Finishing a development branch
Skill gustavo-meilus/superpipelines/plugins/superpipelines/skills/finishing-a-development-branch
Structured integration protocol that enforces a test-verification gate and presents branch disposition options (merge, PR, keep, or discard). Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and an integration decision for the development branch is pending.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add gustavo-meilus/superpipelines --skill finishing-a-development-branchAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 4 stars4 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.
SKILL.md
3.9 KB, 898 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Finishing a Development Branch — Integration Protocol
<overview> Finishing a Development Branch ensures that work is integrated or preserved according to the user's explicit choice. It enforces a mandatory test verification gate before any options are presented, preventing the promotion of broken or unverified code to the base branch. </overview> <glossary> <term name="Base Branch">The target for integration, typically `main` or `master`.</term> <term name="Worktree">An isolated directory for development; must be cleaned after integration.</term> <term name="PR Gate">Option 2, which involves pushing the branch and creating a Pull Request via `gh pr create`.</term> </glossary>Ensures work is integrated or preserved according to explicit user choice. A mandatory test verification gate is enforced before any options are presented, preventing promotion of broken or unverified code to the base branch.
The Completion Protocol
<protocol> ### 1. VERIFY TESTS (THE GATE) - The project's primary test suite is run (e.g., `npm test`, `pytest`). - <HARD-GATE>If tests fail, STOP. Integration options cannot be presented until all tests are green.</HARD-GATE>2. DETERMINE BASE BRANCH
- The split point is identified (e.g.,
git merge-base HEAD main). - The base branch is confirmed with the user if ambiguity exists.
3. PRESENT STRUCTURED OPTIONS
- Exactly these four options are presented without modification:
- Merge back to [base] locally
- Push and create a Pull Request
- Keep the branch as-is (Handle later)
- Discard this work
4. EXECUTE CHOICE
- Option 1: Base is checked out, latest is pulled, branch is merged, tests are re-verified, and the feature branch is deleted.
- Option 2: Branch is pushed to origin and a PR is created using the
ghCLI. - Option 4: Explicit typed confirmation ("discard") is required before destructive deletion.
5. CLEANUP
- For Options 1, 2, and 4: The associated git worktree is removed to maintain repository hygiene. </protocol>
Completion Patterns
<patterns> | Option | Merge | Push | Cleanup Branch | Cleanup Worktree | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **1. Merge Locally** | ✓ | - | ✓ | ✓ | | **2. Create PR** | - | ✓ | - | ✓ | | **3. Keep As-Is** | - | - | - | - | | **4. Discard** | - | - | ✓ (force) | ✓ | </patterns>Red Flags — STOP
- "I'll merge now and fix the tests later." → STOP. Integration of failing code is a SEV-0 failure.
- "What should I do next?" → STOP. Present the four structured options defined in the protocol.
- "Deleting worktree automatically." → STOP. Option 3 requires worktree preservation.
Rationalization Table
<rationalization_table>
| Excuse | Reality |
|---|---|
| "PR handles testing anyway." | Local verification prevents broken builds and reduces CI overhead. |
| "It's just a one-line change." | One-line changes are the leading cause of "it worked in my head" regressions. |
| "Discarding is faster than cleanup." | Unconfirmed discards cause irreversible data loss. |
| </rationalization_table> |
Reference Files
sk-worktree-safety/SKILL.md— Worktree management.verification-before-completion/SKILL.md— Final evidence gate.running-a-pipeline/SKILL.md— Integration point for pipeline completion.
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most test skills give in 898 tokens
Counted across 1,201 of the 2,096 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-09-06
- Write a failing test before writing codein 43 of 1201, across 36 files
- Run the full test suitein 36 of 1201, across 35 files
- Test only one variable per experimentin 34 of 1201, across 17 files
- Read product marketing context before asking questionsin 34 of 1201, across 14 files
- Mock external dependenciesin 34 of 1201, across 30 files
- Define primary, secondary, and guardrail metricsin 33 of 1201, across 16 files
- Pre-determine sample size before startingin 31 of 1201, across 14 files
- Test behavior rather than implementationin 31 of 1201, across 29 files
- Formulate a hypothesis before designing a testin 30 of 1201, across 13 files
- Document every test hypothesis, variant, and resultin 29 of 1201, across 11 files
- Use descriptive test function namesin 25 of 1201, across 21 files
- Commit to the methodology without stopping earlyin 24 of 1201, across 8 files
Said here and by no other author read
- identify the base branch
- present four structured integration options
- re-verify tests after local merge
- require explicit confirmation to discard work
- remove worktree after integration or discard
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.