewing stagingGroups unrelated changes into one commit, losing atomicity

Commit Body

The body is MANDATORY. Include a blank line between the description and body.

When including a body, focus on what changed and why, not implementation diary:

Good body:

Add rate limiting to API endpoints

Users were hitting the API too frequently, causing server strain.
This change implements token bucket algorithm to throttle requests.

Bad body (implementation diary):

Add rate limiting

- Added RateLimiter class
- Created middleware
- Added config file
- Fixed tests

Body Guidelines

  • Explain the reason for the change
  • Describe the problem being solved
  • Mention consequences or trade-offs
  • Use paragraphs, not bullet lists
  • Wrap at 72 characters

Footer

Footer is optional. Use for:

  • Breaking changes: BREAKING CHANGE: <description>
  • Issue references: Closes #123, Refs #456

Related Skills

SkillWhen to Use
work-unit-commitsPlan commits as reviewable slices — use before writing code
chained-prSplit large changes into stacked PRs that protect review focus

Resources

Git Safety Protocol

  • NEVER update git config
  • NEVER run destructive commands (--force, hard reset) without explicit request
  • NEVER skip hooks (--no-verify) unless user asks
  • NEVER force push to main/master
  • If commit fails due to hooks, fix and create NEW commit (don't amend)

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.