Review an open change thoroughly and against something outside the change itself: assess what work categories the diff contains, resolve each category's review treatment from the review-knowledge memory shelf, review each through its layers (objective linters, then design-grounding from committed sources for design-bearing categories), consolidate findings that each cite their basis, and stop at one decision gate resolved per gate-config — the reviewer owns the approve/reject verdict when the gate is on; when off the computed recommendation is recorded and posted as a clearly marked harness verdict. The gate (third step) of the end sequence in the ProductOS command model. Use when a PR is ready to be reviewed and a verdict is needed.
Diff-bounded single-pass quality evaluation for PR review. Classifies every changed path by ARTIFACT TYPE first (runtime code / deployable config / tests / docs-planning / garura prose / ProductOS model / STM evidence / wireframes — pure globs, first match wins), then evaluates standard-ID checks against the diff using mechanical match rules from the PR severity taxonomy — grep-based rules fire only on runtime-code/deployable-config/tests (a keyword in prose is not a security defect,
Merge an approved change — merge the PR, switch to main and pull the latest, and delete the feature branch (local and remote). The final step of the end sequence in the ProductOS command model. Use when a reviewed, approved PR is ready to land.
Compile a deterministic "play" (a multi-step, gated workflow recipe) from an intent. Interviews for the intent triple, generates the expectation, identifies the skills, scripts, and agents the play needs, selects a workflow structure, generates evals, and emits a compiled play (a SKILL.md plus bundled scripts for its mechanical work). Use this whenever the user wants to create, build, compile, or review a play — or says "create a play", "new play", "compile this into a play", "play-creator", "turn this intent into a play", or "review my play for gaps" — even if they don't say the word "play" explicitly but are describing a repeatable, multi-step, checkpoint-gated workflow they want captured as a runnable recipe.
Commit all uncommitted work on the feature branch, grouped by concern, with conventional messages that reference the issue — leaving a clean tree ready to raise. Commits only; does not push. The first step of the end sequence in the ProductOS change pipeline. Use when work is done and needs committing before propose-change.
Raise the current change for review — run a scope-and-quality self-review from the project's standards, push the branch, and open a pull request carrying that review and the issue reference. The second step of the end sequence in the ProductOS command model. Use when a committed change is ready to raise as a PR.
Open a unit of work cleanly — resolve or create the tracked issue, cut a feature branch off up-to-date main, set up a git worktree when config calls for it, and initialize the STM workspace. The start-of-pipeline play in the ProductOS command model. Use when beginning work on a change, starting an issue, or kicking off a feature.
Modify an existing compiled play — change its goal, a constraint, a failure condition, a success scenario, a step, the workflow shape, or the agents/skills it uses — by editing the play's ICE source and recompiling, never by hand-patching the output into disagreement with its intent. This is the companion to play-creator (which makes new plays). Use this whenever the user wants to edit, change, modify, update, tweak, extend, or fix an existing play — or says "edit the play", "change this play", "add a constraint to the play", "the play needs a new failure condition / step / scenario", "play-editor", or "recompile the play after I changed its intent" — even if they don't say "play" outright but are clearly reshaping a workflow recipe that already exists.