Codebase explore
Skill Flagrare/agent-skills/plugins/flagrare/skills/codebase-explore
Claude Code skills that wrap your full dev cycle — ticket intake, ATDD planning, code review, doc-drift audits, PR writing, and changelogs.
npx -y skills add Flagrare/agent-skills --skill codebase-exploreAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 9 stars9 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Explore the codebase to map conventions, reusable utilities, analogous features, and data flows relevant to a planned change. Returns raw findings (file paths, patterns, code snippets), does NOT produce a plan. Used by /flagrare:atdd-plan as its codebase understanding step.
SKILL.md
4.8 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Codebase Explore
Return raw exploration findings for a planned change. No plan, no tests, no implementation steps. Just facts about the codebase that a planning skill needs to make informed decisions.
When to Use
- Called by
/flagrare:atdd-planbefore it writes acceptance tests - Called directly when you need to understand a codebase area before making decisions
- User says "explore the codebase for X", "what exists for X", "find patterns for X"
Inputs
Receive one of:
- A context brief (from
/flagrare:intake) - A ticket summary describing what will be built
- A plain-text description of the change
Step 1: Check for prior attempts
Search for branches, PRs, and commits related to this work:
git branch -a | grep -i "<ticket-key-or-keyword>"
git log --all --oneline | grep -i "<ticket-key-or-keyword>"
gh pr list --search "<ticket-key-or-keyword>" --state all
If found, read them. They reveal: abandoned approaches, partial implementations, reviewer feedback, constraints discovered during prior attempts.
Step 2: Identify the feature area
From the context brief or description, determine which directories and files the change will touch. Start broad, narrow fast:
- Search for the main entry point (component, route, controller, endpoint)
- Trace one level out: what calls it, what it calls
- Map the data flow: where does data come from, how is it transformed, where does it go
Step 3: Find analogous features
The strongest predictor of how new code should look is how the codebase already solved a similar problem.
Search for:
- Features with similar UI patterns (if frontend)
- Endpoints with similar request/response shapes (if backend)
- Services with similar responsibilities
- Components with similar conditional logic
Read 1-2 complete analogous files. These become the template.
Step 4: Map conventions
For the feature area, identify:
| Convention | How to find it |
|---|---|
| File organization | ls the directories where changes will live |
| Naming patterns | Read 2-3 files in the same directory |
| Testing style | Read the closest existing test file |
| State management | How do sibling features manage state? |
| Error handling | How do sibling features handle failures? |
| i18n / messaging | What pattern do message definitions follow? |
| Imports / dependencies | What shared utilities are imported? |
Step 5: Inventory reusable pieces
Find utilities, helpers, shared components, and abstractions that the implementation should use instead of creating from scratch:
- Shared component libraries
- Path/route generators
- API client wrappers
- Validation utilities
- State selectors
- Test helpers and factories
For each, note the import path and a one-line description of what it does.
Step 6: Check constraints
- Linting / formatting: Read
.eslintrc,prettier.config, or equivalent - Type system: What type definitions exist for this area?
- Build / bundling: Any special considerations (lazy loading, code splitting)?
- Feature flags / gating: How are features gated in this codebase?
- CLAUDE.md / DEVELOPMENT_GUIDELINES.md: Read project-level guidance if it exists
Output Format
Return findings in this structure (no headers beyond these, no plan, no steps):
## Prior Attempts
[branches, PRs, commits found, or "none found"]
## Feature Area Map
[entry point → data flow → dependencies, with file paths]
## Analogous Features
[1-2 similar features with file paths and what makes them analogous]
## Conventions
[table of conventions observed in this area]
## Reusable Utilities
[list: import path + one-line description]
## Constraints
[lint rules, type system requirements, gating, project guidelines]
Anti-patterns
- Don't write a plan. Return findings only.
- Don't write tests or implementation steps. That's atdd-plan's job.
- Don't summarize or interpret beyond what you directly observed in the code.
- Don't read entire codebases. Focus on the feature area and one level out.
- Don't guess file paths. Verify they exist before reporting them.
- Don't skip Step 1 (prior attempts). Abandoned PRs contain critical context.
Flow position
/flagrare:intake ← context brief produced
↓
/flagrare:atdd-plan
├── /flagrare:codebase-explore ← THIS SKILL (returns raw findings)
├── writes acceptance tests
├── names design patterns
├── SOLID audit
└── gap review