Commit Message Generator

Generate commit messages following project conventions for staged changes.

Instructions

When this skill is invoked:

1. Run git diff --staged to review the staged changes
2. Run git status to understand the overall state
3. Run git log --oneline -10 to see recent commit style for context
4. Analyze what was changed and why
5. Generate a commit message following the format below
6. Present the commit message to the user for approval - keep it concise, just show the message and ask for approval
7. If approved, execute the commit

Presentation Style: Be direct and minimal. Present only the commit message and ask "Proceed with this commit message?" - no analysis, explanations, or bullet points unless the changes are complex or ambiguous.

Commit Message Format

<type>: <short description>

[optional body with more detail]

Types

• feat - New feature
• fix - Bug fix
• refactor - Code restructuring without behavior change
• test - Adding or updating tests
• docs - Documentation changes
• style - Formatting, whitespace (no code change)
• chore - Build, config, dependency updates

Rules

1. First line: Must be under 72 characters
2. Tense: Present tense, imperative mood ("add" not "added" or "adds")
3. Description: Complete the sentence "This commit will..."
4. Body: Optional, use for explaining "why" not "what"
5. NO AI attribution: Never include "Generated with Claude Code" or "Co-Authored-By" lines

Examples

feat: add auto-reveal toggle for estimation rounds

fix: prevent duplicate user connections to lobby

refactor: extract insight resolution logic to separate resolvers

test: add usecase tests for SetEstimateCommand handler

docs: update architecture documentation with processing groups

chore: upgrade Spring Boot to 3.4.12

Analysis Guidelines

When analyzing changes, consider:

• Module affected: Which module (api, lobby, session, ui)?
• Layer affected: Domain, usecase, adapter, or API contract?
• Intent: What problem does this solve or capability does it add?
• Scope: Is this a single logical change or mixed concerns?

Common Patterns to Recognize

Backend Changes:

• New Commands/Events/Queries in api/ → feat: add X command/event/query
• Handler implementations → feat: implement X handler or fix: correct X handler logic
• Domain logic updates → feat: add X behavior to aggregate or refactor: simplify X logic
• Read model updates → feat: update X view projection
• Tests → test: add tests for X

Frontend Changes:

• New components → feat: add X component
• State management → feat: implement X state handling
• UI improvements → feat: enhance X interface
• Styling → style: update X component styles

Mixed Changes:

• If frontend + backend for same feature → feat: add X feature (describe full feature)
• If unrelated changes → Suggest splitting into multiple commits