git-commit

Turn a set of changes into a clean, conventional commit (and push, if asked). Work from the actual repo state and the project's own rules, never from assumptions about what the change "probably" is.

Hard rules: never break these

• No co-authors, ever. Never add a Co-Authored-By: trailer. Never mention Claude, Claude Code, or any AI in a commit message, body, or branch name. The message must read as if a human engineer wrote it.
• Commit only when asked. Do not commit mid-task, opportunistically, or "to be safe." Wait for an explicit instruction to commit. One commit per request unless the user asks for more.
• Confirm before git commit and git push. State exactly what you're about to commit (files + message) or push (branch + remote) and get a yes first. These are not reversible-for-free; treat them as outward-facing.
• Never git add -A or git add .. Stage files explicitly by path, and only files you've inspected and understood.
• Never commit ignored or generated content. No node_modules, build output, .env/secrets/keys, lockfile churn you didn't intend, or generated artifacts (plans, reports, analyses, summaries, scratch notes). Source-code changes only; anything else needs an explicit ask.

Step 1: Gather full context

Build a complete picture before touching anything. Run these (read-only) and actually read the output:

• git status: what's modified, staged, untracked.
• git diff (unstaged) and git diff --staged (staged): the actual changes, line by line.
• git branch --show-current and git branch -a: where you are and what exists.
• git log --oneline -15: the repo's established message and scope style; match it.
• git status --ignored: confirm nothing sensitive or generated is sneaking in, and that .gitignore already covers node_modules, build dirs, env files, etc.

If something is untracked that should be ignored (secrets, env, build output, dependencies), flag it and suggest a .gitignore entry rather than committing it.

Step 2: Discover and honor the project's rules

Repos enforce their own conventions; find and obey them before writing anything:

• Commit-message linting: look for commitlint.config.{js,cjs,mjs,ts}, .commitlintrc*, a commitlint key in package.json, or equivalents in other ecosystems. Read the allowed types/scopes and subject limits and conform exactly.
• Pre-commit / hooks: check .pre-commit-config.yaml, .husky/, .git/hooks/, lefthook.yml, or framework equivalents. The commit must pass these. Don't bypass with --no-verify; if a hook fails, fix the cause (formatting, lint, tests) and report it.
• Branch-name rules: some repos lint branch names too (in commitlint config, hooks, or CONTRIBUTING). Conform.
• Contributor docs: skim CONTRIBUTING* and any PR/commit template for additional expectations.

When the repo's rules conflict with the defaults below, the repo wins.

Step 3: Stage logically

• Group related changes into one commit; split unrelated changes into separate commits. A commit should be one coherent idea.
• Stage by explicit path (git add path/to/file), reviewing each. Use git add -p to split mixed files into logical hunks.
• Leave out incidental churn, debug leftovers, and anything from the "never commit" list.

Step 4: Branch (when needed)

If the work doesn't belong on the current branch (e.g. you're on main/master or a release branch), create one off the up-to-date main branch. Naming convention:

Use short, kebab-case descriptions: feat/task-dependency-api, fix/refresh-token-expiry, docs/update-contributing, chore/upgrade-prisma. Honor any stricter rule found in Step 2.

Step 5: Write the commit message

Subject line: type(scope): summary

• Use a Conventional Commits type: feat, fix, docs, style, refactor, perf, test, build, ci, chore, revert (or whatever the repo's commitlint permits).
• Scope is optional but helps: feat(auth): ….
• Imperative mood, lowercase after the colon, no trailing period. Keep it ≤ 72 characters (aim for ~50).
• Mark breaking changes with !: feat(api)!: drop v1 token endpoint.

Body: explain why, not what. The diff already shows what changed; the body exists for future code archaeology. Wrap at ~72 columns. Cover, in prose:

• Why this change was needed: the motivation, the trigger, the constraint.
• The problem it solves: the business or technical pain being addressed.
• Include a terse what only when the change is non-obvious from the diff.

Footer

• Reference tickets/issues exactly as the project does. Inline in the subject when natural (fix(auth): handle token expiry (#42)) and/or as footers: Closes #42, Refs JIRA-1234, ClickUp: CU-abc.
• If the user mentions any Jira/issue/ClickUp/tracker ID, it must appear in the commit.
• Breaking changes get a BREAKING CHANGE: <description> footer.

Template (adapt, don't pad with empty sections):

type(scope): concise imperative subject (#123)

Why: the motivation or constraint that prompted this change, and the
problem it solves, written for someone reading `git blame` in a year.

[Only if non-obvious] What: the key technical move that makes it work.

Closes #123

Step 6: Commit and push (with confirmation)

1. Show the user the staged files and the exact message, and confirm.
2. On approval, commit. Pass multiline messages with repeated -m flags or a heredoc; never embed an AI/co-author trailer.
3. Let pre-commit hooks run. If they reformat or fail, surface it, fix the cause, and re-stage; don't --no-verify.
4. Push only when explicitly asked, and confirm the branch and remote first. If the branch is new, set upstream (git push -u origin <branch>).

Report what landed: the commit hash/subject and, if pushed, where.