Notre avis
Ce skill analyse la conversation en cours pour repérer un skill dont la documentation s'est révélée erronée, propose des corrections avant/après sur SKILL.md et ses fichiers annexes, puis les applique après approbation explicite de l'utilisateur, avec commit git optionnel.
Points forts
- Aucune modification n'est faite sans validation : le workflow présente les diffs et attend un choix explicite (1-4) parmi appliquer+commit, appliquer sans commit, réviser ou annuler.
- Analyse structurée de la cause racine (API obsolète, paramètres erronés, mauvais endpoint, contexte manquant) avant toute proposition de correction.
- Portée multi-fichiers : SKILL.md, references/ et scripts/ sont scannés et peuvent être corrigés ensemble, avec vérification de cohérence croisée.
- Relecture systématique des sections modifiées après application et confirmation finale par liste de fichiers.
Limites
- La détection du skill ciblé repose uniquement sur le contexte de conversation (messages d'invocation, SKILL.md récemment référencé) ; si le contexte est ambigu, le skill doit demander à l'utilisateur.
- Les outils autorisés sont restreints (Read, Edit, Bash ls/git) : pas d'écriture de nouveaux fichiers ni d'exécution de tests pour valider les corrections.
- Suppose l'arborescence propre aux skills Claude Code (./skills/*/SKILL.md) et ne s'applique pas aux dépôts organisés autrement.
À utiliser juste après avoir constaté qu'un skill a produit une erreur ou un comportement incorrect et identifié la correction à apporter à sa documentation.
À éviter pour créer un skill entièrement nouveau ou pour corriger du code de production sans lien avec la documentation d'un skill existant.
Analyse de sécurité
SûrThe skill instructs a documentation healing workflow using only Read, Edit, Bash(ls:*) and Bash(git:*). It requires explicit user approval before any file edits or commits, and the Bash commands are limited to listing files and git operations for version control. There is no destructive, exfiltrating, or obfuscated action.
Aucun point d'attention détecté
Exemples
The stripe-integration skill made us call a deprecated endpoint during this session — run the heal skill to update its SKILL.md with the correct endpoint and parameters./heal the pagination section of the web-scraper skill: the selector it documents no longer matches the page structure we saw.We just figured out the right auth header by testing — heal the relevant skill docs so this mistake doesn't happen again, but don't commit yet.description: Heal skill documentation by applying corrections discovered during execution with approval workflow argument-hint: [optional: specific issue to fix] allowed-tools: [Read, Edit, Bash(ls:), Bash(git:)]
<objective> Update a skill's SKILL.md and related files based on corrections discovered during execution.Analyze the conversation to detect which skill is running, reflect on what went wrong, propose specific fixes, get user approval, then apply changes with optional commit. </objective>
<context> Skill detection: !`ls -1 ./skills/*/SKILL.md | head -5` </context><quick_start> <workflow>
- Detect skill from conversation context (invocation messages, recent SKILL.md references)
- Reflect on what went wrong and how you discovered the fix
- Present proposed changes with before/after diffs
- Get approval before making any edits
- Apply changes and optionally commit </workflow>
</quick_start>
<process> <step_1 name="detect_skill"> Identify the skill from conversation context:- Look for skill invocation messages
- Check which SKILL.md was recently referenced
- Examine current task context
Set: SKILL_NAME=[skill-name] and SKILL_DIR=./skills/$SKILL_NAME
If unclear, ask the user. </step_1>
<step_2 name="reflection_and_analysis"> Focus on $ARGUMENTS if provided, otherwise analyze broader context.
Determine:
- What was wrong: Quote specific sections from SKILL.md that are incorrect
- Discovery method: Context7, error messages, trial and error, documentation lookup
- Root cause: Outdated API, incorrect parameters, wrong endpoint, missing context
- Scope of impact: Single section or multiple? Related files affected?
- Proposed fix: Which files, which sections, before/after for each </step_2>
<step_3 name="scan_affected_files">
ls -la $SKILL_DIR/
ls -la $SKILL_DIR/references/ 2>/dev/null
ls -la $SKILL_DIR/scripts/ 2>/dev/null
</step_3>
<step_4 name="present_proposed_changes"> Present changes in this format:
**Skill being healed:** [skill-name]
**Issue discovered:** [1-2 sentence summary]
**Root cause:** [brief explanation]
**Files to be modified:**
- [ ] SKILL.md
- [ ] references/[file].md
- [ ] scripts/[file].py
**Proposed changes:**
### Change 1: SKILL.md - [Section name]
**Location:** Line [X] in SKILL.md
**Current (incorrect):**
[exact text from current file]
**Corrected:**
[new text]
**Reason:** [why this fixes the issue]
[repeat for each change across all files]
**Impact assessment:**
- Affects: [authentication/API endpoints/parameters/examples/etc.]
**Verification:**
These changes will prevent: [specific error that prompted this]
</step_4>
<step_5 name="request_approval">
Should I apply these changes?
1. Yes, apply and commit all changes
2. Apply but don't commit (let me review first)
3. Revise the changes (I'll provide feedback)
4. Cancel (don't make changes)
Choose (1-4):
Wait for user response. Do not proceed without approval. </step_5>
<step_6 name="apply_changes"> Only after approval (option 1 or 2):
- Use Edit tool for each correction across all files
- Read back modified sections to verify
- If option 1, commit with structured message showing what was healed
- Confirm completion with file list </step_6> </process>
<success_criteria>
- Skill correctly detected from conversation context
- All incorrect sections identified with before/after
- User approved changes before application
- All edits applied across SKILL.md and related files
- Changes verified by reading back
- Commit created if user chose option 1
- Completion confirmed with file list </success_criteria>
- Read back each modified section to confirm changes applied
- Ensure cross-file consistency (SKILL.md examples match references/)
- Verify git commit created if option 1 was selected
- Check no unintended files were modified </verification>
Generateur de Documentation API
Documentation
Genere automatiquement de la documentation API OpenAPI/Swagger.
Rédacteur Technique
Documentation
Rédige de la documentation technique claire selon les meilleurs style guides.
Rédiger une fiche de playbook
Documentation
Ajouter une nouvelle fiche au playbook hogsend.com. Suit une structure stricte de métadonnées et de cinq parties.