finish

Commits in this repo go through an explicit approval stop. /implement closes a ticket with /code-review, then hands over here — it does not commit on its own.

Process

1. Run git status — identify changed, added, and deleted files
2. Run git diff (staged and unstaged) — read the actual changes in detail
3. Exclude files that must not be committed: .env*, build artifacts, scratch files, editor state
4. Stage all relevant files with git add. Never git add . or git add -A
5. Determine the commit type from the changes:
   • feat — new feature or user-visible capability
   • fix — bug fix
   • refactor — restructuring without behavior change
   • docs — documentation only
   • test — adding or updating tests
   • chore — build, tooling, dependencies, config
   • style — formatting, no logic change
   • perf — performance improvement
6. Draft the commit message following the format below

⛔ STOP. Present the staged file list and the proposed commit message. Do not commit until explicitly approved.

Commit format

<type>(<scope>): <short summary, imperative mood, max 72 chars>

<One sentence that frames the overall change — what it adds or fixes
 at a high level, and why it matters.>

- <Specific change — what was added/modified and the reasoning or
  tradeoff behind the decision.>
- <Specific change — include method names, file paths, component names
  when they clarify what was touched.>
- <Specific change — explain exclusions and edge cases explicitly:
  "X is intentionally excluded because Y".>

<Footer — notable technical context that isn't obvious from the diff:
 migration notes, performance tradeoffs, deliberate design decisions,
 known limitations. Not required if there's nothing non-obvious.>

Rules for the message

• Summary line: imperative mood (add, fix, remove, update), lowercase, no trailing period
• Scope: the domain or module most affected (auth, security, payments, cart)
• Overview sentence: one sentence only — frames the "what and why" at the highest level
• Bullets: one per logical unit of change; name real identifiers (functions, files, endpoints); explain the why behind each decision, not just the what
• Explicit exclusions belong in the bullets: "X is intentionally excluded because Y"
• Footer: non-obvious context only — migration decisions, deliberate tradeoffs, known caveats
• If changes are unrelated, propose splitting into multiple commits
• Prose paragraphs instead of bullets are fine when the change is a single idea that needs explaining rather than a list — match what recent commits on the branch do

Pushing is a separate action and needs its own consent.