Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

expand

Turn one user criticism into a principle-level fix: find the violated principle, every similar occurrence, and fix the shared cause. Use only when the user explicitly invokes expand, $expand, /up:expand, or /skill:expand.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

btseytlin/ultrapack47 stars(GitHub 47 + cccskills 0)

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Files included (2)

  • SKILL.md2.6 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml215 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Expand a criticism

The user pointed at one instance of a problem. Treat it as a sample, not the whole problem. Find the principle behind it, find every place that breaks that principle, and fix them all.

Steps

  1. Restate the criticism. Find what the user is really saying. Write the smallest general description of the problem that still covers the pointed-out case.
  2. Name the violated principle. One sentence. It must explain why the pointed-out code is wrong, not only that it is wrong.
  3. Describe the correct behavior. Say what the code would do if it followed the principle.
  4. Find every violation. Search the codebase and related files for more instances of the same kind of issue. Include code, config, docs, and tests. Read each hit before counting it. List each with file:line.
  5. Plan the fix. Prefer fixing the shared cause over patching each instance. If one helper, base class, or convention created the instances, change that.
  6. Fix it. Apply the plan, then run the relevant checks. Re-search with the step 4 queries to confirm no violation is left.
  7. Report briefly.

Approval gate

After step 5, ask the user to approve the plan if the change is major. Do not ask in hands-off mode or when the user already told you to proceed without asking.

Hands-off mode is on when the first argument token is the literal handsoff, or when the active task file has **Mode:** hands-off. Strip the handsoff token before reading the criticism. In hands-off mode, follow the handsoff contract and log the decision.

A change is major when it does any of these:

  • Changes a public interface, schema, or file format.
  • Deletes or replaces a module.
  • Changes behavior that callers outside the violating code rely on.
  • Touches enough files that the user could not review it in one sitting.

Rules

  • Do not stop at the pointed-out instance. A fix to only that spot is a failed run.
  • Do not widen the principle to make more hits. Each listed violation must break the same principle from step 2.
  • If you find no other violations, say so and show the searches you ran.
  • If a violation needs a decision the user must make, list it as open and do not guess.

Report

Problem: <general description from step 1>
Principle: <violated principle>
Found: <count> violations
- <file:line> — <what was wrong>
Fixed: <what changed, shared cause first>
Open: <violations left and why, or none>

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Run a bounded implement-attack-repair loop for a user-specified task. Use when work needs repeated independent criticism: perform the task, dispatch a fresh attacker, verify significant findings, repair them, and stop on a clean attack or the user's round limit.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

btseytlin/ultrapack47Updated Oct 15, 2026

e

Free

Explain a file, error, design, diff, or concept like a helpful engineering colleague: grounded in evidence, concise, and with useful follow-up threads. Use when the user asks for a clear explanation of the current work or codebase.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

btseytlin/ultrapack47Updated Oct 15, 2026

Use when a task needs an isolated checkout. Verify the worktree location, keep mutable environments and build outputs local, and run only authorized setup and checks.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

btseytlin/ultrapack47Updated Oct 15, 2026

Contract for hands-off mode — the ultrapack workflow variant that minimizes user prompts after Design, takes the safest reversible path, and logs every auto-choice for one end-of-task review. Referenced by the workflow entry point and child skills (udesign, uplan, uexecute, uverify, ureview). Read when the task file's **Mode:** header is `hands-off`.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

btseytlin/ultrapack47Updated Oct 15, 2026

Use when the user explicitly asks to launch and supervise a job. Require an authorized launch, monitoring, recovery, and teardown contract. Detect failures without inventing permission to restart or spend money.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

btseytlin/ultrapack47Updated Oct 15, 2026

make

Free

Orchestrate the full Ultrapack workflow in Codex and Pi: create or resume a task file, design, plan, execute, verify, review, and validate the observable goal. Use when the user asks to build, fix, or deliver a non-trivial change with the complete workflow.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

btseytlin/ultrapack47Updated Oct 15, 2026

See all skills by btseytlin

Report a problem with this skill