Claude Skills by Smithbox-ai

Use when a repository task needs a high-quality ControlFlow plan before coding — small, medium, or large scope, cross-file edits, risky migrations, architectural uncertainty, or any work that should produce a saved Markdown plan artifact in plans/. Single-sources the plan format from schemas/planner.plan.schema.json and the plan template.

Use after /controlflow-claude-code:controlflow-plan produces a plan, before implementation. Runs adversarial pre-execution verification inline in the main context (zero subagents): structural audit, assumption/mirage detection, and executability cold-start simulation. Emits APPROVED / NEEDS_REVISION / REJECTED with evidence.

Use when a saved plan may contain hidden assumptions disguised as facts, especially for medium or large tasks, unresolved high-risk plans, or plans that mention files, APIs, versions, integrations, tests, or concurrency patterns that should be verified against the repository before execution.

Use when a saved plan should be tested for cold-start executability before coding, especially for large tasks, weak-confidence plans, or plans whose early phases may be too vague for a fresh executor to follow without hidden context.

Use when work spans many turns or phases and you need durable notes, active-objective tracking, or context compaction without letting stale memory override the current codebase.

Use when executing a multi-step repository task in phases, especially when progress should be tracked with gates, approvals, retries, localized replanning, or optional sub-agent delegation instead of one long monolithic run.

Use when a saved implementation plan should be adversarially reviewed before coding, especially for small, medium, or large tasks that may contain architecture flaws, scope gaps, destructive risk, weak rollback, weak tests, or dependency conflicts.

Use when a repository task needs a strict ControlFlow-style implementation plan before coding, especially for small, medium, or large scope, cross-file edits, risky migrations, architectural uncertainty, or any work that should produce a saved Markdown plan artifact in plans/.

Use when asked to review code, a diff, or a completed phase, especially when the result should emphasize bugs, regressions, validation status, and evidence-backed findings instead of style commentary.

Use when a task broadly matches ControlFlow and you need to decide whether to start with spec capture, strict workflow, planning, pre-execution plan review, orchestration, code review, or memory hygiene, or whether to combine several of those skills in sequence.

Use before planning non-trivial work when requirements, acceptance criteria, boundaries, constraints, or success measures are not yet clear enough for a safe implementation plan.

Use when you want the full ControlFlow process as one strict workflow, especially for non-trivial repository work that should move from saved plan to plan review to execution to code review with durable artifacts at each step.