mk:ask-me

mk:ask-me

Overview

Answer questions about the current project — codebase, architecture, conventions, workflows, rationale, constraints — with minimal cited file:line evidence. Gives the agent deep, fast project understanding instead of long grep/search sessions. Read-only by default; the answer is the deliverable.

Redirect First

Classify the request BEFORE answering. If a specialist skill owns it, name that skill and STOP — do not partially answer.

Request asks for...	Route to
Alternatives / options / "how should we build"	mk:brainstorming
"Should we X or Y" / debate / design review	mk:party
Stuck / impossible / too complex	mk:problem-solving
Product idea validation / "is this worth building"	mk:office-hours
Review of an existing plan	mk:plan-ceo-review
Re-examining an output / verdict / analysis	mk:elicit
API design (endpoints, status codes, pagination)	mk:api-design
DB schema / migration design	mk:database
Bug / error / "why is X broken" / root cause	mk:investigate
Review of a diff / PR	mk:review
Grading a running build	mk:evaluate
Security audit / threat model	mk:cso or mk:vulnerability-scanner
"What should I do next" / which command	mk:help
Broad file discovery / whole-repo inventory	mk:scout
Library / framework docs (not this project)	mk:docs-finder
Diagram / slides / visual or exportable artifact	mk:preview --explain
"Which requirements lack tests"	mk:nyquist

Scope test: this skill answers what is true / how it works here / why it exists / what constraints apply — about the current project only.

When to Use

Auto-activate on:

• "how does X work here / in this project / in this repo"
• "what does X mean" (project file, config, convention)
• "why is X structured this way"
• "is it true that ... in this repo" (claim-check)
• "what constraints apply before touching X"
• "explain X with sources / citations"

Explicit: /mk:ask-me [question] [--depth quick|standard|deep] [--save-to <path>]

Do NOT invoke when: the request matches any Redirect First row, asks to change code, or is a pure general-knowledge question (answer those directly, no scouting).

Process

1. Route check. Match against Redirect First. Owned elsewhere → name the skill, stop.
2. Parse. Extract the question. Infer kind: factual, explanation, rationale, constraint-summary, or claim-check. Depth: standard unless flagged.
3. Minimal evidence plan. Prefer user-provided paths; else grep targeted keywords. Docs/project context first, then targeted code/config. Apply the forbidden-path list below.
4. Bounded gather. Read only relevant slices within the depth budget. Stop as soon as the answer is sufficiently supported. Track path:line for every source-backed claim.
5. Synthesize. Direct answer first; separate verified claims from inference; state confidence (high/medium/low — mandatory); list limitations; mention a related specialist skill only if the user's next likely action leaves scope.
6. Optional save. Only via --save-to or explicit request, per the save-path policy below. On unsafe path or conflict, refuse the write and return the answer inline.

Depth Budgets (hard caps)

Depth	Max greps	Max files read	Max lines/file	Output style
quick	2	3	80	Direct answer only
standard	5	8	140	Answer + evidence
deep	8	14	220	Saved report allowed

Forbidden Paths (never read)

.env*, secrets/keys/credentials/tokens of any kind, .claude/memory/, session-state/, dependency dirs (node_modules/, .venv/), build outputs, browser profiles. No WebSearch — current-docs lookup belongs to mk:docs-finder.

Save-Path Policy

Write only when asked, and only under: an explicit user path inside the project root, tasks/reports/, or ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_DATA}/ask-me/. Path escapes a safe root → refuse and answer inline. Target exists → ask before overwrite or use a timestamped name.

Output Format

## Answer

[Direct answer in 1-3 paragraphs.]

**Confidence:** high | medium | low

## Evidence

| Claim | Source |
|---|---|
| [claim] | [path:line] |

## Inference

- [Only if needed — points not directly source-backed.]

## Limitations

- [Missing docs, partial evidence, stale source, or budget cap.]

## Related Next Skill

[Only if the user likely needs a specialist workflow next.]

## Unresolved Questions

[Only if any.]

Failure Handling

Failure	Condition	Handling
ROUTE_REDIRECT	Specialist skill clearly owns request	Name owning skill and why; do not answer here
QUESTION_MISSING	No concrete question	Ask for one specific project question
SCOPE_TOO_BROAD	Needs whole-repo inventory	Redirect to mk:scout or ask user to narrow
EVIDENCE_NOT_FOUND	No relevant source within caps	Answer low-confidence only if generally useful; list missing evidence
FORBIDDEN_PATH	Needed source is a secret/local-state path	Refuse that path; ask for sanitized excerpt or alternative
CONFLICTING_EVIDENCE	Sources disagree	Show conflict, cite both; choose only if source precedence is obvious
BUDGET_EXCEEDED	Depth cap hit before sufficient evidence	Stop reading, downgrade confidence, suggest deeper scoped run or mk:scout
SAVE_PATH_UNSAFE	Output path escapes safe roots	Refuse write; return inline answer
OUTPUT_EXISTS	Save target exists	Ask before overwrite or use timestamped path

Workflow Integration

On-demand — no single phase anchor; usable at any point from Phase 0 (orient) through Phase 6 (reflect). Does not gate or feed any phase artifact.

Handoff Protocol

The answer is terminal by default — no agent receives it. If the user's next action leaves this skill's scope, point to the single owning specialist skill (one pointer, never auto-invoke it).

Gotchas

• Don't turn an answer request into a plan — the answer IS the deliverable.
• Don't over-scout: stop at sufficiency, not at budget exhaustion.
• Don't answer option-selection questions; route them (mk:party / mk:brainstorming).
• Never cite project facts without path:line sources; unsourced points go under Inference.
• Missing docs lower confidence but don't block — fall back to targeted code/config reads.
• "How does [library] work" is mk:docs-finder territory; this skill only answers "how does X work in this project".