Claudefiles

Use when the user says: "clean code check", "style review", "LLM smell check", "code hygiene", "nitpick this", "style check", "find style sins", "nitpicker review", "anal retentive review", "exhaustive style review", "no-filter style report". Dispatches three parallel stylistic checkers — llm-checker (training-bias patterns), lazy-checker (deferred debt), and nitpicker (style hygiene) — and consolidates findings into a report organized by checker with a Summary section for orchestration consumption.

Use when the user says: "review my changes", "run the reviewers", "code and integration review", "readability review", "maintainability review", "sniff test this", "WTF check", "code smells", "is this code any good", "fresh eyes on this branch", "review this directory", "check this module", "review this skill", "review these instructions". Dispatches three parallel reviewers — code, integration, and a readability pass for code; consistency, instruction quality, and writing quality for instruction files — and consolidates findings into one prioritized report.

Use when the user says: "spec this out", "help me define what I want to build", "interview me about this idea", "design this change", "write a design doc", or needs to define WHAT and HOW to build something. Proportional discovery interview + codebase investigation → design.md.

Use when the user says: "draft a plan", "create work packages", "generate WPs", "review this plan", or "check the plan". Turns a design doc into task files and validates them against a traceability-focused checklist.

Use when the user says: 'close gaps in this design', 'fill gaps in the spec', 'lightweight design review', 'gap-close this doc', 'completeness review', or wants to verify a doc has all required content before implementation.

Use when the user says: "ship it" or "commit push and PR". Commits, pushes, and creates a PR in one step.

Use when the user says: "execute the plan", "orchestrate implementation", or "start executing". Runs tasks task-by-task with implementer + reviewer subagent loop.

Use when the user says: "address PR comments", "fix review feedback", "fix failing CI", or "resolve merge conflicts". Triages and resolves PR blockers on GitHub or Azure DevOps.

Use when the user says: "brainstorm options", "generate ideas", "explore ideas", "what are our options", or wants divergent thinking before committing to an approach. Four parallel thinkers generate ideas, rank by user-chosen criteria.

Use when the user says: "prior art", "how do others do this", "what patterns exist", "industry standards for X", or wants to survey external approaches.

Use when the user says: "visual QA", "screenshot review", "review the UI visually", "take screenshots and find issues", or "UX review". Screenshots a live app via Playwright, then analysis agents review the captures — first impressions, cross-page consistency, and unstructured design narrative.

Use when the user says: "comb this", "fine-toothed comb", "comb this brief", "comb this design", "go over this with a fine-toothed comb", "comb the implementation against the design", "check this for consistency", "is this design consistent and complete". Open-ended holistic review of an artifact (or an artifact against a reference) — catches inconsistency, inaccuracy, drift, and thinness a checklist can't. The one-off form of the comb baked into mine-define, mine-plan, and mine-orchestrate.

Use when the user says: 'create an issue', 'file an issue', 'open an issue', 'write an issue', 'new issue for this'. Codebase-aware issue creation — investigates the code to produce well-structured issues with acceptance criteria, affected areas, and enough detail for automated triage.

Use when the user says: "create PR" or "open pull request". Reviews branch changes and creates a PR on GitHub or Azure DevOps.

Use when the user says: "mockup this UI", "show me what it looks like", "HTML mockup", "UI preview", or "generate a mockup". Generate self-contained HTML mockup files. Reads design/context.md if present for consistent styling.

Use when the user says: "challenge this", "poke holes in this", or "what's wrong with this approach". Adversarial review with triage-driven critic selection, parallel critics (1–3 on first run; max 2 on re-challenges). Assumes the target is wrong, finds out why, and argues for a better approach.

Use when the user says: "improve CLI discoverability", "CLI help UX", "CLI flag design", "CLI affordances", "CLI command structure". Review CLI tool discoverability — flag design, subcommand structure, help quality, and progressive disclosure.

Use when the user says: "audit this CLI", "CLI quality check", "full CLI review", "CLI UX audit". Comprehensive CLI tool quality audit across all dimensions — hardening, output, clarity, affordances, and complexity.

Use when the user says: "fix CLI messages", "improve CLI help text", "CLI error messages", "CLI UX writing", "confusing CLI output". Improve the clarity of CLI tool communication — errors, help text, prompts, and status messages.

Use when the user says: "simplify this CLI", "too many flags", "CLI too complex", "reduce CLI complexity", "streamline CLI". Simplify CLI tools — reduce flags, improve defaults, lower cognitive load per invocation.

Use when the user says: "harden this CLI", "CLI edge cases", "make this CLI resilient", "handle CLI errors", "CLI robustness". Review CLI tools for edge-case resilience and production readiness.

Use when the user says: "fix CLI output", "CLI output formatting", "improve CLI output", "CLI readability", "CLI table formatting". Review and improve how CLI tools present information.

Use when the user says: "simplify this codebase", "find simplification opportunities", "where can I simplify", "code judo this", "judo this module", "find structural simplifications", "what can I collapse", "reduce complexity in this code". Runs the code-judo posture against existing code (a file, directory, or whole repo) — not a diff — fanning out parallel structural-simplification reviewers and consolidating their moves into one impact-ranked report.

Use when the user says: "find tool gaps", "session archaeology", or "missing cli features". Mines session history for recurring patterns that should be scripts or CLI tools.

Use when the user says: "document how X works", "write up how this works", "durable explanation", "explain this for the docs", "document this subsystem". Writes a durable, architectural-altitude explanation that survives code churn.

Use when the user says: "how does X work", "walk me through", "explain this subsystem", "explain how", "trace the flow". Complexity-adaptive subsystem explanation — builds mental models conversationally, not documentation artifacts.

Use when mine-orchestrate Phase 3 runs the post-execution quality gate. Reviews changed files against design doc and task files using a Sonnet subagent.

Use when the user says: "commit and push". Commits and pushes changes to the current branch.

Use when the user says: "grill me on this", "poke holes in my idea", "help me think this through", "what am I not thinking about", or wants multi-angle questioning before committing to building something. Pre-pipeline exploration that sharpens thinking.

Use when the user says: "create a skill", "write a skill", "new skill", or wants to author a new SKILL.md. Guided skill creation following Claudefiles conventions.

Use when the user says: "responsive design", "make it mobile-friendly", "adapt for mobile". Make interfaces work across screen sizes with responsive design.

Use when the user says: "add animations", "motion design", "transitions". Add meaningful animations and transitions to interfaces.

Use when the user says: "audit this UI", "frontend quality", "full UI audit", "design audit". Comprehensive audit of interface quality across accessibility, performance, theming, and responsive design.

Use when the user says: "make it bolder", "more distinctive", "too generic". Make designs more distinctive and visually striking.

Use when the user says: "improve the copy", "error messages are confusing", "UX writing". Improve UX clarity, reduce confusion, and improve information hierarchy.

Use when the user says: "fix the colors", "color system", "palette needs work". Improve color palettes, contrast, and theming.

Use when the user says: "critique this UI", "design critique", "review this interface", "does this look AI-generated". Evaluate design effectiveness with actionable feedback.

Use when the user says: "add delight", "make it more fun", "moments of joy". Add micro-interactions and moments of delight to interfaces.

Use when the user says: "too complex", "simplify this UI", "strip it down". Simplify complex interfaces without losing function.

Use when the user says: "production hardening", "handle edge cases in UI", "make it resilient", "improve onboarding", "empty states", "first-run experience". Improve interface resilience, error states, onboarding flows, and edge cases.