Exploratory Data Analysis

Build or review messaging agents with Photon Spectrum (`spectrum-ts`). Use for Spectrum setup, messages and content, spaces and users, provider capabilities, iMessage/WhatsApp/Terminal integrations, custom platforms, lifecycle, or production message-processing architecture.

Safely change and test untested codebases using Feathers' "Working Effectively with Legacy Code". Use when the user mentions "legacy code", "no tests", "untested codebase", "how do I test this", "seams", "characterization tests", "golden master", "sprout method", "afraid to change this code", "monster method", "dependency breaking", or "inherited a messy codebase". Also trigger when changing code without tests safely, getting a class under test when constructors, statics, or singletons block it, adding features to tangled modules, or planning incremental test coverage for an old codebase. Covers the legacy-code change algorithm, seams, characterization tests, sprout/wrap, and dependency-breaking techniques. For refactoring code that already has tests, see refactoring-patterns. For day-to-day code quality, see clean-code.

Review generated or changed WordPress code — plugins, themes, and blocks — before it ships. Best used reactively after an agent writes, edits, or reviews code touching WordPress APIs: add_action/add_filter, shortcodes, meta boxes, AJAX handlers, REST routes, WP_Query or $wpdb, widgets, or WP-CLI commands. Use on 'review this plugin', 'is this safe to ship', 'make this translatable', 'speed up this query', or after tasks like 'write a plugin' or 'add an endpoint/shortcode/meta box'. Enforces escaping and sanitization, nonces plus capability checks, prepared database queries, core-API-first development, translation-ready strings, and query/caching discipline. DO NOT USE for WooCommerce-specific order, product, or checkout logic (use woo-guard), non-WordPress PHP, generic code quality review (use clean-code-guard), test code review (use test-guard), server or hosting configuration, or conceptual WordPress questions.

Review generated or changed WooCommerce code — extensions, payment and shipping integrations, checkout customizations, and order/product logic — before it ships. Best used reactively after an agent writes, edits, or reviews code touching WooCommerce APIs: wc_get_order, wc_get_orders, wc_get_product, WC() cart or session, woocommerce_* hooks, Store API endpoints, payment gateways, order or product meta, HPOS, subscriptions, or bookings. Use on 'review this Woo plugin', 'is this HPOS compatible', or after tasks like 'write a WooCommerce extension', 'add a checkout field', 'hook into the order flow', or 'update stock'. Enforces HPOS-safe order access, CRUD over direct meta, feature-compatibility declarations, server-side checkout validation, money-handling discipline, and hooks over template overrides. DO NOT USE for WordPress code without WooCommerce APIs (use wp-guard), generic code review (use clean-code-guard), test review (use test-guard), or store configuration and admin-screen ques

Audits an existing test file or suite in any language for anti-patterns and quality issues — produces a severity-ranked report (Critical/Warning/Info). INVOKE whenever asked to audit or review tests, find what's wrong with a suite, judge whether tests are any good, or check for: tests that pass but verify nothing, missing assertions, swallowed exceptions, self-comparing / tautological assertions, coverage-touching tests, broad exceptions, flaky or order-dependent tests (Thread.Sleep, DateTime.Now, shared state), duplicated tests, or magic values — in .NET, Python/pytest, TS/Jest, Java, Go, Ruby or C++. DO NOT USE FOR: writing new tests (use code-testing-agent, or writing-mstest-tests for MSTest); running tests (use run-tests); migration; assertion-diversity metrics (use assertion-quality); coverage/CRAP metrics (use coverage-analysis); the testsmells.org academic catalog (use test-smell-detection); fixing or modernizing MSTest tests, assertions, attributes, or lifecycle (use writing-ms

Use when the user asks for podcast or a task matching the examples below. Two-host podcast video for any URL or free-form topic — 1 minute, 4 acts × ~15s, native multi-shot dialogue, optional voice cloning for Host A. Use when the user asks to "make a podcast", "podcast about [thing]", "podcast review of [url]", "two-host explainer", "interview-style clip", "two people talking on camera", "I/me and X talk about Y", or "interview with [persona] about [topic]". Native audio is the deliverable; captions are skipped by default because podcast dialogue mistranscribes domain terms.