go-code-walk

name	go-code-walk
description	Use when Fable needs to understand unfamiliar or cross-package Go behavior before planning or changing code. Walk current source using package docs, crawler-entry comments, semantic navigation, tests, ADR/TSR history, and support routing; report inspected evidence and unknowns before proposing changes.

Go Code Walk

Overview

Use this skill to build current-state understanding from the repository before planning, explaining, reviewing, or editing non-trivial Go behavior. It is for facts and call paths, not for implementation. Fable-native counterpart to codex-skills/go-code-walk/SKILL.md.

Workflow

1. Anchor the question.

   • Identify the package, command, config key, log/event, protocol path, or user-visible behavior under discussion.
   • Prefer package READMEs, crawler-entry comments, and selected/open files as the first routing layer.
   • If the anchor is ambiguous, search docs and source before asking the user.

2. Walk one material level up and down.

   • Read the defining file and the nearest caller/callee where behavior is material.
   • Use gopls definition, gopls references -d, gopls implementation, gopls call_hierarchy, and gopls symbols when a symbol location is known.
   • Use rg, fd, bat, go list, and go test -list to find source, tests, package ownership, and named behavior.

3. Use whole-program tools when local navigation is insufficient.

   • Use callgraph -algo rta -test ./... or callgraph -algo vta -test ./... for possible whole-program call edges.
   • Treat callgraph output as a conservative aid, not proof that a path runs in the concrete scenario.
   • Optional tools such as Graphviz dot, goda, or go-callvis can improve package or graph visualization when installed, but their absence is not a blocker for ordinary code walking.
   • If the custom GPT support agent will need the result later, put the stable package edges, inspected files, and limits in a Markdown code map under docs/code-maps/; do not rely on a rendered graph alone.

4. Check decision and support context.

   • Read docs/decision-log.md and docs/troubleshooting-log.md for component-relevant ADRs/TSRs when behavior may have durable history.
   • For operator/support surfaces, check customgpt/source-map.md, customgpt/developer-guide-index.md, and the relevant package docs.

5. Report evidence before conclusions.

   • Name inspected files, commands, and tests.
   • Separate facts, assumptions, and unknowns.
   • If a fact is not established from inspected source, say Unknown from inspected code and name the next file/tool that would resolve it.

Output Expectations

• Include a Code-walk evidence section when this skill is used for Non-trivial workflow discovery.
• Keep command output summarized; do not paste large call graphs.
• For support-agent reuse, summarize durable graph conclusions in Markdown that points to source files and tests the support agent can retrieve.
• Do not propose changes until current behavior and unknowns are clear enough to support a plan or an explanation.