backprop

Included with Lifetime

$97 forever

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 one non-obvious thing SDD does that plan-then-execute doesn't. Triggers on test failure, bug report, post-mortem, or explicit user ask.

Code Review

What this skill does


# backprop — bug → spec

Plan-then-execute fixes the code & forgets.
SDD fixes the code AND edits spec so recurrence is impossible.
That edit is backprop.

## WHEN TO BACKPROP

- Test failed at `/build` verification.
- User reports bug.
- Post-mortem after production incident.
- `/check` flags VIOLATE with root cause found.

## SIX STEPS

### 1. TRACE
Read failure output / bug report.
Find exact file:line of wrong behavior.
Name root cause in one caveman sentence.

### 2. ANALYZE
Ask three questions:
- Would a new §V invariant catch this class of bug? (most common: yes)
- Is §I wrong — did spec claim shape the code cannot deliver? (sometimes)
- Is §T wrong — did we build the wrong thing? (rare but real)

### 3. PROPOSE
Draft the spec change. Never skip §B; §V/§I/§T are case-by-case.

Template:
```
§B row: B<next>|<date>|<root cause>|V<N>
§V line: V<next>: <testable rule that would have caught it>
```

Example:
```
§B row: B3|2026-04-20|refund job ran twice on retry|V7
§V line: V7: ∀ refund → idempotency key check before charge reversal
```

### 4. GENERATE TEST
New invariant without test = lie. Add failing test first.
Name test so it cites the invariant: `TestV7_RefundIdempotent`.

### 5. VERIFY
Fix code. Run test. Must pass. Run full suite. Must not regress.

### 6. LOG
Commit spec edit + test + code fix together.
Commit msg: `backprop §B.<n> + §V.<N>: <one-line cause>`.

## WHAT MAKES A GOOD INVARIANT

- Testable in code (grep-able or assert-able).
- Scoped to a behavior, not a file.
- Stated positively when possible (`! hold` over `⊥ forbid`).
- References §I surface where it applies.

**Bad**: V8: code should be correct.
**Good**: V8: ∀ pg_query ! params interpolated via driver, ⊥ string concat.

## WHEN NOT TO ADD §V

- Bug was purely mechanical typo with no class (`i++` vs `i--` in throwaway).
- Fix is a one-time migration.
- Root cause is external dep (upgrade deps instead, note in §C).

Still append §B entry — record that this failure mode was considered. Future bug with same smell → §B search shows precedent.

## OUTPUT SHAPE

Every backprop run produces:
1. §B entry (always).
2. §V entry (usually).
3. Test file (when §V added).
4. Code fix.
5. One commit.

No dashboards. No log files. SPEC.md + git is the full history.

Files: 1

Size: 2.6 KB

Complexity: 7/100

Category: Code Review

Source: https://github.com/juliusbrussee/cavekit/tree/main/skills/backprop

Related in Code Review

gstack

Included

Fast headless browser for QA testing and site dogfooding. Navigate pages, interact with elements, verify state, diff before/after, take annotated screenshots, test responsive layouts, forms, uploads, dialogs, and capture bug evidence. Use when asked to open or test a site, verify a deployment, dogfood a user flow, or file a bug with screenshots. (gstack)

Code Reviewscriptsfeatured

startup-due-diligence

Included

Legal due diligence review for seed-stage and Series A startups (US, Delaware C-Corp focus). Supports both investor and founder perspectives. Capabilities include: (1) Interactive document review and issue spotting; (2) Document request list generation; (3) Cap table and SAFE/convertible note analysis; (4) Red flag identification with severity ratings; (5) Diligence report generation. TRIGGERS: due diligence, DD, startup investment, cap table review, Series A, seed round, investor diligence, legal review startup, SAFE analysis, convertible note, 409A, founder vesting.

Code Reviewscripts

interview-master

Included

This skill should be used when the user asks to "generate interview questions", "prepare for interview", "optimize resume", "conduct mock interview", "analyze git commits for resume", "generate resume from code", "review my resume", or mentions interview preparation, career assistance, or extracting project experience from git history. Provides comprehensive interview and career development guidance for both job seekers and interviewers.

Code Reviewscripts

fix-issue

Included

Fixes GitHub issues using parallel analysis agents for root cause investigation, code exploration, and regression detection. Reads issue context from gh CLI, searches codebase and memory for related patterns, generates a fix with tests, and links the resolution back to the issue via PR. Includes prevention analysis to avoid recurrence. Use when debugging errors, resolving regressions, fixing bugs, or triaging issues.

Code Reviewscripts

sf-apex

Included

Generates and reviews Salesforce Apex code with 150-point scoring. TRIGGER when: user writes, reviews, or fixes Apex classes, triggers, test classes, batch/queueable/schedulable jobs, or touches .cls/.trigger files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: LWC JavaScript (use sf-lwc), Flow XML (use sf-flow), SOQL-only queries (use sf-soql), or non-Salesforce code.

Code Reviewscripts

swift-development

Included

Comprehensive Swift development for building, testing, and deploying iOS/macOS applications. Use when Claude needs to: (1) Build Swift packages or Xcode projects from command line, (2) Run tests with XCTest or Swift Testing framework, (3) Manage iOS simulators with simctl, (4) Handle code signing, provisioning profiles, and app distribution, (5) Format or lint Swift code with SwiftFormat/SwiftLint, (6) Work with Swift Package Manager (SPM), (7) Implement Swift 6 concurrency patterns (async/await, actors, Sendable), (8) Create SwiftUI views with MVVM architecture, (9) Set up Core Data or SwiftData persistence, or any other Swift/iOS/macOS development tasks.

Code Reviewscripts