Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

hook-updater

Research-backed hook refresh workflow for updating existing hooks with TDD checkpoints and settings.json registration validation.

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

See how to install

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md3.3 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Hook Updater

Overview

Use this skill to refresh an existing hook safely: research current best practices, compare against current implementation, generate a TDD patch backlog, apply updates, and verify ecosystem integration including settings.json registration.

When to Use

  • Reflection flags stale or malfunctioning hook behavior
  • EVOLVE determines hook capability exists but quality is outdated
  • User asks to audit/refresh an existing hook
  • Hook exit code or stdin protocol issues detected

The Iron Law

Never update a hook blindly. Every refresh must be evidence-backed, TDD-gated, and integration-validated.

Workflow

Step 0: Evaluate Current State

  1. Read the hook file and understand its purpose
  2. Check settings.json registration (which events, which matchers)
  3. Run existing tests if they exist
  4. Identify issues: wrong API pattern, missing registration, broken requires

Step 1: Research Best Practices

  1. Read .claude/hooks/CLAUDE.md for hook conventions
  2. Review similar hooks in the same category for patterns
  3. Check .claude/rules/hooks.md for hook rules
  4. Use Skill({ skill: 'research-synthesis' }) if external research needed

Step 2: Generate Patch Backlog

  1. List specific changes needed (TDD-style: test first, then implement)
  2. Prioritize by risk: registration fixes > exit code fixes > logic improvements
  3. Estimate scope: <30 lines = auto-apply, >30 lines = plan mode

Step 3: Apply Updates

  1. Write or update tests first (RED phase)
  2. Apply hook changes (GREEN phase)
  3. Refactor for clarity (REFACTOR phase)
  4. Use Edit tool — never rewrite the entire file

Step 4: Verify Integration

  1. Confirm hook is registered in .claude/settings.json for correct events
  2. Verify hook exit codes: 0=allow, 2=block, 1=error (SE-03)
  3. Verify stdin JSON parsing follows the standard protocol
  4. Run pnpm lint:fix && pnpm format
  5. Run hook-specific tests

Step 5: Record

  1. Log changes via MemoryRecord if significant
  2. Update CHANGELOG.md entry

Domain-Specific Validation

  • Hook MUST be registered in settings.json under appropriate event
  • Hook MUST use stdin JSON protocol (not programmatic function exports)
  • Hook MUST exit 0 (allow) or 2 (block) — never exit 1 for blocking
  • Hook MUST wrap body in try/catch, exit 0 on unexpected errors (SE-03)
  • Hook require() paths MUST be file-relative (../../lib/...), not CWD-relative

Anti-Patterns

  • Updating a hook without checking its settings.json registration
  • Changing exit codes without understanding the 0/1/2 semantics
  • Converting a stdin-protocol hook to programmatic API (or vice versa)
  • Removing error handling to "simplify" the hook

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

Ensure accessibility in UI components including semantic HTML, ARIA attributes, keyboard navigation, and WCAG 2.2 AA compliance.

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

oimiragieo/agent-studio42Updated Jul 14, 2026

Use when you want to improve response quality through meta-cognitive reasoning. Applies 15+ reasoning methods to reconsider and refine initial outputs.

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

oimiragieo/agent-studio42Updated Jul 14, 2026

N-round opposing-stance debates for trade-off analysis. Assigns pro/con roles to agents, runs structured debate rounds with quality scoring, and produces a moderator synthesis with confidence-rated recommendation. Generalizable to architecture, technology, security, and design decisions.

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

oimiragieo/agent-studio42Updated Jul 14, 2026

Force adversarial code review stance that eliminates confirmation bias — reviewer must find issues or re-analyze

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

oimiragieo/agent-studio42Updated Jul 14, 2026

Creates specialized AI agents on-demand when no existing agent matches a request. Use when the Router cannot find a suitable agent for a task. Enables self-evolution by generating persistent agents.

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

oimiragieo/agent-studio42Updated Jul 14, 2026

LLM-as-judge evaluation framework with 5-dimension rubric (accuracy, groundedness, coherence, completeness, helpfulness) for scoring AI-generated content quality with weighted composite scores and evidence citations

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

oimiragieo/agent-studio42Updated Jul 14, 2026

See all skills by oimiragieo

Report a problem with this skill