Create a reusable command with explicit preconditions, numbered actions, checks after each step, and error handling. This template provides a structure to customize so Claude verifies the required context before starting a defined workflow.
Template for commands that implement a structured recipe: validate preconditions, then execute numbered steps. Fork this and replace the placeholder content. The 'Context Validation Checkpoints' section is the key pattern, forcing Claude to verify preconditions before starting.
Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.
This is a template. Replace all
[placeholder]content with your specifics.
Before executing any step, verify all of these are true. If any checkpoint fails, stop and explain why to the user.
[Clear instructions for this step. Be specific about what to read, what to check, what to write.]
Validation: [How Claude verifies this step completed correctly before moving to Step 2]
[Instructions]
Validation: [How to verify]
[Instructions]
Validation: [How to verify]
Summarize what was done:
| Situation | Response |
|---|---|
| [Error condition 1] | [What to do: retry / stop / ask user] |
| [Error condition 2] | [What to do] |
| Precondition checkpoint fails | Stop. Explain which checkpoint failed and what the user needs to fix before re-running |
If $ARGUMENTS[0] was provided: [how to use it]
If no argument was provided: [default behavior]
The "Context Validation Checkpoints" section is the key pattern from this template. It forces Claude to verify preconditions explicitly rather than discovering failures mid-execution. Inspired by recurring patterns in Packmind commands (Apache 2.0).
No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.
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.
Evaluate Claude Code agents, skills, and commands with weighted quality criteria. Get scores, readiness grades, template comparisons, and practical improvement suggestions in Markdown or JSON reports to guide reviews before release.
Assess a codebase across seven areas, including exposed credentials, security, dependencies, structure, and tests. Receive category scores, findings tied to file locations, and a prioritized improvement plan with smaller tasks that can be completed quickly.
Measure code patterns such as casts to any or disabled lint rules, then run repeated, targeted edits. Keep changes that improve the chosen metric, revert unsuccessful changes, and track results for each improvement loop.
Generate several separate solutions, compare them against criteria fixed in advance, and verify the selected result through executable checks or an independent reviewer. Keep a proof log documenting candidates, evidence, failures, and remaining limits.
Monitor a live application after deployment and compare it with a saved baseline, a record of its earlier state. Check page responses, loading times, and new errors, flag persistent changes, and produce a per-page health report.
Rebuild project context after clearing a conversation or returning to work. Review recent Git history, uncommitted changes, and TODO markers to get a structured summary of project status and suggested next steps.