Skip to main content

autodev

Use when the user asks to take a task end-to-end autonomously (e.g. "autodev", "/autodev", "build this on autopilot"). Runs the full chain — plan → implement → review → PR → converge — stopping only at real decisions.

معلومات المصدر

المستودع
skyhook-io/skyhook-skills
آخر نشاط في المصدر
١٠ سبتمبر ٢٠٢٦ في ٠٩:٥٥
لغة SKILL.md المكتشفة
الإنجليزية
النجوم
١
التفرعات
٠

خيارات التثبيت

يُحدَّد Prompt الذي يراجع المصدر أولًا بشكل افتراضي. يمكنك التبديل إلى أمر مباشر أو تنزيل نسخة محلية.

مراجعة ملفات المصدر

اقرأ SKILL.md وأي ملفات مرافقة يعرضها SkillsMP قبل أن تقرر التثبيت.

عرض SKILL.md

SKILL.md
تعليمات المصدر · معاينة للقراءة فقط
name
autodev
description
Use when the user asks to take a task end-to-end autonomously (e.g. "autodev", "/autodev", "build this on autopilot"). Runs the full chain — plan → implement → review → PR → converge — stopping only at real decisions.
metadata
{"short-description":"Autopilot — plan, build, review, PR, converge"}
# Autodev (Codex) Full-pipeline autopilot, Codex-side. Same workflow as Claude's `/autodev`; this skill adapts it for a Codex cockpit. **Canonical procedure:** read `~/.codex/skills/skyhook-skills-commands/autodev.md` and follow it (chain, modes, plan gate, the `--auto` ceiling, hand-back). Apply these **Codex translations** wherever it names a Claude command: | Claude command | Codex equivalent | |---|---| | `/plan-loop` | the **plan-loop** skill | | `/review-loop` | the **review-loop** skill | | `/cross-review` (cross-model) | the **claude-review** skill — from Codex the secondary reviewer stays Claude (it reviews your work) | | `/qa` | read the repo's `.claude/commands/qa.md` and follow it (Codex reads it as a file) | | `/pr` (verify + open/update PR) | inline via `git` + `gh`: run `/qa`, then create/update the PR (stage relevant files only, `--force-with-lease`). **Write the body per `~/.codex/skills/skyhook-skills-commands/pr.md`** — depth proportional to the change, lead with motivation + design, **no review-fix trivia, re-derive don't append**. (Codex especially tends to dump 4 terse bullets — don't.) | | `/fix-pr-loop` (converge) | inline the reactive loop: wait for CI + bots (`gh pr checks`, `gh pr view --json comments,reviews`), triage each finding skeptically, fix the real ones, push, repeat until settled or capped. **The AI reviewers + failing build/test CI are the primary signal** — wait for those, triage them. **Don't block on CodeQL >~2 min** — it's a secondary scanner; if it's the only laggard, proceed and note `CodeQL pending` | | `/triage-findings`, `/fix-findings`, `/simple` | no such commands — perform the discipline inline (read the real code, never auto-accept, cite evidence on skips, don't ping-pong, fix confirmed issues) | **Non-negotiable invariants** (don't let translation lose them): - **Default mode gates on the plan** — stop for sign-off before code. `--auto` logs assumptions to `NOTES.md` and proceeds, but **always stops** for the ceiling: prod/deploy/data-migrations · external-publish/money · security/auth/secrets · breaking-public-API/destructive-file-ops. - **Triage every reviewer skeptically; never auto-accept.** Cross-review only when nontrivial. - **Scenario-sensitive work needs a ledger before "done."** For user-facing copy, diagnostics/remediation, detector precision, error classification, security/permissions, or UI states, list each scenario with expected final behavior/copy, source-of-truth evidence, self-review verdict, Claude status, tests/live proof, and open decision. Claude status is either the verdict or `skipped: <reason>` when cross-review was intentionally skipped. If review happened before later fixes, state whether the final head was re-reviewed. - **Risk / blast radius belongs in the hand-back.** For nontrivial changes, state affected surface, likely failure mode, mitigation/test proof, and residual risk. Keep it proportional; low-risk copy/test-only work can be one sentence. - **Every loop caps and reports** — never loop or proceed-past-a-blocker silently. - **Never** merge, deploy, push to `main`, hard-`--force`, or stage unrelated files. PRs are fine; shipping is the user's call. - **Narrate the run** with the glyph-tagged phase banners and close with the end-of-run summary ledger defined in the canonical file (per-step counts, triage breakdowns, result line, `--auto` assumptions, open items). - **Phases are judgment calls, not a fixed sequence** — decide which apply each run, and **honor free-text steering in the invocation** (e.g. `consult claude`, `no PR`, `plan only`, `quick`, `focus on <area>`) as an override, per the canonical file's directives section. - **UI / product-facing features:** lean toward running visual-test + product-review in the review phase, **before opening the PR** (recommended, not forced — a skip is fine when small/non-visual, but must be stated). **State visual-test and product-review status in the hand-back** (ran/skipped + why), never silent. Don't open the PR blind to its own rendered result. - **Consider a review packet** before handing back, when the work would be hard to judge from the PR alone — large or multi-PR, a rendered surface, captured output worth showing, or open product calls. Judgement call, not a step; say if skipped.
عرض على GitHub