Best use case
fpf:actualize is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Reconcile the project's FPF state with recent repository changes
Teams using fpf:actualize should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/actualize/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How fpf:actualize Compares
| Feature / Agent | fpf:actualize | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Reconcile the project's FPF state with recent repository changes
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# Actualize Knowledge Base This command is a core part of maintaining a living assurance case. It keeps your FPF knowledge base (`.fpf/`) in sync with the evolving reality of your project's codebase. The command performs a three-part audit against recent git changes to surface potential context drift, stale evidence, and outdated decisions. This aligns with the **Observe** phase of the FPF Canonical Evolution Loop (B.4) and helps manage **Epistemic Debt** (B.3.4). ## Action (Run-Time) ### Step 1: Check Git Changes Run git commands to identify changes since last actualization: ```bash # Get current commit hash git rev-parse HEAD # Check for changes since last known baseline # (Read .fpf/.baseline file if it exists, otherwise use initial commit) git diff --name-only <baseline_commit> HEAD # List all changed files git diff --stat <baseline_commit> HEAD ``` ### Step 2: Analyze Report for Context Drift 1. Review changed files for core project configuration: - `package.json`, `go.mod`, `Cargo.toml`, `requirements.txt` - `Dockerfile`, `docker-compose.yml` - `.env.example`, config files 2. If configuration files changed: - Re-read project structure (README, config files) - Compare detected context with `.fpf/context.md` - Present diff to user 3. Ask user if they want to update `context.md` ### Step 3: Analyze Report for Evidence Staleness (Epistemic Debt) 1. Read all evidence files in `.fpf/evidence/` 2. Check `carrier_ref` field in each evidence file 3. Cross-reference with changed files from git diff 4. If a referenced file changed: - Flag the evidence as **STALE** - Note which hypothesis is affected ### Step 4: Analyze Report for Decision Relevance 1. Read all DRR files in `.fpf/decisions/` 2. Trace back to source evidence and hypothesis files 3. If foundational files changed: - Flag the DRR as **POTENTIALLY OUTDATED** ### Step 5: Update Baseline Create/update `.fpf/.baseline` file: ``` # FPF Actualization Baseline # Last actualized: 2025-01-15T16:00:00Z commit: abc123def456 ``` ### Step 6: Present Findings Output a structured report: ```markdown ## Actualization Report **Baseline**: abc123 (2025-01-10) **Current**: def456 (2025-01-15) **Files Changed**: 42 ### Context Drift The following configuration files have changed: - package.json (+5 dependencies) - Dockerfile (base image updated) **Action Required**: Review and update `.fpf/context.md` if constraints have changed. ### Stale Evidence (3 items) | Evidence | Hypothesis | Changed File | |----------|------------|--------------| | ev-benchmark-api | api-optimization | src/api/handler.ts | | ev-test-auth | auth-module | src/auth/login.ts | | ev-perf-db | db-indexing | migrations/002.sql | **Action Required**: Re-validate to refresh evidence for affected hypotheses. ### Decisions to Review (1 item) | DRR | Affected By | |-----|-------------| | DRR-2025-01-10-api-design | src/api/handler.ts changed | **Action Required**: Consider re-evaluating decision via `/fpf:propose-hypotheses`. ### Summary - Context drift detected: YES - Stale evidence: 3 items - Decisions to review: 1 item Run `/fpf:decay` for detailed freshness management. ``` ## File: .fpf/.baseline Track the last actualization point: ```yaml # FPF Actualization Baseline last_actualized: 2025-01-15T16:00:00Z commit: abc123def456789 branch: main ``` ## When to Run - **Before starting new work**: Ensure knowledge base is current - **After major changes**: Sync evidence with code changes - **Weekly maintenance**: Part of regular hygiene - **Before decisions**: Ensure evidence is still valid
Related Skills
tech-stack:add-typescript-best-practices
Setup TypeScript best practices and code style rules in CLAUDE.md
tdd:write-tests
Systematically add test coverage for all local code changes using specialized review and development agents. Add tests for uncommitted changes (including untracked files), or if everything is commited, then will cover latest commit.
tdd:test-driven-development
Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code - write the test first, watch it fail, write minimal code to pass; ensures tests actually verify behavior by requiring failure first
tdd:fix-tests
Systematically fix all failing tests after business logic changes or refactoring
sdd:plan
Refine, parallelize, and verify a draft task specification into a fully planned implementation-ready task
sdd:implement
Implement a task with automated LLM-as-Judge verification for critical steps
sdd:create-ideas
Generate ideas in one shot using creative sampling
sdd:brainstorm
Use when creating or developing, before writing code or implementation plans - refines rough ideas into fully-formed designs through collaborative questioning, alternative exploration, and incremental validation. Don't use during clear 'mechanical' processes
sdd:add-task
creates draft task file in .specs/tasks/draft/ with original user intent
sadd:tree-of-thoughts
Execute tasks through systematic exploration, pruning, and expansion using Tree of Thoughts methodology with meta-judge evaluation specifications and multi-agent evaluation
sadd:subagent-driven-development
Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session or facing 3+ independent issues that can be investigated without shared state or dependencies - dispatches fresh subagent for each task with code review between tasks, enabling fast iteration with quality gates
sadd:multi-agent-patterns
Design multi-agent architectures for complex tasks. Use when single-agent context limits are exceeded, when tasks decompose naturally into subtasks, or when specializing agents improves quality.