Skip to main content

change-brief

Write a Change Brief, a compact 6 Ws summary (What, Why, Who, Where, When, How) with the change's Impact and one insight worth remembering, after completing a substantial change or when the user asks what changed, for a PR description, or for the impact of a change. Use it for code, config, infra, data, documents, policies, or any edited work product. "Substantial" means 2+ files, ~25+ lines, or any config, infra, data, security, or user-facing change.

Quellinformationen

Repository
pipeshub-ai/sharp
Letzte Quellaktivität
15. Oktober 2026 um 14:15
Erkannte Sprache von SKILL.md
Englisch
Sterne
4
Forks
0

Installationsoptionen

Standardmäßig ist der Prompt ausgewählt, der zuerst die Quelle prüft. Sie können zu einem direkten Befehl wechseln oder eine lokale Kopie herunterladen.

Quelldateien prüfen

Lesen Sie SKILL.md und alle von SkillsMP angezeigten Begleitdateien, bevor Sie sich für eine Installation entscheiden.

SKILL.md wird angezeigt

SKILL.md
Quellanweisungen · Schreibgeschützte Vorschau
name
change-brief
description
Write a Change Brief, a compact 6 Ws summary (What, Why, Who, Where, When, How) with the change's Impact and one insight worth remembering, after completing a substantial change or when the user asks what changed, for a PR description, or for the impact of a change. Use it for code, config, infra, data, documents, policies, or any edited work product. "Substantial" means 2+ files, ~25+ lines, or any config, infra, data, security, or user-facing change.
when_to_use
After finishing multi-file or risky edits; "summarize the change", "what's the impact", "write the PR description", "what did you do and why".
# Change Brief Give **just the right amount**: the human should understand the change, its risk, and one rule for the next similar situation, in under 30 seconds. Use sharp's detail level (from session context; default **brief**). If the user asks for "more", "details", or a PR description, step up one level. **The Change Brief replaces your usual end-of-task summary. Don't write both.** At most one short sentence may come before it (for example, "Fixed; tests pass 2/2."). Everything else belongs inside the brief, or is left out and given if the user asks for more. ## brief (default): 4 lines, all 6 Ws compressed ``` ### Change Brief **What & why:** <what changed, in user terms> because <root cause, not the symptom>; <how, in a few words if non-obvious>. **Who · where · when:** <who's affected or should know> · <components touched> · <takes effect on merge/deploy/flag/now> **Impact:** <low|medium|HIGH> blast radius · <two-way: rollback = …|ONE-WAY: …> · Verified: <what you ran> · Not verified: <gap or "—"> **Next time:** when <situation you'd recognise> in <context>, <what to do>, because <why>, unless <when it doesn't apply>. ``` ## standard: about 12 lines ``` ### Change Brief **What:** … **Why:** … **Who:** … **Where:** … **When:** … **How:** … (one line each) **Impact:** blast radius · reversibility · behaviour change · risk to watch · verified / not verified (one line each) **Next time:** when …, …, because … ``` ## full Standard, plus rollback steps, alternatives considered and why they were rejected, the list of changed files, and a trade-off line for any conflict resolved. ## Rules (all levels) - **Proportional.** Mechanical changes (renames, formatting, typos, moving files) get ONE line ("Renamed X → Y in 3 files; no references left."), not a brief. - **Conflicts must be named.** If requirements or stakeholders conflicted, "What & why" names both sides and the principle that decided it ("PM wanted X, finance needed Y; one shared calculation satisfies both"). - **Say each thing once.** Never restate the opening sentence inside the brief, or the brief inside "Next time". - **Who = who's affected or should know**, never the requester's name or email. - **Risk first.** A HIGH blast radius or a ONE-WAY door goes in bold on the Impact line. - **Honest verification.** Say "Verified" only for what you actually ran. Untested paths go under "Not verified". This line matters most for the human's judgment. - **Next time** is a rule for a *future, similar situation*, not a fact to memorize or a restatement of the diff. Describe the situation by the signals someone would notice ("a total is off by a cent", "a migration touches a column other services read"), so it's recognisable next time. Good: "Next time: when money math gives stray decimals, convert to integer cents and round once, because binary floats can't represent 0.1." Bad: "Changed money.js to use cents." - **Context matters.** The same action can be right in one context and wrong in another (half-up rounding suits checkout totals but would be wrong for scientific averages). Name the context the rule holds in, and its main exception, if there is one. - **Save it** (silently, one command) if the rule is genuinely reusable, so sharp can bring it back when a similar situation appears: ```bash node ~/.sharp/bin/sharp.mjs lesson add --topic "<area>" --when "<the situation, described by signals you would notice next time>" --context "<where this holds: environment, stakes, constraints>" --unless "<when it does NOT apply>" --principle "<what to do or think>" --why "<the underlying reason>" --source "<the task/file/PR it came from>" ``` - **Conflict resolved?** In brief mode, fold it into Next time ("decided by <principle>"). Standard and full get a separate Trade-off line. - **One learning element per reply.** The brief's "Next time" line *is* that element, so don't add a separate quiz, question or principle on top. If this topic already got a "Next time" earlier in the conversation, drop the line. - **Don't pad.** Drop any W that adds nothing, and never repeat what the user already saw in the conversation. - **Non-code work** (documents, analyses, plans): "where" means sections or audiences, and "verified" means the sources checked. - **Legal:** every citation, quote or statute either appears under Verified (checked against the primary source) or under Not verified, marked UNVERIFIED. Never leave it implicit. - **Learn mode:** leave Next time for the user to write. Ask "What's your rule for the next time this happens?" and refine it with them.
Auf GitHub ansehen