| name | packmind-update-playbook |
| description | Use when updating, adding, fixing, changing, or deprecating Packmind playbook artifacts (standards, commands, skills). Triggers on explicit phrases like "update packmind standard", "add a packmind skill", "fix packmind command", "change packmind playbook", "deprecate a standard". Also triggers when the conversation reveals an opportunity to update the playbook — e.g., a convention was established, a pattern emerged, a workflow changed, or an artifact is stale. This skill defines a mandatory workflow: do NOT edit artifact files directly — follow all phases (0→4) regardless of change size. Supports non-interactive mode via `CI=true` or `--non-interactive` for automated playbook updates from PR review findings. |
Update Playbook
Evaluate the user's intent against existing Packmind artifacts (standards, commands, skills) to identify what needs creating, updating, or deprecating. Produce a structured change report, then apply approved changes.
⚠️ MANDATORY WORKFLOW — This skill defines a strict phase sequence (0→1→2→3→4, plus Phase 5 in non-interactive mode). Do NOT skip phases or edit artifact files directly. Even for a single-line change, follow every phase. The workflow ensures changes are reviewed, approved, submitted correctly.
Requirements
- Source attribution in CLI messages: Every
packmind-cli diff -m and packmind-cli diff --submit -m message MUST include navigable URLs linking to the original datasources (e.g., GitHub PR, Slack thread, Jira ticket, Confluence page, Notion page). Never use placeholder URLs. See Step 2d for format details.
Execution Mode Detection
Determine the execution mode before starting the workflow:
- Check
CI env var: run echo $CI. If the value is true, set non_interactive = true.
- Check skill arguments: if the skill was invoked with
--non-interactive, set non_interactive = true.
- Inherit from caller: if invoked by another skill (e.g.,
github-pr-review) that is already running in non-interactive mode, inherit non_interactive = true.
If neither condition is met, non_interactive = false (interactive mode — original behavior).
Phase 0: Intent Validation
STOP. This phase runs FIRST, before anything else. No file reads, no CLI commands, no subagents until this gate passes.
Analyze the user's input and conversation context to determine intent:
Non-interactive mode: Only Case B applies. The caller (e.g., github-pr-review) always provides explicit intent with the findings report. If no intent is found, abort with error: "Non-interactive mode requires explicit intent. Provide a findings report or specify the changes."
Interactive mode (original behavior):
Case A: No prior conversation / empty input
The skill was invoked standalone with no context. Ask:
"What Packmind artifact do you want to modify? For example: a standard (coding rule/convention), a command (multi-step workflow), or a skill (specialized capability). Please describe what you'd like to change."
BLOCK — do not proceed until the user responds.
Case B: Explicit intent found
The user explicitly asked to update, add, fix, change, or deprecate a Packmind artifact. Extract an intent summary:
- Target artifact(s): which standard(s), command(s), or skill(s) to modify (or "new")
- Kind of change: create, update, deprecate, fix
- Specifics: any details the user provided about the change
Proceed to Phase 1 with this validated intent.
Case C: Opportunity detected from conversation
The conversation reveals a playbook update opportunity — e.g., a convention was established, a pattern emerged, a workflow was changed, or a known artifact is now stale — but the user did not explicitly ask for a playbook update. Summarize the opportunity and ask:
"I noticed an opportunity to update the Packmind playbook: . Would you like me to run the update workflow?"
BLOCK — do not proceed until the user confirms.
Case D: No intent and no opportunity
If the conversation contains no references to modifying Packmind artifacts and no detectable update opportunity, tell the user:
"I didn't detect any intent or opportunity to modify the Packmind playbook. What artifact would you like to update — a standard, command, or skill? Please describe the change."
BLOCK — do not proceed until the user responds.
Phase 1: Intent Summary
Only proceed after Phase 0 validates intent (explicit request or confirmed opportunity).
Summarize the validated intent before launching any subagents. Extract:
- Which artifact(s) the user wants to modify and what kind of change
- Any specifics the user provided about the desired change
- If prior conversation exists, relevant context that supports the intent (patterns observed, decisions made, problems encountered)
This intent summary is passed as input to all subagents.
Phase 2: Domain Analysis (parallel)
No subagent support? If the Task tool is unavailable, perform all three domain analyses sequentially in the current session — run each references/domain-*.md analysis one after another before proceeding to Phase 3.
Launch all three as Task(general-purpose) subagents simultaneously — do not wait for one before starting the others. Each subagent handles its own listing, filtering, and deep analysis in one pass.
Construct each prompt as:
## Validated Intent
<the intent summary from Phase 1>
## Analysis Task
<full contents of the corresponding references/domain-*.md file>
| Subagent | Reference File | Output |
|---|
| Standards | references/domain-standards.md | Standards change report |
| Commands | references/domain-commands.md | Commands change report |
| Skills | references/domain-skills.md | Skills change report |
For each domain, decide whether to launch or skip based on the validated intent's target artifact type:
- Launch if the intent mentions or affects that artifact type (standard, command, or skill)
- Always launch skills — skill accuracy must be checked against any behavioral change
- Skip if the intent exclusively targets a different artifact type (e.g., "update standard X" → skip commands and skills)
Phase 3: Consolidated Report
Non-interactive mode: After consolidating the report, log the full report for CI output, then auto-approve all changes. Skip the user approval prompt and proceed directly to Phase 4.
Interactive mode (original behavior):
After all subagents complete, consolidate their reports. Number every change sequentially so the user can selectively approve:
## Playbook Change Report
<!-- Only include sections that have changes. Omit empty sections entirely. -->
<!-- Ordering reflects priority: skill accuracy first, then standards, then commands. -->
<!-- New commands have a high bar — see domain-commands.md for criteria. -->
### Skill Updates
1. [skill] <name>: <what changed and why>
### New Skills
2. [skill] <name>: <reason>
### Standard Updates
3. [standard] <name>: <what changed and why>
### New Standards
4. [standard] <name>: <reason>
### New Commands
5. [command] <name>: <reason>
### Command Updates
6. [command] <name>: <what changed and why>
### Deprecations
6. [standard|skill] <name>: <reason>
Only include sections that have actual changes — omit empty sections entirely. Order by priority: skills first, then standards, then commands.
Present this report and ask the user for approval:
- Single change: ask "Do you accept this change?"
- Multiple changes: ask "Which changes to apply?" and accept:
- All: apply every numbered change
- Inclusion list: "1, 3, 5" or "only 2 and 6"
- Exclusion list: "all but 4" or "everything except 2, 7"
Phase 4: Apply Changes
Step 1: Group approved changes by topic
Cluster all approved changes (new + update + deprecate) into semantic topic groups:
- Each change belongs to exactly one topic
- If one finding produces multiple artifact changes (e.g., a standard + a skill), they share the same topic
- Name each topic concisely (e.g., "Error handling conventions", "Logging format")
Step 2: Apply and submit per topic
For each topic group, execute the following steps in order. Complete the full cycle (2a→2d) for one topic before starting the next.
2a. Write new artifacts (scoped to this topic)
For each approved new artifact in this topic, read the corresponding creation procedure from references/, then write the file(s) at the specified location:
For skills: check which agent skills directory exists at the project root (.claude/skills/, .cursor/skills/, .github/skills/) — pick the first found in that priority order. If none exist, create .claude/skills/.
After writing each new artifact, run packmind-cli diff add <path> -m "<message>" to stage and submit it.
IMPORTANT: The -m message on diff add is the submission message for that artifact — there is no separate submit step for new artifacts. Use the full source-attributed format from Step 2d:
<topic>: <summary> (source: <origin>)
Example: packmind-cli diff add .packmind/standards/code-comment-placement.md -m "Code comment placement: Place comments above code, not inline (source: MR !1 https://gitlab.com/ns/project/-/merge_requests/1)"
2b. Edit existing artifacts (scoped to this topic)
For each approved update to an existing artifact in this topic, edit the local installed files directly. Search the project root and all subdirectories (e.g. src/backend/.cursor/skills/, packages/api/.packmind/standards/):
- Standards:
**/.packmind/standards/<slug>.md (source of truth). Installed copies also exist in:
- Claude Code:
**/.claude/rules/packmind/
- Cursor:
**/.cursor/rules/packmind/
- GitHub Copilot:
**/.github/instructions/packmind-*
- Commands:
**/.packmind/commands/<slug>.md (source of truth). Installed copies also exist in:
- Claude Code:
**/.claude/commands/
- Cursor:
**/.cursor/commands/
- GitHub Copilot:
**/.github/prompts/
- Skills: no
.packmind/ source — skills live directly in agent directories:
- Claude Code:
**/.claude/skills/<skill-name>/
- Cursor:
**/.cursor/skills/<skill-name>/
- GitHub Copilot:
**/.github/skills/<skill-name>/
If a same artifact exists in multiple agent directories, pick one to edit.
2c. Preview (scoped to this topic)
Run packmind-cli diff and verify only this topic's changes appear.
Non-interactive mode: Log the output. Proceed without waiting for confirmation.
Interactive mode: Present the output. If unrelated changes appear, inform the user before proceeding.
2d. Submit with source attribution
Run packmind-cli diff --submit -m "<message>" where <message> follows this format:
<topic>: <summary> (source: <origin>)
The <origin> must include the URL(s) of the source so a reviewer can navigate directly to the original discussion. Adapt the format to the source type — examples:
- GitHub PRs:
PR #N https://github.com/<owner/repo>/pull/N, PR #M https://github.com/<owner/repo>/pull/M
- Slack:
Slack #channel https://team.slack.com/archives/CHANNEL_ID/pTIMESTAMP
- Jira:
Jira KAN-1 https://team.atlassian.net/browse/KAN-1
- Confluence:
Confluence <Page Title> https://team.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/ENG/pages/123456789
- Other sources: use a similar pattern — always include the URL so a reviewer can navigate directly to the original discussion
Extract source references from the report header and findings tables. Scope to references relevant to this topic when possible.
URL requirement: The <origin> MUST contain real, navigable URLs — never placeholders like (url). Each use case skill is responsible for populating full URLs in its findings report (using API response fields like html_url, web_url, issue keys, or channel IDs + timestamps). If a findings report contains placeholder URLs instead of real ones, do not submit — log a warning and skip the submission for that topic.
- Truncation rule: if the source reference list exceeds ~200 chars, show the first 3 items and append
and N more
- Max message length: 1024 characters
Post-submit verification
After submitting, run packmind-cli diff and verify it returns empty before starting the next topic. This prevents cross-topic contamination.
Repeat steps 2a→2d for each remaining topic group.
Phase 5: Log Report (non-interactive only)
Interactive mode: Skip this phase entirely.
Non-interactive mode: After Phase 4 completes, write a structured log report to .claude/reports/playbook-update-YYYY-MM-DD.md (using today's date). Create the directory if needed.
Report Structure
# Playbook Update Report
**Date**: YYYY-MM-DD
**Mode**: non-interactive
**Triggered by**: <caller skill name, e.g., github-pr-review>
---
## Intent Summary
<the validated intent from Phase 1>
## Changes Applied
| # | Type | Artifact | Action | Status |
|---|------|----------|--------|--------|
| 1 | standard | <name> | create | success/failed |
| 2 | skill | <name> | update | success/failed |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
## Details
### <Artifact name> (<action>)
**Status**: success/failed
**CLI output**:
\`\`\`
<packmind-cli output or creation skill output>
\`\`\`
---
## Summary
- **Total changes**: N
- **Succeeded**: N
- **Failed**: N
Log the final output path:
"Playbook update report written to .claude/reports/playbook-update-YYYY-MM-DD.md."
