name: quick
description: "Tracked lightweight execution with composable rigor flags: --trivial, --discuss, --research, --full. Covers zero-ceremony inline fixes (typo, spelling fix, small mistake in a single file, ≤3 edits) through contained multi-file changes."
user-invocable: true
argument-hint: "[--trivial] [--discuss] [--research] [--full] <task>"
allowed-tools:
  - Read
  - Write
  - Edit
  - Bash
  - Grep
  - Glob
  - Skill
  - Task
routing:
  force_route: true
  triggers:
    - quick task
    - small change
    - ad hoc task
    - add a flag
    - small refactor
    - targeted fix
    - quick fix
    - typo fix
    - fix typo
    - fix the typo
    - one-line change
    - trivial fix
    - rename variable
    - rename this variable
    - update value
    - fix import
    - small mistake
    - small mistake in
    - mistake in spelling
    - spelling mistake
    - spelling fix
    - fix the spelling
    - typo in
    - small fix in
    - small fix
    - tiny fix
  not_for: "'quick' as speed preference, general bug diagnosis requiring investigation"
  complexity: Simple
  category: process

/quick - Tracked Lightweight Execution

Quick covers the full lightweight tier from zero-ceremony inline fixes (≤3 edits, --trivial mode) through contained multi-file changes. Full-ceremony Simple+ tasks (task_plan.md, agent routing, quality gates) belong in /do. The key design principle is composable rigor: the base mode is minimal (plan + execute), and users add process incrementally via flags.

Flags (all OFF by default):

Flag	Effect
--trivial	Zero-ceremony inline mode for ≤3 file edits: no plan display, no branch, direct commit. Scope-gates strictly — escalates automatically if the task needs more than 3 edits. Use for typo fixes, one-line constant changes, renaming a variable, fixing an import.
--discuss	Add a pre-planning discussion phase to resolve ambiguities (breadth-first — surfaces all gray areas at once)
--interview	Add a depth-first decision-tree interview before the edit phase. One question at a time with a recommendation per question. Sibling to --discuss — pick --interview when decisions are interdependent and answer A constrains valid options for B.
--research	Add a research phase before planning to build context on unfamiliar code
--full	Add plan verification + full quality gates (tests, lint, diff review)
--no-branch	Skip feature branch creation, work on current branch
--no-commit	Skip the commit step (for batching multiple quick tasks)

Reference Loading Table

Signal	Load These Files	Why
usage examples, task ID format, error handling	examples.md	Loads detailed guidance from examples.md.
emitting banners, commit format, or STATE.md entries	templates.md	Loads detailed guidance from templates.md.

Instructions

Phase --trivial: INLINE EXECUTION (only with --trivial flag)

When --trivial is passed (or the router recognises a clearly one-line mechanical change), execute inline without plan display, without a feature branch, and without spawning subagents — because the overhead of those steps dwarfs the actual work.

Step 1: Read CLAUDE.md

Read repository CLAUDE.md before any edit, because repo-specific constraints affect how even trivial changes should be made.

Step 2: Scope check

Question	If Yes
Does this need reading docs, investigating behavior, or understanding unfamiliar code?	Drop --trivial, redirect to /quick --research
Does this touch more than 3 files?	Drop --trivial, redirect to standard /quick
Does this add imports from new packages or modify dependency files?	Drop --trivial, redirect to standard /quick
Is the request ambiguous or underspecified?	Ask one clarifying question; if still ambiguous after one round, drop --trivial and use /quick --discuss

If redirecting, say: This task exceeds --trivial scope ([reason]). Continuing as /quick. Then proceed to Phase 0 with the original request.

Step 3: Locate target files and execute

Read the target file(s). Make edits using the Edit tool. Track edit count. After each edit, check: have we hit 3 edits? If more are needed, stop -- do not rationalize "just one more edit." Say: "Scope exceeded during --trivial execution (3+ edits needed). Preserving work done. Continuing as /quick." Hand off to the standard quick phases with context about what was already done.

Step 4: Check branch

If on main/master, create a short-lived branch: git checkout -b quick/<brief-description>.

Step 5: Stage and commit

Stage specific files with git add <specific-files>. Commit using the format from references/templates.md (conventional commit, type usually fix:, chore:, or refactor:).

Step 6: Display summary

Use the --trivial summary banner format from references/templates.md.

GATE: Edit count is 1-3, commit succeeded. STOP — do not proceed to Phase 0.

---

Phase 0: SETUP

Step 1: Read CLAUDE.md

Read and follow the repository's CLAUDE.md before doing anything else, because repo-specific conventions override defaults and skipping this causes style/tooling mismatches.

Step 2: Parse flags

Extract --discuss, --interview, --research, --full, --no-branch, and --no-commit from the invocation. Everything remaining after flag extraction is the task description.

Step 3: Scope check

If the task involves multiple components, architectural changes, or needs parallel execution, redirect to /do instead because quick tasks are single-threaded by design -- parallelism means the task has outgrown this tier.

Phase 1: DISCUSS (only with --discuss flag)

This phase activates when the user passes --discuss or the request contains signals of uncertainty ("not sure", "maybe", "could be", "what do you think").

Step 1: Identify ambiguities

Read the request and list specific questions:

• What exactly should change? (if underspecified)
• Which approach among alternatives? (if multiple valid paths)
• What are the acceptance criteria? (if success is unclear)

Step 2: Present questions

Use the DISCUSS banner format from references/templates.md. Wait for user response. Do not proceed until ambiguities are resolved.

GATE: All ambiguities resolved. Proceed to Phase 2 or Phase 3.

Phase 1.5: INTERVIEW (only with --interview flag)

This phase activates when the user passes --interview. It is the depth-first sibling to --discuss — pick this mode when decisions are interdependent and answering A would change the valid options for B, so batch-asking forces premature commitments.

Step 1: Load the depth-first reference

Load planning/references/depth-first-interview.md and follow its phases (PRIME → ENUMERATE BRANCHES → TRAVERSE → COMPILE OUTPUT). The reference enforces a hard cap of 5 total questions and 3-level recursion per branch — these limits are infrastructure, not advisory.

Step 2: Treat --interview as an explicit trigger

Per the reference's Phase 0 trigger classification, /quick --interview is an explicit invocation. Skip the Phase 0 opt-out question — the user already opted in by passing the flag. Go directly to ENUMERATE BRANCHES.

Step 3: Compile output to inline context

The reference's Phase 3 emits a structured block (Resolved Decisions / Carried Forward / Scope Boundary / Mode Used). Keep this block inline as the discussion artifact and use it to inform Phase 3 PLAN. Do not write a separate task_plan.md for /quick tier.

GATE: Interview output emitted. Resolved decisions inform the inline plan. Proceed to Phase 2 or Phase 3.

Phase 2: RESEARCH (only with --research flag)

This phase activates when the user passes --research or the task touches code that needs investigation. Use --research when touching unfamiliar code because confidence about code behavior is not the same as correctness — --trivial exists for when you truly know.

Step 1: Identify scope

Determine which files and patterns need reading to understand the change.

Step 2: Read and analyze

Read relevant source files, tests, and configuration. Build a mental model of:

• Current behavior
• Where the change fits
• What might break

Step 3: Summarize findings

Present a brief (3-5 line) summary of what you learned and how it affects the plan.

GATE: Sufficient understanding to plan the change. Proceed to Phase 3.

Phase 3: PLAN

Step 1: Generate task ID

Assign the task ID now, not later, because untracked tasks become invisible and "later" never comes.

Format: YYMMDD-xxx where xxx is Base36 sequential (0-9, a-z).

# Check STATE.md for today's tasks to determine next sequence
date_prefix=$(date +%y%m%d)

If STATE.md exists in the repo root, find the highest sequence number for today's date prefix and increment. If no tasks today, start at 001. Use Base36 for the sequence: 001, 002, ... 009, 00a, 00b, ... 00z, 010, ...

If STATE.md is corrupted, scan git log for Quick task YYMMDD- patterns to find the true next ID. If a branch name collision occurs, increment the sequence number and try again.

Step 2: Create inline plan

Always display the inline plan, even for obvious tasks, because the plan catches misunderstandings before they become wrong edits and confirms alignment in 10 seconds that saves minutes. Use the inline plan banner instead of writing a task_plan.md file; that keeps the workflow in the Simple+ tier and preserves the minimum viable ceremony.

Use the inline plan banner format from references/templates.md.

If estimated edits exceed 15, prompt the user to consider /do -- edit count is a scope signal regardless of difficulty.

If the task involves security, payments, or data migration, recommend --full because a one-line auth change can be catastrophic and risk is about impact, not size.

Step 3: Create feature branch (unless --no-branch)

Create a feature branch because small changes on main break the same as big ones:

git checkout -b quick/<task-id>-<brief-kebab-description>

If already on a non-main feature branch and --no-branch is set, stay on the current branch.

GATE: Task ID assigned, plan displayed, branch created. Proceed to Phase 4.

Phase 4: EXECUTE

Step 1: Make edits

Execute the changes described in the plan. Track edit count throughout.

Step 2: Scope monitoring

• At 10 edits: display a warning -- "10 edits reached. Quick tasks typically stay under 15."
• At 15 edits: suggest upgrade -- "15 edits reached. This may benefit from /do with full planning. Continue? [Y/n]"
• No hard cap -- the user decides. Quick's scope is advisory, not enforced like Fast's 3-edit gate.

Step 3: Verify changes (base mode)

Run a language-appropriate syntax check on edited files (e.g., python3 -m py_compile, go build ./..., tsc --noEmit). If --full flag is set, run the full quality gate instead (see Phase 5).

GATE: All planned edits complete. Sanity check passes.

Phase 5: VERIFY (only with --full flag)

Step 1: Run tests for affected packages/modules only -- do not run the full suite unless explicitly requested.

Step 2: Lint check using the repo's configured linter on changed files.

Step 3: Review changes with git diff. Check for unintended changes, missing error handling, and broken imports.

GATE: Tests pass, lint clean, diff reviewed. Proceed to Phase 6.

Phase 6: COMMIT (skip with --no-commit)

Stage specific files with git add <specific-files> -- not git add ., to avoid accidental inclusions. Commit using the format from references/templates.md. Include the task ID in the commit body for traceability.

GATE: Commit succeeded. Verify with git log -1 --oneline.

Phase 7: LOG

Step 1: Update STATE.md

Log the task to STATE.md because this is how tasks stay visible and cross-referenceable. Use the STATE.md schema from references/templates.md to create the file if it does not exist, and append one row per task. If escalated from --trivial, use tier trivial->quick.

Step 2: Display summary

Use the completion banner format from references/templates.md.

Reference Material

See references/examples.md for worked examples per flag mode, task ID format, and error handling.