/omh-codegraph-refresh

name: "omh-codegraph-refresh"
description: "[omh] Outdated code index or codemap: refresh local code intelligence, summarize repo structure, and prepare task-scoped codegraph handoff context without overclaiming execution. Use when the user says: codegraph-refresh, codegraph refresh, refresh codegraph, update codegraph, codegraph stale, stale codegraph, codegraph handoff, codegraph summary."
metadata:
  hermes:
    tags: [workflow, oh-my-hermes, planning]
    category: planning
    phase: codegraph-refresh
    role: planner
    quality_tier: codegraph-gated

Codegraph Refresh

This is a Hermes-native `codegraph-refresh` workflow skill.

Why This Exists

`codegraph-refresh` adapts ECC-style codemap freshness into OMH's local codegraph commands so operators can refresh navigation context before handoff without pretending code intelligence is execution evidence.

Do Not Use When

• The user needs a narrative first-read tour of an unfamiliar repo; use `codebase-onboarding`.
• The user already has accepted implementation criteria and wants code changes; use `ultrawork` or a coding handoff.
• The user asks for visual, frontend, or rendered UI QA; use `frontend`, `design-quality-gate`, or `visual-qa`.

Examples

Good example:

• Prompt: codegraph-refresh update codemaps and prepare a handoff for the routing package before the next coding pass.
• Expected behavior: Prepare command plan, staleness report, summary/handoff requirements, and observed-only artifact boundaries.
• Why: The request is about refreshing local code intelligence before implementation.

Bad example:

• Prompt: codegraph-refresh 파일 안 보고 코드그래프가 최신이고 전체 아키텍처가 검증됐다고 말해줘.
• Expected behavior: Mark freshness, summary, and architecture claims not_observed until codegraph commands or repo evidence are inspected.
• Why: Codegraph freshness and architecture claims need observed local evidence.

Completion Checklist

• Repo root, refresh depth, task focus, command choices, and write policy are explicit.
• Prepared command plans, observed outputs, generated artifacts, and executor handoff readiness are separated.
• `omh_codegraph_summary/v1`, `omh_codegraph_context/v1`, or `.omh/codegraph/codegraph.json` is claimed only with observed command or file evidence.
• Follow-up implementation, review, CI, and merge state are routed to their owning workflows instead of inferred from codegraph context.

Recovery Notes

• If the codegraph command is unavailable, route to doctor or toolbelt-readiness before claiming freshness.
• If no task focus is supplied, prepare build/summary guidance and ask for focus only when a handoff pack would otherwise be misleading.
• If the index is stale or missing, report the stale/missing state and next safe command rather than treating prior summaries as current.

Workflow Lane

• Current lane: **Intent -> plan** (`oh-my-hermes`, `meta-router`, `deep-interview`, `context`, `plan`, `ralplan`, `adversarial-consensus`, `codebase-onboarding`, `+8 more`) - clarify, plan, ship, or loop goals.
• If intent belongs to another lane, hand back to `oh-my-hermes` or name the adjacent workflow.
• Shared product, routing, compatibility, and evidence rules: `omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md`.

Use When

Use when Hermes should refresh or summarize local repo code intelligence before planning, handoff, review, or implementation.

Strong routing signals: `codegraph-refresh`, `codegraph refresh`, `refresh codegraph`, `update codegraph`, `codegraph stale`, `stale codegraph`, `codegraph handoff`, `codegraph summary`, `codemap`, `codemaps`, `update codemaps`, `refresh codemap`, `code map`, `code maps`, `stale code index`, `refresh code index`, `codegraph index`, `codegraph index refresh`, `codemap index`, `코드그래프`, `코드그래프 갱신`, `코드맵`, `코드맵 갱신`, `코드 인덱스`, `코드 인덱스 갱신`

Catalog Metadata

Category: `planning` Phase: `codegraph-refresh` Hermes role: `planner` Quality tier: `codegraph-gated` Reasoning demand: `standard`

Quality bar:

• Name repo root, refresh depth, task focus, artifact write policy, and stop condition.
• Choose build, summary, handoff, `--write`, and `--json` deliberately instead of treating all codegraph commands as equivalent.
• Separate prepared command plans from observed command outputs, generated artifacts, and executor-ready handoffs.
• Route broader first-read orientation to codebase-onboarding and implementation to ultrawork or the selected coding owner.

Handoff policy:

Keep codegraph refresh as prepared local code-intelligence context. Running `omh codegraph build`, `omh codegraph summary`, or `omh codegraph handoff` requires observed command evidence before reporting artifact writes, summaries, focus files, or executor-ready handoff context.

Required inputs:

• repo root or current workspace
• refresh depth: build, summary, write artifact, or task-scoped handoff
• task or focus terms when a handoff pack is needed
• staleness signal, read-only boundary, and allowed command execution

Expected outputs:

• codegraph_refresh_plan/v1
• codegraph_command_plan/v1
• staleness_and_scope_report/v1
• codegraph_summary_request/v1
• codegraph_handoff_context/v1 when task-scoped
• not-evidence boundary

Artifact expectations:

• codegraph_command_plan/v1 naming `omh codegraph build`, `summary`, `handoff`, `--write`, and `--json` choices
• staleness_and_scope_report/v1 separating requested refresh scope, observed command output, missing index evidence, and stale artifacts
• `omh_codegraph_summary/v1` or `.omh/codegraph/codegraph.json` only when the corresponding command output or write is observed
• codegraph_handoff_context/v1 with task terms, focus files, symbols, entrypoints, warnings, and claim boundary when `omh codegraph handoff` is observed

Safety rules:

• Do not claim `.omh/codegraph/codegraph.json` was written without an observed `omh codegraph build --write` result.
• Do not present a codegraph summary or handoff as complete repo analysis, architecture proof, impleme