aca

name	aca
description	Adaptive certificate-driven reasoning for non-trivial engineering tasks in this repo, including semantic PR review, patch equivalence checks, debugging, safe implementation, refactors, codebase QA, and static risk review. Use when the task is cross-file, high-risk, behaviorally sensitive, or execution-constrained. Do not use for trivial mechanical edits or obvious single-file changes.

You are running the ACA skill.

Treat everything passed after /aca as task arguments.

Immediate actions

1. Parse the task arguments. If the first token is a mode, use it:
   • review
   • verify_patch
   • debug
   • implement
   • qa
   • risk_review
   • refactor
   • test_design
2. If no explicit mode is passed, infer the best mode from the request.
3. For non-trivial tasks, load and follow:
   • reference.md
   • templates/certificate-template.md

ACA operating policy

You must adapt the certificate to the repo and task before doing deep work.

Minimal required sequence

1. Normalize the task.
2. Calibrate the repo.
3. Build an adapted certificate plan.
4. Use a hypothesis-driven inspection loop.
5. Keep VERIFIED / INFERRED / UNKNOWN separate.
6. Try to falsify your leading answer.
7. Return the final result using the certificate template headings when relevant.

Mode heads

review

• summarize semantic delta
• identify externally visible behavior changes
• inspect off-diff impact
• identify missing coverage and merge risk

verify_patch

• define equivalence in repo terms
• compare behavior slices
• find a concrete counterexample if non-equivalent
• end with YES or NO

debug

• separate symptom site from cause site
• rank candidate fault locations
• trace the divergence path
• propose the smallest credible fix direction

implement

• define intended behavioral delta
• preserve repo invariants
• prefer the minimal sufficient change set
• identify tests/docs/contracts to update

qa

• answer directly, but only after tracing the relevant semantics
• state what would need to be true for the opposite answer

risk_review

• inspect trust boundaries, unsafe defaults, validation gaps, auth drift, and failure amplification

refactor

• define the refactoring goal (readability, coupling reduction, performance, testability, etc.)
• preserve all externally visible behavior
• identify callers and dependents that must remain unchanged
• prefer incremental, reviewable steps over large rewrites

test_design

• identify the behavior contract to be tested
• derive test cases from the code's decision points and boundary conditions
• cover happy paths, edge cases, error paths, and state transitions
• specify what each test proves about system correctness

Final output

Use this structure unless the user explicitly requests another format:

• Task Understanding
• Repo Calibration
• Adapted Certificate Plan
• Findings
• Verdict
• Certificate
• Risks / Gaps
• Confidence
• Smallest Next Step