Install
$ agentstack add skill-checkpickerupper-skills-pizza1 ✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
About
/pizza1
Justify by correctness, never by convention.
The trigger
You defended a design by pointing at what the codebase already does. That is not a correctness argument. Re-derive from first principles.
The core
If a codebase named every variable pizza1, pizza2, pizza3, that would not make those names good. So "it's what the codebase uses" is never a reason a design is correct. It is incidental. Prevalence is not evidence.
Banned justifications
Delete these from the next response. None of them is a reason:
- "it's what the codebase already does"
- "the established pattern"
- "the canonical lane does it"
- "consistent with the rest"
- "it's more ergonomic"
- "less churn"
- "already wired"
- "fewer changes"
- "out of scope to change"
- "not worth touching now"
How to handle each case
- Correct pattern: Say why it is correct. Name the concrete failure it prevents. Assert it with confidence even when the codebase already uses it. The codebase using it is not the argument; the correctness is.
- Wrong pattern the codebase uses everywhere: Call it wrong regardless of how widespread it is. Prevalence does not launder a bug; it just means the bug is grandfathered.
- Correct and also ergonomic/conventional: Fine. The justification is still correctness, with ergonomics as a bonus, never the basis.
Hooks and lint messages
A guard must say why the banned shape is wrong: the concrete bug it causes. It must not say only "this isn't how we do it here." If a deny message cannot name the failure it prevents, the hook is pizza1. Fix the message to name the failure, or drop the rule.
Worked example
A freeze fix forced switching a commit to commitState, which tripped ban-fanout-after-commit-in-operation. The agent defended commit-then-run ordering by pointing at a canonical operation that did the same thing.
That is pizza1: convention, not correctness.
Correct reasoning:
- State is your record of "this happened." It must be committed last, after the effects actually ran.
- Commit-then-run means a mid-flight effect failure leaves the state claiming a world that never happened.
- The canonical operation committing first is not a precedent; it is the same bug.
- Fix: commit last. Justification: correctness, because state must never lead the world.
Contract
- Drop every convention, ergonomics, churn, and scope justification from the next response.
- Re-derive the answer from correctness.
- Name the invariant preserved or the bug the alternative causes.
- Be confident in the correct answer, including when the codebase already happens to do it.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: CheckPickerUpper
- Source: CheckPickerUpper/skills
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet — be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.