From workflows
This skill should be used when the user asks to 'explore the codebase', 'map architecture', 'find similar features', or in Phase 2 of /dev workflow.
npx claudepluginhub edwinhu/workflows --plugin workflowsThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
**Announce:** "I'm using dev-explore (Phase 2) to map the codebase."
Implements Playwright E2E testing patterns: Page Object Model, test organization, configuration, reporters, artifacts, and CI/CD integration for stable suites.
Guides Next.js 16+ Turbopack for faster dev via incremental bundling, FS caching, and HMR; covers webpack comparison, bundle analysis, and production builds.
Discovers and evaluates Laravel packages via LaraPlugins.io MCP. Searches by keyword/feature, filters by health score, Laravel/PHP compatibility; fetches details, metrics, and version history.
Announce: "I'm using dev-explore (Phase 2) to map the codebase."
Map relevant code, trace execution paths, and return prioritized files for reading.
Prerequisite: .planning/SPEC.md must exist with draft requirements.
RETURN KEY FILES LIST. This is not negotiable.
Every exploration, you MUST return:
After agents return, you MUST read all key files before proceeding.
STOP if you're about to move on without reading all key files.
| Excuse | Reality | Do Instead |
|---|---|---|
| "I can design without reading all key files" | You'll miss critical patterns | READ every file on the list |
| "The file names tell me enough" | File names hide implementation details | READ the actual code |
| "I'll read them if I need more info" | You cannot know what is missing | READ all key files NOW |
| "Exploration summary is enough" | Summaries miss crucial nuances | READ original files |
| "Reading files will take too long" | You'll waste days later by skipping them | READ now, save time later |
| "I already understand the architecture" | Your assumptions remain incomplete | READ to confirm understanding |
| "I can grep for specific details later" | You'll miss context and relationships | READ to understand connections |
Returning key files without reading them is NOT HELPFUL — you'll design against imagined code and create days of rework.
Exploration agents find the files. Main chat MUST read them to understand the codebase. Skipping reads means proceeding with incomplete knowledge, which guarantees wrong implementation choices.
Reading costs minutes. Wrong architecture costs days of rework.
After reading all key files and updating .planning/SPEC.md with findings, IMMEDIATELY invoke:
Read ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../skills/dev-clarify/SKILL.md and follow its instructions.
DO NOT:
The workflow phases are SEQUENTIAL. Complete explore → immediately start clarify.
| DO | DON'T |
|---|---|
| Trace execution paths | Ask user questions (that's clarify) |
| Map architecture layers | Design approaches (that's design) |
| Find similar features | Write implementation tasks |
| Identify patterns and conventions | Make architecture decisions |
| Return key files list | Skip reading key files |
Explore answers: WHERE is the code and HOW does it work Design answers: WHAT approach to take (separate skill)
Use run_in_background: true for ALL explore agents.
This enables true parallel execution:
Pattern from oh-my-opencode: Default to background + parallel for exploratory work.
Based on .planning/SPEC.md, spawn 3-5 agents with different focuses:
# PARALLEL + BACKGROUND: All Task calls in ONE message
Task(
subagent_type="Explore",
description="Find similar features",
run_in_background=true,
prompt="""
Explore the codebase for [FEATURE AREA].
Focus: Find similar features to [SPEC REQUIREMENT]
Use ast-grep for semantic search:
- sg -p 'function_name($$$)' --lang [language]
- sg -p 'class $NAME { $$$ }' --lang [language]
Tasks:
- Trace execution paths from entry point to data storage
- Find similar implementations to follow
- Identify patterns used
- Return 5-10 key files with line numbers
Context from SPEC.md:
[paste relevant requirements]
""")
Task(
subagent_type="Explore",
description="Map architecture layers",
run_in_background=true,
prompt="""
Explore the codebase for [FEATURE AREA].
Focus: Map architecture and abstractions for [AREA]
Use ast-grep for semantic search:
- sg -p 'class $NAME($BASE):' --lang [language]
- sg -p 'interface $NAME { $$$ }' --lang [language]
Tasks:
- Identify abstraction layers
- Find cross-cutting concerns (logging, auth, errors)
- Map module dependencies
- Return 5-10 key files with line numbers
Context from SPEC.md:
[paste relevant requirements]
""")
Task(
subagent_type="Explore",
description="Find test infrastructure",
run_in_background=true,
prompt="""
Explore the codebase for [FEATURE AREA].
Focus: Test infrastructure and patterns
Use ast-grep for test discovery:
- sg -p 'def test_$NAME($$$):' --lang python
- sg -p 'it($DESC, $$$)' --lang javascript
- sg -p '@pytest.fixture' --lang python
Tasks:
- Find test directory and framework
- Identify existing test patterns
- Check for fixtures, mocks, helpers
- Return 5-10 key test files with line numbers
Context from SPEC.md:
[paste relevant requirements]
""")
After launching all agents in parallel:
/tasks commandOnce agents complete, collect their findings:
# Check running tasks
/tasks
# Get results from completed agents
TaskOutput(task_id="task-abc123", block=true, timeout=30000)
TaskOutput(task_id="task-def456", block=true, timeout=30000)
TaskOutput(task_id="task-ghi789", block=true, timeout=30000)
Stop Conditions (from oh-my-opencode):
DO NOT over-explore. Time is precious.
After all agents return, consolidate their key files lists:
CRITICAL: Main chat must read every file on the key files list.
Read(file_path="src/auth/login.ts")
Read(file_path="src/services/session.ts")
...
This builds deep understanding before asking clarifying questions.
Write exploration summary (can be verbal or in .planning/EXPLORATION.md):
Prefer semantic search over text search when exploring code.
Use ast-grep (sg) for precise AST-based pattern matching and ripgrep-all (rga) for searching non-code files.
For detailed patterns and usage, see: references/ast-grep-patterns.md
NO TEST INFRASTRUCTURE = NO IMPLEMENTATION. This is a gate, not a finding.
REAL automated tests EXECUTE code and verify RUNTIME behavior. Grepping source files is NOT testing. Log checking is NOT testing.
See references/constraints/real-test-enforcement.md for the canonical REAL vs FAKE test tables.
DISCOVER test framework → FOUND?
├─ YES → Document in SPEC.md, continue to clarify
└─ NO → STOP. This is a BLOCKER. Cannot proceed without test strategy.
If no way to EXECUTE and VERIFY exists:
| Thought | Reality |
|---|---|
| "This project doesn't have tests" | Then add tests. That's Task 0. |
| "It's a UI/DOM project, hard to test" | Use Playwright, ydotool, screenshot comparison |
| "SPEC.md says manual testing" | That's wrong. Fix SPEC.md or ask user. |
| "I can add tests later" | No. TDD means tests FIRST. |
| "User won't want to set up tests" | Ask them. Don't assume. |
| "Just this one feature without tests" | No exceptions. Ever. |
# Find test directories across common locations
ls -d tests/ test/ spec/ __tests__/ 2>/dev/null
# Find test frameworks in build configuration
cat meson.build 2>/dev/null | grep -i test
# Find test frameworks in Node package manifest
cat package.json 2>/dev/null | grep -E "(test|jest|mocha|vitest)"
# Find pytest configuration in Python projects
cat pyproject.toml 2>/dev/null | grep -i pytest
# Find dev dependencies in Rust projects
cat Cargo.toml 2>/dev/null | grep -i "\[dev-dependencies\]"
# Find and list existing test files
find . -name "*test*" -type f | head -20
| What to Test | Tool | How It's a REAL Test |
|---|---|---|
| Functions | pytest, jest, cargo test | Calls function, checks return value |
| CLI | subprocess, execa | Runs binary, checks output |
| Web UI | Playwright MCP | Clicks button, verifies DOM |
| Desktop UI | ydotool + grim | Simulates input, screenshots result |
| API | requests, fetch | Sends request, checks response |
| D-Bus apps | dbus-send | Invokes method, checks return |
# Check for desktop automation tools
which ydotool grim dbus-send 2>/dev/null
# List available D-Bus services for desktop app automation
dbus-send --session --print-reply --dest=org.freedesktop.DBus \
/org/freedesktop/DBus org.freedesktop.DBus.ListNames 2>/dev/null | grep -i appname
REQUIRED findings for SPEC.md:
A test that exercises the wrong code path is a FAKE test. For example:
| Question | Why It Matters |
|---|---|
| What protocol/transport does the feature use? | Tests must use SAME protocol |
| How does user input reach the code? | Tests must follow SAME path |
| What does the user actually see? | Tests must verify SAME output |
| What UI elements are involved? | Tests must interact with SAME elements |
[ ] Protocol identified (HTTP / WebSocket / IPC / D-Bus / etc.)
[ ] Entry point traced (UI click / API call / CLI command / etc.)
[ ] Data flow mapped (user action → ... → visible result)
[ ] UI components identified (panels, buttons, status bars, etc.)
Example 1: Web app with GraphQL
- **Protocol:** GraphQL over HTTP POST (NOT REST)
- **Entry point:** User clicks "Save" button
- **Data flow:** click → mutation → server response → UI update
- **UI component:** Toast notification shows "Saved successfully"
A REAL test must use GraphQL mutations, not REST endpoints.
Example 2: CLI tool
- **Protocol:** Command-line invocation with arguments
- **Entry point:** User runs `mytool --format json input.txt`
- **Data flow:** argv → parser → processing → stdout
- **UI component:** Terminal output
A REAL test must invoke the CLI binary, not call internal functions.
Example 3: Electron app with WebSocket
- **Protocol:** WebSocket (NOT HTTP)
- **Entry point:** User highlights text in editor
- **Data flow:** selection → WebSocket message → panel update
- **UI component:** Panel shows status
A REAL test must use WebSocket, not HTTP endpoint.
If you skip code path discovery, you WILL write fake tests. See references/constraints/real-test-enforcement.md for the full fake test detection tables and the Iron Law of REAL Tests.
Update SPEC.md with code path findings before proceeding.
Each agent MUST return files in this format:
## Key Files to Read
| Priority | File:Line | Purpose |
|----------|-----------|---------|
| 1 | `src/auth/login.ts:45` | Entry point for auth flow |
| 2 | `src/services/session.ts:12` | Session management |
| 3 | `src/middleware/auth.ts:78` | Auth middleware |
| 4 | `src/types/user.ts:1` | User type definitions |
| 5 | `tests/auth/login.test.ts:1` | Existing test patterns |
| Your Drive | Why You Skip | What Actually Happens | The Drive You Failed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Helpfulness | "User is waiting, I'll explore less" | Shallow exploration produces wrong architecture | Anti-helpful |
| Competence | "File names tell me enough" | Implementation details surprise you mid-build | Incompetent |
| Efficiency | "I'll skip reading key files to save time" | You design against imagined code, rework everything | Inefficient |
The protocol is not overhead you pay. It is the service you provide.
| Action | Why It's Wrong | Do Instead |
|---|---|---|
| Skip reading key files | You'll miss crucial context | Read every file on the list |
| Ask design questions | You're conflating exploration with design | Save for clarify/design phases |
| Propose approaches | You're jumping to decisions too early | Just document what exists |
| Start implementing | You must understand first | Complete exploration fully |
Exploration complete when:
Checkpoint type: human-verify
Before proceeding to clarify, verify:
[ ] Test framework identified (pytest/jest/playwright/etc.)
[ ] Test command documented (how to run tests)
[ ] At least one existing test file found OR
[ ] User approved adding test infrastructure as Task 0
If ALL boxes are unchecked → STOP. Ask user how to proceed.
Before proceeding to clarify, verify code paths documented:
[ ] Protocol/transport identified (WebSocket/HTTP/IPC/etc.)
[ ] User entry point traced (what action triggers the feature)
[ ] Data flow mapped (input → ... → output)
[ ] UI components identified (what user sees)
[ ] Testing skill determined (dev-test-electron/playwright/etc.)
If any box is unchecked → You WILL write fake tests. Complete discovery first.
This is not optional. Fake tests are worse than no tests because they create false confidence.
Phase summary (append to LEARNINGS.md):
## Phase: Explore
---
phase: explore
status: completed
requires: [SPEC.md]
provides: [codebase-map, testing-infra-discovery, dependency-audit]
key-findings:
- [one-liner per significant discovery]
---
REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: After completing exploration, IMMEDIATELY invoke:
Read ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../skills/dev-clarify/SKILL.md and follow its instructions.