review-before-commit - SKILL.md Agent Skill

name: review-before-commit description: Run a behavioral self-check before persisting story results. Verifies diff simplicity, scope adherence, and verifiable completion against enso §10 behavioral principles. Use when a story's implementation is complete and ready to close. license: MIT compatibility: opencode

When to Use

Load this skill when:

A story's implementation is complete and you're about to move/close it
Before running git add/git commit at the end of a story
Before session-persist when code changes have been made
You want a final sanity check against behavioral drift

Invoke it explicitly. This is an advisory skill — it does not block execution.

Workflow

Step 1: Gather Evidence

Read the active story document (the one in docs/stories/ you're closing)
Run git diff to see what actually changed
Review the story's Acceptance Criteria and Verification sections

Step 2: Check Principles

Run each check. If any fails, report the violation and suggest a fix.

§10.1 Think Before Coding — Did I plan?

The Approach section was filled out before execution started
No file modifications happened between "create story" and "complete approach"
Risks were identified upfront, not discovered during implementation
If failed: Reopen planning. Do not persist.

§10.2 Simplicity First — Is this the minimum?

No new abstractions were introduced for single-use code
No "flexibility" was added that wasn't explicitly requested
No features beyond the ask were implemented
If failed: List the speculative additions. Ask the user if they should stay.

§10.3 Surgical Changes — Did I touch only what I must?

No lines were changed that don't trace directly to the user's request
No adjacent code was "improved" (refactored, reformatted, commented)
Dead code created by MY changes was cleaned up
Pre-existing dead code was NOT removed unless explicitly asked
If failed: Revert unrelated changes, or flag them for user review.

§10.4 Goal-Driven Execution — Can I verify completion?

Every acceptance criterion has a checkmark or explicit reason why it's irrelevant
Verification steps (tests, builds, output checks) were run and passed
"Done" is not a gut feeling — it has evidence (passing tests, clean build, etc.)
If failed: Do not close the story. Run the missing verification steps.

Step 3: Report

## Pre-Commit Review: [STORY-ID]

**Status:** PASS / FAIL

### Simple Changes
[YES/NO] — Diff is surgical. [If NO: list files with unrelated changes]

### Simple Code
[YES/NO] — No speculative additions. [If NO: list additions]

### Verifiable Completion
[YES/NO] — Evidence attached. [If NO: list missing verifications]

### Action
- If PASS: Proceed to persist.
- If FAIL with minor issues: Fix in place, re-run review.
- If FAIL with significant drift: `/clear`, rewrite prompt incorporating findings, re-execute.

Checklist

git diff reviewed against §10.3
Story Acceptance Criteria show evidence of completion
Speculative additions flagged or absent
Report generated and appended to story log