Tome is opt-in per project — each project declares its own knowledge management approach. Spire retains a small knowledge-awareness skill that explains what tome does and provides a fallback strategy for projects without it. - New plugins/tome/ with own manifests, README, all 5 sub-skills - Spire keeps skills/knowledge/SKILL.md as awareness stub - Updated all READMEs and marketplace JSONs - tome: namespace refs now correct (tome is its own plugin)
3.9 KiB
name, description, disable-model-invocation, allowed-tools
| name | description | disable-model-invocation | allowed-tools |
|---|---|---|---|
| handoff | After substantial implementation work, check whether the tome knowledge layer needs updating before you hand off — use impact analysis to find wiki docs and CLAUDE.md routers affected by the files you changed, triage what actually needs updating, and validate the result. Human-triggered. Use at the end of a feature, refactor, or structural change. Skip for bug fixes, minor refactors, and implementation details. | true | Bash(just:*), Bash(uv run:*), Bash(git:*) |
Tome — Handoff
A targeted knowledge-layer check keyed to the files you just changed. Target: 5-10 minutes of agent time. This is NOT a full curation pass.
Step 1: Detect what changed
# Files changed on this branch vs main
git diff --name-only main...HEAD
# Or against a specific number of commits
git diff --name-only HEAD~3
If the change was a single targeted fix (one file, no structural impact), you can skip to Step 5 (validate). Impact analysis pays off for multi-file, structural, or architectural changes.
Step 2: Run impact analysis
Pipe the changed paths into the impact subcommand:
# Via just (preferred)
just tome impact src/path/file.rs src/path/other.rs
# Or pipe from git diff
git diff --name-only main...HEAD | uv run -q --script <tome-plugin-dir>/bin/knowledge.py impact
The output groups hits into four buckets:
| Bucket | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Direct hits | Wiki docs whose source-paths list the exact changed file |
| Directory hits | Wiki docs whose source-paths list a parent directory |
| Control file hits | CLAUDE.md routers in ancestor directories |
| Potential stale | Same-module wiki docs (weak signal only) |
Step 3: Triage — decide what actually needs updating
Work top-down by bucket priority: direct -> directory -> control -> potential.
Direct and directory hits — these wiki docs explicitly cover the changed code:
- Read the doc and check whether any stated facts are now wrong
- Look for: named components/systems that were renamed, removed, or replaced; described lifecycles that changed; documented hazards that were resolved or introduced; architectural claims that no longer hold
Control file hits — CLAUDE.md routers:
- Check if the module's stated purpose, key types, or entry points still match
- These usually only need updates for module renames, splits, or new cross-cutting dependencies
Potential stale — skim only if the change was structural:
- New module added, file moved, concept renamed -> worth a look
- Bug fix, refactor within same module -> skip
Most changes need no wiki updates. The triage step often concludes: nothing to do.
Step 4: Fix what is actually wrong
Update only what you can confirm is incorrect. Do not speculatively rewrite.
Update wiki docs when:
- A named component, system, plugin, or resource was renamed or removed
- A lifecycle or state machine changed (new states, different transitions)
- A new hazard or known failure mode was introduced
- A documented integration pattern no longer applies
Update CLAUDE.md routers when:
- The module's primary responsibility changed
- A new domain, plugin, or cross-cutting dependency was added
- Key entry-point files moved or were renamed
Do NOT update for:
- Bug fixes and implementation detail changes
- Internal refactors that don't change public contracts or architecture
- Performance tweaks, test additions, or formatting changes
- Content that is already accurate but could be "improved"
Adding new wiki content — only if the change introduced something the wiki should cover: a new domain, a new hazard class, a new architectural pattern. Apply the "earned place" test: would removing this force an agent to do thinking work, or just a tool call?
Step 5: Validate
just tome check
Confirms no broken links or structural issues were introduced. Fix any errors before handing off.