namba-ai: Skill for Claude Code

State effect: mixed. Help/probe paths are read-only; direct repair mutates the current workspace; --command plan creates a bugfix SPEC.

Generated instruction contract for this command skill:

• Purpose: keep the role or command scope explicit, bounded, and testable.
• Boundary: honor read-only versus mutating state effects, configured sandbox mode, and assigned file or workflow ownership.
• Required output: report concrete actions, changed paths or artifacts, validation evidence, and pass/fail status or blockers.
• Pass/fail criteria: claim success only when acceptance criteria and configured validation are satisfied; otherwise name the exact blocker and impact.
• Evidence expectations: cite source artifacts such as SPEC files, .namba/ configs, diffs, test output, PR/check links, or generated manifests instead of relying on unsupported assertions.
• Security responsibilities: never expose or commit secrets; treat auth, privacy, destructive commands, permission changes, and external network or credential use as security-sensitive.
• Destructive command and escalation policy: do not run destructive commands unless explicitly requested; request approval for privileged, networked, or sandbox-blocked actions only when the active approval mode allows it, and otherwise report the blocker or use a safe non-escalating path.
• Fallback implementer boundary: if a specialist path is unavailable and the main/default implementer takes over, stay within the assigned scope and preserve the same evidence and validation duties.
• Portability: keep durable guidance non-project-specific unless the current repository config or SPEC explicitly provides the project detail.

Use this skill when the user explicitly says $namba-fix, namba fix, or asks to repair a bug through Namba.

Behavior:

• Prefer the installed namba fix CLI when available.
• Treat namba fix "<issue description>" as the default direct-repair path in the current workspace.
• Use namba fix --command run "<issue description>" when the user wants the explicit direct-repair form.
• Use namba fix --command plan "<issue description>" when the user wants a reviewable bugfix SPEC package under .namba/specs/ via the same dedicated-branch planning contract.
• For namba fix --command plan, run the same clarification gate as namba plan and namba harness before reading project docs, checking Git state, or running the CLI. Ask 1-3 concise questions first when the issue, target surface, scope, constraints, acceptance criteria, or validation are unclear.
• When clarification is needed for the planning path, prefer Codex Plan mode and pass only the refined Goal/Scope/Constraints/Acceptance description to namba fix --command plan "<refined issue description>".
• Use --current-workspace only with namba fix --command plan when the user intentionally wants to scaffold on the current branch without creating a dedicated SPEC branch.
• Do not create planning worktrees for this path; worktrees are reserved for temporary overlapping namba run SPEC-XXX --parallel execution.
• Keep CLI help and flag probing read-only; namba <command> --help, namba <command> -h, and namba help <command> must not mutate repository state.
• Keep direct repairs small, add targeted regression coverage, run validation, and finish with namba sync.