| name | standards |
| description | Load only the standards relevant to a caller-supplied change, then report concrete findings. Triggers: "check standards", "which standards apply". |
| practices | ["pragmatic-programmer","clean-code"] |
| hexagonal_role | supporting |
| consumes | [] |
| produces | ["stdout"] |
| context_rel | [] |
| skill_api_version | 1 |
| metadata | {"capabilities":["standards"],"effects":[],"canonical_status":"canonical","disposition":"keep_specialist","tier":"knowledge","dependencies":[]} |
| output_contract | cited standards and factual findings |
Standards — focused engineering guidance
Load the smallest set of standards justified by the caller's files, language,
and risks. Do not preload the entire reference corpus.
Procedure
- Record the supplied paths, language, change type, and risk cues.
- Load
common-standards.md plus only the matching language or checklist
references.
- Compare the supplied artifact to those sources.
- Return cited findings with path and line when possible, plus checked and
not-checked scope.
- Stop.
This skill provides context and findings. It does not edit, validate, retry,
approve, commit, release, deliver, or decide continuation.
Load-bearing conventions for produced code (MEASURED)
When the caller is about to WRITE code (not only review it), surface the
matching language rules INLINE in the working context — a behind-the-link
reference does not change behavior; an inline imperative does. The Go core:
- Wrap every propagated error with context:
fmt.Errorf("doing X: %w", err)
— never return a bare inner error.
- Multi-case functions get TABLE-DRIVEN tests (
[]struct cases + t.Run per
case), asserting exact expected values including the error cases.
For other languages, pull the matching reference below and inline its top
rules the same way.
Measured 2026-08-04, probe standards-go-conventions (gpt-5.6-luna, N=2,
directional): control produced the %w-wrapped + table-driven shape in 1/2
runs; with these rules inline, 2/2. Inline-imperative beats reference-link —
the graphify probe measured a linked doc instruction obeyed 0/2. Ledger:
evals/skill-probes/LEDGER.md.
Mutation-safety standards
When the supplied change rewrites existing files in bulk — formatters,
codemods, migration scripts, generators pointed at hand-written sources —
check it against three standards and report each as a finding when absent:
- Single audited mutation chokepoint. All rewrites flow through one named
command or script whose inputs, outputs, and dry-run mode can be inspected.
Edits scattered across ad-hoc one-liners and manual touch-ups are the
diffuse mutation failure mode: no single point can be audited, re-run,
or blamed. Finding: name every mutation path outside the chokepoint.
- Hash-witnessed backups before rewrite. Before the chokepoint runs, the
originals are preserved with content hashes recorded (a committed baseline
counts), so "the rewrite changed only what it claims" is checkable
byte-for-byte, not asserted. Finding: a bulk rewrite with no verifiable
before-state.