Codebase recon

Codebase Recon

Build a reusable, falsifiable model of a repository. This skill reports what the tree and executable probes support; it does not edit code or issue a final PASS/WARN/FAIL verdict.

Constraints

• To prevent a floating recon, record the exact repository commit and local source-of-truth precedence.
• Because confidence is not evidence, type every material claim and cite each fact and inference.
• To preserve traceability, prefer a verified delta when a prior pack exists instead of rewriting unchanged evidence as fresh discovery.

Modes, views, and lenses

One skill replaces a cluster of loose recon skills. Steer it with mode, view emphasis, lens, and depth — do not invent a second skill for each shape.

Control	Values	Use when
Mode	baseline | delta	First pack vs refresh after a prior recon
View emphasis	mental model · bounded audit · pattern evidence · synthesis	Archaeology-style map, audit-style findings, pattern harvest, or executive synthesis
Lens	persistence · auth · CLI · build · test (one per pass)	Domain-deep cut instead of a shallow whole-tree sweep
Depth	quick · standard · deep	Orientation vs onboarding vs decision-grade evidence

Ask for the shape explicitly, for example:

codebase-recon --mode=delta --view=audit --lens=cli --depth=standard
codebase-recon baseline, mental-model view, persistence lens, deep

Natural-language equivalents count. The durable pack still carries all four views; emphasis changes what you spend tokens on and what the companion report leads with. Pattern packaging beyond evidence pointers belongs in pattern-mining. Binding PASS/FAIL stays with validate.

Workflow

1. Record the current commit and the repository's local source-of-truth precedence. Search for a prior recon pack before starting.
2. If no prior pack exists, use baseline mode. If one exists, verify its still-valid claims against the current commit and use delta mode. Preserve valid evidence by reference and describe only changed paths and synthesis.
3. Trace representative paths from entry point to domain logic, integration boundary, and test. Prefer a few complete flows over a broad file inventory.
4. Keep four views distinct in the report: mental model, bounded audit, pattern evidence, and synthesis. Label each claim fact, inference, or unknown, assign confidence, and cite evidence for facts and inferences.
5. List inspected and uninspected scope. Write the JSON manifest and companion report, then run the validator. Missing evidence and hidden coverage gaps are contract failures, not prose caveats.

Docs-first entry-point tracing

Enter through what the repository declares about itself — README, architecture docs, build manifests, CLI help — and only then verify those declarations against the tree. Before the first broad search, list the declared entry points and trace at least one of them to code. The named failure mode is grep-first drift: opening with keyword sweeps builds a model of whatever happened to match, and the recon inherits the search terms' blind spots instead of the repository's actual shape. When declaration and code disagree, that is a finding, not noise: record the doc's claim as inference, the traced behavior as fact, and cite both.

One-domain-deep lens per pass

Each pass adopts exactly one lens — persistence, auth, CLI surface, build system, test harness — and follows it from entry point through domain logic to its tests before switching lenses. A pass ends in exactly one of two states: the lens has one complete entry-to-test flow, or the report names the file and line where the trace was cut and why. The named failure mode is the shallow sweep: touching every directory at depth one produces a file inventory that reads like a model but supports no claim, because no path was followed far enough to falsify anything.

Citation floor: file:line or downgrade

The durable output doc earns its keep only if a future reader can re-verify a claim without redoing the recon. Every fact cites file:line; every inference cites the file:line facts it rests on. A claim that cannot be cited is downgraded to unknown before the report ships — never shipped uncited at its original confidence. The manifest validator accepts a bare path, but hold the companion report to the stricter floor: a path without a line is a pointer to homework, not a citation, and counts as a coverage gap in the report's own terms.

Output Specification

• Artifact directory: .agents/recon/<run-id>/
• Filename convention: codebase-recon.json with companion report codebase-recon.md in the same directory.
• Format: codebase-recon.v1 JSON manifest plus an evidence-cited Markdown report covering the same commit, mode, flows, claims, and scope boundaries.
• Validation command: skills/codebase-recon/scripts/validate-output.sh <codebase-recon.json> validates the machine-readable manifest; the cited Markdown report remains its human-readable companion.
• Downstream handoff: pass both validated artifact paths to the requesting research, planning, review, or documentation workflow; the consumer owns any decision or code-change plan.

Baseline manifests carry at least one complete entry-to-test flow. Delta manifests name an existing prior recon, prove baseline_verified: true, and describe at least one changed path. Every manifest lists both inspected and uninspected scope.

The validator is the machine boundary:

skills/codebase-recon/scripts/validate-output.sh <recon.json>

Evidence entries are existing file paths, optionally followed by a line number. Delta manifests require an existing prior pack, baseline_verified: true, and at least one described change.

Executable behavior: references/codebase-recon.feature.

Quality

• Every fact and inference resolves to existing evidence; unknowns remain visibly typed and never masquerade as established behavior.
• Representative flows reach entry, domain, integration, and test surfaces, while inspected and uninspected scope stay explicit.
• The named validator passes before the JSON manifest and companion report are handed to a downstream consumer.

Do not

• Regenerate a full replacement report when a verified delta is possible.
• Present an inference as fact or omit uninspected scope.
• Turn the recon artifact into a completion verdict or a code-change plan.