tomevault-io Git Commit Helper Skill
Generate conventional commit messages from your git diff.
When I Activate
- ✅
git commitwithout message - ✅ User asks "what should my commit message be?"
- ✅ Staged changes exist
- ✅ User mentions commit or conventional commits
- ✅ Before creating commits
What I Generate
Conventional Commit Format
<type>(<scope>): <subject>
<body>
<footer>
Types:
feat: New featurefix: Bug fixdocs: Documentation changesstyle: Code style (formatting, no logic change)refactor: Code refactoringperf: Performance improvementstest: Test additions or fixesbuild: Build system changesci: CI/CD changeschore: Maintenance tasks
Examples
Feature Addition
# You staged:
git add auth.service.ts login.component.tsx
# I analyze diff and suggest:
feat(auth): add JWT-based user authentication
- Implement login/logout functionality
- Add token management service
- Include auth guards for protected routes
- Add unit tests for auth service
Closes #42
Bug Fix
# You staged:
git add UserList.tsx
# I suggest:
fix(components): resolve memory leak in UserList
Fixed subscription not being cleaned up in useEffect,
causing memory leak when component unmounts.
Closes #156
Breaking Change
# You staged:
git add api/users.ts
# I suggest:
feat(api): update user API response format
Changed response structure to include metadata
for better pagination and filtering support.
BREAKING CHANGE: User API now returns { data, metadata }
instead of direct array. Update client code accordingly.
Documentation Update
# You staged:
git add README.md docs/api.md
# I suggest:
docs: update API documentation with authentication examples
- Add authentication flow diagrams
- Include cURL examples for protected endpoints
- Document error responses
Analysis Process
Step 1: Check Staged Changes
git diff --staged --name-only
git diff --staged
Step 2: Categorize Changes
- New files → feat
- Modified files → fix, refactor, or feat
- Deleted files → chore or refactor
- Test files → test
- Documentation → docs
Step 3: Analyze Content
- What was changed?
- Why was it changed?
- What's the impact?
- Are there breaking changes?
Step 4: Generate Message
Subject line:
- Max 50 characters
- Imperative mood ("add" not "added")
- No period at end
- Lowercase after type
Body:
- Explain WHAT and WHY, not HOW
- Wrap at 72 characters
- Bullet points for multiple changes
Footer:
- Breaking changes:
BREAKING CHANGE: description - Issue references:
Closes #123,Fixes #456
Message Components
Type Selection
feat: New functionality
- New components, features, capabilities
fix: Bug fixes
- Resolving issues, fixing bugs
refactor: Code improvements
- No functional changes, better code structure
perf: Performance
- Speed improvements, optimization
docs: Documentation
- README, comments, guides
test: Testing
- Adding or fixing tests
style: Formatting
- Code style, linting, formatting
chore: Maintenance
- Dependencies, build config, tooling
Scope Selection
Common scopes:
- Component name:
feat(UserCard): ... - Module:
fix(auth): ... - Package:
chore(api): ... - Area:
docs(readme): ...
Subject Guidelines
✅ Good:
add user authenticationfix memory leak in componentupdate API documentation
❌ Bad:
added user authentication(past tense)fixes bug(too vague)Update API docs.(period at end)
Advanced Examples
Multiple Changes
# Multiple files in auth feature
feat(auth): implement complete authentication system
- Add JWT token generation and validation
- Implement password hashing with bcrypt
- Create login/logout API endpoints
- Add auth middleware for protected routes
- Include refresh token functionality
Closes #42, #43, #44
Refactoring
# Code restructuring
refactor(api): extract database logic into repository pattern
Moved database queries from controllers to repository classes
for better separation of concerns and testability.
No functional changes or API modifications.
Performance Improvement
# Optimization
perf(queries): optimize user data fetching
- Implement query batching to eliminate N+1 queries
- Add database indices on frequently queried columns
- Cache user profile data with 5-minute TTL
Performance improvement: 80ms → 12ms average response time
Git Integration
Pre-commit Hook
I work great with pre-commit hooks:
#!/bin/sh
# .git/hooks/prepare-commit-msg
# If no commit message provided, trigger skill
if [ -z "$2" ]; then
# Skill suggests message based on staged changes
echo "# Suggested commit message (edit as needed)" > "$1"
fi
Amending Commits
# Poor initial message
git commit -m "fix stuff"
# Amend with better message
# I suggest improved message based on changes
git commit --amend
Sandboxing Compatibility
Works without sandboxing: ✅ Yes Works with sandboxing: ✅ Yes
May need network access for:
- Fetching issue details from GitHub API
- Checking if issue numbers are valid
Sandbox config (optional):
{
"network": {
"allowedDomains": [
"api.github.com"
]
}
}
Customization
Custom Commit Types
Edit SKILL.md to add company-specific types:
deploy: Deployment
migrate: Database migrations
hotfix: Production hotfixes
Custom Scopes
Train the skill to recognize your project structure:
Common scopes: auth, api, ui, database, admin, mobile
Message Templates
Customize message format for your team:
# Standard format
feat(scope): subject
# Your custom format
[JIRA-123] feat(scope): subject
Tips for Best Messages
- Be specific: "fix login button" not "fix bug"
- Use imperative mood: "add" not "added" or "adds"
- Include context: Why this change was needed
- Reference issues: Always include issue numbers
- Breaking changes: Always flag in footer
Common Patterns
Frontend Changes
feat(ui): add responsive navigation menu
fix(components): resolve prop validation warning
style(css): update button hover effects
Backend Changes
feat(api): add user pagination endpoint
fix(database): resolve connection pool exhaustion
perf(queries): add database indices for user lookups
Infrastructure Changes
ci: add automated deployment pipeline
build: update dependencies to latest versions
chore(docker): optimize container image size
Related Tools
- code-reviewer skill: Reviews code before commit
- @docs-writer sub-agent: Generates changelog from commits
- /review command: Pre-commit code review
Integration
With code-reviewer
# 1. Write code
# 2. code-reviewer flags issues
# 3. Fix issues
# 4. Stage changes
# 5. I generate commit message
git commit # Uses my suggested message
With /review Command
# 1. Make changes
/review --scope staged # Review before commit
# 2. Address findings
# 3. Stage final changes
# 4. I generate commit message
git commit
Learn More
Source: alirezarezvani/claude-code-tresor — distributed by TomeVault.