[Process] Use when you need to end the active workflow and clear state.
[BLOCKING] Execute skill steps in declared order. NEVER skip, reorder, or merge steps without explicit user approval.
[BLOCKING] Before each step or sub-skill call, update task tracking: set in_progress when step starts, set completed when step ends.
[BLOCKING] Every completed/skipped step MUST include brief evidence or explicit skip reason.
[BLOCKING] If Task tools are unavailable, create and maintain an equivalent step-by-step plan tracker with the same status transitions.
Quick Summary
Goal: [Process] Close the active workflow cleanly — clear workflow tracking so the next prompt gets fresh detection, and before clearing state print a one-way developer-comprehension recap (what / purpose / how / why) of what the workflow changed so the developer understands the work without re-reading the diff.
Summary:
This is the penultimate state-closure step (runs before /watzup); workflow end is model-driven — it completes when all TaskList items are done, NO hook clears state on completion (residual .ck-workflow-state.json is only cleared by session-init on explicit /clear).
Gate before closing: run the integration-test coverage check on changed business-logic files (handlers/commands/services/controllers) — if any lacks a matching test, MUST surface via AskUserQuestion, never silent-skip.
When a diff exists, ALWAYS print the one-way four-part comprehension recap (what changed / purpose / how / why), depth throttled by ( → → default 3); skip only when there are no changes. The recap never quizzes and never blocks — deeper explanation is the standalone skill.
codingLevel
CK_CODING_LEVEL
.claude/.ck.json
/understand
Sync the knowledge graph only if .code-graph/ exists, then announce Workflow [name] completed so the next prompt gets fresh detection.
Workflow:
Detect — classify request scope and target artifacts.
Execute — apply required steps with evidence-backed actions.
Explain — print the diff-gated comprehension recap (skip only when no changes).
Verify — confirm constraints, output quality, and completion evidence.
Key Rules:
MUST ATTENTION when the workflow produced a diff, print the comprehension recap (what changed / purpose / how it works / why) — depth throttled by codingLevel, but NEVER fully skip when changes exist.
MUST ATTENTION the recap is one-way — NO quiz, NO teach-back, NEVER blocks. Deeper comprehension is handled by the standalone /understand skill, which /watzup invokes as its final handoff and which the developer can also invoke directly for any target.
MUST ATTENTION run the spec ↔ TDD-test sync gate (spec-tdd-test-sync-gate) BEFORE task-completion verification when behavior-changing files are in the diff — the workflow MUST NOT report completed while a behavior-vs-spec divergence is unadjudicated; surface unsynced drift via AskUserQuestion, never silent-close.
MUST ATTENTION keep claims evidence-based (file:line) with confidence >80% to act.
MUST ATTENTION keep task tracking updated as each step starts/completes.
MUST ATTENTION define success criteria before execution and loop until observable verification passes.
MUST ATTENTION when creating/reviewing specs or tests, name Business Intent / Invariant Guarded or the protected business intent/invariant and ensure the test would fail if that intent breaks.
NEVER skip mandatory workflow or skill gates.
When This Runs
This skill is the workflow state-closure step. In workflows including /watzup, runs after final verification/docs work and before /watzup, so active workflow closes before post-workflow summary and /understand handoff. As penultimate action — after all workflow work done, before clearing state — prints one-way developer-comprehension recap of what workflow changed. Use /understand for deep standalone explainer of any target.
NOT for: Manual invocation mid-workflow (use workflow switching via /start-workflow instead).
What To Do
Integration test coverage check (skip if workflow is docs/design/investigation/e2e-only, or project has no test suite):
git diff --name-only HEAD && git ls-files --others --exclude-standard
(The second command lists untracked files not yet staged — catches brand-new handler files before first git add) - Scan changed files for those likely requiring integration test coverage: business logic files such as handlers, commands, queries, services, controllers, resolvers, event processors. Naming varies by stack — infer from the project's existing file patterns (e.g., *Service.*, *Handler.*, *Controller.*, *Command.*, *Query.*). - For each identified file → search for a corresponding test file. Infer the project's test naming convention from existing tests (e.g., *.test.ts, *Tests.java, *_test.py, *.spec.js, *Tests.cs). Check standard test directories (tests/, spec/, __tests__/, or adjacent test projects). - If ANY identified file lacks a corresponding test → MANDATORY: use AskUserQuestion: - Option A: "Run /integration-test now" (Recommended) - Option B: "Tests already written/updated — proceed" - No silent skip. Business logic changes without test coverage MUST be surfaced to the user. - If no business logic files changed, or all have matching tests → skip silently
Spec ↔ TDD-test sync gate (spec-tdd-test-sync-gate — runs BEFORE task-completion verification; skip with reason only if the workflow is docs/design/investigation/e2e-only OR the diff has no behavior-changing files):
The feedback half of the loop closes HERE — a workflow MUST NOT report completed while the spec still diverges from the code that just changed. Green tests do NOT normalize that drift.
Scope to the behavior-changing files in the diff (same surface the coverage check above scanned — handlers/commands/queries/services/controllers/entities/event processors and behavior-bearing frontend logic).
Run /spec [mode=sync] over the §8 TCs ↔ integration tests for those files: reconcile every §8 TC against its covering test, and surface any §8 TC with no covering test or any test guarding behavior with no §8 TC.
Re-check for unadjudicated spec-vs-code drift: any behavior-changing file whose divergence from the canonical Feature Spec was never classified CODE-WRONG / SPEC-STALE / AMBIGUOUS / in-sync (per SYNC:spec-drift-adjudication).
If /spec [mode=sync] finds an unsynced §8 TC, OR any behavior-vs-spec divergence is unadjudicated → MANDATORY: surface via AskUserQuestion:
Option A: "Reconcile now — run /spec [mode=sync] / /spec [update] to close the drift" (Recommended)
Option B: "Accept as-is — I will record the reason" (the user's accept-as-is reason is captured in the recap)
No silent skip, no silent close.Workflow MUST NOT report completed while a behavior-vs-spec divergence is unadjudicated — record the gate outcome (synced / accepted-as-is-with-reason) before proceeding.
Sync knowledge graph (skip if .code-graph/ dir doesn't exist):
if [ -d ".code-graph" ]; then python .claude/scripts/code_graph sync --json && python .claude/scripts/code_graph update --json; fi
Report results briefly.
Mark this task as completed via TaskUpdate
Explain the changes — developer comprehension recap (the final teaching step; runs after everything else is done):
Scope what this workflow changed:
git diff --name-only HEAD && git ls-files --others --exclude-standard
No diff (pure investigation/research/docs-only workflow with nothing built) → skip with reason "no changes to explain".
Diff present → ALWAYS print a one-way teaching recap so the developer understands the work without re-reading the diff. This is one-way — NO quiz, NO teach-back, NEVER blocks. For a deeper explanation of any target (a plan, subsystem, decision, concept, or bug), use /understand; /watzup invokes it as the final handoff.
Throttle depth by coding level (resolve first found: env CK_CODING_LEVEL → .claude/.ck.jsoncodingLevel → default 3):
Level
Recap depth
4–5
2–4 tight sentences on the highest-blast-radius change only
2–3
The four-part recap below, concise
0–1
The four-part recap, fuller, plainest language, define non-obvious terms
Always print at least the short recap when a diff exists — NEVER fully skip.
Structure (optimize for easiest learning — lead with high-level motivation, then drill into low-level logic; surface what a reader would NOT guess from the diff):
What changed — concrete edits grouped by behaviour (not by file); cite file:line.
Purpose / kind — feature / bug fix / enhancement / refactor / perf / security — and the problem it solves.
How it works — mechanism, key logic, invariants relied on, edge cases preserved; focus the non-obvious.
Why this way — rationale and trade-offs; why over the obvious alternative.
Announce to the user: "Workflow [name] completed. Next prompt will trigger fresh workflow detection."
Workflow end is model-driven — it completes once this skill's TaskList items are all marked done, AND the spec ↔ TDD-test sync gate (step 2) recorded synced-or-accepted-as-is. No hook clears persisted state on completion; any residual .claude/.ck-workflow-state.json is cleared by session-init on an explicit /clear.
Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).
Workflow End
Finalize and close the active workflow, clearing state so the next user prompt triggers fresh workflow detection.
AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:
Re-read files after context changes. Context compaction, resume, or long-running work can make memory stale; verify current files before acting.
Verify generated content against source evidence. AI hallucinates APIs, names, claims, and document facts. Check the relevant source before documenting or referencing.
Check downstream references before deleting or renaming. Removing an artifact can stale docs, generated mirrors, configs, and callers; map references first.
Trace the full impact chain after edits. Changing a definition can miss derived outputs and consumers. Follow the affected chain before declaring done.
Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. One green check is not all green checks; validate every output surface the change can affect.
Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing. Before changing a constant, limit, flag, wording, or pattern, read nearby context and history.
Surface ambiguity before acting — don't pick silently. Multiple valid interpretations require an explicit question or stated assumption with risk.
Keep shared guidance role-relevant. Universal guidance must help every receiving skill or agent; code-specific obligations belong only in code-specific protocols.
Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act.
Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.
Project Reference Docs Gate — Run after task-tracking bootstrap and before target/source file reads, grep, edits, or analysis. Project docs override generic framework assumptions.
Identify scope: file types, domain area, and operation.
Read every required doc. If docs/project-config.json, the docs index, lessons.md, CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, or any task-required reference doc is missing or stale, auto-run /project-init or the narrow lower-level route (/project-config, /docs-init, /scan-all, /scan --target=<key>, /claude-md-init) before ordinary project-specific work. If Codex mirrors or AGENTS.md are missing/stale, ask the user to run /sync-codex; do not auto-run it.
Before target work, state: Reference docs read: ... | Not applicable: ....
MUST ATTENTION apply critical + sequential thinking — every claim needs appropriate traced evidence (file:line for repo/code claims; source URL or artifact section for research, product, content, and docs claims); confidence >80% to act, <60% DO NOT recommend. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact, admit uncertainty freely, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence.
MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references before deleting or renaming, verify all affected outputs, re-read files after context loss, and surface ambiguity before acting.
MANDATORY After task-tracking bootstrap and before target/source work, read required project-reference docs and cite Reference docs read: ....
MANDATORY Always include lessons.md; project conventions override generic defaults.
MANDATORY If project config, root instruction files, or any required reference doc is missing, stop and run or ask the user to run /project-init.
Prompt-Enhance Closing Anchors
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION follow declared step order for this skill; NEVER skip, reorder, or merge steps without explicit user approval
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION for every step/sub-skill call: set in_progress before execution, set completed after execution
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION every skipped step MUST include explicit reason; every completed step MUST include concise evidence
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION if Task tools unavailable, maintain an equivalent step-by-step plan tracker with synchronized statuses
Closing Reminders
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Goal: Close the active workflow cleanly — clear workflow tracking so the next prompt gets fresh detection, AND before clearing state leave the developer understanding what the workflow changed via the diff-gated one-way comprehension recap.
Protocols in force (concise digest of the SYNC/shared blocks this skill carries):
AI Mistake Prevention: verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references, verify all affected outputs, re-read after context loss, surface ambiguity.
Critical Thinking: MUST ATTENTION traced file:line proof per claim; confidence >80% to act; NEVER guess as fact.
Project Reference Docs Guide: MUST ATTENTION read required project-reference docs (ALWAYS lessons.md) before target work.
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION when the workflow changed code (diff present), print the comprehension recap — what changed / purpose / how it works / why — grouped by behaviour not file, optimized for easiest learning; depth throttled by codingLevel (CK_CODING_LEVEL → .claude/.ck.json → default 3), NEVER fully skip when changes exist — why: the developer must understand the work without re-reading the diff
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION the spec ↔ TDD-test sync gate runs BEFORE task-completion verification — NEVER report the workflow completed while a behavior-vs-spec divergence is unadjudicated; reconcile via /spec [mode=sync] or capture an explicit accept-as-is reason — why: green tests do not normalize spec drift; the feedback half of the loop closes here
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION run the integration-test coverage check on changed business-logic files (handlers/commands/queries/services/controllers/resolvers/event processors) — if ANY lacks a matching test, surface via AskUserQuestion; NEVER silent-skip — why: business-logic change without coverage ships an unguarded regression path
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION the recap is one-way and NEVER blocks — no quiz, no teach-back; route deeper comprehension to the standalone /understand skill — why: blocking on a teaching step would stall workflow closure
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION workflow end is model-driven — close ONLY once every TaskList item is done AND the sync gate recorded synced-or-accepted-as-is; NEVER wait for a hook to clear state — why: no hook clears .ck-workflow-state.json on completion (only session-init on explicit /clear)
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks with TaskCreate BEFORE starting; mark one in_progress, complete it immediately after its evidence lands; add a final review todo — why: untracked steps get silently skipped under long context
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search codebase for 3+ similar patterns before creating new code, and verify pattern FIT (same base class, scope, lifetime, preconditions) before copying the nearest example — why: closest example ≠ matching constraints
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite file:line evidence for every claim — confidence >80% to act, <60% DO NOT recommend; NEVER present a guess as fact
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION sync the knowledge graph ONLY if .code-graph/ exists, then announce Workflow [name] completed so the next prompt triggers fresh detection
Anti-Rationalization:
Evasion
Rebuttal
"No real code changed, skip the recap"
A diff exists → print at least the short recap. Skip ONLY with reason no changes to explain.
"Tests are green, mark the workflow completed"
Green ≠ synced. Run the spec↔TDD-test sync gate FIRST; unadjudicated drift blocks completed.
"Business file changed but I'm sure it's covered"
Show the matching test file:line. No proof → surface coverage gap via AskUserQuestion.
"Workflow feels done, clear state now"
Model-driven: confirm ALL TaskList items done + sync gate recorded before announcing completion.
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Goal echo: close the workflow cleanly — diff-gated recap delivered, sync gate adjudicated, state cleared for fresh detection.
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION NEVER silent-skip the integration-test coverage gate or the spec↔TDD-test sync gate — surface gaps via AskUserQuestion.
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite file:line evidence (confidence >80%); print the diff-gated recap; NEVER report completed with unadjudicated drift.
[TASK-PLANNING] Before acting, analyze task scope and systematically break it into small todo tasks and sub-tasks using TaskCreate.
[IMPORTANT] Analyze how big the task is and break it into many small todo tasks systematically before starting — this is very important.
