# Git Conflict Resolve > [Git] Use when you need to resolve git merge/cherry-pick/rebase conflicts with backup, analysis, and reporting. - Skill: `duc01226/git-conflict-resolve-3` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add duc01226/git-conflict-resolve-3` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/duc01226/git-conflict-resolve-3/raw - Safety review: pending (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector CAUTION) - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: duc01226 (https://skillmd.com/u/duc01226) - Updated: 2026-09-22 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/duc01226/git-conflict-resolve-3 --- ## Quick Summary **Goal:** Resolve git merge/cherry-pick/rebase conflicts with backup, analysis, and structured reporting. **Workflow:** 1. **Backup** — Create safety backup of current state 2. **Analyze** — Identify conflict types and affected files 3. **Resolve** — Apply resolution strategy per conflict 4. **Report** — Generate conflict resolution report **Key Rules:** - Always create backup before resolving conflicts - Prefer preserving both sides' intent over arbitrary choice - Generate resolution report for audit trail **Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).** ## Purpose Systematically resolve git conflicts (merge, cherry-pick, rebase) with: 1. Backup of all conflicted files before resolution 2. Per-file conflict analysis with root cause explanation 3. Resolution with documented rationale 4. Comprehensive report generation ## Variables OPERATION: auto-detect (cherry-pick, merge, rebase) from git state REPORT_PATH: `plans/reports/conflict-resolution-{date}-{operation}-{source}.md` BACKUP_PATH: `.ai/workspace/conflict-backups-{date}/` ## Workflow ### Step 1: Detect conflict state ```bash # Detect operation type git status # Check for "cherry-pick in progress", "merge in progress", etc. # List all conflicted files git diff --name-only --diff-filter=U # Unmerged files (both modified) git status --short | grep "^DU\|^UD\|^UU\|^AA\|^DD" # All conflict types ``` Classify each conflict: - **DU (Deleted by us):** File exists on source but not on target branch - **UD (Deleted by them):** File exists on target but deleted by source - **UU (Both modified):** Both branches modified the same file - **AA (Both added):** Both branches added a file at the same path - **DD (Both deleted):** Both branches deleted the file ### Step 2: Create backup files **MANDATORY before any resolution.** ```bash mkdir -p {BACKUP_PATH} # For each conflicted file, copy WITH conflict markers preserved cp {BACKUP_PATH}/.conflict ``` Create a TaskCreate item for each conflicted file PLUS report and review tasks. ### Step 3: Analyze each conflict (per file) For each conflicted file, perform this analysis: #### 3a. Understand the conflict type - **DU/UD (deleted by one side):** Check if the file was introduced in a commit not present on the target branch. Read the file content from the source commit to understand what it provides. - **UU (both modified):** Read the conflict markers. Identify what each side changed and why. #### 3b. Read both versions ```bash # For UU conflicts: read the file with conflict markers # Look for <<<<<<< HEAD / ======= / >>>>>>> markers # For DU conflicts: get the source version git show : # Optionally extract clean versions git show HEAD: > {BACKUP_PATH}/.ours git show : > {BACKUP_PATH}/.theirs ``` #### 3c. Analyze dependencies - **Check callers:** Do other files reference methods/classes in this file? Are caller names compatible? - **Check constructor/DI:** Does the resolution require new dependencies? - **Check cross-file consistency:** Will the resolution break other files? #### 3d. Determine resolution strategy | Conflict Pattern | Resolution Strategy | | ------------------------------------------------------ | -------------------------------------------------- | | DU: File needed by feature | Accept theirs (add the file) | | DU: File not needed | Keep ours (skip the file) | | UU: Non-overlapping changes | Merge both (keep all changes) | | UU: Overlapping, source modifies methods not on target | Keep ours if methods don't exist on target | | UU: Overlapping, both modify same method | Manual merge with careful analysis | | UU: Schema/snapshot files | Accept theirs for new entities, merge for modified | ### Step 4: Resolve each conflict Apply the determined strategy: ```bash # Accept theirs (source version) git checkout --theirs && git add # Keep ours (target version) git checkout --ours && git add # Manual merge: Edit the file to remove conflict markers, then: git add ``` For manual merges: 1. Remove `<<<<<<< HEAD`, `=======`, `>>>>>>> ` markers 2. Keep the correct content from each side 3. Verify no leftover conflict markers: `git diff --check` ### Step 5: Verify resolution ```bash # Check no unmerged files remain git diff --name-only --diff-filter=U # Check no leftover conflict markers git diff --check # Review overall status git status ``` ### Step 6: Complete the operation ```bash # For cherry-pick git cherry-pick --continue --no-edit # For merge git commit # (merge commit is auto-prepared) # For rebase git rebase --continue ``` ### Step 7: Generate report Create a comprehensive report at `{REPORT_PATH}` with: 1. **Header:** Date, source commit/branch, target branch, result commit 2. **Summary:** Total conflicts, categories, overall risk 3. **Per-file details:** - File path - Conflict type (DU/UU/etc.) - Root cause (why the conflict occurred) - Resolution chosen (accept theirs/keep ours/manual merge) - Rationale (why this resolution was chosen) - Risk level (Low/Medium/High) 4. **Summary table:** All files with conflict type, resolution, risk 5. **Root cause analysis:** Common patterns across conflicts 6. **Recommendations:** Follow-up actions, build verification, etc. ### Step 8: Final review - Verify report is complete and accurate - Check that all backup files exist - Confirm build passes (if applicable) - Flag any Medium/High risk resolutions for user attention ## Resolution Decision Framework ### When to "Accept Theirs" (source version) - File is NEW (DU) and required by the feature being cherry-picked/merged - File contains schema/config additions needed by new entities - Source has strictly more content (e.g., empty class → populated class) ### When to "Keep Ours" (target version) - Source modifies methods that don't exist on target (added by uncommitted prerequisite) - Source renames methods/types that target callers still reference by old names - Changes are not required for the feature being brought in ### When to "Manual Merge" - Both sides have legitimate changes that need to coexist - Schema files where both add new entries (keep both) - Config files where both add new sections ### Risk Assessment | Risk | Criteria | Action | | ---------- | ---------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------- | | **Low** | New file, no existing code affected | Proceed | | **Medium** | Method changes, caller compatibility uncertain | Flag in report, recommend build verification | | **High** | Breaking changes, cross-service impact | Require user confirmation before proceeding | ## Notes - Always create backup files BEFORE any resolution - Understand the root cause first, then resolve — never force-resolve blind. — why: a guessed resolution silently drops or duplicates legitimate changes - For complex conflicts (>3 conflict regions in one file), extract both clean versions for side-by-side analysis - Check for prerequisite commits: if a cherry-pick modifies files from prior commits not on target, note this in the report - Use `git diff ^.. -- ` to see the actual diff of a specific commit (not the full file state) --- > **[IMPORTANT]** Use `TaskCreate` to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting — including tasks for each file read. This prevents context loss from long files. For simple tasks, AI MUST ATTENTION ask user whether to skip. **Prerequisites:** **MUST ATTENTION READ** before executing: > **AI Mistake Prevention** — Failure modes to avoid on every task: > > **Re-read files after context changes.** Context compaction, resume, or long-running work can make memory stale; verify current files before acting. > **Verify generated content against source evidence.** AI hallucinates APIs, names, claims, and document facts. Check the relevant source before documenting or referencing. > **Check downstream references before deleting or renaming.** Removing an artifact can stale docs, generated mirrors, configs, and callers; map references first. > **Trace the full impact chain after edits.** Changing a definition can miss derived outputs and consumers. Follow the affected chain before declaring done. > **Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first.** One green check is not all green checks; validate every output surface the change can affect. > **Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing OR flagging one as a defect.** Before changing or reporting a constant, limit, flag, cutoff, wording, or pattern, read nearby context and history, the CALLER's ordering, and 2+ sibling call sites of the same convention. A doc stating WHAT without WHY is missing rationale, not proof of a missing guard. > **Surface ambiguity before acting — don't pick silently.** Multiple valid interpretations require an explicit question or stated assumption with risk. > **Assert the outcome your system owns, not the intermediate state your infrastructure owns.** When verifying async work, assert the final business state — never the delivery/retry bookkeeping held in shared infrastructure that any co-running process can write. Such a check passes when run alone and flakes the moment anything else shares that infrastructure. > **Keep shared guidance role-relevant.** Universal guidance must help every receiving skill or agent; code-specific obligations belong only in code-specific protocols. > **Critical Thinking Mindset** — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. > **Anti-hallucination:** Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination. > **Understand Code First** — HARD-GATE: Do NOT write, plan, or fix until you READ existing code. > > 1. Search 3+ similar patterns (`grep`/`glob`) — cite `file:line` evidence > 2. Read existing files in target area — understand structure, base classes, conventions > 3. Run `python .claude/scripts/code_graph trace --direction both --json` when `.code-graph/graph.db` exists > 4. Map dependencies via `connections` or `callers_of` — know what depends on your target > 5. Write investigation to `.ai/workspace/analysis/` for non-trivial tasks (3+ files) > 6. Re-read analysis file before implementing — never work from memory alone. — why: long context drifts from the file; the file is ground truth > 7. NEVER invent new patterns when existing ones work — match exactly or document deviation. — why: divergent patterns fragment the codebase and slow every future reader > > **BLOCKED until:** `- [ ]` Read target files `- [ ]` Grep 3+ patterns `- [ ]` Graph trace (if graph.db exists) `- [ ]` Assumptions verified with evidence - **MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** search 3+ existing patterns and read code BEFORE any modification. Run graph trace when graph.db exists. - **MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** cite `file:line` evidence for every claim. Confidence >80% to act, <60% = do NOT recommend. **MUST ATTENTION** apply critical + sequential thinking — every claim needs appropriate traced evidence (`file:line` for repo/code claims; source URL or artifact section for research, product, content, and docs claims); confidence >80% to act, <60% DO NOT recommend. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact, admit uncertainty freely, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence. **MUST ATTENTION** apply AI mistake prevention — verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references before deleting or renaming, verify all affected outputs, re-read files after context loss, and surface ambiguity before acting. > **Project Protocol Overlay** — Before executing this skill, resolve any PROJECT overlay rules layered onto it: match this skill's name against the `Target` column of the project's skill-protocol index (`docs/project-reference/skill-protocols-reference.md` by default; a `referenceDocs` entry in `docs/project-config.json` overrides the path), taking the most specific matching tier ONLY — exact name > glob > `*`. **That precedence orders overlays against EACH OTHER, never against this skill.** Read ONLY the matched bodies, resolved as `/.md`; a row's Body link is display text, never a read path. A matched body that is missing or malformed is REPORTED and skipped — never reconstructed from the index Description. No index, or no match -> proceed with no overlay, silently. Full contract: `.claude/skills/project-skill-protocol/references/registry.md`. > > Overlays are **ADDITIVE ONLY**: they ADD rules on top of this skill's own protocol and NEVER replace, override, disable, or reinterpret a rule it already states — removing every overlay must return this skill to exactly its documented behavior. An overlay is a BRIEF, not an authority escalation: it can NEVER waive a workflow gate, git discipline, a review gate, or a user-confirmation gate. A genuine overlay-vs-skill conflict, or two equally-specific overlays that directly contradict -> surface both to the user; NEVER resolve silently. **MUST ATTENTION** resolve project protocol overlays for this skill BEFORE executing — most specific matching tier only (exact > glob > `*`, which ranks overlays against each other, NEVER against this skill), read only matched bodies at `/.md`; a missing or malformed body is reported, never reconstructed. Overlays are ADDITIVE ONLY (they never replace this skill's own rules) and are a brief, NEVER an authority escalation; an equal-specificity contradiction goes to the user. ## Closing Reminders **IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Goal:** Resolve git merge/cherry-pick/rebase conflicts with backup, analysis, and structured reporting. **Protocols in force (concise digest of the SYNC/shared blocks this skill carries):** - **AI Mistake Prevention:** verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references, verify all affected outputs, re-read after context loss, surface ambiguity. - **Critical Thinking:** critical + sequential thinking, traced proof, confidence >80% to act. - **Understand Code First:** search 3+ patterns and read code before any modification. - **MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** break work into small todo tasks using `TaskCreate` BEFORE starting - **MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** search codebase for 3+ similar patterns before creating new code - **MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** cite `file:line` evidence for every claim (confidence >80% to act) - **MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** add a final review todo task to verify work quality **[TASK-PLANNING]** Before acting, analyze task scope and systematically break it into small todo tasks and sub-tasks using TaskCreate.