بنقرة واحدة
init
// Analyze project structure and populate the "Repository Identity" section of CLAUDE.md (Zone B) plus AGENTS.md.
// Analyze project structure and populate the "Repository Identity" section of CLAUDE.md (Zone B) plus AGENTS.md.
| name | init |
| description | Analyze project structure and populate the "Repository Identity" section of CLAUDE.md (Zone B) plus AGENTS.md. |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
Analyze this project and populate the Repository Identity (Zone B) section of CLAUDE.md, and mirror the same information into the project-specific sections of AGENTS.md.
Zone A — Orchestra concept & template base (template-owned)
# @orchestra:template-boundary
Zone B — Repository Identity ← this skill writes here
# @orchestra:repo-boundary
Zone C — Working state (sessions, features, design pointers)
CLAUDE.md. Never modify Zone A (above @orchestra:template-boundary) or Zone C (below @orchestra:repo-boundary).AGENTS.md, do NOT modify the "Extensions" section and below — only update the top project-specific sections.CLAUDE.md lacks the 3-zone markers (legacy layout), ask the user to run ./scripts/update.sh first. Do not hand-insert markers.Find these files to identify the tech stack:
package.json → Node.js/TypeScript projectpyproject.toml / setup.py / requirements.txt → Python projectCargo.toml → Rust projectgo.mod → Go projectMakefile / Dockerfile → Build/deploy config.github/workflows/ → CI/CD configAlso detect:
Use AskUserQuestion tool to ask:
First verify the 3-zone markers exist:
grep -q "@orchestra:template-boundary" CLAUDE.md && grep -q "@orchestra:repo-boundary" CLAUDE.md
If either marker is missing, stop and ask the user to run ./scripts/update.sh to migrate the file; the updater auto-migrates legacy single-boundary layouts.
Replace the content between the two markers with the following template (keep the marker lines and their ━ separators intact). Use the Edit tool by anchoring on the full block between the two boundary box lines.
## Repository Identity
<!-- Managed by /init. Re-run /init to refresh. -->
### Project Overview
{User's answer to "what does this project do"}
### Language Settings
- **Thinking/Reasoning**: English
- **Code**: {Based on analysis — English or Japanese}
- **User Communication**: Japanese
### Tech Stack
- **Language**: {Detected language}
- **Package Manager**: {Detected tools}
- **Dev Tools**: {Detected tools}
- **Main Libraries**: {Detected libraries}
### Common Commands
```bash
{npm run dev / poe test / make build etc.}
### 4. Partial Update of AGENTS.md
Mirror the same information into `AGENTS.md` so Codex sees it. Update only the top section (up to the first `---`) with this format:
```markdown
# Project Overview
{User's answer}
## Language Settings
- **Thinking/Reasoning**: English
- **Code**: {Based on analysis - English or Japanese}
- **User Communication**: Japanese
## Tech Stack
- **Language**: {Detected language}
- **Package Manager**: {Detected tools}
- **Dev Tools**: {Detected tools}
- **Main Libraries**: {Detected libraries}
## Common Commands
```bash
{Detected commands}
### 5. Check Unnecessary Rules
Check rules in `.claude/rules/` and suggest removing unnecessary ones:
- Non-Python project → `dev-environment.md` (uv/ruff/ty) may not be needed
- No-test project → `testing.md` may not be needed
### 6. Report Completion
Report to user (in Japanese):
- Detected tech stack
- Files updated (`CLAUDE.md` Zone B, `AGENTS.md`)
- Recommended rules to remove (if any)
Add a feature to an existing codebase with Codex-first multi-agent collaboration (Codex + Opus 4.6). Codex CLI is consulted in EVERY phase for scope analysis, architecture design, and implementation planning. Phase 1: Scope & impact analysis (Opus subagent codebase scan + Codex scope analysis + Claude user clarification). Phase 2: Design & plan (Codex architecture design + Codex implementation plan + Codex validation). Phase 3: Implementation routing by complexity (SIMPLE: Codex direct, MODERATE: Codex + /team-review, COMPLEX: /team-implement).
Comprehensive onboarding for new or returning contributors. Scans repository artifacts (git history, CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md, project rules, skill catalog, DESIGN.md, research & library notes, checkpoints, agent-team logs) and synthesizes a GUIDE.md at the repository root summarizing what has been worked on, why, and how to resume work.
Save full session context: git history, CLI consultations, Agent Teams activity, and discover reusable skill patterns — all in one run. No flags needed. Run at session end, after major milestones, or when you want to capture learnings.
Codex CLI handles planning, design, and complex code implementation. Use for: architecture design, implementation planning, complex algorithms, debugging (root cause analysis), trade-off evaluation, code review. External research is NOT Codex's job — use general-purpose subagent (Opus) instead. Explicit triggers: "plan", "design", "architecture", "think deeper", "analyze", "debug", "complex", "optimize".
Research a library and create comprehensive documentation in .claude/docs/libraries/.
Time-boxed technical investigation/feasibility study with Codex-first multi-agent collaboration (Codex + Opus 4.6 + Agent Teams). Codex CLI is consulted in EVERY phase for question framing, feasibility analysis, and final evaluation. Phase 1: Frame the investigation question & constraints (Claude user interaction + Codex question decomposition). Phase 2: Parallel investigation (Agent Teams: Researcher [Opus external research] + Feasibility Analyst [Codex deep analysis] + optional prototype). Phase 3: Codex synthesis into go/no-go recommendation & research report. Produces a DECISION DOCUMENT, NOT an implementation plan. Use /add-feature or /start-feature after a GO decision.