PluginBench
Skill
Pass
Audit score 90

terminal-ops

affaan-m/ecc

Evidence-first terminal execution workflow for debugging, running commands, and pushing verified fixes.

What is terminal-ops?

Terminal Ops is an operator workflow for real repo execution with exact proof of what was run and verified. Use it when you need to run commands, inspect git state, debug CI failures, or push narrow fixes with documented evidence of changes and verification.

  • Execute commands and capture exact output as proof
  • Inspect repo state, git diffs, and CI/build failures before making changes
  • Debug and fix issues with minimal, focused changes
  • Verify fixes locally before committing or pushing
  • Report precise execution status: inspected, changed locally, verified locally, committed, or pushed

How to install terminal-ops

npx skills add null --skill terminal-ops
Claude Code
Cursor
Windsurf
Cline

How to use terminal-ops

  1. 1.Identify the repo path, branch, and requested mode (inspect, fix, verify, or push)
  2. 2.Read the failing surface first: inspect the error, file, test, or git state without making changes
  3. 3.Make the minimal fix needed to address the dominant failure
  4. 4.Run the proving command to verify the fix works locally
  5. 5.Commit and push only after verification, reporting exact status and branch

Use cases

Good for
  • Debug a failing CI build by running the exact command locally and capturing output
  • Fix a narrow bug, verify it with a proving command, then push with evidence
  • Inspect repo state and git history to understand what changed and why
  • Run a test suite after a fix to confirm the issue is resolved
  • Push a verified change upstream with documented proof of local verification
Who it's for
  • DevOps engineers managing repo execution and CI workflows
  • Developers debugging build or test failures
  • Code reviewers verifying that fixes were tested before merge
  • Teams needing audit trails of what was executed and verified

terminal-ops FAQ

When should I use Terminal Ops vs. general coding guidance?

Use Terminal Ops when the task requires real command execution, git state inspection, CI debugging, or pushing verified fixes with exact proof of what was run and tested.

What does 'evidence-first' mean in this workflow?

It means you must run the proving command or test after any change and report the exact output before claiming the fix is verified, committed, or pushed.

Can I use this for broad repo-wide refactoring?

No. Terminal Ops is intentionally narrow—solve one dominant failure at a time and keep fixes focused. Use general coding skills for larger refactors.

What should I do if a command keeps failing with the same error?

Stop broad retries and narrow the scope. Inspect the error more carefully, isolate the root cause, and test a smaller fix.

How do I report the status of my work?

Use exact status words: inspected, changed locally, verified locally, committed, or pushed. Include the repo path, branch, and the exact proving command or result.

Full instructions (SKILL.md)

Source of truth, from affaan-m/ecc.


name: terminal-ops description: Evidence-first repo execution workflow for ECC. Use when the user wants a command run, a repo checked, a CI failure debugged, or a narrow fix pushed with exact proof of what was executed and verified. metadata: origin: ECC

Terminal Ops

Use this when the user wants real repo execution: run commands, inspect git state, debug CI or builds, make a narrow fix, and report exactly what changed and what was verified.

This skill is intentionally narrower than general coding guidance. It is an operator workflow for evidence-first terminal execution.

Skill Stack

Pull these ECC-native skills into the workflow when relevant:

  • verification-loop for exact proving steps after changes
  • tdd-workflow when the right fix needs regression coverage
  • security-review when secrets, auth, or external inputs are involved
  • github-ops when the task depends on CI runs, PR state, or release status
  • knowledge-ops when the verified outcome needs to be captured into durable project context

When to Use

  • user says "fix", "debug", "run this", "check the repo", or "push it"
  • the task depends on command output, git state, test results, or a verified local fix
  • the answer must distinguish changed locally, verified locally, committed, and pushed

Guardrails

  • inspect before editing
  • stay read-only if the user asked for audit/review only
  • prefer repo-local scripts and helpers over improvised ad hoc wrappers
  • do not claim fixed until the proving command was rerun
  • do not claim pushed unless the branch actually moved upstream

Workflow

1. Resolve the working surface

Settle:

  • exact repo path
  • branch
  • local diff state
  • requested mode:
    • inspect
    • fix
    • verify
    • push

2. Read the failing surface first

Before changing anything:

  • inspect the error
  • inspect the file or test
  • inspect git state
  • use any already-supplied logs or context before re-reading blindly

3. Keep the fix narrow

Solve one dominant failure at a time:

  • use the smallest useful proving command first
  • only escalate to a bigger build/test pass after the local failure is addressed
  • if a command keeps failing with the same signature, stop broad retries and narrow scope

4. Report exact execution state

Use exact status words:

  • inspected
  • changed locally
  • verified locally
  • committed
  • pushed
  • blocked

Output Format

SURFACE
- repo
- branch
- requested mode

EVIDENCE
- failing command / diff / test

ACTION
- what changed

STATUS
- inspected / changed locally / verified locally / committed / pushed / blocked

Pitfalls

  • do not work from stale memory when the live repo state can be read
  • do not widen a narrow fix into repo-wide churn
  • do not use destructive git commands
  • do not ignore unrelated local work

Verification

  • the response names the proving command or test
  • git-related work names the repo path and branch
  • any push claim includes the target branch and exact result