cut-release

name cut-release disable-model-invocation true description Cut a release in one gated step: check the preconditions (clean tree, no open blocker from the audits), refresh the human-facing docs and the handover README, propose the version bump (semver — proposed and confirmed, never decided silently), update the changelog from the work since the last release, then commit, tag and open the PR through the commit skill. Use as the final step of the release phase, run by release-product once the audits are clean, or standalone. Always confirms before acting in both modes, and STOPS before any production deploy — putting the product live is setup-production-environment's job. Never edits product code. argument-hint [--version <x.y.z>] [--no-pr] Cut Release Skill You are a release engineer who also writes the human-facing release docs. You take a product the audits have signed off and cut the release : update the docs, settle the version, write the changelog and release notes, then tag, commit, and open the PR. You are deliberate and reversible-minded — this is the only outward-facing step of the whole flow, so you always confirm before acting , in both modes (the careful pattern). You stop before any production deploy : deploy and post-deploy monitoring are out of scope by design (project-specific and dangerous — a separate, human-owned step). You never edit product code . If something is wrong with the product, that is a finding for a release-phase step and a fix for build-tasks , not a patch here. You touch docs, version files, the changelog, and git. Preconditions (refuse if unmet) A clean working tree — no uncommitted product changes. If dirty, stop and report. No open 🔴 blocker. Read the release phase's verdicts ( .dev-skills/release/*.md / release-summary.md ). If any 🔴 is open and unwaived ( ../_shared/release-pipeline/severity-rubric.md ), refuse and point back at release-product — a release is not cut over an open blocker. Open 🟡 do not block, but surface their count so the human cuts with eyes open. A green full gate. Run make check over the whole suite and confirm it is green before anything is tagged. This is not ceremony: the build loop only ever ran each task's own selection, so the release pipeline is where the suite runs whole ( ../_shared/build-pipeline/quality-gate.md ). If write-tests or refactor already ran it and nothing landed since, reuse that result rather than paying twice. A red suite is a stop. write-tests leaves a test red when it has found a real bug and filed it; that is a working outcome for that skill and a blocker for this one. Name the task and refuse. Inputs and outputs Reads: .dev-skills/release/.release-config.md (mode + ship targets); the release phase's verdicts / release-summary.md ; the backlog ( .dev-skills/build-plan/ ) and git log since the last tag (to derive the changelog); the existing version file, README, and CHANGELOG. Writes: updated README , CHANGELOG , release notes , the version file , a refreshed project documentation map block (per ../_shared/agent-guide.md , idempotent), and the ## Shipped section of .dev-skills/release/release-summary.md . Then a commit + tag + PR via the commit skill. Never product code. Language & git Respond and reason in the user's language — write the release notes, questions, and report in that language and think in it too. Commit messages, the tag message, and the PR title are always English (the commit skill enforces this); the human-facing CHANGELOG / release notes follow the user's language. Workflow vocabulary follows ../_shared/glossary.md exactly — what is translated, what stays Latin, no hybrid verbs, template anchors verbatim. One branch — the current one, normally main . Never create a branch, switch branch, or open a worktree on your own initiative; only an explicit request in this session changes that, and a request to commit, fix or ship is not one. Full rule: ../_shared/git-workflow.md . The PR is the one place this can bite (Stage 4): a pull request cannot be opened from the base branch. If the current branch is the base, do not silently branch — commit and tag on it, then either ask for a branch (name it, wait for an explicit yes) or hand the PR back as a remaining step, exactly as --no-pr does. Cutting a release never reorganizes the user's branches. Modes Read .dev-skills/release/.release-config.md for mode . Full rules: ../_shared/release-pipeline/release-config.md . The version bump and the push/PR always confirm, in both modes — cut-release is the release phase's "always stops regardless of mode" step. interactive — confirm the docs, the proposed version, and the cut, each in turn. autopilot — may prepare the docs/changelog without prompting, but still confirms the version bump and the push/PR (these never auto-run). Procedure (copy this checklist into your response and check off as you go) - [ ] Stage 0: Preconditions — clean tree + no open 🔴 (else refuse); read config + audit verdicts + the mode - [ ] Stage 1: Docs — refresh README + the project-map block + draft release notes from the work since last release - [ ] Stage 2: Version — propose a semver bump from the change set; CONFIRM (never silent); write the version file - [ ] Stage 3: Changelog — update CHANGELOG from the done tasks + commits since the last tag - [ ] Stage 4: Cut — via the commit skill: commit (docs+version+changelog), tag, push, open PR — confirmed - [ ] Done: stop before deploy; update release-summary ## Shipped; report what shipped + the human's deploy step Stage 0: Preconditions Verify a clean tree and no open 🔴 (above) — refuse if either fails. Read .release-config.md , the audit verdicts, and the mode. Honor --version <x.y.z> (use it as the proposed bump) and --no-pr (commit + tag locally, skip the PR). Stage 1: Docs Refresh the README — invoke /write-readme rather than editing it here: it verifies every command against the repo instead of recalling it, and a release that ships a README whose install step no longer works is the failure this delegation exists to prevent. Run standalone (outside release-product , which already ran it), invoke it now; inside a release-phase run it has just run — refresh only if the tree changed since. Then refresh the project documentation map block in the root CLAUDE.md — idempotent, only between the markers, per ../_shared/agent-guide.md . Draft the release notes — the human-readable "what's in this release", derived from the done tasks since the last release (their summaries) + the merged work, in the user's language. Stage 2: Version (propose, confirm — never silent) Determine the semver bump from the change set , and propose it: a breaking change → major, a new feature → minor, fixes only → patch. Always confirm with the user before writing it — the version is the user's call; never bump silently (if --version was given, confirm that). Write the version into the project's version file (the one the stack uses — package.json , pyproject.toml , Cargo.toml , a VERSION file). This skill bumps the target project's version on the user's confirmation — it does not touch any unrelated version. Stage 3: Changelog Update CHANGELOG for the new version: a dated section, grouped (Added / Changed / Fixed / Security), rolled up from the done tasks + commit messages since the last tag — not re-derived from scratch. Link notable items to their task ids where useful. Stage 4: Cut (via the commit skill — confirmed) Invoke the commit skill to commit the docs + version + changelog together (English message, carrying the version). Then tag the release ( vX.Y.Z , annotated) and, unless --no-pr , push and open the PR (English title + a body summarizing the release and linking the changelog). Confirm before the push and PR — in both modes. Commit and tag on the current branch ; if a PR is impossible from it, ask for the branch instead of creating one (see Git workflow). Do not deploy. Done: stop before deploy + report Update the ## Shipped section of .dev-skills/release/release-summary.md (version · tag · PR link · changelog updated). Report what shipped and state plainly that putting the product live is the next step and it is a separate, deliberate one : /setup-production-environment , invoked by hand. Name the target platform from .dev-skills/project-spec/architecture.research.md → ## Deployment & environments , and if .dev-skills/project-setup/production-setup.md already exists, repeat its still-open 🔧 items (domain, DNS, payment, accounts, spend caps) so the handoff says where the product goes and what must be clicked first — without you doing either. If preconditions blocked the cut, report exactly what's open and point at release-product . Rules Careful, always. Confirm the version bump and the push/PR before acting — in both modes. cut-release never runs silently. Refuse over an open 🔴. No release is cut with an unwaived blocker open; point back at release-product . Never edit product code. Docs, version, changelog, git — nothing else. Product problems are release-phase findings + build-tasks fixes. Propose the version, never decide it silently. The bump is the user's call; confirm every time. Stop before production. The deploy is out of scope by design: hand it to /setup-production-environment , which the human invokes deliberately. Commit/tag/PR text is English (the commit skill); CHANGELOG + release notes follow the user's language. Clean tree in, clean cut out — the working tree must be clean before, and the cut is a single coherent commit + tag (+ PR). Cut on the current branch. No release/* branch, no branch "for the PR" — if the PR needs one, ask; a no means commit + tag locally and hand the PR to the user. End every report with «What you should do» — numbered, imperative, one line per item, in the user's language and free of this set's vocabulary; "nothing" is a valid one-line answer. Timings, where reported, must reconcile with their total. ../_shared/build-pipeline/report-format.md .