ワンクリックで
hotfix
Applies a minimal, targeted fix for emergency bugs — enforces review and testing without brainstorm or planning phases.
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
メニュー
Applies a minimal, targeted fix for emergency bugs — enforces review and testing without brainstorm or planning phases.
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
Executes an implementation plan — writes code and tests, runs quality review, and ships a pull request.
Turns high-level brainstorming and ideas into well-structured, actionable implementation plans.
Reviews an externally-authored implementation plan for quality, VGV conventions, and scope. Plans created by /plan are already reviewed during creation.
Runs quality review agents on demand — reviews code against VGV standards for architecture, tests, and simplicity, then writes one consolidated, numbered report.
Explores requirements and approaches through collaborative dialogue before planning implementation.
Stage, commit, push, and open a pull request following project conventions and the Conventional Commits spec. Accepts optional skip-checks argument to bypass validation when called from /build.
| name | hotfix |
| user-invocable | true |
| description | Applies a minimal, targeted fix for emergency bugs — enforces review and testing without brainstorm or planning phases. |
| effort | high |
| argument-hint | bug description, issue link, or error message |
| allowed-tools | Bash(rm -rf docs/hotfix-review/) |
| compatibility | Designed for Claude Code (or similar products with agent support) |
Apply a minimal, targeted fix fast. No brainstorm document, no plan document — but tests and review are still non-negotiable.
<bug_description>$ARGUMENTS</bug_description>
If the bug description above is empty, ask the user: "What's the bug? Paste a description, issue link, or error message."
DO NOT proceed until you have a bug description.
Summarize the bug in one sentence. Identify:
Run a focused codebase exploration to find the problem area:
After the agent returns:
If the root cause is unclear after exploration, use AskUserQuestion to ask the user for additional context before proceeding.
Set up a hotfix branch. Unlike normal feature branches, hotfix branches use the hotfix/ prefix.
Run:
git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD
If already on a hotfix/ branch: skip silently.
Otherwise: infer a branch name in the format hotfix/<kebab-slug> where the slug is derived from the bug description (max 60 characters total). Use AskUserQuestion to confirm:
git checkout -b hotfix/<slug>Before writing any code, outline which files and layers the fix touches.
If >5 files, multiple layers, or new abstractions needed: warn the user and use AskUserQuestion: (1) Proceed with hotfix, (2) Switch to /plan.
If contained (≤5 files, single layer): proceed directly.
Write the minimal change that addresses the root cause. Change only what is necessary — no drive-by refactors. If you touch unrelated code, stop and flag scope creep. Leave // TODO(hotfix): <description> comments for out-of-scope issues. Match surrounding code style.
Tests are non-negotiable, even for hotfixes:
Follow the validation and fix procedure.
// TODO(hotfix): <description of known limitation and its severity> comment in the code and note it in the PR description. The goal is to stop the bleeding, not achieve perfection.Run review agents in parallel to validate the fix. Use a reduced set — speed matters, but quality is non-negotiable.
Run pwd and let <PWD> be the result — subagents may change directories, making relative paths unreliable.
Each agent prompt must include the review agent instructions with <RAW_DIR> set to <PWD>/docs/hotfix-review/raw and <name> set to the agent's report name below (a bare stem — the agent writes <RAW_DIR>/<name>.md). Substitute <PWD> with the absolute path.
The reduced agent set and their report names (<name>):
| Agent | Report name |
|---|---|
| @vgv-review-agent | vgv-review |
| @test-quality-review-agent | test-quality-review |
If an agent fails, note it, continue with the other, and record the failure in the report header so the reduced review isn't silently halved.
Follow the review consolidation procedure: deduplicate the agents' structured findings, order them deterministically, assign stable FINDING-NN ids, and write one consolidated file to <PWD>/docs/hotfix-review/review.md using the report template. Print the aligned chat summary (same ids, order, and titles as the file). Then fix Critical findings by id and present Important findings to the user. The report is deleted at Cleanup, so the fix commit does not cite FINDING-NN ids.
Remove review reports after findings are addressed:
rm -rf docs/hotfix-review/
A hotfix has no plan, so there is no success-criteria block. Follow the drive to green procedure with the detected project suite (formatter, linter, test runner) as both the gate set and the authoritative command run once. It loops until green by real output, delegates to a matching installed verification skill when one exists, and escalates only on un-runnable or self-contradictory failures — never on an ordinary, fixable one. Do not proceed until it is green.
Create a single, cherry-pick-friendly commit. Stage only fix-related files (no unrelated changes). Use this commit format:
fix: <concise description of what was fixed>
<Root cause explanation in 1-2 sentences>
Bug: <original bug description or issue link, truncated if long>
Push the branch and create a PR. Title: fix: <concise description> (under 70 chars). Body: Use the PR template.
Use AskUserQuestion to present options:
/plan → /build.hotfix/ prefix, not fix/. Other skills use fix/ — do not mix them.docs/hotfix-review/ already exists from a previous interrupted hotfix, delete it before running Phase 4 to avoid stale reports contaminating the review./plan → /build.