beutl-ai-self-review

Beutl AI workflow self-review

Refresh the AI setup so it never drifts from the codebase. The skill only touches files inside the AI surface: AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, .agents/skills/beutl-* (do NOT edit .agents/skills/speckit-*), .claude/agents/, .claude/skills/beutl-* (do NOT edit .claude/skills/speckit-*), .claude/rules/, .claude/hooks/, docs/ai-workflow/, .specify/memory/constitution.md. It never edits source code, tests, CI workflows, the linter config, or anything under .specify/scripts/ / .specify/templates/.

1. Pick the review window

Decide the git range to inspect, in this order:

1. If $ARGUMENTS starts with since=, use the value after the = directly (e.g. since=HEAD~20, since=2026-04-01).
2. Else, if .claude/.last-self-review exists, read its contents and use <sha>..HEAD.
3. Else, fall back to --since="30 days ago".

Capture the chosen window as $WINDOW for the rest of the run.

2. Collect signals

Run these in parallel where possible.

Git history

git log $WINDOW --no-merges --name-only --pretty=format:'%h %s'

Bucket changed paths:

• New top-level dirs under src/<NewModule>/
• New top-level dirs under tests/<NewTestProject>/
• New / removed files under .github/workflows/
• Changes to .editorconfig, Directory.Build.props, Directory.Build.targets, Directory.Packages.props, xamlstyler.json, global.json, Beutl.slnx
• Anything that renames or deletes a path referenced from the AI surface

Repo-state cross-check

For every file path, project name, or module name mentioned in the AI surface files, confirm it still exists. Concretely:

1. List the AI surface files:

   ls AGENTS.md CLAUDE.md .agents/skills/beutl-*/SKILL.md \
      .agents/skills/beutl-*/references/*.md .claude/agents/*.md \
      .claude/rules/*.md .claude/skills/beutl-*/SKILL.md \
      .claude/skills/beutl-*/references/*.md \
      docs/ai-workflow/*.md .specify/memory/constitution.md 2>/dev/null
   

2. For each, Grep for tokens that look like paths or csproj names:
   • src/Beutl.<word> / src/Beutl.<word>.<word>
   • tests/Beutl.<word> / tests/<word>Test
   • .github/workflows/<word>.yml
   • Beutl.<word>.csproj
3. For each unique reference, Glob for the file. If the Glob returns nothing, mark the reference as stale.

Recent PR feedback on AI surface

gh pr list --state all --limit 10 --json number,title

For each PR number N:

gh api "repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/$N/comments" \
  --jq '[.[] | select(.path | test("^(\\.agents/|\\.claude/|AGENTS\\.md|CLAUDE\\.md|docs/ai-workflow/)")) | {pr: '"$N"', path, line, body, user: .user.login}]'

Aggregate themes by counting how often each cluster recurs (same wording or same target path across 2+ PRs).

Hook log (optional)

test -f .claude/logs/instructions-loaded.log && \
  awk -F'\t' '{print $4}' .claude/logs/instructions-loaded.log | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn

Surface rules that load disproportionately often (description too loose) or rules that never load (description too narrow or paths: too strict).

3. Synthesize findings

Cap at 10 findings, ordered by severity. Each finding must include:

• Target file(s) with absolute paths from repo root
• What is stale or missing, one sentence
• Proposed concrete edit — the smallest diff that resolves it

Do not report findings whose only impact is style (linter territory) or findings that ask to modify CI workflows.

4. Confirm each finding with the user

Use the runtime's user-question mechanism (AskUserQuestion in Claude Code, request_user_input in Codex plan mode, or a concise direct question when no question tool is available). Batch at most 4 questions per call. For every finding, offer the same option set:

• Apply the edit (the proposed diff)
• Skip (acknowledge, no change this round)
• Apply differently (user describes the alternative)

Do not group findings unless they touch the same file with mechanically identical edits (e.g. renaming the same project across 6 docs).

5. Apply the approved edits

Use Edit (or Write only for new files in the AI surface). Group edits by file so each file is rewritten in a single pass. Keep diffs minimal. Do not introduce new sections, new files, or new conventions that were not part of the approved finding.

6. Update the marker

After the run — even if zero findings were applied — write the current SHA to the marker so the next review starts from here:

git rev-parse HEAD > .claude/.last-self-review

7. Summarize

End the turn with a short report:

• Applied: N findings — list as file:line — fix summary
• Skipped: N findings
• Open (user chose "apply differently" but did not specify the alt yet): list these
• Next window: <new marker SHA>..HEAD

Do not stage, commit, or push. The user decides when to commit the changes.

Constraints

• Stay inside the AI surface. Never edit src/, tests/, .github/workflows/, .specify/scripts/, .specify/templates/, .specify/integrations/, .specify/workflows/, the linter config, .agents/skills/speckit-*, or .claude/skills/speckit-*.
• Do not propose stylistic-only edits — .editorconfig, xamlstyler.json, and dotnet format own that.
• Cap PR-feedback scanning at the most recent 10 PRs.
• If gh or git is unavailable, degrade: skip that signal and proceed with the others; do not abort.
• Never commit, push, or open a PR. Leave staging entirely to the user.