Recheck Against Upstream

Recheck against upstream

A drift corrector for the discipline that existing state does not vouch for itself. The method, re-anchor, audit the work in flight, correct forward, report, and the tone that firing this is not an accusation, lives in ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/context/re-anchor-audit-correct.md. Read it; this file adds only what is specific to upstream-conformance discipline.

The discipline this re-anchors

Existing state, a config file, a code path, a runbook, an infra definition, is evidence of what is, never proof that it matches the upstream it depends on. Upstream ships new defaults, renames flags, deprecates APIs, and obsoletes yesterday's workaround; the state that was correct when written silently rots. Resolve the source of truth per the method doc's ladder: if the consuming project states an upstream-conformance rule in its own CLAUDE.md / .claude/rules/, re-anchor THAT. Otherwise re-anchor this portable baseline:

• Present state is not self-justifying. "It's already configured this way" and "the code does X" describe the state; neither shows it still matches upstream. Conformance is a claim to verify, not to assume.
• Compare against the CURRENT official upstream, fetched now. Re-read the vendor's live documentation for the surface in play this session, never training-data recall of it, never a stale in-repo summary of it.
• Resolve the applicable upstream version first. When the repo pins a supported major/minor, compare against the docs for THAT version. The latest docs can legitimately prescribe APIs and defaults the pin does not have. Divergence between the pinned line and latest is its own finding (upgrade candidate or deliberate hold), never a false gap against the pin.
• Unverified conformance is not "clean". A surface you did not compare is unaudited, not passing. Report what was compared and what was skipped; do not launder the unchecked into a green result.

The loop's audit step. Classify each divergence

Run the method doc's audit as a compare-and-classify pass. For the surface in flight, fetch the current upstream docs, diff the repo's state against them, and sort every divergence into one of three categories:

1. Gap. Docs say X, we do Y, and no rationale is recorded anywhere in the repo. Treat as a straight defect to correct toward upstream. Call out deprecation and version drift here: a flag upstream renamed, a default it changed, an API it marked deprecated is a gap even when the old form still functions today.
2. Deliberate divergence, a rationale IS recorded in the repo's docs or an ADR. Do not "correct" it. Audit only whether it STILL holds against the current docs: upstream may have shipped the very thing the workaround was written to route around, obsoleting the recorded rationale. Report- only when the rationale still holds; flag it when the docs have overtaken it.
3. Undocumented divergence, the state looks intentional but no written rationale exists, so the correct resolution is the human's call: adopt the docs' way, or keep the divergence and record its rationale. Route the resolution to the repo's ADR / docs convention (read it from the consuming project's own instruction layer); do not silently pick a side.

Correct each forward now per the method doc: fix gaps toward upstream, re-check that deliberate divergences still hold, and surface undocumented ones for the human with both options stated. Where your own reading of the docs is the suspected source of error, re-verify in a fresh-context subagent.

Distinct axes. What this is NOT

• vs /discipline:reason-dont-recite. That skill interrogates INTERNAL precedent. Inherited structure coasting on "that's how it's done here". This one measures against an EXTERNAL upstream authority: the vendor's current docs, not the repo's own inherited habits.
• vs /discipline:follow-our-standards. That skill audits against the consuming ORG's own engineering standards. This one audits against the third-party VENDOR's documentation, the upstream the state depends on, not the conventions the org authored.

What this skill does NOT do

• Does not treat divergence as automatic error. A recorded, still-valid deliberate divergence audits clean; the duty is to classify, not to force every difference back to the default.
• Does not fabricate conformance or a finding. A surface that matches the current docs audits clean; a surface not compared is reported as skipped, never as passing.

Gotchas

• "Still functions" is not "still current". A deprecated flag or a superseded default that has not yet been removed is a gap, not a pass; version drift is a finding even before it breaks.
• A recorded rationale can expire. The category-2 trap is treating "we decided this once" as permanent; re-check it against what upstream ships today, because the workaround may now be obsolete.
• Silence about the unchecked reads as a pass. State the surfaces you compared and the ones you did not; an honest skip list is part of the report, not an admission of failure.