SOC 직업 분류 기준
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
직접 명령은 검토 Prompt를 거치지 않습니다. 실행하기 전에 소스를 확인하세요.
npx skills add https://github.com/existential-birds/beagle --skill commit-push명령은 한 줄로 유지됩니다. 복사하기 전에 가로로 스크롤해 전체 내용을 확인하세요.
로컬 사본을 원하시나요? SkillsMP에서 현재 제공할 수 있는 파일을 다운로드하세요.
SKILL.md 표시 중
Use when you need a bite-sized, TDD-driven implementation plan but do NOT have a brainstorm-beagle spec to plan against. quick-plan reconstructs intent from the current conversation, fans out domain-expert exploration subagents across the codebase, and synthesizes the same plan format write-plan produces — without requiring `.beagle/concepts/<slug>/spec.md`. Triggers on: "quick plan", "plan this out", "plan what we just discussed", "turn this into an implementation plan", "plan this without a spec", "I don't have a spec, just plan it", "write-plan but no spec". Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants an implementation or TDD plan and there is no spec to plan against — even if they just say "plan it" after discussing a feature. Writes to `.beagle/plans/<slug>/plan.md`. If a finalized spec already exists at `.beagle/concepts/<slug>/spec.md`, prefer write-plan. Does NOT brainstorm specs, write code, or execute the plan — produces the plan document (and an optional handoff prompt) only.
Use when the user has a fuzzy idea and wants to shape it into a concrete project spec before planning or building. Triggers on: "brainstorm this", "I have an idea for...", "help me think through this project", "what should I build", "spec this out". Also catches vague feature descriptions needing structured questioning to clarify scope. Does NOT write code, plan implementation, review strategy docs, or run strategy interviews — produces a WHAT/WHY spec through dialogue, not a HOW plan.
Use as the follow-up to brainstorm-beagle when a spec has an Open Questions section (or quietly carries latent gaps) that need closing before planning or implementation can begin. Triggers on: "resolve the open questions", "close the gaps in this spec", "research the open items", "finalize my spec", "make this spec implementation-ready", "answer the TBDs". Also triggers whenever the user points at a brainstorm-beagle spec and asks for research, proposals, or answers to unresolved items. Orchestrates parallel research subagents when available (falls back to inline sequential research otherwise), proposes answers one at a time for user approval, then rewrites the spec in place so it arrives at planning with no known gaps. Does NOT write code, design implementation, or create plans — it only produces a complete spec.
| name | commit-push |
| description | commit and push all local changes to remote repo |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
Commit all local changes following Conventional Commits format and push to remote.
Complete in order. Do not run the next action until the Pass condition is satisfied (use command output as evidence, not memory).
git status, git diff, and git diff --cached are consistent with your one-sentence description of what changed (or you recorded that there is nothing to commit).type(scope): description (or type: description if omitting scope) that matches the change set you intend to ship.git add, git diff --cached --stat (and spot-check git diff --cached if needed) shows only the paths you meant to include; adjust staging before committing if not.git branch -vv, git remote -v); then push.git status is clean and git status -sb shows the branch is up to date with its configured upstream (no unexpected unpushed commits left for this task).Run these commands in parallel to understand the changes:
# See all untracked and modified files
git status
# See staged and unstaged changes
git diff
git diff --cached
# See recent commit messages for style reference
git log --oneline -10
Review the changes and determine:
Type: What kind of change is this?
feat - New feature or capabilityfix - Bug fixdocs - Documentation onlyrefactor - Code restructure without behavior changetest - Adding or updating testschore - Maintenance, dependency updatesperf - Performance improvementci - CI/CD changesScope: Which component is affected?
git log for patterns)Breaking: Does this break backward compatibility? If yes, add ! after scope.
Format:
type(scope): description
[optional body explaining why, not what]
[optional footer with issue references]
Rules:
Closes #123 or Fixes #456Satisfy Gates 1–3 before git commit; satisfy Gate 4 before git push; satisfy Gate 5 after push.
# Stage all changes (or selectively stage)
git add -A
# Gate 3: confirm staged set before committing
git diff --cached --stat
# Commit with message (use HEREDOC for multi-line)
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
type(scope): description
Optional body explaining the motivation.
Closes #123
EOF
)"
# Push to remote
git push
# Simple feature
git commit -m "feat(api): add pagination support to list endpoints"
# Bug fix with body
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
fix(auth): handle token expiration during long requests
The previous implementation did not account for tokens expiring
during the processing of long-running requests.
Fixes #42
EOF
)"
# Breaking change
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
feat!(api): change response format for user endpoints
BREAKING CHANGE: The `status` field is now an object with `state` and
`message` properties instead of a plain string.
EOF
)"
Optionally append a co-author or footer trailer per project convention (e.g. a Co-Authored-By: line or a tool-attribution footer). Omit it when the project has no such convention.
After pushing, satisfy Gate 5: run git status and git status -sb and confirm a clean tree and upstream sync (or an expected ahead/behind you can explain, e.g. fork workflow).