Never proposed the simpler way

## Propose the smallest change first
- Before writing code, state the smallest change that would satisfy the request. Implement that
  unless the user asks for more.
- If you believe the request isn't needed, or a much simpler approach exists (including reusing
  existing code or not making the change), say so first and let the user choose.
- No new classes, layers, factories or config options unless the request needs them.
- Comments explain why, briefly. Don't narrate what the code does.
- In your summary, name one thing you chose not to build and why.

## Propose the smallest change first
- Before writing code, state the smallest change that would satisfy the request. Implement that
  unless the user asks for more.
- If you believe the request isn't needed, or a much simpler approach exists (including reusing
  existing code or not making the change), say so first and let the user choose.
- No new classes, layers, factories or config options unless the request needs them.
- Comments explain why, briefly. Don't narrate what the code does.
- In your summary, name one thing you chose not to build and why.

---
description: "AgentFails: Never proposed the simpler way"
alwaysApply: true
---

## Propose the smallest change first
- Before writing code, state the smallest change that would satisfy the request. Implement that
  unless the user asks for more.
- If you believe the request isn't needed, or a much simpler approach exists (including reusing
  existing code or not making the change), say so first and let the user choose.
- No new classes, layers, factories or config options unless the request needs them.
- Comments explain why, briefly. Don't narrate what the code does.
- In your summary, name one thing you chose not to build and why.

#!/usr/bin/env python3
"""Fail if the diff vs BASE touches files outside .agent-scope or exceeds the budget."""
import fnmatch, os, subprocess, sys

base = sys.argv[1] if len(sys.argv) > 1 else "HEAD"
max_files = int(sys.argv[2]) if len(sys.argv) > 2 else 6
max_lines = int(sys.argv[3]) if len(sys.argv) > 3 else 150

allowed = []
if os.path.exists(".agent-scope"):
    allowed = [l.strip() for l in open(".agent-scope") if l.strip() and not l.startswith("#")]

out = subprocess.run(["git", "diff", "--numstat", base], capture_output=True, text=True, check=True).stdout
untracked = subprocess.run(["git", "ls-files", "--others", "--exclude-standard"],
                           capture_output=True, text=True, check=True).stdout.split()

files, lines, outside = 0, 0, []
rows = [r.split("\t") for r in out.strip().splitlines()] + [["0", "0", p] for p in untracked]
for added, deleted, path in rows:
    files += 1
    if added != "-":
        lines += int(added) + int(deleted)
    if allowed and not any(fnmatch.fnmatch(path, p) for p in allowed):
        outside.append(path)

problems = []
if outside:
    problems.append("out-of-scope files: " + ", ".join(outside))
if files > max_files:
    problems.append(f"{files} files changed (budget {max_files})")
if lines > max_lines:
    problems.append(f"{lines} lines changed (budget {max_lines})")

if problems:
    print("OVER BUDGET: " + "; ".join(problems))
    sys.exit(1)
print(f"within budget: {files} files, {lines} lines")

---
name: review-diff
description: Review the current diff with fresh context before a PR. Use after /verify passes.
---

# Review the diff

Start a subagent that has NOT seen this conversation. Give it only:
- the original request (one paragraph, verbatim),
- the output of `git diff origin/main...HEAD`,
- the names of the test/build commands.

Ask it to report, with file:line for each finding:
1. **Wrong feature**: does the diff do what the request asked? Quote the request line each change serves.
2. **Bugs**: logic errors, missing edge cases (empty, null, boundary), unhandled errors,
   unawaited promises, invented APIs or packages, swallowed exceptions.
3. **Overreach**: changes no request line needs (refactors, renames, formatting, dependency or
   config edits, public API changes, weakened tests).
4. **Evidence gaps**: claims in the PR description that no command output supports.

Then fix real findings, or list them under "Known issues" in the PR. Do not argue with the reviewer
in the PR text; either fix or explain in one line.