| name | hydrate-reconcile |
| description | Compare drafts against existing working memory and against the codebase. Annotates each draft as net-new, would-overwrite, or conflicts-with-code. Greenfield projects skip the existing-working-memory comparison.
|
hydrate-reconcile
Input: drafts from hydrate-draft.
When this skill is activated:
- For each draft, check against existing working memory if present:
- Net new: no matching content; safe to add.
- Would overwrite: existing content covers the same territory; surface the diff.
- For each draft, sanity-check against the codebase. The draft asserts something; does the code agree?
- If yes: leave the annotation as-is.
- If no: flag as conflicts with code. Either the draft is wrong (extracted from stale source) or the code is wrong (drift from stated intent). Investigation needed.
- Output the drafts plus annotations.
Output
The original drafts plus a reconciliation block per draft.
Common gotchas
- Trusting a stale README over current code. The README is a source, but it can lie. When in conflict, the code is more often right.
- Flagging convention drafts as "conflicts" when the code has multiple patterns. The convention is the dominant pattern; minority patterns are noise unless they're the new direction.
- Treating an existing working memory entry as authoritative when it predates a major refactor.
git log _working-memory/<file>.md tells you when the entry was last touched. If the codebase moved on, the entry needs updating.
