vibeguard · git:20260401.5b626f9 · 2026-04-01 · sha256 20d2bb7070f0671c
vibeguard git:20260401.5b626f9A
Immutable. This exact content is served forever at /api/v1/blob/20d2bb7070f0671c.
--- name: vibeguard description: Lightweight anti-hallucination workflow for task kickoff, review prioritization, and regression retrospectives. Use when the user asks for guardrails, task contracts, risk scoring, or review templates. --- # VibeGuard Lightweight VibeGuard for everyday use inside Claude Arsenal. This skill helps with three moments where AI-assisted work usually drifts: - before implementation starts - while review findings are being prioritized - after regressions or avoidable mistakes happen ## What This Skill Includes - A task contract checklist for scoping work before coding - A scoring matrix for prioritizing findings with evidence - A weekly review template for regression and guardrail retrospectives ## Hard Boundaries This skill is intentionally lightweight. It does: - guide task kickoff - structure review output - make risk tradeoffs explicit It does not: - install hooks - run guard scripts automatically - patch global Claude or Codex configuration - claim that full VibeGuard enforcement is active If the user asks for automated interception, repo-level rules, or environment setup, escalate to the full VibeGuard repository and tooling. ## When To Use It Trigger this skill when the user asks for: - anti-hallucination guardrails - task startup checks - review scoring or triage - regression prevention - retrospective templates - "vibeguard" by name ## Workflow ### 1. Start With The Task Contract Open [`references/task-contract.yaml`](./references/task-contract.yaml) and confirm: - goal - source of truth - acceptance criteria - scope Do not move into implementation until these are concrete. ### 2. Score Findings Before Acting Open [`references/scoring-matrix.md`](./references/scoring-matrix.md) and score each finding on: - impact - effort - risk - confidence Use the score to separate urgent fixes from weak guesses. ### 3. Pick The Right Delivery Mode - 1-2 files: implement directly once the contract is clear - 3-5 files: write a short spec or step plan first - 6+ files: produce a full design/spec and staged execution plan ### 4. Review The Failure, Not Just The Symptom If something regressed, identify which defense failed: - scope control - source-of-truth validation - verification depth - review prioritization - missing guardrail Then capture the follow-up in [`references/review-template.md`](./references/review-template.md). ## Expected Outputs Depending on the request, produce one of these: - a filled task contract - a scored findings table with priorities - a short regression review or weekly retrospective ## Reference Files - [`references/task-contract.yaml`](./references/task-contract.yaml) - kickoff checklist - [`references/scoring-matrix.md`](./references/scoring-matrix.md) - prioritization model - [`references/review-template.md`](./references/review-template.md) - retrospective template