Clawpatch — agent workflow
Clawpatch (openclaw/clawpatch, https://clawpatch.ai) is an agent-driven
CLI: it reviews a repo into structured findings and can apply validated
per-finding fixes. It needs Node.js 22+ and a provider CLI (codex by
default); fix refuses dirty source worktrees by default, while
review/ci/revalidate can include dirty code when explicitly scoped.
This skill is judgment + orchestration, not a CLI reference. For exact
flags, JSON fields, and exit codes, trust clawpatch <cmd> --help and the
live --json output over anything written here — Clawpatch is pre-1.0 and
its surface drifts, so a written copy will mislead. What this skill carries
is what --help can't tell you: when to reach for it, how to fix findings
in parallel, and the traps.
When to use
Use Clawpatch when the user names it, or wants whole-repo automated review
that yields locatable findings plus optional validated fixes.
Don't use it for: a small diff already under review (a whole-repo review cycle
is overkill — use a diff-review tool); a bug the user already understands and
just wants written; or when no provider CLI (codex/claude/cursor/grok/
opencode/pi/acpx, or mock for tests) is installed — clawpatch doctor
fails fast, so say so and stop.
Setup
clawpatch doctor verifies the install and the provider. The published CLI
requires Node.js 22+. If clawpatch is missing, install the current published
package (npm install -g [email protected]). The provider (codex by default) is
the user's to install and authenticate — don't run login flows on their behalf.
Gitignore .clawpatch/ early to keep status, commits, and PR diffs clean.
Clawpatch allows its own state directory to change during runs; fix's dirty
guard is for source worktree changes, not .clawpatch/ churn. Add the single
line .clawpatch/ before review/fix when the repo doesn't already ignore it,
but remember .gitignore is tracked — confirm with the user before editing it.
Review → findings
The pipeline is init → map → review → report. init and heuristic map are
local and cheap; review is the expensive step (~30–60s per feature with
codex) and runs with a bounded worker pool by default.
For a first whole-repo pass, clawpatch ci runs that pipeline in one call and
writes the same .clawpatch/ findings the staged steps would — so
"ci → pick a fix path" is a fine default. Drop to the staged commands only
when you need to sample before sweeping a large or paid provider
(review --limit 3, below), scope to a slice (review --since <ref>), or
resume an existing review as code moves (revalidate / review --since,
below). Either way ci stops at findings — it never fixes or opens PRs;
fixing stays the paths under "Choose how to fix."
Run init && map directly — they're idempotent and non-destructive, so an
existing .clawpatch/ just gets refreshed (init no-ops without --force;
heuristic map re-classifies). No scan, no --force. map writes one JSON
file per feature — the subsystem-sized unit (a package, a command, a
service) that both review and scoping operate on — into .clawpatch/features/.
If deterministic mapping is too shallow, clawpatch map --source auto can add
read-only provider-assisted slices; use --source agent only when you
deliberately want provider mapping even if heuristics found enough.
State persists in .clawpatch/ and there's no natural point where the agent
deletes it, so findings — and their fixed/wont-fix/uncertain statuses —
carry across runs. That persistence is intentional: Clawpatch owns resume
and freshness, so use its commands instead of hand-managing or wiping
findings. When code has moved since the last review:
clawpatch revalidate --since <ref> (or --all) re-checks existing
findings against the current code and updates their statuses — this is the
CLI's de-stale mechanism.
clawpatch review --since <ref> reviews only the features changed since
<ref>, including changed features regardless of previous review status,
without a full re-review.
Prefer those over trusting stale statuses or wiping. Wiping
([ -d .clawpatch ] && rm -r .clawpatch — guarded, never rm -rf) is a last
resort for genuinely corrupt state, not the freshness tool — it discards
resume context and costs a full re-review. (There's no --resume flag;
"resume" just means the on-disk state is still there.)
Use clawpatch triage --finding <id> --status <status> --note <text> to mark
false positives or decisions; it preserves the finding and appends history
instead of rewriting JSON by hand.
On a large or unfamiliar repo, smoke-test first (review --limit 3) and
treat that as often-sufficient — surface the time/cost before committing to a
full sweep (ci or review). For cost control on broader runs, --jobs
defaults to roughly half the CPU cores (max 10); lower it or use
--rate-limit-per-minute / CLAWPATCH_RPM when provider spend or quotas
matter.
By default review sees only committed code; --include-dirty (on review,
ci, and revalidate) pulls uncommitted worktree changes into scope — reach
for it to review in-progress work before it's committed. It's a review-scope
switch, not a fix dirty-tree override (Safety).
Use clawpatch review --mode deslopify when the user wants slop,
maintainability, or performance cleanup. Keep default review mode for ordinary
bug, security, API-contract, data-loss, and release-risk review.
Scoping the review
The switches above scope which code review sees; this scopes which features
it spends on. review has no path filter — you scope it by selecting
features. Each .clawpatch/features/*.json carries an opaque featureId (a
hash like feat_library_…, not a 1..N index — passing a number silently
matches nothing and the run reviews zero features) plus its title and
ownedFiles[].path. To review only what the user named ("just the Go code",
"only the auth package", "ignore the docs"), translate paths → ids yourself,
then pass them. For more than a one-off id, prefer --feature-list: it reads
one feature id per line, keeps first-seen order, and de-duplicates:
for f in .clawpatch/features/*.json; do
jq -r '[.featureId,.title,((.ownedFiles//[])|map(.path)|join(","))]|@tsv' "$f"
done # read the table, pick ids, then:
printf '%s\n' <id> <id> > /tmp/clawpatch-features.txt
clawpatch review --feature-list /tmp/clawpatch-features.txt
Repeated --feature <id> still works for short ad hoc selections. Confirm
mutual exclusions in clawpatch review --help before mixing feature selection
with --since, --project, or dirty-worktree scoping.
--limit <n> is the cheapness knob (first N features in map order) — right
for a smoke test, useless for targeting an area; reach for --feature when the
user names a subsystem. All Clawpatch state (features, findings, reports) is
plain JSON under .clawpatch/, so read it directly when a --json payload is
too large to scan or a wrapper truncates it.
Read findings from report --json. The full flag set is clawpatch report --help; two non-obvious traps it won't flag for you:
--json writes the JSON to stdout; --output writes Markdown.
Capture JSON by redirecting stdout (> findings.json), not --output.
- In 0.7.2 the shape is
{ "findings": <count>, "total": <count>, "output": <path|null>, "items": [ … ], "results": [ … ] }. findings is a
deprecated count, not the array; read .items[] (.results[] is an alias).
Field names still drift from prose docs (the id is id; evidence uses
path/startLine/endLine). Probe before parsing: jq 'keys, .items[0]' findings.json.
Each finding already carries fix-ready prose — title, reasoning,
reproduction, recommendation, suggestedRegressionTest,
minimumFixScope — ready to drop into a fix prompt or PR body. Ignore the
next: hint Clawpatch prints; rank findings yourself (severity → confidence
→ triage), and never auto-fix without the user's pick (providers emit false
positives).
Choose how to fix: scanner-only vs full-cycle
Scanner-only (default, and the only safe parallel path). Use Clawpatch
purely as the reviewer; the host agent fixes findings with its own tooling.
Required when the user wants fixes in parallel, the repo has strict commit/PR
conventions, you want control over each patch, or the host model beats the
provider's.
Full-cycle. Let clawpatch fix produce and validate the patch. Fine for
single-developer, sequential work in a low-ceremony repo where you trust the
provider and want its format/typecheck/lint/test gate.
The two are mutually exclusive — never run clawpatch fix from dispatched
subagents (see Safety).
Scanner-only dispatch
init → map → review, then report --json > /tmp/findings.json, in a
throwaway worktree.
- Pick findings to fan out; prefer ones whose
minimumFixScope/evidence
paths don't overlap, so subagents can't collide.
- Per finding: extract its JSON (
jq '.items[] | select(.id==$id)') and
dispatch a subagent in a fresh worktree branched from main (not the
review worktree). Paste the finding JSON inline in its prompt.
- The subagent fixes with the host's normal edit/test/commit/PR tooling and
never calls
clawpatch. Tell it to confirm the finding is real before
changing anything (false positives) and to stay within minimumFixScope
(no over-correcting).
- The review worktree and its
.clawpatch/ are disposable — discard after.
Don't reconcile fixed-status back into .clawpatch/; the audit trail is
git (PRs, commit trailers).
Full-cycle
On a clean worktree, clawpatch fix --finding <id>. On success the finding
goes to uncertain, not fixed — confirm with clawpatch revalidate --finding <id>. Then ship with clawpatch open-pr --patch <patchAttemptId> --draft
(Clawpatch writes a finding-rich PR body) or hand the diff to your own commit/PR
flow. Check flags with clawpatch fix --help. fix has no dirty-tree
--force; clean or stash source changes first, or use --dry-run only for a
preview. Never run two
fixes in parallel on one .clawpatch/ (feature locks serialize them;
interleaved patches don't merge). Stop and report on the first surprise:
validation failure (exit 6 → git restore .), an oversized diff, or repeated
wont-fix.
Safety & pitfalls
- Never
clawpatch open-pr --force without explicit user approval — it
overrides the failed-validation guard. fix has no --force; keep the clean
source-worktree preflight intact. Clawpatch does not merge/land PRs today
(there's no land command); if a merge/land command ever appears, treat it
the same way — never run it without approval.
- Never combine subagents with
clawpatch fix. Sharing .clawpatch/
across subagents risks patches landing in the wrong worktree (evidence
paths resolve against the original rootPath); copying state per subagent
is fragile. Pick one mode and stay in it.
- Don't blind-retry a non-zero exit. Codes are typed (3 = dirty tree,
4 = provider auth, 6 = validation failed, 7 = lock). On lock failures, try
clawpatch clean-locks --stale-only first; use unfiltered clean-locks only
after confirming no local or remote review process is active. clawpatch --help / the spec has the full set.
- Treat this doc as fallible. Verify any flag, field, or exit-code detail
against
clawpatch <cmd> --help and live --json output — they're the
source of truth; this skill is the workflow around them.