paseo-god · git:20261025.2cafec2 · 2026-10-25 · sha256 a26d2d93d3c0ad12
paseo-god git:20261025.2cafec2A
Immutable. This exact content never changes and is served at /api/v1/blob/a26d2d93d3c0ad12.
--- name: paseo-god description: >- Use only when the user explicitly invokes /paseo-god or requests Paseo God mode (갓모드). Carry a bounded task through acceptance criteria, selective debugging/review/spike guidance, evidence-based verification and a resumable run record. Ordinary coding, planning and session resumption do not trigger it. --- # Paseo God ## Start or resume one run God mode is a task workflow, not extra permissions or a different model. Work autonomously inside the user's request and project instructions. Read relevant project context, not every skill, session or memory file. Load a reference below only when it helps. 1. State the goal, scope and observable acceptance criteria. Infer routine details; ask only for missing information that blocks work. 2. Create or find the run record with the installed skill's helper (Node 18+): ```text node <skill-dir>/scripts/god-run.mjs init --root <project-root> --goal "<goal>" node <skill-dir>/scripts/god-run.mjs list --root <project-root> node <skill-dir>/scripts/god-run.mjs resume --root <project-root> --id <run-id> ``` Records live in `.paseobility/god/runs/<id>/`; the helper only manages records. Without Node, copy [RUN.md](templates/RUN.md) into a new uniquely named run directory. Keep these local records out of commits. 3. Fill `RUN.md` with criteria, their observable scenarios and expected check results. Keep literal paths, command names and requested formats intact. Analysis or preparation ends at the requested deliverable; do not invent implementation or runtime checks for it. Reuse the active run when the user steers the same task. To resume, `list` and pick the run whose goal matches; ask only if several fit. Update the `- Status:` line in `RUN.md` yourself; the helper has no status update or completion command. Each run has one writer. A second writer creates its own run and, when edits overlap, its own worktree. Do not rewrite another run to resolve a conflict. ## Plan before substantive work After reading enough context to choose an approach, briefly state the plan to the user and put its TODO in `RUN.md` before substantive changes. Choose concrete actions that advance the criteria, order dependencies and include the checks that establish the outcome. A small correction needs only one or two steps; a larger task needs meaningful stages, not an exhaustive task graph. Proceed without a separate plan-approval round unless a required decision is missing. An available plan/TODO tool can show progress; keep it consistent with the durable record rather than maintaining a different plan there. Start the next ready item, update after meaningful outcomes, and change the plan when observations invalidate the approach. Distinguish pending, in-progress, blocked, completed and cancelled items. Mark a required outcome complete only with its evidence; checking off a TODO cannot substitute for verification. On resume, continue the existing unfinished plan instead of starting over. Delivering a handoff or summary of unfinished work does not itself close the underlying goal. Record that deliverable separately and retain unmet criteria and TODOs in the appropriate unfinished run state; pause only on user request. For request changes, long-task resumption or delegation, use [planning and handoff](references/planning-and-handoff.md). Record the loaded God skill's path and version/content digest in `RUN.md`, including references used; add other skill identities only when they materially affect the result. This is provenance, not enforced version pinning. A changed skill prompts an impact check, not automatic invalidation of all earlier work. ## Keep fixed costs proportional Per-task overhead repeats on every small change, so size it to the change. - Classify the change once (copy or bug fix, UI, rights- or data-sensitive, release) and record the checks that class needs. Escalate when the diff crosses into a heavier class. - Read mandatory project documents once per run and record the applicable constraints in a few lines; reread only when a document changed. - Iterate with the cheapest check that can fail. Run slow checks (full renders, e2e, release builds) once after the batch they cover. - Pass context to other agents through the run record. Remove check output this run generated unless recorded evidence cites it. - When the user reports slowness or cost, time each layer before naming a cause, and record a tiered proposal as a learning candidate. ## Keep the checks tied to the request - Connect each criterion to a scenario, the cheapest sufficient check, its expected observation and the layer it proves. For implementation, method repair or a resumed check, use [verification](references/verification.md). - Keep the requested outcome and coverage when repairing a check. Record why the old method failed and why its replacement tests the same obligation. User changes can revise scope; a failing check cannot silently revise it. - Associate results with the actual checked inputs, method and environment. After a relevant edit, mark affected results stale and recheck them after the last writer finishes. Preserve unrelated valid evidence; a Git SHA alone does not identify uncommitted files or installed runtime state. - Missing, truncated, skipped or ambiguous evidence leaves the affected obligation unproven. Inspect actual output/artifacts; a tool's successful return or a helper's `complete` label is not an outcome check. ## Work, check, continue - Take the next step that advances an unmet criterion. Procedures when useful: [debugging](references/debugging.md), [review](references/review.md), [spike](references/spike.md). For changes to shared APIs, persisted data, state or coordinated work, use [change boundaries](references/change-boundary.md). - Use any available tools and installed skills (`paseo-design` for frontend, browser or native-app skills as needed); discover active tool schemas rather than assuming them. Batch independent steps. - Spawn a helper agent (second opinion, independent review, parallel spike) when it clearly saves time or catches risk worth its token cost, and say so. When the installed base skills are present, use `paseo-advisor` for a second opinion and `paseo-committee` when planning is stuck; otherwise keep this behavior. Large fan-outs or tournaments belong to `paseo-orchestration`. - Preserve unrelated work. Update the TODO after meaningful outcomes. Record decisions, changed paths, check results and the next step; no secrets or raw transcripts. - When the user changes the request, update its criteria and TODO, communicate the revised scope to owned helpers, and reconcile old work before starting conflicting steps. A late result from the old scope is not current evidence. - Verify the relevant boundary; distinguish source, local test, installed runtime and deployed state. Rerun a check only after a relevant change. - Distinguish a product/check failure from a tool or environment failure. Two attempts with the same cause and no new evidence call for a different approach; rerunning a regression after a relevant fix is useful progress. If an interrupted action may already have taken effect, reconcile its state before retrying; cancellation or timeout does not prove rollback. Continue independent work. Save `blocked` with evidence and a concrete resume step only when nothing left in scope can advance the task. No unbounded retries or background schedules. ## Finish and hand back Mark `complete` only when every required criterion has current supporting evidence. Compare the actual final state with the user's literal requirements, including names, paths, formats and counts. If replacement or installation was part of the work, check the affected existing entry points still work. A build or deploy preparation proves only its own layer; an unsettled action is not verified completion. Local run records are agent-maintained, not host-enforced certificates, locks or a security boundary. Ask first only before spending money, irreversible deletion, account-security changes, or pushing, publishing, deploying or sending something the user did not ask for. Finish everything reviewable up to that point, record `awaiting-input` and name the one remaining action. Use `paused` only when the user asks. On resume, read the record, check current files and runtime for drift (old evidence is not current proof), then continue the next unmet criterion. If the user cancels or replaces the task, record `cancelled`. Report the outcome, proven criteria, material limits and the run ID when it helps resuming. Keep the response proportional to the task. ## Learning is a proposal When a reusable procedure or preference emerges, add it to `LEARNING-CANDIDATES.md` in this run with the observed trigger, evidence, applicable project/task scope, limits, proposed text and destination. Merge duplicate candidates; distinguish a stated preference from an inferred lesson. Do not broaden a project lesson into a global rule or revive a rejected lesson without new evidence. Write it into `AGENTS.md`, memory files, skills or public repositories only when the user asks; a successful trial is not permission to promote or publish it.