Use when you need to review a plan, OpenSpec change, specification, or implementation proposal for breaking-change risk across commands, skills, generated outputs, XML sources, README/docs, tests, CI, APIs, schemas, configuration, data, migration, and release guidance. This should trigger for requests such as Review breaking changes in this spec; Check compatibility risks; Avoid breaking changes in this OpenSpec change; Review migration impact before release; Assess command and skill compatibility. Part of Plinth Toolkit
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.
Use when you need to review a plan, OpenSpec change, specification, or implementation proposal for breaking-change risk across commands, skills, generated outputs, XML sources, README/docs, tests, CI, APIs, schemas, configuration, data, migration, and release guidance. This should trigger for requests such as Review breaking changes in this spec; Check compatibility risks; Avoid breaking changes in this OpenSpec change; Review migration impact before release; Assess command and skill compatibility. Part of Plinth Toolkit
license
Apache-2.0
metadata
{"author":"Juan Antonio Breña Moral","version":"0.18.0"}
Avoid Breaking Changes
Review planned repository changes for breaking-change and compatibility risk before implementation or release promotion. This is an interactive SKILL.
Skill routing compatibility: identifiers, metadata, descriptions, triggers, references, generated local output, and acceptance coverage
Generated-output ownership: XML/source files versus .agents/skills, public skills/, .cursor/commands, .cursor/rules, and docs/
Source and generator contracts: XML, XInclude, XSLT, Maven modules, schema expectations, and module validation
README, localized README, changelog, migration, and deprecation guidance
External and runtime contracts: APIs, schemas, data formats, configuration keys, persistence, CLI behavior, and CI expectations
Structured compatibility reports with severity-ranked findings and validation guidance
Constraints
Keep the review evidence-based, read-only, and scoped to compatibility risk unless the user explicitly asks for implementation.
MUST read references/056-design-avoid-breaking-changes.md before producing compatibility guidance
MUST identify the source artifacts reviewed and the compatibility surfaces considered
MUST distinguish confirmed breaking changes, potential risks, non-breaking changes, and unknowns that need maintainer decision
MUST include migration, deprecation, validation, or release-note guidance for intentional breaking changes
MUST respect repository source ownership: edit XML and source docs, regenerate generated output through documented workflows, and avoid direct generated-output edits unless the repository explicitly owns that file
MUST NOT modify plans, specs, source files, generated outputs, or issue descriptions during review unless the user explicitly requests implementation
When to use this skill
Review breaking changes in this spec
Check compatibility risks
Avoid breaking changes in this OpenSpec change
Review migration impact before release
Assess command and skill compatibility
Find generated output compatibility risks
Review API schema configuration or data contract changes
Workflow
Read the compatibility reference
Read references/056-design-avoid-breaking-changes.md, then identify the source artifacts to review, their authority, and whether the request is read-only review or approved implementation.
Inventory compatibility surfaces
Check commands, skills, generated outputs, XML/source ownership, README/docs, tests, CI/build gates, external contracts, runtime behavior, data/configuration contracts, and release or migration guidance relevant to the proposed change.
Classify findings
Classify each finding as BREAKING, POTENTIALLY BREAKING, NON-BREAKING, or UNKNOWN. Include the affected users, artifacts, contracts, and validation evidence or missing evidence.
Recommend migration and validation
For each confirmed or potential risk, recommend deprecation, compatibility windows, migration notes, release-note updates, generator checks, focused tests, or owner decisions.
Report the review outcome
Produce a concise compatibility report with reviewed sources, risk summary by surface, severity-ranked findings, recommended validation, and a clear no-risk statement when no breaking-change risks are found.
