backprop
Bug → spec protocol. When a bug is found or a test fails, trace the cause, decide whether a new §V invariant would catch recurrence, append to §B. This is the…
Plan-then-execute implementation against SPEC.md. Native single-thread loop, no sub-agents. On test or build failure, auto-invokes the backprop skill before retrying — a failed verification always considers whether a new §V invariant would prevent recurrence. Triggers when the
$ npx -y skills add JuliusBrussee/cavekit --skill build --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/buildContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Plan-then-execute implementation against SPEC.md. Native single-thread loop, no sub-agents. On test or build failure, auto-invokes the backprop skill before retrying — a failed verification always considers whether a new §V invariant would prevent recurrence. Triggers when the
name: build description: | Plan-then-execute implementation against SPEC.md. Native single-thread loop, no sub-agents. On test or build failure, auto-invokes the backprop skill before retrying — a failed verification always considers whether a new §V invariant would prevent recurrence. Triggers when the user asks to build, implement, execute the spec, or tackle a specific §T task (`build §T.3`, `build --next`, `implement next task`, `run the build`). Expects SPEC.md to exist; if not, defers to the spec skill.
Single-thread native plan→execute. You are main Claude. No swarm.
1. Read `SPEC.md`. If missing → tell user to invoke the spec skill first. Stop. 2. Read `FORMAT.md` once if not loaded. 3. Read §R if present — external facts the build must honor, ⊥ re-derive or contradict. 4. Parse invocation args:
High blast radius (shared module, auth, data, money, public §I)? Run `/review` first. Trivial & reversible? Skip planning ceremony, just do step EXECUTE.
Native plan mode — you delegate to it, you do not reinvent task breakdown. For chosen task(s):
1. Cite every §V invariant that applies. Plan must respect all. 2. Cite every §I interface touched. Plan must preserve shape. 3. List files to create / edit. 4. **Verification contract** — name the EXACT test(s) / acceptance criteria that prove each §V touched. Which test, not "add tests". "Do TDD" alone backfires; the spec says *what to check*. Each §V touched → a named test that fails first. 5. Name verification command (test, build, lint) — this is the external oracle. Green = done; ⊥ "looks done".
Show plan. Wait for user OK unless auto mode.
Per task in order:
1. Flip §T.n status cell `.` → `~`. Just write to SPEC.md. 2. Edit code per plan. 3. Run verification command. 4. **Pass** → flip `~` → `x`. Next task. 5. **Fail** → invoke backprop skill. Do NOT retry blindly.
On test/build failure:
1. Read failure output. 2. Ask: is failure (a) my code bug, (b) spec wrong, or (c) unspecified edge case? 3. If (a) → fix code, re-run. No spec change. 4. If (b) or (c) → invoke spec skill with `bug: <cause>` first, let it update §V and §B, then resume build against updated spec.
Rule: never silently fix root-cause without considering backprop. §B is the memory that stops recurrence.
Task `x` only if:
Frozen — compressed spec-driven development plugin for Claude Code. Still works; active development moved to JuliusBrussee/caveman.
Bug → spec protocol. When a bug is found or a test fails, trace the cause, decide whether a new §V invariant would catch recurrence, append to §B. This is the…
Caveman encoding for SPEC.md and spec-adjacent writes. Loaded by /spec, /build, /check. Cuts tokens ~75% vs prose while staying precise. Triggers on any write…
Read-only drift detector. Diffs SPEC.md against current code and reports violations grouped by severity. Writes nothing — suggests remedies via the spec or…
Optional design-improvement pass for when you have spare usage to drain. Finds the shallowest modules in the code the spec touches, researches a deeper design,…
Calibrated interrogation of a fuzzy idea before it becomes a spec. Asks one question at a time, recommends an answer, and lands each answer in §G (goal) or §C…
Gather external knowledge the spec needs and distill it into §R — the durable research log — so build grounds in facts instead of hallucinating library…