Individual skill
code-theory
Builds a Naur-style theory of a codebase — the understanding needed to change it without damaging its conceptual integrity. Use when inheriting an unfamiliar system, capturing design rationale, or recovering lost design intent. Writes `THEORY.md` plus any drift and contradictions it finds to `.issues/`.
skills/code-theory/SKILL.md
Source commit 83315e4f8206fad56f9791a8f7884eec5609296a
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- Yes
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- Yes
- Observed behavior
- Network or broad shell
- Last checked
- Nov 5, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
Standard SKILL.md format has not been attested at this commit. No installation command is available; inspect the source.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 14
- Repository last updated
- Nov 6, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- claude-code Repository topic
- dotfiles Repository topic
- hooks Repository topic
- agent-skills Repository topic
- claude-code-config Repository topic
- claude-skills Repository topic
- code-review Repository topic
- release-automation Repository topic
- subagents Repository topic
- design Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 7,275 bytes
Read excerpt
Build and express a theory of this codebase in the sense Peter Naur meant in "Programming as Theory Building": not a summary of what files exist, but an account of the understanding a competent maintainer would need to hold in mind to modify this system without damaging its conceptual integrity.
Scope the investigation to `$ARGUMENTS` if provided, otherwise treat the whole repository as in scope. Examples: `the scheduler`, `src/billing/`, `the plugin system`.
Skip vendored dependencies, build output, generated code, and lockfiles (`node_modules/`, `dist/`, `vendor/`, `*.min.js`, `go.sum`).
## Phase one — investigation
Read widely before you read deeply.
1. **Orient.** Entry points, build configuration, top-level module structure. Enough to know what runs and in what order.
2. **Follow the grain.** Trace a few representative flows end-to-end. A flow you can follow from input to durable effect teaches more than ten files skimmed.
3. **Read the tests.** They record which behaviors the authors considered load-bearing. A behavior with an exhaustive test suite and a behavior with none are telling you different things.
4. **Read the history.** Recent commits, design notes, ADRs, long comments. These are the decisions the authors thought worth recording — and the ones they kept revisiting.