Works with the AI Agents you already use

    Claude CodeClaude CodeCursorCursorCodex CLICodex CLIMuseMuseDotsDots+21 more

    Git History Archaeologist pro

    1

    Specialized Git forensics for tracing code evolution, detecting reverts, and reconstructing commit narratives.

    $5

    Secure checkout via Stripe

    Money-back guarantee

    Converts to your local currency at checkout

    Security scanned
    Git History Archaeologist pro

    Git History Archaeologist pro

    Example session with this skill installed

    Analyze file auth_service.py from line 45 to 60. I need to know why the token validation logic changed and if the previous security check was fully removed or just moved elsewhere.

    • Read your context and instructions
    • Compiled the git history archaeologist

    The investigation reveals that the token validation logic was modified to support OAuth2 scopes, and the original security check was moved to a middleware component rather than deleted.

    Git History Forensic Report

    Repository Scope

    auth_service.py (Lines 45-60)

    Timeline

    DateCommitEventEvidenceConfidence
    2023-10-12a1b2c3dIntroductionInitial validation logic added.High
    2024-01-15e5f6g7hModificationLogic changed to support Scopes.High
    2024-01-15e5f6g7hRefactorOriginal check moved to middleware/auth.py.Medium
    2024-03-02i9j0k1lCurrent StateCurrent implementation with bug fix i9j0k1l.High

    Blame Findings

    Line/RangeBlame CommitAuthorDateEvidenceFollow-up
    45-52e5f6g7hdev_alpha2024-01-15Diff shows scope check insertion.i9j0k1l
    53-60a1b2c3ddev_beta2023-10-12Original error handling remains.None

    Narrative Reconstruction

    The logic at line 45 was altered in e5f6g7h to introduce scope-based authorization. The previous check, which validated raw token strings, was not deleted but refactored into a shared middleware utility to prevent duplication. However, the current implementation in auth_service.py lacks the explicit null-check present in the original version, which may be the source of recent reported issues.

    Next steps

    1. Run git show e5f6g7h:middleware/auth.py to verify the logic was preserved correctly.
    2. Compare the diff of a1b2c3d vs e5f6g7h to confirm the removal of the null-pointer guard.
    3. Check git log -S "validate_token" to see if other files were affected by this refactor.

    Connects securely to your tools. The creator never sees your data.

    About this skill

    The problem

    Git blame is a starting point, not a complete story. Developers often struggle to understand why code changed, where a deleted function went, or whether a past bug fix was accidentally reverted during a messy merge.

    What it does

    • Traces line origins across renames, refactors, and complex move operations.
    • Detects hidden reverts by comparing patches and commit relationships rather than just searching for keywords.
    • Reconstructs chronological narratives for features or bugs to distinguish between facts and interpretations.
    • Analyzes merge history to identify conflict resolutions and corrective commits.
    • Audits commit messages against actual diff evidence to flag discrepancies.

    Why this beats prompting it yourself

    General LLMs often hallucinate commit hashes or invent author intent to satisfy a prompt. This skill enforces strict evidence-based forensics, explicitly separating facts from hypotheses and grading every finding with a confidence score.

    Use cases

    • Pinpointing exactly when and how a regression was introduced during a specific sprint.
    • Recovering lost logic by tracing deleted code to its last known stable state.
    • Performing due diligence on suspicious commits or legacy code blocks with no documentation.

    Known limitations

    Requires read access to Git logs, diffs, or blame data. It cannot infer author intent or deployment status without explicit repository evidence.

    Requires repository history, logs, or blame data as input. Operates in read-only mode by default and avoids destructive operations like force-pushes or history rewriting.

    How to use

    1. 1

      Connect your agent to the Agensi MCP

      Copy the prompt and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor or any agent that supports MCP. It sets up the connection for you. Manual setup

    2. 2

      Sign in to Agensi

      Your agent shows a sign-in link. Sign in and click Allow.

    3. 3

      Ask for what you need

      Your agent loads this skill and uses it on your task. It always asks before any payment.

    Reviews

    No reviews yet

    Be one of the first to try it. Every listed skill goes through the trust checks below.

    Security scanned

    Checked by our 8-point scan before listing

    Fresh listing

    Recently published to Agensi

    Money-back guarantee

    Doesn't do what its page promises? You get your money back.

    Trust & safety

    Security scan

    Security scan passed 1 month ago

    Software
    Git

    Permissions

    Terminal / Shell
    Listed1 month ago

    What's inside

    Frequently Asked Questions

    While standard Git blame stops at renames, this skill performs deep forensics to track logic across refactors, file moves, and complex merges that typically break standard tracking tools.

    The skill requires read-only access to your Git repository's logs, diffs, and blame data; it does not require write permissions as it focuses strictly on forensic analysis.

    This skill is compatible with most major AI agent frameworks and development environments that support file-system access or Git CLI integrations.

    Yes, the Archaeologist can identify 'hidden' reverts by analyzing patch contents and diff patterns, even if the developer didn't use the 'git revert' command or mention it in the commit message.

    Unlike general LLMs that might guess at history, this skill uses a strict evidence-based approach that assigns confidence scores to every finding, separating documented facts from logical inferences.

    New in Testing & Debugging