Mine the git history for churn, bug magnets, coupled files, and bus-factor silos — predict where the next bug lands.
Free & open · no signup · read-only — it ends by asking · nothing leaves your machine
You are working inside this repo. Mission: mine the git history for what the code alone can't tell you — where change concentrates, where bugs cluster, which files secretly move together, and where knowledge lives in one head.
Read-only pass: git log analysis only. Your only write is the report file.
Phase 2 sweeps the codebase through every one of these, citing file and line for each finding.
files both large and frequently edited: the highest-risk quadrant
the fix-commit leaders; is each inherently hard, or badly structured?
files that change together but live far apart: a hidden dependency or a missing abstraction
single-author critical areas: the bus-factor map
old, untouched code that everything depends on; is stability maturity or fear?
is churn concentrating (a hardening core) or spreading (architecture erosion)?
One structured report at the repo root — or in reports/, if you keep one — the same shape every time, ready for a teammate — or the optional Studio — to act on.
Every Goal Prompt follows the same four steps, so results are consistent and repeatable — no matter which one you run.
Run read-only git analysis (adjust ranges to repo age).
Churn × size — files both large and frequently edited.
Numbers required.
Create HOTSPOTS.md at repo root.
Copy it and paste it into your agent inside the repo you want checked.
Install the goal plugin once — two commands — then just type /goal:git-hotspot-mining.
/plugin marketplace add GhostlyGawd/goal-prompts/plugin install goal@goal-promptsOr install only this Goal Prompt as /goal-git-hotspot-mining:
curl -fsSL https://goal-prompts.vercel.app/install | BRIEF=22 shLet an agent fetch it mid-conversation, or pull the raw Goal Prompt by URL.
https://goal-prompts.vercel.app/raw/22.mdNothing hidden — this is the whole Goal Prompt, verbatim. Read it in a minute, edit it, or copy it as-is.
# Goal: Git Hotspot Mining You are working inside this repo. Mission: mine the git history for what the code alone can't tell you — where change concentrates, where bugs cluster, which files secretly move together, and where knowledge lives in one head. Read-only pass: git log analysis only. Your only write is the report file. ## Phase 1 — Extract the history Run read-only git analysis (adjust ranges to repo age): - Churn leaders: file change frequency (git log with name-only output, aggregated) - Fix magnets: files most present in commits whose message contains fix/bug/hotfix - Coupling: files that repeatedly appear in the same commits - Authorship: files/areas with a single significant author ## Phase 2 — Interpret through 6 lenses 1. **Churn × size** — files both large and frequently edited: the highest-risk quadrant 2. **Bug magnets** — the fix-commit leaders; is each inherently hard, or badly structured? 3. **Temporal coupling** — files that change together but live far apart: a hidden dependency or a missing abstraction 4. **Knowledge silos** — single-author critical areas: the bus-factor map 5. **Stale foundations** — old, untouched code that everything depends on; is stability maturity or fear? 6. **Trajectory** — is churn concentrating (a hardening core) or spreading (architecture erosion)? ## Phase 3 — Curate - Numbers required: every claim carries its counts - Cross-check against the code: history flags, code confirms ## Phase 4 — Report Create `HOTSPOTS.md` at repo root: 1. **Hotspot ranking** — file · commits · fix-commits · size · verdict 2. **Coupling pairs** — with the suggested resolution: merge, extract shared piece, or accept 3. **Silo map** — area · owner · risk · suggested pairing or docs 4. **Prediction** — where the next bug statistically lands, and the preemptive move 5. **Refactor targets** — justified by history, not taste Start the report with today's date. If `HOTSPOTS.md` already exists from a previous run, read it first and lead with what changed since. ## Rules - History over opinion: churn data outranks aesthetic judgments - A hotspot earns refactoring only if it's still changing - No meaningful git history (fresh or shallow clone) in this repo? Say so in a one-paragraph null report and stop — a null result is a valid finding. - If a `reports/` directory exists at the repo root, write the report there instead of the root. - Before asking, present the top findings as a ranked list in plain words - Report only — end by asking which target to address
reports/ directory exists at the repo root, write the report there instead of the root.Missing indexes, absent constraints, JSON blobs hiding structure — with a migration plan sequenced safest-first.
Which user behaviors are invisible today — and the tracking plan that makes the five questions that matter answerable.
Trace where personal data enters, spreads, and lingers — then run the delete-request test: could you honor one today?
Schema and data migrations under real traffic — table locks, reversibility, timed-out backfills, and the deploy ordering that turns a change into an outage.
Runs inside these playbooks — curated sequences you can launch with one paste: