investigating-repository-history

Solid

Investigate GitHub repository history before risky code changes using git blame/log, GitHub PRs, review comments, squash/rebase/cherry-pick/rename heuristics, and cited evidence. Use when asking why code exists, whether a change is safe, what PR introduced behavior, or before editing API, compatibility, security, concurrency, persistence, migration, or performance-sensitive code.

Code & Development 77 stars 3 forks Updated 6 days ago MIT

Install

Quality Score: 91/100

Stars 20%

63

Recency 20%

100

Frontmatter 20%

70

Documentation 15%

100

Issue Health 10%

80

License 10%

100

Description 5%

100

Skill Content

# Repository History Investigator Use this skill to reconstruct the historical intent behind code before changing it. The goal is not merely “find the blame commit”; the goal is to return a compact, cited history note explaining relevant PRs, review comments, constraints, rejected approaches, and anomalies. ## Contents - [Trigger conditions](#trigger-conditions) - [Core rule](#core-rule) - [Fast path](#fast-path) - [Progressive disclosure](#progressive-disclosure) - [Investigation workflow](#investigation-workflow) - [Evidence confidence rules](#evidence-confidence-rules) - [Output template](#output-template) - [Gotchas](#gotchas) - [Available scripts](#available-scripts) ## Trigger conditions Use this skill when the user asks any of these: - “Why is this code written this way?” - “Can I remove/simplify/change this check, constraint, branch, migration, public API, or feature flag?” - “Which PR introduced this behavior or regression?” - “Find the relevant PR/review discussion/history for this code.” - Before editing code that touches API compatibility, security, concurrency, persistence, migrations, performance, generated interfaces, feature flags, or unclear legacy/workaround logic. Do not use this skill for trivial new code with no dependency on existing behavior. ## Core rule Before making a risky edit, produce a **history note** answering: 1. What code scope was inspected? 2. Which commits and PRs are relevant? 3. Which review comments or PR discussions explain i...

Details

Author: CodeAlive-AI
Repository: CodeAlive-AI/ai-driven-development
Created: 4 months ago
Last Updated: 6 days ago
Language: Python
License: MIT

Integrates with

GitHub · DevTools

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Listed

investigate

Deep-dive into a codebase question, failure, or architectural concern without making changes

11 Updated today

Code & Development Listed

skill-git-history-learning

Use git history as a learning asset for onboarding and decision tracking.

43 Updated 3 months ago

Code & Development Listed

github-repo-hardening

Audit GitHub repository governance and access control settings including branch protection rules, ruleset configuration, secret scanning, push protection, CODEOWNERS, signed commits, required reviews, and admin bypass policies. Use this skill whenever the user asks about branch protection, "is my main branch safe", required reviews, force-push prevention, CODEOWNERS, signed commits, gitsign, Sigstore, secret scanning, push protection, custom secret patterns, repo settings, ruleset vs branch protection, or merge queue. Trigger on phrases like "harden my repo", "audit my branch rules", "secret scanning", "CODEOWNERS review", "are my settings safe", "lock down main". Use this even when the user only mentions one of these sub-topics.

1 Updated 1 weeks ago

Code & Development Listed

code-review

Reviews pull requests, git diffs, branches, and code changes for bugs, regressions, repository guideline violations, and high-confidence risks. Use when the user asks for a code review, PR review, pull request review, review of changes, review this diff, or wants automated review feedback before merge. For GitHub pull requests, requires the GitHub CLI (`gh`) authenticated in the target repository.

1 Updated today

AI & Automation Listed

fact-check

Enforces evidence-based reasoning for any task that involves making factual claims about a codebase — debugging, bug fixing, code investigation, code modification, AND explaining what code does, answering "where is X" / "what does Y do" / "is this safe", or summarizing behavior. Use this skill whenever the user asks to fix a bug, investigate an issue, modify existing code, trace a problem, debug behavior, refactor, change, update code, or explain/locate/audit any part of the codebase. This skill ensures Claude gathers real evidence from source code, docs, git history, and runtime behavior before making any claim — never guessing, never paraphrasing comments as fact, never relying on training memory. Even if the task seems straightforward, use this skill to guarantee that every claim and recommendation is grounded in verified facts.

0 Updated 2 days ago