Create Branch workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Create a git branch following Sentry naming conventions. Use when asked to "create a branch", "new branch", "start a branch", "make a branch", "switch to a new branch", or when starting new work on the default branch and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.
Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.
Une commande directe contourne le prompt de vérification. Examinez la source avant de l'exécuter.
Create Branch workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Create a git branch following Sentry naming conventions. Use when asked to "create a branch", "new branch", "start a branch", "make a branch", "switch to a new branch", or when starting new work on the default branch and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.
This public intake copy packages plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills-claude/skills/create-branch from https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills into the native Omni Skills editorial shape without hiding its origin.
Use it when the operator needs the upstream workflow, support files, and repository context to stay intact while the public validator and private enhancer continue their normal downstream flow.
This intake keeps the copied upstream files intact and uses the external_source block in metadata.json plus ORIGIN.md as the provenance anchor for review.
Create Branch Create a git branch with the correct type prefix and a descriptive name following Sentry conventions.
Imported source sections that did not map cleanly to the public headings are still preserved below or in the support files. Notable imported sections: Limitations.
When to Use This Skill
Use this section as the trigger filter. It should make the activation boundary explicit before the operator loads files, runs commands, or opens a pull request.
You need to create a new git branch that follows the repository's naming convention.
You are starting a new piece of work from the default branch and need help classifying it as feat, fix, docs, or another branch type.
You want the branch name proposed from either the task description or the current local diff.
Use when the request clearly matches the imported source intent: Create a git branch following Sentry naming conventions. Use when asked to "create a branch", "new branch", "start a branch", "make a branch", "switch to a new branch", or when starting new work on the default branch.
Use when the operator should preserve upstream workflow detail instead of rewriting the process from scratch.
Use when provenance needs to stay visible in the answer, PR, or review packet.
Operating Table
Situation
Start here
Why it matters
First-time use
metadata.json
Confirms repository, branch, commit, and imported path through the external_source block before touching the copied workflow
Provenance review
ORIGIN.md
Gives reviewers a plain-language audit trail for the imported source
Workflow execution
SKILL.md
Starts with the smallest copied file that materially changes execution
Supporting context
SKILL.md
Adds the next most relevant copied source file without loading the entire package
Handoff decision
## Related Skills
Helps the operator switch to a stronger native skill when the task drifts
Workflow
This workflow is intentionally editorial and operational at the same time. It keeps the imported source useful to the operator while still satisfying the public intake standards that feed the downstream enhancer flow.
Changes exist: read the diff content to understand what the work is about and generate a description.
No changes: ask the user what they are about to work on.
Type - Use when
feat - New user-facing functionality
fix - Broken behavior now works
ref - Same behavior, different structure
chore - Deps, config, version bumps, updating existing tooling — no new logic
Imported Workflow Notes
Imported: Step 1: Get the Username Prefix
Run gh api user --jq .login to get the GitHub username.
If the command fails (e.g. not authenticated), ask the user for their preferred prefix.
Imported: Step 2: Determine the Branch Description
If $ARGUMENTS is provided, use it as the description of the work.
If no arguments, check for local changes:
git diff
git diff --cached
git status --short
Changes exist: read the diff content to understand what the work is about and generate a description.
No changes: ask the user what they are about to work on.
Imported: Step 3: Classify the Type
Pick the type from this table based on the description:
Type
Use when
feat
New user-facing functionality
fix
Broken behavior now works
ref
Same behavior, different structure
chore
Deps, config, version bumps, updating existing tooling — no new logic
perf
Same behavior, faster
style
CSS, formatting, visual-only
docs
Documentation only
test
Tests only
ci
CI/CD config
build
Build system
meta
Repo metadata changes
license
License changes
When unsure: feat for new things (including new scripts, skills, or tools), ref for restructuring existing things, chore only when updating/maintaining something that already exists.
Imported: Step 4: Generate and Propose
Build the branch name as <username>/<type>/<short-description>.
Rules for <short-description>:
Kebab-case, lowercase
3 to 6 words, concise but clear
Describe the change, not file names
Only use ASCII letters, digits, and hyphens — no spaces, dots, colons, tildes, or other git-forbidden characters
Present it to the user and ask if they want to use it, modify it, or change the type.
Examples
Work description
Branch name
Dropdown menu not closing on outside click
priscila/fix/dropdown-not-closing-on-blur
Adding search to conversations page
priscila/feat/add-search-to-conversations
Restructuring drawer components
priscila/ref/simplify-drawer-components
Updating test fixtures
priscila/chore/update-test-fixtures
Bumping @sentry/react to latest version
priscila/chore/bump-sentry-react
Adding a new agent skill
priscila/feat/add-create-branch-skill
Imported: Step 5: Create the Branch
Once confirmed, detect the current and default branch:
If symbolic-ref fails, fall back to git branch --list main master: use the one that exists; if both or neither exist, ask the user.
If git branch --show-current is empty (detached HEAD), show the current commit (git rev-parse --short HEAD) and ask whether to branch from it or switch to the default branch first.
Otherwise, if the current branch is not the default branch, warn the user and ask whether to branch from the current branch or switch to the default branch first.
If the user wants to switch to the default branch, handle any uncommitted changes appropriately (offer to stash them if present), then run git checkout <default-branch>. On any failure, restore stashed changes if applicable and stop.
Before creating the branch, check that the name doesn't already exist locally or on the remote (git show-ref). If it does, ask the user to choose a different name.
Create the branch:
git checkout -b <branch-name>
Restore any stashed changes after the branch is created.
Imported: Limitations
Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review.
Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.
Examples
Example 1: Ask for the upstream workflow directly
Use @create-branch to handle <task>. Start from the copied upstream workflow, load only the files that change the outcome, and keep provenance visible in the answer.
Explanation: This is the safest starting point when the operator needs the imported workflow, but not the entire repository.
Example 2: Ask for a provenance-grounded review
Review @create-branch against metadata.json and ORIGIN.md, then explain which copied upstream files you would load first and why.
Explanation: Use this before review or troubleshooting when you need a precise, auditable explanation of origin and file selection.
Example 3: Narrow the copied support files before execution
Use @create-branch for <task>. Load only the copied references, examples, or scripts that change the outcome, and name the files explicitly before proceeding.
Explanation: This keeps the skill aligned with progressive disclosure instead of loading the whole copied package by default.
Example 4: Build a reviewer packet
Review @create-branch using the copied upstream files plus provenance, then summarize any gaps before merge.
Explanation: This is useful when the PR is waiting for human review and you want a repeatable audit packet.
Best Practices
Treat the generated public skill as a reviewable packaging layer around the upstream repository. The goal is to keep provenance explicit and load only the copied source material that materially improves execution.
Keep the imported skill grounded in the upstream repository; do not invent steps that the source material cannot support.
Prefer the smallest useful set of support files so the workflow stays auditable and fast to review.
Keep provenance, source commit, and imported file paths visible in notes and PR descriptions.
Point directly at the copied upstream files that justify the workflow instead of relying on generic review boilerplate.
Treat generated examples as scaffolding; adapt them to the concrete task before execution.
Route to a stronger native skill when architecture, debugging, design, or security concerns become dominant.
Troubleshooting
Problem: The operator skipped the imported context and answered too generically
Symptoms: The result ignores the upstream workflow in plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills-claude/skills/create-branch, fails to mention provenance, or does not use any copied source files at all.
Solution: Re-open metadata.json, ORIGIN.md, and the most relevant copied upstream files. Check the external_source block first, then restate the provenance before continuing.
Problem: The imported workflow feels incomplete during review
Symptoms: Reviewers can see the generated SKILL.md, but they cannot quickly tell which references, examples, or scripts matter for the current task.
Solution: Point at the exact copied references, examples, scripts, or assets that justify the path you took. If the gap is still real, record it in the PR instead of hiding it.
Problem: The task drifted into a different specialization
Symptoms: The imported skill starts in the right place, but the work turns into debugging, architecture, design, security, or release orchestration that a native skill handles better.
Solution: Use the related skills section to hand off deliberately. Keep the imported provenance visible so the next skill inherits the right context instead of starting blind.
Related Skills
@00-andruia-consultant - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
@00-andruia-consultant-v2 - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
@10-andruia-skill-smith - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
@10-andruia-skill-smith-v2 - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
Additional Resources
Use this support matrix and the linked files below as the operator packet for this imported skill. They should reflect real copied source material, not generic scaffolding.
Resource family
What it gives the reviewer
Example path
references
copied reference notes, guides, or background material from upstream
references/n/a
examples
worked examples or reusable prompts copied from upstream
examples/n/a
scripts
upstream helper scripts that change execution or validation
scripts/n/a
agents
routing or delegation notes that are genuinely part of the imported package
agents/n/a
assets
supporting assets or schemas copied from the source package
