requesting-code-review
Dispatch code review subagents with focused context to catch issues before they compound.
using-git-worktrees
Isolated git worktrees with smart directory selection and safety verification.
Full skill instructions
Ensure work happens in an isolated workspace. Prefer your platform's native worktree tools. Fall back to manual git worktrees only when no native tool is available.
Core principle: Detect existing isolation first. Then use native tools. Then fall back to git. Never fight the harness.
Announce at start: "I'm using the using-git-worktrees skill to set up an isolated workspace."
Before creating anything, check if you are already in an isolated workspace.
GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current)
Submodule guard: GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON is also true inside git submodules. Before concluding "already in a worktree," verify you are not in a submodule:
# If this returns a path, you're in a submodule, not a worktree — treat as normal repo
git rev-parse --show-superproject-working-tree 2>/dev/null
If GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON (and not a submodule): You are already in a linked worktree. Skip to Step 2 (Project Setup). Do NOT create another worktree.
Report with branch state:
<path> on branch <name>."<path> (detached HEAD, externally managed). Branch creation needed at finish time."If GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON (or in a submodule): You are in a normal repo checkout.
Has the user already indicated their worktree preference in your instructions? If not, ask for consent before creating a worktree:
"Would you like me to set up an isolated worktree? It protects your current branch from changes."
Honor any existing declared preference without asking. If the user declines consent, work in place and skip to Step 2.
You have two mechanisms. Try them in this order.
The user has asked for an isolated workspace (Step 0 consent). Do you already have a way to create a worktree? It might be a tool with a name like EnterWorktree, WorktreeCreate, a /worktree command, or a --worktree flag. If you do, use it and skip to Step 2.
Native tools handle directory placement, branch creation, and cleanup automatically. Using git worktree add when you have a native tool creates phantom state your harness can't see or manage.
Only proceed to Step 1b if you have no native worktree tool available.
Only use this if Step 1a does not apply — you have no native worktree tool available. Create a worktree manually using git.
Follow this priority order. Explicit user preference always beats observed filesystem state.
Check your instructions for a declared worktree directory preference. If the user has already specified one, use it without asking.
Check for an existing project-local worktree directory:
ls -d .worktrees 2>/dev/null # Preferred (hidden)
ls -d worktrees 2>/dev/null # Alternative
If found, use it. If both exist, .worktrees wins.
If there is no other guidance available, default to .worktrees/ at the project root.
MUST verify directory is ignored before creating worktree:
git check-ignore -q .worktrees 2>/dev/null || git check-ignore -q worktrees 2>/dev/null
If NOT ignored: Add to .gitignore, commit the change, then proceed.
Why critical: Prevents accidentally committing worktree contents to repository.
# Determine path based on chosen location
path="$LOCATION/$BRANCH_NAME"
git worktree add "$path" -b "$BRANCH_NAME"
cd "$path"
Sandbox fallback: If git worktree add fails with a permission error (sandbox denial), tell the user the sandbox blocked worktree creation and you're working in the current directory instead. Then run setup and baseline tests in place.
Auto-detect and run appropriate setup:
# Node.js
if [ -f package.json ]; then npm install; fi
# Rust
if [ -f Cargo.toml ]; then cargo build; fi
# Python
if [ -f requirements.txt ]; then pip install -r requirements.txt; fi
if [ -f pyproject.toml ]; then poetry install; fi
# Go
if [ -f go.mod ]; then go mod download; fi
Run tests to ensure workspace starts clean:
# Use project-appropriate command
npm test / cargo test / pytest / go test ./...
If tests fail: Report failures, ask whether to proceed or investigate.
If tests pass: Report ready.
Worktree ready at <full-path>
Tests passing (<N> tests, 0 failures)
Ready to implement <feature-name>
| Situation | Action |
|---|---|
| Already in linked worktree | Skip creation (Step 0) |
| In a submodule | Treat as normal repo (Step 0 guard) |
| Native worktree tool available | Use it (Step 1a) |
| No native tool | Git worktree fallback (Step 1b) |
.worktrees/ exists | Use it (verify ignored) |
worktrees/ exists | Use it (verify ignored) |
| Both exist | Use .worktrees/ |
| Neither exists | Check instruction file, then default .worktrees/ |
| Directory not ignored | Add to .gitignore + commit |
| Permission error on create | Sandbox fallback, work in place |
| Tests fail during baseline | Report failures + ask |
| No package.json/Cargo.toml | Skip dependency install |
git worktree add when the platform already provides isolationgit check-ignore before creating project-local worktreeNever:
git worktree add when you have a native worktree tool (e.g., EnterWorktree). This is the #1 mistake — if you have it, use it.Always:
Dispatch code review subagents with focused context to catch issues before they compound.
Evaluate code review feedback with technical rigor before implementing, avoiding performative agreement and blind implementation.
Structured workflow for completing development branches with test verification and merge/PR options.
review
Conducts multi-axis code review. Use before merging any change. Use when reviewing code written by yourself, another agent, or a human. Use when you need to assess code quality across multiple dimensions before it enters the main branch.
Standardized git commits using Conventional Commits specification with intelligent diff analysis and message generation.
Structures git workflow practices. Use when making any code change. Use when committing, branching, resolving conflicts, or when you need to organize work across multiple parallel streams.
Code review focused exclusively on over-engineering. Finds what to delete: reinvented standard library, unneeded dependencies, speculative abstractions, dead flexibility. One line per finding: location, what to cut, what replaces it. Complements correctness-focused review, this one only hunts complexity.
Generate Excalidraw diagrams from natural language descriptions in multiple formats.
Whole-repo audit for over-engineering. Like ponytail-review, but scans the entire codebase instead of a diff: a ranked list of what to delete, simplify, or replace with stdlib/native equivalents. One-shot report, does not apply fixes.
Systematic code review practices for constructive feedback, bug detection, and team knowledge sharing.
Identify and review overdue Google Tasks requiring immediate attention.
Opus.ai: Revolutionize Your Web Experience
Build a no-code AI app in minutes.
An IDE for code migration from legacy to modern frameworks through coding agents.
Automate CGI animation in live-action scenes
Branded artistic QR-code concepts
Launch a website in seconds with AI.
Streamline Your Coding Experience with AI Code Helper
Convert any screenshot or design to clean code.