ask-matt

작성자: mattpocock

어떤 스킬이나 플로우가 상황에 맞는지 물어보세요. 이 저장소의 사용자 호출 스킬을 라우팅합니다.

npx skills add https://github.com/mattpocock/skills --skill ask-matt

Ask Matt

You don't remember every skill, so ask.

A flow is a path through the skills. Most paths run along one main flow, and two on-ramps merge onto it. Everything else is standalone, or a vocabulary layer that runs underneath.

The main flow: idea → ship

The route most work travels. You have an idea and want it built.

  1. /grill-with-docs sharpens the idea by interview. Start here whenever you are working in a working directory: it's stateful, retaining what it learns in CONTEXT.md and ADRs. (No working directory? Use /grill-me instead, covered under Standalone. Both run the same /grilling primitive; grill-with-docs is the one that leaves a paper trail, which makes it the better of the two whenever a repo is there to leave it in.)

  2. Branch: can you settle every question in conversation? If a question needs a runnable answer (state, business logic, a UI you have to see), detour through a prototype, bridged by /handoff in both directions (a prototype lives in its own directory, which is exactly what /handoff is for; see Phase boundaries):

    • /handoff out, then open a fresh session against that file,
    • /prototype to answer the question with throwaway code,
    • /handoff back what you learned, and reference it from the original idea thread.
  3. Branch: is this a multi-session build?

    • Yes/to-spec (turn the thread into a spec), then /to-tickets to split it into tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges. On a local tracker that's one file per ticket under .scratch/<feature>/issues/, worked blockers-first by hand; on a real tracker the edges become native blocking links, so any ticket whose blockers are done can be grabbed: kick off /implement per ticket, /clearing context between each one. Each ticket is self-contained, so the last one's context is disposable.
    • No/implement right here, in the same context window.

    Either way, /implement builds each issue by driving /tdd internally (one red-green slice at a time), then closes out by running /code-review, a two-axis review (Standards + Spec) of the diff, before committing. Reach for /tdd on its own when you just want to build a concrete behaviour test-first without a full spec, and /code-review on its own whenever you want to review a branch or PR against a fixed point.

Context hygiene

Keep steps 1–3 in one unbroken context window (don't compact or clear until after /to-tickets) so the grilling, spec, and tickets all build on the same thinking. Each /implement then starts fresh, working from the ticket.

The limit on this is the smart zone: the window (~150k tokens on state-of-the-art models) within which the model still reasons sharply. If a session approaches it before /to-tickets, don't push on degraded; /compact at the nearest phase boundary and carry on (see Phase boundaries).

On-ramps

A starting situation that generates work, then merges onto the main flow.

  • Bugs and requests piling up/triage. It moves issues through triage roles and produces agent-ready issues, which /implement later picks up.

    Triage is only for issues you didn't create: bug reports, incoming feature requests, anything that arrives raw. Tickets that /to-tickets produced are already agent-ready, so don't triage them.

  • Something's broken/diagnosing-bugs. For the hard ones: the bug that resists a first glance, the intermittent flake, the regression that crept in between two known-good states. It refuses to theorise until it has a tight feedback loop (one command that already goes red on this bug), then fixes with a regression test. Its post-mortem hands off to /improve-codebase-architecture when the real finding is that there's no good seam to lock the bug down.

  • A huge, foggy effort: a greenfield project or a huge feature build, too big for one session/wayfinder, the most cognitively demanding flow here. When the way from here to the destination isn't visible yet, it charts a shared map of decision tickets on the issue tracker and resolves them one at a time, producing decisions, not deliverables, until the fog is pushed back and the way is clear. Where /grill-with-docs sharpens an idea you can hold in one session, wayfinder is for the idea you can't, and it's slower and denser, so save it for exactly that, never a well-scoped feature.

    When the map clears, it hands off, it doesn't build: merge onto the main flow at /to-spec, which collapses the map's linked decisions into a buildable plan, then /to-tickets and /implement as usual. Looping the map straight into /implement skips that collapse and throws the linked detail away, so go straight to /implement only when the effort turned out genuinely small.

Codebase health

Not feature work, just upkeep.

  • /improve-codebase-architecture runs whenever you have a spare moment to keep the codebase good for agents to operate in. It surfaces deepening opportunities; picking one generates an idea you can take into the main flow at /grill-with-docs. It's the survey that finds the candidates; /codebase-design (below) is the bench you design the chosen one on.

Vocabulary underneath

Two model-invoked references that run beneath the other skills, each the single source of truth for its vocabulary. Reach for them directly when the words, not the process, are the problem; or let the skills above pull them in.

  • /domain-modeling: sharpen the project's domain language: challenge a fuzzy term, resolve an overloaded word ("account" doing three jobs), record a hard-to-reverse decision as an ADR. It's the active discipline /grill-with-docs drives to keep CONTEXT.md a clean glossary.
  • /codebase-design is the deep-module vocabulary (module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage, locality) for designing a module's shape: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface at a clean seam. /tdd and /improve-codebase-architecture both speak it.

Phase boundaries

A phase is a chunk of work inside a session: the grilling, the implementation, the QA. At the boundary between two of them you have five options, and picking between them is the fuzziest decision in this whole map:

  • Continue: stay put. Costs nothing, loses nothing.
  • /clear: empty the window, when nothing here matters to what's next.
  • /handoff writes a portable markdown file. Narrow: only for a new harness, a new directory, a colleague, or forking a side task mid-phase. What it buys is portability.
  • Subagent: send a tightly-scoped task to its own window and get a report back.
  • /compact compresses this context and seeds a fresh session with it. The default, at the bottom of the tree rather than the first reach.

Read PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md for the ordered tree: the five questions, the reasoning behind each branch, and why the primary-source cost makes Continue the one to rule out first. Make the decision at a boundary; mid-phase, continue or split the rest into subagents.

Standalone

Off the main flow entirely.

  • /grill-me: the same relentless interview as /grill-with-docs, but stateless: it saves nothing locally and builds no CONTEXT.md. Reach for it when you are not working in a working directory (sharpening a plan, a design, a piece of writing, anything with no repo under it). If you are in a working directory, use /grill-with-docs instead: it runs the same interview and leaves a paper trail, so it is strictly the better one.
  • /grilling is the interview primitive itself: rounds, the frontier, facts are the agent's job and decisions are yours. /grill-me and /grill-with-docs are the two named ways in, and /triage, /wayfinder and /improve-codebase-architecture all run it internally. Reach for it directly only when you want the interview with no wrapper around it.
  • /resolving-merge-conflicts works an in-progress merge or rebase conflict hunk by hunk, resolving by intent traced to each side's primary source rather than by picking lines, then finishes the operation. It never runs --abort. Standalone and off every flow: reach for it when you are already mid-conflict.
  • /prototype is a small, throwaway program that answers one design question: does this state model feel right, or what should this UI look like. Throwaway is a constraint on how the code is written, not a promise to destroy it: the answer folds into the real code, and the prototype itself is kept as a primary source on a prototype/<name> branch out of main, pointed at from the implementation issue. It's the detour in step 2 of the main flow, but reach for it any time a design question is hard to settle on paper.
  • /research: delegate reading legwork to a background agent: it investigates a question against primary sources, then leaves a cited Markdown file in the repo. Keep working while it reads. The file it produces is something to take into the main flow at /grill-with-docs, since research feeds the thinking rather than replacing it.
  • /to-questionnaire comes in when the thing blocking you isn't in your head or the codebase but in someone else's, and it writes them a questionnaire to fill in. It's the inverse of /grill-me: instead of interviewing you about the subject, it interviews you about the send (who it's going to, what you need back) and aims the questions at the gap. What comes back is material for /grill-with-docs or /to-spec.
  • /wizard is for the steps only a human can take: provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, clicking through an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, running a one-off migration or cutover. It generates an interactive bash script that opens each URL, captures each value, and writes it into .env and GitHub secrets, so the procedure stops being something you re-explain to an agent every time. Model-invoked, so the agent reaches for it the moment it hits a wall only you can pass. If the agent could just do it itself, it should; this is for where a human is genuinely in the loop.
  • /wait-what is the corrective for a message that didn't land. Use it mid-conversation, inside any other skill, and the agent re-pitches what it just said with the context you were missing, in plain English, using the CONTEXT.md vocabulary. It works after the fact; /grill-with-docs is the upfront cure, because a shared language agreed early is what stops the jargon arriving at all.
  • /teach: learn a concept over multiple sessions, using the current directory as a stateful workspace.
  • /writing-for-agents is the reference for writing documents agents consume: skills, AGENTS.md, pointed-at docs.

Precondition

/setup-matt-pocock-skills: run before your first engineering flow to configure the issue tracker, triage labels, and doc layout the other skills assume. Custom issue trackers also work.

mattpocock의 다른 스킬

writing-for-agents
mattpocock
에이전트를 위한 문서 작성. 스킬을 생성하거나 편집할 때, 또는 AGENTS.md나 CLAUDE.md를 수정할 때 사용합니다.
wait-what
mattpocock
멈춰. 그 마지막 메시지는 전달되지 않았어 — 다시 제안해.
communication
to-questionnaire
mattpocock
완전히 답할 수 없는 결정을 다른 사람이 작성할 설문지로 바꿉니다.
grill-me
mattpocock
사용자의 계획이나 디자인에 대해 철저히 질문하여 공통된 이해에 도달할 때까지 결정 트리의 각 분기를 해결합니다. 사용자가 계획을 검증받고 싶어하거나, 디자인에 대해 집중 질문을 받고 싶어하거나, "grill me"라고 언급할 때 사용하세요.
researchcommunicationproject-management
tdd
mattpocock
레드-그린-리팩터 루프를 사용한 테스트 주도 개발. 사용자가 TDD로 기능을 구축하거나 버그를 수정하려 할 때, "레드-그린-리팩터"를 언급할 때, 통합 테스트를 원할 때, 또는 테스트 우선 개발을 요청할 때 사용합니다.
developmenttesting
handoff
mattpocock
현재 대화를 다른 에이전트가 이어받을 수 있도록 핸드오프 문서로 압축합니다.
communicationproject-managementdocument
prototype
mattpocock
디자인을 확정하기 전에 일회용 프로토타입을 만들어 검토합니다. 상태나 비즈니스 로직을 확인할 수 있는 실행 가능한 터미널 앱과, 하나의 경로에서 전환 가능한 여러 개의 완전히 다른 UI 변형이라는 두 가지 분기로 나뉩니다. 사용자가 프로토타입을 만들고, 데이터 모델이나 상태 머신을 검증하며, UI를 목업하고, 디자인 옵션을 탐색하려 하거나, "이걸 프로토타입으로 만들어 봐", "한번 가지고 놀게 해줘", "몇 가지 디자인을 시도해 봐"라고 말할 때 사용합니다.
developmentdesigncreative
triage
mattpocock
트라이지 역할에 의해 구동되는 상태 머신을 통해 이슈를 분류합니다. 사용자가 이슈를 생성하거나, 이슈를 분류하고, 들어오는 버그나 기능 요청을 검토하고, AFK 에이전트를 위해 이슈를 준비하거나, 이슈 워크플로를 관리하려는 경우 사용합니다.
developmentproject-managementcommunication