Apply one scoped debundle peel or reorganization assignment in a worktree. Use for confirming graph peelability, reading binding context, choosing honest module boundaries, editing debundle YAML, running the adapter-provided gate and regen commands, and committing one reviewable worker branch.
Scanned 9/9/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add agentydragon/ducktape --skill debundle_lane_worker --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Debundle Lane Worker?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/agentydragon-debundle-lane-worker-ducktape)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: debundle_lane_worker
description: Apply one scoped debundle peel or reorganization assignment in a worktree. Use for confirming graph peelability, reading binding context, choosing honest module boundaries, editing debundle YAML, running the adapter-provided gate and regen commands, and committing one reviewable worker branch.
---
# Debundle Lane Worker
Use this role for one scoped implementation assignment: a seed cluster from
intake, a binding-patch/residual cohort, or a firm reorganization task from
the architect.
Read bundled references as needed:
- `references/workflow.md` for role boundaries and failure routing
- `references/debundle_user_guide.md` for graph/source/gate evidence conventions
- `references/module_shape.md` for seam and layer-ownership heuristics
## Inputs
The orchestrator or project adapter provides:
- worktree root and expected base SHA
- assignment with owner IDs, binding IDs, proposed destination, and notes
- `<graph>`, `<modules-dir>`, `<emitted-js-root>`, and optional source root
- project conventions/taxonomy docs
- exact gate, regen, uniqueness-check, and commit expectations
## Procedure
1. Confirm the worktree is at the expected base before editing.
2. Check the assignment against the current graph with `debundle_plan_work`
commands such as `explain` and `source-slice`.
3. Read each binding's surrounding code: consumers, dependencies, and nearby
implementation details.
4. Choose a module boundary that looks like a real JavaScript seam under the
project conventions.
5. Edit only the debundle spec and required generated output paths. Do not
modify the upstream/source bundle.
6. Remove now-owned entries from the non-emitting rename/annotation patch
stream when the project uses one.
7. Run the adapter-provided uniqueness check, gate, and regen commands.
8. Commit one reviewable branch and report the result.
## Boundary Heuristics
A good module has a coherent reason to exist: stable public surface, internal
references dominating external references, clear layer ownership, or multiple
meaningful consumers. Member count alone is not the rule.
Usually avoid standalone modules for:
- primitive constants with one consumer
- one-line helpers with one consumer
- enum-like values that only parametrize a larger owner
- local style/config/data artifacts with no public contract
Do not co-locate solely by consumer count when that would violate layer
ownership. Policy, domain, persistence, infra, and integration logic keep
their own homes even when a presenter is currently the only caller.
You may expand the batch when the assigned peel would create a worse module
shape without a companion. You may also skip assigned items when their natural
owner is not peelable yet.
## Failure Handling
- If the graph is stale, rerun the adapter-provided graph refresh or report
the stale evidence.
- If the gate rejects the batch, read the structured cycle/report output
first. Use the cut/evidence if present; do not blindly bisect before reading
the report.
- If broad minified-source analysis is needed, stop and ask for intake
grounding.
- If the destination is architecturally unclear, stop and route to the
architect instead of inventing a dump bucket.
## Report
Keep the report short:
- branch and commit hash
- gate and regen result
- destinations changed and bindings moved
- skipped candidates and why
- architecture or intake follow-ups discovered
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!