Watzup
watzup
[Utilities] Use when you need to review recent changes and wrap up the work.
SKILL.md
Full skill instructions
<!-- PROMPT-ENHANCE:STEP-TASK-ANCHOR:END -->[BLOCKING] Execute skill steps in declared order. NEVER skip, reorder, or merge steps without explicit user approval. [BLOCKING] Before each step or sub-skill call, update task tracking: set
in_progresswhen step starts, setcompletedwhen step ends. [BLOCKING] Every completed/skipped step MUST include brief evidence or explicit skip reason. [BLOCKING] If Task tools are unavailable, create and maintain an equivalent step-by-step plan tracker with the same status transitions.
Quick Summary
Goal: Hand the developer a complete, evidence-backed wrap-up — by reviewing current branch changes and summarizing impact/quality — with a change summary, doc/spec staleness flags, root-cause lessons, and a /understand explanation, WITHOUT mutating any file, so they decide the next step from full context.
Workflow:
- Review — Analyze recent commits: what was modified, added, removed
- Summarize — Provide detailed change summary with quality assessment
- Doc Check — Cross-reference changed files against docs/ for staleness
- Lesson Learned — Analyze AI mistakes/issues during the task and capture lessons
- Understand Handoff — Invoke
/understandas the final mandatory task so the developer gets a Purpose → How → Why explanation of the completed work
Key Rules:
- READ-ONLY: only flag findings, never implement or fix anything
- Doc staleness check is REQUIRED (see mapping table below)
- Lesson-learned analysis is REQUIRED (see section below)
- Final review task MUST ATTENTION include doc-staleness check, lesson-learned analysis, AND the final
/understandhandoff - MUST ATTENTION call
/understandafter the watzup summary/doc/mistake analysis and before the final Next Steps prompt
Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).
Review my current branch and the most recent commits. Provide a detailed summary of all changes, including what was modified, added, or removed. Analyze the overall impact and quality of the changes.
IMPORTANT: Review and summarize only, never start implementing.
Doc Staleness Check (REQUIRED)
After change summary, run git diff --name-only (against base branch or recent commits), cross-reference changed files against relevant docs:
| Changed file pattern | Docs to check for staleness |
|---|---|
.claude/hooks/** | .claude/docs/hooks/README.md, hook count tables in .claude/docs/hooks/*.md |
.claude/skills/** | .claude/docs/skills/README.md, skill count/catalog tables |
.claude/workflows/** | CLAUDE.md workflow catalog table, .claude/docs/ workflow references |
{configured-service-source-root}/** | docs/specs/ doc for the affected service (path from docs/project-config.json) |
{configured-frontend-source-root}/** | docs/project-reference/frontend-patterns-reference.md, relevant business-feature docs |
CLAUDE.md | .claude/docs/README.md (navigation hub must stay in sync) |
Output one of:
- A bulleted list of docs that may need updating, with a brief note on what is likely stale (e.g., "hook count changed from 31 to 32").
No doc updates needed— if no changed file pattern maps to a doc.
Do not edit docs during watzup. Only flag. The user decides whether to fix.
Spec-Driven Development Health Check (REQUIRED when business code changed)
Run this check when git diff --name-only includes ANY changes under the backend service source paths or frontend app/domain source paths (resolve the concrete paths from the project's structure reference / docs/project-config.json).
Step 1 — Feature Spec Root Check
ls docs/specs/ 2>/dev/null
Note: Results are app-bucket names. To find a specific Feature Spec, probe
ls docs/specs/{app-bucket}/for canonicalREADME.{Feature}.mdfiles and derived bucket indexes/ERDs.
| Result | Action |
|---|---|
| Directory missing or empty | ⚠️ Flag: "No Feature Specs found under docs/specs/. Consider running /workflow-spec-driven-dev (mode: init-full) to bootstrap spec-driven documentation for this codebase." |
| Feature Specs exist | Proceed to Step 2 |
Step 2 — Spec Staleness Check (only if bundle exists)
For each spec file in docs/specs/:
git log --since="30 days ago" --name-only -- docs/specs/ | head -10
| Result | Action |
|---|---|
| No commits in last 30 days AND business code changed in this session | ⚠️ Flag: "Engineering spec bundle may be stale (no updates in >30 days). Consider running /workflow-spec-driven-dev (mode: audit) to verify freshness." |
| Recent commits found | ✅ Spec bundle is being maintained |
Step 3 — Feature Docs Freshness Check
git log --since="30 days ago" --name-only -- docs/specs/ | head -10
| Result | Action |
|---|---|
| No commits in last 30 days AND business code changed | ⚠️ Flag: "Business feature docs may be stale. Consider running /docs-update to sync." |
| Recent commits found | ✅ Feature docs are being maintained |
Output only flags that apply. Skip this section entirely if no business code changed.
AI Mistake & Lesson Learned Analysis (REQUIRED)
After doc staleness check, review entire session for AI mistakes and lessons learned.
Step 1 — Surface all mistakes
List every error made during session. For each, note:
- What happened (observable symptom — build fail, test fail, wrong output)
- Where it happened (file:line if applicable)
Common mistake categories:
- Assumed an API/type/enum value existed without reading the source
- Assumed infrastructure availability without checking requirements
- Conflated "code exists" with "code executes" — missed path tracing
- Used a pattern without verifying the new context has the same preconditions
- Reported "done" without verifying ALL affected outputs across all stacks
- Hallucinated method names, class names, or file paths
Step 2 — Extract root-cause lessons (NOT symptom fixes)
For each mistake, apply this 3-step extraction:
2a. Name the failure mode — NOT the symptom, the reasoning failure:
| Symptom (BAD lesson) | Failure mode (GOOD lesson) |
|---|---|
| "Used wrong enum value" | "Generated code using an assumed API without verifying it exists in the source" |
| "Wrong namespace in using" | "Assumed project setup without reading project-specific configuration files first" |
| "Happy-path assertion failed in CI" | "Wrote assertions without tracing what infrastructure the handler requires at runtime" |
| "Set properties that don't exist on query" | "Assumed all types in a hierarchy share the same interface without reading base class" |
2b. Find the class — Where else could this SAME failure mode strike?
If failure mode applies in only one specific file or case → go up one abstraction level until it generalizes. Good lesson applies to ≥3 different contexts.
2c. Write as a universal rule — Strip ALL project-specific names:
- No file paths, class names specific to this codebase, or tool names
- Must read as useful advice on a completely different codebase in a different language
- If multiple mistakes share the same failure mode → consolidate into ONE lesson
- Test: "Would this prevent the same class of mistake in a Java, Go, or Python project?" If yes → good. If no → rewrite.
Step 3 — Ask user to persist
"Found [N] root-cause lesson(s). Should I use
/learnto save them for future sessions?"
Wait for user confirmation before invoking /learn.
Output one of:
- A numbered list: failure mode → universal lesson → proposed
/learntext No AI mistakes identified in this session— if genuinely none found
Be honest and self-critical. Surface-level symptom fixes ("always check file X") applying only to this codebase are NOT lessons — they are noise. Purpose: root-cause prevention compounding across sessions.
Next Steps
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — NO EXCEPTIONS before presenting these options, invoke /understand as the final mandatory todo task using the watzup summary and current change set as scope. If /understand is unavailable, stop and report that blocker instead of silently skipping the handoff.
After /understand completes, MUST ATTENTION use AskUserQuestion to present these options. NEVER skip because task seems "simple" or "obvious" — the user decides:
- "/workflow-end (Recommended)" — Complete and close the active workflow
- "/commit" — Commit changes if not using workflow
- "Skip, continue manually" — user decides
[IMPORTANT] Use
TaskCreateto break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting — including tasks for each file read. This prevents context loss from long files. For simple tasks, AI MUST ATTENTION ask user whether to skip.
External Memory: For complex or lengthy work (research, analysis, scan, review), write intermediate findings and final results to a report file in
plans/reports/— prevents context loss and serves as deliverable.
<!-- SYNC:nested-task-creation -->Evidence Gate: MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — every claim, finding, and recommendation requires
file:lineproof or traced evidence with confidence percentage (>80% to act, <80% must verify first).
<!-- /SYNC:nested-task-creation --> <!-- SYNC:project-reference-docs-guide -->Nested Task Expansion Contract — For workflow-step invocation, the
[Workflow] ...row is only a parent container; the child skill still creates visible phase tasks.
- Call
TaskListfirst. If a matching active parent workflow row exists, setnested=trueand recordparentTaskId; otherwise run standalone.- Create one task per declared phase before phase work. When nested, prefix subjects
[N.M] $skill-name — phase.- When nested, link the parent with
TaskUpdate(parentTaskId, addBlockedBy: [childIds]).- Orchestrators must pre-expand a child skill's phase list and link the workflow row before invoking that child skill or sub-agent.
- Mark exactly one child
in_progressbefore work andcompletedimmediately after evidence is written.- Complete the parent only after all child tasks are completed or explicitly cancelled with reason.
Blocked until:
TaskListdone, child phases created, parent linked when nested, first child markedin_progress.
<!-- /SYNC:project-reference-docs-guide --> <!-- SYNC:task-tracking-external-report -->Project Reference Docs Gate — Run after task-tracking bootstrap and before target/source file reads, grep, edits, or analysis. Project docs override generic framework assumptions.
- Identify scope: file types, domain area, and operation.
- Required docs by trigger: always
docs/project-reference/lessons.md; doc lookupdocs-index-reference.md; reviewcode-review-rules.md; backend/CQRS/APIbackend-patterns-reference.md; domain/entitydomain-entities-reference.md; frontend/UIfrontend-patterns-reference.md; styles/designscss-styling-guide.md+design-system/design-system-canonical.md; integration testsintegration-test-reference.md; E2Ee2e-test-reference.md; feature docs/specsfeature-spec-reference.md+spec-system-reference.md+spec-principles.md; behavior/public-contract/spec-test-code syncworkflow-spec-test-code-cycle-reference.md; derived spec index/ERD/reimplementation guidesspec-system-reference.md+ source Feature Specs underdocs/specs/; architecture/new areaproject-structure-reference.md.- Read every required doc. If
docs/project-config.json, the docs index,lessons.md,CLAUDE.md,AGENTS.md, or any task-required reference doc is missing or stale, auto-run/project-initor the narrow lower-level route (/project-config,/docs-init,/scan-all,/scan --target=<key>,/claude-md-init) before ordinary project-specific work. If Codex mirrors orAGENTS.mdare missing/stale, ask the user to run/sync-codex; do not auto-run it.- Before target work, state:
Reference docs read: ... | Not applicable: ....Ready when: scope evaluated, required docs checked/read or setup route completed,
lessons.mdconfirmed, citation emitted.
<!-- /SYNC:task-tracking-external-report --> <!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset -->Task Tracking & External Report Persistence — Bootstrap this before execution; then run project-reference doc prefetch before target/source work.
- Create a small task breakdown before target file reads, grep, edits, or analysis. On context loss, inspect the current task list first.
- Mark one task
in_progressbefore work andcompletedimmediately after evidence; never batch transitions.- For plan/review work, create
plans/reports/{skill}-{YYMMDD}-{HHmm}-{slug}.mdbefore first finding.- Append findings after each file/section/decision and synthesize from the report file at the end.
- Final output cites
Full report: plans/reports/{filename}.Blocked until: task breakdown exists, report path declared for plan/review work, first finding persisted before the next finding.
<!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset --> <!-- SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning -->Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.
<!-- /SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning --> <!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention -->Evidence-Based Reasoning — Speculation is FORBIDDEN. Every claim needs proof.
- Cite
file:line, grep results, or framework docs for EVERY claim- Declare confidence: >80% act freely, 60-80% verify first, <60% DO NOT recommend
- Cross-service validation required for architectural changes
- "I don't have enough evidence" is valid and expected output
BLOCKED until:
- [ ]Evidence file path (file:line)- [ ]Grep search performed- [ ]3+ similar patterns found- [ ]Confidence level statedForbidden without proof: "obviously", "I think", "should be", "probably", "this is because" If incomplete → output:
"Insufficient evidence. Verified: [...]. Not verified: [...]."
<!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention --> <!-- SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning:reminder -->AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:
Check downstream references before deleting. Deleting components causes documentation and code staleness cascades. Map all referencing files before removal. Verify AI-generated content against actual code. AI hallucinates APIs, class names, and method signatures. Always grep to confirm existence before documenting or referencing. Trace full dependency chain after edits. Changing a definition misses downstream variables and consumers derived from it. Always trace the full chain. Trace ALL code paths when verifying correctness. Confirming code exists is not confirming it executes. Always trace early exits, error branches, and conditional skips — not just happy path. When debugging, ask "whose responsibility?" before fixing. Trace whether bug is in caller (wrong data) or callee (wrong handling). Fix at responsible layer — never patch symptom site. Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing. Before changing any constant, limit, flag, or pattern: read comments, check git blame, examine surrounding code. Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. Changes touching multiple stacks require verifying EVERY output. One green check is not all green checks. Holistic-first debugging — resist nearest-attention trap. When investigating any failure, list EVERY precondition first (config, env vars, DB names, endpoints, DI registrations, data preconditions), then verify each against evidence before forming any code-layer hypothesis. Surgical changes — apply the diff test. Bug fix: every changed line must trace directly to the bug. Don't restyle or improve adjacent code. Enhancement task: implement improvements AND announce them explicitly. Surface ambiguity before coding — don't pick silently. If request has multiple interpretations, present each with effort estimate and ask. Never assume all-records, file-based, or more complex path. Keep domain concepts out of generic/shared/infrastructure layers. A reusable layer (shared library, framework, infra module) must reference NO consumer-specific domain concept — tenant/customer/product IDs, business entities, feature rules. The leak compiles and runs, so it passes review silently while coupling the "reusable" layer to one consumer. Push domain fields/logic down into the consumer via subclass or composition.
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite file:line evidence for every claim (confidence >80% to act). NEVER speculate without proof.
MUST ATTENTION apply critical thinking — every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact.
<!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder -->MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — holistic-first debugging, fix at responsible layer, surface ambiguity before coding, re-read files after compaction.
<!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:task-tracking-external-report:reminder -->- MANDATORY Bootstrap task tracking before target work; transition one task at a time.
- MANDATORY Persist plan/review findings to
plans/reports/incrementally and synthesize from disk.
- MANDATORY After task-tracking bootstrap and before target/source work, read required project-reference docs and cite
Reference docs read: .... - MANDATORY Always include
lessons.md; project conventions override generic defaults. - MANDATORY If project config, root instruction files, or any required reference doc is missing, stop and run or ask the user to run
/project-init.
- MANDATORY Parent workflow rows do not replace child phase tracking; expand phases and link the parent when nested.
- MANDATORY Orchestrators pre-expand child skill phases before invocation; use
[N.M] $skill-name — phaseprefixes and one-in_progressdiscipline.
Prompt-Enhance Closing Anchors
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION follow declared step order for this skill; NEVER skip, reorder, or merge steps without explicit user approval
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION for every step/sub-skill call: set in_progress before execution, set completed after execution
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION every skipped step MUST include explicit reason; every completed step MUST include concise evidence
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION if Task tools unavailable, maintain an equivalent step-by-step plan tracker with synchronized statuses
Closing Reminders
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Goal: Hand the developer a complete, evidence-backed wrap-up — change summary, doc/spec staleness flags, root-cause lessons, and a /understand explanation — WITHOUT mutating any file, so they decide the next step from full context.
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION stay READ-ONLY — only flag findings, NEVER implement or fix anything during watzup — why: watzup is a review/handoff, not an edit pass.
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using TaskCreate BEFORE starting.
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION validate decisions with user via AskUserQuestion — never auto-decide.
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality.
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION invoke /understand as the final watzup handoff before asking the Next Steps question.
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION READ the following files before starting:
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION READ CLAUDE.md before starting
[TASK-PLANNING] Before acting, analyze task scope and systematically break it into small todo tasks and sub-tasks using TaskCreate.
[IMPORTANT] Analyze how big the task is and break it into many small todo tasks systematically before starting — this is very important.
