feature-dev
Feature Development Skill
Trigger
- Keywords: develop feature, implement, write code, verify, precommit, refactor, simplify
When NOT to Use
- Just want to understand code (use Explore)
- Review code only (use codex-code-review)
- Review documents only (use doc-review)
- Pure test-only tasks without feature changes (use
/codex-test-reviewdirectly)
Prohibited Actions
❌ git add | git commit | git push — per @rules/git-workflow.md
This skill implements features but does not commit. /precommit is a quality gate only. To commit, the user must invoke /smart-commit --execute separately.
budget:token_budget200000</budget:token_budget>
Workflow
Requirements → Design → Implement → Test + Review → Precommit Gate → Doc Sync
│ │ │ │ │
▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼
/codex- /codex- /verify /precommit /update-docs
architect implement /codex-test-review (or /precommit) /create-request --update
/codex-review-fast
Commands
| Phase | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Design | /codex-architect |
Get architecture advice |
| Implement | /codex-implement |
Codex writes code |
| Test: Run | /verify |
Run tests (lint → typecheck → unit → integration) |
| Test: Review | /codex-test-review |
Mandatory — review test sufficiency (5 dimensions) |
| Test: Generate | /codex-test-gen |
Generate unit tests for gaps |
| Test: Integration | /post-dev-test |
Write missing integration/e2e tests |
| Review | /codex-review-fast |
Code review (auto-loop) |
| Precommit | /precommit |
lint + build + test (auto-loop canonical path) |
| Doc Sync | /update-docs |
Sync docs with code |
| Doc Sync | /create-request --update |
Update request progress |
| Refactor | /simplify |
Final refactoring |
Test + Review Phase (Detail)
This is the core of feature-dev — ensuring sufficient test coverage before code review.
Step 1: Run existing tests
/verify → all tests pass?
Yes → Step 2
No → fix failures → re-run /verify
Step 2: Test adequacy review (mandatory for code changes)
/codex-test-review → ✅ Tests sufficient?
Yes → Step 3
No → close gaps (Step 2a) → /codex-test-review --continue
Step 2a: Gap closure
| Gap Type | Remediation Command |
|---|---|
| Unit test missing/insufficient | /codex-test-gen → write tests → /verify |
| Integration/E2E missing | /post-dev-test → write tests → /verify |
Step 3: Code review (auto-loop)
/codex-review-fast → ✅ Ready?
Yes → Precommit Gate
No → fix issues → re-run /codex-review-fast (auto-loop)
Freshness rule
If code changes after the latest ✅ Tests sufficient gate (e.g., fixes from code review), rerun /verify then /codex-test-review --continue before proceeding to precommit gate.
Testing Requirements
Follow @rules/testing.md for conventions (AAA, naming, evidence model).
Follow @rules/testing-project.md for project-specific overrides (directories, runner, adequacy mode).
| Change Type | Test Requirements |
|---|---|
| New Service/Provider | Must have corresponding unit test |
| Modify existing logic | Existing tests pass + new logic tested |
| Bug fix | Must add regression test |
| New API endpoint | Integration test required |
| Cross-service change | E2E test required |
Test File Mapping
Use project convention from @rules/testing-project.md. If no override is defined, follow ecosystem defaults:
| Source Pattern | Test Pattern |
|---|---|
src/<module>/ |
test/unit/<module>/ or test/<module>/ |
scripts/<name>.sh |
test/scripts/<name>.test.js |
skills/<name>/SKILL.md |
test/skills/<name>.test.js |
Output
- Implemented feature code + tests
- Test adequacy gate: ✅ Tests sufficient
- Review gate: ✅ Ready
- Precommit results: ✅ All Pass
Verification Checklist
- All tests pass (
/verify) - Test adequacy reviewed (
/codex-test-review) - Code review passed (
/codex-review-fast✅ Ready) - Precommit passed (
/precommit✅ All Pass) - No
git add/commit/pushexecuted
Doc Sync (after precommit Pass)
⚠️ Auto-triggered by @rules/auto-loop.md — behavior-layer rule, not hook-enforced.
Only when change maps to a feature under docs/features/. Target detection uses 3-level fallback — see /update-docs for algorithm details.
precommit Pass
→ Locate feature docs (see /update-docs 3-level fallback)
→ /update-docs docs/features/<feature>/2-tech-spec.md
→ /create-request --update docs/features/<feature>/requests/<date>-<title>.md
→ /codex-review-doc (per updated file)
→ Safety valve: new code diff? → back to review loop (see /update-docs)
Review Loop
MUST re-review after fix until PASS (per @rules/auto-loop.md)
Review → Issues found → Fix → Re-review → ... → ✅ Pass → Next step
Examples
Input: Implement a fee calculation method
Action: /codex-architect → /codex-implement → /verify → /codex-test-review → /codex-review-fast → /precommit
Input: This code needs refactoring
Action: /simplify → /verify → /codex-test-review → /codex-review-fast → /precommit
Input: Feature dev, continue (resuming work)
Action: Check git status → identify remaining tasks → continue from current phase
More from sd0xdev/sd0x-dev-flow
statusline-config
Customize Claude Code statusline. Use when: user says 'statusline', 'status line', 'customize statusline', 'modify statusline', 'statusline settings', 'statusline theme', 'change theme', 'color scheme', wants to add/remove/change segments (cost, git, model, context), switch color themes (catppuccin, dracula, nord), or asks what can be shown in the statusline.
52tech-spec
Tech spec generation and review. Use when: designing features, writing specs, spec review. Not for: requirements analysis (use req-analyze), implementation (use feature-dev), architecture advice (use codex-architect). Output: numbered tech spec document.
45codex-brainstorm
Adversarial brainstorming via Claude+Codex debate. Use when: exploring solutions, feasibility analysis, exhaustive enumeration. Not for: implementation (use feature-dev), architecture only (use codex-architect). Output: Nash equilibrium consensus + action items.
7security-review
Security review via Codex MCP. Use when: OWASP Top 10 audit, dependency vulnerability check, security-sensitive changes. Not for: code review (use codex-code-review), test review (use test-review). Output: security findings + audit report.
7test-review
Test coverage review via Codex MCP. Use when: reviewing test sufficiency, identifying coverage gaps, test quality audit. Not for: generating tests (use codex-test-gen), code review (use codex-code-review). Output: coverage analysis + gap report.
7post-dev-test
Post-development test completion. Use when: checking test coverage after feature-dev, writing missing integration/e2e tests. Not for: unit test generation (use codex-test-gen), test review (use test-review). Output: test files + coverage report.
6