Command Creator

Command Creator Skill

This skill generates slash commands that follow Sando Design System philosophy: only create commands that justify token cost by adding intelligent value.

Guidelines: Single Source of Truth

CRITICAL: Command functionality must respect Sando guidelines when analyzing/validating project artifacts.

Primary Guidelines for Command Logic:

• 02-architecture/MONOREPO_STRUCTURE.md - Turborepo structure, package locations
• 03-development/GIT_WORKFLOW.md - Git status, branch naming, conventional commits
• 05-quality/TEST_COVERAGE.md - Coverage thresholds (>85% unit, 100% a11y)
• 05-quality/PERFORMANCE_BUDGETS.md - Bundle size budgets (<10KB/component)
• 02-architecture/COMPONENT_ARCHITECTURE.md - 7-file structure validation

Full Index: .claude/guidelines/GUIDELINES_INDEX.md

Guideline Priority:

1. Sando Guidelines - For validation/analysis logic
2. Golden Rule - Only create if adds intelligent value
3. Bash Alternative - Always prefer bash if no value added

🎯 GOLDEN RULE: Command Justification

Before creating ANY slash command, validate:

❌ NO if only executes bash command
   - Wrapper of package.json script
   - No analysis or context added
   - Example: /build → pnpm build
   - Action: Use bash directly (free)

✅ YES if adds intelligent value:
   ✓ Combines multiple sources
   ✓ Analyzes and interprets results
   ✓ Generates AI-powered recommendations
   ✓ Provides context requiring intelligence
   ✓ Debugging/troubleshooting automation
   ✓ Example: /status → git + builds + tests + analysis

✅ YES if skill shortcut (convenience):
   ✓ /new-component faster than full sentence
   ✓ Invokes skill explicitly
   ✓ Frequent workflow meriting shortcut

Validation Checklist (4 Questions)

1. ¿Script exists in package.json?

cat package.json | grep -A 50 '"scripts"'

• SÍ exists → ❌ NO create command, use bash
• NO exists → ✅ Continue

2. ¿Command adds analysis/intelligence?

• NO adds value → ❌ NO create command
• SÍ adds value → ✅ Continue

3. ¿Combines multiple sources or provides insights?

• NO combines → ⚠️ Probably not worth it
• SÍ combines → ✅ Probably worth it

4. ¿User needs result interpretation?**

• NO needs interpretation → ❌ Bash sufficient
• SÍ needs interpretation → ✅ Command justified

✅ Examples of GOOD Commands (Add Value)

/status - Multi-Source Analysis

Why good:

• ✅ Combines git status + build artifacts + test results + coverage
• ✅ Analyzes timestamps (detects stale builds per MONOREPO_STRUCTURE.md)
• ✅ Generates actionable recommendations
• ✅ Cannot be replicated with single bash command

/coverage - Intelligent Insights

Why good:

• ✅ Parses complex JSON coverage reports
• ✅ Identifies files <85% per TEST_COVERAGE.md threshold
• ✅ Prioritizes what to test (impact-based)
• ✅ Generates estimated effort

/review-component <name> - 50+ Criteria Checklist

Why good:

• ✅ Validates 7 mandatory files per COMPONENT_ARCHITECTURE.md
• ✅ Checks token consumption (Recipes only per TOKEN_ARCHITECTURE.md)
• ✅ Validates WCAG 2.1 AA per WCAG_COMPLIANCE.md
• ✅ Analyzes test coverage across unit/E2E/a11y per TEST_COVERAGE.md
• ✅ Cannot be done with grep/find alone

❌ Examples of BAD Commands (No Value)

/build - Simple Wrapper

Why bad:

• ❌ Only executes pnpm build
• ❌ No analysis or intelligence added
• ❌ Wastes tokens for zero value
• ✅ Alternative: Use pnpm build directly (free)

/test - No Added Value

Why bad:

• ❌ Only executes pnpm test
• ❌ Doesn't parse results or suggest fixes
• ❌ Simple bash wrapper
• ✅ Alternative: Use pnpm test directly (free)

Command File Structure

Slash commands stored in .claude/commands/category-name/command-name.md:

.claude/commands/
├── status/
│   ├── status.md              # /status command
│   ├── coverage.md            # /coverage command
│   └── why-failing.md         # /why-failing command
├── review/
│   ├── component.md           # /review-component command
│   ├── tokens.md              # /review-tokens command
│   └── a11y.md                # /review-a11y command
└── new/
    ├── component.md           # /new-component command
    ├── flavor.md              # /new-flavor command
    └── variant.md             # /add-variant command

Command Template

Every command file follows this structure:

---
description: Brief description (shown in /help)
allowed-tools: Tool1, Tool2, Tool3
argument-hint: [arg-name (optional)] # If accepts arguments
---

Brief introduction.

# Section 1: Data Gathering

Explain what information to collect from where.
Reference guidelines for validation thresholds.

# Section 2: Analysis

Explain how to interpret data.
Apply guideline standards (TEST_COVERAGE.md thresholds, etc.).

# Section 3: Recommendations

Provide actionable recommendations.

# Output Format

Show example output format.

Command Creation Workflow

Step 1: Validate Against Golden Rule

# Check package.json script
cat package.json | grep -A 50 '"scripts"' | grep "command-name"

# If exists → STOP, use bash
# If not exists → Continue

Step 2: Determine Command Type

1. Intelligent analysis? (combines sources + insights)
2. Troubleshooting? (diagnoses + suggests fixes)
3. Aggregated info? (collects + organizes complex data)
4. Skill shortcut? (explicit invocation of existing skill)
5. Performance analysis? (metrics + regressions)

If none → ❌ Command NOT justified

Step 3: Determine Command Location

• Status/Info: .claude/commands/status/
• Review/Analysis: .claude/commands/review/
• Creation/Generation: .claude/commands/new/
• Troubleshooting: .claude/commands/debug/
• Performance: .claude/commands/performance/

Step 4: Create Command File

Using template structure with guideline references.

Step 5: Add Justification Comment

At end of command file:

---

## 💰 Token Cost Justification

**Why this command is worth token cost:**

- ✅ Combines X sources of information
- ✅ Analyzes per GUIDELINE.md standards (lines X-Y)
- ✅ Generates Z actionable recommendations
- ✅ Cannot be done with single bash command

**Estimated tokens per use:** ~XXX tokens
**Value added:** [Specific value]
**ROI:** Positive after X uses

Step 6: Test Command

/command-name [arguments]

# Verify it:
# 1. Executes without errors
# 2. Provides intelligent analysis
# 3. Applies guideline standards correctly
# 4. Generates actionable recommendations
# 5. Justifies token cost

Sando-Specific Command Considerations

1. Three-Layer Token Architecture Awareness

Commands working with tokens must understand per TOKEN_ARCHITECTURE.md:

• Ingredients (primitives, no references)
• Flavors (semantic, reference Ingredients only)
• Recipes (component-specific, reference Flavors only)

Example: /review-tokens validates this architecture

2. Monolithic Component Structure

Commands working with components must validate per COMPONENT_ARCHITECTURE.md:

• 7 mandatory files (implementation, types, stories, unit tests, E2E, a11y, index)
• Token consumption from Recipes layer only
• WCAG 2.1 AA compliance per WCAG_COMPLIANCE.md

Example: /review-component checks all 7 files

3. Quality Thresholds

Commands analyzing quality must apply per guidelines:

• TEST_COVERAGE.md: >85% unit, 100% a11y
• PERFORMANCE_BUDGETS.md: <10KB per component, Core Web Vitals
• WCAG_COMPLIANCE.md: WCAG 2.1 AA, 4.5:1 contrast ratio

Example: /coverage uses TEST_COVERAGE.md thresholds

4. Monorepo Structure

Commands must understand per MONOREPO_STRUCTURE.md:

• Turborepo task orchestration
• pnpm workspaces
• Build dependencies (@sando/tokens → @sando/components)

Example: /status checks build artifact timestamps

✨ Final Reminder

"El mejor comando es el que no necesitas crear porque bash ya lo hace gratis."

Only create commands that justify token cost through intelligent analysis, multi-source aggregation, troubleshooting automation, or convenience shortcuts to existing skills.

When in doubt: "¿Puedo hacer esto con bash directamente?"

• YES → Use bash (free, no tokens)
• NO → Create command (adds value)