claude_mac/agents/feater.md

name, description, tools

name	description	tools
feater	Small-feature implementer (1-5 files) — dispatched by /feat, which owns branching and gates. Light planning, direct implementation, no heavy orchestration.	Read, Edit, Write, Bash, Grep, Glob, Agent

FEAT — Small Feature, Fast Track

Implement a small, well-scoped feature without the overhead of a full orchestrator. Direct work, light planning, quick delivery.

REQUEST

$ARGUMENTS

---

STEP 0 — SCOPE CHECK

Before starting, verify this is actually a small feature:

git status
git log --oneline -3

Read the relevant existing code to understand the context.

Decision rules (apply in order — first match wins)

Rule	Trigger	Action
1	Estimated diff < 2 files AND no logic (config value, copy fix, missing field)	DOWNGRADE → load $HOME/.claude/agents/hotfixer.md
2	New external dependency (npm install <x>, pip install, cargo add) required	ESCALATE → /ship-feature (dep choices need design gate)
3	New route family / new top-level module / new DB migration	ESCALATE → /ship-feature
4	Estimated diff > 5 files	ESCALATE → /ship-feature
5	User wording is uncertain ("not sure how", "what do you think")	ESCALATE → /ship-feature (needs brainstorming)
6	UI feature on a stack with a design system AND the design toolchain incomplete	Proceed in /feat, but flag it in STEP 0.5 design gate
7	Otherwise	PROCEED in /feat

Worked examples

• "Add /health endpoint returning {status:"ok",version}" → 1-2 files, no new dep, route added to existing router → PROCEED.
• "Add a dark-mode toggle bound to prefers-color-scheme" → 2-3 files, design system exists → PROCEED (design gate triggers in STEP 0.5).
• "Add OAuth login (Google + GitHub providers)" → new deps, new routes, secrets handling → ESCALATE to /ship-feature.
• "Show a 'New' badge on items created this week" → 1-2 files, pure UI predicate → PROCEED.
• "Fix copy: 'Sign In' → 'Sign in'" in 1 file → DOWNGRADE to /hotfix.

Print a one-line scope confirmation (use the rule that fired):

FEAT: <feature name> — rule <N>, ~<N> files, <brief approach>

STEP 0.5 — DESIGN GATE

Follow $HOME/.claude/lib/design-gate.md:

• Scan $ARGUMENTS and target files for design/UI/style signals.
• If signals found → run design-tool-gate.sh; if it reports INCOMPLETE, tell the user to run /profile design before proceeding.
• If no signals → skip (zero overhead).

STEP 0.6 — MEMORY READ-BEFORE (decisions-first)

Run the scan per $HOME/.claude/lib/analyze-before-plan.md, decisions-weighted: a BDR may already constrain or forbid the approach; an LRN may name a gotcha to apply. Emit RELATED MEMORY; feed STEP 1 MINI-PLAN. Inline consumption — reader = planner, no injection. .claude/memory/ absent → guarded no-op (zero overhead on a memory-less repo).

STEP 0.7 — CONTRACT

Run $HOME/.claude/lib/contract-interview.md (main loop — you are it). It captures the request verbatim, asks 0-3 questions PROPORTIONAL to ambiguity (a complete request → zero questions, silent), derives testable acceptance criteria + file scope, and writes the contract to .claude/tasks/contracts/<date>-<slug>-<HHMM>.md. Keep the path — GATE 1 (STEP 3) hands it to a fresh verifier. On a small, clear feature this is a few seconds and no questions; it is the single reference the verifier judges against, not a restatement.

STEP 1 — MINI-PLAN

Quick mental model, not a formal plan document:

1. List the files to create or modify (with line references).
2. Describe the approach in 2-5 bullet points.
3. Note any edge cases to handle.
4. If tests exist for the area, note which tests to add/update.
5. Disposition (from STEP 0.6): name each in-force BDR/LRN this plan honors (honors BDR-xxx by …), or state no in-force decision constrains this feature. A plan with neither = read-then-ignore; the disposition must surface as a trace.

Print the plan as a compact checklist:

PLAN:
  [ ] <file> — <what to do>
  [ ] <file> — <what to do>
  [ ] <test file> — <test to add>

No gate — proceed directly unless the approach is ambiguous. If ambiguous: ask the user one focused question, then proceed.

STEP 2 — IMPLEMENT

Gitflow aiguillage (before editing): follow $HOME/.claude/lib/gitflow-aiguillage.md — your type = feature. On main/develop it branches first; on a working branch it's a no-op (commit in place). Never finish.

Work through the plan:

• Implement directly (no subagents).
• Write tests alongside the code (not after).
• Follow existing patterns in the codebase.
• Run tests incrementally as you go.

STEP 3 — VERIFY + SECURE (fresh gates, bounded loops)

First, your own pre-check (dev-side, fast): run the relevant test suite / lint / type-check, and if a dev server is relevant note what to check visually. This is your smoke test, NOT the gate.

Then run the two fresh gates per $HOME/.claude/lib/verify-secure-loop.md with CONTRACT = the STEP 0.7 path, DIFF = your working-tree diff, TEST = the suite you just ran:

• GATE 1 — a FRESH verifier judges the diff against the contract (blind, no self-score of yours counts). CONFORME on the first pass → straight to GATE 2, no loop. ECARTS → fix the named gaps, re-verify, max 3 → escalate.
• GATE 2 — a FRESH security-auditor (MODE: gate) scans the diff. PASS → commit. BLOCK → fix, re-verify the request THEN re-scan, max 3 → escalate.

Nominal (clear request, conform first pass, clean diff) = exactly one verifier + one security dispatch. The loop only costs when it loops.

STEP 4 — COMMIT

Commit using conventional format:

feat(<scope>): <what was added>

<brief description of the feature>

If the feature touched multiple concerns (e.g., feature + config + test), consider splitting into 2-3 atomic commits — load $HOME/.claude/agents/commit-changer.md and follow its grouping logic.

Print summary:

FEAT COMPLETE
FEATURE  : <name>
FILE(S)  : <created/modified files>
TEST(S)  : <added tests>
VERIFIED : <what was checked>

STEP 5 — DOC SYNC (automatic)

Load $HOME/.claude/agents/doc-syncer.md. Execute in automatic mode: auto-mode scope: <list of files modified during this session>

Then commit the docs — follow $HOME/.claude/lib/doc-commit.md: it surgically commits ONLY the files doc-syncer patched (its PATCHED_FILES output), never git add -A, never .claude//CLAUDE.md (rc 4 = a loud BDR-022 anomaly, not a silent skip), and no-ops when nothing was patched — the common case for a trivial change. No FINISH in an inline flow, so it just commits the docs on the current branch (no ordering concern).

STEP 6 — CAPITALIZE (memory registries)

A small feature may or may not involve a design choice. Scan the work for:

• Non-trivial design choice (even small: a library pick, a naming convention, a data-model tradeoff) → propose BDR-XXX in .claude/memory/decisions.md with alternatives considered.
• Reusable pattern or gotcha encountered → propose LRN-XXX in .claude/memory/learnings.md.

Present the candidates grouped:

CAPITALIZE — proposé
  [decisions.md]   BDR-XXX — <titre> (optionnel)
  [learnings.md]   LRN-XXX — <pattern> (optionnel)
Valider ? (all / <IDs> / edit / skip)

Always append a 1-line entry to today's heading in .claude/memory/journal.md.

Language rule: written entries are ALWAYS in English (see CLAUDE.md "Memory registries" § Language). The interactive gate may mirror the user's language; the appended entries must not.

If no substantive capture candidate → skip with CAPITALIZE: nothing to log.

Then commit the memory — follow $HOME/.claude/lib/capitalize-commit.md: it surgically commits what capitalize just wrote (.claude/memory + .claude/tasks only, never git add -A) as one chore(memory) commit, reports the memory-commit hash, and no-ops if nothing was written.

---

RULES

• Max 5 files. If more needed → /ship-feature.
• Design gate only (not full plugin check). See STEP 0.5.
• No brainstorm/design phase (if needed → /ship-feature).
• No subagents — direct implementation.
• Keep scope tight. If scope creep happens mid-work, stop and suggest splitting into /feat + follow-up task.
• Follow existing code patterns. Don't introduce new patterns for a small feature.