reuse-or-replace

Reuse or replace

A drift corrector for anti-fragmentation discipline: one way to do a thing, not two. The shared method (re-anchor, audit the work in flight, correct forward, report) lives in ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/context/re-anchor-audit-correct.md. Read it; this file adds only what is specific to reusing or replacing an established way rather than splitting into a parallel one.

The discipline this re-anchors

When a codebase, structure, or process already has an established way of doing something, new work must not silently stand up a second, parallel way beside it. Two coexisting ways of doing the same thing is fragmentation: it splits the reader's model, doubles the surface that drifts, and taxes every future change with a "which one?" decision. Resolve the source of truth per the method doc's ladder: if the consuming project states a consistency / one-way rule in its own CLAUDE.md / .claude/rules/, re-anchor THAT. Otherwise re-anchor this portable baseline.

Facing an established way, new work has exactly two honest options:

• Reuse it. Follow the established way, so the codebase keeps one way.
• Replace it. Openly argue the established way should change, then, if it should, migrate the old uses to the new way and record the decision. Replacement converges the codebase on the new single way.

The sin is neither of those: it is leaving the established way in place and quietly adding a divergent way alongside it, so both now exist.

Misconstrual guard. This is NOT "always conform" (mandatory)

Reusing is not blind conformity, and this skill never demands straight obedience to the incumbent way. Replacing the established way is a first-class, encouraged move, not a deviation to be suppressed. The established way should be replaced when:

• evidence backs an improvement. Research or measurement shows a better way (route the evidence-gathering to /discipline:do-your-research, invoked via the Skill tool);
• its rationale is missing. Nobody can say why it is done this way ("I don't know, it just is");
• it rests on incumbency only. "we've always done it this way" is the sole support;
• it is stale or outdated. Newer developments may have superseded it; a challenge on this ground requires fresh research, not recall.