booping — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited booping (Plugin) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
A self-learning, project-scoped sprint workflow for Claude Code. booping turns a feature idea into a durable, on-disk loop — groom → develop → retro → learn — that effectively utilizes sub-agents to avoid context rot and cross-validates each plan against Gemini before development begins. Every artifact (plans, retros, lessons, sprint snapshots) lives under ~/Claude/{project}/, one folder per codebase, so weeks-long programs stay legible long after the session ends.
Vault open in Obsidian
Each project's vault is a plain Obsidian-friendly folder of markdown files.
The vault at ~/Claude/{project}/ is markdown-only with YAML frontmatter that Obsidian renders natively as Properties. One vault per project, side-by-side with whatever else you keep in ~/Claude/. No proprietary database, no lock-in — just files you can grep, version, and edit by hand.
booping is aimed at experienced developers and tech leads — people comfortable making architectural calls, decomposing work, and reviewing code critically. The skills assume you can tell a sharp plan from a vague one and a sound diff from a sloppy one.
It's built for iterative, agile-style development: maintenance, incremental features, or growing a project sprint by sprint. It is not a waterfall tool — don't hand it a whole-project spec and expect a finished product. One plan is one sprint; the loop compounds across many.
The framework is in beta. Per-project configuration is now live: place a ~/Claude/{project}/config.yaml file in your vault and it deep-merges over the plugin's src/config.yaml at render time — the lifecycle, sprint scale, and agent wiring are the natural targets for per-project tuning. The /code-review skill is now available as a side-route for stack-aware review of in-progress diffs against the active plan.
Required: uv and git. Optional: GEMINI_API_KEY environment variable for /groom cross-validation against Gemini.
# macOS
brew install uv git
# Linux (Debian/Ubuntu)
sudo apt install -y git
curl -LsSf https://astral.sh/uv/install.sh | shInside Claude Code, register the marketplace once, then install the plugin:
/plugin marketplace add A/claude-booping
/plugin install booping@boopingUpdate later via /plugin update booping (or from the /plugin UI).
After installing, cd into the target repo and run /install. That single step scaffolds ~/Claude/{project}/ (with plans/, retrospectives/, lessons/, notes/, _booping/).
For a hand-holding walkthrough and per-command reference, see the docs site.
The full loop is five commands. Run them in order:
# Inside the target repo, once:
/install
# Spec a feature, bug, or refactor — free-text description.
# The more detailed your brief, the sharper the resulting plan:
/groom Add per-tenant rate limiting to the public API
# Execute the next ready plan (auto-claims from the queue):
/develop
# …or target a specific one (path relative to ~/Claude/{project}/):
/develop plans/20260426-per-tenant-rate-limiting.md
# Retrospect on what shipped:
/retro plans/20260426-per-tenant-rate-limiting.md
# Fold the retro's findings into durable rules:
/learn retrospectives/20260426-per-tenant-rate-limiting.mdThe skills will list candidates if you forget the exact filename.
A plan moves through a small set of statuses. /groom shapes the spec and waits for explicit user approval before handing off; /develop claims the next ready plan and executes milestone by milestone; /retro compares what shipped to the original spec; /learn distils the retrospective into rules that bind the next sprint.
The status vocabulary below is the canonical set in src/config.yaml plan.statuses:
/groom backlog → in-spec → awaiting-plan-review → ready-for-dev
(loopback: awaiting-plan-review → in-spec)
(parking: in-spec → backlog)
(cancellation: backlog/in-spec/awaiting-plan-review → cancelled)
/develop ready-for-dev → in-progress → awaiting-retro
(failure: in-progress → fail)
/retro awaiting-retro → awaiting-learning
(skip: awaiting-retro → done)
/learn awaiting-learning → done
Terminal states: cancelled · done · failA plan carries one of the following statuses in its frontmatter. Terminal states are marked.
/groom is actively researching, designing, and drafting./groom is presenting and awaiting explicit user approval, change request, or cancellation./develop to claim./develop has claimed the plan and is executing milestones./retro to write the retrospective./learn to absorb lessons./learn has absorbed all lessons./develop hit an unrecoverable blocker.src/config.yaml plan.statuses is the canonical contract for the full transition table — including triggers (when), gates, artifacts, and on_exit mutations. Read it there if you need the exact rules; this README only narrates them.
In booping, a plan is a sprint — the unit /groom produces and /develop executes end-to-end. Story Points (SP) measure the sprint's complexity and review burden, not effort or time. A 20-SP sprint might take a couple of hours on one project, a full session on another, and a full day on a third; what matters is that SPs give you a feel for the size and review weight of the sprint, independent of how fast the underlying work happens.
The 1–5 scale (src/config.yaml sprint.scale):
In practice, sprints over 35 SP (sprint.default_threshold_sp) get hard to keep reviewable, so /groom ends up suggesting a split into sibling sprints above that mark. It's a soft cap, not a velocity — booping has no fixed cadence and no per-week capacity. Tasks at 5 SP must be re-decomposed; tasks at 1 SP should be grouped into a single agent briefing.
Wide-domain skills stay stack-agnostic. Project-specific concerns live entirely in your vault:
/groom your codebase's conventions or /develop your test runner.** — project-local plan templates. Discovered alongside the core templates (backend, frontend, claude-skill, cli); can override a core one by sharing its name` or add entirely new ones.** — project-local code-review templates. Loaded by /code-review alongside the core templates (coding-architecture, python, security); the skill picks the matching subset by inspecting the repo's manifests and reading each template's description` frontmatter./learn. Read by skills' Preflight on every invocation./retro and /learn are the loop that makes booping worth more than the sum of its sprints.
/retro reads the plan, scans the session logs and git diff for what actually shipped, and writes a retrospective at ~/Claude/{project}/retrospectives/YYYYMMDD-{kebab-title}.md — what worked, what didn't, divergences from spec, the business goal outcome.
/learn then reviews the retrospective with the user, picks the durable findings, and writes them into two surfaces: project-wide lessons (~/Claude/{project}/lessons/{N}_{title}.md) and extra instructions for the matching skill or agent (~/Claude/{project}/_booping/skill_<name>.md, _booping/agent_<name>.md). Lessons are loaded by future /groom and /develop invocations; extension files travel with the matching skill or agent at load time. The user confirms each finding before it lands.
booping is a feedback loop, not an autopilot. Three things stay your job:
/groom produces a draft and waits at awaiting-plan-review for a reason — sharpen it, push back, ask for splits. As lessons accumulate, plans drift toward your style and constraints, but only if you fed the loop honest reviews. Shit in, shit out./develop ships milestones; you own the quality bar. /code-review is a helper that runs stack-aware passes against the in-progress diff and surfaces findings — but reading those findings, deciding what's off, and bringing the feedback into /retro so /learn can turn it into rules is still your job./retro and /learn are scaffolding for a feedback loop, not a substitute for one. You still need to sit with the retrospective, confirm which findings are durable, and let /learn write them down. Skip that step and the loop stalls.Invest in the loop and it compounds. Treat it as a magic box and you'll get magic-box results.
MIT — see LICENSE.
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.