library-craft

name	library-craft
description	Reviews reusable package craft: exports, layout, naming, tests, docs, compatibility, and release shape. Use for npm packages, SDKs, framework utilities, reusable modules, or public APIs.

Library Craft

Quick Start

Use this skill when the work affects a reusable package, public API, package exports, or maintainer-facing source organization.

Example trigger: library-craft this package before we publish

Default posture: analysis first. Do not edit source files unless the user explicitly asks to implement.

Default scope: review the whole library contract unless the user gives a narrower scope.

Breaking changes are welcome when they make the library cleaner, smaller, or more honest. If the user opts out of breaking changes, preserve compatibility and name the trade-off.

Workflow

1. Identify the package, public entrypoints, consumer contract, and whether breaking changes are allowed.
2. Read package metadata, export maps, source entrypoints, build config, tests, fixtures, README/docs, examples, and release notes.
3. Separate the public surface from internal shape.
4. Review the craft lenses:
   • surface - exports, subpaths, types, defaults, runtime guarantees.
   • shape - folders, helpers, generated files, fixtures, build output.
   • names - user-facing concepts, options, files, helpers.
   • tests - public API, fixtures, examples, type tests, regression checks.
   • comments - public docs, rationale, compatibility notes, noisy narration.
   • release - semver impact, migration path, shims, deprecations.
5. Load references/principles.md for the review vocabulary.
6. For serious public-surface decisions, recommend focused ecosystem comparison. Load references/ecosystem-comparison.md before proposing large API, export, compatibility, or release-shape changes.
7. Load references/report-shape.md before writing the final aggressive report.

Action Labels

• keep - preserve a pattern that is earning its cost.
• rename - a name hides the concept or leaks implementation.
• move - file or folder placement fights the scan path.
• narrow - public surface or options are broader than needed.
• split - one entrypoint or file owns multiple public concepts.
• merge - separation creates ceremony without a real concept.
• comment - comments are missing, stale, noisy, or API-significant.
• test - contract, fixture, type, or example coverage is missing.
• break - compatibility is making the package worse.

For every break, include what breaks, why it is worth it, the migration path, and whether a compatibility shim should exist.

Rules

• Keep keep short; spend most of the report on pressure.
• Treat package.json exports, README examples, and generated types as API.
• Comments explain why; they do not narrate what the code already says.
• Do not invent a new taxonomy when the package already has a clear local pattern.
• If the issue is really module depth, seam design, or locality, hand off to improve-codebase-architecture.
• If naming changes affect project language, say so and suggest grill-with-docs; do not update project context by default.
• Do not publish comments, issues, releases, or PR notes without explicit user consent.