Commit Message (Conventional Commits v1.0.0)

Trigger phrases: "commit message", "make a commit", "conventional commit", "write a commit", "git commit"

Format: type(scope): summary + (optional blank line + body) + (optional footer).

Type (required)

• feat — new feature · fix — bug fix
• docs — docs only · refactor — restructure with no behavior change
• perf — performance · test — add/fix tests
• build — build/dependency · ci — CI configuration
• chore — maintenance/automated · revert — revert a previous commit
• style — formatting (no logic)

Which type? (deciding when ambiguous)

• A new capability for the user? → feat. Fixing an existing wrong behavior? → fix.
• Behavior the same, only the structure changed? → refactor (if behavior changed it's feat/fix, not refactor).
• Touched only tests/docs/formatting? → test/docs/style (don't touch code logic).

Scope (optional, preferred)

The affected area/module: auth, api, backend, db, frontend, session, agent, etc. One word, consistent with the project's module name.

Summary line

• In the project's established language (English by default for open source), imperative/summary mood, start lowercase, NO period at the end, ≤ ~72 characters.
• Say what it does, not how; avoid vague words ("fix", "update", "wip"). ✅ feat(auth): one-time code TTL + brute-force limit ❌ fix: bug · ❌ update · ❌ changes

Body (optional — recommended for meaningful changes)

After a blank line: the WHY (motivation) + notable consequences/tradeoffs. Wrap at ~72 characters. Leave context for the future reader who opens git-blame — the diff already shows the "what"; you write the "why".

Footer (optional)

• BREAKING CHANGE: <description> — a backward-incompatible breaking change (triggers SemVer MAJOR, release skill).
• Refs: #<issue> / Closes #<issue>.

Atomic commit — splitting a mixed diff

If a diff contains several logical changes, split it; don't cram it into one commit:

git add -p            # pick hunk by hunk; stage related changes separately
git add <specific/file>

Each commit focused on a single topic; "feat + fix + refactor" doesn't belong in one commit.

Good / bad

Worked good-vs-bad commit examples: references/examples.md.

Rules

• Atomic: one logical change = one commit.
• No commit without DoD: don't propose a message until /simplify + tests green + (if SonarQube is used) sonarqube-check 0/0/0/0 pass.
• If there is no staged diff, warn; ask the user about the git add scope with explicit options.
• Don't run git commit silently; propose the message, wait for approval.

Prohibitions (absolute — see CLAUDE.md §4)

• No AI trace: no co-author trailer, auto-generation footer, or robot emoji in the subject/body; words naming an AI assistant, model, or coding tool, and the .claude name, do not appear in the message.
• No vendor name: the third-party template/skeleton name and any "vendor copy / cleanup" disclosure are not written in the message (§4.2).
• Human, natural language: the message is natural, technical, and in the project's established language (English by default for open source).
• Approval: commit only when the user says "commit"; "done" is not approval (§4.4).
• Destructive: amend / reset / force / --no-verify only on an explicit request; the hook is not skipped (§4.5).