| name | breaking-changes-management |
| version | 1.2 |
| last_updated | "2026-04-25T00:00:00.000Z" |
| tags | ["breaking","changes","management","workflow","quality"] |
| description | Manage breaking API changes, migration guides, deprecation notices, and semver versioning. Use when introducing breaking changes, writing migration paths, updating changelogs, or releasing major versions. |
Breaking Changes Management
Use this skill when behavior, interfaces, configuration, or compatibility contracts change in a way that can break consumers.
- Leverage native parallel subagent dispatch and 200k+ context windows where available.
Activation Conditions
Use symptom -> action triggers: when one matches, apply this skill and verify with the protocol below.
- Releasing a major version
- Renaming or removing public APIs
- Changing request or response shapes
- Replacing config keys, env vars, CLI flags, or file formats
- Writing migration notes, deprecation notices, or upgrade checklists
Workflow
- Identify the exact consumer-visible break.
- State who is affected and from which version.
- Provide the replacement path or mitigation.
- Add before/after examples.
- Update
CHANGELOG.md and any setup or usage docs that changed.
Required Outputs
- Changelog entry with a clear
BREAKING label
- Migration guide with old usage, new usage, and upgrade steps
- Deprecation timeline if removal is delayed
- Validation notes for any examples or scripts that changed
Anti-Patterns
- Starting work before the plan or gate is clear: Execution drifts when success criteria are implied instead of explicit.
- Treating verification as optional cleanup: The last mile is where regressions and missing updates are usually hiding.
- Mixing planning, implementation, and release work in one jump: You lose the causal chain that explains why a change is safe.
Verification Protocol
Before claiming "skill applied successfully":
- Pass/fail: The Breaking Changes Management workflow starts from explicit success criteria, constraints, and stop conditions.
- Pass/fail: Required evidence is collected before any completion, approval, or readiness claim.
- Pass/fail: The next action follows the documented gate order without skipping review or verification steps.
- Pressure-test scenario: Apply the workflow under time pressure with one failing check and one tempting shortcut.
- Success metric: Zero rationalizations; blocked, failed, or unverified work is reported as such.
Migration Checklist
References & Resources
Documentation
Scripts
Cross-Client Portability
This skill is written to stay usable across GitHub Copilot, Claude Code, Codex, and Gemini CLI.
- GitHub Copilot: keep the folder in a Copilot-visible skill or plugin path, or wrap the workflow as project instructions if the host does not support portable skill folders directly.
- Claude Code: keep the folder in a local skills directory or a compatible plugin or marketplace source.
- Codex: install or sync the folder into
$CODEX_HOME/skills/<skill-name> and restart Codex after major changes.
- Gemini CLI: this repository generates a project command named
/skills:breaking-changes-management from this skill. Rebuild commands with python scripts/export-gemini-skill.py breaking-changes-management and then run /commands reload inside Gemini CLI.
MCP Availability And Fallback
Preferred MCP Server: None required
- Fallback prompt: "Use the Breaking Changes Management skill without MCP. Rely on the local
SKILL.md, bundled references or scripts, and manual verification. Show the exact commands, evidence, and final checks you used before concluding."
- If the current host does not expose a matching server, use the bundled references, scripts, native toolchain, and manual workflow already described in this skill.
- Treat direct local verification, rendered output, logs, tests, or screenshots as the fallback evidence path before completion.
Related Skills
- development-workflow: Use it when the workflow also needs planning, quality gates, and delivery tracking.
- code-quality: Use it when the workflow also needs two-stage review (spec compliance first, then code quality), maintainability, and refactoring guidance.
- systematic-debugging: Use it when the workflow also needs root-cause debugging before proposing fixes.
- test-driven-development: Use it when the workflow also needs test-first implementation and regression safety.
