Add new skills and utilities for enhanced writing and testing

- Introduced graphviz conventions for visualizing process flows in writing skills.
- Added a comprehensive guide on persuasion principles to improve skill design effectiveness.
- Implemented a script to render graphviz diagrams from markdown files to SVG format.
- Created a detailed reference for testing skills with subagents, emphasizing TDD principles.
- Established a task tracker template for live task management.
- Developed a shell script to check the integrity of the antigravity profile and required files.
- Added test scripts to validate the initialization of agent projects.
- Created workflows for brainstorming, executing plans, and writing plans to streamline processes.
This commit is contained in:
spaceman1412
2026-02-26 15:16:32 +07:00
commit fd4c3c2fc7
53 changed files with 7886 additions and 0 deletions

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,115 @@
---
name: requesting-code-review
description: Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
---
# Requesting Code Review
Run a structured review pass to catch issues before they cascade.
**Core principle:** Review early, review often.
## When to Request Review
**Mandatory:**
- After each task in single-flow task execution
- After completing major feature
- Before merge to main
**Optional but valuable:**
- When stuck (fresh perspective)
- Before refactoring (baseline check)
- After fixing complex bug
## How to Request
**1. Get git SHAs:**
```bash
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1) # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
```
**2. Run structured code review checklist:**
Use `requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md` template and review the diff against requirements. In Antigravity single-flow mode, do not dispatch generic coding agents.
**Placeholders:**
- `{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}` - What you just built
- `{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}` - What it should do
- `{BASE_SHA}` - Starting commit
- `{HEAD_SHA}` - Ending commit
- `{DESCRIPTION}` - Brief summary
**3. Act on feedback:**
- Fix Critical issues immediately
- Fix Important issues before proceeding
- Note Minor issues for later
- Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)
## Example
```
[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]
You: Let me request code review before proceeding.
BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
[Run checklist-based review]
WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/plans/deployment-plan.md
BASE_SHA: a7981ec
HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
[Review returns]:
Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
Issues:
Important: Missing progress indicators
Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
Assessment: Ready to proceed
You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]
```
## Integration with Workflows
**Single-Flow Task Execution:**
- Review after EACH task
- Catch issues before they compound
- Fix before moving to next task
**Executing Plans:**
- Review after each batch (3 tasks)
- Get feedback, apply, continue
**Ad-Hoc Development:**
- Review before merge
- Review when stuck
## Red Flags
**Never:**
- Skip review because "it's simple"
- Ignore Critical issues
- Proceed with unfixed Important issues
- Argue with valid technical feedback
**If reviewer wrong:**
- Push back with technical reasoning
- Show code/tests that prove it works
- Request clarification
See template at: requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md