Coding Loop
task-coding-loop
Earn trust through verification. Invoke at session start to establish verifiable checkpoints (environment, baseline, completion). Trust comes from gates, not claims.
SKILL.md
Full skill instructions
Coding Loop
Trust is earned, not assumed.
Context: Where Coding-Loop Fits
This skill operates within the Execute stage of RSID:
USER-DRIVEN: Listen → Execute ← YOU ARE HERE → Reflect
AUTONOMOUS: Ideate → Execute ← YOU ARE HERE → Reflect
After completing Execute (PR merged), invoke rsid skill to Reflect and record learnings.
The Principle
You have autonomy to change code. That autonomy requires accountability:
| Claim | Gate |
|---|---|
| "Environment is safe" | devcontainer OR explicit host acknowledgment |
| "Starting state is clean" | ./verify.sh --agent passes |
| "Changes are correct" | ./verify.sh --agent passes |
| "Work is complete" | PR merged + main verified |
No gate, no trust.
Session Gates
- Start: Verify baseline green before writing code
- Design: Invoke coding-patterns before creating new packages (see Pre-Design Gate below)
- Implement: Verify after significant changes
- Pre-PR: Pass hard gates (see below) before creating PR
- Review: Spawn tsc-reviewer subagent (MANDATORY - do NOT self-review)
- Complete: PR merged (not just created) + main verified post-merge
- Reflect: Invoke rsid to record learnings in memory.yaml
- Stuck: After 3 failed attempts → escalate, don't loop
Hard Gates (Blocking)
These gates MUST be satisfied before PR creation:
0. Pre-Design Gate (for new packages)
Before designing new contract/port packages, invoke coding-patterns skill and answer:
- Is this a capability (interface with methods) or data structure (pure types)?
- If data structure: are operations in port as pure functions (not methods on contract)?
- Does this follow existing package patterns in the monorepo?
If creating packages without this gate: Design will likely conflate data and operations. Stop, invoke skill, redesign.
1. Commit Atomicity Gate
# Check commit count and size
git log --oneline main..HEAD
git diff --stat main..HEAD
| Commits | Lines Changed | Action Required |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | > 200 | SPLIT: Use git rebase -i main per effective-git |
| Any | > 500 total | SPLIT: Break into logical units |
If gate fails: Invoke effective-git skill and restructure before PR.
2. Subagent Review Gate
Before merge, the tsc-reviewer subagent MUST approve:
Spawn: "Use the tsc-reviewer agent to review this PR"
Loop until:
- Verdict = APPROVED
- Blockers = 0
Only then: gh pr merge
If subagent not spawned: Review is incomplete. Do not merge. If blockers remain: Address findings, re-spawn subagent, repeat.
3. Size-Based Skill Invocation
| Change Size | Required Skills |
|---|---|
| < 50 lines | coding-loop (this) |
| 50-200 lines | + tsc-reviewer (agent for review) |
| > 200 lines | + effective-git (restructure first) |
| > 10 files | Consider human review escalation |
Commands
./verify.sh --agent # Minimal output: VERIFY:PASS or structured failure
git status -sb # Know your state
gh pr diff <n> # Review before merge (mandatory)
Slash Commands
Use these for accelerated workflows:
| Command | Purpose |
|---|---|
/verify | Run full pipeline or specific stage |
/verify-lint [package] | Quick lint check with optional scope |
/lint-and-learn | Auto-fix lint + extract lessons + create PR |
/tsc-review <pr> | Spawn TSC reviewer with auto-merge on APPROVED |
Deeper Guidance
- rsid → outer context, post-merge reflection
- plan-writing → rigorous plans for distinguished engineers
- coding-patterns → architecture patterns
- tsc-reviewer (agent) → mandatory PR review before merge (contains all review criteria)
- effective-git → commit discipline
- verification-pipeline → debugging failures
- devcontainer-sandboxing → environment safety
- pull-request → PR authoring and review workflow