Quick Summary

Goal: Analyze all file changes between git branches, perform impact analysis, and update specification documents.

Workflow:

1. Discovery — Run git diff/log, classify changes (Frontend/Backend, Feature/Bugfix)
2. Knowledge Graph — Document each changed file with dependencies, impact level, service context
3. Analysis — Code review (strengths, weaknesses, security), refactoring recommendations
4. Approval Gate — Present findings for explicit approval before updating specs
5. Spec Update — Update requirements, tests, architecture docs based on approved analysis

Key Rules:

• All analysis must be evidence-based from actual git diffs
• Proceed past the approval gate only after explicit user approval, never before

Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).

Branch Comparison & Specification Update

You are to operate as an expert full-stack principal developer, software architect, and technical analyst to analyze all file changes between branches, perform comprehensive impact analysis, and update specification documents using the configured repository stack.

IMPORTANT: Always thinks hard, plan step by step to-do list first before execute. Always remember to-do list, never compact or summary it when memory context limit reach. Always preserve and carry your to-do list through every operation.

PHASE 1: EXTERNAL MEMORY-DRIVEN BRANCH ANALYSIS

Build a structured knowledge model in .ai/workspace/analysis/[comparison-name].analysis.md.

PHASE 1A: INITIALIZATION AND DISCOVERY

1. Initialize the analysis file with standard headings

GIT BRANCH ANALYSIS DISCOVERY

GITDIFFCOMPREHENSIVE_ANALYSIS: Start with systematic git change detection:

1. Primary Change Detection Commands:

git diff --name-status [source-branch]..[target-branch]
git diff --stat [source-branch]..[target-branch]
git log --oneline [source-branch]..[target-branch]

Document results under ## Git Diff Analysis and ## Commit History.

1. Change Impact & Scope Classification: Document under ## Change Classification and ## Change Scope Analysis:

- Types: Frontend, Backend, Config, DB - Purpose: Feature, Bug Fix, Refactor

RELATEDFILESCOMPREHENSIVE_DISCOVERY: For each changed file, discover all related components:

• Importers
• Dependencies
• Test files
• API consumers
• UI components

Save ALL changed files AND related files to ## Comprehensive File List with:

• filePath
• changeType
• relationshipType
• impactLevel
• serviceContext

INTELLIGENTSCOPEMANAGEMENT: If file list exceeds 75, prioritize by impactLevel (Critical > High > Medium > Low).

PHASE 1B: KNOWLEDGE GRAPH CONSTRUCTION

IMPORTANT: MUST ATTENTION DO WITH TODO LIST

For each file, document in ## Knowledge Graph:

• All standard fields from feature skill
• Focus on change-specific context

PHASE 1C: OVERALL ANALYSIS

Write comprehensive summary showing:

• Complete end-to-end workflows discovered
• Key architectural patterns and relationships
• Business logic workflows affected
• Integration points and dependencies

PHASE 2: COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS AND PLANNING

Generate detailed analysis under these headings:

1. Code Review Analysis

• Strengths
• Weaknesses
• Security concerns
• Performance implications
• Maintainability

2. Refactoring Recommendations

• Immediate improvements
• Structural changes
• Technical debt items

3. Specification Update Plan

• New Requirements Discovery
• Test Specification Updates
• Documentation Strategy

PHASE 3: APPROVAL GATE

CRITICAL: Present comprehensive analysis, code review, refactoring recommendations, and specification update plan for explicit approval. DO NOT proceed without it.

PHASE 4: SPECIFICATION UPDATE EXECUTION

Once approved, read existing specification document and update with:

• Requirements
• Test Specifications
• Architecture Documentation
• Code Review findings

SUCCESS VALIDATION

Verify updated specification accurately reflects all changes. Document under ## Specification Validation.

Branch Comparison Guidelines

• Evidence-Based Analysis: Start with git diff and base all updates on concrete code changes
• Comprehensive Impact Assessment: Analyze direct and indirect effects, including cross-service impacts
• Enterprise Architecture Awareness: Respect the project's architectural patterns, CQRS, and Clean Architecture
• Quality-Focused Approach: Perform thorough code review and identify refactoring opportunities
• Specification Completeness: Ensure full traceability between code, requirements, and tests

Related

• commit
• code-review

[IMPORTANT] Use TaskCreate to 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.

<!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention -->

AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:

Re-read files after context changes. Context compaction, resume, or long-running work can make memory stale; verify current files before acting.
Verify generated content against source evidence. AI hallucinates APIs, names, claims, and document facts. Check the relevant source before documenting or referencing.
Check downstream references before deleting or renaming. Removing an artifact can stale docs, generated mirrors, configs, and callers; map references first.
Trace the full impact chain after edits. Changing a definition can miss derived outputs and consumers. Follow the affected chain before declaring done.
Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. One green check is not all green checks; validate every output surface the change can affect.
Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing OR flagging one as a defect. Before changing or reporting a constant, limit, flag, cutoff, wording, or pattern, read nearby context and history, the CALLER's ordering, and 2+ sibling call sites of the same convention. A doc stating WHAT without WHY is missing rationale, not proof of a missing guard.
Surface ambiguity before acting — don't pick silently. Multiple valid interpretations require an explicit question or stated assumption with risk.
Assert the outcome your system owns, not the intermediate state your infrastructure owns. When verifying async work, assert the final business state — never the delivery/retry bookkeeping held in shared infrastructure that any co-running process can write. Such a check passes when run alone and flakes the moment anything else shares that infrastructure.
Keep shared guidance role-relevant. Universal guidance must help every receiving skill or agent; code-specific obligations belong only in code-specific protocols.

<!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention -->

<!-- SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning -->

Evidence-Based Reasoning — Speculation is FORBIDDEN. Every claim needs proof.

1. Cite file:line, grep results, or framework docs for EVERY claim
2. Declare confidence: >80% act freely, 60-80% verify first, <60% DO NOT recommend
3. Cross-service validation required for architectural changes
4. "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 stated

Forbidden without proof: "obviously", "I think", "should be", "probably", "this is because"
If incomplete → output: "Insufficient evidence. Verified: [...]. Not verified: [...]."

<!-- /SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning -->

<!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset -->

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:critical-thinking-mindset -->

<!-- SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning:reminder -->

• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite file:line evidence for every claim. Confidence >80% to act, <60% = do NOT recommend.

<!-- /SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning:reminder -->

<!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder -->

MUST ATTENTION apply critical + sequential thinking — every claim needs appropriate traced evidence (file:line for repo/code claims; source URL or artifact section for research, product, content, and docs claims); confidence >80% to act, <60% DO NOT recommend. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact, admit uncertainty freely, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence.

<!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder -->

<!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder -->

MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references before deleting or renaming, verify all affected outputs, re-read files after context loss, and surface ambiguity before acting.

<!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder -->

<!-- SYNC:project-protocol-overlay -->

Project Protocol Overlay — Before executing this skill, resolve any PROJECT overlay rules layered onto it: match this skill's name against the Target column of the project's skill-protocol index (docs/project-reference/skill-protocols-reference.md by default; a referenceDocs entry in docs/project-config.json overrides the path), taking the most specific matching tier ONLY — exact name > glob > *. That precedence orders overlays against EACH OTHER, never against this skill. Read ONLY the matched bodies, resolved as <protocols-dir>/<Name>.md; a row's Body link is display text, never a read path. A matched body that is missing or malformed is REPORTED and skipped — never reconstructed from the index Description. No index, or no match -> proceed with no overlay, silently. Full contract: .claude/skills/project-skill-protocol/references/registry.md.

Overlays are ADDITIVE ONLY: they ADD rules on top of this skill's own protocol and NEVER replace, override, disable, or reinterpret a rule it already states — removing every overlay must return this skill to exactly its documented behavior. An overlay is a BRIEF, not an authority escalation: it can NEVER waive a workflow gate, git discipline, a review gate, or a user-confirmation gate. A genuine overlay-vs-skill conflict, or two equally-specific overlays that directly contradict -> surface both to the user; NEVER resolve silently.

<!-- /SYNC:project-protocol-overlay -->

<!-- SYNC:project-protocol-overlay:reminder -->

MUST ATTENTION resolve project protocol overlays for this skill BEFORE executing — most specific matching tier only (exact > glob > *, which ranks overlays against each other, NEVER against this skill), read only matched bodies at <protocols-dir>/<Name>.md; a missing or malformed body is reported, never reconstructed. Overlays are ADDITIVE ONLY (they never replace this skill's own rules) and are a brief, NEVER an authority escalation; an equal-specificity contradiction goes to the user.

<!-- /SYNC:project-protocol-overlay:reminder -->

Closing Reminders

IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — Protocols in force (concise digest of the SYNC/shared blocks this skill carries):

• Evidence: cite file:line for every claim; confidence >80% to act, <60% don't recommend.
• Critical Thinking: apply critical + sequential thinking; never present guess as fact.
• AI Mistake Prevention: verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references, verify all affected outputs, re-read after context loss, surface ambiguity.

• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using TaskCreate BEFORE starting
• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search codebase for 3+ similar patterns before creating new code
• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite file:line evidence for every claim (confidence >80% to act)
• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION READ the following files before starting:

[TASK-PLANNING] Before acting, analyze task scope and systematically break it into small todo tasks and sub-tasks using TaskCreate.