# Dvy1987 Agent Loom Git Workflow And Versioning

> Git Workflow and Versioning

- Skill: `tomevault-io/dvy1987-agent-loom-git-workflow-and-versioning` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add tomevault-io/dvy1987-agent-loom-git-workflow-and-versioning`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/tomevault-io/dvy1987-agent-loom-git-workflow-and-versioning/raw
- Safety review: pending (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS)
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: AI & ML
- Author: tomevault-io (https://skillmd.com/u/tomevault-io)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/tomevault-io/dvy1987-agent-loom-git-workflow-and-versioning

---


# Git Workflow and Versioning

You keep git history reviewable, reversible, and honest. Commits are save points; messages document intent.

## Hard Rules

One logical change per commit — never mix feature + refactor + formatting.
Commit messages explain **why**, not only what the diff shows.
Never commit secrets — scan staged diff for password, secret, api_key, token patterns.
Never force-push to shared `main`/`master` without explicit user request.
Tests should pass before commit when the project has a test command.

---

## Workflow

### Step 1 — Review what's changing

Run `git status` and `git diff` (staged if committing). Confirm scope matches one logical change.

### Step 2 — Pre-commit hygiene

Run project tests/lint if applicable. Reject staged secrets. Split if mixed concerns.

### Step 3 — Write the message

```
<type>: <short imperative description>

<optional body — why, tradeoffs, links to spec/task>
```

Types: `feat` | `fix` | `refactor` | `test` | `docs` | `chore`

### Step 4 — Commit or advise the user

If the user's environment allows commits, commit. Otherwise output the exact message for them to run.

### Step 5 — Summarize for reviewers

Emit a short change summary (see Output Format).

---

## Branching defaults

- **Trunk-based:** keep default branch deployable; merge feature branches within 1–3 days.
- **Naming:** `feature/<slug>`, `fix/<slug>`, `chore/<slug>`, `refactor/<slug>`
- **Parallel agents:** prefer `git worktree add` over constant branch switching.
- **Incomplete features:** feature flags on main beat month-long branches.

---

## Gotchas

- Squashing everything at the end destroys the slice narrative — commit incrementally.
- Formatting-only commits mixed with behavior changes make review and bisect painful.
- Missing `.gitignore` until `.env` lands in history.
- `git reset --hard` on shared branches loses others' work — warn first.

---

## Common Rationalizations

| Excuse | Reality |
|--------|---------|
| "I'll commit when the feature is done" | One giant commit can't be reviewed or reverted safely. |
| "Message doesn't matter" | History is documentation for future you and agents. |
| "I'll squash later" | Prefer clean incremental commits from the start. |
| "Branches are overhead" | Short-lived branches isolate work; long-lived branches are the cost. |

---

## Output Format

```markdown
## Git summary

Commits recommended:
- `<type>: <description>`

CHANGES:
- path: one-line what/why

NOT TOUCHED (intentional):
- path: reason out of scope

CONCERNS:
- [risk or question for human]
```

---

## Examples

<examples>
  <example>
    <input>I'm done with the validation endpoint. Ready to commit.</input>
    <output>
Staged review: one logical change (POST /validate + tests).
Message:
```
feat: add skill validation endpoint

Exposes validate-skills checks for CI; refs task validate-api.
```
Run: `npm test` → pass, then commit.
    </output>
  </example>
</examples>

---

## Impact Report

```
Git workflow: [commit advised / committed / review-only]
Commits: N | Concerns flagged: N
```

---
> Source: [dvy1987/agent-loom](https://github.com/dvy1987/agent-loom) — distributed by [TomeVault](https://tomevault.io).
<!-- tomevault:4.0:skill_md:2026-06-15 -->