#+TITLE: Code Review Skill Creation and Worklog Cleanup #+DATE: 2025-12-28 #+KEYWORDS: code-review, skill, worklog, refactoring, orch-consensus, lenses #+COMMITS: 6 #+COMPRESSION_STATUS: uncompressed * Session Summary ** Date: 2025-12-28 (Continuation from 2025-12-26 session) ** Focus Area: Creating /code-review skill, cleaning up worklog skill * Accomplishments - [X] Ran orch consensus on code-review workflow design (gpt + gemini, qwen was flaky) - [X] Created /code-review skill based on consensus recommendations - [X] Closed proto skills-fvc and 7 child tasks (replaced by skill) - [X] Added code-review to dotfiles claudeCodeSkills deployment - [X] Added code-review to delbaker .skills manifest - [X] Holistic review of skills repo (50 open issues, 2 blocked epics) - [X] Completed all 5 worklog cleanup tasks (127 -> 88 lines, -31%) - [X] Tested updated extract-metrics.sh script - [X] Ran code-review on updated worklog skill (clean - no issues worth filing) - [X] Filed 5 issues in dotfiles from code-review of flake.nix * Key Decisions ** Decision 1: Skill over Proto for code-review workflow - Context: Had both lenses (prompts) and a beads proto (skills-fvc) for code review - Options considered: 1. Keep proto as workflow orchestrator - unused, adds complexity 2. Create Claude Code skill as entrypoint - matches actual usage pattern 3. Ad-hoc documentation only - too loose - Rationale: Consensus from GPT + Gemini agreed skill is the right abstraction. Proto was never actually used (bd pour/wisp commands). - Impact: Simpler mental model - /code-review is the entrypoint, lenses are prompts it uses ** Decision 2: Interactive by default for code-review - Context: How much automation for issue filing? - Options considered: 1. Full automation - file all findings automatically 2. Interactive - present findings, ask before filing 3. Report only - never file, just output - Rationale: Both models recommended interactive. Prevents issue spam, keeps human in loop. - Impact: Skill asks "which findings to file?" after presenting summary ** Decision 3: Consolidate worklog skill aggressively - Context: 5 cleanup tasks from earlier lens review - Rationale: Quick wins, reduce maintenance burden, test the lens -> issue -> fix cycle - Impact: 127 -> 88 lines (-31%), cleaner skill prompt * Problems & Solutions | Problem | Solution | Learning | |---------|----------|----------| | Orch consensus with qwen hanging | Kill and retry with gpt + gemini only | qwen has reliability issues on long prompts | | Orch consensus timing out | Run models separately with orch chat, synthesize manually | Parallel queries work, consensus command buffers until all complete | | Proto tasks polluting other repos | Close proto, use skill instead | molecules.jsonl cross-repo loading needs work (bd-k2wg) | | extract-metrics.sh not showing branch/status | Added BRANCH and STATUS output to script | Script was metrics-focused, now includes full git context | | Semantic compression references | Already removed when merging Guidelines/Remember | Sometimes cleanup tasks overlap | * Technical Details ** Code Changes - Total files modified: 20 - Key files changed: - =skills/code-review/SKILL.md= - New skill (120 lines) - =skills/code-review/README.md= - Skill documentation - =skills/code-review/lenses/*.md= - Bundled lens prompts - =skills/worklog/SKILL.md= - Refactored (127 -> 88 lines) - =skills/worklog/scripts/extract-metrics.sh= - Added branch/status output - =modules/ai-skills.nix= - Added code-review to skills list - =~/proj/dotfiles/home/claude.nix= - Added code-review to claudeCodeSkills - =~/proj/delbaker/.skills= - Added code-review to manifest ** New Files Created - =skills/code-review/SKILL.md= - Main skill prompt - =skills/code-review/README.md= - Quick reference - =skills/code-review/lenses/= - Bundled copies of lens prompts ** Commands Used #+begin_src bash # Orch consensus (failed with 3 models) uv run orch consensus --temperature 1.0 "..." gemini gpt qwen3 # Orch chat (worked for individual models) uv run orch chat "..." --model gpt --temperature 1.0 uv run orch chat "..." --model gemini --temperature 1.0 # Test updated extract-metrics script ./skills/worklog/scripts/extract-metrics.sh # Update skills flake in dotfiles cd ~/proj/dotfiles && nix flake update skills #+end_src ** Architecture Notes - Skill deployment: home-manager symlinks skills from nix store to ~/.claude/skills/ - Per-repo skills: .skills manifest + use-skills.sh creates repo-local symlinks - Lenses bundled in skill but also deployed to ~/.config/lenses/ for direct orch use - Proto/molecules layer deemed overhead - skill is simpler for this use case * Process and Workflow ** What Worked Well - Orch consensus (when it worked) provided useful multi-model perspective - Quick iteration: create skill -> deploy -> test on real target (dotfiles flake.nix) - TodoWrite for tracking the 5 worklog tasks - Beads for tracking issues and closing them as work completed - Running code-review on recently modified code as validation ** What Was Challenging - Orch reliability: qwen hanging, consensus command timing out - Remote git server down throughout session (local commits only) - Context recovery from previous session compaction * Learning and Insights ** Technical Insights - orch chat is more reliable than orch consensus for long prompts - Skills are the right abstraction for Claude Code workflows - simpler than protos - Shell script changes need home-manager rebuild to deploy ** Process Insights - Lens -> issue -> fix cycle works well for incremental cleanup - Running multiple lenses finds overlapping issues (good for synthesis) - Interactive review prevents over-filing low-value issues ** Architectural Insights - Skills repo has 3 layers: skills (prompts), lenses (review prompts), workflows (protos) - Lenses are a subset of skills conceptually - focused single-purpose prompts - Proto/molecule layer adds complexity without proportional benefit currently * Context for Future Work ** Open Questions - Should lenses output JSON for structured parsing? - How to handle orch reliability issues (qwen, timeouts)? - Should code-review skill use orch internally or leave it optional? ** Next Steps - Run code-review on other skills (niri-window-capture has pending review) - Consider remaining 2 worklog tasks (j2a done, njb done - actually all done now) - Address dotfiles issues filed this session (5 issues in flake.nix) - Rebuild home-manager to deploy updated skills ** Related Work - [[file:2025-12-26-multi-lens-code-review-workflow-testing.org][2025-12-26 Multi-Lens Code Review Testing]] - Created lenses, tested on orch - [[file:2025-12-24-adr-revision-lsp-research-code-audit.org][2025-12-24 ADR Revision]] - Initial lens creation - orch-loq: qwen empty responses bug (filed in orch repo) - bd-k2wg: molecules.jsonl hierarchical loading (filed in beads repo) * Raw Notes - Session started from context recovery (previous session compacted) - GPT recommendation: skill as entrypoint, orch for synthesis only, JSON output, interactive by default - Gemini recommendation: consolidate into skills/, single agent explores, orch at end for filtering - Both agreed: delete proto, make skill, interactive review - Worklog cleanup tasks all from earlier lens review (2025-12-25) - extract-metrics.sh output changed from "Session Metrics" to "Git Context" ** Orch Consensus Key Points From GPT: - Skill = primary workflow entrypoint - Orch = synthesis/filtering only, not for running every lens - JSON source of truth, markdown is rendering - Repo-local beads storage to avoid cross-repo pollution From Gemini: - Rename lenses to skills (we kept them separate) - Single agent explores, orch filters at end - "Driver" pattern - human approves before filing - Delete proto as unused complexity ** Commits This Session 1. feat: add /code-review skill with bundled lenses 2. docs: add code-review to skills list (ai-skills.nix) 3. feat: add code-review skill (dotfiles) 4. chore: update skills flake (dotfiles) 5. refactor(worklog): consolidate skill prompt 6. refactor(worklog): consolidate git commands into script * Session Metrics - Commits made: 6 (across skills and dotfiles repos) - Files touched: 20 - Lines added/removed: +829/-70 - Issues filed: 5 (in dotfiles) - Issues closed: 8 (proto) + 5 (worklog) = 13 - Tests added: 0