remy-patch

name	remy-patch
description	Apply code modifications under engineering constraints. Accepts plan packets from /remy-plan as argument, or use standalone with a modification request.
allowed-tools	Read, Edit, Write, Grep, Glob, Bash, AskUserQuestion
argument-hint	[task_packet_file (optional)]
disable-model-invocation	true

Code Modification Standards

1. Input Requirements (Mental Model)

Although strict schema validation is disabled, you MUST internally structure your approach around these inputs:

• Intent: What is the goal? (e.g., "Fix NPE in auth service")
• Risk Analysis: Potential ripple effects, framework integrity, and performance risks.
• Target Files: List of files targeted for modification.
• Call Chain Analysis: Explicit list of upstream callers and downstream dependencies.
• Verification Plan: How you will verify library signatures and framework compatibility.

---

2. Core Engineering Principles (Mandatory)

2.1 Data Flow & Hierarchy (Downstream Adapts)

• Principle: Modifications should flow downstream. Downstream consumers must adapt to upstream changes (data structures, APIs), unless the upstream itself is buggy.
• Action: Trace the data flow. If you change a core data structure, you MUST update all consumers.

2.2 Configuration Over Hardcoding

• Principle: Avoid hardcoding. Use constants, config files, or function arguments.
• Exception: If existing mechanisms explicitly prevent configuration (rare), you MUST inform the user before proceeding.

2.3 Framework & Compiler Integrity

• Principle: Do NOT break cross-file frameworks or compiler constraints.
• Check: If the target file uses compiler decorators (e.g., JIT compilation, AOT compilation), metaprogramming patterns, or code generation — verify that new code is compatible with those constraints.
• Action: Read the decorator/framework documentation or source to confirm supported language features before modifying decorated functions.

2.4 Performance & Resource Management

• Principle: Do NOT degrade performance on critical paths.
• Check: If the target code is on a performance-critical path (loop bodies, hot functions, data pipelines), verify that the change does not introduce unnecessary copies, allocations, or serialization overhead.
• Action: If a change might introduce overhead, you MUST justify it or find an alternative.

2.5 Strict Library Verification (No Assumptions)

• Principle: Verify, Don't Guess.
  • Ban: Do not assume a function exists or has a specific signature just because it "should".
  • Action: You MUST read the library code (if local) or use context7 / documentation tools to verify signatures before writing code.

2.6 Incremental & Modular Change

• Principle: Minimize Blast Radius.
  • Strategy: Use incremental, additive changes where possible. Avoid "Big Bang" rewrites.
  • Override Protocol: If a total rewrite/override is necessary, you MUST PAUSE and explicitly ask for user permission, explaining why incremental change is impossible.

2.7 Ripple Effect & Minimalism

• Principle: Global Consistency & Minimal Noise.
  • Ripple: Analyze the call chain. Ensure logical consistency across the entire project.
  • Minimalism: Do NOT touch unrelated comments, formatting, whitespace, or variable names. ONLY change what is necessary for the task.

---

3. Workflow Protocol

Phase 0: Packet Loading (Conditional)

Execute only if a task_packet_file argument was provided.

If argument IS provided:

1. Read: Load .claude/temp_task/{task_packet_file} using the Read tool.
   • If file does not exist: HALT. Report error. Do NOT proceed.
2. Extract constraints: parse evidence_packet.proposed_changes[] as the authoritative change scope.
   • MUST NOT make changes outside the described scope.
   • For any evidence[] item with status: "suspected": re-read the referenced path and range and confirm before proceeding.
3. Proceed to Phase 1.

If NO argument provided:

• If .claude/temp_task/.active_packet exists: run Bash("rm -f '.claude/temp_task/.active_packet'") to clear stale state.
• Proceed directly to Phase 1.

Phase 1: Discovery & Tracing (Mandatory)

1. Map Dependencies:
   • Check: Run Bash("test -f .claude/logic_index.db && echo EXISTS || echo MISSING").
   • EXISTS: Run Bash("python \"~/.claude/skills/remy-index/impact.py\" <target_file_1> <target_file_2> ...") with the files targeted for modification. Use the output as the definitive dependency list. If exit code = 2 (no call graph data), fall through to the manual path below.
   • MCP alternative: If remy-index MCP server is active, query_impact / query_callers tools provide equivalent data without subprocess overhead.
   • MISSING or exit 2: Use grep or glob to locate all files that import or call the target_files.
   • Read: For every file at Upstream Depth 1 and Downstream Depth 1 in the impact output (or all grep-discovered files in the manual path):
     • If the output includes line ranges (e.g., [L120-L155]) and the file exceeds PRECISION_READ_THRESHOLD lines (default: 500), use Read(file_path, offset=start_line, limit=end_line - start_line + 1) for each listed function. Group adjacent functions into a single Read when their ranges overlap or are within 10 lines.
     • Otherwise, Read the entire file.
2. Verify Signatures: Read the definitions of any external functions you intend to use.

Phase 2: Framework Compliance Check (Conditional)

Execute only if target files contain compiler decorators, metaprogramming patterns, or performance-critical annotations.

1. Detect: Grep target files for decorators or annotations that impose language/feature constraints (e.g., @jit, @compiled, @cached, framework-specific markers).
2. If detected: Read the decorator/framework source or documentation to verify the new code uses only supported features.
3. If not detected: Skip this phase.

Phase 3: Execution (Read-Plan-Edit)

For each file to be modified, execute the following sub-steps in order. Maintain a _rollback_cache (mapping file path → original content) for the duration of Phase 3.

3.1 Pre-Read & Cache

1. Read the file to be edited.
2. Cache: Store the full original content in _rollback_cache[file_path].

3.2 Discovery Checkpoint (Packet Mode Only)

Skip this sub-step entirely if no packet was loaded in Phase 0.

Before each Edit call, evaluate the following 3 conditions:

#	Condition	Trigger
H1	The file about to be edited is NOT listed in any proposed_changes[].description or referenced evidence[].path	Scope overflow
H2	The target function's signature or structure has changed since the audit's evidence[].excerpt	Stale plan
H3	The edit would violate a constraint stated in sender_payload.analysis	Constraint conflict

If ANY condition is TRUE → Hard Interrupt:

1. HALT editing.
2. Report which condition triggered and what was discovered.
3. Use AskUserQuestion with 3 options:
   • "扩展范围并继续 (Expand scope)" — add the new file/change to scope, continue editing immediately.
   • "中止并重新审计 (Abort & re-audit)" — revert ALL Phase 3 edits using _rollback_cache, then print: "已回滚所有修改。请重新运行 /remy-plan 进行审计。"
   • "忽略并继续 (Ignore & continue)" — proceed despite the violation (user accepts risk).
4. If user chooses Abort: For each entry in _rollback_cache, use Edit or Write to restore the original content. Then HALT Phase 3. Do NOT proceed to Phase 4.

If ALL conditions are FALSE → Proceed to Edit.

3.3 Soft Decision Log (Packet Mode Only)

Skip if no packet was loaded in Phase 0.

During editing, if you make a behavioral choice NOT explicitly covered by proposed_changes[] or sender_payload.analysis (e.g., choosing a specific error type, deciding on a default value, selecting between two valid patterns):

1. Record the decision in memory.

2. After ALL edits in Phase 3 are complete, if any decisions were recorded:

   • Ensure directory: mkdir -p ".claude/temp_decisions"
   • Write to .claude/temp_decisions/decisions_{PACKET_ID}.md:

   # Decisions Log — {PACKET_ID}
   
   | 文件路径 | 决策描述 | 类别 |
   | :--- | :--- | :--- |
   | path/to/file | 选择抛出 ValueError 而非返回 None | Behavior |
   

   Categories: Interface / Resource / Behavior / Ordering / Boundary.

3. If NO undocumented decisions were made, do NOT create the file.

3.4 Edit & Verify

1. Edit: Apply the change.
2. Post-Read: Verify the change was applied correctly.

3.5 Repeat

Repeat sub-steps 3.1–3.4 for each file in the modification set.

Phase 4: Validation

4.1 Test Selection

1. If impact.py was run in Phase 1: Identify test files from the impact output (files in test directories at any depth).
2. If no impact data: Grep for test files that import or reference the modified symbols.
3. If no tests found: Skip to 4.4.

4.2 Test Execution

1. Run the identified tests using the project's test framework.
2. Capture exit code, stdout, and stderr.

4.3 Failure Handling

If tests fail:

1. Report: Print the failing test names, error messages, and triage conclusion (test defect vs. implementation defect).
2. Ask: Use AskUserQuestion to present options:
   • "Apply fix to implementation" — attempt to fix the regression.
   • "Revert changes" — undo the edits made in Phase 3 (use Edit to restore original content).
   • "Ignore and continue" — accept the failure (user takes responsibility).
3. If user chooses fix: Apply fix, re-run tests. If still failing after 2 attempts, HALT and report.
4. If user chooses revert: Restore original file content from Pre-Read state.

4.4 No Tests Available

If no relevant tests exist:

1. Print: "No tests cover the modified symbols. Consider running /remy-inspect for test generation and coverage analysis."
2. Proceed without validation.