commit
- Repo stars 0
- Author updated Live
- Author repo skills-registry
- Domain
- Engineering
- Compatible agents
-
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- Cline
- Codex
- Windsurf
- Gemini CLI
- +20
- Trust score
- 88 / 100 · community maintained
- Author / version / license
- @tomevault-io · no license declared
- Token usage
- Lean
- Setup complexity
- Plug-and-play
- External API key
- Not required
- Operating systems
- Unspecified (assume cross-platform)
- Runtime requirements
- No special requirements
- Permissions
-
- Read-only
- Write / modify
- Env read
- Network behavior
- Local-only
- Install commands
- 26 variants
Profile is derived at build time from SKILL.md and install vectors. Subject to drift from author intent.
Heads up: 未限定 allowed-tools，默认拥有全部工具权限。
---
name: commit
description: Automate git commit and push following the project's review workflow. Stages files, generates a…
category: engineering
runtime: no special runtime
---
# commit output preview
## PART A: Task fit
- Use case: Automate git commit and push following the project's review workflow. Stages files, generates a Norwegian conventional-commit message, and optionally pushes via `git review` (never `git push`). Use when the user says 'commit', 'committ', 'lagre endringer', 'push', 'send til review', or asks to save/commit their work. Also trigger when a quality gate passes and the user wants to commit the result. Use when this capability is needed..
- Inputs: target material, constraints, expected output, and acceptance criteria.
- Evidence boundary: follow “Step 1: Understand the Changes / Step 2: Generate Commit Message / Step 3: Stage Files” and do not present inference as author intent.
## PART B: Execution result
- **01** The card summarizes the use case; runtime output centers on “Automate git commit and push following the project's review workflow. Stages files, generates a Norwegian conventional-commit message, and optionally pushes via `git review` (never `git push`). Use when the user says 'commit', 'committ', 'lagre endringer', 'push', 'send til review', or asks to save/commit their work. Also trigger when a quality gate passes and the user wants to commit the result. Use when this capability is needed.”.
- **02** When the source has headings, the agent prioritizes “Step 1: Understand the Changes / Step 2: Generate Commit Message / Step 3: Stage Files” so the result follows the author’s structure.
- **03** Typical output includes task judgment, concrete steps, required commands or file edits, validation, and follow-up options.
- **04** Risk context follows the fingerprint: read files, write/modify files, read environment variables; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
## Running Rules
- read files, write/modify files, read environment variables; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
- Validate with a small sample before expanding scope.
- Return the result, validation criteria, and next iteration options.The source does not require a stable slash command. After installation, invoke the skill by name and describe the task.
Name target files or source material, expected output, forbidden changes, and whether network or shell access is allowed. Permission fingerprint: read files, write/modify files, read environment variables.
Start with a small task and check whether the result follows “Step 1: Understand the Changes / Step 2: Generate Commit Message / Step 3: Stage Files”. Inspect diffs, logs, previews, or tests before expanding scope.
Confirm the final output includes a concrete result, evidence, and next action. If it stays generic, tighten inputs, boundaries, and acceptance criteria.
---
name: commit
description: Automate git commit and push following the project's review workflow. Stages files, generates a…
category: engineering
source: tomevault-io/skills-registry
---
# commit
## When to use
- Automate git commit and push following the project's review workflow. Stages files, generates a Norwegian conventional…
- Use it when the task has clear inputs, repeatable steps, and validation criteria.
## What to provide
- Target material, scope, expected result, and forbidden changes.
- Whether network, commands, file writes, or external services are allowed.
## Execution rules
- Organize steps around “Step 1: Understand the Changes / Step 2: Generate Commit Message / Step 3: Stage Files” and keep inference separate from source facts.
- read files, write/modify files, read environment variables; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
- Validate with a small sample before expanding the task.
## Output requirements
- Return the deliverable, key evidence, validation method, and next action.
- Mark missing information as unknown; do not invent commands, platforms, or dependencies.The author source anchors workflow facts; repository files anchor sources and commands; Fluxly only adds fit, limitations, and quality judgment.
skill "commit" {
input -> user goal + target files + boundaries + acceptance criteria
context -> Step 1: Understand the Changes / Step 2: Generate Commit Message / Step 3: Stage Files
rules -> SKILL.md triggers / order / output contract
runtime -> no special runtime | read files, write/modify files, read environment variables | mostly runs locally
guardrails -> usually needs no extra API key + small-sample validation + diff/log review
output -> copyable result + checklist + next iteration
}Commit Skill
Step 1: Understand the Changes
Run in parallel:
git status
git diff --staged
git diff
git log --oneline -5Step 2: Generate Commit Message
Write a conventional commit message in Norwegian:
- Format:
type: kort beskrivelse— types:featfixchoretestdocsrefactora11y - One short line on the "why"; use
—for multi-concern:fix: småfiks — typo, typesikkerhet m.m.
Present message and ask for confirmation before proceeding.
Step 3: Stage Files
Stage only files relevant to this task. Unstage unrelated files first (git restore --staged <file>).
Never stage: .env*, credentials, node_modules/, coverage/.
Use git add <specific-file> — never git add -A or git add ..
Step 4: Create the Commit
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
type: beskrivelse
Co-Authored-By: Claude Code <noreply@anthropic.com>
EOF
)"Step 4.5: Code Review Before Push
Skip if push was NOT requested.
This step loops until the review is clean, max 3 iterations. Track iteration count starting at 1.
BASE_SHA=$(git merge-base HEAD origin/main 2>/dev/null || git rev-parse HEAD~1)
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)Dispatch a general-purpose Agent with this prompt (fill placeholders):
You are a Senior Code Reviewer.
What Was Implemented
{COMMIT_MESSAGE}
Project-Specific Rules (violations = Critical)
Read CLAUDE.md. Extra checks:
- CSS tokens: Only variables from
src/styles/global.css— no hardcoded hex or Tailwind color classes- Sheets API: Numeric
sheets.values.getcalls MUST usevalueRenderOption: 'UNFORMATTED_VALUE'- Architecture: Changes to images/messages/section-backgrounds/security must follow
docs/architecture/- Security: No XSS, injection, exposed secrets, or unsafe innerHTML without DOMPurify
Git Range
git diff --stat {BASE_SHA}..{HEAD_SHA} git diff {BASE_SHA}..{HEAD_SHA}Output
Strengths
Issues
Critical (Must Fix)
Important (Should Fix)
Minor (Nice to Have)
Each issue: file:line — what's wrong — why it matters — how to fix.
Assessment
Ready to merge? Yes / No / With fixes — [1-2 sentence reasoning]
After review:
- No Critical/Important: Proceed to push.
- Only Minor: Show issues, ask user whether to push anyway.
- Critical or Important found: Fix all issues, commit the fixes, then update
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)— keep BASE_SHA unchanged from the start of Step 4.5 — and re-run review. Increment iteration count. If iteration count reaches 3 without a clean review, stop — present remaining issues and ask the user to resolve them manually before retrying.
Step 5: Push (Only If Requested)
NEVER use git push. Always:
git reviewStep 6: Report
One-line summary: commit message, files changed, pushed or not.
Source: ahaarrestad/tennerogtrivsel_new — distributed by TomeVault.
Decide Fit First
Design Intent
How To Use It
Boundaries And Review