spa-day

name	spa-day
description	Audit rules and skills for semantic contradictions, redundancy, and staleness, then interactively resolve with the user. Use periodically when agent performance degrades or after adding many rules/skills.
version	1.1.0
level	advanced
category	meta

Spa Day

Periodic health audit for your rules and skills. Finds contradictions, redundancies, dead references, and oversized files, then walks you through resolving each one interactively.

Constraints

• Read gotchas.md before starting
• NEVER modify files without explicit user approval for each change
• Read-heavy, write-light — most work is analysis
• Do NOT load all files upfront — read progressively as needed
• Stateless — no config, no logs, ask scope each time
• Use the platform's structured question mechanism for user interactions when available; otherwise ask in normal conversation and wait for the response

---

Phase 0 — Determine Scope

Use the available structured question mechanism, or normal conversation, to ask the user what to audit. Options:

• User-level only (the active platform's user-level configuration root)
• Project only (the active platform's repository-level configuration root)
• Both

Then scan the chosen locations:

• Detected instruction entry files, such as AGENTS.md or a platform equivalent
• Markdown rule files beneath the platform's rules location
• SKILL.md files beneath the platform's skills location

Build an inventory table: file path, purpose (first line or heading), line count.

---

Phase 1 — Contradiction Detection

Read references/contradiction-patterns.md for the 6 pattern types to check.

Cross-reference all inventoried files for:

• Direct contradictions (rule A says X, rule B says NOT X)
• Implicit conflicts (skill uses approach A, rule bans approach A)
• Scope overlaps (global and project say opposite things)
• Stale references (an instruction entry file points to files that don't exist)

---

Phase 2 — Redundancy Detection

Scan for:

• Duplicate or near-duplicate directives across files
• Rules that are subsets of other rules
• Skills with overlapping descriptions (false trigger risk)
• Gotchas that restate existing rules

---

Phase 3 — Health Report

Read references/health-metrics.md for thresholds. Present a report covering:

• Total files, total lines
• Contradictions found (with evidence: quotes from both files)
• Redundancies found (with both locations)
• Oversized files exceeding thresholds
• Dead references
• Recommendation per finding: consolidate / split / delete / update ref

See examples/ for concrete report samples.

If no issues found: "All healthy. No contradictions or redundancies found." and stop.

---

Phase 4 — Interactive Resolution

For each finding, use the available structured question mechanism, or normal conversation, to present the issue with evidence and ask for an action:

• Rewrite — edit the conflicting file(s) to resolve
• Delete — remove the redundant file
• Merge — combine files covering the same concern
• Update refs — fix instruction entry-file pointers
• Skip — defer this item, no action now

Consolidation guidance:

• When merging: keep the more specific/recent version
• When splitting: extract if a file covers >2 unrelated concerns
• When deleting: verify nothing references it first
• Global vs project conflict: project-level wins (intentional override)

---

Phase 5 — Summary

Print before/after metrics: file count, total lines, changes made. If the context-budget skill is available, suggest invoking it through the platform's skill mechanism for token impact verification.