Clawpatch

SKILL.md

---
name: clawpatch
description: >-
  This skill is specifically for the Clawpatch CLI (openclaw/clawpatch,
  https://clawpatch.ai) — an npm-installed automated code-review and
  per-finding fix tool. Use it ONLY when Clawpatch itself is in play: the user
  says "review with clawpatch", "run clawpatch", "clawpatch fix", "find bugs
  with clawpatch", "clawpatch report/findings", "clawpatch open-pr", wants to
  dispatch subagents to fix Clawpatch findings in parallel, or otherwise names
  Clawpatch or one of its commands. Do NOT use it for generic "review this
  code", "find bugs", or "code review" requests that don't involve Clawpatch —
  those belong to a different tool.
version: 0.1.3
metadata:
  openclaw:
    homepage: https://clawpatch.ai
    emoji: "🤓"
    install:
      - id: npm
        kind: node
        package: clawpatch
        bins: [clawpatch]
        label: Install Clawpatch (npm)
    envVars:
      - name: CLAWPATCH_PROVIDER
        required: false
        description: Override the default review/fix provider (codex). One of codex, claude, cursor, grok, opencode, pi, acpx, mock.
      - name: CLAWPATCH_MODEL
        required: false
        description: Provider-specific model string (e.g. opencode/big-pickle, anthropic/claude-sonnet-4).
      - name: CLAWPATCH_REASONING_EFFORT
        required: false
        description: Codex reasoning level (low/medium/high/xhigh).
      - name: ANTHROPIC_API_KEY
        required: false
        description: Only required when CLAWPATCH_PROVIDER=pi.
  hermes:
    tags: [code-review, clawpatch, cli, bug-fixing, automation]
    category: software-development
    requires_toolsets: [terminal]
---

# Clawpatch — agent workflow

> Clawpatch (`openclaw/clawpatch`, https://clawpatch.ai) is an agent-driven
> CLI: it reviews a repo into structured findings and can apply validated
> per-finding fixes. It needs a provider CLI (codex by default) and refuses
> dirty worktrees.
>
> **This skill is judgment + orchestration, not a CLI reference.** For exact
> flags, JSON fields, and exit codes, trust `clawpatch <cmd> --help` and the
> live `--json` output over anything written here — Clawpatch is pre-1.0 and
> its surface drifts, so a written copy will mislead. What this skill carries
> is what `--help` can't tell you: when to reach for it, how to fix findings
> in parallel, and the traps.

## When to use

Use Clawpatch when the user names it, or wants whole-repo automated review
that yields locatable findings plus optional validated fixes.

Don't use it for: a small diff already under review (a whole-repo review cycle
is overkill — use a diff-review tool); a bug the user already understands and
just wants written; or when no provider CLI (`codex`/`claude`/`cursor`/`grok`/
`opencode`/`pi`/`acpx`) is installed — `clawpatch doctor` fails fast, so say so and stop.

## Setup

`clawpatch doctor` verifies the install and the provider. If `clawpatch` is
missing: `npm install -g clawpatch`. The provider (codex by default) is the
user's to install and authenticate — don't run login flows on their behalf.

**Gitignore `.clawpatch/` up front — this is a prerequisite, not hygiene.**
Once `init`/`review` write into `.clawpatch/`, an un-ignored state dir shows
up as untracked files, which makes the worktree dirty — and `clawpatch fix`
refuses to run on a dirty tree (exit 3). So ensure the repo's `.gitignore`
contains the single line `.clawpatch/` *before* you review or fix, not after
you hit the refusal (the line can be added even before `init`). It's a
tracked file — confirm with the user before editing it.

## Review → findings

The pipeline is `init → map → review → report`. `init` and `map` are local and
cheap; `review` is the expensive step (~30–60s per feature with codex).

For a first whole-repo pass, `clawpatch ci` runs that pipeline in one call and
writes the same `.clawpatch/` findings the staged steps would — so
"`ci` → pick a fix path" is a fine default. Drop to the staged commands only
when you need to **sample before sweeping** a large or paid provider
(`review --limit 3`, below), **scope to a slice** (`review --since <ref>`), or
**resume an existing review** as code moves (`revalidate` / `review --since`,
below). Either way `ci` **stops at findings — it never fixes or opens PRs**;
fixing stays the paths under "Choose how to fix."

Run `init && map` directly — they're **idempotent and non-destructive**, so an
existing `.clawpatch/` just gets refreshed (`init` no-ops without `--force`;
`map` re-classifies). No scan, no `--force`. `map` writes one JSON file per
**feature** — the subsystem-sized unit (a package, a command, a service) that
both review and scoping operate on — into `.clawpatch/features/`.

State persists in `.clawpatch/` and there's no natural point where the agent
deletes it, so findings — and their `fixed`/`wont-fix`/`uncertain` statuses —
carry across runs. **That persistence is intentional: Clawpatch owns resume
and freshness, so use its commands instead of hand-managing or wiping
findings.** When code has moved since the last review:

- `clawpatch revalidate --since <ref>` (or `--all`) re-checks existing
  findings against the current code and updates their statuses — this is the
  CLI's de-stale mechanism.
- `clawpatch review --since <ref>` reviews only the features changed since
  `<ref>`, adding findings for new code without a full re-review.

Prefer those over trusting stale statuses *or* wiping. Wiping
(`[ -d .clawpatch ] && rm -r .clawpatch` — guarded, never `rm -rf`) is a last
resort for genuinely corrupt state, not the freshness tool — it discards
resume context and costs a full re-review. (There's no `--resume` flag;
"resume" just means the on-disk state is still there.)

On a large or unfamiliar repo, **smoke-test first** (`review --limit 3`) and
treat that as often-sufficient — surface the time/cost before committing to a
full sweep (`ci` or `review`).

By default review sees only **committed** code; `--include-dirty` (on `review`,
`ci`, and `revalidate`) pulls uncommitted worktree changes into scope — reach
for it to review in-progress work before it's committed. It's a review-scope
switch, not a `fix` dirty-tree override (Safety).

### Scoping the review

The switches above scope *which code* review sees; this scopes *which features*
it spends on. `review` has no path filter — you scope it by **selecting
features**. Each `.clawpatch/features/*.json` carries an opaque `featureId` (a
hash like `feat_library_…`, **not** a `1..N` index — passing a number silently
matches nothing and the run reviews zero features) plus its `title` and
`ownedFiles[].path`. To review only what the user named ("just the Go code",
"only the auth package", "ignore the docs"), translate paths → ids yourself,
then pass them — the flag repeats:

```
for f in .clawpatch/features/*.json; do
  jq -r '[.featureId,.title,((.ownedFiles//[])|map(.path)|join(","))]|@tsv' "$f"
done                                   # read the table, pick ids, then:
clawpatch review --feature <id> --feature <id> …   # confirm the flag in `review --help`
```

`--limit <n>` is the *cheapness* knob (first N features in map order) — right
for a smoke test, useless for targeting an area; reach for `--feature` when the
user names a subsystem. All Clawpatch state (features, findings, reports) is
plain JSON under `.clawpatch/`, so read it directly when a `--json` payload is
too large to scan or a wrapper truncates it.

Read findings from `report --json`. The full flag set is `clawpatch report
--help`; two non-obvious traps it won't flag for you:

- `--json` writes the JSON to **stdout**; `--output` writes **Markdown**.
  Capture JSON by redirecting stdout (`> findings.json`), not `--output`.
- The shape is `{ "findings": <int count>, "items": [ … ] }` — the findings
  are in `.items[]`, and field names drift from the docs (the id is `id`;
  evidence uses `path`/`startLine`/`endLine`). **Probe before parsing:**
  `jq 'keys, .items[0]' findings.json`.

Each finding already carries fix-ready prose — `title`, `reasoning`,
`reproduction`, `recommendation`, `suggestedRegressionTest`,
`minimumFixScope` — ready to drop into a fix prompt or PR body. Ignore the
`next:` hint Clawpatch prints; rank findings yourself (severity → confidence
→ triage), and never auto-fix without the user's pick (providers emit false
positives).

## Choose how to fix: scanner-only vs full-cycle

**Scanner-only (default, and the only safe parallel path).** Use Clawpatch
purely as the reviewer; the host agent fixes findings with its own tooling.
Required when the user wants fixes in parallel, the repo has strict commit/PR
conventions, you want control over each patch, or the host model beats the
provider's.

**Full-cycle.** Let `clawpatch fix` produce and validate the patch. Fine for
single-developer, sequential work in a low-ceremony repo where you trust the
provider and want its format/typecheck/lint/test gate.

The two are mutually exclusive — never run `clawpatch fix` from dispatched
subagents (see Safety).

### Scanner-only dispatch

1. `init → map → review`, then `report --json > /tmp/findings.json`, in a
   throwaway worktree.
2. Pick findings to fan out; prefer ones whose `minimumFixScope`/evidence
   paths don't overlap, so subagents can't collide.
3. Per finding: extract its JSON (`jq '.items[] | select(.id==$id)'`) and
   dispatch a subagent in a **fresh worktree branched from `main`** (not the
   review worktree). Paste the finding JSON inline in its prompt.
4. The subagent fixes with the host's normal edit/test/commit/PR tooling and
   **never calls `clawpatch`**. Tell it to confirm the finding is real before
   changing anything (false positives) and to stay within `minimumFixScope`
   (no over-correcting).
5. The review worktree and its `.clawpatch/` are disposable — discard after.
   Don't reconcile fixed-status back into `.clawpatch/`; the audit trail is
   git (PRs, commit trailers).

### Full-cycle

On a clean worktree, `clawpatch fix --finding <id>`. On success the finding
goes to `uncertain`, **not** `fixed` — confirm with `clawpatch revalidate
--finding <id>`. Then ship via `clawpatch open-pr --patch <id> --draft`
(Clawpatch writes a finding-rich PR body) or hand the diff to your own
commit/PR flow. Check flags with `clawpatch fix --help`. Never run two
`fix`es in parallel on one `.clawpatch/` (feature locks serialize them;
interleaved patches don't merge). Stop and report on the first surprise:
validation failure (exit 6 → `git restore .`), an oversized diff, or repeated
`wont-fix`.

## Safety & pitfalls

- **Never `--force` `fix`/`open-pr` without explicit user approval** —
  `--force` overrides the dirty-tree/validation guards. Clawpatch does **not**
  merge/land PRs today (there's no `land` command); if a merge/land command
  ever appears, treat it the same way — never run it without approval.
- **Never combine subagents with `clawpatch fix`.** Sharing `.clawpatch/`
  across subagents risks patches landing in the wrong worktree (evidence
  paths resolve against the original `rootPath`); copying state per subagent
  is fragile. Pick one mode and stay in it.
- **Don't blind-retry a non-zero exit.** Codes are typed (3 = dirty tree,
  4 = provider auth, 6 = validation failed, 7 = lock → `clawpatch
  clean-locks`); `clawpatch --help` / the spec has the full set.
- **Treat this doc as fallible.** Verify any flag, field, or exit-code detail
  against `clawpatch <cmd> --help` and live `--json` output — they're the
  source of truth; this skill is the workflow around them.