# Cw Slice

> Use before writing code for any Codewhale feature, upgrade, or refactor: find the existing owner of the behavior, bound the change to one reviewable slice, and fix the evidence bar before you start.

- Skill: `hmbown/cw-slice` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add hmbown/cw-slice`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/hmbown/cw-slice/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: Hmbown (https://skillmd.com/u/hmbown)
- Updated: 2026-09-09
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/hmbown/cw-slice

---


# cw-slice

The expensive mistake in this repo is not a bad implementation — it is a second
implementation. A new `model_*`, `*_config`, `provider_*`, or "bridge" module
beside the one that already does the job ships two systems and a comment that is
no longer true. This skill is the ponytail ladder's rung 2 with commands
attached: **find the thing that already exists, then edit it.**

Stage 2 of the loop: [cw-orient](../cw-orient/SKILL.md) → **slice** →
[cw-gates](../cw-gates/SKILL.md) → [cw-dogfood](../cw-dogfood/SKILL.md) →
[cw-land](../cw-land/SKILL.md) → [cw-handoff](../cw-handoff/SKILL.md).

## When to use

- Any feature, upgrade, refactor, or "make X work like Y" request.
- Before creating a new module, trait, config struct, or command.
- When a plan or issue tells you to build something and you have not yet
  confirmed it does not already exist.

## Workflow

1. **Walk the ladder, out loud, before opening an editor.** Stop at the first
   rung that answers, and say which one you stopped at:
   1. Does this need to exist? → skip it.
   2. Already in this codebase? → reuse it.
   3. Stdlib does it? → use it.
   4. Native platform feature? → use it.
   5. Installed dependency? → use it.
   6. One line? → one line.
   7. Only then: the minimum that works.

   The ladder runs *after* reading the code, never instead of it. A short diff
   written without reading the call sites is a guess, not a small change.

2. **Grep for the predecessor.** This is the step that gets skipped and the one
   that costs the most:
   ```bash
   grep -rn "<the concept, in the words the code would use>" crates --include='*.rs' | head -40
   ls crates
   grep -rln 'model_\|_config\|provider_' crates/*/src --include='*.rs' | head -30
   ```
   Search behavior and symbols, not just filenames. If you find an owner, edit
   it. If you are still adding a new layer, its module doc must name the
   predecessor it replaces — otherwise you are editing the wrong file.

3. **Check the contracts you are about to walk into.** These are the ones this
   repo actively guards, and a guard test fails if you duplicate them:
   - One turn loop: `crates/tui/src/core/engine/turn_loop.rs`, guarded by
     `crates/core/tests/single_turn_loop.rs`. Do not add a second.
   - One base prompt: `BASE_PROMPT` in `crates/tui/src/prompts/text.rs`.
   - The subagent tool is `agent`. Do not revive `agent_open` / `agent_eval` /
     `agent_close` / `delegate_to_agent`.
   - The system prompt + tool catalog are a session-pinned KV-cache prefix
     (`docs/CACHE.md`). Any new session-context contributor must state its cache
     effect — frozen prefix vs. append-only history. Never splice a volatile
     fact into the prefix.
   - `crates/tui/src/core/` is a module inside the TUI crate. `crates/core` is a
     different crate that runs no turns. Do not confuse them.
   - Repeatedly misidentified as dead, verify consumers before removing:
     `tui/src/context_budget.rs`, `tui/src/model_registry.rs`,
     `tui/src/prompt_zones.rs`, `tui/src/tools/remember.rs`, `config/src/route/`.

4. **Read the scoped guidance for the files you will touch.** `crates/tui/AGENTS.md`
   owns the UI contracts (one owner per fact, `palette::grammar` semantics, typed
   state enums, toast routing, `tr(locale, MessageId::...)` for user prose).
   `crates/tui/locales/AGENTS.md` owns string changes. `web/AGENTS.md` owns the
   site. `docs/MOTION_CONTRACT.md` owns motion. Design law lives in
   `docs/design/`, not in a prototype file someone left in a sibling directory.

5. **Bound the slice.** One coherent change, reviewable in one sitting, that
   leaves the tree building and green. Two rules keep slices honest:
   - **An abstraction must delete caller code.** If adopting it is pure
     obligation — required methods, no default bodies that do work — it will be
     built, adopted once, and abandoned. Don't build it.
   - **Migrate the last consumer, or do not start.** Framework, one caller,
     ticket the rest, silence the warning: that is how two systems ship. If the
     migration will not fit in this slice, narrow the slice — never the adoption.

6. **Fix the evidence bar now, not after.** Decide before writing code what will
   prove this works, and write it into your plan:
   - the focused test or existing check that covers the behavior
     (`scripts/dev-test.sh --list` maps an area to its fastest invocation);
   - whether the change is visible enough to need [cw-dogfood](../cw-dogfood/SKILL.md);
   - whether it is cross-cutting enough to need the full sweep in
     [cw-gates](../cw-gates/SKILL.md).

7. **Write the implementation first.** Code first, then tests — this repo does
   not practice TDD, and that overrides any skill that says otherwise. Build it,
   prove it runs, then add or adjust tests to cover what you actually built. A
   regression test written after the fix still has to be shown failing without
   the fix.

## Red flags / don't

- Don't add a module that "bridges", "mirrors", "stages", or "wraps" something
  that already exists without naming that thing in the module doc.
- Don't add a second turn loop, base prompt, delegation axis, or lifecycle
  system. The repo has exactly one of each on purpose.
- Don't write tests first. Don't add tests by default either — add one when it
  cheaply protects safety, data integrity, protocol compatibility, or a
  reproduced regression.
- Don't contort production code to keep a brittle assertion green. A test that
  only encodes old behavior is evidence, not a veto: change it with the code.
- Don't cut trust-boundary validation, data-loss handling, security, or
  accessibility to make a diff shorter. Brevity is never a reason to drop a guard.
- Don't leave a `#[allow(dead_code)]` behind as the cost of an incomplete
  migration — `scripts/check-dead-code-budget.py` is the running receipt.

## Output

Before the first edit, state:

- which rung of the ladder you stopped at and why;
- the existing owner you found (`path/to/file.rs:line`), or the predecessor
  your new module names;
- the bounded slice, in one sentence;
- the evidence bar you will meet, chosen in advance.